Adam Carolla on the 1% (and occupy this and that) NSFW Lang.

[IBCoupe]

Surely these lawbreakers are the worst kind of protesters. HOW DARE THEY SIT THERE QUIETLY.

Interestingly, none of those people broke the law. Aren't you supposed to be an expert on this stuff?

None of those OWS 'tards could carry Rosa's purse.

The point of civil disobedience, Greg, is that they did break the law. Buses were segregated in Montgomery, AL by law. Trespassing statutes were enforced against blacks in white establishments. The schools in question in Brown v. Board of Education were public schools. There were plenty of laws that people disobeyed in the name of civil disobedience. That didn't just happen in India.

[AZhitman]

Unfortunately, greed tends to be the predominant philosophy in doing business these days, which is exactly what the underpinnings of the OWS movement started out as. I just take exception to messages that seem to accept this as "the way it works". There is a difference between wanting to have a successful business, provide for your employees, create a healthy culture, create a top-notch product and/or service, and have a healthy/neutral impact on the environment and wanting to make as much money as possible in any way possible.

I despise the culture who believes in the latter and not the former.

Here's the thing, though:

Usually anyone starting a business has invested significant capitol up-front to get things off the ground (you're looking at one). Not just financial capitol, but time, effort, education, and in some cases, an entire lifestyle - maybe they left their 9-to-5, maybe starting a business meant raiding the nest egg, selling the house, or deciding to forego school or kids...

So, it's really no surprise that the perception would be "OMG GREED", when the reality is, there's a real motivation to see a return ASAP because of the investment made up-front.

Then, other factors come into play: A little success breeds copycats, so you've gotta stay ahead of them (or risk failure). Growth is mandatory, if stakeholders are to be appeased. Downturns create slowdowns, which mean you've gotta compensate by "getting while the getting's good"... there's a ton of reasons why perception isn't always accurate, and I'm not too comfortable with this recently-hatched notion that perceived greed is a bad thing.

I've always believed that the more I have, the more I can give (whether that means reaching out to help more people through what we do here, helping out someone who's less fortunate, or providing a better start for my chilluns.

[AZhitman]

...they did break the law...

I stand embarrassingly corrected. Thanks homey.

I'll maintain this: There's a big difference between Rosa challenging a clearly unconstitutional law and asserting her personhood, and a bunch of people laying in front of trucks - those people haven't stepped on the protesters' rights in any way, shape or form.

[Jesda]

Doesn't matter anyway. The cold weather keeps folks indoors.

[Jesda]

Unfortunately, greed tends to be the predominant philosophy in doing business these days, which is exactly what the underpinnings of the OWS movement started out as. I just take exception to messages that seem to accept this as "the way it works". There is a difference between wanting to have a successful business, provide for your employees, create a healthy culture, create a top-notch product and/or service, and have a healthy/neutral impact on the environment and wanting to make as much money as possible in any way possible.

I despise the culture who believes in the latter and not the former.

It depends on how you look at greed. I'd hate to bring a copout like 'situational ethics' into the discussion, but it loosely applies here.

--Greed, in excess, feeds short-term thinking, destructive choices (destructive to the business AND external stakeholders), and brings about the potential downfall of a successful organization (General Motors).
--Greed is also part of a natural human motivation to have, do, and create more -- in effect creating a better world.

It isn't as simple as one extreme or the other.

You, I, and others wake up, do our thing, and come home. We're motivated to provide for ourselves in the most effective way we believe we can, within the reasonable bounds of societal norms, laws, and ethical standards. And we're inclined to retain most of what we build, create, and earn for ourselves, our families, and our friends.
: That's also "greed" and "selfishness" depending on how you depict it, and its generally positive for society.

Creating shell corporations to hide losses until it blows up in everyone's face (Enron), knowingly issuing unsustainable mortgages for short term gain (banks), and blatant dishonesty about earnings (Worldcom, Arthur Anderson, Tyco, Global Crossing, Adelphia) -- that's the kind of destructive greed I hope OWS stays focused on.

