Occupy Wall Street

Remy's Occupy Wall Street Protest Song

|

As the Occupy Wall Street movement spreads like a, well, financial contagion through global markets, intergalactic Internet sensation Remy and Reason.tv give the movement its anthem.

Written and performed by Remy and produced by Meredith Bragg.

About 2.45 minutes. Go to Reason.tv for downloadable versions. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to get automatic updates when new material goes live.

Follow Reason on Twitter.

For Reason's coverage of Occupy Wall Street, including video coverage from lower Manhattan, go here.

For more Remy & Reason.tv vids, go here.

For even more Remy, go to his YouTube channel.

Lyrics to the "Occupy Wall Street Protest Song"

Come gather round people
come and join your hands
we're taking Wall Street
and we're making demands
and we're heeding the call
and we're crying for help
only 1% of us have wealth

but first we need posters
we need to make signs
but to do so it seems
that we need some supplies

We need poster board
I can't make it myself
but it's 10 cents a sheet
at the store it's on sale
an example of economies of scale
it's so evil

They're saying that freedom
has done little to stop
Corporations from keeping
the wealth at the top
But at what point in history
would a kid and a king
both have clean water to drink?

George Washington was
the richest man of his age
But he lost all his teeth
at a very young age
Because they didn't have Scope
and they all crapped in trays
we're not wealthy?

now there's fountains on streets
from which clean water pours
Four dollar generics
at all big box stores
a sultan and student
both have iPhone 4s
it's not fair

Come gather young people
come on everyone
and I'll tell you a tale
of a fortunate son

He's born in a country
and given vaccine
and rendered immune
to all kinds of disease
the Kardashians are on
all his TVs
it's not perfect

Banks don't need bailouts
on that we agree
so let's start up a group
and let's take to the streets
because if we do that then
you know what that means
we're racist.
[End]

NEXT: Danny Cline: Occupy Wall Street Thug, Raving Anti-Semite

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Very good satire.

      1. Max’s Mom wrote that post, because she can spell “satire” better than he can.

        1. But he gives better head than she does, so it’s a push.

          1. Let’s get Tony in here to arbitrate this.

            1. Hey Mikey, he likes it.

    1. Only +950 for rhyming age with age.

      1. This tune might be more effective if he didn’t sound like Neil Diamond. I’m getting a “Love on the Rocks” vibe and it ain’t pretty.

  2. Reason’s getting ridiculously sloppy. Come on, guys, stop humiliating yourself! All those “they took our democracy” posters obviously mean it’s not happening in the United States, since the United States are a republic. Don’t you have any editors???

    Awesome satire, by the way. I loved it.

    1. The distinction between a republic and a democracy is minimal. We have a democratic republic. A republic merely means a middle man has been inserted in the process….same result…..it doesn’t work!
      When everyone can vote, everyone loses.

      1. “We have a democratic republic. A republic merely means a middle man has been inserted in the process….same result…..it doesn’t work!”

        Supposedly, the US experiment in governance had a Constitution which strictly limited the issues open for vote.
        Shame it hasn’t worked out that way.

        1. But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain ? that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.

          1. There are people who ignore laws against murder. Still, I’m glad those laws exist.

        2. eh, the constitution was actually a relative expansion of powers.

    2. They don’t agree with the protesters so its not really an issue. Certainly the lyrics promote freedom, and capitalism over democracy.

  3. Awesome song!

  4. I do have to point out the little matter of relativity. Compared to a Midieval lord an unemployed African American is wealthy in many ways, but who cares? It’s only the African American’s situation relative to that of his contemporaries that matters. Good satire, but not exactly deep analysis.

    1. Yes, Max and his ilk won’t be happy until everyone is poor. Envyocracy.

      1. Envyocracy

        Worse. Mob Envyocracy.

      2. Max is truly mad!

        1. Max has never been that good at articulating things… I smell a rat in his post above. It’s like someone wrote it FOR him.

          Funny how he picks out “poor African-American” people, though… it’s like he forgot there are poor people of other skin tones, as well.

          Never let a crisis go to waste, eh?

    2. I see. So you want to get rid of capitalism and create a system where those in political power are more wealthy than everyone else, much like how feudal lords were more wealthy than their african american unemployed serfs.

      1. Worked for us!

        1. STILL works for us!

          1. Hellooooo!!! WINNING!!!!!!

            1. I just scored some killer beachfront resort property.

              1. We’ll be an evil empire again!

    3. Wasn’t worth clicking “unignore.”

      Gray Ghost, wherever you are, thanks for directing me to reasonable!

    4. Re: The ridiculously inane Max,

      It’s only the African American’s situation relative to that of his contemporaries that matters.

      Matters to whom? YOU? Who the fuck are you? You condescending piece of cat droppings.

      There.

      It should matter to the person that wants to improve his situation. You can, instead, go fuck yourself.

    5. “It’s only the African American’s situation relative to that of his contemporaries that matters. Good satire, but not exactly deep analysis.”

      This, I think, is the fundamental difference in mindset between collectivists and individualists. The collectivist gets his sense of self-worth by looking at how he stacks up against others, whereas the individualist gets his self-worth by comparing where he is today vs. where he was yesterday. All the Capitalism vs. Socialism follows from that.

        1. +10

          1. It goes to 11.

    6. So all the Mercedes drivers should riot because they don’t have Bentleys.

    7. So we should end the minimum wage so that African Americans, failed by the school system have the same opportunities?

  5. “It’s only the African American’s situation relative to that of his contemporaries that matters”

    Do the world a favor, Max, and go fuck yourself.

  6. I’d much rather Occupy Kardashian.

    1. that’s like invading a country for recycled oil

    2. That cuntry is so big it won’t even notice you’re occupying it.

      1. This is why ongoing hotdog/hallway ratio research is deserving of more federal funding.

      2. Depends on how your size compares to the previous occupants. I’ve never had the problem of which you speak, but I can see how it would be an issue for smaller guys.

        1. You have a huge skull? Because that’s what you’d be putting up there, right? That doesn’t surprise me at all. You look like a Ferengi, I’ve always assumed. Are you a Space Jew?

          1. That’s funny.

  7. It finally makes sense!

    We’re living in the Watchmen‘s universe. AWESOME!

    1. I don’t see glowing blue dicks, so it can’t be Watchmen.

      1. They’re invisible.

        Crossover universe.

        BY THE POWER OF GAYSKULL!

  8. You are all obviously too stupid to get my point.

    1. The irony in your post is most viscous, Max.

      Much like your mom’s vaginal discharge.

    2. Re: Max,

      No, we get your point: That you’re H&R’s pet yorkie.

      ARF ARF ARF!!

      Shut up, Max! Go git yourself out! Go, git!

    3. Yip Arf Yelp Snap Nip!

    4. We get your point. We just think it’s retarded.

      I’d rather live in a world where I have all the comforts of modern society – even if other people have more shit – than one where everyone lives equally on the threshold of starvation in a bunch of mud huts.

  9. I would have you all note that when rectal shows up, the troll infestation goes through the roof. Draw your own conclusions.

    1. poor epi, is your dealer in jail? FCS, isn’t there a doctor you can blow for some samples?

      1. …and confirmation of my point. Thank you, rectal, for being as stupid, predictable, and manipulable as I expected you to be. DANCE!

        1. Holy shit you’re slow. What part of I just showed up that you don’t get?

          I have to work on my chapter; so Mr. Epiaranoia, I’m otherwise occupied

          1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    2. You think Max is cyberstalking rather?

      1. We can only hope.

      2. Tulpa, Max is a regular!!
        Half the people on this site have several handles

        …so you’re a large man?

        1. You didn’t get my tweet?

        2. Re: rather,

          Half the people on this site have several handles

          That is no vice as long as one of them is a handle on reality – which is something I cannot say about good ol’ Max.

  10. They are bringing back Arrested Development, so mission accomplished, Occupy Wall Street. Gob well done.

    1. Dey tuk ur gobs!

    2. The money is in the banana stand.

        1. I just hope they haven’t made a huge mistake.

          1. I don’t understand the question and won’t respond to it.

  11. Yeah, the banks got a bailout and we’re still broke.
    Where’s my bailout? GIVE ME BACK MY MONEY WALL ST

    1. Who/what gave them the bailout?

      Just curious, based on your post, do you think:

      a) They should have been bailed out but you should also get a bailout.

      b) They should not have been bailed out but you should get a bailout.

      c) Neither you nor they should get a bailout but some selected groups/people should.

      d) No one should ever get bailed out.

      e) All of the above.

      Which is it?

      1. The banks caused the housing crisis and were rewarded by their servants in DC

        1. The banks were forced to make bad loans.

          You left that part out.

