yes I saw that...there is hope, especially as the cops start realizing they are a part of us. i'm excited at the possibilities that OWS has given us, but I really want it to be a longstanding part of the discussion in the year's ahead. I don't want to look back at this the way older people look back at '68 as a missed opportunity. We can't miss this opportunity, and I'm concerned.
Re. the statement in bold above- excellent point and I vouch for that thought. I look back on '68 as a missed opportunity. Many boomers my age don't bother to look back at all and far too many will give you a million reasons why they are too busy to get involved once again today. Your concern is quite valid but your opportunity is still very much alive.
(Gee sorry- that last sentence sounds like a fortune cookie )
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
OWS ... spreading or receding??? Any witnesses care to report?
I'm too far off in the sticks to know ... I witnessed a local Occupy Main Street event which consisted of a broke-down tractor which blocked traffic for 30 minutes.
To be clear I haven't actually heard of any violence at these protests outside of tony bologna pepper spraying the protesters, and a few other incidents that were similar. What I am wondering is what 'peaceful' protest is going to get done? What would violent protest get done? I'm, admittedly, not sure, but I think that the latter would be more successful in exacting the changes we need.
am I the only one who wants this shit to get ultraviolent?
Call me crazy, but that appears to be advocating violence. Whoops.... pardon me, that appears to be advocating ultraviolence.
I wrote the first one last night under the influence of alcohol...shouldn't have presented it in that way for sure. Just got fired up by watching some of the media reax to the protests. I guess what I am asking is what are we trying to accomplish through OWS and what will enable that change? For those who are against violence (that's a valid way to move forward) how will non-violence get the change to happen? For those of us who think maybe violence is an answer where would it need to be directed? Who would need to be held responsible? Would violence actually be better than non-violence?
oh yeah.....the ole' "i was drunk" card. i forgot about that one. i will be sure to use it, the next time.
live and let live...unless it violates the pearligious doctrine.
OWS ... spreading or receding??? Any witnesses care to report?
I'm too far off in the sticks to know ... I witnessed a local Occupy Main Street event which consisted of a broke-down tractor which blocked traffic for 30 minutes.
Who knows? I'm sure the supporters would say growing, and others would say not. The fact is, they are still there, and I give them credit if they make it through the next couple months.
But, I live close to the OWS, and it affects me and everyone else I come into contact 0, so it really doesn't exist. It's sort of like if a tree falls in the woods....
Keep hanging out in the park. They've already cost NYC over $3 million in police OT. So, they'll begin to anger a few more people when the realities of what they are ACTUALLY accomplishing starts directly affecting people. Though, I'm sure the families of those police officers will thank them when they have the happiest Christmas in a long time.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
So what will these protests accomplish if the allegations turn out to be true that the NYCC (which is basically ACORN now that ACORN was exposed and some offices closed--same office and many of the same staffers) is paying people $100/day to stand at the protests all day, paying homeless people $10/hour to protest, and having people go door-to-door to collect money for various causes (such as saying they're collecting money for the United Federation of Teachers to test for PCBs in schools) when they are really giving the money to Occupy Wall Street? These reports are coming from sources inside the NYCC and from people who say they and others were hired at homeless shelters by the NYCC.
So what will these protests accomplish if the allegations turn out to be true that the NYCC (which is basically ACORN now that ACORN was exposed and some offices closed--same office and many of the same staffers) is paying people $100/day to stand at the protests all day, paying homeless people $10/hour to protest, and having people go door-to-door to collect money for various causes (such as saying they're collecting money for the United Federation of Teachers to test for PCBs in schools) when they are really giving the money to Occupy Wall Street? These reports are coming from sources inside the NYCC and from people who say they and others were hired at homeless shelters by the NYCC.
I'm not saying that the allegations are true, just asking what effect it would have on the protest's impact, credibility, etc. if it is true. Most people will see the source and immediatley dismiss it but that's not really my problem. This could be true or it could be fabricated by people within NYCC who are upset for whatever reason or who are just misinformed about the facts and think they're doing the right thing. Who knows? The organization's website does mention fighting PCBs in NYC schools and does mention supporting Occupy Wall Street. Obviously, those 2 facts don't make the allegations true because they can be 2 unrelated causes being supported by the group legally and ethically. I just think that it's something worth looking into.
