Abandoning PC for the Idiot Box P|OT OT OT

In ,
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) typed:
Matthew wrote:
"hopitus" wrote in message
...
On Oct 14, 1:42 pm, Judith Latham
wrote:
In article
,
hopitus wrote:

as we are having RL riots at the CO Capital downtown MileHigh and
the "Occupy Denver" squat-tents nearby between the "occupy"
protesters and local riot-greared cops enforcing the "no-squat"
law with our goofy Guv lookjng on from safe higher observation
post in Capital building facing the action.
This is too good to miss. Leave it to the cowboys to complicate a
simple demonstration; this should make national headlines I bet.
I hear same thing going on in NY.
Purrs and prayers that no one gets hurt and that the situation is
sorted in a proper manner.

Judith

--
Judith Latham
Stourbridge, West Midlands. UK.

Thanks. What usually brings proper manners to the fore is LE en masse
at the scene;
what happened here early this a.m. Only ones "hurt" were the
panhandlers (who had
nothing to do with the protests) whose free handout food/drinks got
shut down.


These folks are trying this down here in Florida.

More power to them as long as they don't interfere with my normal
life let them protest.

They have been warned if they get out of line in any way like they
did up north. They will be arrested immediately no playing around

I'm 100% with them! If I were still physically able, I'd be out there
with the Arizona crowd. How much longer can an allegedly "free"
nation allow a corrupt government to oppress the common man without
doing something about it? The "middle class" has all but disappeared
into the "poverty level". Unemployment is at record highs,
thousands of "responsible" citizens are losing their homes to
foreclosure (thanks to the big banks turning mortgage investing into
a stock-market game). Most of the allegedly "created" jobs are being
exported to countries with much lower wages, and we even have one
moronic presidential candidate proposing a 9% national sales tax (on
ALL items, including food) which would hit the poor hardest of all,
and guarantee a lot more defaults by people who are still able to
make their mortgage payments (only just)!

If more of the law abiding citizens don't start paying attention to
what's REALLY happening to our country, the attempts at peaceful
protest may deteriorate into armed revolution. I always maintained
that "Communism" was no threat here (despite the late Joe McCarthy,
J. Edgar Hoover, and their ilk) because true revolution is only a
danger when the majority of people are so desperate that ANY change
looks to be a change for the better. I'm not so sure we're not
approaching that point in our society now, unless people begin to
wake up and pay attention to the news that most of the media ignores
or downplays.

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the protestors, but have to note
that whilst they rail against the "1%" in their own country, they are
actually the "10%" when compared to the rest of the world. The vast majority
of the world's population would consider their lifestyle - my lifestyle -
mindbogglingly wealthy. Even the time & resources and indeed *right* to
protest is a luxury that many people around the world do not have.

I also have to note that from an outsider's point of view, the OWS movement
(which is a people's movement on the left) and the Tea party movement (which
is people's movement on the right) have a lot in common. Both sense that
there is something wrong with the way current western society works
(particularly USAnian society), and they want to change it "for the better",
but feel powerless to do so. Both sides also seemto desire low unemployment,
a good standard of living, freedom to do as they see fit, and access to what
they deem essential services. They may have different ideas about how to go
about it, but I'd suggest that the 'little people' on each side of 'the
great divide' actually have far more in common with each other than they
think. Mostly because, first and foremost, they are human beings.

Yowie
Yowie

"Yowie" wrote in message
...
In ,
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) typed:
Matthew wrote:
"hopitus" wrote in message
...
On Oct 14, 1:42 pm, Judith Latham
wrote:
In article
,
hopitus wrote:

as we are having RL riots at the CO Capital downtown MileHigh and
the "Occupy Denver" squat-tents nearby between the "occupy"
protesters and local riot-greared cops enforcing the "no-squat"
law with our goofy Guv lookjng on from safe higher observation
post in Capital building facing the action.
This is too good to miss. Leave it to the cowboys to complicate a
simple demonstration; this should make national headlines I bet.
I hear same thing going on in NY.
Purrs and prayers that no one gets hurt and that the situation is
sorted in a proper manner.

Judith

--
Judith Latham
Stourbridge, West Midlands. UK.

Thanks. What usually brings proper manners to the fore is LE en masse
at the scene;
what happened here early this a.m. Only ones "hurt" were the
panhandlers (who had
nothing to do with the protests) whose free handout food/drinks got
shut down.


These folks are trying this down here in Florida.

More power to them as long as they don't interfere with my normal
life let them protest.