          1. No they were not.

            They could have gone “on strike” and simply not given any loans at all. Exited the business. This would have forced the public to face the consequences of bad govt policy.

            But God forbid they should have an off quarter. Management and stockholders ARE too damn greedy in the short term. Just not in the way these OWS types think.

            1. Re: goneGalt,

              They could have gone “on strike” and simply not given any loans at all.

              Absolutely right! Until, that is, ACORN showed up on their doors accusing the bank that practiced such good sense of being “racist.”

              1. You make an excellent point. I have little use for these organizations.

                But at some point, if we are ever to see things get fixed, the producers need to take the hit and “Go Galt”. Until Atlas shrugs, nothing will change.

            2. They could have gone “on strike” and simply not given any loans at all. Exited the business. This would have forced the public to face the consequences of bad govt policy.

              Why would they do that?

              They made tons of money by generating ‘bad’ loans and then shuffling them around.

              1. I left out the reason why the banks had to make the bad loans. Thanks, OM.

                1. I just want to press the point that no bank HAD to make a bad mortgage.

                  When I say go on strike, I mean shut the doors, dismiss the employees, cash out the business and send checks to the shareholders. No more mortgages, loans, checking accounts, debit cards, 24-7 access to money via ATMs.

                  Problem is, as long as just ONE bank is willing to put up with the statist bullcrap, we will never see a solution. I’m not optimistic. And that is why I’ve goneGalt.

                  1. So if we don’t like Obamacare all the insurance companies and hospitals should just close down? How about all the coal plants? The idea of a company let alone an entire industry going on strike as you call it due to regulation is silly what do you think would have actually happened? Odds are that congress would just use it to show how greedy and childish the corporations are then open government banks that would be under their personal control and with federal backing removed from any market controls. Single crack whore mom from the slums wants a business loan, sure your disadvantaged. College grad from a middle class family, I’m sorry you are too privileged to qualify but if you want a job I know a crack whore looking for an accountant.

                    1. So if we don’t like Obamacare all the insurance companies and hospitals should just close down? How about all the…

                      YES! To all the above!

                      As noted in my post above, I AGREE with you that it is unlikely a company or industry will really go on strike. That is why I am not optimistic.

                      BTW, according to the articles I have read at this site, the banking industry is already under the government’s personal control, federally backed, and thus removed from any market controls.

          2. Slight correction:

            The banks were provided with false signals that incentivized making bad loans. Signals that were created by intentional government efforts to make housing more “affordable”. The government pushed a deliberate policy of loosening loan terms while driving up housing prices.

            1. Combined with absurdly low interest rates for an inordinately long time.

        2. I noticed you didn’t answer the multiple choice. Please do. Feel free to offer your own option if none of those suit you.

          The banks caused the housing crisis and were rewarded by their servants in DC

          You are half (2/3?) right. Banks don’t lend people money if it’s not extremely likely that those people will pay it back, with interest. It’s called profit. That works well until someone removes the risk of giving money to people that likely can’t pay (guess who that was). Now add on regulations and stipulations that require the banks to make these loans (guess who again).

          So if you want to say that the government created a distorted market that banks took advantage of at the urging/coercion of government that then bailed them out when the governmental policy resulted in it’s logical conclusion, I can agree.

          1. Agreed, you said it better than I did. But I still believe corporations (management and stockholders) screw themselves in the long run with their short term focus.

        3. OK peoplepower, you need to watch this:

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnXZzx9pAmQ

        4. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

          The banks caused the housing crisis[…]

          No, they did not. SOME banks did. So did the government. So did the FED. So did the people that purported to centrally-control the economy.

          […] and were rewarded by their servants in DC

          The same servants that are still there to serve – which YOU helped put there. Remember “Hope and Change”?

        5. You can say the banks caused the housing crisis, but that’s not saying anything important really. Why and how did this crisis occur is what you need to answer. The reason this crisis occurred is because the government interfered with capitalism. It took away the risk the banks were supposed to be balancing their behavior on. Capitalism isn’t the problem here. In capitalism, there are no bailouts; you have to face the consequences of your actions, the risk. If you want that to happen, you have to remove the government’s power to interfere in the market. That’s the only way.

          1. Then reinstate the Glass-Stegall act

            1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

              Then reinstate the Glass-Stegall act

              I’m amazed you can even spell it, because I truly believe you have NO IDEA, NO CLUE, NOT A HINT of what Glass-Stegall actually did or did not do. And one thing it did NOT do: It didn’t fix the banking system.

              Get this, you direct result of the Amerikan Pulbic Skool Seistem: Canada had NO such restriction on banking and investment, yet had also NO banking crisis, since or now.

              1. Repeal of The Glass Steagall Act Has Produced The Highly Leveraged Investment Imbroglio That Is Just Now Starting To Unwind
                http://my.opera.com/richardinb…..ml/1796860

                1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

                  Repeal of The Glass Steagall Act Has Produced The Highly Leveraged Investment Imbroglio That Is Just Now Starting To Unwind

                  You’ve got to be kidding me. What the FUCK did investment banking have to do with the mortgage crisis? The crisis did not derive from the derivatives, it was the other way around – you have it exactly backwards, like your head.

                  1. That’s correct. The housing crisis started first. The derivatives became a problem only after the bubble blew up and nobody knew what to do with them.

                    Not to say the derivatives weren’t a problem. But the problem with the derivatives was, er, a derivative of the overall problem with the housing market.

            2. If you want that to happen, you have to remove the government’s power to interfere

              Then reinstate the Glass-Stegall act

              That response doesn’t make any sense.

              1. neither does capitalism.
                hah

                1. There is no substitute for capitalism.

                2. Wow, I think I just had an aneurysm.

                  heller says: “If you want that to happen, you have to remove the government’s power to interfere in the market. That’s the only way.”

                  Pee Pee Power replies: “Then reinstate the Glass-Stegall act.”

                  Now correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Glass-Stegall exactly the kind of government power to interfere in the market that heller was referencing?

                  Not even Max and Chony are THAT self-contradictory…

    2. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

      Yeah, the banks got a bailout and we’re still broke.

      “Where’s my free money??? Waaaa!”

  12. THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE WORLD
    https://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/10/07-0

    1. Garbage.

    2. “general [presumably nationwide] strike”

      “ban elections”

      approval of Socialist Party USA involvement

      mention of “labor rally” (i.e., union employees are superior to non-union employees)

      “If the majority agrees that the movement would be better served by the Socialist Party than the Greens, then let’s have the Socialists. But by all means let’s have a party – and only one.”

      Yeah, that’s *very* encouraging.

      1. Dude, don’t you know anything? If the majority agrees to something, it must be right!

        1. Um… sure. Whatever.

          Hey, I have a cousin who lives in South Bend, Indiana… which makes as much relevant sense as your post.

    3. Naomi Klein Article: ” Since amplification is (disgracefully) banned, and everything I say will have to be repeated by hundreds of people so others can hear (a?k?a “the human microphone”), what I actually say at Liberty Plaza will have to be very short.”

      and since she probably didn’t make her usual speaking fees….

      Also from the article: “I love you”
      That first line of her speech sums up the emotional childishness of the far left. Everything in politics for them can be separated into “Who/What I hate” and “Who/what I love”, or making each other feel good about what makes them feel bad.

      1. “Everything in politics for them can be separated into “Who/What I hate” and “Who/what I love”, or making each other feel good about what makes them feel bad.”

        BOOM. Exactly. Is there ANYTHING behind the “Obama gas to get tough!” MSNBC line of argument besides “Obama needs to get the people I don’t like!”?

        1. Gas=has

    4. “Corporations were becoming more powerful than governments and that was damaging to our democracies.”

      I love when I hear this…

      World’s largest corporation: Wal-Mart – $400 billion revenues (worldwide).

      US Government: $3,700 billion revenues plus tanks, F-15s, and nuclear weapons.

      1. Hiroshima A-bomb: 75 TJ of energy

        US light bulb usage for a year: 360 TJ

        Which one is more dangerous?

        1. Do YOU use light bulbs, fuckstain?

        2. The most concentrated. Failed analogy.

        3. So the USA light bulb usage is about 1 TJ per day, compared to the 75 TJ released by the Hiroshima A-bomb in one day. What’s your point, Mustard?

          1. Hiroshima A-bomb: 75 TJ of energy

            US light bulb usage for a year: 360 TJ

            Ocean currents energy per year: 10^13 TJ

            Which one is more dangerous?

            1. Mustard, I think you have to agree, if little boy killed 66,000 people with 75 TJ, the oceans must kill every man, woman and child on earth about once every three seconds, which is, like, WAY too often.

