‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

. Seriously, you need to move on from the French Revolution now. Or read Peter McPhee's excellent book on the subject. I would suggest Eric Hobspawn on Revolutions but as he was a Marxist all that extreme leftiness and talk of the dialectic might distress you (it drives me spare!).

And really - for the last time. I did NOT compare the French Revolution to Dame Street - I used the French Revolution as an example of changes in societies brought about by people complaining! I also used the American Revolution, Stonewall Riots, Easter 1916 and Rosa Parks on the damn bus!

It's not remarkable to find more than half the population expressing dissatisfaction with a sitting government, especially during a period of economic recession and public spending cutbacks. In the USA at present, just 11 percent of the population is satisfied with the performance of Congress. In the UK in June, just 35 percent felt that the government was doing a good job, while 50 percent said they were doing a bad job.

89% unhappy with the US Congress -and Occupy camps are beginning in more US cities every day. Occupy camps are spreading across the UK too - perhaps it's a coincidence. I don't think so. Whether you like it or not (and I would suspect it is a big not) - this movement is growing and shows no sign of halting.

It's important to note that degrees of dissatisfaction also exist. The fact that 55 percent of the people are dissatisfied cannot be interpreted to mean that the country is poised on the brink of revolution.

Well, I think we can surmise that the crowds of people who have marched through Dublin and Cork two Saturdays in a row - plus those who have established Occupy Camp in Galway and Belfast it would appear that for an ever increasing percentage the degree of dissatisfaction is growing every day.


I never said the country was poised on the brink of Revolution - at least not a violent revolution- but I do think the potential is there for a political revolution.

hatrickpatrick

ei.sdraob wrote: »

I see this whole 1% vs 99% nonsense is surfacing again

So according to @Bannasidhe the 1% are people who are satisfied with the government? Its interesting how this definition of this elusive 1% group keeps changing :rolleyes:

Got almighty you're starting to really piss me off. Would you look up the definition of "metaphor", 1% DOES NOT REFER TO A LITERAL STATISTIC, IT'S A SYMBOLIC METAPHOR, AS IS THE CENTRAL BANK AS A PROTEST LOCATION

Got it?
If you ask either of those questions again I for one will ignore them. I urge everyone else to do the same.

hatrickpatrick

Scofflaw wrote: »

Yes, that's what I said.



No offence, but exactly the same thing was said about the last round of protests, and the round before that. And protesting about the pain of a burst bubble when nobody protested the creation of the bubble remains unimpressive anyway - if anything, the less impressive the more people protest.

cordially,
Scofflaw

For the final time, it's not about the pain of the burst bubble. It's about the massive injustice in how that pain is being distributed versus who had a direct hand in causing the crisis.

When I see Seanie Fitz counting his change, shopping in Lidl and queuing up for unemployment benefit like so many victims of his and his bank's corrupt behaviour, then I will stop protesting.

As of right now, justice is not being served. The people whose corrupt actions played a substantial role in causing the mess are walking away with lots of the cash and none of the consequences.

And again, this isn't about practical solutions, I'm 100% aware that his money isn't going to get Ireland out of this situation, but I'm sickened by the fact that I, someone who wasn't even remotely involved in causing this disaster am being asked to pay for it, but the man whose fraud brought down a bank and took a huge chunk of the economy with it is having every blind eye turned to him by those who have the power to hold him accountable.

And he's just ONE example of someone in the 1%. Just one. There are so many I couldn't even count them. The amount of croneyism, corruption and buck passing among the political elite in this country is an absolute, utter, indefensible disgrace.

I don't mind being asked to contribute. But those whose deliberate corruption directly precipitated this situation damn well better be asked to contribute too.

Scofflaw

EI_Flyboy wrote:

Does having your vote ignored not count? How many times have we voted more than once on the European referanda...?

I'm afraid that's just a failure to understand how referendums work.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I think many feel that the current system does render them 'otherwise precluded from having any influence on politics'. The last GE was an anomaly in terms of voter participation and much of it was an anger vote aimed against FF.

I'm afraid not - the previous general election turnout was 67.03%, and, again, 86% of those who voted voted for mainstream parties (again, I'm including SF there). And 42% of people voted for Fianna Fáil, which might explain their annoyance in 2011.

Look at the current Presidential election as well - Sean Gallagher is very visibly a product of one of our political parties, whatever about the strength of his current links, and the other candidates are largely so as well. Those that aren't - Norris, Davis, and Dana - are at the bottom of the pile.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Now that FG/LP are full steam ahead with basically same policies as the previous government and U turning on their pre-election(while chanting the same its the IMF/ECB making us do it mantra) promises I reckon that feeling of being precluded from having any influence has intensified.