So what will these protests accomplish if the allegations turn out to be true that the NYCC (which is basically ACORN now that ACORN was exposed and some offices closed--same office and many of the same staffers) is paying people $100/day to stand at the protests all day, paying homeless people $10/hour to protest, and having people go door-to-door to collect money for various causes (such as saying they're collecting money for the United Federation of Teachers to test for PCBs in schools) when they are really giving the money to Occupy Wall Street? These reports are coming from sources inside the NYCC and from people who say they and others were hired at homeless shelters by the NYCC.
Anyway, I read the article and I'm not putting much credibility into it. The fact that former ACORN workers are involved in OWS is not surprising and the reporter is most likely blowing this WAY out of proportion.
This is the EXACT same shit that liberal media outlets did to paint the Tea Party as racist extremists. It's easy to find bad apples and focus on them.
I agree that it doesn't discredit the movement just because there are some people involved who are--at best--unethical. I think it would damage the public perception of the movement however, if people start to question if the number of people there has been exaggerated by the fact people are being paid and if people question if there's an ethical difference between going door-to-door for donations that aren't going where they're intended and Wall Street execs getting bonuses after accepting bailouts (a difference in the scale of the actions, certainly, but not in the ethics). Public opinion is pretty fickle and I wonder if this would wind up erasing whatever chance there is for the protesters to see any sort of reform at the end of this thing.
Taking an optimist view of it, at least some jobs have been created out of this if it's true.
Anyway, I read the article and I'm not putting much credibility into it. The fact that former ACORN workers are involved in OWS is not surprising and the reporter is most likely blowing this WAY out of proportion.
This is the EXACT same shit that liberal media outlets did to paint the Tea Party as racist extremists. It's easy to find bad apples and focus on them.
OWS ... spreading or receding??? Any witnesses care to report?
I'm too far off in the sticks to know ... I witnessed a local Occupy Main Street event which consisted of a broke-down tractor which blocked traffic for 30 minutes.
Who knows? I'm sure the supporters would say growing, and others would say not. The fact is, they are still there, and I give them credit if they make it through the next couple months.
But, I live close to the OWS, and it affects me and everyone else I come into contact 0, so it really doesn't exist. It's sort of like if a tree falls in the woods....
Keep hanging out in the park. They've already cost NYC over $3 million in police OT. So, they'll begin to anger a few more people when the realities of what they are ACTUALLY accomplishing starts directly affecting people. Though, I'm sure the families of those police officers will thank them when they have the happiest Christmas in a long time.
people are gonna get pissed about the 3 million dollars spent "controlling" the people protesting the 600 million we gave to rich people? methinks this is the point of the whole movement. went down to bmore today, it had about 75 people and 30 tents at 2 pm...heard it's about to get crazy tonight when the police try to shut it down.
people are gonna get pissed about the 3 million dollars spent "controlling" the people protesting the 600 million we gave to rich people? methinks this is the point of the whole movement. went down to bmore today, it had about 75 people and 30 tents at 2 pm...heard it's about to get crazy tonight when the police try to shut it down.
I have to say your view of this is a bit warped. They are not there to control the protestors. They are there for several reasons:
1) Protect the protestors
2) Make sure protestors don't get out of control
3) Control traffic
4) Do their normal jobs
Nowhere is it meant that they control the protestors. And, yes - those that actually pay taxes will feel the brunt of this and be more pissed that they have to pay taxes than some illusion folks have about beating rich people being the solution to going out and finding a job.
EDIT: If what you think is the point of the protests, then they're more stupid than I thought.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
the point of the protests are that neoliberal capitalism is unfair, unsustainable, and that the $600 mill we gave bankers, and the hundreds of millions of dollars we give owners of sports teams to build stadiums (the $500 mill to rebuild the Superdome post-Katrina is the MOST egregious form of rich people handouts to date), the tax breaks, kick backs, etc. are all various nodes of evidence about how stupid this particular form of capitalism is.
people are gonna get pissed about the 3 million dollars spent "controlling" the people protesting the 600 million we gave to rich people? methinks this is the point of the whole movement. went down to bmore today, it had about 75 people and 30 tents at 2 pm...heard it's about to get crazy tonight when the police try to shut it down.
I have to say your view of this is a bit warped. They are not there to control the protestors. They are there for several reasons:
1) Protect the protestors
2) Make sure protestors don't get out of control
3) Control traffic
4) Do their normal jobs
Nowhere is it meant that they control the protestors. And, yes - those that actually pay taxes will feel the brunt of this and be more pissed that they have to pay taxes than some illusion folks have about beating rich people being the solution to going out and finding a job.