            2. You forgot the SI unit “hitlerintensity”. The atomic bomb was 11.11 trillion HIs.

    5. “Something else this movement is doing right: You have committed yourselves to non-violence.”

      “Unlike your previous iterations, which did not.”

      By the way, using the public sidewalks and tarmac as a toilet is not precisely “non-violence.”

      1. “By the way, using the public sidewalks and tarmac as a toilet is not precisely ‘non-violence.'”

        Old Spic forgets to take his meds again…

        Yes dickhead, even that is nonviolent.

        1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

          Yes dickhead, even that is nonviolent.

          No, dickwad – it is NOT.

          I PAID for those sidewalks and tarmac, you insignificant piece of shit.

          1. OM,

            Shouldn’t you be at a neo-confederate rally today? Your new sheets are all pressed and ready to go.

            1. So, it’s okay to shit on a sidewalk if the cause is just?

              1. IT’S OK IF WE DO IT!!!!! sheesh

      2. Most people consider violence to refer to violation of personal rights, not property rights. Not every instance of wrongdoing is “violence”.

    1. NPR/PBS and Planned Parenthood also get our tax money as part of their funding.

      Guess you’re for that, eh?

    2. Psst… Remember when mall kiosk employees, falconry enthusiasts, and ACORN spilled oil in the Gulf, made Toyotas careen out of control, and payed no taxes? Me neither… Pass it on.

      1. The next-door neighbor of the guy who fixed some guttering at the home of my nephew’s babysitter caused the housing crisis, all by himself. He just now confessed that to me, but I don’t know what to do with that information. Should I turn him in, or let AG Holder take care of it?

        1. Sounds like he’s the 1%. Call in a drone strike.

    3. Remember when Hitler posted annoying links on websites we otherwise enjoyed for hours under annoying usernames? Me neither…pass it on.

      1. Remember when JFK killed Bob Crane? Me neither… pass it on.

    4. Remember when groups that we support did a selective list of things that we don’t support, me neither…pass it on.

      Dear lord, is this what is passing as “witty” for the left?

    5. Remember when teachers, public employees, Planned Parenthood, NPR and PBS did something useful? Yeah, me neither.

    6. Remember when Democrat-allied government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac engaged in fraudulent and unethical business practices (and got away with it due to interference from powerful Democratic politicians)? Remember when how their market power allowed their low standards of conduct to spread throughout the industry, broke the housing market, and crashed the stock market as a result?

      Remember when government workers in the SEC decided that surfing porn was more important than preventing fraud?

      Remember when Democrats in Congress voted 3 to 1 to give away trillions in bailouts to the companies they helped to wreck? (Republicans split 50/50, though their guy signed the bill).

      Remember when government officials at MMS allowed oil companies like BP and Transocean to do as they pleased in exchange for sex, drugs, and money?

      Because I remember all that.

  13. Ron Paul wins the Values Voters Summit’s Straw Poll with 37% of the votes, and accusations of ballot-stuffing immediately start to fly from a so-called “Leading Social Conservative”(WTFTM)

    Nobody seems to realize that between Paul and Cain (who came in second with 23% of the votes) they had 60% of the votes, which would make Cain’s supporters just as liable of being ballot-stuffers as Paul’s supporters. But the establishment GOPers do not really care about statistics, or good sense, that much.

    1. Cain sucks Ron Paul’s cock, but they both claim to be heterosexual.

      1. Citation needed, Max.

        Show us the pictures.

        1. Max, did you know we have a gay porn app for the iPad? You can now surf for your favorite self-pleasurement material on the latest equipment we offer!

          1. on her own bloody pad….

      2. How great is your grasp on the subject, Max… Shows quite an extensive first-hand experience.

        I have to wonder.

        1. Max paid a LOT of money for a Kung-Fu Grip G.I. Joe, and I didn’t ask questions.

    2. Santorum has always been against stuffing things into other things, so no news there.

      1. Thankfully, Santorum will not be president.

  14. That song was better than I expected.

  15. So at Occupy Seattle the NGO Food, Not Bombs was there handing out free food only they lost all their plates and forks, rendering them unable to serve anybody unless they ran to Costco.

    Isn’t that awesomely symbolic of where these people would lead us?

    1. but costco is run by democrats!

      1. But it’s corporationy!

  16. OK, this In Time flick looks like an interesting idea, but kind of a contrived premise.

    1. logan’s run

    2. Yep. Assuming the time scarcity is purely artificial, pirates would have a fucking field day with that world. And they’d be ageless, to boot.

  17. Fun song, funnier comments here, thanks for lightening my Sunday morning 🙂

  18. OT:DOJ/LE can’t be accused of crimes, they’re heroes!

    Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, called on Holder to resign.

    On Wednesday, Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., told the publication the Daily Caller, “When you facilitate that and a murder or a felony occurs, you’re called an accessory. That means that there’s criminal activity.”

    The comment raised Holder’s ire. He wrote to the members of the oversight committees, “I simply cannot sit idly by as a Majority Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform suggests, as happened this week, that law enforcement and government employees who devote their lives to protecting our citizens be considered ‘accessories to murder.’ Such irresponsible and inflammatory rhetoric must be repudiated in the strongest possible terms. Those who serve in the ranks of law enforcement are our nation’s heroes and deserve our nation’s thanks, not the disrespect that is being heaped on them by those who seek political advantage. I trust you feel similarly and I call on you to denounce these statements.

    1. You cut off Holder’s gem at the end, claiming that his testimony was truthful because he didn’t remember hearing about F&F back in 2010.

      I wonder what other operations Holder has forgotten about over the past year that involved smuggling weapons into foreign countries. I guess it’s pointless to ask him whether we’re shipping pepper spray to the UK for use by yob gangs.

  19. …Killer Holder cannot sit idly by. Who is he going to fuck over now?

  20. To PeopleButtPwder:

    Here is the real reason you’re screwed:

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blo…..-Flyer.pdf

    “Capitalism” is not the problem. The rich are not the problem. But the real power elite would love for you to think they are. It takes the focus off of them.

    Here?s the problem:
    Once upon a time, people decided they were tired of carrying around the stuff they had, looking for people who had the things they wanted and also happened to want the things they
    had. Some of them decided that, rather than carry around chickens and looking for someone who had lumber but wanted chickens, they would come up with something that would be easier to carry around, wouldn?t go bad, and most importantly, would serve as a common medium of exchange that people could use to trade for other things.

    They came up with lots of things, from salt to seashells and spices and big-ass rocks at the bottom of the ocean that nobody could even move. Over time, people tended to prefer things like precious metals. Nobody controlled this, nobody regulated how much the metals or the salt or the seashells or big-ass rocks were worth. And for a while, nobody tried to monopolize the issuance of these things.

    Eventually,governments decided that they should take over the once voluntary and grass-roots institution of money. They declared themselves the arbiters of what could and could not be used as money, and of who could issue money. Once they did this, they found that they could do something else too: They found that if they debased the money (usually precious metals by this time), by shaving off or clipping the edges of coins, or by mixing other metals in with the gold or silver before the coins were minted, they could steal some of the money for themselves, while everyone else kept using it as if it were worth its original value. Hundreds of years later, they are still doing it.

    When government monopolizes money, it is able to counterfeit that money. The government and the people it pays (think military contractors, bailout recipients, etc.) are the ones who get to use it at full value. By the time it gets down to the rest of us, it holds only a fraction of its value and we need a lot more of it to buy the things we want and need.

    Meanwhile, by pumping extra money into the system, the central banks create artificial booms which later turn into very real busts. People think there is more (real) money than there actually is. The price of money (the interest rate) is lower than it should be, so people believe that it is cheaper to invest than it actually is. All kinds of people (not just “money-grubbing rich people”) invest in things, thinking the cost of doing so is cheaper than it is, and you’ve got a bubble. This is what caused the dot com bubble and bust, and it’s what caused the housing bubble and bust.

    If you think that the banks and bankers are a big part of the problem, you’re right – but probably not for the reasons you think you are. They’re not part of the problem because they are “greedy” or because they deal in “money”. They are part of the problem because they are profiting from what is essentially counterfeiting.

    They are destroying the money supply, and the wealth that ordinary people have built up for themselves. They absolutely are profiting at our expense. But unless you understand HOW they are doing that, you’re not going to even come close to addressing the real problem. In fact, you will probably make it worse by calling for “more government regulation of the financial industry.” That would be nonsense. It is government’s involvement in the world of finance, and in money itself, that is at the source of the problem.

