Thread: Occupy Dreamviews

Nice juroara, nice to see that the cops around you actually know the law and protect it.

This is really sad.

Edit: It looks like tommo already posted it. Whatever, it needed a bump.

Take a look at the breakdown of the Occupy Wallstreet people
http://occupywallst.org/media/pdf/OW...nt-v2-HRCG.pdf

Originally Posted by louie54

This is really sad.

Edit: It looks like tommo already posted it. Whatever, it needed a bump.

What are those people being charged with?

Hehe, most of them are employed full-time, and earn less than $25,000 a year.
Kinda backs up their whole point hey? And destroys the media's BS while it's at it.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

What are those people being charged with?

We already said - "Being inside".

Originally Posted by tommo

We already said - "Being inside".

I think they are going to call it "trespassing", but as you can see, they forced that lady into the Citibank building. I mean what's that all about? Fight back with false imprisonment and kidnapping.

I believe part of the story is that some of these people took out a loan for college and are having trouble paying it back, which would normally lead me to believe that they're just being retards that don't want to take responsibility for their debt. But why are the being locked up inside the building? It's not right.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

What are those people being charged with?

I'm pretty sure they were charged with trespassing and disorderly conduct considering they went in there lecturing the employees instead of keeping their mouths shut and simply closing their accounts and going on about their business.

The woman outside the bank was in violation and charged with obstruction.

"lecturing" would fall under freedom of speech

the most they could do if they were "lecturing" was to be kicked out of the business place, as managers have that right. but to arrest? its still against constitutional rights

They were arrested because they refused to leave. I support the collective bank closing protests but you have to expect this.

I closed my account today. I just told the teller I was closing my account. When he asked why, I said because Wells Fargo practiced predatory lending and I didn't agree with the ethics of the bank. He said pretty much all banks do that and I said that's why I'm switching to a credit union, and by the way, that's no excuse. Then I took my money and left.

Originally Posted by juroara

"lecturing" would fall under freedom of speech

I agree, however the lecturing included being disruptive and disorderly and when requested to leave by management they became belligerent, thus breaking the law. It's unfortunate how it all went down but they were rightfully arrested under law.

My thing is this, if any bank is charging fee's that you do not want why keep banking there? Why did they wait until Occupy Wall Street to close their account? I attended a University and received student loans, I commuted to save money. After graduating I worked crap jobs until something in my field of expertise became available to pay the loans back. Most of these people are probably living well beyond their means. The logical steps would be to not take more than half your expected first years salary out in student loans. For some strange reason some people think that their take home income right after college is going to be 6 figures plus.

Originally Posted by louie54

I believe part of the story is that some of these people took out a loan for college and are having trouble paying it back, which would normally lead me to believe that they're just being retards that don't want to take responsibility for their debt. But why are the being locked up inside the building? It's not right.

Retards for getting pushed in to paying hundreds of thousands for basic education?
Education should be free in the first place. Which is one of the main things they're protesting.

Originally Posted by tommo

Education should be free in the first place. Which is one of the main things they're protesting.

You want free education? You'll get what you pay for.

I don't think very many people support free education, it's the unfair cost and interest rates that are being protested. A good education in the USA costs about $30,000. A good education in England is set at about 4000 pounds, and there is a government cap on how much they can charge. The schools aren't necessarily any better here, Oxford is considered one of the top schools in the world.

Corporate America Explained through Calvin and Hobbes panel.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I don't think very many people support free education, it's the unfair cost and interest rates that are being protested. A good education in the USA costs about $30,000. A good education in England is set at about 4000 pounds, and there is a government cap on how much they can charge. The schools aren't necessarily any better here, Oxford is considered one of the top schools in the world.

I support free education. To scare off the "no free lunchers" I'll call it 100% subsidized education. It think its integral to the ladder of success (and the competitive edge of the society) that absolutely anyone has access to a complete education. I think it's irresponsible to consider any other option.

Money does not equal quality.

Plenty of students will tell you that their courses at a community college ($500 a semester avg.) was the same quality as a university ($2000 - $5000 a semester right?). I've heard this in san antonio, and now I'm hearing it in arlington. Unfortunately several degrees just aren't offered at the community college, though it would save students thousands.

My thing is this, if any bank is charging fee's that you do not want why keep banking there? Why did they wait until Occupy Wall Street to close their account? I attended a University and received student loans, I commuted to save money. After graduating I worked crap jobs until something in my field of expertise became available to pay the loans back. Most of these people are probably living well beyond their means. The logical steps would be to not take more than half your expected first years salary out in student loans. For some strange reason some people think that their take home income right after college is going to be 6 figures plus.

