*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Friday, October 28th, 2011 1:04pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter dystopianfuturetoday.

I dont think he got schooled at all. Well, unless you think ad homs are cool.

Guy with Anonymous/V for Vendetta mask FTW.

Yeah, I'd like to see Schiff take on someone with actual debate chops rather than random bystanders. The fact that he looked bad next to a random protester speaks volumes though. You can't FIND someone at a Tea Party rally who could put forth an even slightly cogent argument.

>> ^Jinx:

I dont think he got schooled at all. Well, unless you think ad homs are cool.


He talked, and acted, like a fool--he got called a fool.

Petey tried to control the conversation with talking points--he couldn't.

Schooled.

He kind of schools himself. >> ^Jinx:

I dont think he got schooled at all. Well, unless you think ad homs are cool.

Fuck ReasonTV there is nothing Reasonable about them.

Issues such as the Lets disband the EPA, The Board of Education & FDA are popular now with a lot of conservatives because they like the status of being Fiscal protectionists but never think of the long term costs and how it will likely hurt other individuals (which is completely against the libertarian mantra of don't infringe on the rights and liberties of others if they are not hurting you in any way). this is exactly like how the issue of 'Tort reform' in the healthcare debate was the proposed solution to help bring down costs, but few explained that Tort is the legal right of public individuals to sue others within the healthcare industry for negligence or malpractice, thus taking away the right to protect possible harm caused through no fault of their own & further aid the corporations and healthcare lobby.

Wow. I just lost alot of respect for ol' Schiff. I guess he can only seem sharp in a scripted forum.

The fact is, Mr. Schiff was not up to the intellectual level of that protestor, and was rightly called out for it at the end. The guy was very respectful, until Schiff went off into fringe/crackpot territory.

Anyone who advocates banning the FDA and EPA is indeed a fool, or a rich, callous, selfish MF. Which is it, Schiff?

They're both fools. Both offered overly simplistic rationalizations for complex issues, or sometimes didn't even offer that.

Maybe the EPA and FDA could use some cleaning up, but without them, if there's profit to be had, is the free market gonna protect people and the environment from being abused?

Companies already expect and prepare for potential lawsuits and fines as part of doing business, and keep pushing tort reform to limit those liabilities. People are already being hurt or killed with corrupt regulators in place, so in what reality does no regulation lead to a better result?

And then they manage to force people they've hurt into silence, if they want any compensation, so we may never know how much damage they've caused.

Schiff is a trained media professional who had the luxury of being able to a) prepare for this event in advance and b) edit it down after the fact. This pathetic attempt was the best he could come up with.

The protesters did great. Whatever they lack in media savvy, they make up for in the 'getting it' and 'vision' departments, two things that Schiff is incapable of despite vast wealth, power and resources. There is nothing these protesters could do or say to convince Schiff to cease propping up the bloated corpse of the corrupt corporate establishment. He is a true believer. He thinks he's one of the good guys.

I love how the douche showed up to the protest in a douche-suit. Lulz

>> ^heropsycho:

They're both fools. Both offered overly simplistic rationalizations for complex issues, or sometimes didn't even offer that.


x2, x3, x4.

The argument oscillated between being against free trade and disbanding massive government departments because they're inefficient rather than reforming them. In other words there was no actual discussion and it was just two people shouting separate ideas at each other.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

>> ^Jinx:
I dont think he got schooled at all. Well, unless you think ad homs are cool.

He talked, and acted, like a fool--he got called a fool.
Petey tried to control the conversation with talking points--he couldn't.
Schooled.

No sorry. Talking points or not he did still make points. Points that could have been deconstructed and debated. Instead we got some guy calling him an idiot, which true as it may be is probably something any of us could do on our worst days. So no, he wasn't schooled. He is an idiot though and I would like him to get properly destroyed by a real argument, and not just this schoolyard shit.

Oh wait. I suppose in that sense he was "schooled". GODDAMN I'M WITTY.

>> ^RedSky:

>> ^heropsycho:
They're both fools. Both offered overly simplistic rationalizations for complex issues, or sometimes didn't even offer that.

x2, x3, x4.
The argument oscillated between being against free trade and disbanding massive government departments because they're inefficient rather than reforming them. In other words there was no actual discussion and it was just two people shouting separate ideas at each other.


x5

Notice how he tries to provoke a precise dollar amount so that he can use it to somehow segue into the lame 'job creator' line? Then after a couple minutes - after it's clear they are not going to fall for the ploy - he just awkwardly blurts out the punchline.

"Koch Brothers lackey Peter Schiff gets schooled by OWS"

I think the title proves who the real fool and idiot is.