Unfortunately, as the movement devolves into an amorphous blob of left-wing noise, the message gets fuzzy and people stop caring. [And the weather certainly doesn't help.] That's bad news for all of us.

[AZhitman]

They won't - They haven't educated themselves on the true targets of their ire.

They're all running around without noses.

It's, "OMG RICH PEOPLE ARE RICH AND I HAZ NO JOB!"

While that's easy to get a lot of people to turn out for, it's an ineffectual platform for change.

[Razi]

I don't think I've seen them complain about rich people being rich.
Isn't it more about the big corporations manipulating politicians?

[Jesda]

I don't think I've seen them complain about rich people being rich.
Isn't it more about the big corporations manipulating politicians?

The problem with the "99% vs 1%" theme dominating the movement is that it targets and categorizes classes of people while making ethics secondary.

[Razi]

Good point
That "We are the 99%" thing is getting pretty silly.
Even then, they aren't actually whining about the rich being rich, right?

Maybe instead of writing that on all their signs, they should write something that expresses their thoughts better.

[Encryptshun]

Buzzwords and catchphrases frequently don't relay explicit information regarding the product or service they are drawing attention to. "Coke is it" doesn't tell you what Coke is, what the company stands for, or why you should buy it.

Greg and Jesda, I hear you. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that running a business to make a profit is a bad thing. I'm saying that running a business to make a profit at the expense of ethics and upholding the social contract is a bad thing. "Greed" is, by definition, excessive. Ensuring you have enough revenue to keep your business afloat and your employees employed is not what I'd consider greedy in most cases.

[Jesda]

Of course, then you have to define excessive. That opens another can of worms.

I prefer the definition of greed that describes it as "intense selfishness" -- that denotation indirectly addresses human nature, and from there we can think about how selfishness is beneficial to economic output or detrimental to ethical behavior, and how the two affect societal well-being.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Apple is making money hand over fist, why isn't anyone calling them greedy?

[AZhitman]

Because, as I stated earlier, the idiots who whine about "corporate greed" wouldn't DARE give up their iPhones and iPads.

You think any of them choose to disconnect their cable, so they don't support the wealthy media conglomerates? Any of them sell their car, so as not to support the wealthy oil magnates? Are they ditching their A&F clothing in a show of solidarity with the oppressed textile workers in 3rd-world countries? How many STARBUCKS cups have they left behind in the parks?

C'mon. Legitimacy isn't their strong suit.

It's nothing more than an angsty serial photo-op devised to garner support from the least common denominators. I guarantee there was much [secret] cheering the first time someone got pepper-sprayed: OMG LEGITIMACY ACHIEVED +111111!!!!

[PapaSmurf2k3]

That reminds me. I can tell you exactly how many unemployed people I know that actually turned off cable and internet: 0

People just suck at saving money these days.

[Encryptshun]

The Apple thing is an unquestionable irony.

"Down with corporations!

--sent from my iPhone 4G"

[AZhitman]

<-- Desperately trying not to smile smugly.

I can't take seriously the "plight" of anyone who won't accept less money than they were making before, won't give up their double-mocha-latte, won't turn in their cell phone and cable box, won't forego fast food, won't hold a garage sale, and won't take their car back to the bank and buy a $500 beater.

Lest anyone bring up pots and kettles, I've been there, done that. It sucked, but I made it through unemployment in the prior recession.

Those people need a mega-dose of some Dave Ramsey in their lives, STAT.

[AZhitman]

More arrests in NY (geniuses think it's ok to scale a fence and "camp out" on private property)...

The OWS morons don't represent me. The only reason they're even known is because it's easier for "Mr. Wannabe News Anchor" to cover their shenanigans than to do some REAL journalism and learn about far-more-interesting people doing far-more-interesting things (such as many of you here).

