Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

dsteingass wrote:@Auston - I know it was only like 15 real minutes ago, but it was 2 pages ago that you asked me about the links. I wasn't making a point there, I was just sharing right and left news stories about the topic

I'm not even sure either one of those was from the right, and I'm almost convinced the second one was artful fiction.
But ok I get it, no point just links. I was actually more confused by the first one, maybe I didn't get it but it seemed like screen shots of new reports?

Jihadin wrote:I'm sworn to defend the Constitution of the United States from both foreign and domestic

Hypothetically speaking if a war broke out between two groups over weather the current government threatened the constitution, who would you wide with? The people claiming to want to restore and protect the Constitution or the POTUS and Congress?

AustonT wrote:

dsteingass wrote:@Auston - I know it was only like 15 real minutes ago, but it was 2 pages ago that you asked me about the links. I wasn't making a point there, I was just sharing right and left news stories about the topic

I'm not even sure either one of those was from the right, and I'm almost convinced the second one was artful fiction.
But ok I get it, no point just links. I was actually more confused by the first one, maybe I didn't get it but it seemed like screen shots of new reports?

Jihadin wrote:I'm sworn to defend the Constitution of the United States from both foreign and domestic

Hypothetically speaking if a war broke out between two groups over weather the current government threatened the constitution, who would you wide with? The people claiming to want to restore and protect the Constitution or the POTUS and Congress?

He's bound by the government to serve the government, but Robert E. Lee fought for the south only because his family lived in the South and he didn't want to hurt them, in fact Robert E. Lee was partially punished for this reason when they seized his house in Arlington along with a lot of his land to create Arlington National Cemetery. To ask a soldier now and days which sides they would choose is stupid and can actually get them into trouble should the wrong person see it.

Also its supposed to be "whether" and not "weather".

halonachos wrote:No, I'm part of the 53% that's actually going out and working instead of being a BMW because I made some bad choices.

I'm guessing, being as you're a college student, that you aren't actually paying taxes (per the definition of "paying taxes" that is relevant); meaning that you aren't part of the 53%. Though, quite honestly, based on some "I am the 53%" signs, its likely that many of the people in question are not either.

halonachos wrote:
The upper class protestors do things against the will of the others, seems like such a nice organized protest.

Protesting has to be organized in order to be for a good cause?

halonachos wrote:
The occupy crowd has NAZI and Communist party support, the last time these two groups agreed with each other Poland was split into two.

You're really comparing the presence of two, generally opposing, groups at a single protest to the partition of Poland by nation-states? That's more than a little bit of a stretch.

halonachos wrote:
People do stupid gak for stupid reasons and before you're 25 your precognitive center hasn't fully developed and your emotions reign control until then.

I was unaware that, after age 25, people obtained some form of ESP.

That aside, and assuming you're talking about cognitive development and, more specifically Piagetian theories of it, there is little distinction made between emotional and logical thought processes. Rather, the question regards how, and to what degree, logic is employed; with emotion held as an effective constant.

halonachos wrote:
If you chose to do it for money then you screwed up and are just as greedy as the 1%, you're just more of an idiot than them.

More likely, he simply started without the same degree of wealth. I don't have hard numbers, but I would imagine that very few members of the 1% started out either outside it, or particularly far below it.

dogma wrote:More likely, he simply started without the same degree of wealth. I don't have hard numbers, but I would imagine that very few members of the 1% started out either outside it, or particularly far below it.

I guess that depends where the 1% starts, I don't really know. IIRC 80% of millionaires in the US are the first generation of thier family to be rich. I'd have to search for a source though. Where does the 1% start is it an accumulated wealth number or by yearly income?

dogma wrote:

halonachos wrote:No, I'm part of the 53% that's actually going out and working instead of being a BMW because I made some bad choices.

I'm guessing, being as you're a college student, that you aren't actually paying taxes (per the definition of "paying taxes" that is relevant); meaning that you aren't part of the 53%. Though, quite honestly, based on some "I am the 53%" signs, its likely that many of the people in question are not either.

Actually I do pay taxes. I owed $500 to federal and $100 to state for some odd reason after taxes. Seriously, I'm a full-time college student who is a dependent and I still pay taxes. That $600 is not including the taxes I had already paid.

dogma wrote:

halonachos wrote:
People do stupid gak for stupid reasons and before you're 25 your precognitive center hasn't fully developed and your emotions reign control until then.

I was unaware that, after age 25, people obtained some form of ESP.

