Can someone please explain this to me?

[Maggie]

Very little but I not would describe your hypothetical as odd. But that is not the point, is it? Is it? You are better than than this Ixiah (at least based on what I have read over time).

I don't understand what your problem is - unless it is the same "problem" I have encountered recently in downtown Manhattan. In which case you are simply confused, for the time being.

Summary:

My initial post was a mild criticism of how badly our government seems to be running things. Essentially a "throw the bums out" which WuDrWu seems to share the same sentiment.

Next couple of posts was merely disputing a statement you made on demands made by the demonstrators. You have agreed with me that none exist at this time.

I have already stated I did not endorse anything they are protesting over.

Then you made the statement about the protest being odd. My point in my last post was people protest over everything so what is odd about this one??

I see no "confusion" on this side. Perhaps you did not see that I did not endorse the protesters in the earlier post.

I am not confused. Glad you are not either.

Look I understand. But your "dispute" is not a dispute - I wrote the link mentioned was not, in light of your post, a "list of demands". I read the site 48 hours prior to your post (which I also mentioned to you). Fair enough.

I don't care whether or not you endorse Saturn covered with truffle butter. Although that might be tasty. I was attempting to move you on - the protests are kind of odd, no?

[Maggie]

I suspect different people have different reasons for participating in this protest. But if you go to the link I posted on the last post of the previous page of this topic, you'll see what I guess must be the core reason(s).

What is that Royal? I will let them know. Seriously, they seem to be willing to talk.

Don't pretend you have any idea who these people are in NY. They are not open to your message, they are not open to any message - beyond what they have "learned".

They may verbalize certain things that you think is right - but they do so for different reasons. It doesn't jive with your world view - not at all, not one bit, not ever.

For the record, I don't know who these people are or what they are for, besides what they themselves are putting out there, which the link I posted uses. That's all. I don't claim to think they believe as I do or any such thing. In fact I suspect most of them think (if they think much at all) opposite of myself.

Some of them are not so "bad" Royal, on certain issues. They just come at it from a different perspective (it has been said "the East has made me soft")

And they are not willing to discuss anything.

[RoyalShock]

I don't think they are necessarily bad people, just that from the appearance their "movement" is putting out there, they are identifying the wrong entity with which to blame their grievances.

[Maggie]

I don't think they are necessarily bad people, just that from the appearance their "movement" is putting out there, they are identifying the wrong entity with which to blame their grievances.

I didn't say that.

Many are, some are not. Let me know what you want me to say to them. I will do my best, (as backup if you have any snarky responses -let me know too - I am running dry in that regard, and some here might recognize me).

P.S. sometimes these folks nail the right entity but for the wrong reasons. But hey, an arrow pierces.....why doesn't matter?

[Ixiah]

I was attempting to move you on - the protests are kind of odd, no?

When people feel an individual or group is "odd" there are characteristics that bring about such a stateement. Please elucidate.

At this time I see nothing unusual about protesters gathering at the symbolic source of financial power in the United States. People protest over everything.

[Maggie]

I was attempting to move you on - the protests are kind of odd, no?

When people feel an individual or group is "odd" there are characteristics that bring about such a stateement. Please elucidate.

At this time I see nothing unusual about protesters gathering at the symbolic source of financial power in the United States. People protest over everything.

I am not sure what word you would prefer.

What I find odd is a group of people who "protest" - but don't really know why. In the meantime, while they wander around with a thumb up their a$$, they destroy the people they claim to support.

This frankly upsets me, personally. Because I know these people. They are Arabs, Jews, Coptic Christians, ect. And they ask me why - I don't have an answer but the interlopers won't leave.

An action does have a cost, no?

[SFL]

They could spend their energy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbGthv-dJp4

[Ixiah]

I am not sure what word you would prefer.

What I find odd is a group of people who "protest" - but don't really know why. In the meantime, while they wander around with a thumb up their a$$, they destroy the people they claim to support.

This frankly upsets me, personally. Because I know these people. They are Arabs, Jews, Coptic Christians, ect. And they ask me why - I don't have an answer but the interlopers won't leave.

An action does have a cost, no?

Well the original goals per wikipedia:

In mid-2011, the Canadian-based group Adbusters Media Foundation, best known for its advertisement-free anti-consumerist magazine called Adbusters, proposed a peaceful occupation of Wall Street to protest corporate influence on democracy, address a growing disparity in wealth, and the absence of legal repercussions behind the recent global financial crisis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

[Maggie]

I am not sure what word you would prefer.

What I find odd is a group of people who "protest" - but don't really know why. In the meantime, while they wander around with a thumb up their a$$, they destroy the people they claim to support.

This frankly upsets me, personally. Because I know these people. They are Arabs, Jews, Coptic Christians, ect. And they ask me why - I don't have an answer but the interlopers won't leave.

An action does have a cost, no?