I should start a counter-movement: "Accomplish America". We won't have meetings (we're too busy). We won't get arrested (we obey the law). We won't get news coverage (we're relatively boring). Come to think of it, no one will know who we are. And that's ok.

[Encryptshun]

That reminds me. I can tell you exactly how many unemployed people I know that actually turned off cable and internet: 0

People just suck at saving money these days.

Because, of course, your punishment for finding yourself unemployed should be that you cut yourself off from any and all sources of pleasure. And it's of course easy to find a job without the internet and/or a phone these days.

Sorry, my friend, but that particular point of argument is tiresome and overdone.

[AZhitman]

O TEH SARCASMS!

Just because a point of contention is "tiresome and overdone" doesn't mean it's not valid.

Sure, they don't want to hear it - Immediate gratification and entitlement don't exactly play nice with unemployment, but just because it's distasteful doesn't make it wrong.

"Rice and beans, beans and rice", or, suffer the consequences. Or, more simply, "stop digging".

[Encryptshun]

Beyond simple sarcasm, unemployment when you don't *want* to be unemployed is incredibly stressful. If spending $60/month on basic cable and internet helps you keep it together, keep looking for work, and out of a depressive state requiring potentially expensive trips to the doctor (which would come out of public coffers), then even without the practical aspects, it generates good ROI.

Plus (the practical points you ignored above), you pretty much have to have the internet to find a job these days and it's impossible to find one if you don't have a phone. (As a matter of fact, I'd say 99% of the places I apply won't even let you complete the application without a valid phone number.) You could certainly use a library for internet, but considering you need on-demand access and can spend up to 8+ hours a day looking, libraries aren't feasible -- they impose restrictions on how much time you can use it and there are always lines (at least in my district).

So yeah, tiresome and overdone.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

I haven't applied for a non-career oriented job in a while (last time was ~10 or 11 years ago? Holy crap...), but I'd be willing to bet you can walk into any restaurant and fill out an application to be a cook or dishwasher. Is it a career? Well, it could be, but we'll say no. It DOES get you out of the house, and it DOES get you positive cashflow though.

Hell, just look at what Torry did. He said "you know what guys, I've got too much debt, and too much of my money is going towards things I don't need". He sold his G, got some dependable roomates in a sustainable living situation, and picked up another job (delivering pizzas). Does it suck sometimes when his friends want to go out at 8pm on a Friday an he's working? I'm sure it does, but he is admirably climbing out of his debt hole.

Not to be a douche, but I completely disagree with your logic on cable and internet. I could see keeping SOME form of internet (a friend's house, mooching wi-fi from McDonalds, library, or worst case scenario: your house for basic internet), but you really don't need TV (I did it for a whole year in 2006-2007)

[Jesda]

I still agree with the original intent of OWS -- fighting corruption so that institutions stay out of our way as we work to become better and more prosperous people.
Not so fond of some of the feel-good types who have recently latched on to the movement.


That said...

I haven't had TV service in about a year. I have a portable TV with an antenna on my nightstand for weather emergencies ($20, pawn shop). For regular shows, I download things. Internet service is also cheaper than you think. A Virgin Mobile phone is $150, then for $55/mo you can enjoy unlimited voice calls and unlimited data (after 2GB they slow you down) tethered to your laptop. I wouldn't use it to download torrents or watch Netflix, but for job searching it works quite well while saving $50+ per month by not paying for cable/DSL.

Saving money requires creativity. I've been poor before, living on part-time minimum wage for extended periods of time in my early 20s. I've also commuted on the bus, sharing seats with people who talk in my ear and smell like sewage. It SUCKS, but that's life. You make sacrifices and suffer while you scrape your way forward.

When my parents came to the US, my mom worked in a shoe factory. That's dull, grueling, awful work that we now expect the Chinese to do. [Strangely enough, that factory is still open, still making shoes in the USA.] Then after that she wiped old people's asses as a nurse aid while earning a hair above minimum. Yada yada yada, after a couple college degrees and several years of marriage and raising my fat a** later, she now owns investment property.