That aside, and assuming you're talking about cognitive development and, more specifically Piagetian theories of it, there is little distinction made between emotional and logical thought processes. Rather, the question regards how, and to what degree, logic is employed; with emotion held as an effective constant.

Its actually biology affecting psychology, the amygdala matures before the pre-frontal cortex does. The amygdala controls the emotions that a person experiences so that means emotions control the reasoning of the person until the pre-frontal cortex develops. The pre-frontal cortex matures until about 20 years of age, but doesn't finish maturation until closer to 25 to 28 years of age. (From "Adolescence", Santrock, John. Thirteenth Edition.)

If you do want to include Piaget, it could be close to his Formal Operational stage which is characterized by abstract, idealistic, and logical. Note that it says idealistic.

halonachos wrote:
Wow, something on the John Stewart show. Apparantly in Zucati Park the OWS broke into two segments of upper class protestors and lower class protestors. The upper class protestors do things against the will of the others, seems like such a nice organized protest.

Yup. A comedy show is now the best source of unbiased news. Shows just how far we've fallen.

The occupy crowd has NAZI and Communist party support, the last time these two groups agreed with each other Poland was split into two.

You've not read anything beyond what Foxnewz has told you to have you? The question was rhetorical. I know the answer.

As to people forming mobs and protesting for no good reason, I know a few women from Salem who would like to have a word for you. The term is "mass hysteria", kind of like what happened when "War of the Worlds" was broadcast over the radio. People do stupid gak for stupid reasons and before you're 25 your precognitive center hasn't fully developed and your emotions reign control until then. That's psychology so when I look at this crowd I don't see a group of well reasoned individuals, I see a mass of emotions that are misdirected.

Is this really the stance you want to make? Think wisely about it. Look at all the veterans who support the movement; all the elderly who support the movement, and all the obviously 25+ people involved, and then come back here and tell me that they're just 'precognitively underdeveloped'. God, I wish I had your kind of precognitive prowess. I might have kept Kennedy alive.

GE and the poor have one thing in common, they don't pay taxes or get enough tax deductions that they actually get paid. That means there is something wrong with the tax code, there's nothing wrong with the corporations because they're doing what they're supposed to do. We need to reform the hell out of the current tax code but we have people in this crowd that support Obama who hasn't done anything to change the tax system, in fact he was one of them who supported the bailouts. I want Herman Cain because he would set a tax limit on them that would not be reduced, 9% for their business investments, 9% for their income, and 9% of whatever they spend. The rich will still be paying more in taxes thanks to 9% of 1,000 being more than 9% of 10, if they make more and get taxed the same percentage they still pay more.

Okay, and what does this have to do with the protesters?

They have degrees in heavily populated areas, you chose a CS major and learned IT. That's awesome because so did 1,000,000 others and they're all competing for 100 jobs. Why did they choose Computer Science, was it because it was their passion or did they choose it because they wanted money? If you chose to do it for money then you screwed up and are just as greedy as the 1%, you're just more of an idiot than them.

"Haha, you picked a job that, while at the time of you being interested, there was demand and promise of a fair wage, but in the meantime, we found a way to tell you to feth off. Now you have to go do skilled labour at the rate of 1000 grains of rice per day or flip burgers. I find no problem with this because this is not my form of employment." Again, come talk to us when you've tasted of the real world.

This movement is a failure, they're setting up ghettos in public and even private areas. The Boston Tea Party was a crime and guess what happened afterwards, people were punished.

And?

The OWS crowd is setting up shanties in private areas, that would be like the Tea Party going to your lawn and living there. They aren't just protesting, they're living on this land. That means they throw their garbage there, defecate and urinate there, and do whatever else there.

Perhaps I'd let them. The moment I can reasonably afford a lawn, I'll let you know. Until then, I'll continue to rent and hope in the meantime.

AustonT wrote:
I guess that depends where the 1% starts, I don't really know. IIRC 80% of millionaires in the US are the first generation of thier family to be rich. I'd have to search for a source though. Where does the 1% start is it an accumulated wealth number or by yearly income?

Theoretically there should be a great deal of overlap between the two, though wealth is probably the better measure given that, as income increases, the amount which is sourced from wealth (as opposed to work) tends to increase.

I'm not sure where the exact cut-off is either though, in terms of net worth, but I imagine its in the tens of millions.

