The Demands, Take 2

A commenter on an earlier post about the protesters’ demands pointed out this story: Some Say Occupy Wall Street Protesters Aimless; Facts Say Otherwise

There has been a lot said about the lack of vision, lack of specific demands, and a disparity of beliefs and goals among the Occupy Wall Street protesters in the media in the past several weeks. A survey of the protestors shows that none of these criticisms are true.

The idea that this guy could talk to 50 people and show “that none of these criticisms are true” is just plain silly, even if we all choose to ignore the various claims and lists and opinions and ideas put forward by others.

Ignore all those other people with different goals! I can assure you we all have the same goals!

Seriously, this isn’t the playground during 2nd grade recess, kids.

Anyway, here are the ideas that scored 90% or better and are probably safe bets about the sort of thing the crybabies want:

  1. 98% believe that health care should be free
  2. 98% believe that Insurance companies make too much money and some of their profits should be taken to pay for more healthcare for others
  3. 95% believe that drug prices should be controlled
  4. 93% believe that communications like cell phone and internet access be a right and not just reserved for the rich and we should have free internet and cell phone service as a national goal.
  5. 93% say that student loan debt should be forgiven

So 98% think healthcare should be free. Murdoc thinks clean waster should be free. Neither is at all reasonable in reality. Nothing is FREE. Nothing. Deal with it. If something relatively simple like clean water cannot possibly be provided to anyone anywhere on the planet for free, how can something complicated like healthcare be provided for free?

Oh, they don’t really mean “free,” they mean someone else should pay for it. Keep this in mind; it’s a recurring theme with this bunch.

98% also think health insurance companies make too much money, and they’ve been tapped to pay for healthcare. Murdoc thinks labor unions make too much money and should be required to funnel lots of their profits into my health care. If insurance companies and labor unions are required to put X into health care, what do we think will happen to insurance premiums and unions dues? Anyone? Anyone?

95% think drugs should be “price controlled.” Now, without more info it’s hard to know exactly what respondents actually think about this, though we’ve been assured they all think the same thing. And Murdoc’s pretty sure they’re all on a similar page and agree that drugs should be cheaper. Murdoc thinks food should be cheaper. If we make drug companies and food producers cut their profits by 75%, what will happen to drug research/production and food supplies? Big pharma and little farmers are both motivated by the same thing, folks. And if less money is coming in, the answer won’t be to double output.

93% think cell phones and internet access is some sort of right. Sorry, no little counterpoint from Murdoc on this one. Cell phones and internet access are NOT basic human rights. Period. That’s stupid.

And then we have the 93% who think student debt should be forgiven. Again, that’s just stupid. Not a different, yet legitimate, opinion. Not even socialism or un-American. Just plain stupid. You don’t want to pay off a loan? Don’t take out the damn loan.

If Murdoc hadn’t seen photos of these people, he’d swear they were five-year olds.

So while there are claims that the protesters are “aimless,” no one is trying to convince anyone that they aren’t all agreed on the idea that they want everyone else to pay for their crap. No one I’ve heard of thinks otherwise. That is a crystal clear unifying force behind this big crybaby movement.


  1. I should reiterate that this was not a scientific poll of only 50 people by only one guy. My Statistics 101 proff would scoff.

    …and the Sam-Hec largely agree with the Murdoc.

  2. Yeah, Sam, I didn’t mean to go overboard body punching the messenger. (Well, not this time anyway…)

    Murdoc will actually chime in an say that, if you boil the protesters’ common themes down to “it would be nice if more people spent less time being jackasses,” Murdoc would be onboard. It’s the method of reducing the jackassery which is being put forward that is not acceptable to me.

    Also for the record, one of the lists of demands (maybe the one I linked to a couple of days ago? maybe not…) mentioned paper ballots for all elections. Murdoc agrees on that one.

    1. If there was any ire in my direction, I totally failed to notice. 🙂

      Anyway MY List of Demands would be much simpler:

      1. End Gerrymandering

      2, Different voting methods (ranked or semi-proportional)

      3. Paper Ballots. (don’t trust the ‘cheens!)

      Most of the demonstrations would not happen if the folks felt their elected leaders actually listened to them…it would help if voters donated much more too.

  3. It reads like the European Union’s manifesto.

    Everyone has rights,


    Only the government has responsibilities.

    (The responsibility to confer the “rights” on the peasants.)

    What the idiots on the street either don’t realize or don’t care about is that the Governments confer rights for one reason CONTROL. However, the cost of those rights are paid for by stealth taxes on the very village idiots who believe they’re getting a free ride.

    Look what’s happening when some of those “give-aways” are being recinded by the government in Greece.

    Greek Government loses control. Kids thrown violent tantrums.

    The “Occupy the Streets” people can be split in a couple of ideological camps. 1) The naive idiots. 2) Hard-Core Socialists.

    In either case the Obama folks are encouraging these demonstrations because the demonstrators support BIG government.

  4. The shift from negative rights (the government or society can’t stop you from doing X) to positive rights (the government or society owe you X) is really laughable. The former simply confer (or acknowledge a preexisting) freedom of action on the individual to accomplish their goals in life, to pursue happiness without anyone getting in the way. The latter confers massive power to the agency (government) tasked with providing those rights. And since they are not actually rights but goods and services, we willingly empower government to steal from us to fulfill other people’s “rights.” And it starts out with people of actual good will who want to help out the less fortunate, and seems to lead rather quickly and directly to people who are actually fairly well off in the grand scheme of things whining that they want a free lunch.

    Getting aid from someone who has more is not a right. It is altruism and should be done voluntarily, not coercively. A society that can’t accomplish that goal doesn’t seem likely to remain free for long anyway. If “the rich” have ill gotten riches, reform or change the system that rewards them unfairly. Simply taking from them solves nothing.

    End sermon =)

    1. Nadnerbus,

      And altruism, expressed as philanthropy, has a very long tradition in our society, as old as the Republic itself. When there were perceived shortcomings in life that were not addressed by govt or church, philanthropic entities were founded to address them.

      Kids want cell phones and internet to be “free”? Well hell- set yourself up a non-profit devoted to that goal. Write your case statement.

      Then explain to the hated rich, whose donations you need to meet your goal, why they need to pay to give everyone free internet.

      It would be a brief, but exciting, conversation.

  5. The protesters don’t look like America. There are not enough minorities. Therefore they must be racists and only deserve our ridicule and scorn.

  6. 11 Bravo,

    When you get enough “minorities” they are no longer a minority, but a majority.

    Then, the cycle starts all over again.

    It’s a cultural “Ponzi” scheme!

Comments are closed