>>3921696
Tea part are retarded religious faggots,
OWS has a good cause even if it's full of retarded hipsters.

so yeah, there's that.

Not science.

>socialism

buzzword dependency.

Considering a more even distribution of wealth is not inherently "socialism".

>>3921713
the vast majority of the occupy wallstreet movement seems bent on forcefully redistributing wealth and property from one group of people to another.
that's kind of what the red october was about...

again, there are better ways to solve this but all the dumb shit liberal arts majors don't seems competent enough to understand this

Both are stupid, and the media has responded to both by calling them stupid. Hell even the daily show made fun of them and it generally borders on leftist propaganda.

I don't know if you're doing this because you're paid or because you're devoted to your ideology, but it's getting really, really annoying.

Every fucking board seems to have these threads attempting to discredit OWS. Listen, I don't give a fuck about OWS. I do give a fuck about you shitting up 4chan with your constant attempts to push your political beliefs.

This isn't science. Reported.

>>3921707
> OWS has a good cause even if it's full of retarded hipsters.

What good cause is that? They just want free money from Wall Street after having bowed towards WS for decades.

And that's how those hippie liberal freaks like to do things: Let somebody accumulate wealth, just so they can confiscate it for re-distribution to themselves.

>>3921737
i think people are just tired of seeing these assholes lifted onto a pedestal

Those with power and wealth are corrupt, those who want to change things are ignorant, and everyone else doesn't care.

Hopefully one or more of these things will change.

>libtards
>able to do an enginneering program

Supported by the media, Democrats, communists, and Nazis.

The funny thing is how the Tea Party was called out on their racism and then some, and nobody says shit about the racism in OWS.

>Occupy Wall Street’s General Assembly operates under a revolutionary “progressive stack.” A normal “stack” means those who wish to speak get in line. A progressive stack encourages women and traditionally marginalized groups speak before men, especially white men. This is something that has been in place since the beginning, it is necessary, and it is important.

>“Step up, step back” was a common phrase of the first week, encouraging white men to acknowledge the privilege they have lived in their entire lives and to step back from continually speaking. This progressive stack has been inspiring and mind-boggling in its effectiveness. Manissa McCleave Maharawal writes on Racialicious regarding her block. In fact, the Declaration of the Occupation of Wall Street would not have been released if not for the blocking power of a different document a week prior by the Speakeasy caucus (for non-male identified and traditionally marginalized people)

http://feministing.com/2011/10/04/guest-post-my-hope-for-occupy-wall-street/

>>3921740
I don't fucking believe for a second these threads are genuine, and I hope others are noticing as well.

4chan, even on the most literate and well-spoken boards, has a noticeable style that's markedly distinct from most of the OWS threads I've seen, which causes me to suspect that it's just you, posting right-wing talking point after right-wing talking point.

The fact that these threads occur across all boards, even where it's wildly off-topic (here is a good example - what the fuck does this have to do with science?) is another sign that this a concerted effort by a small, dedicated team to spread a point of view.

Let me say it again - I'm on to you. Fuck off.

>>3921761
you cannot be racist against white males
and there is no such thing against reverse feminism, i thought you knew this?

>>3921768
your tinfoil hat is on a little tight. but to be fair, a /v/ thread praising these people did drive me to post this thread.

>>3921739 They just want free money from Wall Street
Ironic thing is that Wall street took trillions of free money from taxpayers bailouts when the banks collapsed in 2008. The regulations on them should be stronger so they can't gamble dangerously and need another bailout, but they have too much influence on politics for that to happen. The goal of OWS is to separate corporations and politics.

>>3921719
>2011
>comparing occupy wallstreet protests to marxist-leninist overthrow

ISHYGDDT

>>3921774

Again, they should be protesting the government in that case. The corporations clearly don't care - it's not their shareholders that are protesting, and their stock isn't damaged by the protests.

But the government has to listen to it's people.

>>3921774
a better system would be to encourage more violent financial darwinism, but have a safety net for people left out in the cold by bank collapses

if a bank fucks up? it's gone, out of there, and have some system for the people who were in that bank to be redistributed.