Edit: According to this WSJ article to be a part of the 99th percentile (they refer to it as the 1st percentile, for some reason) you must be worth at least 6 million USD (2004).

daedalus wrote:

As to people forming mobs and protesting for no good reason, I know a few women from Salem who would like to have a word for you. The term is "mass hysteria", kind of like what happened when "War of the Worlds" was broadcast over the radio. People do stupid gak for stupid reasons and before you're 25 your precognitive center hasn't fully developed and your emotions reign control until then. That's psychology so when I look at this crowd I don't see a group of well reasoned individuals, I see a mass of emotions that are misdirected.

Is this really the stance you want to make? Think wisely about it. Look at all the veterans who support the movement; all the elderly who support the movement, and all the obviously 25+ people involved, and then come back here and tell me that they're just 'precognitively underdeveloped'. God, I wish I had your kind of precognitive prowess. I might have kept Kennedy alive.

And what about the hundreds of vets and current serving members of the military who counter the movement?


@daedalus, I've tasted the real world and I realize that it sucks. I'm passionate about helping people, but there are two constants in this world, death and taxes. I chose medical because I can help people and I will always have a job. I've been screwed over by a system and I plan to screw the system back should I need to, its all about playing it smart.

I look at medical school and I see that I need a 3.4 to look good. My GPA is a 2.7, but in my psychology classes I have a 3.3 and my GPA is determined by major, minor, and GER classes. So if I change my major before I send in my transcript I will have a nifty little 3.3. The system screwed me over by making it harder for me to get A's and B's compared to the rest of the country(we didn't use the 10 point scale in highschool, 94 was cutoff for an A, 86 was a B, 78 was a C.). The world is full of people screwing people over, but it won't stop me and if I have to I will respond in kind.

halonachos wrote:
Actually I do pay taxes. I owed $500 to federal and $100 to state for some odd reason after taxes. Seriously, I'm a full-time college student who is a dependent and I still pay taxes. That $600 is not including the taxes I had already paid.

Ah, you're still a dependent, that explains it.

halonachos wrote:
Its actually biology affecting psychology, the amygdala matures before the pre-frontal cortex does. The amygdala controls the emotions that a person experiences so that means emotions control the reasoning of the person until the pre-frontal cortex develops. The pre-frontal cortex matures until about 20 years of age, but doesn't finish maturation until closer to 25 to 28 years of age. (From "Adolescence", Santrock, John. Thirteenth Edition.)

I would dispute that. Emotion is always important to cognition, its simply that the development of the prefrontal cortex increases the ability of any given person to parse emotional attachment according to a hierarchy of value.

halonachos wrote:
If you do want to include Piaget, it could be close to his Formal Operational stage which is characterized by abstract, idealistic, and logical. Note that it says idealistic.

Idealism is no more deeply connected to emotion than logic is, and neither is entirely divorced from it. Logic can bring you to a conclusion given an initial set of premises (in the case of cognition, these are basically just emotional preferences). The dominance of emotion may make one more likely to hold a conviction, but it doesn't necessarily have any bearing on whether or not that conviction is based on logical processes.

AustonT wrote:I guess that depends where the 1% starts, I don't really know. IIRC 80% of millionaires in the US are the first generation of thier family to be rich. I'd have to search for a source though. Where does the 1% start is it an accumulated wealth number or by yearly income?

Related, Upward mobility does still exist for the lowest earners, and contrary to what many believe, downward mobility for the 1% is almost a given.

about 60 percent of households that were in the lowest income quintile in 1999 were in a higher quintile in 2007, and about a third of those in the lowest quintile moved to the middle quintile or higher. In other words, while it is difficult for one to rise from rags to riches, and while it may be harder now than it was in the past, there is still real upward economic mobility in the United States.

both the above from: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/283324/income-mobility-millionaires-veronique-de-rugy

And what about the hundreds of vets and current serving members of the military who counter the movement?

I would say maturity have a role in my/theirs view point. Most of our early adult life is regimentize. We learn that for something needs to happen one has to make happen. Also pride is another. Very few once leaving active duty service file for unemployment for up to a year and ride it out.

The other reason to counter is "whining". Whining loses you a bit of credibility. Yes I know OWS is a protest but its not organize as like a Tea Party Protest as a comparison.

Organization is another. Some serious lack of it and eventually the unions and what have you are trying to guide them into something they're not really conforming to. With organization one would at least know how to actualy protest, knowing the ordinance/law concerning the area they're protesting in (knowing that they cannot build a tent city and living there 24/7 is against the law) Its their responsibility to know the law and what they can and cannot do while they protest.

