Freaks and geeks

Dateline: Fri 07 Oct 2011

and those practitioners of conscientious capitalism....

don't camp out Saturday in your Occupy Indy protest at Veterans' Memorial Plaza at 550 N. Meridian (you know, the one with the big black obelisk, formerly known as Obelisk Square, that has some convinced Indy is the center of paganism...but that is another story).

Here's the latest, from Ball State Daily online (which shows you who some of the protesters will be....bored kids with nothing better to do, or, in a different spin, passionate kids who really care about the world):

"Occupy Indianapolis has been moved from Veterans Memorial Plaza to a location that has not yet been determined, according to the Occupy Indianapolis Facebook page.

"A warning was posted to the Facebook page shortly after 3 p.m. Friday to tell protesters Veteran's Memorial Plaza in downtown Indianapolis is off limits. The post also stated those who do camp at Veteran Memorial Plaza will be arrested.

"'It's a monument to our veterans, and we will not dishonor the space,' the Facebook post said.

"After several users commented on the post asking where they are supposed to congregate, an administrator of the group posted that protesters will still meet at Veteran Memorial Plaza, but they will not be allowed to camp there. They will decide where to demonstrate once meeting at Veteran Memorial Plaza. "

Cheez. I recall homeless people congregating not too far from Veterans Memorial Plaza to get their Sunday handouts from various charities....but whatever. I fail to see how a bunch of people objecting to corporate America would disrespect vets.

Don't you hate the way battle lines are always drawn? I can think of nothing more American than free speech and protest, which, I thought, is what the veterans fought and died forw.

Anyhow, the veteran I live with is not complaining, for once.  Certainly this is not on his radar.

So who is calling the shots????? I mean, besides Facebook.





Wilson46201 [unverified] said:

the noontime event will be at Veterans Plaza (with a permit) -- some passionate folk were expecting to camp out quasi-permanently. Of course that's not allowed there so other venues for camping are being researched...

maybe Brown County State Park ?
Occupy Nashville!

2011-10-07 19:59:14

John Howard [unverified] said:

They could camp under the railroad tracks around Georgia and College.

Lots of folk to mingle with and swell their numbers who already call that place 'home.'

2011-10-07 21:06:37

Whitebeard [unverified] said:

"Don't you hate the way battle lines are always drawn? I can think of nothing more American than free speech and protest, which, I thought, is what the veterans fought and died for."

Well said, Ruth. My late Dad was a decorated WWII combat veteran and he would have strongly approved of such activities. He became passionately anti-corporation in his senior years and generally quite liberal in his politics.

2011-10-07 22:40:33

Ms. Cynical [unverified] said:

Military Park is where Civil War recruits camped out....

2011-10-07 23:44:38

hendy [Member] said:

It's a namby-pamby protest that doesn't disrupt something. Being too polite helps you not get noticed. I'd say: at the Governor's Mansion, as it's never used.

Or Monument Circle. Anywhere along the Mall N of the Federal Courts. Perhaps on S Delaware near a famous corporate HQ.

Everyone that reads this is part of the 99%. That's all of you. The rich don't read here. They're building dynasties and dodging taxes.

2011-10-08 06:34:12

RL [unverified] said:

Speak for yourself comrade hendy.

I'm not part of the "99%." Those I've seen interviewed claiming to be part of the 99% may be against corporate Fascism, but their ideals sound like they support governmental Fascism, which is even worse since over the history of time, it is governments that have set up labor camps, political prisons, and even concentration/death camps.

The only thing they seem to support individual liberty wise is free abortion on demand and freedom of speech. They are totally against individual liberty when it comes to what kind of vehicle I want to drive, what kind of light bulb I want to use, how I own firearms, etc.. Why aren't these folks occupying Freddie and Frannie? Why aren't they occupying the Dept. of Justice who is demanding banks loan to poor people? Why aren't they going to the former homes of those who ran these federal agencies? Because they are leftist, and they hate capitalism, but embrace Socialism and Communism.

It is clear to me that the leftist political parties have overtaken this movement. The Tea Party types may have been on Wall Street early on, but everything I'm seeing and reading about now makes me wonder if there is anyone who leans right or conservative involved anymore. Look at the organizers for the Indy protest, the ones I've read about are all leftist.

Not only that, check out the ridiculous post over on this website:

People want it all. Some are willing to work for it, but they feel they should be able to do what they want and still get what they feel they are entitled too. Sorry, but if you get some worthless degree in Women's or Afro Studies, don't be surprised if the only jobs out there are at universities. Don't be surprised if your broke because you racked up credit card debt. Most of those people likely dug their own grave, now they want a bailout. Typical of this country, the United Socialist States of America.

2011-10-08 06:59:10

hendy [Member] said:

No ya don't. Your polarized concept of what government does is not only not mainstream, but you pin yourself into the membership of the propaganda mills. There are mills on the right and left, battling it out, both of them full of themselves, and "facts".

