Occupy Wall Street movement. .. I live near Denver Colorado. Our Occupy Wall Street protesters had issues with homeless people stealing their food and , and they ended up beating up several ho
Home Funny Pictures YouTube Funny Videos Funny GIFs Text/Links Channels Search

Occupy Wall Street movement

+1497
Views: 58262
Favorited: 67
Submitted: 07/05/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites Subscribe to portucheese E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend

Comments(207):

[ 207 comments ]
Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:
Order:

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Anonymous commenting is allowed
#190 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
It's rather hilarious that something like this made it to the frontpage when probably the majority of all funnyjunkers have a relatively low income.
Why must so many low class people act like rich men?
User avatar #196 to #190 - srskate (07/06/2013) [-]
you know this how?
#197 to #196 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Because 12 year olds doesn't usually have a big income..
User avatar #198 to #197 - srskate (07/06/2013) [-]
but their parents do
User avatar #173 - stringfingerable (07/06/2013) [-]
That guy's face reminds me of Randy Blythe.
#163 - rmoran (07/06/2013) [-]
Good thing he had that "homeless" sign pinned to his chest
Good thing he had that "homeless" sign pinned to his chest
#159 - xredsoxmuffin (07/06/2013) [-]
That is so true, if you are "poor" how can you afford a $500 iPad or iPhone?
That is so true, if you are "poor" how can you afford a $500 iPad or iPhone?
#191 to #159 - taintedangel (07/06/2013) [-]
Saving small amounts of you paycheck every payday that didn't need to go to food and bills until you had enough for said item you desired to purchase?
Saving small amounts of you paycheck every payday that didn't need to go to food and bills until you had enough for said item you desired to purchase?
User avatar #192 to #191 - xredsoxmuffin (07/06/2013) [-]
These people who protest don't have jobs, how do you think they protest all day?
User avatar #193 to #192 - taintedangel (07/06/2013) [-]
vacation time?
User avatar #195 to #193 - xredsoxmuffin (07/06/2013) [-]
Dude, vacation time for like a year and a half? This protest has been happening for since like December of 2011.
User avatar #189 to #159 - dramakid (07/06/2013) [-]
Banks->Loans->US way of life.
#153 - comentator (07/06/2013) [-]
MFW people try to be equal between themselves.
#152 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Honestly I'm still in my last year of high school, yet I found out I can get disability payments for Crohn's Disease. I am going to try to get it because I can then save up the money to go to college. Both of my parents are disabled, and legally handicapped so they can't afford to give me anything for education. Even though I can live off the government for the rest of my life, I want to use the money to actually become something, so I'm not going to blow it on stupid **** .
User avatar #169 to #152 - schneidend (07/06/2013) [-]
Good man.
#156 to #152 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
parasite
#211 to #156 - flemsdfer ONLINE (07/07/2013) [-]
Oh god! Someone that wants to use the system the way it was intended for and get a boost to where he no longer needs it rather than to ride it for the rest of his goddamn life. Yeah that damn parasite. He should accept the free money for the rest of his life and never go anywhere like all of the other non parasites out there.
Oh god! Someone that wants to use the system the way it was intended for and get a boost to where he no longer needs it rather than to ride it for the rest of his goddamn life. Yeah that damn parasite. He should accept the free money for the rest of his life and never go anywhere like all of the other non parasites out there.
#161 to #156 - windblowkash **User deleted account** (07/06/2013) [-]
at least hes going to get a job and not leech off the government
#160 to #156 - pebar (07/06/2013) [-]
If he's actually willing to work, then there's mutual benefit.
#144 - malifauxdeux (07/06/2013) [-]
Sorry, but hipsters don't represent OWS or the OWS values. I'm really tired of conservatives trying to dredge up this non-point about how liberals don't give away everything they own, so they must be hypocrites, so they must be wrong. It's just such a waste of time and it infuriates me that people buy in to this type of thinking.

User avatar #170 to #144 - schneidend (07/06/2013) [-]
And it infuriates everybody else when anybody thinks the Occupy movement was anything other than a colossal waste of time and a well-crafted plot for hipster and hippy dudes to get blowjobs from impressionable young idealists.
#147 to #144 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
using the government to FORCE people to share.... that's what democrats do
#150 to #147 - malifauxdeux (07/06/2013) [-]
While your reply has literally nothing to do with mine... I'll respond anyway... THATS WHAT EVERY GOVERNMENT DOES YOU **** ! Until there is a political party whose platform is to abolish taxes in general, then that's what all government does. But, I can't say that I'm surprised a conservative would say something so pointless that completely ignores the truth.
#174 to #150 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
democrats just do it way more than is necessary, to such an extent that the government is a hindrance on society
User avatar #136 - I Am Monkey (07/06/2013) [-]
I go to an incredibly liberal college in New York that's obsessed with Occupy Wallstreet and not a single one of them would even acknowledge the homeless on our subway platform. They're all massive hypocrites. When they say "spread the wealth" they really mean "someone pay for my student loans".
#180 to #136 - larknok (07/06/2013) [-]
I don't see an inherent problem with a sort of partially good philosophy. Yes, hypocrisy is always to some extent reprehensible. But let's imagine that you've got two choices of drug addicts: drug addicts who tell others not to use drugs, or drug addicts that tell others to use drugs. The first is a hypocrite, while the second is not. But who would you rather have in your neighborhood?

