Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Son of a Buffet: "Conscience Laundering", and OWS

Posted 11 months ago on Aug. 5, 2013, 4:18 p.m. EST by shooz (18022)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

On Saturday, July 27, Peter Buffett, son of billionaire Warren Buffett and chairman of the NoVo Foundation, wrote a brilliant Op-Ed piece in the New York Times. With this, he also became an instant icon and unknowing spokesperson for the Occupy Wall Street Movement.

Here’s how.

http://writtenoffamerica.com/warren-buffetts-son-conscience-laundering-and-occupy-wall-street/

8 Comments

8 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17442) 11 months ago

introduced this team to the little-known fraternity of the buying and selling of medical debt.


This is a very good article but, I don't see how the Rolling Jubilee was recreating anything. Don't get me wrong---the Rolling Jubilee is the most awesome thing ever. The system was already in existence. They gained entrance to it, gave those fuckers what they wanted, but altered whom benefited. The Rolling Jubilee pretty effectively erased the overhead. They weren't out to con anyone.

[-] 0 points by shooz (18022) 11 months ago

I originally found the article here.

http://occupywallstreet.net/

and linked it to it's source. The point, I believe was Buffets admission to the 1%'s false belief in "conscience laundering" that still garners high profits to those that are allegedly helping, as opposed to OWS's low overhead and high proficiency at getting the donations to where they can do the most good..

[-] 0 points by GirlFriday (17442) 11 months ago

Oh, I got the point. In fact,one of my primary bitches-both large and smaller (local) organizations-is that it is often more money laundering behind a dress up I done good Kodak moment. But, the part I was commenting on. was the access itself to a system that was already in place.

[-] 0 points by shooz (18022) 11 months ago

OK, I suppose I missed your point, as I've been once again defending unions from those that can ONLY say, " I'm not anti-union" .

They will scream that over and over. As though it has any real meaning.

It doesn't.

Not surprisingly , they NEVER say they are pro union, and never have a an actual good thing to say about them.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17442) 11 months ago

They are simply repeating the right wing line of crap. Although, if you live in the south (anywhere from Florida to Arizona) you will be taught in school that unions are a bad thing from the ground up.

[-] 1 points by shooz (18022) 11 months ago

Texas school board suppository, eh?

I guess that explains narley.