Let's hop on the cluetrain and understand several real facts. The first one is that there is no real communism on this planet. There are numerous pretenders, most of them are totalitarian and neo-socialist. Propaganda lesson: stop listening to the Bircher rhetoric.

Consider the hard core socialist diatribe. Government is the benevolent and righteous redistributor of income. NOT HERE. We do indeed have programs like social security, which is bought and paid for. We prevent people from dying in the streets, and take care of the mentally ill. There is money to prevent starvation. Do you know how many times people on quote-unquote entitlement programs are scrutinized to prevent welfare and entitlement fraud? It's embarrassing what we do to their dignity.

No, instead, we allow these rubrics to push corporations to sequester profits from offshore-- to off shore. We use the lie of high corporate salaries and golden parachutes because we need people to lead corporations like they were monetary generals. So boneheads that drive stock values into the dirt get enormous sums of money when gutless boards decide finally have to go.

Through the use of the most obfuscating tax code on the planet, the tax burden's not evenly distributed at all.

And a Women's Studies degree and an African Studies degree wouldn't be useful to you: you instantly pin yourself as a white male-- many of whom seem to fear women and black people-- and without justification.

But I won't use an epithet like United Crackers of America.... cause we're in this together. Get used to it.

2011-10-08 09:19:32

RL [unverified] said:

If this country is going far left, I'm fine. I can quit my $45K/year job and live off government welfare programs. If it's good enough for tens of millions of my fellow country men and women, I don't see a problem with it. No way am I being a wage slave, waking up at 5AM to get to work, etc..

I figure I can live like a former neighbor on "disability." Stay at home and work on the yard/home, go out around town with friends and stuff. Who needs a job when one can just get a check from government?

2011-10-08 11:11:18

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Across the bow of RL: If you make 45K a year, you ARE in the 99%, absent a huge trust fund.

But you really don't get it, do you? You're too busy throwing around Hannity-esque labels and thinly-veiled insuts or "clever: quips.

Hint: it's not clever. It's kinda asshatty, or perhaps even downright mean.

You don't have to agree with today's protestors. I find them refreshing; and unlike the last such large political gathering (Tea Party), there was nary a racist sign in sight.

2011-10-08 18:49:52

hendy [Member] said:

Hey-- I'm not a wage slave. I get to eat what I kill-- I mean write! Yeah, I pay taxes and plenty of them. Are they right? Yeah. Right now Marion County owes me a pretty fat refund, and I'm about to eat their lunch over taking six years to pay it back to me. But they'll get over it. They're rich. Right? That 30% compounded per annum won't hurt them. Nah, not at all.

2011-10-08 21:23:51

Boomer Indy [unverified] said:

I'm siding with RL on several points. Also, don't lump in rich people with Wall Street. Many rich people own and operate small businesses who are not the multi-millionaires on Wall Street. Many rich people got that way by working hard for living, taking a chance and hiring people to help build the dream. While I don't fully support the Occupy protesters on this issue, I do believe we can find more equitable ways to fairly tax all Americans. And TTT, the comment about Tea Party and the racist element is tired. Each side has fringe elements that don't speak to the whole movement. You know that, so cut it out.

2011-10-08 22:01:19

Whitebeard [unverified] said:

"You don't have to agree with today's protestors. I find them refreshing."

I find them refreshing and I agree with them.

If this worn out old body could have handled the walking, I wish I could have been there with them.

Next protest, I may have to rent a wheelchair. Out of my own thin wallet, since my health insurance company won't pay for such luxuries.

2011-10-08 23:11:06

RL [unverified] said:

I guess it all comes down to the definition of "rich." For some people, they could make $250/year for a family of four, have minimal higher education loans, and they would still claim to be part of the 99%.

So what is "rich" in the Indy metro area? Our combined income has been around $75K/year. With no kids, it is hard for me to say I'm not "rich." Of course I'm not a greedy American who thinks it is my "right" to drive around in a $40K+ automobile, be able to take a $7K cruise vacation year after year, own a boat and jet skis, have a second home, or a primary residence in the area I want for a cheap price, etc..

That is why I don't side with these people. In addition for most of them seeing my wife and I as "rich," they would have no problem taking advantage of my frugal ways and claiming "Well, you can afford to pay more, so you should." My frugal ways have given me a paid in full home. Did I take a huge hit, hell yes, likely $20K-$30K, but I'm not complaining because everything I see points this being an issue all over the country. Similar homes I looked in Carmel that were going for $175K are now down to the $140Ks.

The 99% are no different than the people they are protesting. In fact, they aren't protesting those people and what they did, they are protesting the fact they didn't get the same socialized losses. For this reason, I can agree with them. For their anti-capitalist ideals, they sicken me. For some of their anti-individual freedom ideals, they sicken me. Maybe we just need a %40,000,000,000,000.00 "jobs plan?" Come on Obama, ramp up those printing presses. Buy our homes, and for those of us with paid off homes, give us a check! Pay or all of our education, college should be free! Create 20,000,000 government jobs, with a minimum pay of $50K/year. Lets just do this and make everyone happy.