They have been warned if they get out of line in any way like they
did up north. They will be arrested immediately no playing around

I'm 100% with them! If I were still physically able, I'd be out there
with the Arizona crowd. How much longer can an allegedly "free"
nation allow a corrupt government to oppress the common man without
doing something about it? The "middle class" has all but disappeared
into the "poverty level". Unemployment is at record highs,
thousands of "responsible" citizens are losing their homes to
foreclosure (thanks to the big banks turning mortgage investing into
a stock-market game). Most of the allegedly "created" jobs are being
exported to countries with much lower wages, and we even have one
moronic presidential candidate proposing a 9% national sales tax (on
ALL items, including food) which would hit the poor hardest of all,
and guarantee a lot more defaults by people who are still able to
make their mortgage payments (only just)!

If more of the law abiding citizens don't start paying attention to
what's REALLY happening to our country, the attempts at peaceful
protest may deteriorate into armed revolution. I always maintained
that "Communism" was no threat here (despite the late Joe McCarthy,
J. Edgar Hoover, and their ilk) because true revolution is only a
danger when the majority of people are so desperate that ANY change
looks to be a change for the better. I'm not so sure we're not
approaching that point in our society now, unless people begin to
wake up and pay attention to the news that most of the media ignores
or downplays.

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the protestors, but have to note
that whilst they rail against the "1%" in their own country, they are
actually the "10%" when compared to the rest of the world. The vast
majority of the world's population would consider their lifestyle - my
lifestyle - mindbogglingly wealthy. Even the time & resources and indeed
*right* to protest is a luxury that many people around the world do not
have.

I also have to note that from an outsider's point of view, the OWS
movement (which is a people's movement on the left) and the Tea party
movement (which is people's movement on the right) have a lot in common.
Both sense that there is something wrong with the way current western
society works (particularly USAnian society), and they want to change it
"for the better", but feel powerless to do so. Both sides also seemto
desire low unemployment, a good standard of living, freedom to do as they
see fit, and access to what they deem essential services. They may have
different ideas about how to go about it, but I'd suggest that the 'little
people' on each side of 'the great divide' actually have far more in
common with each other than they think. Mostly because, first and
foremost, they are human beings.

Yowie

I think you've summed it up very well, with one exception. I don't think
the OWS people have any idea of how to solve the problems. I have some
sympathy for them too, but I don't understand how they think they can
accomplish anything when they are only complaining, not offering a solution.
At least those who were protesting against the Viet Nam war knew had a
solution - get out of Viet Nam. I haven't seen any hint of a suggestion
about how to solve the current problems. In fact, the protesters here
aren't even all protesting the same thing.

Joy

Joy wrote:

I think you've summed it up very well, with one exception. I don't think
the OWS people have any idea of how to solve the problems. I have some
sympathy for them too, but I don't understand how they think they can
accomplish anything when they are only complaining, not offering a solution.
At least those who were protesting against the Viet Nam war knew had a
solution - get out of Viet Nam. I haven't seen any hint of a suggestion
about how to solve the current problems. In fact, the protesters here
aren't even all protesting the same thing.

Sometimes complaining is the first step in acknowledging a problem. Before
people can come up with solutions, the nature of the problem itself has to
be defined and agreed upon. This is a pretty complex situation, so I can
understand why people in different places or groups are tackling it from
different angles. That doesn't mean they're not protesting the same essential
issue, which is a vast (and continuously growing) economic inequality.

One way to shut people up is to say, "All you can do is complain. Can you
do anything better?" People should be able to call attention to a problem
without having a 20-point plan completed and ready to go. It's a work in
progress.

If you found out that your water supply was contaminated by, say, pesticide
runoff from nearby farms, you wouldn't wait until you'd figured out how to
divert the runoff, or how to convert huge agribusiness corporations to
organic methods, or how to remove the contaminants from the water, before
you even said a word, would you? Not when your kids are getting sick. I think
the economic situation is just as dire for a lot of people right now. So I'm
glad they're making a ruckus about it.

--
Joyce

If an animal does something, they call it instinct. If we do exactly
the same thing for the same reason, they call it intelligence.
-- Will Cuppy

Yowie wrote:

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the protestors, but have to note
that whilst they rail against the "1%" in their own country, they are
actually the "10%" when compared to the rest of the world. The vast majority
of the world's population would consider their lifestyle - my lifestyle -
mindbogglingly wealthy.

You (and I) are probably better off than many Americans, many of whom are
broke and homeless. So I wouldn't include either of us among the most severely
affected by the global economy.

It's true that destitute Americans (or Australians) are probably better
off than a destitute person in the Phillipines. But are you saying that people
shouldn't complain unless they're as bad off as a human being can possibly
get?