Well the original goals per wikipedia:

In mid-2011, the Canadian-based group Adbusters Media Foundation, best known for its advertisement-free anti-consumerist magazine called Adbusters, proposed a peaceful occupation of Wall Street to protest corporate influence on democracy, address a growing disparity in wealth, and the absence of legal repercussions behind the recent global financial crisis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

I had never heard of Adbusters until I read this column:

The Milquetoast Radicals

Take the Occupy Wall Street movement. This uprising was sparked by the magazine Adbusters, previously best known for the 2004 essay, “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?” — an investigative report that identified some of the most influential Jews in America and their nefarious grip on policy.

Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?

[SubGod22]

Occupy Wall Street vs. Jobs

The last week brought us a striking contrast that tells us much about the current debate over the direction of this country.

On one hand were the perpetually aggrieved protestors of Occupy Wall Street. While much of the media, desperate to find a liberal counterpart to the Tea Party (remember coverage of the state-house takeover in Wisconsin?), tried to pretend that this was an organic and leaderless uprising by middle America, the reality was that most of the demonstrators were the same motley crew that regularly shows up to demonstrate against the World Bank or G8 meetings, their ranks bolstered by union activists, MoveOn.org, and the Obama front group Organizing for America — not to mention the usual collection of filthy-rich movie stars who flew in on private jets and then climbed into waiting limousines to show up to denounce the filthy rich.

But while Roseanne Barr was suggesting that the rich should be beheaded and demonstrators were making such reasonable demands as the forgiveness of all debt, much of the rest of the world was mourning the death of Steve Jobs, the filthy-rich businessman who was responsible for all those iPhones and iPads that the iPod-sporting protestors used to organize their demonstrations.

[Maggie]

Meet the Occupants

The organizers of Occupy Wall Street hoped for a turnout of 90,000 when protests began on September 17. Only a few hundred activists showed up, but those who did have been a hardy bunch. They’re still camped in the open air in Zuccotti Park (near the WTC site)—and just got some big labor groups to promise to join their cause. We polled 100 protesters who are in it for the long haul.

Are you …
Male: 66%
Female: 30%
“Other”: 4%

How old are you?
Under 20: 10
20–29: 50
30-39: 15
40-49: 9
Over 50: 2

Pick one: Capitalism …
Isn’t fundamentally evil; it just needs to be regulated: 46
Can’t be saved; it’s inherently immoral: 37
Didn’t answer: 17

Pop quiz!
The proposal to prohibit banks from engaging in both client trading and proprietary trading is called …
Glass-Steagall Act: 40
Volcker Rule: 6
Buffett Rule: 11
Elizabeth Warren Bill: 11
Didn’t Answer: 32
The correct answer is “Volcker Rule.”

What do you think of Obama?
I believed in him, and he let me down: 40
He’s doing great: 1
I never believed in him: 27
He’s doing the best he can: 22

The country with the best government in the world is …
"Canada. It’s most like the U.S. but more the way I want.”
“Denmark.”
“I don’t accept the premises of this question.

Did you vote in the 2010 midterm elections?
Yes: 39
No: 55
No, but only because I wasn’t 18: 5

Explain how you would fix Wall Street.
“A maximum-wage law.”
“President Elizabeth Warren."
“Burn it down.”

Rank yourself on the following Scale of Liberalism:.
Not liberal at all: 6
Liberal but fairly mainstream (i.e., Barack Obama): 3
Strongly liberal (i.e., Paul Krugman): 12
Fed up with Democrats, believe country needs overhaul (i.e., Ralph Nader): 41
Convinced the U.S. government is no better than, say, Al Qaeda (i.e., Noam Chomsky): 34

Has the occupation been a success so far?
79: “Yes. We’re still here.”
13: “No. We’re still here.”

[RoyalShock]

A column regarding the "disaffected students" in the protests.

http://www.popecenter.org/commentaries/article.html?id=2590

[WuDrWu]

That's a brilliant and strikingly honest piece.

It should be required reading for junior and senior high students.


I've advocated for years that there is a serious lack of real world and practical teaching going on in our schools.

It's yet another perfect example of allowing the federal government to get involved in something that should be private and/or local.

It's way too easy to get student loans for worthless university classes.

[Maggie]

Solid article. Big topic - though. Big money.

It is not just what these kids are being taught; but maybe, just maybe, some should not be there to begin with (try telling that to a parent or high school student). But that is the way the system works, for now.

[ShockBand]

A good and quite accurate article. I as an educator fully believe that we push way too many kids down the college path, and we set up the system to be geared towards that to the detriment of many.

If I had my choice, high school would have the freshman and sophomore years be oriented as the end of our traditional core subject structure (math, science, social studies, English, plus some semester long things and some electives). Junior and senior years would be focused very specifically into what the student is wanting to get ready for after high school. For many, that would be college prep and the classes would be a lot like what they are now. But there are many who would be better served by getting a couple years of classes targeted towards a career. They would still be getting their "core" subjects, just embedded in career preparation. I know some don't like the idea of making kids choose at age 15, but honestly, one could go through a career path, and if he or she decided college was the desire at after high school, it is still possible. Maybe first by going to a juco before moving on, and such a student would hopefully be a bit more intrinsically motivated.