EDIT: If what you think is the point of the protests, then they're more stupid than I thought.
Isn't point number 2 about controlling the protesters? yes i get your point though. However I don't think that it's stupid that people think that rich people are (at least partly) to blame for their joblessness. Individually, sure, some of those kids are lazy, undereducated, etc. but some of that stems from the failures of the system, and some of that stems from the fact that many jobs have been outsourced and/or no longer exist.
I have to say your view of this is a bit warped. They are not there to control the protestors. They are there for several reasons:
1) Protect the protestors
2) Make sure protestors don't get out of control
3) Control traffic
4) Do their normal jobs
Nowhere is it meant that they control the protestors. And, yes - those that actually pay taxes will feel the brunt of this and be more pissed that they have to pay taxes than some illusion folks have about beating rich people being the solution to going out and finding a job.
EDIT: If what you think is the point of the protests, then they're more stupid than I thought.
Isn't point number 2 about controlling the protesters?
Ummm. No. If I need to explain, please let me know.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
OWS ... spreading or receding??? Any witnesses care to report?
I'm too far off in the sticks to know ... I witnessed a local Occupy Main Street event which consisted of a broke-down tractor which blocked traffic for 30 minutes.
Who knows? I'm sure the supporters would say growing, and others would say not. The fact is, they are still there, and I give them credit if they make it through the next couple months.
But, I live close to the OWS, and it affects me and everyone else I come into contact 0, so it really doesn't exist. It's sort of like if a tree falls in the woods....
Keep hanging out in the park. They've already cost NYC over $3 million in police OT. So, they'll begin to anger a few more people when the realities of what they are ACTUALLY accomplishing starts directly affecting people. Though, I'm sure the families of those police officers will thank them when they have the happiest Christmas in a long time.
people are gonna get pissed about the 3 million dollars spent "controlling" the people protesting the 600 million we gave to rich people? methinks this is the point of the whole movement. went down to bmore today, it had about 75 people and 30 tents at 2 pm...heard it's about to get crazy tonight when the police try to shut it down.
Well hopefully cooler heads prevail.
I went down to the Minneapolis one the other day and chatted a few people up... I heard a lot about "they"...they do a lot of stuff, I had no idea. They have even brainwashed me into thinking that Government isn't part of the solution....that was my favorite...I don't watch fox news but 3 of the 4 people accused me of regurgitating fox news talking points...I am really sick of the whole if you are against us you have been brainwashed bullshit. Other than that I fully support their attempt to get involved. I don't agree with the focus of their anger, but welcome more people getting involved...it will lead to them better educating themselves on all sorts of issues, and possibly even economics...which is a sorely under-represented field of education among our elected officials..
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Mike, I think you are right on this. I think most of the Tea Party's positions are inane, BUT I respect the fact that they are stepping outside of the Demopublican realm and coming up with new ideas. Personally, I think that if OWS and the Tea Party become the starting points of political discussion then we've truly gotten somewhere different and hopefully better.
Isn't point number 2 about controlling the protesters? yes i get your point though. However I don't think that it's stupid that people think that rich people are (at least partly) to blame for their joblessness. Individually, sure, some of those kids are lazy, undereducated, etc. but some of that stems from the failures of the system, and some of that stems from the fact that many jobs have been outsourced and/or no longer exist.
Please explain how rich people are to blame for their joblessness?
Let me give you a counterpoint to the argument you are about to make.
We are looking to hire folks, but we get either unqualified folks or people with unreasonable expectations of salaries (and we pay better than most b/c we are a mid sized company that must compete with the big boys). Finally someone walks in with minimal background in our industry, but a great programming background (it's an analyst position that relies a lot on programming). He started out in the financial industry 15 years ago, and ended up getting laid off. He wandered around for a couple of years, but in the meantime went back and got certificates in a different industry (ours) because he saw it as a mostly recession proof industry (which he is right about). He came in aknowledging his lack of experience in our field.
He also came in with low expectations of salary to start. He was very smart. And I was especially impressed with his initiative. We ended up offering him more than he asked. That interview made me think even less of the OWS folks. There are jobs out there.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Isn't point number 2 about controlling the protesters? yes i get your point though. However I don't think that it's stupid that people think that rich people are (at least partly) to blame for their joblessness. Individually, sure, some of those kids are lazy, undereducated, etc. but some of that stems from the failures of the system, and some of that stems from the fact that many jobs have been outsourced and/or no longer exist.
