Occupy Wall Street

[jpp8]

Makes sense when banks are effectively the ones in control of mortgages and loans with interest. That might be something that differentiates all those utility companies from banks; that they mostly profited from these foreclosures of subprime mortgages since those people were paying off interest and their mortgage. I don't think those car companies or utilities would make much of a profit from repoing a depreciated car or cutting off service permanently.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

Makes sense when banks are effectively the ones in control of mortgages and loans with interest. That might be something that differentiates all those utility companies from banks; that they mostly profited from these foreclosures of subprime mortgages since those people were paying off interest and their mortgage. I don't think those car companies or utilities would make much of a profit from repoing a depreciated car or cutting off service permanently.

Perhaps not a profit, but they are utility companies; not charitable organizations. There's no financial benefit for them in not cutting the cord if they can't get paid.

The utilities and car and such I don't see a huge problem with. Yes, it's sad. But those are the rules. The faulty mortgages I see as a legitimate problem because that played out almost like a prank.

 

[Mr. X]

And for once, the posting played out just like I intended it to.

The mortgages that these people signed up for were faulty due to lack of regulation. You know how this problem could have been prevented? More regulation.

Had the mortgages been legit, odds are this never would have happened in this large of scale. You'll still see a couple of foreclosures a day overall but those will most likely be the fault of bad money management on part of the customer instead of a bad business model on part of the bank.

The sad thing is that a lot of politicians are saying that less regulation will be better. Short term, yes. But how long do you think it will be before these same events play out again?

 

[lx_theo]

Not trying to justify the actions of the protestors, but what about the actions of banks that lead to the subprime mortgage crisis in the first place? I'm not entirely familiar with the legality of the whole situation (or the concept of subprime mortgages in the first place), but if the people shouldn't have bought housing they couldn't afford, then why did banks push so many people to get subprime mortgages (which apparently only benefit themselves) with the premise that their homes would increase in value? Educate me, please (mostly because I'm too unfamiliar with the WHOLE picture).

The banks pushed so much because the Reagan administration had the bright idea that every had to have their own little home for a nuclear family. They pushed the banks to start that trend.

Though I'm not familiar with how the other parts of it work.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

There's a sizable Occutard camp on my college campus. As an elected official, it was my duty to talk to them to see what their purpose and concerns are. Apparently, they are protesting the latest tuition increase. I asked if they'd be willing to repeal the California DREAM Act, which is a major factor in why the latest increase occurred. One of the occupation's leaders said "No".

It appears that these people really think that they can have their cake and eat it too. -__-

 

[jpp8]

Did you even ask them how they wanted to alleviate their tuition costs? Or did you just try to use them to advance your own political agenda akin to a certain mammal-like news network? Next thing you know, you'll be telling them to vote for Ron Paul so he can deregulate the market entirely because that's what's good for them.

"They're not just saying 'don't cut' – they're saying that the banks and the 1% are the culprits here, and we'll no longer let them off the hook while our schools, our jobs, and our communities suffer" (Eaton)

 

[TRIFORCE89]

There's a sizable Occutard camp on my college campus. As an elected official, it was my duty to talk to them to see what their purpose and concerns are. Apparently, they are protesting the latest tuition increase. I asked if they'd be willing to repeal the California DREAM Act, which is a major factor in why the latest increase occurred. One of the occupation's leaders said "No".

It appears that these people really think that they can have their cake and eat it too. -__-

I'd comment if I knew what the dream act entailed.

 

[jpp8]

DREAM - Development, Relief, and Education for Undocumented Minors. Allows undocumented immigrants who came to America under the age of 16, met GPA requirements, and attended school regularly to be qualified to apply for financial aid should they choose to move onto higher education.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

Local landscapers have volunteered to repair the park the #OccupyTO campers had control of. Costing the city nothing. Awesome. The #OccupyTO people also seem to have vanished off the face of the Earth. They didn't take up the city's invitation to come back and protest during operational hours.

 

[jpp8]

What good would it do them to protest without their tents? But I digress. According to their site, they still have general assembly meetings and mic checks, so I think that rather vanishing from the face of the earth, they vanished from the viewpoint of the media.

 

[TRIFORCE89]

What good would it do them to protest without their tents? But I digress. According to their site, they still have general assembly meetings and mic checks, so I think that rather vanishing from the face of the earth, they vanished from the viewpoint of the media.

It would do them a lot of good. O_o Protesting, marching, getting the word out, being seen by people and media. They can do all of that without tents. Get loud and have their voices heard. Not that they were doing it before anyway after the first week while they had tents, but still.

They have had some general assembly meetings though, yes. But mostly trying to decide where to camp next. They're considering Queen's Park (Ontario's legislative assembly) as that's provincial territory instead of municipal and that makes a whole lot more sense to me. But... still, the focus seems to be camping (they're taking the occupy part of this a little too seriously I think) instead of protesting and getting their message out.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

Local landscapers have volunteered to repair the park the #OccupyTO campers had control of. Costing the city nothing. Awesome. The #OccupyTO people also seem to have vanished off the face of the Earth. They didn't take up the city's invitation to come back and protest during operational hours.

