Why is there no thread on this yet -- OccupyWallSt.org The movement began in New York City, as I believe just a few college students; it has since grown to massive proportions, with thousands involved, and spanning several cities. One of their more popular slogans is "we are the 99th percent," referring to the fact that our current system is benefiting only the top 1%, while the rest of us--99% of the people--suffer. The mainstream media has given the movement a great deal of negative press, even by mostly Liberal newspapers like the New York Times. Any thoughts or opinions on it? I have a looooooooot but it is my bedtime so I will wait until I have more time. c:
The first "fatality" of Occupy Wall Street has occurred. I use that term loosely, though the article I read called it a "Loss of life." The pregnant 19 year old who was pepper sprayed and the victim of other police brutality suffered a miscarriage. Though I wouldn't call it a murder, accidental or not, since it was a fetus (inb4whenlifebeginsargument), I definitely think some repercussions should be made. link
honestly, i think this whole thing is a little stupid and my overall opinion of the movement and the people are negative. what makes them think that this so called 1% gives a sh** that they are camping outside? instead of occupying these areas and blocking traffic, they should be trying to come up with a REAL solution to these problems. camping outside is not going to solve any problems with the system. also, i've seen these people in my city and one thing no one can deny is that these people are filthy. there is garbage and feces everywhere and the whole thing just looks like a homeless shelter to me rather than a protest. from the protests i have seen from them, i think these people need a reality check, seriously. i saw a bunch of signs saying "A Job Is A Right" and i'm thinking "um, since when? last time i checked, a job was something that had to be earned". one more thing, has anyone seen their list of demands? it's ridiculous. i'm probably going to get flamed quite a bit for this last bit but is a job really that hard to find these days? i know office jobs are, believe me i've searched and still am, but i have never once been unable to find a single job. i'm not trying to stroke my ego, but i was always able to find something which could be dish washing, cashier, or if i'm really lucky a paid internship (which actually pays well), or my current job as a janitor. maybe i'm just lucky or privileged, i don't know, but it seems to me a job isn't that far out of reach. might not be the most glamorous job but minimum wage is enough for me to pay my bills and with careful budgeting enough to get something nice now and then. i am quite baffled as to why people sympathize with these "protesters". however, i am happy to hear any opinions on this so post away. who knows, maybe i have these people all wrong
I think you're missing the point. They're not camping to solve it. Is camping helping? probably not with actual influence, but it's definitely spreading awareness. Uh I think you just got the crap of the bunch (pun intended) lol. I haven't seen nor heard of people just taking a dump wherever. Though I guess it should be expected, when large groups of people get together outside for a prolonged period of time, a mess usually happens (sports games, concerts, etc.). Though I do find it disgusting that they're just feces everywhere. We can argue back and forth about whether or not a job is hard to find, but the unemployment rate speaks for itself. Granted, there are a lot of people who just want a job, but if you really think all of the protesters are lazy and don't want to put effort into finding a job, you're mistaken. I think one thing to keep in mind about the movement is why they're called the 99% and the 1%. If anything, I think that's the main point of the movement. 1% of the population has over 50% of the nation's wealth. 1% of the population has enough of the nation's wealth to influence the politics to not only keep that gap the way it is, but increase it. That 1% of the nation isn't exactly kindhearted enough to use their influence for the common good.
Well, I pretty much am in support of OWS. The fact that 1% of the US population has half of the wealth of the country is both frightening and ridiculous. Even though we can't all get the same share of wealth, the playing field should be more leveled. The amount of wealth that 1% has is able to, and still is, influencing politicians into keeping the ga (as Bueno said), and the other 99% are being more or less muted. Kind of agree with this. I'm not saying that the protesters are lazy, but in a way we all are. I mean, the mindset we've been raised (and are raising younger generations with) is that college + business jobs are the way to go. People can get jobs as plumbers or garbage men, but they don't want that because those manual labor jobs are no longer appealing or to be honest, socially acceptable jobs. I mean, how would a person think of you if you told them you were a plumber, as opposed to being like, a doctor? tl;dr: Protesters are not lazy but all of us kind of are in a way by societal design. Point is, I agree that the protestors are not being lazy
Watch this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-november-16-2011/occupy-wall-street-divided After seeing many interviews of the people OWS, I don't care for them anymore. Sure its a good thing they are trying to achieve (which they won't achieve regardless), but there are so many idiots there!