>>3921737
>I don't know if you're doing this because you're paid or because you're devoted to your ideology, but it's getting really, really annoying.
This so much. I wouldn't be surprised at all if 4chan were being astroturfed.

Fucking shillery at it again. Get these paid trolls out of here goddamn! Not science!

/sci/ - Economics and Philosophic

>pretty much everyone local hates them for good reason
>By a 67 - 23 percent margin, New York City voters agree with the views of the Wall Street protesters and say 87 - 10 percent that it is "okay that they are protesting," according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1302.xml?ReleaseID=1662

Well I think the problem is, as many of you guys have noted in other threads, is that the whole finance industry is linked.

For instance, the banks are borrowing and lending to each other all the time. So when one of them goes out of business. The whole industry suffers since their loans and debts are all throughout the system. Likewise the behavior among banks is pretty homogeneous, so if one of them does something that lands them out of business, its likely their competitors did the same thing.

I think what might help to avoid this problem is to make banking more competitive. We need to reinact the laws that say banks and insurance firms cant merge. Neither can a number of related financial service companies.

Another way we can make banks more competitive is by reforming the federal reserve system. Right now to be a bank you need to start an account in the federal reserve. Who can afford to do such a thing except a super mega bank? There is really no point to forcing banks to become members of the federal reserve anyway. There are smarter alternatives.

>>3921696
I don't really understand the whole thing (I'm not American, so I haven't heard much about it), why are they protesting at Wall Street, surely Washington would be more appropriate? Are they suggesting that the economic climate is the fault of investment groups or something?

>>3923837

>Are they suggesting that the economic climate is the fault of investment groups or something?

Yeah they are.

>>3923837
I'd imagine it's from the evident stupidity of the American public. The solution is campaign reform, election reform, and so on, not bitching at private companies. It's their own goddamn fault for not starting to demand an overhaul of the entire election process.

They wont achieve a thing protesting "wall street". Wall street does not require their approval.
If they were serious, they would track the movements of a few ceo's that benefitted from the collapse and allocated bailout money for themselves personally, and once they had determined their daily travel habits and routes, and in a sycronized effort, put bullets in their heads and send messages to the press announcing a new age of accountability.

And even that would probably not work. But nothing less then well times and directed violence will have any effect at all.

>Defending the Tea Party in and way shape or form

>media responds by photoshopping their signs to be offensive or racist

NOPE. Media didn't have to photoshop shit. The tea party is racist and dumb.

That's right, keep doing what Fox news tells you.

Stay classy USA.

>>3921696
>Dumb ass redneck detected

>>3923853

Sadly, that image only too easily sums it up.

I'm not even American, and I feel sorry for you bastards.

but they didnt photoshop the signs....so you just called the tea party dumb and racist.

Good job lol


worst.
parrot.
ever.

>>3923853
http://www.quora.com/Fox-News-cable-network/What-are-the-demographics-of-Fox-News-viewers

There is no significant difference in viewing demographics between news broadcasters.

The whole left wing versus right wing thing is more of a cultural thing, not to mention bullshit. Yes, that includes trendy hipsters who blame the right wing for all their problems. That's bullshit as well.

>>3921770
>you cannot be racist against white males
exactly true, because racist/racism doesn't mean what most people think it means. it used to mean "judging an entire race of people without cause to be inferior to another based on skin color." now racism is "anything that is not sufficiently anti-white or pro non-asian minority".

this is not the media or people who lean left being hypocritical or anything like that, it is simply that most people don't realize the meaning of the word has changed. this is why shit like affirmative action and under reporting of crime trends and statistics is not racist in the slightest.

is anon on /sci/ familiar with annarcho-capitalism or are you guys a bunch of marxist failfags too?

>>3923833

I would say there is too much spending for security. My local subway system is falling apart, yet we have the latest and greatest in surveillance systems. I wonder, what would be safer, all of these cameras, or getting us moving through the system faster.

The money is there, just spent wrong.

>>3923812
Am i reading this right?
>>By a 67 - 23 percent margin

meaning that the
>87 - 10 percent
could just aswell be 20 - 77 against the movment?

what the hell kind of poll has that big of an error margin and why would you even think about using it proof against anything?