Jump to content

NYC, Occupy Wall Street headed into court for legal showdown after Zuccotti Park evictions

Shortline Bus

By Shortline Bus,
in Off Topic Lounge

Recommended Posts


Harry

Harry

Posted
Posted

I and many other people believe there is a faction within the OWS movement who's intentions are good and bring up very valid points. It's just that it has gotten out of hand. The good ones need to separate themselves from the one's looking for free food, drugs and sex.

 

With proper leadership and organization this can be the right movement that this country needs in these tumultuous times. There's way too many people in America who don't know what the hell is going on in this country and this world. They need to wake up. They just don't have a good grasp on what is really happening out there. This is the movement to wake them up.

 

So I agree whole heartily with what they doing but it needs to be cleaned up and organized better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubwayGuy

SubwayGuy

Posted
Posted
We tried that. It's called the Democratic party but they were beaten into submission by the right and lack a spine today. We need a progressive left, and well, we're getting it.

 

The Democratic party is another aristocratic self serving interest. They will raise your taxes and use it to fund pet projects that they can boast about for re-election, which take away your freedoms in the name of a progress that is undesired by the American people.

 

They want to tell you what you can eat and drink. They want to tell you how to live your life. And they want to tax you more to do it.

 

The Republicans want to give every dollar you own to their rich businessman friends so that you are all penniless, poor, and enslaved in debt to them.

 

It's a two pronged assault on life in this country as we knew it. The Republicans will give up your money and your job for you. The Democrats will give up your freedoms in the name of "the greater good." (cue HOT FUZZ reference)

 

Leaving you, ultimately, with nothing. But you're American, so you're free right? And hey, I can still watch TV and go on the internet.

 

See the movie Idiocracy if you haven't...minus the humor, that's where we're headed. And the Democrats are just as guilty as the Republicans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubwayGuy

SubwayGuy

Posted
Posted

I do need to add a couple of notes to this:

 

I got a whole college education that used existing programs to lessen the costs to myself, and not dig a hole of debt. Programs that are open to everyone. Where the frack do you see me being selfish and greedy? Huh? Where? I've been through Shit that these losers problibly never have to deal with.

 

I don't know what yours and his issue is, but I do need to add this. First let me start by saying I admire and appreciate what you did to get an education and not "dig a hole of debt" in this economy. However, that said, as much as healthcare costs are given attention for eternally rising, college costs are out of control. Some tuitions are going up by double digit percentage points every year.

 

A financial calculator I used estimated that if I had my first child at age 30, by the time he/she was ready to go to college, with the current inflation in tuition, it would cost about half a million dollars to send him/her for four years.

 

Yes, there are those in this movement who picked the wrong school and took out a TON of loans (many took private loans which carry higher interest rates). And yes there are those who just want a free "debt forgiveness". But what's being ignored in this debate is the skyrocketing cost of education, the decreasing benefit (an undergraduate degree does not guarantee a job or competitiveness in the workforce like it used to), and the non-change in the quality of the education. It's like taking the Vitamin C out of an orange, not making it taste any better, but raising the cost year over year.

 

That's the real issue that needs to be addressed here, and it's lost amid the whining of those who want a handout.

 

Why is college costing more? Skyrocketing athletics budgets and constant new construction of new buildings. A whole lot of BIGGER/MORE. Why are new fitness centers necessary? Why do college coaches pull down multimillion dollar a year salaries? Why do athletes get scholarships to these same institutions regular students have to scratch and claw through competitive admissions to get in when they can barely read?

 

Businesses exist to make a profit, they exist to make money. and if you walk head first into this fracking mess because your too stupid to know any better, that's your own dam fault, and it's not my job, or anyone else's to have to fix it for you. After my father died, we did get into a hole, but we're working to fix that. We sell stuff on Ebay for profit. we've made a sort of business out of it. We can easily make a $1000 a month. Buy stuff cheap, store it for a few months or so, and then put it up. Heck, a few years ago, we got $1,100 for the first four Harry Potter books with the author's signature.

 

Businesses exist not to make money but to provide a service and employ people. That's why businesses exist.

 

Profits are the reward that come for providing a service in such a way that it is appreciated by consumers who reward you with money.

 

Money is not the endgame, but a reward for a job well done.

 

In the case of banks, they exist to safeguard assets and make loans that enable businesses that deal in tangible goods to expand.

 

General motors must contiue to pay it's workers, even if no one is buying their cars. That's why they got a bailout. Banks must be able to provide you with your money, even if they have nothing is coming in. that's why the got a bailout. If GM or Ford went under, millions of people all over the world would have lost thier jobs. ever hear of Vaxhaul? how about Opel? Maybe Holden? those are GM's international brands. Vaxhaul is UK, Opel is Europe and holden is Australia. If GM died, they would have gone too.

 

I only agreed with the auto bailouts because 1) they were relatively small (a couple billion dollars) and 2) they maintained real production jobs here in the US.

 

The bank bailouts were a disgrace because there were no controls over what happened to the money. Much of it went to bonuses and the government did not do ONE THING to curtail that. Additionally, with the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates low, banks pay depositors - savers - the "wise ones" - NEAR NOTHING of interest. This coupled with "free checking" accounts that many times pay zero (as in 0.0%) interest. Meanwhile, banks continue to charge moderately high rates on loans. That differential is pure profit. The banks could pay the savers more and still be profitable.

