Kinda Sucks To Subsidize Freeloaders, Huh?
Commenter Renee called this out from Occupy Wall Street, from an MSNBC story by Miranda Leitsinger:
"People forget this is the middle of the street," Burke said. "All walks of life are in here, so it's not like a bunch of crazy people are in this park. But there is an element in this park that is eating free food, living in tents and being subsidized by the movement. It's one of the weak parts of the movement, but it's changing. ... It's just a thing everyone's working out as we go along."
Renee wrote on "Occupy Sense":
HA! So you don't like to subsidize others and the way they live? But you want the big bad business men and government to subsidize your decision to go to some high dollar school and study American Folk Dancing or some crap? The irony was too funny not to share!!
Who doesn't like free stuff?
Dave B at November 3, 2011 10:59 AM
Many Liberals believe that all human activity is a social construct. People are directed by "society" to be a laborer, or a mathematician, or something else. Assuming this amazing irrationality, it then follows by pure reason (eyes closed) to require the discriminatory institutions of society to correct their unequal assignments. They need only the will to produce workers of all types and abilities in proportion to their numbers in the population.
Karl Marx on Social Identity
( marxists.org/archive/marx/works/subject/quotes/index.htm )
=== ===
In a communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic.
=== ===
This is one message of Occupy Wall Street. We went to school, now where are our careers? Why do we need to do one thing rather than another? It is pure Marx, a philosopher who proposed rules for a world that doesn't exist.
The Solution Is Simple
Andrew_M_Garland at November 3, 2011 11:48 AM
I also saw that riots broke out in Oakland with all the Occupiers. This was after blocking a major port all day. Thanks, guys. Those blue collar workers on the docks got your message loud and clear. They were sent home, minus one days wages. Job well done. The major corporations that you were trying to bother? Probably barely a blip on their radar. Again, what 12 year old is in charge of coming up with their "grand plans"?
Renee at November 3, 2011 1:01 PM
So let's sum up their accomplishments thus far:
1. They've turned public property (yes, property that belongs to the 100%) into a shanty town, sans running water or any other means of hygiene.
2. They've managed to get some young, impressionable girls sexually assaulted.
3. They've come up with a plan to break tax-payer's equipment at the post office by "mailing all things heavy". Oh yeah, and they probably managed to make the trash guys that pick up at the call centers they mailed their crap to work harder.
4. They've sent some hard-working Americans home from their jobs to "stick it to the man".
5. They've complained about subsidizing the homeless, because they are apparently not part of the 99%.
6. They've not come up with one plan of action that has common sense than my big toe.
Did I miss anything?
Renee at November 3, 2011 5:00 PM
"They were sent home, minus one days wages. "
When we buy into the media support for the powerful who could have easily granted everyone a paid day off but decided not to, well, what does that say about us and our willingness to accept whatever the TV tells us is right, wrong, and outrageous?
Personally I think setting the have-littles against the have-nots is much smarter than setting the have-lots against the have-everythings. The poor don't vote with their checkbooks, ya know.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at November 3, 2011 5:17 PM
Yeah, they get all upset when it happens directly to them; happening to someone else for something they approve of, well, that's fine!
Reminds me of the 'anarchists' rioting for more government money, more government regulation... if these clowns were actual anarchists they'd be rioting to GET RID OF THOSE THINGS.
Firehand at November 3, 2011 6:52 PM
@Renee
Were Oakland port workers sent home without pay? I thought the longshoreman's union supported yestersay's "General Strike". Figured they got their strike pay from the union.
Christopher at November 3, 2011 7:28 PM
Are OWS people wanting to freeload off of rich people? I thought they wanted jobs with decent wages.
NicoleK at November 3, 2011 7:56 PM
Why should the "rich" have to pay for "unnatural acts"? And you have to remember that it wasn't just the direct employees that were screwed by the OWS, it is every single trucker, food cart vendor, small business that does direct pickup that was affected as well.
The truckers are paid by their individual freight company from J.B. Hunt to the single Owner/Operator.
You missed the poor schmuck that is now probably going to be embroiled in a lawsuit for running over a couple of the idiots.
Jim P. at November 3, 2011 8:20 PM
Are OWS people wanting to freeload off of rich people? I thought they wanted jobs with decent wages.
Posted by: NicoleK
Well they want someone to pay off their loans for them. Apparenlty being too stupid to understand gender studies or liberal arts wont get you a good paying job is reason enough to demnad others pay for your bad decisions
lujlp at November 3, 2011 9:12 PM
You know, if these people *really* wanted jobs with decent wages, they wouldn't be so quick to refuse the many decent jobs out there that don't just happen to coincide with their failed educational choices.