Please explain how rich people are to blame for their joblessness?
Let me give you a counterpoint to the argument you are about to make.
We are looking to hire folks, but we get either unqualified folks or people with unreasonable expectations of salaries (and we pay better than most b/c we are a mid sized company that must compete with the big boys). Finally someone walks in with minimal background in our industry, but a great programming background (it's an analyst position that relies a lot on programming). He started out in the financial industry 15 years ago, and ended up getting laid off. He wandered around for a couple of years, but in the meantime went back and got certificates in a different industry (ours) because he saw it as a mostly recession proof industry (which he is right about). He came in aknowledging his lack of experience in our field.
He also came in with low expectations of salary to start. He was very smart. And I was especially impressed with his initiative. We ended up offering him more than he asked. That interview made me think even less of the OWS folks. There are jobs out there.
i guess my questions would be why are the people unqualified? not like the obvious part, but more why haven't they been able to get the schooling needed? as for the others what makes their salary expectations unreasonable? isn't this particular form of capitalism the science of exploitation? by that i mean don't you plan on making more from your worker than you pay them...and if you can get away with it won't you pay them as little as you possibly can and hope that the best qualified person (which it seems you lucked into) takes the job?
4.12pm: Veterans for Peace have released a statement on Scott Olsen, the former marine who suffered a fractured skull in Oakland yesterday.
Veteran For Peace member, Scott Olsen, a Marine Corps veteran twice deployed to Iraq, is in hospital now in stable but serious condition with a fractured skull, struck by a police projectile fired into a crowd in downtown Oakland, California in the early morning hours of today. Other people were injured in the assault and many were arrested after Oakland police in riot gear were ordered to evict people encamped in the ongoing "Occupy Oakland" movement. Olsen is also a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War.
There is no such thing as leftover pizza. There is now pizza and later pizza. - anonymous The risk I took was calculated, but man, am I bad at math - The Mincing Mockingbird
the point of the protests are that neoliberal capitalism is unfair, unsustainable, and that the $600 mill we gave bankers, and the hundreds of millions of dollars we give owners of sports teams to build stadiums (the $500 mill to rebuild the Superdome post-Katrina is the MOST egregious form of rich people handouts to date), the tax breaks, kick backs, etc. are all various nodes of evidence about how stupid this particular form of capitalism is.
dont even get me started on stadiums...f'n joke...
While I am all for ending government backed crony capitalism, I don't see an end to MNC's and the bottom line... So why not create a situation where they have little influence in the government...and since it was already decided that they "are people"(citizens united) why not take away power from their enabler (the government). Kind of like if I don't want you to drink, I can go to your house and take away your beer, but if I don't stop people from bringing it to you what was the point?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
i agree that there are jobs out there, but if salaries are stagnating and schooling prices rise then somethings going to break. take me for example finished a PhD (2-years of community college (where only 23% of students graduate with a 4-years degree) and no debt, 3-years of private college (where mommy's and daddy's make rich kids dreams come true) $15k b/c of major scholarship help, and work on the side, 6-years of graduate school at UMD (lived for 3 years in my uncle's basement until I couldn't do it anymore) $57k more debt. So I come out with a PhD and get offered $55k to teach at a Research IA institution with $72k in school loans, plus looking to buy a home with my wife who luckily had rich parents put her through 6 years of private school for a Master's Degree. Additionally, I've earned Base+Merit increases each of my first 3 years at this University because of my hard work and the school hasn't granted those increases once. In fact, they've asked me to take furloughs each year instead. Even though professors aren't seeing the money, tuition is increasing so people coming through this behind me are getting FUCKED, and are expected to keep taking starting salaries like I have with tons more debt?
i guess my questions would be why are the people unqualified? not like the obvious part, but more why haven't they been able to get the schooling needed? as for the others what makes their salary expectations unreasonable? isn't this particular form of capitalism the science of exploitation? by that i mean don't you plan on making more from your worker than you pay them...and if you can get away with it won't you pay them as little as you possibly can and hope that the best qualified person (which it seems you lucked into) takes the job?
Actually, yes and no. Of course, we hope the company benefits financially from his work. As the company does with me. And I know the numbers - I'd be a millionaire if I got to keep all the money I made for my company, and no I am not kidding. But, I didn't take the risk. I didn't put up the capital. I don't know if I'd make the same money if I set this all up myself. So, the owner of my company has every right to keep that return on his investment (which is more than just money). And, the same goes for the folks I hire.