The black guy makes a rape analogy between corporations and their victims, but then seems to suffer from Stockholm syndrome when questioning Schiff about EPA, FDA, and Dept of Education.

I'd like to respond to two of the more douchey arguments made by Mr. Schiff.

1. AMERICAN WORKERS ARE DEMANDING MORE MONEY AND LOWER PRICES THAN CORPORATIONS CAN PROFIT FROM.
This would be more believable if a. Corporate profits weren't at record highs, b. the disparity between worker and executive pay is huge and has been more or less steadily increasing and c. the disparity between the top 20% and everyone else has also been increasing. So essentially the rich are demanding more for less and they're getting it.

2. I WORKED HARD TO EARN EVERYTHING I GOT, SO I DESERVE TO KEEP IT ALL AND DO WHATEVER I WANT.
This is a ridiculous argument designed to make the person who has the most look like a victim. It ignores the tremendous advantages he enjoys in a society that strives to give workers a relatively comfortable wage and keep opportunities for economic advancement open. Had he been born in one of his oh so precious 'competitive' wage countries in all likelihood he'd be living in poverty sewing shoes for a $1 a day till the day he died of poor health at the age of 45. Further more it also ignores his socioeconomic upbringing and make the assumption he's a self-made man who picked himself up from his own boot-straps out of the mud of poverty. In Mr. Schiff's case his father was a well connected political activist, investor, and current tax dodging jail bird. Its probably safe to say Peter Schiff didn't start with nothing, but in fact had a lot more avenues to success open to him than the majority of Americans do. There's also the element of chance, its nice to think that everything you succeed at is purely a result of your own tenacity and personal genius, but I'd argue there is also a good deal of chance involved; being in the right place at the right time and making the right decision. No, I'm not suggesting people have no control over what they do in life, I'm arguing the assertion that they have complete control is false.

I don't think the protester did an awful job, and the fact he gave someone who's job it is to argue on on TV about economic matters a run for his money is a statement to the weakness of Mr. Schiff's position.

@Crosswords
i am beginning to feel the stirrings of a man-crush on you.

look.
when it comes to money and economics schiff has made some great points and in 2004 was almost prophetic but when it comes to politics schiff appears to be a fish out of water and came to OWS with a self-righteous pre-conception and was rightly shown the error in his ways.

the argument about disbanding the EPA,the FDA or the DOE is a conflation.
we can argue the effeciency vs results but that is an entirely separate argument and has little to do with their actually designed roles and the necessity of those departments.

i do not understand those who keep touting the virtue of an un-regulated and "free" market.
unless you feel that indentured servitude,child labor and unsafe products that may harm or kill are perfectly acceptable.
it not only ignores history but conveniently ignores that uneven disparity that would be inevitable.
you think there is inequality now?
let a true free market become the mantra of pure capitalism and see what happens.
dont have resources and were not born in to an affluent family?
well go fuck yourself and make me a sandwich.

the game is rigged.
the system is fixed.
a CEO defrauds billions and walks away with 160 million in bonuses.
a man steals a pack of underwear and spends 30 days in jail,gets charged for the food and board and owes 500 hours of community service and a years probation at a 100 bucks a month.

all men are created equal under the eyes of the law?
i call bullshit.

>> ^Crosswords:

I'd like to respond to two of the more douchey arguments made by Mr. Schiff.
1. AMERICAN WORKERS ARE DEMANDING MORE MONEY AND LOWER PRICES THAN CORPORATIONS CAN PROFIT FROM.
This would be more believable if a. Corporate profits weren't at record highs, b. the disparity between worker and executive pay is huge and has been more or less steadily increasing and c. the disparity between the top 20% and everyone else has also been increasing. So essentially the rich are demanding more for less and they're getting it.
2. I WORKED HARD TO EARN EVERYTHING I GOT, SO I DESERVE TO KEEP IT ALL AND DO WHATEVER I WANT.
This is a ridiculous argument designed to make the person who has the most look like a victim. It ignores the tremendous advantages he enjoys in a society that strives to give workers a relatively comfortable wage and keep opportunities for economic advancement open. Had he been born in one of his oh so precious 'competitive' wage countries in all likelihood he'd be living in poverty sewing shoes for a $1 a day till the day he died of poor health at the age of 45. Further more it also ignores his socioeconomic upbringing and make the assumption he's a self-made man who picked himself up from his own boot-straps out of the mud of poverty. In Mr. Schiff's case his father was a well connected political activist, investor, and current tax dodging jail bird. Its probably safe to say Peter Schiff didn't start with nothing, but in fact had a lot more avenues to success open to him than the majority of Americans do. There's also the element of chance, its nice to think that everything you succeed at is purely a result of your own tenacity and personal genius, but I'd argue there is also a good deal of chance involved; being in the right place at the right time and making the right decision. No, I'm not suggesting people have no control over what they do in life, I'm arguing the assertion that they have complete control is false.
I don't think the protester did an awful job, and the fact he gave someone who's job it is to argue on on TV about economic matters a run for his money is a statement to the weakness of Mr. Schiff's position.


