Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Climate protesters to 'flood' Wall Street on Monday


freebuddy

Recommended Posts

While their target may be misplaced, should the message be ignored?

I don't think we see the same message there.

I see Freudian displacement, and scapegoating, as the real message.

Instead of doing their part, or admitting they just don't give a f@$k, they protest others for profiting from a system they themselves continue to feed.

It starts with being honest with yourself, and for my part, I'll freely admit I am part of the problem. I own a smart phone two vehicles ect.

If I wanted to get off my a$$ and fight the power there are a lot of sacrifices I would need to make, that I am currently not willing to.

The change would start with me and the decisions I make, not with me b!#@ing at someone else to do the things I'm not willing to do.

It's like that story Ronning tells about Linden in 94'. He took the needle in his broken ribs down the hall so nobody would hear him scream. Then walked into the dressing room like it was all good. Ronning heard it and thought (And I paraphrase) "Whatever happens tonight, we better bring it, cause that guy just raised the bar"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we see the same message there.

I see Freudian displacement, and scapegoating, as the real message.

Instead of doing their part, or admitting they just don't give a f@$k, they protest others for profiting from a system they themselves continue to feed.

It starts with being honest with yourself, and for my part, I'll freely admit I am part of the problem. I own a smart phone two vehicles ect.

If I wanted to get off my a$$ and fight the power there are a lot of sacrifices I would need to make, that I am currently not willing to.

The change would start with me and the decisions I make, not with me b!#@ing at someone else to do the things I'm not willing to do.

It's like that story Ronning tells about Linden in 94'. He took the needle in his broken ribs down the hall so nobody would hear him scream. Then walked into the dressing room like it was all good. Ronning heard it and thought (And I paraphrase) "Whatever happens tonight, we better bring it, cause that guy just raised the bar"

To be clear. People don't need to cast off all their possessions and become monks. Just be mindful of your purchases.

Try to buy local. Make due with a smaller (or one) car. Buy higher quality tools/machines etc and *gasp* share them with your friends/family/neighbours. Buy goods made from sustainable materials/with workers paid fair wages from companies who actually make an effort to tread lighter on the environment.

It's really not that difficult, it just requires people to stop being mindless, stuff acquiring consumer zombies. People just need to think (I know, sounds like a lot to ask).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? We're painting with broad strokes here aren't we? You and him are of like mind. Peas in a pod. You both fit in a tidy "conservative" box wrapped with a bow.

The difference is, when I paint with broad strokes, I look good doing it.

Your broad strokes have you comparing me to a fake character. I'm not silly enough to compare you to Speshul Ed, even though the shoe would fit. ;)

To be clear. People don't need to cast off all their possessions and become monks. Just be mindful of your purchases.

Try to buy local. Make due with a smaller (or one) car. Buy higher quality tools/machines etc and *gasp* share them with your friends/family/neighbours. Buy goods made from sustainable materials/with workers paid fair wages from companies who actually make an effort to tread lighter on the environment.

It's really not that difficult, it just requires people to stop being mindless, stuff acquiring consumer zombies. People just need to think (I know, sounds like a lot to ask).

Man, no one does nor will do most of those things you mentioned.

In North America we're far more concerned with trinkets, and obsessed with paying rock bottom prices without understanding what goes into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is, when I paint with broad strokes, I look good doing it.

Your broad strokes have you comparing me to a fake character. I'm not silly enough to compare you to Speshul Ed, even though the shoe would fit. ;)

So you're witty retort to my pointing out your flawed and ridiculous "broad stroke" thinking is to basically call me retarded.

Ferris Bueller you're my hero :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're witty retort to my pointing out your flawed and ridiculous "broad stroke" thinking is to basically call me retarded.

Ferris Bueller you're my hero :rolleyes:

Well, the thing is, you never refuted my "broad stroke". Where are all the liberals who support capitalism and limited government?

Chances are, in the discussion of OWS/AGW movements, you won't find 'em.

Painting things with a broad stroke is only a bad idea when very few are like the broad stroke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Refuted your ridiculous sentiment that all liberal-minded people are a hive mind and opposed to capitalism and efficient government? Why would I ever waste my time?

"Efficient" government -- the US government that efficiently makes things worse the more power it gets to "regulate" things? Because so many liberals think this is a "regulation" problem (as in, need more government) rather than a "big government" problem where the populace would be better served if the government stayed out as much as possible? We're starting to get to the crux of it here.. and it's looking pretty good for my argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Efficient" government -- the US government that efficiently makes things worse the more power it gets to "regulate" things? Because so many liberals think this is a "regulation" problem (as in, need more government) rather than a "big government" problem where the populace would be better served if the government stayed out as much as possible? We're starting to get to the crux of it here.. and it's looking pretty good for my argument.

Thanks for editorializing my posts with your own misguided spin.

I thought you wanted the government to better control corporations (whom you evidently believe can't and won't do it themselves)?

So full of contradictions and hypocrisy on top of the broad strokes. That's swell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for editorializing my posts with your own misguided spin.

I thought you wanted the government to better control corporations (whom you evidently believe can't and won't do it themselves)?

So full of contradictions and hypocrisy on top of the broad strokes. That's swell.

No, not to control corporations. It's interesting that you counter what you call editorializing with pulling the very same thing.

Take the financial crisis..

If "regulations" were allowed to run the day, there'd have never been a subprime market.

Instead, Democrats thought of a wonderful idea.. how about we pass legislation undermining the regulations we already have, subsidizing the subprime market, and guaranteeing loans to people banks wouldn't issue that kind of credit to on their own! We can call it "giving houses to the poor".

Of course, all that wound up being was a mandate to the housing market and predatory lending.. causing a housing bubble and increasing the default risk of the subprime market.

I could go further into depth about this, but the solution here was for government to keep what regulations it had and stay out, let the banks determine who they want to issue credit to, and deal with the repercussions of their loans on their own. If the government were out of the way, instead of incentivizing, then guaranteeing bad loans, banks and credit issuers in general would be more cautious who they would be issuing credit to. Whenever government gets involved in the economy, more often than not, they directly support and encourage stupid economic behaviour companies otherwise wouldn't do.

Yet once again liberals whined about it being from a lack of regulation. Hard to be about regulation when regulations were in place and the government was deliberately circumventing it's own regulations. But hey, I've got a great idea.. let's do some more regulation!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corporations are as responsible for "rigging the game" as they are for Americans being fat.

A liberal will blame them for all of the above.

Wall Street is not "good". Wall Street is pathetic. A bunch of rich guys formally begging for special treatment at "dinners", in Congress, etc., and to thumb their noses at capitalism by trying to use taxpayers as collateral in place of them bearing the risk of their own ventures.. wanting to only bear the fruits of those risks.

I have zero respect for those people, but make no mistake, there's also zero logic in blaming those people for when the government, the entity entrusted with saying no, decides to oblige them.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but where do you get that this is part of the "rabid OWS" movement to begin with, and why are you dragging economics into this? As near as I can see, what the people want at this particular protest is to call attention to the effects of burning fossil fuels and Wall Street's participation in it. Are you against people peacefully gathering to protest this? Isnt that what democracy is about? Also, this seems to be an extention of the protesting that happened over the weekend in NYC and around the world to get their GOVERNMENTS to act. Since you seem to share the same disgust against Wall Street fatcats that the OWS people do, does that qualify you as a "liberal" in your own definition of the word?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to put too fine a point on this, but where do you get that this is part of the "rabid OWS" movement to begin with, and why are you dragging economics into this? As near as I can see, what the people want at this particular protest is to call attention to the effects of burning fossil fuels and Wall Street's participation in it. Are you against people peacefully gathering to protest this? Isnt that what democracy is about? Also, this seems to be an extention of the protesting that happened over the weekend in NYC and around the world to get their GOVERNMENTS to act. Since you seem to share the same disgust against Wall Street fatcats that the OWS people do, does that qualify you as a "liberal" in your own definition of the word?

Well no, Wall Street is not the government, they're protesting what they see is capitalism being the problem, which is why they advocate for "government" to do something about it.

I do appreciate your attempts to obfuscate the issue, such as adding that I'm "against people protesting". If you aren't a pundit for the American media, I'd suggest you put in your résumé for it. You've got the gimmick down pat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well no, Wall Street is not the government, they're protesting what they see is capitalism being the problem, which is why they advocate for "government" to do something about it.

I do appreciate your attempts to obfuscate the issue, such as adding that I'm "against people protesting". If you aren't a pundit for the American media, I'd suggest you put in your résumé for it. You've got the gimmick down pat.

No, I simply asked if you were against people protesting in peaceful assembly. What's wrong with advocating that the government and Wall Street do something about climate change? Aren't you advocating that government keep limited authority over business and didn't you also claim to despise Wall Street fatcats?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I simply asked if you were against people protesting in peaceful assembly. What's wrong with advocating that the government and Wall Street do something about climate change? Aren't you advocating that government keep limited authority over business and didn't you also claim to despise Wall Street fatcats?

I would recommend reading post #46, that answers your questions -- well, the ones worth answering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would recommend reading post #46, that answers your questions -- well, the ones worth answering.

Okay, so people are just supposed to sit back and let the lobbyists who work for the corporations tell the politicians to "limit" government and hope that they act in such a fashion as to stop producing fossil fuels instead of renewable energy? Good luck with that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so people are just supposed to sit back and let the lobbyists who work for the corporations tell the politicians to "limit" government and hope that they act in such a fashion as to stop producing fossil fuels instead of renewable energy? Good luck with that.

So the solution then is let's go protest Wall Street because government decides to cater to corporations and their lobbyists rather than their constituents... good luck with that accomplishing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...