Responsibility of one actions. If one instigate a law enforcement officer then one should know the peril he/she going to get into. If one is being instigated by a law enforcement officer then one needs to step behind the line to defuse the escalation. Example be US troops approaching a mosque to get the shooters from there which drew a lot of attention and a riot almost insued cause of their action. Command was giving to take knee and smile at the locals. Tension level dropped. Responsibility also let one know where to urinate and defecate in a facility then instead of on the ground in a public place.

well...to name a few.

Hypothetically speaking if a war broke out between two groups over weather the current government threatened the constitution, who would you wide with? The people claiming to want to restore and protect the Constitution or the POTUS and Congress?

halonachos cover that quite well for me. The military takes it commands from the PROTUS who is our Commander in Chief who was duly elected by the people..well...electoral. Before I go further I want to clarify a lawful order to an unlawful order:

If I'm order to maintain a line to keep the protest from spreading I will hold the line. I will not advance the line nor withdraw the line. If my line is pressed then I've no issue for my soldiers to zipcuff an individual who's trying to instigate a altercation with my soldier. I lot of us wear combat gloves that have hardened plastic knuckles to put someone in the right frame of mind after two hits. Thats a lawful order being carried out. If my soldier commits to repeatedly beat a insurg...eerrrr protestor beyond reasonable then he took it upon himself to break a lawful order and he better be willing to face remaficatin of the action he took.

If I'm called upon to fire into the crowd without being fired upon then thats an unlawful order and will not be followed. Unless some idiot has a weapon in the crowd and willing to use it. There be so many flashbangs thrown to take down the "Hero" it would not be funny. I will advance my line pass the main line of resistence to secure the protestors and shooter (everyone gets zippedcuff). If someone pulls a assualt rifle out from the protestor side so be it. One can wave it around and what not but unless he points the weapon at us then I'm sure the police sniper will take care of him for us if not then I will give the order to take him out with my designated shooter. Its still a lawful order since now we're at deadly force level.

If orders came down to secure the leaders of the protest its unlawful. I have to wait for the leaders to instigate against my soldiers. I will not order my troops to go in to get a leader.

I better stop since I'm going of topic

I would add ability to define a problem and come up with a course of action (or multiple COAs) geared towards achieving a defined objective and target the right target.

As for responsibility for one's actions, I would argue that the OWS crowd is protesting in part to avoid just that. One of the major issues they brought up early was forgiveness of debt/student loans. Loans they applied for, accepted, and spent but now feel they shouldn't have to pay back... Typical trooper understands when you sign you commit.

murdog wrote:Thats exactly the kind of post I'm talking about, halo. How can we have a conversation if that is what you believe this to be about? In your opinion, the people there are all whining communists, nazis, drug addicts and cop-haters who run anti-military websites and are getting paid to protest? Yikes! Where do you get your information? Please show me where to find out about all the cop-beating college kids.

Here's a link to college kid-beating cops:

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/11/11/occupy_cal_39_arrested_in_forceful

And sorry to burst your bubble, but they do represent you, you just don't realize it. Unless of course you are part of the one percent that control most of the wealth and power in the world, and then, would you really be posting on Dakka Dakka?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And yet another post hoping for violence... what's up with that?

No those pieces of filth don't represent me. Statements like that just make me hate them. I represent me, not vermin who forgot how to bathe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

d-usa wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

d-usa wrote:So you might call me paranoid, but I fully believe that the police department in these cities coordinated a mass raid against #occupy in order to dilute the negative impact these actions would have.

Ignore list achieved

Behold the power of having your world view challenged

Not quite Zippy. What are you fifteen? If it was coordinated, it would have been coordinated. There are other cities in the US besides NY and Oakland. Pro-tip, read a ing map.

"Pieces of filth".

"Vermin."

Some interesting choices and views here.

Some interesting choices and views here.

Itchy trigger finger for the water cannon

just the water cannon....no urge to be a OWS and shoot at the W.H. or threaten/stir up to burn down the city..

Just want my water cannon

Mannahnin wrote:"Pieces of filth".

"Vermin."

Some interesting choices and views here.

And rightly so. Don't claim to represent me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:

Some interesting choices and views here.

Itchy trigger finger for the water cannon

just the water cannon....no urge to be a OWS and shoot at the W.H. or threaten/stir up to burn down the city..

Just want my water cannon

Who doesn't want a water cannon?

The ultimate water cannon baby!

@Jihadin honest answer is honest.