 

Bank profits right now are at record highs while the whole economy struggles. The bailout didn't loosen credit. Money's always been cheap the last few years. But people's ability to pay back has gone down because of unemployment tied to outsourcing, something else the government does nothing about.

 

That's why the banks never needed a bailout. The reason they lost so much money was the buying and selling of securities. Lending is NEVER an unprofitable business unless you make a lot of really bad loans. And even when that happens, you can recover reasonably quickly, or allow borrowers to refinance, and make that same money just over a longer period while allowing people to stay in their homes.

 

But when you lose money through exposure to someone else's bad loans (that you didn't make and you didn't verify creditworthiness for) via derivatives, now the localization of the problem has gone global, and that's when you get a crash like in 2008.

 

I don't think standing around downtown is going to fix anything. in as much as you have the right to think what you think, I have the right to what I think. Rick Perry has the right to call Obama a socalist. He has the right to call him a lot of things. It's the same right by which your fellow pro-OWS folks have been calling people who disagree with them Nazi's.

 

This I agree with. Anyone can call anyone anything short of hate speech. That's freedom. However, it is counterproductive for the political discourse in this country to take on the tone of Stone Cold Steve Austin vs. Vince McMahon in 1990's WWF, which it has in recent years.

 

I only call them "stupid" since I think they're wasting thier time, and could probibly be doing things that could actualy do a better job fixing thier poblems. How does standing in the park do anything but annoy everone who has to live with them?

 

I agree there are other things they could be doing to protest, but they SHOULD and MUST be protesting. Saying "get a job" is dismissive and short sighted since the lack of good paying jobs they can get is WHY they're protesting in the first place.

 

They should be expected in general, to get a decent paying job local to them. Not to have to relocate for a decent way of life. If they don't have that, they have every right to protest. That's freedom of speech. Peace of mind, is not a protected right. There is no law that guarantees people peace of mind during daylight hours. If they happen to live in a protest area, tough. That's the way it is. At night, I agree the noise should be minimized. There actually ARE laws and ordinances in general about noise at night, so the people living there have a right to that.

 

In my mind they would be more productive if they stepped the game up and stopped with the hippie sh*t. Barring bankers from going to work by blocking entrances to these corrupt corps would be a good start. No nudity, no drugs. Make a stand, face the arrests, that's how a real dialogue may begin.

 

They need to avoid being hijacked by big money interests however, and candidates need to come from within. Someone like Michelle Bachmann "of the Tea Party" (sarcastic quotes) was an established Republican who flipflopped over to the movement when the big moneyed interests that caused the financial crisis took it over.

 

This was what the Tea Party was supposed to be, only slightly less organized. The Tea Party became the same Republican group as the Bush group. Tax like a Republican, spend like a Democrat, bankrupt the country...who cares as long as we have our guns, believe in God, and there's no gay marriage. Which of course was NEVER what the original Tea Party was about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
checkmatechamp13

checkmatechamp13

Posted
Posted
I and many other people believe there is a faction within the OWS movement who's intentions are good and bring up very valid points. It's just that it has gotten out of hand. The good ones need to separate themselves from the one's looking for free food, drugs and sex.

 

 

Free food? I'm in! :(

 

Also, are those people who were giving out $20 bills so the protesters could get checked for STDs still there? I could use a few bucks (for my personal use. No, I don't sleep around)

 

 

A financial calculator I used estimated that if I had my first child at age 30, by the time he/she was ready to go to college, with the current inflation in tuition, it would cost about half a million dollars to send him/her for four years.

 

 

 

I disagree. If you go to a CUNY or SUNY school, it can be reasonable. I believe a CUNY school costs around $4,000-$5,000 a year. I'd prefer it be cheaper, but the cost isn't outrageous (though with my grades, I might qualify for a program where they give you $10,000 per year, and since the tuition is $5,000, you get to keep $5,000 for your personal use)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tokkemon

Tokkemon

Posted
Posted
Here's what you said:

I have my problems with the Democrats, and many more with the Republicans, but if you look at the core values of the Democrats, that's the type of sensical party we *should* have. Unfortunately the vast majority are spineless, ball-less Wall Street owned bureaucrats, and that ruins it. But to say they're as guilty as the Republicans? As annoyed as I am at both parties, the Dems have hurt this country far, far less than the Republicans have.

 

 

They have core values?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SubwayGuy

SubwayGuy

Posted
Posted
I disagree. If you go to a CUNY or SUNY school, it can be reasonable. I believe a CUNY school costs around $4,000-$5,000 a year. I'd prefer it be cheaper, but the cost isn't outrageous (though with my grades, I might qualify for a program where they give you $10,000 per year, and since the tuition is $5,000, you get to keep $5,000 for your personal use)

 

That's because the evil gubbermint kicks in funding to sustain the operating costs of those schools so that tuitions can be kept down. Exactly the sort of thing younger people promote to keep the costs of higher education down.

 

Also, remember those are discounted tuitions granted only to in-state enrollees. Out of state students pay a higher tuition, which is still less than private tuition but again that's because of gubbermint money.

 

So when people here say "cut spending" they need to carefully consider what's being cut. A number of congress people would not blink an eye to slash higher education funding. Tuition is out of control as it is IN GENERAL which is why so many people are upset. If the cost is going up, the value received should be too but it's not. It's actually declining. Students today are paying and borrowing more for less than at any point in this nation's history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept