Occupy Kiwi Biker Movement

[bogan]

WTF! Who says anything about ideal. Just because we can do by far better doesn't mean that it's going to be ideal, it only means that it's going to be better for more people... and in my eyes that will be the majority. We'll never know until every single person has been offered a set of alternatives to consider and then they can have their say (something that is yet to happen due to the ideology of the 1% of self-made we know better folk) So claiming to be a member of A 99% is just the same as saying that Hurricanes don't play football. You are the one referring to it as a statistic, for me it is a representational feeling towards a number of issues that all have one thing in common... the 1%. You have your context, I have mine and mine has nothing to do with me being in the 1% financially.

So you, or anyone else for that matter, thinking it a pretentious naming convention is entirely of your own doing and highlights a need to put their finger on something that they can't/don't want to grasp because they are either a majority or believe that things are as good as they can be. I'm fully aware that that is my interpretation, but it seems to be an interpretation that is likely closer aligned to the reasoning behind calling themselves the 99%.

You said that we were happy with those in poverty, as evidenced by the fact we hadn't joined the so called 99%, which implies we think the current situation ideal or at least would not want to change it for the better. That is why it's an insulting argument. You've offered no realistic alternatives to make things better, that's why nothing is taking off for the so called 99%. Stop with all the hate 1% bullshit, and actually try something constructive if you want to make a difference.

One thing in a good name, is it should be a good name as judged by your target audience, 'the 99%' is a shit name going by the people's reactions (of whom I can only assume are you target audience), you've every right to use it, just as I have every right to keep calling it out as the pretentious misleading bollocks that it is.

Who is this 'we' you refer to?

The collective 'we',

the Royal 'we'

or you and your bloody tapeworm?

We as in myself and other like minded individuals.

[Oscar]

Are the trains running on time?

[Hinny]

We as in myself and other like minded individuals.

Is it pretentious of you to speak on behalf of other individuals?

I think it is.

[mashman]

You said that we were happy with those in poverty, as evidenced by the fact we hadn't joined the so called 99%, which implies we think the current situation ideal or at least would not want to change it for the better. That is why it's an insulting argument. You've offered no realistic alternatives to make things better, that's why nothing is taking off for the so called 99%. Stop with all the hate 1% bullshit, and actually try something constructive if you want to make a difference.

One thing in a good name, is it should be a good name as judged by your target audience, 'the 99%' is a shit name going by the people's reactions (of whom I can only assume are you target audience), you've every right to use it, just as I have every right to keep calling it out as the pretentious misleading bollocks that it is.

No I didn't, that's the context in which you took it. Perhaps you missed the IF at the start of the sentence. @ no realistic alternative. What, because you can't grasp it it's not a realistic alternative? Nothing is taking off because it hasn't been launched yet and to get what is required off the ground is gonna take more than posting on the internet for an hour a day or a little bit of media attention... it's gonna take door knocking/seminars, education essentially. I don't have answers for everything, but then again, neither do your leaders. However the answers I do have make more sense than the answers they have if you decide to go the holistic route. Spying and keeping the people down is not among mine, quite the opposite.

Ignore the name, focus on the content.

[Virago]

[bogan]

Is it pretentious of you to speak on behalf of other individuals?

I think it is.

Fine, take it as the solo we if you like, or think of me as pretentious, neither really affects the point I was making now does it? Or is it you guys will take any excuse to avoid the points being made?

No I didn't, that's the context in which you took it. Perhaps you missed the IF at the start of the sentence. @ no realistic alternative. What, because you can't grasp it it's not a realistic alternative? Nothing is taking off because it hasn't been launched yet and to get what is required off the ground is gonna take more than posting on the internet for an hour a day or a little bit of media attention... it's gonna take door knocking/seminars, education essentially. I don't have answers for everything, but then again, neither do your leaders. However the answers I do have make more sense than the answers they have if you decide to go the holistic route. Spying and keeping the people down is not among mine, quite the opposite.

Ignore the name, focus on the content.

The if was in reference to the majority's happiness, the insult is where you said the same group are happy with poverty.

If the majority of us are the happy with the way things are, as you claim, then the majority are happy for poverty to continue, which means that the minority aren't.

Like I said, no realistic alternative has been presented to me, you may think you've found one, but last time we discussed it there were some large holes that needed addressing before I'd give it a second thought; and yes, judging by the lack of traction your cause has, that opinion seems to be shared by the majority.

Get a better name, more will take the content seriously.

[mashman]

Yet another bitch with no fuckin clue. So bitch, you're more than happy with people dying of starvation so that oil company's can make profits? More than happy with company's poisoning the oceans and the land that gives us our food so long as they can make their profits? You're ok with letting people go bankrupt, die or be maimed for life because your healthcare system is more than most can afford so that company's can make their profits? You got the fuckin point yet bitch, or do you want more examples of how blindly ignorant you argument is as well as your warped perception of what the 99% stand for? The 1% take it for granted, seems you ain't a member of the 53% after all, bitch.

[Big Dave]

perception of what the 99% stand for?.

Bad maths.

[bogan]

Yet another bitch with no fuckin clue. So bitch, you're more than happy with people dying of starvation so that oil company's can make profits? More than happy with company's poisoning the oceans and the land that gives us our food so long as they can make their profits? You're ok with letting people go bankrupt, die or be maimed for life because your healthcare system is more than most can afford so that company's can make their profits? You got the fuckin point yet bitch, or do you want more examples of how blindly ignorant you argument is as well as your warped perception of what the 99% stand for? The 1% take it for granted, seems you ain't a member of the 53% after all, bitch.

Sent from a bundle of hay, 3 goats, and a fresh pinecone then?

Also, it's a picture mashman, no matter how many insults you can throw out there she won't hear you; course the rest of us do an it makes the so called 99% look like a lunatic fringe movement.

[Hinny]

Fine, take it as the solo we if you like, or think of me as pretentious,.

The solo 'we' is the Royal 'we'.
I guess that would make you pretentious - and in the 1% bracket.

What you appear to disregard is that you are undoubtedly in the 99% bracket.
The 1% bracket are those who own as much as the other 99% of society.
You are trying to argue from the point of pretentious right-wing plonkers who identify with the 1%.
Classic 5 monkey mentality.

[mashman]

The if was in reference to the majority's happiness, the insult is where you said the same group are happy with poverty.

If the majority of us are the happy with the way things are, as you claim, then the majority are happy for poverty to continue, which means that the minority aren't.

Like I said, no realistic alternative has been presented to me, you may think you've found one, but last time we discussed it there were some large holes that needed addressing before I'd give it a second thought; and yes, judging by the lack of traction your cause has, that opinion seems to be shared by the majority.

Get a better name, more will take the content seriously.

Just putting a context around your claim that the majority are happy. So you were the one doing the insulting.

I haven't started yet and as I said, it'll be door knocking etc... when it does. Thought you might have figured that one out by NOW... guess not. Anyhoo, your assumption is a possibility. I accept that it may well turn out that the majority don't accept what I propose, however given more input from other sources (shirley you don't think it's gonna be my way or the highway?) and with the answer to your, "but what about me and my needs, wants and desires" issues, I reckon we're going to end up with a different result. And until every PERSON and human being has been asked, neither of us can successfully claim the majority position.

Why? because that's how you roll?

[Big Dave]

'I got 99 problems and misogyny is one of 'em.' - Jay Zed.

[mashman]

Bad maths.

Yeah, I bet they wish they could be more like the financial maths geniuses of Wall street et al... coz they're just rocket scientists.

Sent from a bundle of hay, 3 goats, and a fresh pinecone then?

Also, it's a picture mashman, no matter how many insults you can throw out there she won't hear you; course the rest of us do an it makes the so called 99% look like a lunatic fringe movement.

Yet another bitch that misses the point. It ain't what's being pulled out that's the issue, it's why it's being pulled out and what it's being used for that's the problem.

Oh she heard me alright. you and your labels and perceptions eh... What was the problem this time? Delivery? ...

[Virago]

Yet another bitch with no fuckin clue. So bitch, you're more than happy with people dying of starvation so that oil company's can make profits? More than happy with company's poisoning the oceans and the land that gives us our food so long as they can make their profits? You're ok with letting people go bankrupt, die or be maimed for life because your healthcare system is more than most can afford so that company's can make their profits? You got the fuckin point yet bitch, or do you want more examples of how blindly ignorant you argument is as well as your warped perception of what the 99% stand for? The 1% take it for granted, seems you ain't a member of the 53% after all, bitch.

Our hearts bleed for those who live a comfortable lifestyle based on the products and corporations they despise. The hypocrisy must burn...

[bogan]

The solo 'we' is the Royal 'we'.
I guess that would make you pretentious - and in the 1% bracket.

What you appear to disregard is that you are undoubtedly in the 99% bracket.
The 1% bracket are those who own as much as the other 99% of society.
You are trying to argue from the point of pretentious right-wing plonkers who identify with the 1%.
Classic 5 monkey mentality.

In terms of income I most certainly am in the lower 99%, it's probably the lower 30% tbh. What I'm not in, is the so called 99% who most certainly do not represent my interests, regardless of whether we share incomes levels, property ownerships levels, or levels of pretentiousness.

Just putting a context around your claim that the majority are happy. So you were the one doing the insulting.

I haven't started yet and as I said, it'll be door knocking etc... when it does. Thought you might have figured that one out by NOW... guess not. Anyhoo, your assumption is a possibility. I accept that it may well turn out that the majority don't accept what I propose, however given more input from other sources (shirley you don't think it's gonna be my way or the highway?) and with the answer to your, "but what about me and my needs, wants and desires" issues, I reckon we're going to end up with a different result. And until every PERSON and human being has been asked, neither of us can successfully claim the majority position.

Why? because that's how you roll?

Not at all, but if you still can't see why implying those who don't agree with you are happy for others to suffer unnecessarily, then good fucking luck winning their hearts and minds buddy!

Good, that is actually a constructive approach.

Me and many others (even in this thread others have questioned your representation), you obviously want to win hearts and minds so I'm not sure why you like a name that sets you off on the back foot with some people.

Yet another bitch that misses the point. It ain't what's being pulled out that's the issue, it's why it's being pulled out and what it's being used for that's the problem.

Oh she heard me alright. you and your labels and perceptions eh... What was the problem this time? Delivery? ...

Err, that's the point, its being used to make things like your computer, what, you think they would just pull it out and burn it if consumers didn't buy it?

Yeh, directly insulting people is not such good delivery, you know, at the winning hearts and minds thing...