Oh look, support for Occupystarbucks down to 33%.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-favor-fading.html

I would so love to roll up on OWS with that Fraz. I stencil "Motivation" on one tube and "Dedication" on the other tube. I see two pressure setting I think. So above the first trigger I stamp in "God" and over the other button "Better then God".....evil evil fun thoughts

To be really honest. If there were um...alcohol flowing freely thoughout the protest....and the Mother of All Water Guns is unleashed. As my troops advance to make the protestors disengage. Alcohol will be confiscated as evidence. Afterwards I will say "What alcohol" on somewhat steady feet...

Frazzled wrote:Oh look, support for Occupystarbucks down to 33%.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-favor-fading.html

So what you're saying is that, in spite of press showing them to be crackpots and reporting on only the fringe of the group, OWS's approval rating is still somehow only over three times that of congress? Perhaps we should demand OWS for congress.

daedalus wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Oh look, support for Occupystarbucks down to 33%.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-favor-fading.html

So what you're saying is that, in spite of press showing them to be crackpots and reporting on only the fringe of the group, OWS's approval rating is still somehow only over three times that of congress? Perhaps we should demand OWS for congress.

Bragging they have higher approval than Congress is like saying they have higher approval than a gang of criminals, but I repeat myself.

I wonder about these so-called scientific approval rating numbers. In order to use the Scientific Method you need to have a sample from the population to poll, where do they get their samples? Who are the samples?

dsteingass wrote:I wonder about these so-called scientific approval rating numbers. In order to use the Scientific Method you need to have a sample from the population to poll, where do they get their samples? Who are the samples?

Rats and Guinea Pigs that's why it's scientific.

dsteingass wrote:I wonder about these so-called scientific approval rating numbers. In order to use the Scientific Method you need to have a sample from the population to poll, where do they get their samples? Who are the samples?

Did you just skip the link provided? A link to the results from that link gives http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_US_11161023.pdf and has some of the info, and their website has more info on their methods.

So, it looks like there are new tactics for OWS today...

Perhaps they are going to switch to the 9 to 5 method of only protesting during business hours now? Would that make them "legitimate" enough?

Of course not. They could create an official OWS party, participate in local and national elections, have a congressional caucus, and still be branded as crazy, dirty hippies.... So why go through those traditional routes. if the rules don't work for you, why bother following them?

After all, if you "win" then it was all legitimate anyway. If you lose, who cares you were losing in the first place right?

Easy E wrote:So, it looks like there are new tactics for OWS today...

Perhaps they are going to switch to the 9 to 5 method of only protesting during business hours now? Would that make them "legitimate" enough?

Of course not. They could create an official OWS party, participate in local and national elections, have a congressional caucus, and still be branded as crazy, dirty hippies.... So why go through those traditional routes. if the rules don't work for you, why bother following them?

After all, if you "win" then it was all legitimate anyway. If you lose, who cares you were losing in the first place right?

Just out of curiosity, if these OWS folks disrupt the exchange (which is their stated intent), who does it really hurt? I bet my 401k, my IRAs, and the investments of any of the "99%" that have investments (i.e. most of the middle class) get hurt a LOT more than the "1%".

lack of situational awareness.....

Easy E wrote:So, it looks like there are new tactics for OWS today...

Perhaps they are going to switch to the 9 to 5 method of only protesting during business hours now? Would that make them "legitimate" enough?

It makes me like them a lot more. Think about it, for the last full week, they haven't been talking about wall street at all. It's been about police and tents. Now that we've gotten this tent business out of the way, they can work on choosing a consistent core message and short set of demands.

Of course not. They could create an official OWS party, participate in local and national elections, have a congressional caucus, and still be branded as crazy, dirty hippies.... So why go through those traditional routes. if the rules don't work for you, why bother following them?

Because being called crazy dirty hippies doesn't actually hurt you in any way. Why go through traditional routes if you're going to be called hippies? Wah wah wah. Everyone in politics gets called things. Democrats get called commies, republicans get called nazis, libertarians get called anarchists. Welcome to the club.

After all, if you "win" then it was all legitimate anyway. If you lose, who cares you were losing in the first place right?

Um, yes, but doesn't this sentiment detract from the point immediately before it?

Just out of curiosity, if these OWS folks disrupt the exchange (which is their stated intent)

Missed that part?

Honestly though I really can't even begin to comment on what they SHOULD be doing until I actually know their goal.

They need to pick 3 or less things that they want accomplished. Once they do that, I can comment on the correct play for accomplishing them through protest.