• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Occupy Wall Street protest

'Occupy D.C.' Goons Push Elderly Woman Down the Stairs

Occupy DC Protesters assaulted conservatives as they exited an Americans For Prosperity “Tribute to Ronald Reagan” dinner.

This elderly woman, 78 years old, rode 11 hrs on a bus from Detroit to attend the dinner. After the attack she was taken to hospital with multiple injuries, a bloody nose which developed after the fall, and a large knot on her head. After x-rays and a CAT scan, she was released the following morning with cuts and large bruises.



Class act.
 
Yes, better fork over the free ten gallons of water or the Occupiers will break your sink, clog your toilet and trash your restaurant. But you deserve that, you successful bastard...
 
12600 said:
I disagree with this tsst.

Not all want more goverment power to control corp.

Click to expand...
Did you listen to it? About 2:45 he says "elect Ron Paul". I may be leaping to assumption here but I am gonna guess he is not an "occupier". I am guessing Ron Paul is more of a yellow arrow type. :shrugs:
 
I think the easiest way to try to figure out the CORRECT path for this country, is to go in the direct opposite of what the major media tries to influence us to. Pretty much any one, or any group that they belittle, discredit, or try to ignore completely are the bandwagons we really should be joining.

Look how they have turned around terms that used to mean something that people used to be proud to be associated with into pretty much derogatory slurs: "militia" and "patriot". They are now doing the same thing with "Tea Party", and Ron Paul is pretty much being shunned concerning getting his name into the news media.

We are being led around by our short attention spans and smothered in fluff. And the powers that be sit back and chortle at us swallowing those whoppers they toss at us.
 
tsst said:
Did you listen to it? About 2:45 he says "elect Ron Paul". I may be leaping to assumption here but I am gonna guess he is not an "occupier". I am guessing Ron Paul is more of a yellow arrow type. :shrugs:
Click to expand...

Yes, I've heard it all the way through about 3 times to ensure I was getting his message clearly, (not saying that I am getting his message clearly still, because I am not in his shoes nor am I him.) but it never struck me that he may not be an Occupier, to me I only see him as an occupier. I also know that a lot of occupier agree with the views Ron Paul suggests "are" his views. (and I am saying it this way because there are plenty of presidents who have gotten in the hot seats and failed to deliver and in return just complied for what was easier.)
 
What a difference a couple generations makes ...
 

Attachments

  • everything.JPG
    everything.JPG
    57.8 KB · Views: 78
I am still trying to figure out what the occupiers want.

Is it to nuke Isreal?
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=370849

Perhaps it is to get free office space and farmland? (BTW I thought Cali was in tough financial times, can taxpayers afford this?)
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...e-feet-of-office-space-farmland-for-1-a-year/

Maybe they just needed some essentials from CVS?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...shoplifting-drug-violations-drunkenness-.html

Launching a career in adult entertainment?
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/11/25/gay-porn-movie-filmed-occupy-oakland

Or maybe it's as simple as some physical relief?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...rested-for-masturbating-in-front-of-children/


The world may never know! :nope:
 
Nearly 2.3 million have seen the video of the awful atrocities perpetrated by the police at UC Davis.


... but somehow less than 30,000 have seen the video right before that where the police were surrounded and detained by the occupiers … who then made demands for their release ... they were told that use of force would happen when transport arrived if the individuals did not clear a path... hmmmm maybe the police were not the awful ones in this case?!?!
 
I don't have time to read all of this right now but let me just give you my views.

First off I think that corporations should no longer be able to lobby the U.S. Government. Corporations paying for politicians political campaigns if they vote how the corporations want them to is bribery. I know there are some groups that can be positive that lobby for fund disease prevention or other things but I think that you just have to do away with all lobbying. No one gets any special say. The representatives are suppossed to represent their constituents not businesses.

Corporations should also lose their limited liability. Only in the most obscene cases are people ever prosecuted for breaking the law in a corporation. It is almost never the CEO or other higher ups that get in trouble for the company breaking the law either. In some cases maybe the CEO didn't know about it but it can't be that way most of the time. At the very least the CEO or other high people in the company basically tell someone farther down the totem pole to make bigger profits any way they can or they lose their job.

Also I think that corporations should not have to have their first priority be to their stock holders. I think that some ground has been gained in this area but until recently it was the LAW that corporations be first loyal to their share holders. But I heard on NPR the other day that you can now have a corporation that is neither non-profit or for-profit but a mix. It is a way for companies that care about doing good in the world to use a corporate model but having more freedom with what they do with their money. There was a company they were talking about that is a medical company that is creating low cost medical care in the developing country that is using this to where they can make profit and be publically traded but they aren't slaves to their shareholders and can use the money to do a public good.

Now this one will probably not be very popular with everyone but I am personally for some law that will limit the amount a CEO can make. I think the best way to do this is to have the CEO's salary and bonuses be no more then ten times the average salary or the median salary (whatever is lower) of say the lower 90% of the CEO's company. I'm not an economist so I don't know if that 90% is a good number and i didn't crunch any data but it sounds good to me. That means that if the average or median salary of your employees is 50,000 then the max that the CEO can make is 500,000. That way If a CEO wants to make more money they have to raise the salary of their workers too.

Another idea some of you wont like: in place of the salary thing I just said some economist have thought that a federal maximum wage of ten times the national average wage would be good for the economy but I think there would be major problems with this personally but it is still an idea but I like the salary idea better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top