But, then, I need to keep such a person happy. You can characterize that as I pay him as little as possible. I'll even go with that premise. But, you know what? If someone else comes along and says he's worth more, I lose him. So, I have to be smart even under that premise. Of course, in a recession, leverage returns more to the employer. But in "good times" leverage goes the other way and folks hop around like mad. Neither is wrong. That's free enterprise. (And BTW, as a result, I like to compensate my folks at the high end. The difference is usually minimal, but the loyalty, hapiness, etc. is usually worth it).
Inherent in all this is I have to make myself of value to a company in the first place. And that's what this interviewee did by demonstrating that he is willing to learn and having a background and education he could leverage into a totally different industry than he originally intended (and having the foresight and initiative to do so).
And, if I ultimately think nobody thinks I'm worth what I do, I can go out on my own and make it. But, I better be prepared to pay the piper should that fail.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
i agree that there are jobs out there, but if salaries are stagnating and schooling prices rise then somethings going to break. take me for example finished a PhD (2-years of community college (where only 23% of students graduate with a 4-years degree) and no debt, 3-years of private college (where mommy's and daddy's make rich kids dreams come true) $15k b/c of major scholarship help, and work on the side, 6-years of graduate school at UMD (lived for 3 years in my uncle's basement until I couldn't do it anymore) $57k more debt. So I come out with a PhD and get offered $55k to teach at a Research IA institution with $72k in school loans, plus looking to buy a home with my wife who luckily had rich parents put her through 6 years of private school for a Master's Degree. Additionally, I've earned Base+Merit increases each of my first 3 years at this University because of my hard work and the school hasn't granted those increases once. In fact, they've asked me to take furloughs each year instead. Even though professors aren't seeing the money, tuition is increasing so people coming through this behind me are getting FUCKED, and are expected to keep taking starting salaries like I have with tons more debt?
since when was it mandated that IF you graduate college you are supposed to get a high paying job and should be able to immediately afford a nice house in a nice neighborhood. seems like you are aiming to be the same people you are supposedly protesting against.
and hey i understand being in debt sucks balls but living in your parents house/or uncle's basement in this country is still a lot better off than a hell of a lot of people in the world. let's not make it out to be 3rd world living that these graduates are living in.
i agree with everything you just said, but isn't the game then rigged so that someone with more capital (oftentimes born into the situation and given free handout education by their parents) has more chances to invest and fuck up. Case in point, my uncle grew up very poor in upstate NY, now he is a partner is a business making high end AV things in rich people's houses in DC. If his business fails his family is fucked (luckily he's doing well), whereas his partner (who grew up wealthy) has three or four businesses so if this one goes under, it sucks, but it's just one less christmas present under the tree. How is that a just and equal system?
i agree that there are jobs out there, but if salaries are stagnating and schooling prices rise then somethings going to break. take me for example finished a PhD (2-years of community college (where only 23% of students graduate with a 4-years degree) and no debt, 3-years of private college (where mommy's and daddy's make rich kids dreams come true) $15k b/c of major scholarship help, and work on the side, 6-years of graduate school at UMD (lived for 3 years in my uncle's basement until I couldn't do it anymore) $57k more debt. So I come out with a PhD and get offered $55k to teach at a Research IA institution with $72k in school loans, plus looking to buy a home with my wife who luckily had rich parents put her through 6 years of private school for a Master's Degree. Additionally, I've earned Base+Merit increases each of my first 3 years at this University because of my hard work and the school hasn't granted those increases once. In fact, they've asked me to take furloughs each year instead. Even though professors aren't seeing the money, tuition is increasing so people coming through this behind me are getting FUCKED, and are expected to keep taking starting salaries like I have with tons more debt?
So, on one hand tuition is too high, but on the other professors aren't paid enough. And this is Wall Street's fault because.....
I'm not getting the connection of Wall Street and the fact that Universities are holding higher endowments than they need and over funding athletics as vanity projects to their main donators. I guess you could say the latter is caused by Wall Street. But, that's not going to help either way. Wack those folks, and there's no shiny new Athletic Center AND there's no more money for education. So, you don't win either way.