I'd agree that that's likely to annoy people, but it's still not the same as disenfranchisement. Over-promising and under-delivering has been a characteristic feature of voting for representatives probably since the Neolithic.

At the moment, it's a lot harder to influence the policies taken by the government because they really are subject to a very constraining set of circumstances. The reason - or part of the reason - we don't have Greek-style rioting and civil disobedience seems to be that people understand that.

So although I dislike the conclusion, I personally think that any reform movement needs to be realistic, and face the fact that the current system really does satisfy the majority of the public. As a result, 'popular' movements based on the idea that there is widespread public dissatisfaction just waiting to be tapped have foundered one after another, and I would see this one likely going the same way.

After all, here on this forum you're dealing with people who are pretty much pre-qualified in terms of interest in politics, yet it can hardly be said that people are queuing up to offer their support.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

For the final time, it's not about the pain of the burst bubble. It's about the massive injustice in how that pain is being distributed versus who had a direct hand in causing the crisis.

When I see Seanie Fitz counting his change, shopping in Lidl and queuing up for unemployment benefit like so many victims of his and his bank's corrupt behaviour, then I will stop protesting.

As of right now, justice is not being served. The people whose corrupt actions played a substantial role in causing the mess are walking away with lots of the cash and none of the consequences.

And again, this isn't about practical solutions, I'm 100% aware that his money isn't going to get Ireland out of this situation, but I'm sickened by the fact that I, someone who wasn't even remotely involved in causing this disaster am being asked to pay for it, but the man whose fraud brought down a bank and took a huge chunk of the economy with it is having every blind eye turned to him by those who have the power to hold him accountable.

And he's just ONE example of someone in the 1%. Just one. There are so many I couldn't even count them. The amount of croneyism, corruption and buck passing among the political elite in this country is an absolute, utter, indefensible disgrace.

I don't mind being asked to contribute. But those whose deliberate corruption directly precipitated this situation damn well better be asked to contribute too.

That's not really justice so much as revenge, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I never said the country was poised on the brink of Revolution - at least not a violent revolution- but I do think the potential is there for a political revolution.

I wouldn't go that far, as per the post above, but I'd agree that we're in danger of wasting some potential for political change.

But I'll say it again - I don't think the sort of process represented by the Occupy movement here will yield much of direct consequence or value, if anything.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hayte

Right and thats fair enough. But you do realize that nobody ever achieved anything with that sort of attitude right?

I don't pretend that OWS is the panacea of financial and political reform but it is a positive paradigm. Its strategy and stated aim is constantly subject to change and it is an open dialogue. That alone makes it a far cry from what our representative democracy has become - beholden to special interests and incredibly opaque.

Scofflaw

Hayte wrote: »

Right and thats fair enough. But you do realize that nobody ever achieved anything with that sort of attitude right?

No, I don't "realise" that. In fact, I think the opposite.

Hayte wrote: »

I don't pretend that OWS is the panacea of financial and political reform but it is a positive paradigm. Its strategy and stated aim is constantly subject to change and it is an open dialogue. That alone makes it a far cry from what our representative democracy has become - beholden to special interests and incredibly opaque.

Funnily enough, our republic is quite openly beholden to special interests. Between them, though, those special interests represent most of the population.

cordially,
Scofflaw

antoobrien

Hayte wrote: »

Its strategy and stated aim is constantly subject to change and it is an open dialogue.

Would it be fair to say that it's for/against anything the "movement" decides it's for/against?

Godge

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The movement is strictly non-violent so if there are riots - it will not emanate from the Occupy movement.

So you say but do others agree?

EI_Flyboy wrote: »

Im not making a threat, I'm pointing out what I feel is obvious. If things continue the way they are, with more and more people percieving the status quo as grossly unfair and them taking to the streets, unless something is done to reverse that trend then riots are inevitable. Riots are even predicted in many IMF restructuring plans. You also make the mistake of failing to recognise that those on Dame street are only a small part of a global protest.



If things get heated, all that's needed is a spark. Plenty of those 1%ers are investing heavily in security so it can be argued that they're expecting the worst wherever it comes from. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/19/business/protests-are-a-payday-for-security-firms.html?_r=1

Besides, it's been show some of our Gards are without a huge respect for civil rights and it only takes one rotten apple whichever side of the fence it's on.

