Dubstepforum.com

pkay wrote:

belalala wrote:sure is- i have some more here if anyone is interested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/61412258@N ... 254076113/

the sun was lovely that afternoon!




also, infinite lulz re: the queue for a starbucks INSIDE a protest condemning corporate power

fucking idiots... i hate my generation

Why does the fight for better profit distribution through more wages and less dividends/bonuses have to contradict the existence of corporations? It's fine for people to make a great product and get rich. It's not fine for them to get insanely rich whilst everyone else gets poorer.

It's really quite simple. Most people milling around on Saturday weren't anti-capitalist. They just want to see capitalism done fairly for everyone involved.

Capitalism isn't about fair.
They wan't socialism.




Can't say I disagree with it.

And I agree with your first point.



Can't say I'd act differently to the heads of the corporations if I was in their shoes tbh, a billion is a beautiful thing.

We've had socialism in the form of an NHS, military, Education service and welfare state for decades perfectly happily alongside capitalism.

Socialism doesn't have to be effected in some purest anti-capitalist form, good government is able to take wisdom from all schools of thought. Regulating industry so that they have to give more to their workers and less to their shareholders seems like good sense. Companies like our department store chain John Lewis (where every employee is a 'partner' and gets a vote on corporate issues and % bonus based on profits) already show that implementing a few 'socialist' ideas into capitalist venture is a really great way to have a loyal, happy and efficient work force.

zerbaman wrote:Can't say I'd act differently to the heads of the corporations if I was in their shoes tbh, a billion is a beautiful thing.

This totally. I absolutely agree.

This is why the majority have to set some limits... after a while, it has to be forced to trickle down to the people doing the work. If you manage to run a one man show and rack up billions of dollars, then you deserve to keep billions of dollars (minus the tax everyone else pays)... but if your profits depend on a huge workforce, they must be properly rewarded for their part in the success of the company. It's good for everyone in the end. I've no problem whatsoever with heads of massive companies being rich... but a lot don't need to be as rich as they allow themselves to become unchecked.

magma wrote:

pkay wrote:

belalala wrote:sure is- i have some more here if anyone is interested: http://www.flickr.com/photos/61412258@N ... 254076113/

the sun was lovely that afternoon!




also, infinite lulz re: the queue for a starbucks INSIDE a protest condemning corporate power

fucking idiots... i hate my generation

Why does the fight for better profit distribution through more wages and less dividends/bonuses have to contradict the existence of corporations? It's fine for people to make a great product and get rich. It's not fine for them to get insanely rich whilst everyone else gets poorer.

It's really quite simple. Most people milling around on Saturday weren't anti-capitalist. They just want to see capitalism done fairly for everyone involved.

Didn't you claim to be involved in economics?

Charging $6 for a cup of coffee that costs $.30 to make is what enables insane profit margins for Starbucks.... which encourages investors to invest because they want a slice of the pie... which encourages investment firms to inflate companies which similar business models... which leads to people investing advertising to encourage the purchasing of starbucks.... teaching kids that carrying around a "latte" is somehow artsy or intelligent.... leading back to new customers going to purchase $6 for a $.30 cup of coffee. Leading to rich folks with rich folks money getting richer off of dumb people who think they need $6 cups of coffee and rich fucks laughing all the way to the bank and exploiting americans not only on the back end of the stock market, but on the front end charging you $6 a cup.

If you're all for that, go for it.... but don't go protest about corporate greed and then enable a corporation to exploit customers.

So what you're saying is that stupid people make capitalists rich.

kay wrote:So what you're saying is that stupid people make capitalists rich.

Stupid isn't right because a lot of people blatantly don't care that they're feeding into corporate greed.... but I would say if you're dedicated enough to protest corporate greed but not willing to personally limit your contributions to corporations, then I believe you would qualify as stupid.