People have been excusing other people from having opinions for a very long time solely on the fallback that "they are only thinking of themselves." If a man pushes politically for the ability to feed thousands of starving children, but profits from it in a way, who cares? Good on the larger scale is not canceled by personal failure or shortcomings, and if it was, we'd all be damned.

Pyschoanalysis, at least when it boils down to someone really trying to talk to you about something serious, is a terrible, terrible thing. (Commonly this might be referred to as an ad-hominem logical fallacy) -> a person's own shortcomings does not invalidate their arguments.
#194 to #180 - comradewinter ONLINE (07/06/2013) [-]
Lead by example. I don't listen to anything a blatantly obvious hypocrite says unless it's something very clear. When a supporter of something is not willing to sacrifice their wealth, why should I? It's like telling someone to convert to Christianity while being a Jew because "it's more likely that Judaism is the true religion".
#141 to #136 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Those aren't liberals. They're dumb asses.


I live in the South, their are plenty of Republicans who do the same thing down here. Stop giving labels to a party for the hypocrisy of a few.
#139 to #136 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
These liberals are not liberals; they're statist social democrats
Real liberals would be more along the lines of libertarians but the term has been so bastardized that libertarians would be outrageously insulted if you called them liberal.
#134 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
democrats in a nutshell
#179 to #134 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Because every liberal does this...
User avatar #168 to #134 - zorororonoa (07/06/2013) [-]
In all honesty, both of the political parties are ****** up in their own way. That is why I am independent. If I see a president who I think will run the country well, I will vote for him. Political parties are just ******** that is dividing the country.
#140 to #134 - imonaboatman (07/06/2013) [-]
Guess what? I'm a liberal-leaning independent. I've given food to the homeless countless times. I don't have an ipad, hipster glasses, or goatee. I hardly ever go to Starbucks. I don't mindlessly support everything Obama says or does. I don't want to kill your babies or abolish your religion. By making that generalization, you're the hypocrite.
#145 to #140 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
you just said you weren't a democrat so what's your point?
User avatar #148 to #145 - imonaboatman (07/06/2013) [-]
You can't generalize an entire group based on the actions of a few.
#151 to #148 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
using big government to force equalization is exactly what democrats advocate for, it's hardly a mere generalization
#143 to #140 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
99% of democrats don't give to homeless shelters so you can hardly represent the party
#146 to #143 - imonaboatman (07/06/2013) [-]
I'm not representing the party. Technically, I don't even belong to the party. But I know plenty of Liberals who are honest, non-hypocritical people who go out of their way to help the poor, just as I know plenty of Republicans who do the same thing. I'm just saying it's not fair to stereotype a whole group because of some 						********					.
I'm not representing the party. Technically, I don't even belong to the party. But I know plenty of Liberals who are honest, non-hypocritical people who go out of their way to help the poor, just as I know plenty of Republicans who do the same thing. I'm just saying it's not fair to stereotype a whole group because of some ******** .
#149 to #146 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
actually, most of the people who vote democrat don't follow the news, have system of values on which to vote on, and don't give a damn what happens in washington
They just vote democrat because the internet told them to.

being for gay marriage doesn't automatically make you democrat, yet a huge chunk of those voters think it does
#167 to #149 - imonaboatman (07/06/2013) [-]
That's another generalization. I could say all Republicans vote that way because Fox news told them to, but that wouldn't be fair either. I tend to vote Democrat because: A. I'm an Environmental Science major, and I'm educated enough to know that there are countless, demanding issues in our environment that need to be resolved, or at the very least, ameliorated, and the Democratic Party has done far more than the Republican Party to solve these issues. B: I don't condone the unnecessary wars that today's Republican Party tend to get involved in. C. I believe that gay people have every right to get married, and we have no right to tell them that they can't. D. I believe that diversity should be encouraged, not looked down upon. The Republican Party stresses conformity, to an extreme. E. The majority of the Republican Party chooses to hold onto antiquated beliefs, and refuses to accept science in fear of change.
I don't agree with every platform of the Democrats, but their policies are much more agreeable with my beliefs than those of the Republicans. I don't vote Democrat because people tell me to. I live in Alabama; 80% of people here tell me to vote Republican. I vote Democrat because the party's belief system matches mine much more closely.
User avatar #176 to #167 - pebar (07/06/2013) [-]
it's weird that democrats are more supportive of giving arms to Syria than republicans if we're the warmongers
#178 to #176 - imonaboatman (07/06/2013) [-]
I never said I was supportive of it, and I'm not at all. That's my point. I certainly don't agree wholeheartedly with the Democratic Party. But, right now, we're on a two-party system, and I agree more with the Democrats. The Party in a whole does some stupid things. But until we're able to break the two-party system, we have to settle for who we agree most with.
User avatar #181 to #178 - pebar (07/06/2013) [-]
The Alternative Vote Explained Likewise a lot of republicans disagree with the party's reluctance to support gay marriage, but we still vote for them because allowing government to grow beyond control is a bigger problem.