    You are right to be outraged at those who have caused the financial mess the world is in right now. But please, please, please take a few moments to understand precisely who those people are and how they did it. You can go on hating capitalism and rich people all you want. But as long as you think they are the source of the problem, the problem will just get worse, while the real bad guys will be off in some back room laughing their asses off.

    1. “To PeopleButtPwder:”

      What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

      1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

        What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

        What kind of adult thinks I give a fucking rat’s fart what YOU think, tart?

        1. “What kind of adult thinks I give a fucking rat’s fart what YOU think, tart?”

          Anyone who reads this thread and looks at how mad you are and how many times you’ve replied.

          1. Hey, imbecile: Posting the same crap many times does not denote intelligence.

            1. Old Spic is even more mad…

              1. Aside from “PeopleButtPwder” do you have any objections to what he posted?

  21. Dudes, concentrations of wealth leave people nervous because they take seriously the old line about money=power.

    They look at a system that seems to leave a very few with a ton of wealth, a bunch of people just doing OK and a bunch doing poorly (and yes of course this is relative, like “tall” and “short”, deal with it) and think “wouldn’t a better system be one in which more people had more stuff?

    Many libertarians think the reason only a small % have so much of the wealth is that only a small, noble group of folks in any society are the Real Innovators and Producers, the rest of the people being sloughful, untrustworthy potential parasites just waiting for the vote to seize the deserved gains of the Productive Class.

    What tiresome tripe from both sides.

    1. Re: MNG,

      Many libertarians think[…]

      We’re off to a bad start when you profess to know what people think.

      […]the reason only a small % have so much of the wealth is that only a small, noble group of folks in any society are the Real Innovators and Producers, the rest of the people being sloughful, untrustworthy potential parasites just waiting for the vote to seize the deserved gains of the Productive Class.

      I would love to know who those libertarians are so I can knock some sense into them with blows from iPads, refrigerators and other examples of the productive minds of Real Innovators. Why, those slothful ingrates!

      Jokes aside, MNG – just why do YOU think only a small proportion of people have all the “wealth”? And why do you think that “wealth” = “money”?

      1. “We’re off to a bad start when you profess to know what people think.”

        Says the person who thinks “To PeopleButtPowder” is an appropriate way to begin a post…

        1. Re: Mindyourownbusinessalready,

          Says the person who thinks “To PeopleButtPowder” is an appropriate way to begin a post

          At least I don’t pretend to read minds, PeopleButtPowder.

          1. “At least I don’t pretend to read minds, PeopleButtPowder.”

            Why is it you idiots are so paranoid? I’m an entirely different person who thinks you’re a fucking idiot.

            What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

            1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

              Why is it you idiots are so paranoid? I’m an entirely different person who thinks you’re a fucking idiot.

              And you must think you’re talking to little kids here like yourself, PeopleButtPowder.

              Don’t leave stains in your mommy’s basement carpet – she will be pissed at you.

              1. “And you must think you’re talking to little kids here like yourself, PeopleButtPowder.”

                Why is it you idiots are so paranoid? I’m an entirely different person who thinks you’re a fucking idiot.

                What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

              2. “What kind of adult thinks I give a fucking rat’s fart what YOU think, tart?”

                Anyone who reads this thread and looks at how mad you are and how many times you’ve replied.

          2. No, you just toss off childish, nonsensical epithets with regularity.

            For someone claiming to be old, you sure act like a petulant child.

            1. Ha ha ha!!

              You’re not even a talented troll, let alone a smart one.

              Hey, imbecile: there are far better trolls visiting this site than YOU. Fuck off!

              1. Oh look who is mad

                No, you just toss off childish, nonsensical epithets with regularity.

                You’re not even a talented troll, let alone a smart one.

                Hey, imbecile: there are far better trolls visiting this site than YOU. Fuck off!

                I win.

                1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

                  I win.

                  Yes, you won, PeopleButtPowder.

                  Here’s your prize.

                  1. awww look who is mad…

              2. Didn’t claim to be talented or a troll. Project much?

                By the way, “imbecile”, “Fuck off”, thanks for proving my point!

              3. Didn’t claim to be talented or a troll. Project much?

                By the way, “imbecile”, “Fuck off”, thanks for proving my point!

                1. I did feed the squirrels though.

                  1. and now he’s spoofing, jesus christ Old Spic is pissed off…

        2. Using a racial slur while complaining about OM’s relatively gentle mocking of an internet user’s handle is pretty pathetic.

          1. “Using a racial slur while complaining about OM’s relatively gentle mocking of an internet user’s handle is pretty appropriate”

            Fuck you Old Spic, you don’t get to call names then cry about it from a sockpuppet.

            1. Take your own advice, JDAOS.

        3. Says the humanoid who thinks referring to people as “spics” is appropriate…

          1. “Much like your mom’s vaginal discharge.”

            “Do YOU use light bulbs, fuckstain?”

            “Can’t remember which fucktard is using Cain’s name as an alias, but I think it’s Max.”

            Says the humanoid who thinks referring to people as quoted is appropriate…

            …and that is just this afternoon!

            1. Fuck off.

              1. At least *I* don’t use racially-tinged terms, prick.

                You, OTOH, have no problem with that.

                1. “You, OTOH, have no problem with that.”

                  Neither would a libertarian.
                  Hypocrite.

              2. No.

                You are free to make the statement. You are not free to bar me from someone else’s property without their permission.

      2. “just why do YOU think only a small proportion of people have all the “wealth”? ”

        Wealth helps create more wealth, it helps reproduce itself in myriad ways. I think part of the wealth of the wealthy undoubtedly comes from people with incredible ideas and smart/hard work, a part comes from rent seeking, and a part comes from the advantages of having wealth to start with.

        1. I just got off of a lefty message board, and now I feel like I need a cold one. Compared to those guys you sound like Scrooge McDuck’s monocle.
          Before too long, attire with built in protection against pitchforks is going to be standard wear for anyone willing to openly say, ‘Bill Gates has done some good for the world.’

    2. Dudes, concentrations of wealth leave people nervous because they take seriously the old line about money=power.

      Which is why the wealthy have the highest tax rates, and are the first targets of every taxation scheme. Plus, if money=power, then it’s pointless for these people to protest since they don’t have the power to change anything. Indeed, if they succeed in their goals, it will be evidence that money != power.

      “wouldn’t a better system be one in which more people had more stuff?

      I note that your “relatively” disclaimer has extremely limited duration. You forgot about it when you wrote the above sentence. How one can look at the current economy and not conclude that “more people have more stuff” compared to decades past or other parts of the world is beyond me.

      Many libertarians think the reason only a small % have so much of the wealth is that only a small, noble group of folks in any society are the Real Innovators and Producers

      Strawman much?

      1. “Which is why the wealthy have the highest tax rates, and are the first targets of every taxation scheme.”

        Naah, that’s because its common moral sense to ask those who can better bear burdens to do so.

        “Plus, if money=power, then it’s pointless for these people to protest since they don’t have the power to change anything.”

        Nope, I didn’t say money is the only form of power.

        “How one can look at the current economy and not conclude that “more people have more stuff” compared to decades past or other parts of the world is beyond me”

        It’s fascinating to me how when I suggest that property rules might have to bent for the greater good of people many posters here scream about sacrificing rights and how unjust it is to take from one group to better off the general welfare, but when someone complains about economic distribution in the US many of the same people say “hey, don’t worry about the justness of it all, the overall welfare has improved!”

        1. Nope, I didn’t say money is the only form of power.

          That’s what “money = power” means. Equality is symmetric, so “power = money” is equivalent.

          In any case, “power” that can’t protect itself is not power at all.

          It’s fascinating to me how….

          There’s no contradiction there; we don’t consider it unjust for people to have different amounts of wealth. Do you consider that unjust?

    3. So, people get worried about concentrations of money, which might somehow become concentrations of power, but they don’t worry about actual already-existing concentrations of power?

      Is it because of elections? It is, isn’t it? Fuck, people are stupid. I’m starting to agree with Bev Purdue. Maybe once the illusion of democracy vanishes entirely, they can see the threat for what it is.

  22. Some people trust governments more than they do corporations because with the former everyone has the same ultimate power and say, one vote, while with corporations and other market institutions the person with more dollars to spend gets way more votes. They feel like in a world where governments hold sway they have more say than in a world where market institutions do.

    The fact that governments can use force but corporations are not supposed to leaves some people less impressed given that everyone has baseline needs which must be satisified and in a market dominated society that means going to centers of market power to get those necessities. This results in playing by their rules or starving and such.