You wouldn't give your money to goldman sachs and then go protest occupy wallstreet would you?

pkay wrote:
Charging $6 for a cup of coffee that costs $.30 to make is what enables insane profit margins for Starbucks.... which encourages investors to invest because they want a slice of the pie... which encourages investment firms to inflate companies which similar business models... which leads to people investing advertising to encourage the purchasing of starbucks.... teaching kids that carrying around a "latte" is somehow artsy or intelligent.... leading back to new customers going to purchase $6 for a $.30 cup of coffee. Leading to rich folks with rich folks money getting richer off of dumb people who think they need $6 cups of coffee and rich fucks laughing all the way to the bank and exploiting americans not only on the back end of the stock market, but on the front end charging you $6 a cup.

If you're all for that, go for it.... but don't go protest about corporate greed and then enable a corporation to exploit customers.

You obviously have prejudices against people who shop at starbucks, and of course they markup their prices, that's how a company can afford to grow. On a massive scale, it's completely up to the consumer what to do with his/her dollar. But the fact that people can afford to pay 6 bucks for a 4 dollar coffee is telling of just how privileged a society we are. But starbucks is not influencing public policy by charging brand-name prices. In fact, the ceo of starbucks is a very liberal minded, caring individual who's actually spoken out against the silly partisan politics we are subject to. The problem is not a fucking cup of coffee. It's that kind of shallow thinking that knocks credibility of these protests, along with the pseudo-anarchists, anti-zionists, and fanatic paulites.

Seriously, this whole anti-consumerist idiot-ology is just grown men acting and thinking like prepubescent kids who just watched fight club and torrented RATM's discography.

AllNightDayDream wrote:

pkay wrote:
Charging $6 for a cup of coffee that costs $.30 to make is what enables insane profit margins for Starbucks.... which encourages investors to invest because they want a slice of the pie... which encourages investment firms to inflate companies which similar business models... which leads to people investing advertising to encourage the purchasing of starbucks.... teaching kids that carrying around a "latte" is somehow artsy or intelligent.... leading back to new customers going to purchase $6 for a $.30 cup of coffee. Leading to rich folks with rich folks money getting richer off of dumb people who think they need $6 cups of coffee and rich fucks laughing all the way to the bank and exploiting americans not only on the back end of the stock market, but on the front end charging you $6 a cup.

If you're all for that, go for it.... but don't go protest about corporate greed and then enable a corporation to exploit customers.

You obviously have prejudices against people who shop at starbucks, and of course they markup their prices, that's how a company can afford to grow. On a massive scale, it's completely up to the consumer what to do with his/her dollar. But the fact that people can afford to pay 6 bucks for a 4 dollar coffee is telling of just how privileged a society we are. But starbucks is not influencing public policy by charging brand-name prices. In fact, the ceo of starbucks is a very liberal minded, caring individual who's actually spoken out against the silly partisan politics we are subject to. The problem is not a fucking cup of coffee. It's that kind of shallow thinking that knocks credibility of these protests, along with the pseudo-anarchists, anti-zionists, and fanatic paulites.

Seriously, this whole anti-consumerist idiot-ology is just grown men acting and thinking like prepubescent kids who just watched fight club and torrented RATM's discography.

You need to stop acting hysterical when someone has a different opinion than you. It's that type of shallow thinking that removes all creditbility of these protests.

Of course the problem isn't a cup of coffee. It's where our money goes when in the hands of corporations.

And I'm sorry if you think Howard Schultz is a stand up guy but it has nothing to do with how Starbucks is run. Starbucks has been sued, numerous times, for being anti-Union, and for shady wage witholding practices.... they're also sponsors of MSNBC in the US, a political TV network. Corporations have no room in american politics... that's a straight republican move. It's not as if Starbucks is denying shady investors the right to purchase their stocks are they? Last I checked Starbucks go to guys were Goldman Sachs.