Well, I listened to the clip again and somehow I couldn't find these Schiff arguments. The only ones making "douchey arguments" are those framing partisan strawman instead of recognizing there's truth to both sides.

Keep sucking that corporate cock. Keep sucking with all your heart and all your mind. Close your eyes and keep sucking it until you are filled up with the warm and sticky spurt of freedom. You are not a whore. You are not a dupe. You are a self made rugged individualist. Breathe in. You are not blindly following a fantastical doctrine. You have come to these conclusions on your own. Breathe out. You are not a sucker. You are a hero. Breathe in. You are not a dupe. You are a champion. Breathe out. You are the living embodiment of liberty. Breathe in. One day you will be rewarded for your loyalty. Breathe out. One day you will be rewarded. Breathe in. One day you will be rewarded. Breath in. One day you will be rewarded with spurt. Breathe out. You are not a dupe. You are a champion. Breathe in. You are not a dupe. You are an champion. Breathe out. You are ayn champion. Breathe in. Champion. Breathe... and suck... and breathe... and suck... and suck... and breathe... and suck... and... spurt.

I'm spent.

>> ^marbles:

"Koch Brothers lackey Peter Schiff gets schooled by OWS"
I think the title proves who the real fool and idiot is.
The black guy makes a rape analogy between corporations and their victims, but then seems to suffer from Stockholm syndrome when questioning Schiff about EPA, FDA, and Dept of Education.

>> ^marbles:


Well, I listened to the clip again and somehow I couldn't find these Schiff arguments. The only ones making "douchey arguments" are those framing partisan strawman instead of recognizing there's truth to both sides.


Yes I did paraphrase and generalize what Mr. Schiff said as they are common arguments made by proponents of unregulated markets and low/no taxation on the rich.

But they were arguments made by Mr. Schiff; the first one starts around 00:55 mark:

The protester asks "...why are you manufacturing your iPhone in China, and you don't have any of your manufacturing here in the united states?"

Mr.Schiff responds "...and I'll tell you why, because we made it, *interrupted* "do you think that's fair to the American people?" *continues*, "...the American people don't own those jobs, Steve Jobs has a right to manufacture where he wants, we have made it too expensive to manufacture here, the government, remember that the reason employers want to lower wages is because the customers want low prices, everybody in this park wants low prices. You can't have low prices...(cut)"

Argument two starts at 02:10 after he gets called a fool by the protester:

"...so I just stumbled into all my wealth, I run all these businesses..."

His response was more aimed at being called a fool and suggesting a foolish person can't be successful like he is, that they can't just stumble into success. My point is that success if oft claimed to be 100% or near 100% the efforts of the successful, wherein reality in most cases there are many contributing factors beyond the successful person's control, that are conveniently forgotten. So yes he could stumble into success with minimal effort on his part, just as he could fail despite lots of effort.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

Keep sucking that corporate cock. Keep sucking with all your heart and all your mind. Close your eyes and keep sucking it until you are filled up with the warm and sticky spurt of freedom. You are not a whore. You are not a dupe. You are a self made rugged individualist. Breathe in. You are not blindly following a fantastical doctrine. You have come to these conclusions on your own. Breathe out. You are not a sucker. You are a hero. Breathe in. You are not a dupe. You are a champion. Breathe out. You are the living embodiment of liberty. Breathe in. One day you will be rewarded for your loyalty. Breathe out. One day you will be rewarded. Breathe in. One day you will be rewarded. Breath in. One day you will be rewarded with spurt. Breathe out. You are not a dupe. You are a champion. Breathe in. You are not a dupe. You are an champion. Breathe out. You are ayn champion. Breathe in. Champion. Breathe... and suck... and breathe... and suck... and suck... and breathe... and suck... and... spurt.
I'm spent.
>> ^marbles:
"Koch Brothers lackey Peter Schiff gets schooled by OWS"
I think the title proves who the real fool and idiot is.
The black guy makes a rape analogy between corporations and their victims, but then seems to suffer from Stockholm syndrome when questioning Schiff about EPA, FDA, and Dept of Education.



LOL nice. That's the best you got?

You should focus more on making rational arguments instead of trying to attack those you disagree with.

>> ^Crosswords:
Yes I did paraphrase and generalize what Mr. Schiff said ...
= I made a douchey argument.