Small minority (seeminly anti-establishment) political movement rejecting democracy claiming to reach out to the real public backed by violence in the streets = Fascism.

If the violence happens as you predict, the only thing missing is a strong leader to unite the movement.

ei.sdraob

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Got almighty you're starting to really piss me off. Would you look up the definition of "metaphor", 1% DOES NOT REFER TO A LITERAL STATISTIC, IT'S A SYMBOLIC METAPHOR, AS IS THE CENTRAL BANK AS A PROTEST LOCATION

Got it?
If you ask either of those questions again I for one will ignore them. I urge everyone else to do the same.

Oh will you please stop, the whole 1% did start out as the richest 1% in US

wikipedia wrote:

The participants' slogan "We are the 99% refers to income inequality in the United States between the top 1% who control about 40% of the wealth.

Now that I have shown that here in Ireland the situation is very different you are trying to change the meaning and weasel out of it
You know well if you used the word like the "elites" people would start rolling their eyes and think you are coming from the conspiracy theory forum, so you trying to change the meaning to suit yourself.
It is becoming quite clear now that the Occupy movement here in Ireland dont have a clue as to what they want, or a clear set of aims.

Even the SF who I disagree with on just about everything understand that they have to work within the democratic framework and laws of this country (having broken so many of them in past!), The occupy mob on the other hand is just that a mob, for it to become a political movement here in Ireland is has to grow up.

hatrickpatrick

Scofflaw wrote: »

That's not really justice so much as revenge, though.

cordially,
Scofflaw

It's not if you think about it. In an equal society, of equal human beings, justice denotes that those who commit crimes pay for them - regardless of who they are or what social group they belong to.

It also denotes that if, as we're being told, "everyone must share the pain", this must include the aforementioned clique.

It's not mere revenge. Justice is a fundamental aspect of any civilized society, and I don't want to live in a society where those at the top don't have to face it like the rest of us would.

hatrickpatrick

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Oh will you please stop, the whole 1% did start out as the richest 1% in US

Have you ever heard of a little thing called "The Atlantic Ocean"?
It's a rather large body of saltwater, in which there is a plate boundary. Arguably, that plate boundary is what separates the continents of Europe and America, physically speaking.

And y'know, situations and circumstances on different sides of this ocean are not identical.

In other words: Stop relating everything to the US. Each country has different problems, inequalities, and injustices.
What's next, if an Occupy China movement springs up are you going to try and use the US criteria to define it?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It's not if you think about it. In an equal society, of equal human beings, justice denotes that those who commit crimes pay for them - regardless of who they are or what social group they belong to.

It also denotes that if, as we're being told, "everyone must share the pain", this must include the aforementioned clique.

It's not mere revenge. Justice is a fundamental aspect of any civilized society, and I don't want to live in a society where those at the top don't have to face it like the rest of us would.

The problem there is this - if a society has not defined something as a crime before the fact, then anyone committing that act has no case to answer after the fact.

The Irish public for over a decade accepted a government that was publicly known to be soft on white-collar crime (see the ODCE saga), and treated that attitude on the part of the government as either a trivial issue, or as a reasonable part of a "business-friendly" strategy. The Irish public cannot therefore reasonably call for punishment after the fact.

cordially,
Scofflaw

hatrickpatrick

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Now that I have shown that here in Ireland the situation is very different you are trying to change the meaning and weasel out of it

I'm not in any way changing the meaning or trying to weasel away from anything. Look at my posts in the three threads we have now on this subject, in all of them I have defined the 1% in Ireland as the social/political elite clique which is protected above everyone else.

You know well if you used the word like the "elites" people would start rolling their eyes and think you are coming from the conspiracy theory forum, so you trying to change the meaning to suit yourself.

...

I have happily used the word "elites" in pretty much all of my posts on this subject, and I don't bat an eyelid whilst using it. If you want to pretend that we don't have croneyism that's your own choice, I suppose if it makes you feel better about the state of the country then so be it, but kindly don't bash those who recognize the blindingly obvious.

It is becoming quite clear now that the Occupy movement here in Ireland dont have a clue as to what they want, or a clear set of aims.

It's developing. Do you know how many different aims and factions there were at the start of IReland's fight for independence? There were people who wanted home rule (still being a UK dominion, just with a local parliament), there were people who simply wanted a better deal over land ownership and tenancy (The Land League), there were those who wanted a completely separate republic, there were those who wanted Ireland to control internal affairs and the UK to control foreign affairs, there were total Unionists, I could go on and on.
Stop expecting something so new to be resolved quickly. It's like how everyone started saying the Arab Spring was a failure because Libya's regime didn't topple in 48 hours like Egypt's and Tunisia's did. Most revolutions take years, why would this one be any different?