All for you drinking coffee

All for you protesting wall street

All for calling you an idiot if you do both

All for you disagreeing with me

that and i wonder how many of the supplies they're using to camp out like tents and such came from walmart

Dunno how you got hysteria out of that, but it is sad, simply because it's not surprising. People in america are used to having people do the thinking for them. Maybe that goes for most of the western world but it's a sad fact nonetheless. The fact you think the real problem has anything to do with the price of a cup of coffee is a model for how most people in this country look at problems: on the very shallow surface.

double post

AllNightDayDream wrote:Dunno how you got hysteria out of that, but it is sad, simply because it's not surprising. People in america are used to having people do the thinking for them. Maybe that goes for most of the western world but it's a sad fact nonetheless. The fact you think the real problem has anything to do with the price of a cup of coffee is a model for how most people in this country look at problems: on the very shallow surface.

Right... I must be an idiot because my opinion differs from yours? No one does any thinking for me.

Like I said, it has nothing to do with a cup of coffee, it has to do with what corporations do with your money. I said this the last time I responded to you but apparently you missed it.

Gonna pass on interaction with you on this subject as I don't want to get into bickering and hair pulling. Peace

deadly habit wrote:that and i wonder how many of the supplies they're using to camp out like tents and such came from walmart

bass pro shop imo

pkay, consumer boycotts are not the One True Way(tm) of modifying corporations' behaviour. in this case, the better tactic is to pressurize governments to regulate corporations more effectively. that doesn't rule out the possibility of using boycotts, but there is no requirement to start there. and no requirement for any boycott to be a 100% of all corporations (or all who raise capital on wall street).

if people were campaigning for all coffee shops to be shut down, then it would be inconsistent to still shop at starbucks.

if they were campaigning for starbucks to be run differently in certain respects (which i doubt that everybody is - except in the limited sense that starbucks have raised capital on wall street, and people would like wall street to be run differently; i'm sure some protestors would also like starbucks to treat the employees better in certain ways, and so on, but others don't), AND there were already plenty of alternative coffee shops which were clearly doing much better at the things that starbucks was doing wrong, then it would also make sense to boycott starbucks.

and then there's the real world.

everytime i open this fucking page Zerbaman's soundcloud starts playing

not. fucking. cool

tyger wrote:pkay, consumer boycotts are not the One True Way(tm) of modifying corporations' behaviour. in this case, the better tactic is to pressurize governments to regulate corporations more effectively. that doesn't rule out the possibility of using boycotts, but there is no requirement to start there. and no requirement for any boycott to be a 100% of all corporations (or all who raise capital on wall street).

if people were campaigning for all coffee shops to be shut down, then it would be inconsistent to still shop at starbucks.

if they were campaigning for starbucks to be run differently in certain respects (which i doubt that everybody is - except in the limited sense that starbucks have raised capital on wall street, and people would like wall street to be run differently; i'm sure some protestors would also like starbucks to treat the employees better in certain ways, and so on, but others don't), AND there were already plenty of alternative coffee shops which were clearly doing much better at the things that starbucks was doing wrong, then it would also make sense to boycott starbucks.

and then there's the real world.

I spoke earlier in this thread about lack of trust with our government. Our government is so divided into partisan camps that its proven ineffective of doing much of anything lately. It's a given fact that the republicans will oppose any type of corporate regulation.

Even if Obama wanted to change, had a plan, got it sponsored in congress, the republicans have the power to kill it, and would.

My point in all of this is that we need to stop looking to our current incapable government for change. If we can't rely on them ideally our first option would be to elect new officials who are more capable. That option set aside we have quite a bit of consumer control in our country.

noam wrote:everytime i open this fucking page Zerbaman's soundcloud starts playing

not. fucking. cool

yeah was wondering what that was lol

Also, can't help that feel that a lot of the 'discussion' going on in this thread is between people who are actually on the same side fundamentally.

lets look for the bad instead of the good of the protests. lets look for ways to bitch instead of ways to move forward.

fuck you.