    It’s certainly a view lacking in important nuances but hardly as crazy as everyone here seems to make out. I’d say the more extreme elements of Occupy WS need to learn about the power of incentive structures to create wealth that benefits everyone and the key role inequality plays in such incentive structures, but their mistrust of concentrations of wealth and idea that the game can be very rigged to tilt wildly towards the few are good things.

    1. Exactly! Everyone has the same say with governments.

      As a candidate, I was making this same point when I promised to reign in the lobbyists.

      And I’m constantly pointing out the vast numbers of people starving on America’s streets. This is why I’m pushing for single payer groceries.

      To think otherwise is indicative of a view lacking in important nuance. Everyone’s welcome to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom!

    2. Re:MNG,

      Some people trust governments more than they do corporations because with the former everyone has the same ultimate power and say, one vote, while with corporations and other market institutions the person with more dollars to spend gets way more votes.

      Like I explained it to Tony, this idea that you have more of a voice with government is a mirage. You have MANY choices when it comes to the market, with many actors vying for your business, whereas government is only ONE. Government couldn’t care less about your vote; at any time, it can dispense itself from it altogether – and then what?

      Instead, producers cannot simply exist by themselves – they can’t simply become like a government, unless they happen to be criminal enterprises… like government.

      It’s certainly a view lacking in important nuances but hardly as crazy as everyone here seems to make out.

      It IS crazy, MNG. It shows the workings of a simple and naive mind, and not a sophisticated, knowledgeable one.

      1. unless they happen to be criminal enterprises

        Corporations are criminals.

        1. YES-HUH! YES THEY ARE!!

          YES HUH!

        2. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

          Corporations are criminals.

          Really? In what way?

          1. YES-HUH! YES THEY ARE!!

            YES HUH!

            1. Every corporation? Or just the ones you hate?

      2. “To PeopleButtPwder:”

        What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

        1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

          What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

          What kind of asswipe thinks he IS being taken seriously, asswipe?

          1. What kind of asswipe thinks he IS being taken seriously, asswipe?

            What kind of blathering lying asshole writes a text wall like this then tries to pretend it wasn’t to be taken seriously spic?

            To PeopleButtPwder:

            Here is the real reason you’re screwed:

            http://www.lewrockwell.com/blo…..-Flyer.pdf

            “Capitalism” is not the problem. The rich are not the problem. But the real power elite would love for you to think they are. It takes the focus off of them.

            Here?s the problem:
            Once upon a time, people decided they were tired of carrying around the stuff they had, looking for people who had the things they wanted and also happened to want the things they
            had. Some of them decided that, rather than carry around chickens and looking for someone who had lumber but wanted chickens, they would come up with something that would be easier to carry around, wouldn?t go bad, and most importantly, would serve as a common medium of exchange that people could use to trade for other things.

            They came up with lots of things, from salt to seashells and spices and big-ass rocks at the bottom of the ocean that nobody could even move. Over time, people tended to prefer things like precious metals. Nobody controlled this, nobody regulated how much the metals or the salt or the seashells or big-ass rocks were worth. And for a while, nobody tried to monopolize the issuance of these things.

            Eventually,governments decided that they should take over the once voluntary and grass-roots institution of money. They declared themselves the arbiters of what could and could not be used as money, and of who could issue money. Once they did this, they found that they could do something else too: They found that if they debased the money (usually precious metals by this time), by shaving off or clipping the edges of coins, or by mixing other metals in with the gold or silver before the coins were minted, they could steal some of the money for themselves, while everyone else kept using it as if it were worth its original value. Hundreds of years later, they are still doing it.

            When government monopolizes money, it is able to counterfeit that money. The government and the people it pays (think military contractors, bailout recipients, etc.) are the ones who get to use it at full value. By the time it gets down to the rest of us, it holds only a fraction of its value and we need a lot more of it to buy the things we want and need.

            Meanwhile, by pumping extra money into the system, the central banks create artificial booms which later turn into very real busts. People think there is more (real) money than there actually is. The price of money (the interest rate) is lower than it should be, so people believe that it is cheaper to invest than it actually is. All kinds of people (not just “money-grubbing rich people”) invest in things, thinking the cost of doing so is cheaper than it is, and you’ve got a bubble. This is what caused the dot com bubble and bust, and it’s what caused the housing bubble and bust.

            If you think that the banks and bankers are a big part of the problem, you’re right – but probably not for the reasons you think you are. They’re not part of the problem because they are “greedy” or because they deal in “money”. They are part of the problem because they are profiting from what is essentially counterfeiting.

            They are destroying the money supply, and the wealth that ordinary people have built up for themselves. They absolutely are profiting at our expense. But unless you understand HOW they are doing that, you’re not going to even come close to addressing the real problem. In fact, you will probably make it worse by calling for “more government regulation of the financial industry.” That would be nonsense. It is government’s involvement in the world of finance, and in money itself, that is at the source of the problem.

            You are right to be outraged at those who have caused the financial mess the world is in right now. But please, please, please take a few moments to understand precisely who those people are and how they did it. You can go on hating capitalism and rich people all you want. But as long as you think they are the source of the problem, the problem will just get worse, while the real bad guys will be off in some back room laughing their asses off.

            YOU DO you pathetic fuck.

            1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

              hat kind of blathering lying asshole writes a text wall like this then tries to pretend it wasn’t to be taken seriously spic?

              Oh! So you think you know everything!

              First, what part of the text I posted is inaccurate?

              Second, why are you calling me a “spic”? I called you an asswipe, and any stupid asshole undeserving of life can be called an asswipe. But why are you calling me a “spic”?

              1. “Oh! So you think you know everything!”

                Never claimed that anywhere, learn to read maybe?

                “First, what part of the text I posted is inaccurate?”

                Never claimed it was inaccurate anywhere, learn to read maybe?

                “Second, why are you calling me a ‘spic’?”

                So, you really ARE that stupid…

                1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

                  Never claimed it was inaccurate anywhere, learn to read maybe?

                  Ok, so now you’re a goddamned liar: “[W]hat kind of blathering lying asshole writes a text wall like this.”

                  The best part is that you expect threads to be won by how many times you post. Silly willy.

                  1. “Ok, so now you’re a goddamned liar: “[W]hat kind of blathering lying”

                    You asked “What kind of asswipe thinks he IS being taken seriously, asswipe?”

                    I pointed out your text wall, which proves decisively you’re lying about being taken seriously.

                    Are you really THAT fucking dumb? Your reading comprehension is THAT shitty?

                    1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

                      I pointed out your text wall, which proves decisively[???] you’re lying about being taken seriously.

                      In order to lie about it, you direct result of the Amerikan Pulbic Skool Seistem, I would have to claim it first. Just posting a text does not mean ispo facto I expect all people to take me seriously or make a claim that I do. I don’t know how you can conclude such a thing.

                      What I am doing is simply laughing at your silly outrage outrage I called you buttpowder.

                    2. “In order to lie about it, you direct result of the Amerikan Pulbic Skool Seistem, I would have to claim it first”

                      “What kind of asswipe thinks he IS being taken seriously, asswipe?”

                      You DID Old Spic.

                      GOD DAMN YOU’RE PISSED!

                    3. “In order to lie about it, you direct result of the Amerikan Pulbic Skool Seistem, I would have to claim it first”

                      “What kind of asswipe thinks he IS being taken seriously, asswipe?”

                      You DID Old Spic.”

                      He’s too old to remember that, just like he was too old to to remember firing off a text a wall in a ridiculous attempt to be taken seriously, then realized it destroyed his attempt to pretend he’s not trying to be taken seriously.

                    4. “What I am doing is simply laughing at your silly outrage outrage I called you buttpowder.”

                      Except you didn’t. As you have been told, that wasn’t me. For some reason, you’re too stupid to read for comprehension.

                      God damn man, CALM DOWN, you’re REALLY PISSED.

                    5. Calling you a liar doesn’t mean he said your post was inaccurate.

                    6. Re: Lurker,

                      Calling you a liar doesn’t mean he said your post was inaccurate.

                      Read his post again, Lurker.

                    7. I don’t have to, I’m not you.

                      However, in the interest of demonstrating that you are incorrect, so that you’ll finally admit it.

                      What kind of blathering lying asshole writes a text wall like this then tries to pretend it wasn’t to be taken seriously spic?

                      It was a question, not a statement. That alone makes you wrong in your claim that he “said your post was inaccurate”. Add that to the fact that he didn’t address the accuracy of your post in any way anywhere and you’ll realize you should maybe Read his post again yourself, or maybe get someone smarter to read it then explain it to you.

                      At the end of his post he also says YOU DO you pathetic fuck. which directly references the question of who writes said text wall without expecting it to be taken seriously. He thinks you did.