I've now seen and read a lot of folks who thought it was perfectly acceptable to make around $200K/year (combined, and maybe not even that) and actually buy a home for $500-$700K+ in some areas of this country. These folks are the complainers because they lost. Had they did the NY, DC, or California $50K-$100K flip six to 12 months after the purchase, they would be singing a different tune.

2011-10-09 05:22:35

sjudge [unverified] said:

As long as politicians react, almost exclusively, to public noise, the only way to establish a moderate middle is going to be a proliferation of fringe public noise on both ends of any given issue. Once it becomes painfully clear to them that they can't simply insure their election by pandering to the fringe, they might even work on solutions...

2011-10-09 07:26:12

hendy [Member] said:

Well said, sjudge. We're being ruled by noise and reaction to it, noise from the propaganda machines, noise from Fox News, noise from the talk show hosts, and few people are able to find real info, but they're in pain in many ways.

But you forget about the people that pay for access, the corporations, the privileged individuals, the lobbyists, the campaign contributors. Politicians seem very much to listen to those people.

Tough time to be a politician. You have to be born without sin, commit none, and heaven help you if you need an active non-monogamous sex life.

2011-10-09 08:40:04

Tell The Truth [Member] said:

Boomer: I compared rally signs. And I've attended two TP rallies. I was stunned and embarrassed by tooo mamny of the rants and signs. If that's not the message the TP wants to send, they'd best police their ranks a little tougher. The truth is powerful.

RL: The definition being applied here refers to incomes. Not wealth. Incomes in the top1% have disproportionately benefitted under current tax policies. The shift began under Ronald Reagan. You may prefer it; others do not. It is an historic shift in tax policy proorities, and it deserves a robust debate.

What can be debated, is whether we want it to continue.

I vote "NO" loudly. But you have a vote, too, of course. In a global economy, we've got to cut expenses and increase income somehow, soon, or we'll go the way of the Greek economy.

You can't redefine the salient points. If you earn in the top 1% of American incomes these days, the Obama tax policy is coming after you, both barrels loaded. And no one should be surprised; he received a nationwide mandate in 2008 to do just that--he didn't hide it one bit.

He was relastively shy about it for two-plus years. The gloves are off now, and I, for one, say it's about damned time. Let the chips fall where they may.

2011-10-09 11:35:15

Mike [unverified] said:

Indy. A Center of Paganism. What numbnuts preacher started that?

2011-10-10 22:49:11

Jason [unverified] said:

In regard to the use of the Veterans' Memorial Plaza:

I've seen media coverage of many protesters in other "Occupy xxxxxx" cities dressed as Black Bloc members. This tells us that this event is probably professionally run and managed, at least in part, by a group of pick-a-protesters who are trained and very capable of doing millions of dollars of damage in a very short amount of time. After they destroyed Seattle during a G8 summit a few years back, intelligence gathering and sharing normally stays on top of any chatter and/or activities where these type of tactics could be employed. They possibly received word that these innocent grassroots protesters were wolves in disguise, hence the desire to make their lives very uncomfortable in lieu of a large bill and a lot of bad publicity. Not saying that this group has been overrun by a larger group of pros trained in civil disobedience who have adopted it as a cause du jour, but it looks like that element is certainly present. There's nothing better than a PEACEFUL protest, and nothing worse than violent protesters. Let us hope the former prevails. I understand where they're coming from, I'm simply more upset with DC for giving out the millions than with Wall Street for taking it. If somebody offered me a boatload of money you better believe I'd jump all over it, lol.

On to taxing the rich. It amazes me that there is this much chatter about closing a loophole that somewhere around 0.0003% of the population is using, if you go by those who have incomes of greater than $1 million/year who are using capital gains rates. It won't balance the budget, reduce the deficit, reduce the debt, restore Eric Holder's dignity or morality (not to imply he ever had any), or help anybody get a job. To top it all off, you have people complaining about it who are actually AMONG those to whom the rule would apply who REFUSE to pay any more than they must. BUT it will be fair, which as we learned long ago is the real prevailing dogma here. It's not about the economy or jobs or the American people. It's about those who think the rich don't pay enough in taxes because they're still rich, despite the fact that half the country doesn't even pay anything in income taxes to begin with, and an enormously disproportionate amount of the taxes are already paid by the top earners.

You truly want to help out poor people and end some of our regressive tax rates? Cut sin taxes on cigarettes and alcohol, cancel the lottery, and actually ENFORCE some of the rules that people on government aid are supposed to be following.

2011-10-11 04:12:59

Comments are closed.


or Register


Syndicate Blog