There's only two ways to acquire wealth, either voluntary trade or theft.
Neither theft nor trade create wealth, they both merely move it around. When you produce a product you have indeed created wealth, and the guy in the boardroom neither designed nor built the product -- the people he hired did. They're the ones who created the wealth. Are you a programmer? You create wealth. Are you a salesman or an accountant? Your job iss needed, but you create no wealth; you obtain your wealth from those who create it.
Those that have not stolen, deserve to be rich.
I haven't stolen, nor am I rich. Do I deserve to be? I would posit that Sam Walton stole his wealth by exploiting his workers. If your workforce recieves food stamps, you're stealing from both your workers and the government.
The rich people I've known became that way through a combination of great luck and very hard work. As I mentioned, there are many who steal their way to riches.
If you're a section-8 landlord, in my mind you're a god damned thief, stealing from both the government and your tenants, as well as your competetitor's tenents, since Section 8 drives up rent prices. Disclaimer: I have been friends with Section 8 landlords, and Section 8 renters so I know both groups.
If you're a stock trader you're a parasite. If you're a CEO who gets huge bonuses after running the business to the ground, you're a thief and a parasite.
If you're an American President who bails out failed businesses for fear of another Great Depression (and there were two, B & O), you're the victim of extortion.
One can get rich honestly, but it's damned hard to do. It takes a shitload of all kinds of luck.
If you're born into wealth and don't use that wealth to better society, you're a parasite.
Re:I propose we Occupy "Occupy"
on
Occupy Flash?
·
· Score: 1
I was watching CNN today and prominent in the video was one guy wearing a "Legalize It" t-shirt with a big marijuana leaf on it
From what I can see, a very large majority of the population is for legalizing marijuana, so it is indeed a good symbol; a symbol of the powers that be (especially politicians) ignoring what the folks who voted for them (the 99%, or a good proportion of the 99%) want.
The Che shirt and Cuban flag was indeed stupid -- unless, of course, he was planted by the anti-occupy folks.
Yes, the civil rights marches had folks wearing suits, and that made sense; they were seen as "dirty niggers" and wanted to show the fact that they were no different than anyone else. But I didn't see any suits at all in the anti-Vietnam War marches or protests (which were civil rights era protests)
Wearing a tie to an occupy march would be stupid. The necktie (Satan's leash or noose) is the sign of the 1%er, the symbol of wealth and power. Ever see a banker work without one? A stockbroker? Occupy protesters wearing ties would be like Palestineans protesting against Israeli domination while carrying Israeli flags.
Re:I propose we Occupy "Occupy"
on
Occupy Flash?
·
· Score: 1
Jumping the shark jumped the shark?
Re:I propose we Occupy "Occupy"
on
Occupy Flash?
·
· Score: 2
Incorrect. They're against the redistribution of wealth from the creators of wealth (those of us who work for a living in factories, in construction, in programmer's cubes -- the 99%) to the 1% who aggreate and control the wealth without creating any of it at all. We're not against paying the 1% for what they do; the wealth doesn't mean much when it's not put to good use, so the 1% are far from useless, but they're WAY overpaid. And they're being paid from the wealth that YOU produce in your cubicle.
It's time to stop the redistribution of wealth from the 99% to the 1%. We created it, we want more of it.
Re:I propose we Occupy "Occupy"
on
Occupy Flash?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
"Ron Paul, a current presidential candidate for the 2012 election, has lead an incredibly successful life and has a Net Worth of $4.9 Million".
"Barack Obama is the former Senator from Illinois and the 44th President of the United States with an estimated net worth of $10.5 million."
Obama is only twice as rich as Ron Paul. They're both 1%ers.
Actually, I'd be very surprised if we didn't find life elsewhere. I think (and have for some time) that there's a good chance we might find life on Europa, or perhaps one of Saturn's moons (you might like this short sci-fi story about possible life on the moons of Saturn, Jupiter, or Neptune). But I won't take "there is life out there!" on faith like it seems everyone else is doing.
Well, I didn't vote for Obama (voted third party), but he hasn't been a bad President. He's a lot better than Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Bush. But he's not good enough. We need an FDR, but unfortunately, there isn't anyone like that who's come to the forefront.
Despite the fact that Obama's far from the best President we've had, I think he's still head and shoulders above any of the other candidates from the other four viable parties (by "viable" I mean on enough ballots in enough states to have a mathematical chance of winning, even if there's no real chance).
does anyone actually think this is going to have any kind of impact.
Some obviously do or they wouldn't have started it. Personally, I thought it was pretty silly, and it seems so do most other slashdotters. There are some good comments.