                      In short, nowhere in there is any claim that your post was inaccurate. You assumed he meant so when he called you a lair, but that was a failure of your reading ability.

                    8. Re: Lurker,

                      It was a question, not a statement.

                      Correction, Lurker – it was a loaded question, clearly implying I am a liar. He then proceeds to place as the only possible evidence my post, verbatim.

                      His previous question merited no other reply than my rejoinder. Asswipe gets mad and then proceeds to call me a liar. YOU think he called me a liar for no good reason despite the fact that a) posting ANYTHING in this blog cannot be construed as an ipso facto STATEMENT that I want to be taken seriously and b) he decided to re-post what I wrote. Think about it for a second: Why would he do that? Do you really think what he is implying makes ANY sense? I am assuming he called me a liar for a SOUND reason, not because he is an irrational dolt – but, maybe that is what YOU believe and don’t want to say.

                      Again, read the post. Carefully. You’re dealing with adults here, not snot-dripping punks like asswipe there.

                  2. I’ll wait patiently for my apology, you shouldn’t call people names just because you can’t read worth a fuck.

              2. Isn’t it funny how he was all about not being taken seriously until he was reminded he tried very hard to be taken seriously and failed…

                LOL @ the old loser

              3. Oh! So you think you know everything!

                Says the guy who posted, “We’re off to a bad start when you profess to know what people think.” less thab an hour ago.

                Hypocrite.

                1. You don’t deserve an apology.

          2. “What kind of adult thinks I give a fucking rat’s fart what YOU think, tart?”

            Anyone who reads this thread and looks at how mad you are and how many times you’ve replied.

            1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

              Anyone who reads this thread and looks at how mad you are and how many times you’ve replied.

              But…. That describes YOU, asswipe. Or are you going to deny it?

              1. “But…. That describes YOU, asswipe. Or are you going to deny it?”

                Ah, the calssic I know you are but what am I defense, from the guy who decided “PeopleBUttPowder” was a good way to go, huge surprise…

                No guy, laughing at a grown man embarassing himself by calling another person “PeopleButtPowder”… that’s not mad. That’s comedy, and you did it.

                1. Re: Now I am going to call you asswipe,

                  Ah, the calssic [sic] I know you are but what am I defense

                  But there’s no need, asswipe – what you said DOES describe you:

                  “Anyone who reads this thread and looks at how mad you are and how many times you’ve replied.”

                  Who do you think reads this thread, asswipe? Whom will they label as being mad? YOU, or me?

                  1. Whom will they label as being mad? YOU, or me?

                    You, you cranky, incoherent crybaby.

                    As shown by how many times that troll got you to angrily insult him.

                    1. Re: asswipe,

                      As shown by how many times that troll got you to angrily insult him.

                      Wait – *I* angrily insult him? Wasn’t the troll known-by-many-names who showed the phony outrage because I called him “buttpowder”? Isn’t the asswipe the one that keeps posting repetitions of the same thing like an idiot savant?

                      Get your facts straight, asswipe. You’re in the big leagues here.

                  2. “But there’s no need, asswipe – what you said DOES describe you:

                    ‘Anyone who reads this thread and looks at how mad you are and how many times you’ve replied.'”

                    Says the guy who thinks adding asswipe to every response isn’t irrefutable proof he’s pissed and hates it.

          3. “Jokes aside, MNG”

            “What kind of asswipe thinks he IS being taken seriously, asswipe?”

            1. The kind that says “jokes aside”?

              Go ahead, DENY IT spic…

              1. Did you really answer your own post?

                Be careful when you stroke your meat, PeopleButtPowder – your mommy’s going to be very upset if you leave any more stains in her basement carpet.

                1. A grown man. You’re a grown man, and have reached the point of frustration where you think posting “Be careful when you stroke your meat, PeopleButtPowder – your mommy’s going to be very upset if you leave any more stains in her basement carpet.” makes sense.

                  Oh yeah, you SO mad…

                  1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

                    You’re a grown man, and have reached the point of frustration[…]

                    Shit, and a psychoanalyst to boot! You certainly have little experience posting here to think that a Sunday afternoon banter in H&R is proof of frustration. Maybe you should stick to luring little kids with candy or something else you know how to do better.

                    1. “to think that a Sunday afternoon banter in H&R is proof of frustration.”

                      It isn’t, it’s your repatead and unrepentant use of insults, coupled with the rusahed incoherence of your posts.

                      And the denials, of course, you are SOOO FUCKING PISSED…

                2. And you ONCE AGAIN failed to address the post, instead went straight to insults.

                  1. He has not yet shown he can defend views from outside his filter bubble. Insults are all he has.

    3. Some people trust governments more than they do corporations because with the former everyone has the same ultimate power and say, one vote

      Are you fucking kidding me? How flerking naive are you dude?

      1. I do believe that ‘voting with money’ as a consumer is underrated.

    4. This results in playing by their rules or starving and such.

      Thank Marx we instituted single-payer food to prevent the kind of mass starvation you see in a free-market economy like North Korea.

  23. Well, if we can’t have America, Fuck Yeah played before college football games or in the 7th inning stretch of the World Series, I’ll take this as an official protest song. Damn Remy, you just went legend.

  24. This should help explain it
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..r_embedded

    1. No one cares about your faux-angsty-I-don’t-know-what-I’m-talking-about “protests”.

    2. I found your contribution:

      http://wearethe99percent.tumbl…..the-strong

      1. Why is it everything you post is the internet equivalent of the stuff I scrape off my shoe?

        1. Don’t blame me, blame the dumb striver poor at the link.

        2. Also, while I agree with you that the person who wrote that placard is shit, no one’s making you read or click those links.

        3. I mean really, how can you read shit manifestos like this and not shake your head at the rampaging narcissism?

          http://wearethe99percent.tumbl…..te-in-2014

          “Will graduate $35K in debt from pursuing my dreams”–I’m supposed to have sympathy for most of these goons, who seem to be discovering for the first time in their life that dreams cost $$$$$?

          Or this one:

          http://wearethe99percent.tumbl…..going-to-a

          $200K in student loan debt? To be a minister? Who did he think he was going to be, the Robert Schuller of the LBGT ministry community? Did he even do the math on this?

      2. I can’t tell if that’s parody or serious.

        1. Of course it’s serious–I’ve seen maybe 3 or 4 that look like fairly obvious flames, but the rest of it seems pretty legit.

  25. Ron Paul won the Value Voters straw poll. Must be his “founding fathers evisioned a robustly Christian nation” shtick. Couldn’t be his racist diatribes…or could it?

    1. “Couldn’t be his racist diatribes…or could it?”

      Awwww look who is mad…

      And since such a thing doesn’t exist, you’re correct, it could not be his racist diatribes.

    2. MaxiePad will have to vote for Romney or Obama now!

    3. Re: Max,

      Couldn’t be his racist diatribes…or could it?

      What racist diatribes?

      1. A grown man. You’re a grown man, and have reached the point of frustration where you think posting “Be careful when you stroke your meat, PeopleButtPowder – your mommy’s going to be very upset if you leave any more stains in her basement carpet.” makes sense.

        Oh yeah, you SO mad…

      2. “to think that a Sunday afternoon banter in H&R is proof of frustration.”

        It isn’t, it’s your repeated and unrepentant use of insults, coupled with the rushed incoherence of your posts.

        And the denials, of course, you are SOOO FUCKING PISSED…

      3. Sounds just like a stalinist. What camps?

        1. You sound like you’ve had a brain injury, and you’ve made claims with fuckall as evidence.

    4. “Couldn’t be his racist diatribes…or could it?”

      Speaking of raciss

  26. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…..-says.html

    Reading between the lines of this statement, I think the Germans and French are preparing to abandon Greece to the wolves and focus all their resources on saving their own banks.

    Thoughts?

    1. Actually, I don’t think so. As it seems right now we’ll keep (or try) bailing out everyone. Merkel is IMHO determined to keep the current shape of the euro-zone no matter the cost.

    2. “Everything possible” to try and convince the bond market that Greece ain’t going to leave investors holding the bag.
      They’ll try once or twice more, but the market will figure out there isn’t enough government money to do it and bail.

    3. About fucking time.
      Why should Germany and France give a fuck about Greece anyway?

  27. Also, I’m struck by the fact that everyone on the left informs me that the world economic crisis was caused by evil banks investing in low-quality mortgages –

    – but that Europe’s banks are about to collapse because they invested in supposedly super-duper-safe government bonds.

    Those damn speculators!

  28. Old Mexican has me confused with someone not using my handle?

    1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

      Old Mexican has me confused with someone not using my handle?

      There’s no confusion, Sybil.