1. Americans are asleep. Most are not aware of half the things we talk about here on this forum. Occupy wallstreet is waking people up, making them realize that what they once excepted as normal is completely unacceptable
2. Crap jobs are one of those unacceptable things. If you work full time, why should you be in poverty? Min. wage is a crime. Every job should provide a living wage.
3. You are lucky to get a job that you studied for. Part of the reason why students and graduates are outraged is because their field of expertise has been taken over seas, or is simply not hiring anymore. This happened to my moms best friend. She got her bachelor in computer science, thousands in debt, and the job went to india.
4. No one is angry because of the short term situation of their life. Why should it take more than a mortal life time to pay back student loans? My sister is forced to take private loans with up to 20% interest to continue her architecture degree. Why? Because she ran out of federal loans. She is estimated to be in at least 70k debt when she gets her bachelor. And that's the nicer number figure, it might even go up to 100k because her private loans are going to kick in while she is in school!! And that figure doesn't even account for her masters, which she needs to be a certified architect. With interest rates, its virtually impossible for her to ever pay off her student loans. She asked certified architects how do they do it.

They said they just pay the interest, and will never actually pay off their student loans!

We've accepted this as the status quo. Do you?

It seems to me a moral crime to have students indebted to banks for decades. The same strategy was used to create slaves in rome. Why should banks profit off education? Why should any student be in debt for education? The thousands of dollars isn't even going into the teachers pockets. No, teachers salaries are being cut. Others are just being fired. Even more, are not being hired.

How is it that education gets more expensive every year, but more and more professors are fired? It doesn't add up. Where is the money going? (NOT INTO EDUCATION THATS FOR SURE!)

Students and teachers are both being taken advantage off.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

I support free education. To scare off the "no free lunchers" I'll call it 100% subsidized education. It think its integral to the ladder of success (and the competitive edge of the society) that absolutely anyone has access to a complete education. I think it's irresponsible to consider any other option.

I have an idea!

Rather than banks charging interest and punishing human beings for wanting education and a better quality of life - banks should INVEST into the future careers of students. They pay for the education, and get a tiny percentage of the profit once the student actually lands a job. Student doesn't land a job - banks lose. This would create the incentive to keep jobs in america. Just an idea.

Originally Posted by Ne-yo

I agree, however the lecturing included being disruptive and disorderly and when requested to leave by management they became belligerent, thus breaking the law. It's unfortunate how it all went down but they were rightfully arrested under law.

No, they didn't refuse to leave, they were locked inside: The NYC Citibank Arrests, According To the OWS Videographer The woman in the video wasn't even inside, the cops dragged her inside.

And the students have no control over how much they take out, how can you suggest they don't take out more than half their expected salary in loans? The price of college is fixed. My friend got a masters degree to be a teacher, she currently makes about $35,000/yr. She has $50,000 in loans. That's how much a masters degree costs, and a masters is required by law to do her job. You can't haggle the cost of college, it's not a used car. She did commute to save money.

And aren't you a cop? Don't you make like $30,000 a year? Aren't you one round of layoffs away form being on the street with no pension? The last round of budget cuts in NYC let 3,500 honest, blue collar policemen go, while increasing the wage of Tony Bolonga and those who let him off the hook with just a loss of some vacation time.

I feel like I've stepped into the "History of Economic Thought" time machine and ended up in 1920s Europe.

Originally Posted by tommo

Education should be free in the first place. Which is one of the main things they're protesting.

I can't argue with you there.

Spoiler for off topic:

But I was just saying that in some situations, these people aren't always 100% innocent. I've seen this a couple of times on TV: on one of our local stations they run this program where this average middle-class person tells their story of how they've been fucked over recently by the city or some company and I remember this one lady was on that was being threatened with foreclosure or something (I can't really remember) because she wouldn't pay some bill. Her story just wasn't adding up and it seemed like she was trying to avoid taking responsibility for her own fuck up.

This is a different story though which is why I said "would normally lead me to believe" in my last post. I do stand by these people.

Originally Posted by louie54

I can't argue with you there.

Spoiler for off topic:

But I was just saying that in some situations, these people aren't always 100% innocent. I've seen this a couple of times on TV: on one of our local stations they run this program where this average middle-class person tells their story of how they've been fucked over recently by the city or some company and I remember this one lady was on that was being threatened with foreclosure or something (I can't really remember) because she wouldn't pay some bill. Her story just wasn't adding up and it seemed like she was trying to avoid taking responsibility for her own fuck up.

This is a different story though which is why I said "would normally lead me to believe" in my last post. I do stand by these people.