>> ^marbles:

>> ^Crosswords:
Yes I did paraphrase and generalize what Mr. Schiff said ...
= I made a douchey argument.


Paraphrasing is a perfectly acceptable method for restating the expressed idea presented, specially in a situation such as the interview in the video where there are many abrupt interruptions and changes of subject.

Further more, you suggested arguments I attributed in my original post weren't presented by Mr. Schiff in the video, and I made sure to give you time marks where the argument occurred in the video and direct quotations of the material I was paraphrasing. I went on to explain where and why I generalized, specifically on the 2nd point, in an attempt to clarify why I was making my original argument.

If you have another view of what was said please enlighten me. Or maybe you're just mad I used a pejorative to describe Mr. Schiff's argument. Well guilty as charged, but at least I gave a lengthy explanation of why I thought it was bad argument.

>> ^Crosswords:

>> ^marbles:
>> ^Crosswords:
Yes I did paraphrase and generalize what Mr. Schiff said ...
= I made a douchey argument.

Paraphrasing is a perfectly acceptable method for restating the expressed idea presented, specially in a situation such as the interview in the video where there are many abrupt interruptions and changes of subject.
Further more, you suggested arguments I attributed in my original post weren't presented by Mr. Schiff in the video, and I made sure to give you time marks where the argument occurred in the video and direct quotations of the material I was paraphrasing. I went on to explain where and why I generalized, specifically on the 2nd point, in an attempt to clarify why I was making my original argument.
If you have another view of what was said please enlighten me. Or maybe you're just mad I used a pejorative to describe Mr. Schiff's argument. Well guilty as charged, but at least I gave a lengthy explanation of why I thought it was bad argument.


You didn't paraphrase Schiff. You revised what he said into easily argued strawman, or what you call "common arguments made by proponents of unregulated markets and low/no taxation on the rich".

You accused him of making "douchey arguments" by misrepresenting what he said. So who is the real douche here?

I don't blame the guy on the street for interrupting him. He keeps pulling the mic away and talking over him instead of letting him finish his point. If he'd let him finish he might have found a really weak argument he could jump on, but I think he was more afraid of the guy building up a good argument and him having no where to attack it from. So he catches him in mid stride and tries to trip him.

What people heard in that crowd is different than what we heard through the video...they edited and he kept pulling the mic away and talking over them. I somehow doubt the video got edited to be favorable to the crowd.

First of all, Schiff didn't get schooled, unless you count him appealing to the disbandment of the EPA, FDA, and Board of Education as him schooling himself. The protester he chose to verbsterbate over was not interested in the kind of 'debate' Schiff was looking for. Or, perhaps, that's what it's supposed to look like with the dude in the suit staring down a protester in a keffiyeh, and Schiff got what he wanted, firing up his fellow suit-wearer base. Looks pretty allegorical to me, though.

Anyway marbles, crosswords: Crosswords' post regarding the arguments Schiff is making were more or less in line with the points Schiff spoke. #1 is more in line, @1:25s Schiff makes the argument that corporations 'need' to move their production elsewhere because Americans demand lower prices than corps can profit from if production is in the US. Crossroads' statement of Schiff's position as: "AMERICAN WORKERS ARE DEMANDING MORE MONEY AND LOWER PRICES THAN CORPORATIONS CAN PROFIT FROM" is entirely in line with what Schiff is saying, simply adding that workers in the US want more money than workers elsewhere, which I'm sure Schiff himself wouldn't argue with.

Crossroads' #2 argument is a bit more of an extension of Schiff's ideas however I think it emerges out of the sentiment expressed by Schiff about the CEO of Apple having a right to give people jobs wherever he wants. The point being made by the protester is that Steve has an obligation to the US, from which he has gained so much, to try to keep manufacturing jobs in the US (another argument for another time, please) to which Schiff says @1:05 "The American people don't own those jobs. Steve Jobs has a right to manufacture where he wants." Now Crossroads' "I WORKED HARD TO EARN EVERYTHING I GOT, SO I DESERVE TO KEEP IT ALL AND DO WHATEVER I WANT" certainly echoes that sentiment. Also, I think you can glean that sentiment from virtually all of what Schiff is saying, from the Apple manufacturing to the abolishment of the various gov't agencies (I can explain that specific point more if you'd like, but think it would be beside the point right now).

So I really do feel like Crossroads' paraphrasing of Schiff's statements is entirely within the realm of the reasonable. And even where they're pushing those boundaries to call them 'douchey' arguments certainly seems baseless. So, marbles, do you have any anything to say about the content of Crossroad's rebuttals to the arguments Schiff has presented?

Hippies.