Even the SF who I disagree with on just about everything understand that they have to work within the democratic framework and laws of this country (having broken so many of them in past!), The occupy mob on the other hand is just that a mob, for it to become a political movement here in Ireland is has to grow up.

The "democratic" framework of this country is not democratic, as I have outlined time and time again in these threads. And I'm frankly tired of repeating myself. Read my previous posts. If it was democratic, we wouldn't have "teacher's pets". If it was democratic, there would be democratic accountability.

The framework itself needs to change before we can arrogantly declare that we have a functioning "democracy".

20Cent

Good article here explaining what its about.
Wall Street Isn't Winning – It's Cheating

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/owss-beef-wall-street-isnt-winning-its-cheating-20111025

The Irish situation is different to course but this affects us also.

hatrickpatrick

Scofflaw wrote: »

The problem there is this - if a society has not defined something as a crime before the fact, then anyone committing that act has no case to answer after the fact.

The Irish public for over a decade accepted a government that was publicly known to be soft on white-collar crime (see the ODCE saga), and treated that attitude on the part of the government as either a trivial issue, or as a reasonable part of a "business-friendly" strategy. The Irish public cannot therefore reasonably call for punishment after the fact.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I don't see why not - this is a democratic country, supposedly, surely if enough of the people call for justice it would have to be looked into? I simply cannot accept the argument that we should allow these gangsters to walk away with the spoils while we pay for their actions. It's morally abhorrent. I don't see how anyone with a conscience can sit by and watch it happen with out at least trying to do something about it.

steve9859

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Scofflaw wrote: »

Yes, that's what I said.



No offence, but exactly the same thing was said about the last round of protests, and the round before that. And protesting about the pain of a burst bubble when nobody protested the creation of the bubble remains unimpressive anyway - if anything, the less impressive the more people protest.

cordially,
Scofflaw

For the final time, it's not about the pain of the burst bubble. It's about the massive injustice in how that pain is being distributed versus who had a direct hand in causing the crisis.

When I see Seanie Fitz counting his change, shopping in Lidl and queuing up for unemployment benefit like so many victims of his and his bank's corrupt behaviour, then I will stop protesting.

As of right now, justice is not being served. The people whose corrupt actions played a substantial role in causing the mess are walking away with lots of the cash and none of the consequences.

And again, this isn't about practical solutions, I'm 100% aware that his money isn't going to get Ireland out of this situation, but I'm sickened by the fact that I, someone who wasn't even remotely involved in causing this disaster am being asked to pay for it, but the man whose fraud brought down a bank and took a huge chunk of the economy with it is having every blind eye turned to him by those who have the power to hold him accountable.

And he's just ONE example of someone in the 1%. Just one. There are so many I couldn't even count them. The amount of croneyism, corruption and buck passing among the political elite in this country is an absolute, utter, indefensible disgrace.

I don't mind being asked to contribute. But those whose deliberate corruption directly precipitated this situation damn well better be asked to contribute too.

In fairness to hatrickpatric, that is a good and valid reason to protest and one which I largely support. Unfortunately it is combined with a load of IMF out and anti capitalist nonsense, which unfortunately means that the sensible message is completely lost.

On a slightly related note, the dedication of your London peers seems in question. The thermal imaging picture on the front of the Times today shows only one tent occupied last night!!

hatrickpatrick

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Wow. Just....... Wow. :eek:

You so desperately want to believe that the country is primed for some kind of glorious revolution that you're prepared to overlook the almost overwhelming evidence to the contrary. I'm not. The Occupy movement is really nothing but a sideshow.

You're wrong. I don't believe, nor do I want to believe that the country is primed for a glorious revolution.
I believe that the entire world is primed for a revolution. All across the globe, it would seem, people are waking up, and they're seeing their corrupt and undemocratic leadership for what it is, and they've got something to say about it.

It's not just the Occupy movement. It's so many other things around the world. The Arab Spring, Wikileaks, The Tea Party in the US (I don't agree with anything they say but they're also up off their asses and actually trying to do something to further their visions), Anonymous, hell even that Marine who stood up in New York to protest against police brutality, and is now calling for Army vets to join the protest...