      1. A grown man. You’re a grown man, and have reached the point of frustration where you think posting “Be careful when you stroke your meat, PeopleButtPowder – your mommy’s going to be very upset if you leave any more stains in her basement carpet.” makes sense.

        Oh yeah, you SO mad…

      2. “to think that a Sunday afternoon banter in H&R is proof of frustration.”

        It isn’t, it’s your repeated and unrepentant use of insults, coupled with the rushed incoherence of your posts.

        And the denials, of course, you are SOOO FUCKING PISSED…

  29. Corporations are evil criminals and should be put on trial.
    They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

    They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.

    They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.

    They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.

    They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless nonhuman animals, and actively hide these practices.

    They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.

    They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.

    They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.

    They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.

    They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.

    They have sold our privacy as a commodity.

    They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press.

    They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.

    They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.

    They have donated large sums of money to politicians supposed to be regulating them.

    They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.

    They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantive profit.

    They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.

    They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.

    They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.

    They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.

    They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.

    They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.

    1. “To PeopleButtPwder:”

      What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?

      1. Re: PeopleButtPowder,

        Corporations are evil criminals and should be put on trial.
        They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

        You still owe the money, don’t you?

        They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.

        Not all corporations were given bailouts – only certain banks and the auto manufacturers who happen to employ workers from Big Labor Unions received the bailout money.

        They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.

        Inequality in the work… Ok, now, this is damned silly.

        They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.

        Stop eating, then. Be principled for once!

        They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.

        This is downright stupid.

        1. Don’t care, not my argument

          “”To PeopleButtPwder:”

          What kind of adult calls someone else “PeopleButtPwder” and still expects to be taken seriously?”

        2. by the way are you trying to be taken seriously THIS TIME, or are you just pretending you’re not trying to be taken seriously to avoid admitting you’re a lying asshole?

    2. This shit up here ^
      And this shit here ->

      1. You’re the worst regular poster on the board.

        1. Schools are out and so the spoofers are out. This ain’t me.

          1. Schools are out and so the spoofers are out. This ain’t me.

            Your spoofers apparently can’t handle realtalk–probably “Liberty for me but not for thee,” who thought that Hoover spending more money every year = cutting government spending.

    3. PeoplePower|10.9.11 @ 5:37PM|#
      “Corporations are evil criminals and should be put on trial. [etc]”

      I asked yesterday how stupid you are; you’ve answered.
      About as dumb as mud.

      1. What makes it dumb? EDUCATE ME

        1. PeopleNOTProfit|10.9.11 @ 9:16PM|#
          “What makes it dumb? EDUCATE ME”

          No, it’s what shows YOU’RE dumb as mud:
          “PeopleNOTProfit”
          Right there.

          1. So some of us care about people more than money. That’s dumb to you? NO! That makes YOU the dumb one.

            1. PeopleNOTProfit|10.9.11 @ 9:29PM|#
              “So some of us care about people more than money.”

              So, of course you want shit for nothing since that’s not ‘greedy’, right?
              And you’ll work for zero pay, right?
              You’re not only dumb as mud, you’re a sleazy hypocrite.

              1. Wrong again. When a CEO makes a multi-million dollar bonus while the employees can barely feed their families, there’s an issue.

                1. PeopleNOTProfit|10.9.11 @ 9:35PM|#
                  “Wrong again. When a CEO makes a multi-million dollar bonus while the employees can barely feed their families,…”

                  Thereby proving you’re too dumb to answer the questions, asshole.
                  And making up dumb-as-mud hypotheticals adds yet more evidence.
                  Now, asshole, will you work for nothing, or do you want money?

                  1. MAKE UP THIS
                    http://www.thegoodhuman.com/20…..ion-bonus/

                    1. Move to North Korea, asshole

                    2. “MAKE UP THIS”
                      Nice ALL CAPS; probably makes you look more intelligent than you are.
                      From the link:
                      “Wal-mart CEO Gets $22 Million Bonus, Workers Still Get Nothing.”
                      Right. CEO gets bonus for hitting targets and rewarding the stock holders. That would be “people” asshole, and I’d be very sorry if some of your retirement came from that.
                      Then we get “workers till get nothing”, which is an outright lie.
                      So, again, asshole, are you willing to work for nothing since you value ‘people more than profit’?
                      Can you read that question, asshole, or do I need to reduce the syllables?

                    3. I use caps, you insult. What’s the difference?
                      To answer your question: I am not suggesting anyone work for free.
                      And how can you defend cutting benefits and hours of front line workers to “maximize revenues” for shareholders?

                    4. PeopleNOTProfit|10.9.11 @ 10:00PM|#
                      “I use caps, you insult. What’s the difference?”
                      The difference is you’re dumb as mud.
                      ——-
                      “To answer your question: I am not suggesting anyone work for free.”
                      Oh, so you *do* value money! Just money for you and not for others? Do I have it right?
                      ——-
                      “And how can you defend cutting benefits and hours of front line workers to “maximize revenues” for shareholders?”
                      Oh, the shareholders are ‘other’ people whom you don’t quite value the same as your sleazy ass, right?
                      Listen, asshole, the shareholders are the people who make that building possible for the ‘people’ to work in. And *make money* doing so.
                      Want to see what happens when a company ‘puts people before profits’?
                      Gotcher loser right here:
                      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra
                      They just laid off 1100 ‘people’ doing exactly what you propose.
                      Now, asshole, when will you start working for nothing?

                    5. shareholders should consider who’s lives they are affecting when “maximizing revenue”

                    6. “shareholders should consider who’s lives they are affecting when “maximizing revenue””

                      Lazy, greedy, stupid sleazebags should admit their hypocrisy.
                      Hey, do you have any money? I want it! I’m people and I value me more than you, so you should hand over all your money to me!

      2. PeoplePower|10.9.11 @ 5:37PM|#
        “Corporations are evil criminals and should be put on trial. [etc]”

        “Posted from my iPhone.”

        1. Probably and PP figures s/he can grow a new one in a ‘sustainable’, ‘organic’ garden peeing and pooping on free seeds from AAPL (After Hours: 370.23 Up 0.43 (0.12%) 7:53PM EDT)
          http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=AAPL

    4. Do people really believe this malarkey? Who exactly is blocking alternative energy — the Solyndra people? And all drugs have a 17-year patent, then anyone can make them generically — exactly who is preventing this? And on and on….

      This list sounds like it was made up by a couple of C-minus sociology students after a few too many bong hits.

    5. A cornucopia of studpity.

      Just to answer the ones the Old Mexican hasn’t …

      They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless nonhuman animals, and actively hide these practices.

      You guys really need to focus your message. Do you want to ban all educational institutions from torturing animals for research purposes? And how the heck is any of this hidden. I’ve seen enough PETA pamphlets to know all about it, and I still think that medical research is a good idea.


      They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.

      Actually they havn’t. Anyone can form a union if you want. The issue is over whether you can ofrce other people to join them and automatically deduct unions dues from people’s paychecks whether they’re members or not.

      They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.

      How the fuck did “corporations” do this? The student loan process is a governmentrun “single-payer” system.

      They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.

      The horror! Trying to reduce costs! Everyone is entitled to the same pay and benefits, no matter how their industry benefits or whether their products sell or not! We can’t just have people not earning as much money as they used to! Society will collapse!

      They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility .

      You mean like full liability, which most libertarians are in favor of?

      They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.

      That’s why you should be buying your own insurance instead of letting your employer buy it for you. Negotiate for higher pay and buy your own health insurance, stupid. What’s stopping you?


      They have sold our privacy as a commodity

      And yet you continue to use their “free” websites. Want privacy? Pay a subscription fee, freeloader.


      They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press.

      Oh really? Citation needed.

      They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.

      So stop buying them. You kinow they’re faulty, so is anyone forcing you to continue buying them?

      They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.
      In contrast to the shining successes of Soviet Russia, Mao’s China, North Korea, Cuba, etc.


      They have donated large sums of money to politicians supposed to be regulating them.

      They are responding to the incentives with which they are presented. How did those incentives get created?

      They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.

      They aren’t blocking alternate forms of energy. It isn’t their fault that it’s not profitable to manufacture solar panels and wind farms when coal, natural gas , and nuclear are cheaper. Anyone who thinks they can turn a profit making windmills and solar panels is welcome to try. In fact Obama will give them plenty of free cash to tilt the playing field in their favor.

      They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantive profit.

      Profits incentivize R&D. Do you want investment dollars to flow into the developement of new drugs or not? The bigger the profits, the more money gets invested in new development.


      They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.

      Coase. Read up.


      They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.

      Like you, and your fear of corporations perhaps?