relevant video
#172 to #167 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
you generalized the republicans...
#175 to #172 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
No, he didn't. He said "most", "majority", and "tends", whereas you said "99% of Democrats".
#177 to #175 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
I said 99%
he criticized me for generalizing
he generalizes the republican party
he's a ******* hypocrite, just like the douche bag liberal in the content
#138 to #134 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
you all bitch about how liberals are retarded yet you still continue to support democrats which do EXACTLY what liberals advocate for... ******* hypocrites

try voting republican, just so you can have an excuse to say you didn't contribute to our failing world
#130 - sloot (07/06/2013) [-]
So those born into a family that have built a dynasty and have immense wealth and teach their following generations of kids/family how to properly invest their money to earn interest and and turn it into even more money (all the while investing into other companies and helping them grow and stimulate the economy thus creating more jobs) are just privileged ass holes who should have to work a ****** job? Sounds like a lot of people are just but-hurt and resentful that their family couldn't do the same... My dad grew up poor and worked his whole life after getting his engineering degree and getting his master'sin business paid for because he worked full time in a tile factory while in college... Yeah rich people are ******* ******** ...
User avatar #137 to #130 - I Am Monkey (07/06/2013) [-]
I don't get the hatred of inheriting wealth. Everyone wants to give their kids the best opportunity they can. Obviously the same principal applies to the rich. If they work hard and make a fortune I don't see why they should be hated for passing it on to their kids. What, are they supposed to just give it all away and say "you're on your own kids"
#133 to #130 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
You seem to be missing the point, but hey, that's cool, I didn't expect you to understand.
#135 to #133 - sloot (07/06/2013) [-]
most of the occupy wall street people were kids with enough money to buy frivolous things anyway... gotcha... however I was more addressing the bitch fest in the comments
#122 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Occupy was a ******* joke. They have legitimate reasons to be angry. The fractional reserve system giving disproportionate opportunity to those with money. The constant wealth growth resulting in exponential growth for the rich while the poor simply have their wages inflated. Hell the student loan system is broken. But what did they say?

"JUST PRINT MORE MONEY LOL! TAX THE RICH 99.9999999%!"
#121 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
not an americafag here.

but the average homeless got more money than your average student
#120 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Well, the movement is to get the very rich 20% (if the 80-20 rule is true, probably actually 95-5) to give to the poorest people. I don't agree with it, but I just wanted to say that the people doing that are not saying everyone gives an expensive item to a nearby bum. It's more Robin Hood style, but rather than stealing, it's just being the hippie of today.
User avatar #119 - navywannabe (07/06/2013) [-]
I still don't get the whole "occupy Wall Street" thing. Well I mean I kind of get it, but I need some clearing up. Aren't the people who work wall street Capatalists? If so, then Capatalism is where if you work hard then you should reap the benefits of a job well done. Isn't that what they are doing? If so, then I see nothing wrong with it. But if that's not the case then tell me what I am missing. I come here to ask a real question, and I don't want to start any fights.
#127 to #119 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Capitalism isn't about working hard, really, it's about economic competition and maximising profits. Basically, those who work hard (e.g. construction) earn inconceivably less than those who don't work at all (e.g. mayor shareholders without an actual seat). Thus, wealth accumulates, but in a very polarised way.
Wall Street represents the companies, not as much the individuals, that accumulate this wealth without actually working for it. While the individuals on Wall Street do work, a lot of the profits go to such shareholders.
#123 to #119 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
I'm not real positive on it either..However I think it has something to do with our countries wealth being held by the 1% or some **** like that..
#117 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Kinda unfair to compare the abusively rich thieves at Wall St against the unemployed hipster with middle-class parents...
User avatar #115 - JesuschristofAZ (07/06/2013) [-]
The occupy protests were occupied by one thing, spoiled brats going to school on mommy and daddy's money that found out they could get the attention they didn't get as children by stopping at the CVS and purchasing markers and poster board, then scribbling messages and protesting things they didn't understand. Then they **** everywhere and littered, then blamed it on Goldman-Sachs. The protests consisted of people who have never donated money in their life, at least without posting a status about how awesome they were for doing it. Let me tell you something, the protest exposed what's wrong with this country, not just the corporate corruption, but the fact that the baby boomer generation have failed and given us a new generation of children more spoiled and annoying than them.

I want no one to be mistaken, I know Wall Street is corrupt and greed controls our country and what have you, but these occupy protesters achieved nothing and acted like they changed the world.
#113 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Does breaking down political/ideological statements while ignoring the clear distinctions into a comic format filled with fallacies then running with it make us any better than Tumbler?....Yes, Yes it does, but not by enough.
0
#109 - JesuschristofAZ has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #114 to #109 - JesuschristofAZ (07/06/2013) [-]
**money
User avatar #108 - AlanbalMIT (07/06/2013) [-]
I agree with many of the socialism manifest....yet nobody can really claim to be socialist
#142 to #107 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
Yes, because all liberals are like this.
[ 207 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)