The world is changing. How much it will change, no one knows, but you absolutely cannot deny that something very profound is sweeping our world at the moment. Never before has there been such a moment of worldwide rebellion against concentrated power and corruption. Of sure, movements such as the Civil Rights movement in the US were a lot bigger, but the key word here is worldwide, international. This seems, to me, to be a moment of worldwide agitation. And it seems to be growing stronger rather than diminishing.

On the other hand, maybe I'm just too much of an optimist. Maybe I have too much faith that this time, things actually are going to change. Maybe my hope is misplaced and I will ultimately end up disappointed as you say I will.

But I'd sure as hell rather be overly optimistic than be a resigned pessimist like so many of ye naysayers are. "This sh!t sucks but there's nothing we can do about it, just bend over when they ask you to" - I can't imagine a more depressing theme by which to live.

Hey, if it works for you, it works for you. Each to his own.

hatrickpatrick

steve9859 wrote: »

In fairness to hatrickpatric, that is a good and valid reason to protest and one which I largely support. Unfortunately it is combined with a load of IMF out and anti capitalist nonsense, which unfortunately means that the sensible message is completely lost.

I'd just liketo state for the record that I am necessarily opposed to capitalism, as long as that capitalism applies to everyone entirely equally. No favourites, no special treatment for anyone. Either we all matter equally or none of us do; either everyone who makes mistakes deserves government intervention or nobody does. I don't accept that one social group is more worthy or important than another, I find that disgusting.

antoobrien

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The "democratic" framework of this country is not democratic, as I have outlined time and time again in these threads. And I'm frankly tired of repeating myself. Read my previous posts. If it was democratic, we wouldn't have "teacher's pets". If it was democratic, there would be democratic accountability.

Let's start with the labour party taking it's funding from the trade union movement so. They refuse to take the public sector to task for fear of losing their funding. This week impact have instructed their members in HSE west not to cooperate with the private management team being appointed to help run the hospitals in Galway. I'm waiting for somebody from labour to condemn this, but since the unions are directing labour policy I'm not holding my breath.

I voted FG in the last election in the hopes of keeping labour out of government because I believed the sacred cows of social welfare & public service pay wouldn't be touched and real public sector reform would not happen. The fact that I don't like the fact that labour are in government doesn't mean that it's not democratic. The voting population (or rather those that gave a damn) spoke.

I was under no illusion that FG & Lab would have to roll back on their promises because they were so blatantly aimed at buying the election. All the focus on the banks etc while not looking at the 12.5 billion current deficit (which does not include payments on national debt - that only added about 6.1 billion to the deficit).

By the way, for those of you with a short/selective memory FG & Lab to buy the election in 2007, when they announced that they would cut stamp duty after the election. They made the mistake of not waiting for the last week, as FF reacted the only way they could - promising the same thing. We, as a nation, voted status quo ante. Why? Why not - there was no good reason to change the government. After all public spending was going up and taxes were going down - things that people in general like to see.

FreudianSlippers

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Have you ever heard of a little thing called "The Atlantic Ocean"?
It's a rather large body of saltwater, in which there is a plate boundary. Arguably, that plate boundary is what separates the continents of Europe and America, physically speaking.

And y'know, situations and circumstances on different sides of this ocean are not identical.

In other words: Stop relating everything to the US. Each country has different problems, inequalities, and injustices.
What's next, if an Occupy China movement springs up are you going to try and use the US criteria to define it?

So remind me why you're calling it Occupy Wall Street again and what does the 99% signify here? Why not come up with a true number for Ireland rather than an arbitrary percentage "borrowed" from the US protests.

They have a lot more to be worried about than the nonsense demands of the people here. IMF out? yeah, ok then what?
Default on our loans and put the world into a bigger depression... seems totally logical.

hatrickpatrick

antoobrien wrote: »

Let's start with the labour party taking it's funding from the trade union movement so. They refuse to take the public sector to task for fear of losing their funding. This week impact have instructed their members in HSE west not to cooperate with the private management team being appointed to help run the hospitals in Galway. I'm waiting for somebody from labour to condemn this, but since the unions are directing labour policy I'm not holding my breath.

In my view, absolutely ALL political donations should be banned. All. That would go a long way to destroying the corporate and government axis (I'm not suggesting it would destroy it, but it would be one major nail in its coffin). Vested interests should not dictate government policy. The general public should dictate government policy.