I doubt Occupy Flash will kill Flash, and I think the Flash occupiers are wasting their time. It's like putting a man on death row who's already dying of cancer. I'm of the belief that flash will die on its own, like so many other obsolete technologies (and other technologies that died that maybe shouldn't have).
Why would anybody install an add-on when the browser can do it without the add-on? HTML5 is capable (or so I've read), so Flash, although once necessary, no longer is.
I think the "Occupy HTML" is even sillier, a bunch of developers trying to hang on to their outmoded skills. Occupy COBOL, anyone? Flash developers, time to take some new classes.
The Tea Party didnt happen till we got a black president.... And neither did a housing market collapse, honest reporting on the national debt, interest paid to the US debtors, rising unemployment and subsequent home forcelosures
All those things happened before Obama was President. Except, of course, the Tea Party. The market crash happened months before the election, homes were being foreclosed on right and left. The economy got so bad in those eight years that Bush is the only President in history to enter office with more Americans working than when he left. Yet there was little or no outcry.
They should have been picketing at least the last two administrations
There was no reason to picket the Clinton administration; he went into office in a recession and huge defecit that had lasted since Reagan and left office with a booming economy and a balanced budget.
Personally, I was amazed that Bush got re-elected. His whole eight years were abysmal. I've never seen a worse President in my 59 years, and I suspect the US has naver had a President that harmed the country so badly.
Interesting view of history you have there. Utterly wrong though.
Yeah? Can you link to anything, anywhere about the tea party that was posted before Obama was elected? Because I never heard of them until then. We're not talking about the 1930s here, we're talking yesterday.
Any fool should know trying to make Democrats shrink the government is a fools errand
Exactly. We just don't know. Actually I think the liklihood of Earth being the only place with life is incredibly low, but unless and until we find life elsewhere, it's pretty unscientific to be absolutely certain that ther is life elsewhere.
I thought the Koch funding was pretty much identified. Saying where the money comes from isn't bashing. Racists? Easy to believe, especially since the tea party didn't hapen until we got a black President. Where were they when Bush was running up the record defecit? Why did they wait until Obama was Prez to come out of the woodwork? You don't think the "birthers" are wingnuts? And where did "Republican plants" come from? They ARE Republicans!
You're sure, huh? You know, we only have evidence of life happening one time and in one place. If there is indeed no life on Europa and it does indeed have the conditions thought necessary for life to form, we might have to ponder the possibility that life is incredibly rare. I suspect that life is, in fact, incredibly rare.
Actually, the ones in the '60s and '70s were worse... the 1968 Democratic convention and police beating protesters mercilessly, the Kent State massacre of unarmed students by the Ohio National Guard, etc.
Too bad the 1%ers don't read history or they'd be a hell of a lot more scared than you are. But the fact that they (or rather, the government they bought) repeated the 1920s during the Bush years and almost repeated 1929 shows that they've never cracked open a history book in their lives.
BTW, the link is to a volume that was required reading in an undergrad history class I took in the '70s. It's a very good read. It's also scary how it mirrors the times we live in now.
Huh? I didn't see a lot of negative press about the tea party. I've seen a lot of negative news about some of their members, like Illinois' own Joe Walsh, a deadbeat dad who campaigned on "fiscal responsibility", Cain and Perry's tard moments (and Cain's sexual harrassment), stupidities like this. But not about the rallies themselves (well, except the one where they booed the wounded veteran because he wa gay).
Do you have some links to this negative coverage by established news outlets that isn't some blog or left wing rag like Mother Jones?
Actually, it prevents the creator from selling to the *pirate*.
More often it creates a sale to the pirate. Back in the '60s when I was a teenager, file sharing was accomplished with analog LPs and tapes. An example of how this "piracy" generated sales was Jimi Hendrix. At least in St Louis before KSHE started, Hendrix never got air play. My crazy friend Tom gave me a cassettes of "Are You Experienced", which I promptly went out and bought. Keep in mind that a first generation cassette made from a new LP was every bit as good as a high quality MP3.
Then I went out and bought two more Hendrix albums. As this is how I was as a teenager, I must assume today's teens are similar. Had I not been able to afford those albums (I had a job and could), the result to the labels would be the same as if I'd never heard that cassette.
Again, studies show that pirates spend more money on music than non-pirates. Most of us have a limited supply of money, but there is no limit to the supply of music (only to the time you have to listen to it).
Studies show that neither the labels nor artists are harmed by piracy. No harm, no foul.
Slashdot Mirror
Since the 1% control the media, you know which side the media are on and whose agenda they promote.
"Dancing With The Stars" as news, anyone?
There's only two ways to acquire wealth, either voluntary trade or theft.