Firstly, I think people are equating an education with formalized schooling which is a misnomer. I think you learn more outside of school then in it especially when you witness the zombie students who show up to class but don't participate or include themselves in the discussion. They treat it like survival, they are just there to get a degree. I see a point in going to school for something like physics, biology, fields of the natural science that take formalized training for but I don't see a point for some of the softer sciences. I am a graduate student for history and I will be the first to admit that you don't need to go to college for a bachelor's in history. It is something you can learn by yourself. The only reason I am in the program is because I need to have formal credentials to be a PhD candidate which is something I just have to do. I think what we are really missing is the ability to apprentice. Apart from general education classes (which are useless) that is really what college is, you apprenticing. Businesses themselves can do that if you are in the commercial market. You don't need to go 30k into debt to do that either.

Juroara, concerning your sister that is just ridiculous. 70k for a bachelor's degree? What college is it? And why they hell is she taking loans out at a 20% rate? That is just stupidity.

Ninja, what state does your friend live in because to my knowledge, all you need to do in many of the states is have a bachelor's degree unless you are trying to be an adjunct professor at a community college? People who are in secondary education usually get master degree's because it PAYS more not because they necessarily need it.

Originally Posted by cmind

You want free education? You'll get what you pay for.

You know what I mean. Tax funded education. Tax funded schools.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

I don't think very many people support free education, it's the unfair cost and interest rates that are being protested. A good education in the USA costs about $30,000. A good education in England is set at about 4000 pounds, and there is a government cap on how much they can charge. The schools aren't necessarily any better here, Oxford is considered one of the top schools in the world.

First, I've seen heaps of people at the protests talking about education and the fact that the cost is too high because it's privatised, and it should be free.
Second, it depends on what kind of education you want to have. Some courses cost well over a hundred thousands dollars.
These are mostly the science courses, which are the most important ones of pretty much any course available (in terms of benefit to society). But also things like architecture (yep, wtf? right).

Originally Posted by ninja9578

No, they didn't refuse to leave, they were locked inside: The NYC Citibank Arrests, According To the OWS Videographer The woman in the video wasn't even inside, the cops dragged her inside.

It doesn't matter, what you fail to understand is that the crowd put the employees, customers and non-customers at a security risk. Remember this is not your ordinary everyday type business establishment. It's a freaking bank! The branch manager's number one responsibility from the time he/she opens the branch until the evening when the branch closes is the security of everyone within the bank. Anybody can walk into a branch and say they are customers. That’s why you have non-loitering laws, especially for bank branches. At some point the branch manager had a responsibility to end the nonsense and contact the authorities. He/She doesn't know these people personally and cannot downplay what anyone would be capable of. No matter how you try and twist it, you can't justify belligerence in an establishment like a bank. Now, I'm in no way saying that their intentions are wrong, what I am saying is that, the execution was wrong and they were arrested when arrest could have been completely avoided had they actually thought it out completely.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

And the students have no control over how much they take out, how can you suggest they don't take out more than half their expected salary in loans? The price of college is fixed.

The tuition for college is fixed but the loan isn't, was the point I was making.

Originally Posted by ninja9578

And aren't you a cop? Don't you make like $30,000 a year? Aren't you one round of layoffs away form being on the street with no pension?

I'm not in that branch of law enforcement.

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

Juroara, concerning your sister that is just ridiculous. 70k for a bachelor's degree? What college is it? And why they hell is she taking loans out at a 20% rate? That is just stupidity.

she was going to UTSA and at the time it was one of the most expensive colleges *architecture*. Its also one of the most stressful on students, second only to those studying to be doctors. Its not uncommon for students to be at the studio working until 6am. Not only were the classes expensive, but so were the books, and the models and projects. I know because I worked at the art supply store! The higher years would spend easily $300 on a single project. Because of the expensive projects, many students have to take out extra loans not to pay for their class, but to pay for supplies for the class. These are private loans.

The other problem my sister had was that she was an unconventional student. She didn't enter college right after highschool, she worked for several years at first. When she decided it was time to pursue her passion, the government decided her income was too high so she had to take out private loans again to finish off the year. Its really retarded because the government goes by your income LAST YEAR, rather than your current income. Her current income at the time, could not afford school. Thus - take out loans.

As for the interest, she didnt have a choice. That was all that was offered to her probably because they knew they could do that to architect students. Some of those loans have kicked in even though shes still going to school *which is why its so high*.

On top of that, the graduating rate for architect students at UTSA at the time was something only like...1/4. You had to compete to enter into your third year, and they only took a certain number of students. This meant several students never got in, and gave up after trying numerous times - leaving them with debt they couldn't pay off.

Frustrated with how UTSA handled its architect students she went to UTA instead because they accept anyone, first come first serve. But they did not accept all of her classes - which is bull - so she had to spend even more money to catch up - even though she didnt need to. Its a long complicated story and there is more to it. But really, the univeristy system has made it more challenging than necessary and has lots of hidden fees.

I call architect students racoons because their eyes are black!