I voted FG in the last election in the hopes of keeping labour out of government because I believed the sacred cows of social welfare & public service pay wouldn't be touched and real public sector reform would not happen. The fact that I don't like the fact that labour are in government doesn't mean that it's not democratic. The voting population (or rather those that gave a damn) spoke.

Here's my issue with this argument. It could be that you believe in what I'm about to say too and just aren't mentioning it, in which case I take back the following. But why attack the "sacred cows" of social welfare and PS pay, but not the "sacred cows" of bank bondholders, executives, golden circles, etc?

In my view, that elite is far MORE directly responsible for the mess we're in than the PS or people on welfare although I think all three need to come down. But that's the issue I have with it. Some people on social welfare are vulnerable and do need some support. No one who earned a six figure salary for the hard work of running a bank into the ground and then scarpering with the spoils when things got ugly can be described either as vulnerable or in need. By all means, reduce PS pay and reduce social welfare if it must be done - but not before every penny corrputly spent on gangsters is either recovered, or the perpetrators punished.

Ironically, I almost misspelled "perpetrators" as "perpetraitors".
I kinda wish I'd left the typo in there.

[quoteI was under no illusion that FG & Lab would have to roll back on their promises because they were so blatantly aimed at buying the election. All the focus on the banks etc while not looking at the 12.5 billion current deficit (which does not include payments on national debt - that only added about 6.1 billion to the deficit). [/quote]

And do you regard that as acceptable? Buying the election? Making false promises solely for the purpose of committing electoral fraud? In my view, this is precisely the kind of thing which needs to be stamped out before we can call ourselves a democracy.

Oh and don't give me the "it would fall apart if Politicians were requiredto keep their promises". Everyone who throws that one at me is missing a crucial piece of the puzzle - no one FORCES any politician to make promises. Can't keep it? Don't MAKE it in the first place. See Eamonn Gilmore's pathetic false statements over Lisbon, made, as revealed by Wikileaks, "for political reasons". It's disgusting. I wouldn't have given him any number on my ballot paper if I'd known about that prior to the election, as it happened I gave him my second preference.

By the way, for those of you with a short/selective memory FG & Lab to buy the election in 2007, when they announced that they would cut stamp duty after the election. They made the mistake of not waiting for the last week, as FF reacted the only way they could - promising the same thing. We, as a nation, voted status quo ante. Why? Why not - there was no good reason to change the government. After all public spending was going up and taxes were going down - things that people in general like to see.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the scandals in the banks came out in 2008, didn't they? After that election.
How many people would have voted different if those secrets had been aired earlier?

Yet another case for leaks and transparency.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

hatrickpatrick

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

So remind me why you're calling it Occupy Wall Street again

....We're not, we're calling it Occupy Dame Street.....

and what does the 99% signify here? Why not come up with a true number for Ireland rather than an arbitrary percentage "borrowed" from the US protests.

I've said it about a bajillion times here already, it signifies the social clique which dictates government policy and comes before everyone else. If Ireland was the Titanic and the government were the crew, the 1% are those who have the VIP lifeboats with buckets of legroom in which you could fit 20 other people, and who get instant access while everyone else has to queue and has no guarantee of actually getting into one before the ship goes down.

They have a lot more to be worried about than the nonsense demands of the people here. IMF out? yeah, ok then what?
Default on our loans and put the world into a bigger depression... seems totally logical.

Again, I've gone over this already. I'm not repeating myself again. Read back maybe 3-4 pages if you're using the standard page view.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Godge

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'd just liketo state for the record that I am necessarily opposed to capitalism, as long as that capitalism applies to everyone entirely equally. No favourites, no special treatment for anyone. Either we all matter equally or none of us do; either everyone who makes mistakes deserves government intervention or nobody does. I don't accept that one social group is more worthy or important than another, I find that disgusting.

So capitalism applies to everyone equally, no favourites, no special treatment for anyone.

Do you even understand what that means? If there is no special treatment for anyone, you would have to abolish social welfare as otherwise you would have to pay it to everyone in the country.

You could probably justify providing subsidised healthcare and education but no grants, no medical cards (unless everyone got one) i.e. everyone would have equal access to the state-provided healthcare.

Of course, the rich under your system (those who work hardest and earn the most under pure capitalism) could but their own healthcare and pension.

What you forget is that those who make mistakes or who don't succeed are rescued all the time by government intervention in our current system - the unemployed, the elderly who don't provide for their pension, the sick, the young etc. They all benefit from the social democratic system we have in place that provides a safety net.

Your system of capitalism is not for me, but then I don't think you understand what it means for you.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.