And I've got a story like that for almost every member of my extended family.

I don't know why people born in the US struggle to figure this stuff out. Being poor is supposed to suck. And you're supposed to fix the "being poor" problem yourself, though there's nothing wrong with the support of family, friends, church, neighbors, etc. While enduring poverty, you aren't supposed to spend your money on malt liquor or get knocked up.

It's hard, absolutely, and sometimes its downright painful, but it's not that complicated. Commit to goals, make sacrifices, move forward.

Sometimes I wish our population could be flushed out and replaced with eager immigrants. There's too many turds floating around in this country.

[Encryptshun]

Why is being poor supposed to suck? Why does the amount of money you have hold ANY bearing over how happy you are supposed to be? Why do we value people as humans based on how wealthy they are? The link between hard work and financial success is correlary, not causal. Likewise, there's a big difference between the welfare culture and the working poor. To somehow lump them into the same group is just tragic.

Also, I assume what you mean is that "you shouldn't make a consious choice to get pregnant voluntarily if you know you are unable to financially provide for your child". If I'm wrong there, please correct me.

There is a big difference between having a kid specifically because it will increase your welfare check and a poor, working person having a child because they want a child. How can someone say that you aren't supposed to have a child unless you live above the poverty line (especially when over 15% of our population--46.2 million people--lives below it). Is poverty genetic? I'm betting that quite a few members of this forum (I freely raise my hand) were born to parents who lived in poverty. Growing up poor taught me to work hard and to appreciate what I have, both of which have, I'd argue, made me a much healthier and more productive member of our society than many kids of affluent families who have always known plenty and who have never had to work for anything.

[Jesda]

Why is being poor supposed to suck? Why does the amount of money you have hold ANY bearing over how happy you are supposed to be? Why do we value people as humans based on how wealthy they are? The link between hard work and financial success is correlary, not causal. Likewise, there's a big difference between the welfare culture and the working poor. To somehow lump them into the same group is just tragic.

Your analytical nature caused you to read more into my post than was actually there.



Exhale, reread, get the main idea.

[Encryptshun]

You and I keep this well within the friendly confines of conversation. But there are loads of people out there (most horrifyingly ones voting and ones running for office) who actually believe that poverty somehow only exists because of lazy people. And, since only lazy people are poor, those people aren't really "people" at all and therefore should not be extended the same rights and freedoms as people with money (ie having kids, enjoying life, living in decent housing, eating decent food). Even though I know YOU didn't mean it exactly that way, Jesda, other people certainly do.

[Jesda]

Even though I know YOU didn't mean it exactly that way, Jesda, other people certainly do.

Cool. Send them an email?

[Encryptshun]

[AZhitman]

I don't know why people born in the US struggle to figure this stuff out. Being poor is supposed to suck. And you're supposed to fix the "being poor" problem yourself, though there's nothing wrong with the support of family, friends, church, neighbors, etc. While enduring poverty, you aren't supposed to spend your money on malt liquor or get knocked up.

It's hard, absolutely, and sometimes its downright painful, but it's not that complicated. Commit to goals, make sacrifices, move forward.

Sometimes I wish our population could be flushed out and replaced with eager immigrants. There's too many turds floating around in this country.

Is it too late to fire up the campaign again? I'll drive the bus - you know I'm loyal.

I could be your Joe Biden... opinionated, dynamic, but really should just STFU most of the time.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Yes, being poor is supposed to have some aspects of suck. Its what compels you to get your a** out of bed in the morning, go out in the world, be productive, and collect a pay check.

[Encryptshun]

Hmm. Maybe it's some weird phase I'm going through or something, but for me money is not my desired motivator for getting up in the morning and being productive. I actually believe that we'd all be much happier, more successful, and more productive if our motivation was going to do something we loved doing rather than something we had to do to avoid being poor.

But like my grampa used to say, "Let me wish in one hand and sh*t in the other. We'll see which fills up first."