Neither theft nor trade create wealth, they both merely move it around. When you produce a product you have indeed created wealth, and the guy in the boardroom neither designed nor built the product -- the people he hired did. They're the ones who created the wealth. Are you a programmer? You create wealth. Are you a salesman or an accountant? Your job iss needed, but you create no wealth; you obtain your wealth from those who create it.
Those that have not stolen, deserve to be rich.
I haven't stolen, nor am I rich. Do I deserve to be? I would posit that Sam Walton stole his wealth by exploiting his workers. If your workforce recieves food stamps, you're stealing from both your workers and the government.
The rich people I've known became that way through a combination of great luck and very hard work. As I mentioned, there are many who steal their way to riches.
If you're a section-8 landlord, in my mind you're a god damned thief, stealing from both the government and your tenants, as well as your competetitor's tenents, since Section 8 drives up rent prices. Disclaimer: I have been friends with Section 8 landlords, and Section 8 renters so I know both groups.
If you're a stock trader you're a parasite. If you're a CEO who gets huge bonuses after running the business to the ground, you're a thief and a parasite.
If you're an American President who bails out failed businesses for fear of another Great Depression (and there were two, B & O), you're the victim of extortion.
One can get rich honestly, but it's damned hard to do. It takes a shitload of all kinds of luck.
If you're born into wealth and don't use that wealth to better society, you're a parasite.
I was watching CNN today and prominent in the video was one guy wearing a "Legalize It" t-shirt with a big marijuana leaf on it
From what I can see, a very large majority of the population is for legalizing marijuana, so it is indeed a good symbol; a symbol of the powers that be (especially politicians) ignoring what the folks who voted for them (the 99%, or a good proportion of the 99%) want.
The Che shirt and Cuban flag was indeed stupid -- unless, of course, he was planted by the anti-occupy folks.
Yes, the civil rights marches had folks wearing suits, and that made sense; they were seen as "dirty niggers" and wanted to show the fact that they were no different than anyone else. But I didn't see any suits at all in the anti-Vietnam War marches or protests (which were civil rights era protests)
Wearing a tie to an occupy march would be stupid. The necktie (Satan's leash or noose) is the sign of the 1%er, the symbol of wealth and power. Ever see a banker work without one? A stockbroker? Occupy protesters wearing ties would be like Palestineans protesting against Israeli domination while carrying Israeli flags.
Jumping the shark jumped the shark?
Incorrect. They're against the redistribution of wealth from the creators of wealth (those of us who work for a living in factories, in construction, in programmer's cubes -- the 99%) to the 1% who aggreate and control the wealth without creating any of it at all. We're not against paying the 1% for what they do; the wealth doesn't mean much when it's not put to good use, so the 1% are far from useless, but they're WAY overpaid. And they're being paid from the wealth that YOU produce in your cubicle.
It's time to stop the redistribution of wealth from the 99% to the 1%. We created it, we want more of it.
"Ron Paul, a current presidential candidate for the 2012 election, has lead an
incredibly successful life and has a Net Worth of $4.9 Million".
"Barack Obama is the former Senator from Illinois and the 44th President of the
United States with an estimated net worth of $10.5 million."
Obama is only twice as rich as Ron Paul. They're both 1%ers.
Or a "Christian" who's never read the new testament would be my first guess.
Actually, I'd be very surprised if we didn't find life elsewhere. I think (and have for some time) that there's a good chance we might find life on Europa, or perhaps one of Saturn's moons (you might like this short sci-fi story about possible life on the moons of Saturn, Jupiter, or Neptune). But I won't take "there is life out there!" on faith like it seems everyone else is doing.
Well, I didn't vote for Obama (voted third party), but he hasn't been a bad President. He's a lot better than Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, and Bush. But he's not good enough. We need an FDR, but unfortunately, there isn't anyone like that who's come to the forefront.
Despite the fact that Obama's far from the best President we've had, I think he's still head and shoulders above any of the other candidates from the other four viable parties (by "viable" I mean on enough ballots in enough states to have a mathematical chance of winning, even if there's no real chance).
Thank you for enlightening me.
does anyone actually think this is going to have any kind of impact.
Some obviously do or they wouldn't have started it. Personally, I thought it was pretty silly, and it seems so do most other slashdotters. There are some good comments.
I doubt Occupy Flash will kill Flash, and I think the Flash occupiers are wasting their time. It's like putting a man on death row who's already dying of cancer. I'm of the belief that flash will die on its own, like so many other obsolete technologies (and other technologies that died that maybe shouldn't have).
Why would anybody install an add-on when the browser can do it without the add-on? HTML5 is capable (or so I've read), so Flash, although once necessary, no longer is.
I think the "Occupy HTML" is even sillier, a bunch of developers trying to hang on to their outmoded skills. Occupy COBOL, anyone? Flash developers, time to take some new classes.