This. The graphs from this article might change your opinion, if you are against the protests. Particularly: Spoiler (Last graph is hard to see, dunno why they did it transparent D: ) Our system right now is becoming more and more one that benefits only those at the "top," while the rest of us are being crushed. And what do the well-off say to that? That we're lazy, there's something wrong with us, that they got themselves where they are today and we can do the same. Clearly we can't. While we're more productive as a workforce, very little to none of the rewards of that hard work are reaching us; instead, they're going to the CEOs. The distribution of wealth is so ridiculously imbalanced. There's just... a lot that's not right, and people are tired of just rolling over and accepting the... oppression. I know that's a really strong word to use but, if left uncontested, it will get to that point.
herpderp I forgot to mention in my post, so Also, they need a leader. If they want to succeed, they need a common, unified plan across the nation. The movements that have been successful were all headed by someone (or a specific group of people), Ghandi being probably the most prominent example (since he is a bamf). But yeah, I can respect Noroz's views on this, mainly because they aren't organized. However, if someone competent does organize them together, I believe they can succeed.
The problem is that the people who agree, who are competent don't participate, because of the obvious idiocy of many of the protesters. I have seen the list of what they want, and though a lot of it is ridiculous, they have good points. The wealth distribution, however, will never change. Even if it was more evenly divided, it would go back to the way things were. The only think I can openly say I agree with 100% is that the government/banks should not bail out companies.
Posted around the same time D: Well, I don't deny that a lot of people are joining into it just for the sake of joining in and being apart of the "counter culture," but I think what the protests stand for is what's really important.
Definitely, but as I mentioned in my previous post (ninja'd you again, haha) is that what they want to achieve in not possible. I'd say that if class was removed or evened out, it would not take more than 5-10 years until we were in the same spot with the same people being on top. Is it a good thing? No. Is it what happens? Yes. I mean, I strive to be part of the 1%, that's what I want to achieve. I want to obtain wealth (That's not all I want with my life, not at all) because I have to. Society today forces us to materialistic, and I'd rather have that than only idealism, because that won't work due to how people act. (Hate, violence etc)
yea, it is just an eyesore where i live. it's even rumored to have been infiltrated by drug dealers and prostitutes. is an unemployment rate of 9% really that much? it doesn't sound like much to me. but anyways, i feel like i am missing the point of the whole movement and i just don't get it at all. i get that 1% of people have over 50% of the wealth but why is that a problem? also, if these people supposedly have as much influence as people make it out to be, are there any examples of this influence actually being detrimental? are these supposed 1% even obliged to help the rest of us (who are these 1% for that matter)? i don't really get this whole movement because, i honestly am trying to figure out what the problem actually is but i'm not seeing it.
Compared to other industrialized countries, I'd say its a lot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate
I do agree that it is unrealistic and, frankly, foolish to think that we need to eliminate the top 1%. That's called communism and, as we've seen, just doesn't work. But right now there is just too big of a gap between the top 1% and the rest of us than is natural. I'm fine with having with an upper-class, a middle-class, and even a lower-class, but the share of the wealth right now just doesn't represent that--it represents the top 1% and everyone else. The distribution is off. And while the middle class plummets far down, much of the top 1% feel that they do not need to do anything about it. So unconfusing way of phrasing it: I agree with you, the goal should not be a classless society. That won't happen. But one where everyone has an opportunity to succeed to share the wealth, to a degree, is something worth striving for. Well, I'd recommend looking at the graphs in my previous post, some of this might help you get the gist of it all as well: Link to article (Granted, that's a user sent in article, so the claims about where the US could be may not be entirely true) For those interested in the social justice rating study, here's a link to the PDF. Highlights include pages 18, 20, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 35, and 39, but an overall summary is found on 48.
So you don't believe we have that today? Everyone has an opportunity to succeed, but there is more needed than opportunity. You must be lucky, you must be smart etc. You don't need to be born into wealth to succeed today, at least not from what I've seen.
Well, I think we're better off than some countries, certainly. We should be thankful for what we've got. But it's not perfect; it is possible to improve your lot but it's difficult, especially in this economic climate. If you are born into a lower-class family, you statistically do not do as well as others in school, for whatever reason that may be. A combination of poor grades and lack of a fund set aside by your parents means you likely won't be able to go to college. Thus, you're probably stuck working a low-skilled, low-paid job, which, with our unemployment rate, aren't easy to come by--let alone a job that pays much more than minimum wage.
I am aware of that, but I think that has nothing to do with the class, that has to do with the individual. I think that if you are lower class, you may have a tendency not to care, because "worst thing that can happen is that I'll work at Wal-Mart, like my dad/mom does. Is that a good thing? No. But that doesn't make it anyone's fault but the individual. Also, the US is the country where you can truly succeed. By that I mean the US is the only country where you can become a part of the 1%. Sure, Norwegians are rich compared to Americans, but that doesn't make them as rich as the richest Americans. Nor does it make us as poor as the poorest Americans. If you want a country where you want to be able to succeed immensely, you'll need to be able to fail immensely as well. It's harsh, but its the truth.
Thought I could drop off some relevant info: Apparently, Adbusters was responsible for the idea, if not for its implementation, and are now offering their full support. They may also have helped to organize the 4chan splinter group Anonymous, which has played a large role in various OWS movements. Both amusing tidbits since I knew about Adbusters before this became a big deal and it seems like something they'd have a hand in.