      They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.

      OMG, Blackwater killed some civilians. Blackwater is a corporation. Therefore ALL CORPORATIONS ARE EVIL!

      They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad.

      Um yeah. Does anyone actually have any colonies anymore, or are we still angry at the British East Indiany Tea Company? Down with the Commonwealth of Virginia while we’re at it.

      They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.

      If we get rid of the corporations, nobody will ever torture or murder other human beings again, you know. It’s just the corporations that make people do evil things. Not, like, governemtns at all.

      They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts.

      Again, once we get rid of corporations, there will be no WMDs. Everyone knows that governments are good, and have nothing to do with making weapons. No chemical, biological or nuclear weapons program in the history of the world has ever been run in-house by a government.

      1. You mean corn hole of stupidia. You live there, clearly.

        You said:
        “You guys really need to focus your message. Do you want to ban all educational institutions from torturing animals for research purposes? And how the heck is any of this hidden. I’ve seen enough PETA pamphlets to know all about it, and I still think that medical research is a good idea”

        Should I start with your use of the straw man of PETA, or your ad hominem of PETA, or your fucking red herring of PETA? Nothing to do with nothing. Congrats.

        You said:
        “Actually they havn’t. Anyone can form a union if you want. The issue is over whether you can ofrce other people to join them and automatically deduct unions dues from people’s paychecks whether they’re members or not.”

        You should bother knowing anything at all about what you are talking about. Saying that a group of people at a corporation can unionize but not everyone should have to join in order to work is problematic. First, they benefit from the union, like free loaders. Second, though, it is analogous to saying that you can have a group of people get together and form, say, a corporation for the benefit of making money and then say, well, this dude over here wants in on that but doesn’t want to be a shareholder and wants to make contracts on the side on behalf of the corporation without input from the shareholders.

        So far, you are about the dumbest little libertarian fake I have found.

        You said:
        “How the fuck did “corporations” do this? The student loan process is a governmentrun “single-payer” system.”

        Are you a moron living in a cave? Or just arrogant?
        Of course large corporations have this hold over students. This “single payer” system you speak of is new. Very. As in, Obama. A huge percentage of students owe money to private banks. And it was the same private banks who lobbied to make student loans like virtually no other debt: unforgivable almost no matter what. It was also the corporations who originally lobbied to turn the system into a loan system from a grant system in the late 70s and early 80s. It is also private corporations pushing for profit schools pushing student loans guaranteed by public money while pushing to not be held accountable for despicable lying practices. The loans default because the “schools” are not offering an education, but a way to redistribute wealth to the finance class.

        You said:
        “The horror! Trying to reduce costs! Everyone is entitled to the same pay and benefits, no matter how their industry benefits or whether their products sell or not! We can’t just have people not earning as much money as they used to! Society will collapse!”

        Are you stupid or evil?
        Your use of straw men isn’t even that interesting.
        Otherwise, though, you are also factually wrong. As though corporations exist in the little vacuum of 100% self made fantasy of Randians worldwide. They don’t. The corporations built themselves up by externalizing costs onto this system, via healthcare, artificial pressure down on wages, lobbying to get out of most or all tax burdens, pollution, therefore, more health costs, getting out of helping to pay for the education of workers they claim to need so bad, lobbying to undermine teachers unions to pay teachers less to privatize schools to make money off of schools where students are being taught how to be good little cogs as in turn of the last century racist education policy, etc, etc.

        Every single point you make is both filled with fallacies and just false. You don’t know your history, your current events, your policy, etc. You wouldn’t know how to reason your way out of a shoe. Putting up straw scarecrows to easily knock down doesn’t make you right. Ad hominem attacks don’t do anything to move an argument forward (my don’t either, I used them to illustrate that point, actually). Red herrings are either about you being dishonest or further illustration of your ignorance of the topics.

        Since Rand was really a class war propagandist, and not the logician she liked to portray herself as, she wouldn’t be ashamed of you morons over here. But as someone who took her at her word for years, she ought to have had contempt for your overt anti-intellectualism.

        Bothering with the rest of your rant is a waist of energy and only legitimizes your ignorance. (Moa? Really? Seriously, as a vet, you are a fucking offensive little shit–cold war’s over, dude, move on.)

        1. “The corporations built themselves up by externalizing costs onto this system, via healthcare, artificial pressure down on wages,”

          Brand new shithead troll. And thoroughly ignorant besides.

  30. Hi guys. What did I miss?

    1. Re: PantsFan,

      You missed how different nicks of the same asshole pretend to discuss with each other.

      1. you also missed the old spic displaying his paranoia, piss poor reasoning and reading comprehension

        1. Re: asswipe,

          Oh, by the way, mat, your pathetic attempt at positing a comment on my blog was of no avail, as I retain posting rights, you failing excuse for a person.

          1. Thanks for making my point about your paranoia. You are now projecting me onto random blog posters.

            Oh yeah, you SO mad…

  31. Wall Street protests the start of ‘American Spring’, says Iranian general

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com…..le2196138/

    Gen. Masoud Jazayeri of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said the protests against corporate greed and the gap between rich and poor are a revolution in the making that will topple what he called the Western capitalist system.

    1. A bunch of antisemites support another bunch of antisemites? Color me surprised.

    2. …”a revolution in the making that will topple what he called the Western capitalist system.”

      Yep, and WI is guessing we’ll all start pooping in the in the dirt and chasing mice for dinner, while People Power is looking forward to free shit from the government and Jazayeri figures we’ll all start facing east 5 times a day and wrapping the women in sack-cloth.
      Hint: ain’t happening.

      1. Neither is Libertopia

        1. Whole lot closer than the alternatives, asshole.

          1. Ypu meant “liberaltopia”, PenilePower.

  32. It’s Tim Tebow time in Denver!

    1. I’m surprised that John fox didn’t call a draw play on that last second hail mary.

  33. The Remy lyrics are pretty mediocre

    This is a better #OWS song – surely Zombie lover Timmy Cav would agree no?

    http://boingboing.net/2011/10/…..treet.html

  34. I LOVE that the entire bottom 3/4 of this post uses a racial epithet!

  35. I like the video. Thanks.

    You know, the DEA office in New York City is within 10 block of Wall Street. The Wall Street Occupiers are choosing to leave it alone as they protest corporations. This choice shows that they are less upset by War on Drugs then by the realization that they are not getting ever larger handouts from the feds.

  36. *surveys wreckage*

    Wow. This all happened, since, like, 4:30 or so. Wow. Hope you guys had fun!

    1. I scare to look

      1. It looks like Gotterdammerung in here.

  37. Awesome.

    Screw ‘see something, say something’.

    See a neo-hippie, beat a neo-hippie.

  38. An interesting dialogue is worth comment. I feel that it’s best to write more on this matter, it won’t be a taboo topic but usually persons are not sufficient to talk on such topics. To the next. Cheers

  39. Hey! I simply wish to give an enormous thumbs up for the good info you might have right here on this post. I might be coming back to your weblog for extra soon.

  40. Wow. I missed the fun.

  41. Loved it. Absolutely loved it. Couldn’t really do a better job demonstrating to the world how a heavily subsidized oil billionaire’s pet website views civil disobedience. Apologia for plutocrats par excellence.

    Let me guess, this chooch with the guitar used to write for Fox’s “Half Hour News Hour” for the whole week it was on, right?

    1. Who’s “Ay Rand”?

  42. I love this blog. Looking forward to your next post

  43. I love this blog. Looking forward to your next post http://www.glchinese.com

  44. Funny, as in not very. Keep living in an ideological vacuum people, I wouldn’t worry, it’s never led to empires falling or anything like that. I especially love how it proves socialism is a good thing.

  45. Once again, a magazine narcissistically calling itself the very definition of clear thinking throws around straw men, et al., fallacies galore for a not funny joke. You not only would flunk a critical reasoning class, let alone an advanced logic course, you wouldn’t make it in a comedy improve group.

    1. “Recovering AR|10.10.11 @ 4:06PM|#
      “Once again, a magazine narcissistically calling itself the very definition of clear thinking throws around straw men, et al.”

      This from an ignoramus posting:
      “The corporations built themselves up by externalizing costs onto this system, via healthcare, artificial pressure down on wages,”

      I’m not going to waste time on most of your bullshit, but please explain how corporations put “artificial pressure down on wages”.
      Stupid is as stupid posts.

  46. The anti-capitalist movement is clearly sexist. Why tell all those women they can’t be mindless consumers and have nice things? ?? When you get a real woman (not some dirty hippie lunatic), all this anti-capitalist nonsense is gonna go the way of the do-do

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.