pepezabala wrote:
at least they achieved that you talk about it and made some research about it.

Here is what nobel-prize of economy Stiglitz has to say about the movement:

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/stiglitz144/English?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+businessinsider+%28Business+Insider%29


true. Interesting article. I wish I shared his optimism in people power though. I kind of lost all faith in that in 2002 when 2 million marched on London, including my parents, and Tony Blair stood up and said, 'bollocks' then went ahead and used the nation's, tax funded armed forces to invade a sovereign nation, against the wishes of the people of the nation, and the whole rest of the world. Bush rendered the UN effectively useless and shat on the world, and a lot of rich countries "who were just following orders" joined in, like Australia who know they have to do whatever the US tells them otherwise we would be fucked if anyone invaded.

So I guess my depressing point is, if 2 million people doesn't raise a drop of sweat in London, then these occupy protests aren't really going to really bother them much.

There have always been landlords, since the alpha Chimp beat the one from the other mob away with a bone. Territory is a fairly innate part of all animals. But we've also traded/bartered/bought/sold forever too, so we'll always do that in some form or another. Some people seem to be more cunning and can own more of it than us, and we are naturally resentful of that. But seeing as how in our times we can't live off the land so easily as property is owned by somebody, then we should at least all be afforded our natural right to all the basic human needs. This is I think what it is really about. Make sure every human being on the planet has those basic rights, including health-care, and use technology that doesn't fuck up the planet for all of us, do our utmost to protect the rights of all sentient beings, then knock yourselves out, speculate and earn as much money as you like.

The British empire was run largely on trade. Now the US empire is too really. How many countries don't have a McDonalds or Coca-cola now?

They just send in the big guns whenever someone makes it a bit harder to trade. The Bush's are businessmen- from Oil, and people like that go for the presidency to make it easier for them to make more money. They also knew that Oil is a finite resource and Saddam was a pain in the arse to deal with and had a lot of it, so they needed to deal with him.

I guess in 1991 they weren't as worried about running out.

I feel like comparing it to the "arab spring" is a bit wrong though. They're not really the same thing. The "west" loved that and supported it even militarily because they knew ultimately it will end up in more places to set up McDonalds and Starbucks with Wi-Fi to pacify the people while they work on the oil....... etc

In fact, the 1% probably even want to improve the conditions of the poor everywhere, because they realise that every person with a disposable income on the planet is a consumer. I didn't fail to notice the irony in an ice cream man showing up on sunday at the end of the park to profit from the anti-capitalist protesters.

People in the west have less jobs now because a lot of them were outsourced to poorer countries, which is raising the standard of living for some poorer people, so they can afford mobile phones now. 5 billion phones now to 7 billion people. India now has a midddle class of more than the entire populations of the US, Canada, Australia and the UK combined. That's a huge market. Except the bastards keep ringing me up trying to sell it to me.

The people in the west are naturally a bit pissed off about this, but it's really nothing like as bad being poor here as it is in some places, and maybe they deserve the jobs more? We can really deal with poverty and still have a pretty good time of it, at least where I live. I've never had money and am definitely considered "breadline" and I have Ableton Live and several controllers, NS10s, sub, New Macbook pro....etc.......

It's hard for people in the west to really understand what real poverty is. (I say "in the west" but in Australia many Aboriginal people experience the same kinds of poverty as in some parts of Africa or India, but because this country is so big it feels like it could be in a different country. It kind of is.)

I think part of the reason some people in our countries are a bit confused about it is because being poor here really is not so bad, so they are kind of wishing for better conditions for people somewhere else more deprived, and they are saying the way to do this is to abolish capitalism - or maybe more correctly, "corporatism" (which Mussolini apparently said was actually the same thing as fascism). But is that the solution, or do we use the system already in place and just start putting a bit more priority on being fairer?

I think part of the reason for the global upheaval is because Gen Y has grown up and realised a few things about how shit things are, but like all new generations they feel they deserve better. And they do. That is what evolution is.

Fuck is it monday night? that was a total stoner rant.....