Even the time & resources and indeed *right* to
protest is a luxury that many people around the world do not have.

There's a logical contradiction here. We're lucky to have the right to
protest, because some people don't have that right, so therefore, we
*shouldn't* protest?

I also have to note that from an outsider's point of view, the OWS movement
(which is a people's movement on the left) and the Tea party movement (which
is people's movement on the right) have a lot in common.

Well, both are "populist" (although that word has pretty much been claimed
by the Right over the past couple of decades). That means they're focused
on the lives of ordinary people. They do have very different scapegoats,
though.

--
Joyce

If an animal does something, they call it instinct. If we do exactly
the same thing for the same reason, they call it intelligence.
-- Will Cuppy

"Yowie" wrote in message
...
In ,
EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) typed:
Matthew wrote:
"hopitus" wrote in message
...
On Oct 14, 1:42 pm, Judith Latham
wrote:
In article
,
hopitus wrote:

as we are having RL riots at the CO Capital downtown MileHigh and
the "Occupy Denver" squat-tents nearby between the "occupy"
protesters and local riot-greared cops enforcing the "no-squat"
law with our goofy Guv lookjng on from safe higher observation
post in Capital building facing the action.
This is too good to miss. Leave it to the cowboys to complicate a
simple demonstration; this should make national headlines I bet.
I hear same thing going on in NY.
Purrs and prayers that no one gets hurt and that the situation is
sorted in a proper manner.

Judith

--
Judith Latham
Stourbridge, West Midlands. UK.

Thanks. What usually brings proper manners to the fore is LE en masse
at the scene;
what happened here early this a.m. Only ones "hurt" were the
panhandlers (who had
nothing to do with the protests) whose free handout food/drinks got
shut down.


These folks are trying this down here in Florida.

More power to them as long as they don't interfere with my normal
life let them protest.

They have been warned if they get out of line in any way like they
did up north. They will be arrested immediately no playing around

I'm 100% with them! If I were still physically able, I'd be out there
with the Arizona crowd. How much longer can an allegedly "free"
nation allow a corrupt government to oppress the common man without
doing something about it? The "middle class" has all but disappeared
into the "poverty level". Unemployment is at record highs,
thousands of "responsible" citizens are losing their homes to
foreclosure (thanks to the big banks turning mortgage investing into
a stock-market game). Most of the allegedly "created" jobs are being
exported to countries with much lower wages, and we even have one
moronic presidential candidate proposing a 9% national sales tax (on
ALL items, including food) which would hit the poor hardest of all,
and guarantee a lot more defaults by people who are still able to
make their mortgage payments (only just)!

If more of the law abiding citizens don't start paying attention to
what's REALLY happening to our country, the attempts at peaceful
protest may deteriorate into armed revolution. I always maintained
that "Communism" was no threat here (despite the late Joe McCarthy,
J. Edgar Hoover, and their ilk) because true revolution is only a
danger when the majority of people are so desperate that ANY change
looks to be a change for the better. I'm not so sure we're not
approaching that point in our society now, unless people begin to
wake up and pay attention to the news that most of the media ignores
or downplays.

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the protestors, but have to note
that whilst they rail against the "1%" in their own country, they are
actually the "10%" when compared to the rest of the world. The vast
majority of the world's population would consider their lifestyle - my
lifestyle - mindbogglingly wealthy. Even the time & resources and indeed
*right* to protest is a luxury that many people around the world do not
have.

I also have to note that from an outsider's point of view, the OWS
movement (which is a people's movement on the left) and the Tea party
movement (which is people's movement on the right) have a lot in common.
Both sense that there is something wrong with the way current western
society works (particularly USAnian society), and they want to change it
"for the better", but feel powerless to do so. Both sides also seemto
desire low unemployment, a good standard of living, freedom to do as they
see fit, and access to what they deem essential services. They may have
different ideas about how to go about it, but I'd suggest that the 'little
people' on each side of 'the great divide' actually have far more in
common with each other than they think. Mostly because, first and
foremost, they are human beings.

Yowie
Yowie


I don't know if this has anything to do with what you're describing as
"USian" but I find it extremely funny

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGnifTXHQOs

Jill

In ,
typed:
Yowie wrote:

I have a certain amount of sympathy for the protestors, but have to
note that whilst they rail against the "1%" in their own country,
they are actually the "10%" when compared to the rest of the world.
The vast majority of the world's population would consider their
lifestyle - my lifestyle - mindbogglingly wealthy.

You (and I) are probably better off than many Americans, many of whom
are broke and homeless. So I wouldn't include either of us among the
most severely affected by the global economy.

Its all relative.

The style of broke and homeless in the USA may still be considered 'good
living' from another's point of view.

Here, ther worst off of all are the 'street people', usually with serious
mental illness. They sleep on the streets, and spend a good deal of time in
soup kitchens and in police lock up (in winter, they often commit petty
crime to spend a few nights in lock-up). However, they are not the folks
likely tobe protesting. Its the next folks up the scale, those who are not
destitute as such but are considered to be below the poverty line. In
general, being below the 'poverty line' here means living in crappy
accomodation and getting a rental subsidy or living in government housing -
neither of which are particularly desirable but are palacial compared to the
lean-to shack of most shanty towns. Such places have clean running water and
a flushing toilet, again, far better than many. The food you can afford on
welfare is not 'nice', but its food, and there's enough not to /starve/
(even if you feel hungry). Rice, bread, weetbix, cheap meat, whatever is on
special. It means no biscuits and no icecream. It means most of your stuff
is second hand, but you will have beds and a sofa, a fridge and washing
machine and stove, probably a microwave, a kettle, a toaster, a TV (even if
its still got a tube in it rather than an LCD screen), maybe a VCR or DVD
player, and a stereo (even if it still plays records). You'll have a phone,
even if its out of credit most of the time, it means you can receive calls
when necessary. It means second hand clothing, second hand computer, crappy
internet access. It probably means a cheap second hand car that is
pepertually in need of repairs. You hope someone wrecks it beyond repair
because its worth more in insurance than it is to drive. But if not, there's
probably public transport even if it means walking for a mile or so to get
it. But this poverty still includes a roof (with more than one room) over
your head, safe water, plumbing, electricity, food (even if its day old
bread, generic baked beans, and a bag of rice and a giant can of cheap tuna
that comes a cardboard abox with 'Salvos' stamped on it) free high school
education (even if its not from the best school), access to libraries etc
etc. Those who are struggling here struggle against stigma, social
expectation and living in undesirable and not particularly safe
neighbourhoods. Homeless generally means 'couch surfing' with friends and
relatives, or living in shelters, cheap motel rooms, hostels etc, sharing
your life with vermin and pests, of not seeing the latest movieat the
cinema, (having to wait till it drops to the weekly rental to get it out),
of eating beans and rice yet again rather than going out to dinner. its
getting casual jobs where the bosses are arseholes, you are on your feet all
day, and have no idea how many hours you'll pick up (or not) the next week.
Not glamourous, not nice, but still better than many people on this planet.
.. Thats the face of poverty here in Australia. I grew up in it. I am doing
far better than most of the people I grew up with. But my household is
still quite signficantly below average on many measures of wealth here
(total income, house size, material possessions, type of holiday etc etc),
because we only have one income (mine - which is a good one, but not great
one, whereas these days most families have two incomes)


It's true that destitute Americans (or Australians) are probably
better
off than a destitute person in the Phillipines. But are you saying
that people shouldn't complain unless they're as bad off as a human
being can possibly get?

Absolutely not.

Even the time & resources and indeed *right* to
protest is a luxury that many people around the world do not have.

There's a logical contradiction here.

Where?

We're lucky to have the right to
protest, because some people don't have that right, so therefore, we
*shouldn't* protest?

Again, absolutely not.

My point was that whilst the protestors consider themselves the 99%, they
are actually the 2-10%. They may not be the wealthiest 1% of the planet, but
are most likely in wealthiest 10%, if not top 20%.

All I hope is that they remember that when they wish for a fairer
distribution of wealth.

I also have to note that from an outsider's point of view, the OWS
movement (which is a people's movement on the left) and the Tea
party movement (which is people's movement on the right) have a lot
in common.

Well, both are "populist" (although that word has pretty much been
claimed
by the Right over the past couple of decades). That means they're
focused
on the lives of ordinary people. They do have very different
scapegoats, though.

As far as I see it, and I could well be wrong, the scapegoat of both parties
are those who they deem to have an unfair amount of money, power and
influence. In the eyes of the OWS folks, thats the megacorporations, and in
the eyes of the teaparty folks, thats the government, but both are people's
movements against those they believe hold too much power over their lives.

Yowie

wrote in message
...
Joy wrote:

I think you've summed it up very well, with one exception. I don't
think
the OWS people have any idea of how to solve the problems. I have some
sympathy for them too, but I don't understand how they think they can
accomplish anything when they are only complaining, not offering a
solution.
At least those who were protesting against the Viet Nam war knew had a
solution - get out of Viet Nam. I haven't seen any hint of a suggestion
about how to solve the current problems. In fact, the protesters here
aren't even all protesting the same thing.

Sometimes complaining is the first step in acknowledging a problem. Before
people can come up with solutions, the nature of the problem itself has to
be defined and agreed upon. This is a pretty complex situation, so I can
understand why people in different places or groups are tackling it from
different angles. That doesn't mean they're not protesting the same
essential
issue, which is a vast (and continuously growing) economic inequality.

One way to shut people up is to say, "All you can do is complain. Can you
do anything better?" People should be able to call attention to a problem
without having a 20-point plan completed and ready to go. It's a work in
progress.

If you found out that your water supply was contaminated by, say,
pesticide
runoff from nearby farms, you wouldn't wait until you'd figured out how to
divert the runoff, or how to convert huge agribusiness corporations to
organic methods, or how to remove the contaminants from the water, before
you even said a word, would you? Not when your kids are getting sick. I
think
the economic situation is just as dire for a lot of people right now. So
I'm
glad they're making a ruckus about it.

--
Joyce

No I wouldn't. I also wouldn't march in the streets or camp in public
parks. I'd call those responsible and complain, and I'd write letters to
the newspapers.

Joy

Joy wrote:

wrote in message
...
Joy wrote:

I think you've summed it up very well, with one exception. I don't
think
the OWS people have any idea of how to solve the problems. I have some
sympathy for them too, but I don't understand how they think they can
accomplish anything when they are only complaining, not offering a
solution.
At least those who were protesting against the Viet Nam war knew had a
solution - get out of Viet Nam. I haven't seen any hint of a suggestion
about how to solve the current problems. In fact, the protesters here
aren't even all protesting the same thing.

Sometimes complaining is the first step in acknowledging a problem. Before
people can come up with solutions, the nature of the problem itself has to
be defined and agreed upon. This is a pretty complex situation, so I can
understand why people in different places or groups are tackling it from
different angles. That doesn't mean they're not protesting the same
essential
issue, which is a vast (and continuously growing) economic inequality.

One way to shut people up is to say, "All you can do is complain. Can you
do anything better?" People should be able to call attention to a problem
without having a 20-point plan completed and ready to go. It's a work in
progress.

If you found out that your water supply was contaminated by, say,
pesticide
runoff from nearby farms, you wouldn't wait until you'd figured out how to
divert the runoff, or how to convert huge agribusiness corporations to
organic methods, or how to remove the contaminants from the water, before
you even said a word, would you? Not when your kids are getting sick. I
think
the economic situation is just as dire for a lot of people right now. So
I'm
glad they're making a ruckus about it.

--
Joyce

No I wouldn't. I also wouldn't march in the streets or camp in public
parks. I'd call those responsible and complain, and I'd write letters to
the newspapers.

I'm glad there are people who would do that, also. I guess people take
whatever action suits them best.

--
Joyce

Mother teach me to walk again
Milk and honey, so intoxicating -- Sarah McLaughlin

Joy wrote:


No I wouldn't. I also wouldn't march in the streets or camp in public
parks. I'd call those responsible and complain, and I'd write letters to
the newspapers.

Joy


.....Which would be ignored by our corporatocracy (and has been for some
time), which is why the disappearing middle class is resorting to more
drastic means!

On 2011-10-20 4:05 PM, EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:


Joy wrote:


No I wouldn't. I also wouldn't march in the streets or camp in public
parks. I'd call those responsible and complain, and I'd write letters
to the newspapers.

Joy

....Which would be ignored by our corporatocracy (and has been for some
time), which is why the disappearing middle class is resorting to more
drastic means!

If you really think that demonstrations by a self-appointed minority
claiming to speak for '99%' (or any other group) is a good method of
obtaining social change, think about what's happened in the past when
other such groups have resorted to such methods, and then more drastic
means when they've failed, because they haven't nearly the support they
claim.

Once the principle that whoever causes the most disruption gets to
decide how the country is to be run has been established, there's
usually generations of violence and bloodshed before a comparatively
peaceful and law-abiding society can be re-established, and the idea
that it's possible to change governments without riots and
demonstrations becomes accepted once again.

Some parts of the world have never managed to gain, or regain, a halfway
effective government using non-violent methods of change BECAUSE they've
had centuries of government change by riot or even demonstrations.

Maybe the US is at the point at which it's about to collapse into
decades of anarchy punctuated by various unstable governments which
either appease or keep down the mobs, and all the consequent bloodshed
and misery, although I wouldn't have thought so, looking on from the
outside. That's where rule by 'demonstration' leads, though.

And I was really irritated when the local 'occupiers' made all those
claims about who they represent. I've yet to see a bit of evidence that
they represent anyone other than themselves.

--
Cheryl