Sometimes they do that. I've had stories posted that didn't contain a single word I wrote, although I was still given credit for those submissions.
The idea there could be protein molecules formed in different ways isn't quite new
We could come across life, even intelligent life, that's so strange that we won't even recognize it as being alive.
The Tea Party didnt happen till we got a black president.... And neither did a housing market collapse, honest reporting on the national debt, interest paid to the US debtors, rising unemployment and subsequent home forcelosures
All those things happened before Obama was President. Except, of course, the Tea Party. The market crash happened months before the election, homes were being foreclosed on right and left. The economy got so bad in those eight years that Bush is the only President in history to enter office with more Americans working than when he left. Yet there was little or no outcry.
They should have been picketing at least the last two administrations
There was no reason to picket the Clinton administration; he went into office in a recession and huge defecit that had lasted since Reagan and left office with a booming economy and a balanced budget.
Personally, I was amazed that Bush got re-elected. His whole eight years were abysmal. I've never seen a worse President in my 59 years, and I suspect the US has naver had a President that harmed the country so badly.
Interesting view of history you have there. Utterly wrong though.
Yeah? Can you link to anything, anywhere about the tea party that was posted before Obama was elected? Because I never heard of them until then. We're not talking about the 1930s here, we're talking yesterday.
Any fool should know trying to make Democrats shrink the government is a fools errand
You never heard of Bill Clinton?
Can I disagree here?
Of course you can.
We have a sample size of 1 right now
Exactly. We just don't know. Actually I think the liklihood of Earth being the only place with life is incredibly low, but unless and until we find life elsewhere, it's pretty unscientific to be absolutely certain that ther is life elsewhere.
I thought the Koch funding was pretty much identified. Saying where the money comes from isn't bashing. Racists? Easy to believe, especially since the tea party didn't hapen until we got a black President. Where were they when Bush was running up the record defecit? Why did they wait until Obama was Prez to come out of the woodwork? You don't think the "birthers" are wingnuts? And where did "Republican plants" come from? They ARE Republicans!
That is actually 100% correct. It isn't easy being a Christian. I wonder who modded you down, and why? Because that is indeed what Christ taught.
You're sure, huh? You know, we only have evidence of life happening one time and in one place. If there is indeed no life on Europa and it does indeed have the conditions thought necessary for life to form, we might have to ponder the possibility that life is incredibly rare. I suspect that life is, in fact, incredibly rare.
In other words, it's dead, Jim.
Actually, the ones in the '60s and '70s were worse... the 1968 Democratic convention and police beating protesters mercilessly, the Kent State massacre of unarmed students by the Ohio National Guard, etc.
Too bad the 1%ers don't read history or they'd be a hell of a lot more scared than you are. But the fact that they (or rather, the government they bought) repeated the 1920s during the Bush years and almost repeated 1929 shows that they've never cracked open a history book in their lives.
BTW, the link is to a volume that was required reading in an undergrad history class I took in the '70s. It's a very good read. It's also scary how it mirrors the times we live in now.
However they aren't just protesting Wall Street, they are protesting capitalism.
Citation needed, and Fox doesn't count.
Huh? I didn't see a lot of negative press about the tea party. I've seen a lot of negative news about some of their members, like Illinois' own Joe Walsh, a deadbeat dad who campaigned on "fiscal responsibility", Cain and Perry's tard moments (and Cain's sexual harrassment), stupidities like this. But not about the rallies themselves (well, except the one where they booed the wounded veteran because he wa gay).
Do you have some links to this negative coverage by established news outlets that isn't some blog or left wing rag like Mother Jones?
Two wrongs don't make a right, but if you punch someone in the face, don't be surprised when they hit you back.
Actually, it prevents the creator from selling to the *pirate*.
More often it creates a sale to the pirate. Back in the '60s when I was a teenager, file sharing was accomplished with analog LPs and tapes. An example of how this "piracy" generated sales was Jimi Hendrix. At least in St Louis before KSHE started, Hendrix never got air play. My crazy friend Tom gave me a cassettes of "Are You Experienced", which I promptly went out and bought. Keep in mind that a first generation cassette made from a new LP was every bit as good as a high quality MP3.
Then I went out and bought two more Hendrix albums. As this is how I was as a teenager, I must assume today's teens are similar. Had I not been able to afford those albums (I had a job and could), the result to the labels would be the same as if I'd never heard that cassette.
Again, studies show that pirates spend more money on music than non-pirates. Most of us have a limited supply of money, but there is no limit to the supply of music (only to the time you have to listen to it).
Studies show that neither the labels nor artists are harmed by piracy. No harm, no foul.