And maybe that's a microcosm of what these folks think their protesting.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
i agree that there are jobs out there, but if salaries are stagnating and schooling prices rise then somethings going to break. take me for example finished a PhD (2-years of community college (where only 23% of students graduate with a 4-years degree) and no debt, 3-years of private college (where mommy's and daddy's make rich kids dreams come true) $15k b/c of major scholarship help, and work on the side, 6-years of graduate school at UMD (lived for 3 years in my uncle's basement until I couldn't do it anymore) $57k more debt. So I come out with a PhD and get offered $55k to teach at a Research IA institution with $72k in school loans, plus looking to buy a home with my wife who luckily had rich parents put her through 6 years of private school for a Master's Degree. Additionally, I've earned Base+Merit increases each of my first 3 years at this University because of my hard work and the school hasn't granted those increases once. In fact, they've asked me to take furloughs each year instead. Even though professors aren't seeing the money, tuition is increasing so people coming through this behind me are getting FUCKED, and are expected to keep taking starting salaries like I have with tons more debt?
since when was it mandated that IF you graduate college you are supposed to get a high paying job and should be able to immediately afford a nice house in a nice neighborhood. seems like you are aiming to be the same people you are supposedly protesting against.
and hey i understand being in debt sucks balls but living in your parents house/or uncle's basement in this country is still a lot better off than a hell of a lot of people in the world. let's not make it out to be 3rd world living that these graduates are living in.
that's not what my point was...it was basically saying how can you get mad about kids wanting higher pay out of college when their tuitions are increasing. I was also pointing out how super freaking lucky I was to ONLY have 72k in debt after getting a PhD...most people I know are crossing the 100k barrier after 4 years of college. There's no rule that says you get a high paying job by going to school, but jesus where is this money they are paying to school going, and why isn't it reflected in someone's pay somewhere?
Comments
Re. the statement in bold above- excellent point and I vouch for that thought. I look back on '68 as a missed opportunity. Many boomers my age don't bother to look back at all and far too many will give you a million reasons why they are too busy to get involved once again today. Your concern is quite valid but your opportunity is still very much alive.
(Gee sorry- that last sentence sounds like a fortune cookie
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I'm too far off in the sticks to know ... I witnessed a local Occupy Main Street event which consisted of a broke-down tractor which blocked traffic for 30 minutes.
thank goodness
Sanitation crews are cleaning the park before it reopens
protestors said they would be back
Who knows? I'm sure the supporters would say growing, and others would say not. The fact is, they are still there, and I give them credit if they make it through the next couple months.
But, I live close to the OWS, and it affects me and everyone else I come into contact 0, so it really doesn't exist. It's sort of like if a tree falls in the woods....
Keep hanging out in the park. They've already cost NYC over $3 million in police OT. So, they'll begin to anger a few more people when the realities of what they are ACTUALLY accomplishing starts directly affecting people. Though, I'm sure the families of those police officers will thank them when they have the happiest Christmas in a long time.
How about a source :roll:
I'm not saying that the allegations are true, just asking what effect it would have on the protest's impact, credibility, etc. if it is true. Most people will see the source and immediatley dismiss it but that's not really my problem. This could be true or it could be fabricated by people within NYCC who are upset for whatever reason or who are just misinformed about the facts and think they're doing the right thing. Who knows? The organization's website does mention fighting PCBs in NYC schools and does mention supporting Occupy Wall Street. Obviously, those 2 facts don't make the allegations true because they can be 2 unrelated causes being supported by the group legally and ethically. I just think that it's something worth looking into.
Anyway, I read the article and I'm not putting much credibility into it. The fact that former ACORN workers are involved in OWS is not surprising and the reporter is most likely blowing this WAY out of proportion.
This is the EXACT same shit that liberal media outlets did to paint the Tea Party as racist extremists. It's easy to find bad apples and focus on them.
Taking an optimist view of it, at least some jobs have been created out of this if it's true.
I have to say your view of this is a bit warped. They are not there to control the protestors. They are there for several reasons:
1) Protect the protestors
2) Make sure protestors don't get out of control
3) Control traffic
4) Do their normal jobs
Nowhere is it meant that they control the protestors. And, yes - those that actually pay taxes will feel the brunt of this and be more pissed that they have to pay taxes than some illusion folks have about beating rich people being the solution to going out and finding a job.
EDIT: If what you think is the point of the protests, then they're more stupid than I thought.
Ummm. No. If I need to explain, please let me know.
Well hopefully cooler heads prevail.