Please tell me where in the profit oriented world is there a need for a PhD in gender studies?
Maybe there's an opening in some disfunctional university somewhere (though the competition must be fierce), but how is that going to translate to a job in the real world?
It really is pretty clear: They're entitlement babies, and they want someone else to do the hard work, and then hand them some money or prestige.
And this whole brouhaha is exacerbated by the fact that a large portion, if not most, of the OWS protesters come from an upper middle class background. They're not hurting in any meaningful way (and even more telling, they're bitching and moaning about the genuinely needy, like the homeless, coming in and taking advantage of the food and shelter in the OWS sites).
It's pretty clear to those with some real insight:
These people aren't really concerned with actually addressing the underlying problems with the financial structure of the country (or they'd be protesting congress and Obama).
They want special favors. Period, end of story.
There are some who call me 'Tim?' at November 4, 2011 12:10 AM
Please tell me where in the profit oriented world is there a need for a PhD in gender studies?
I'm really glad someone did a study of what all these people majored in, since people keep citing this "fact." That's super useful.
MonicaP at November 4, 2011 9:53 AM
In other news:
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/214426/20110915/unemployment-jobs-economy-college-graduate.htm
All those college degrees aren't so useless after all. People with college degrees ARE getting jobs at greater rates than people without. They just have to be willing to mortgage their future for them.
I'm sure all this nonsense about us not needing an educated workforce will continue, though.
MonicaP at November 4, 2011 10:03 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/03/kinda_sucks_to.html#comment-2740474">comment from MonicaPUSC is a private university (but may get public grants and aid -- I don't know), but I was on the radio the other day with a woman who heads...a social media studies program!
Amy Alkon at November 4, 2011 10:14 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2011/11/03/kinda_sucks_to.html#comment-2740477">comment from Amy AlkonLink: http://annenbergonlinecommunities.com/
Amy Alkon at November 4, 2011 10:16 AM
I think it's hilarious that we scream about 4th amendment violations at the airport against us and our kids but think nothing of calling for 1st amendment violations against these patchouli-addled OWSers.
Let them assemble, let them speak. This is America, not Bushutopia.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at November 4, 2011 12:43 PM
I think it's hilarious that we scream about 4th amendment violations at the airport against us and our kids but think nothing of calling for 1st amendment violations against these patchouli-addled OWSers.
Let them assemble, let them speak. This is America, not Bushutopia.
Posted by: Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers
Just because most of us think they are stupid, and a lot of us wish they would shut up, doesnt mean we are saying they cant speak. After all "shut up" is covered under free speech as well.
Also given prosteres have been hauled out of sight of Obama that last crack isnt really apropo
lujlp at November 4, 2011 1:53 PM
I have no issue with them assembling. I have no issue with them speaking or protesting. However...what is their goal? I still haven't been able to cipher that one. Without an agenda or goal, how do you know when to say, "Okay. Mission accomplished. Let's go home." Is this an indefinite thing?
Also, I never stated that they shouldn't be allowed to assemble. I do feel that they shouldn't be able to turn parks into rat-drawing campgrounds. I feel they shouldn't be able to interfere with other people (in their 99%!) being able to do their jobs. Finally, when they decide to break camp and go home...are THEY gonna clean up the mess that they left behind? I would guess that would be an emphatic NO. It's going to be left to city workers (who, by the way, are part of your precious 99%). Oh yeah, and the rest of us taxpayers get to fund that one too. I'm not part of the 99%. I'm part of the majority that would like to see something logical done about the current state of affairs, not just sitting in on a bitch-fest.
Renee at November 4, 2011 4:03 PM
"Let them assemble".
Fine. Let them assemble under the same conditions as the Tea Party and other protesting groups -- putting up thousands in fees and deposits, paying for security and sanitation, and obeying strict limits on the time and place of their assembly. Plus, being held responsible by the media for any extreme opinion stated by anyone in their midst, even if that person is an opposition infiltrator.
Cousin Dave at November 4, 2011 4:42 PM
Assembly and Camping are different.
Andrew_M_Garland at November 4, 2011 5:05 PM
"However...what is their goal? I still haven't been able to cipher that one."
I think it started out as "bring the fight to the people who actually own this country and its government" and then devolved in true hippie style into a save-the-whales, pansexual, anti-authoritarian drum circle.
It's like the Tea Party: they hold a rally to take back America and end up with a bunch of racist morons who don't know how to spell the words on their very own signs.
A little exclusivity when distributing invitations to these get-togethers would be a good idea.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at November 6, 2011 1:36 PM
Leave a comment