Recent content by Tiny Dancer

Sleepy Paco sounds more like a homonym than a pseudonym.

The "1%" thing is catchy and serves the purpose of publicizing how imbalanced the wealth distribution in this country is. And at least that part of the movement seems to be successful -- there has been a lot more media attention paid to wealth inequality over the last few months than there had...

This is confusing, but maybe it's because the Occupy movement is confusing. I don't see how the "greedy and self-interested" stuff intersects with the "hypocritical" stuff. Weren't a bunch of them complaining that they needed student loans and jobs and stuff? That strikes me as...

I guess I'm not understanding why it's hypocritical for people to protest in an attempt to make their lives better in a system they view as unfair. How would you distinguish this from, say the Civil Rights protests of the 1950s and 60s? "They're just protesting because they want to sit in the...

Well, that's partly a result of wealth being concentrated in the hands of so few people. Virtually anybody in this country that advocates for wealth redistribution can be accused of self-interest.

I think that if you're making $20K a year, or even $60K, you can do a lot more to alleviate global poverty by advocating for policies than you can by, say, living in squalor and giving half your income to charity.

I think global redistribution of wealth isn't part of the political conversation in this country. The Occupy movement reflects that.

It's better if you're high.

I don't think the potshots at liberals are really helping your argument. There are plenty of rich liberals that argue for policies that are against their own self-interests. And there are plenty of rich conservatives that argue for self-serving policies.I think advocating for global...

This is a pretty good response to me, and I think you might be right that there's a lot of anti-free trade sentiment amongst Occupy types. I generally tend to think of anti-free trade folks as more misinformed than hypocritical, but it's probably a combination of both.

Is this the same logic as the argument that wealthy pro-taxes advocates are hypocrites unless they're voluntarily paying extra taxes? I didn't think Maurile was one of those types.

I thought it was OK.

Can somebody point to some evidence of this hypocrisy? People just seem to be assuming they know what the Occupy people's views are on international redistribution of wealth.

So?

Why do we want people in other countries to be poor?