I went down to the Minneapolis one the other day and chatted a few people up... I heard a lot about "they"...they do a lot of stuff, I had no idea. They have even brainwashed me into thinking that Government isn't part of the solution....that was my favorite...I don't watch fox news but 3 of the 4 people accused me of regurgitating fox news talking points...I am really sick of the whole if you are against us you have been brainwashed bullshit. Other than that I fully support their attempt to get involved. I don't agree with the focus of their anger, but welcome more people getting involved...it will lead to them better educating themselves on all sorts of issues, and possibly even economics...which is a sorely under-represented field of education among our elected officials..
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Please explain how rich people are to blame for their joblessness?
Let me give you a counterpoint to the argument you are about to make.
We are looking to hire folks, but we get either unqualified folks or people with unreasonable expectations of salaries (and we pay better than most b/c we are a mid sized company that must compete with the big boys). Finally someone walks in with minimal background in our industry, but a great programming background (it's an analyst position that relies a lot on programming). He started out in the financial industry 15 years ago, and ended up getting laid off. He wandered around for a couple of years, but in the meantime went back and got certificates in a different industry (ours) because he saw it as a mostly recession proof industry (which he is right about). He came in aknowledging his lack of experience in our field.
He also came in with low expectations of salary to start. He was very smart. And I was especially impressed with his initiative. We ended up offering him more than he asked. That interview made me think even less of the OWS folks. There are jobs out there.
4.12pm: Veterans for Peace have released a statement on Scott Olsen, the former marine who suffered a fractured skull in Oakland yesterday.
Veteran For Peace member, Scott Olsen, a Marine Corps veteran twice deployed to Iraq, is in hospital now in stable but serious condition with a fractured skull, struck by a police projectile fired into a crowd in downtown Oakland, California in the early morning hours of today. Other people were injured in the assault and many were arrested after Oakland police in riot gear were ordered to evict people encamped in the ongoing "Occupy Oakland" movement. Olsen is also a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War.
The risk I took was calculated, but man, am I bad at math - The Mincing Mockingbird
dont even get me started on stadiums...f'n joke...
While I am all for ending government backed crony capitalism, I don't see an end to MNC's and the bottom line... So why not create a situation where they have little influence in the government...and since it was already decided that they "are people"(citizens united) why not take away power from their enabler (the government). Kind of like if I don't want you to drink, I can go to your house and take away your beer, but if I don't stop people from bringing it to you what was the point?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
Actually, yes and no. Of course, we hope the company benefits financially from his work. As the company does with me. And I know the numbers - I'd be a millionaire if I got to keep all the money I made for my company, and no I am not kidding. But, I didn't take the risk. I didn't put up the capital. I don't know if I'd make the same money if I set this all up myself. So, the owner of my company has every right to keep that return on his investment (which is more than just money). And, the same goes for the folks I hire.
But, then, I need to keep such a person happy. You can characterize that as I pay him as little as possible. I'll even go with that premise. But, you know what? If someone else comes along and says he's worth more, I lose him. So, I have to be smart even under that premise. Of course, in a recession, leverage returns more to the employer. But in "good times" leverage goes the other way and folks hop around like mad. Neither is wrong. That's free enterprise. (And BTW, as a result, I like to compensate my folks at the high end. The difference is usually minimal, but the loyalty, hapiness, etc. is usually worth it).
Inherent in all this is I have to make myself of value to a company in the first place. And that's what this interviewee did by demonstrating that he is willing to learn and having a background and education he could leverage into a totally different industry than he originally intended (and having the foresight and initiative to do so).
And, if I ultimately think nobody thinks I'm worth what I do, I can go out on my own and make it. But, I better be prepared to pay the piper should that fail.
since when was it mandated that IF you graduate college you are supposed to get a high paying job and should be able to immediately afford a nice house in a nice neighborhood. seems like you are aiming to be the same people you are supposedly protesting against.
and hey i understand being in debt sucks balls but living in your parents house/or uncle's basement in this country is still a lot better off than a hell of a lot of people in the world. let's not make it out to be 3rd world living that these graduates are living in.
So, on one hand tuition is too high, but on the other professors aren't paid enough. And this is Wall Street's fault because.....
I'm not getting the connection of Wall Street and the fact that Universities are holding higher endowments than they need and over funding athletics as vanity projects to their main donators. I guess you could say the latter is caused by Wall Street. But, that's not going to help either way. Wack those folks, and there's no shiny new Athletic Center AND there's no more money for education. So, you don't win either way.
And maybe that's a microcosm of what these folks think their protesting.