It's basically giving illegal immigrants free college while our tuition keeps going up. They'll only further drain the public university system.

 

[jpp8]

yeah man.. darn those illegals getting a free ride.. because we should totally not allow students who have shown that they are able the ability to receive an affordable education.. disregard the free ride the middle class has given wall street.. deporting all the illegals will fix everything..

My earlier comment was in jest, TRIFORCE. Just commenting how hellbent the protestors are on keeping their tents. :V But yeah, I myself am starting to doubt the effectiveness of occupying and nothing but. I mean, they got the media's attention initially, but then it got stagnant.

 

[Mr. X]

We should care for our citizens first. If these people want to be a citizen, then they should apply for citizenship just like a normal law abiding person does.

We really need to add to the part about 'if your born here, your a citizen' some extra words. Know what those are? Only if your parents are legal citizens.

 

[jpp8]

True, but after reading accounts of Latino stories of discrimination from firsthand accounts, I can't help but sympathize with those seeking an education. (Also, it's not like DREAM doesn't help them attain citizenship either.)

But how I feel is beside the point. Is denying those who are willing to learn an affordable education really within the goals of Occupy LA? Sounds like the exact opposite of their cause to me.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

True, but after reading accounts of Latino stories of discrimination from firsthand accounts, I can't help but sympathize with those seeking an education. (Also, it's not like DREAM doesn't help them attain citizenship either.)

But how I feel is beside the point. Is denying those who are willing to learn an affordable education really within the goals of Occupy LA? Sounds like the exact opposite of their cause to me.

How about someone who is Latina?

I find is offensive that we are all blanketed as immigrants of that advancing the interests of illegal immigrants will somehow benefit those who are legal citizens of the United States that happen to be of Hispanic decent. I don't get free college.

 

[Mr. X]

(Slow typer I am, this is @ jpp8's post)
I'm not saying deny them education. If they want it then they can either pay for it themselves or get a private scholarship.

But still, forcing citizens to pay for a service that will be used mainly/only by illegal immigrants? No. The fact is that DREAM harms legal citizens who are students. Are you saying that we should hold our own people back to better someone who isn't a person of this country? If were going to give free education to someone, give it to a citizen not a illegal. Essentially, Tax money should be used to better citizens of our country. Not citizens of another.

Also, I'm not singling out Mexicans with the above statements. That goes for all illegal immigrants, not just the most common.

Lastly, you know something I find funny? The US took away Mexican lands a long time ago after a war. Guess what? The Mexicans are taking it back.

 

[jpp8]

Nope, just mostly illegal Latinos for the most part. Additionally, this occutard is I'm apologizing for my previous blanketing. I just wanted to avoid the usage "illegals", an even more marginalizing term than Latinos or Latinas.

I'll admit that this act does impose a burden upon other citizens, but should a high school graduate, who have spent most of their life in the U.S. illegally, not by their own choice be denied the ability to apply for some financial aid to help alleviate their costs (not free college)? Plus, if they're pursuing a higher education, it's more likely than not that they wish to become citizens and this program could help them on their way. Why should these people be striped of their personhood by not being able to have an affordable education while corporations are still considered persons (trying to get back to the topic of OWS here)?

 

[FreakyLocz14]

Nope, just mostly illegal Latinos for the most part. Additionally, this occutard is I'm apologizing for my previous blanketing. I just wanted to avoid the usage "illegals", an even more marginalizing term than Latinos or Latinas.

I'll admit that this act does impose a burden upon other citizens, but should a high school graduate, who have spent most of their life in the U.S. illegally, not by their own choice be denied the ability to apply for some financial aid to help alleviate their costs (not free college)? Plus, if they're pursuing a higher education, it's more likely than not that they wish to become citizens and this program could help them on their way. Why should these people be striped of their personhood by not being able to have an affordable education while corporations are still considered persons (trying to get back to the topic of OWS here)?

Have you seen the state that California's public universities are in? The CSU regents just enacted a 9% tuition increase in anticipation of the CA DREAM Act.

Illegal immigrants do have personhood. They have the same rights as everyone else. They have due process rights, freedom of speech rights, search and seizure rights, etc. Higher education is not a right.

I think these Occupiers, at least the ones here, are confused if they really believe we can decrease tuition while at the same time allow illegals a free ride.

 

[jpp8]

Can you cite a source that states it was explicitly because of the DREAM act? All the articles I've seen on their tuition hikes cite a budget gap as the main source of the hikes.

Nobody's giving those illegals a "free ride". Last I checked DREAM only gave them the ability to apply for financial aid, not get free tuition.

And don't be so arrogant as to think that you're the only person with political background or knowledge on your campus. Occupy is not a bunch of hippies socialists who want everything for free. Nor are they "confused and misguided liberals". This is a diverse group of people who are fed up with the system and can collectively come together to figure out their grievances. Clearly, repealing the DREAM act is not in their interests. Instead of wasting your time and energy here whining about how those meanies didn't like your idea, how about you go back down to that camp, talk to the leader who said "no", and tell him why he's wrong/have him tell you why it's not in their interest to repeal the DREAM act. Certainly, they can do it better than I.