Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We are the 99 percent

CUNY Attacks Tuition Hike Protest

Posted 12 years ago on Nov. 21, 2011, 10:42 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

Occupy CUNY and allied protestors who gathered Monday at Baruch College to express opposition to CUNY tuition hikes, unfair labor practices, and privatization were met with an increasingly familiar response: violent suppression of their basic right to dissent. Protestors were barred from attending a so-called "public" meeting of the school's trustees and ordered to disperse. CUNY security and NYPD moved in with nightsticks drawn, turning a nonviolent protest into a chaotic melee.

Protestors later regrouped to occupy a New School building on Fifth Avenue near 14th Street, where banners were hung reading: "Zuccotti's Virus Will Spread" and "Ⓐnnihilate Capitalism; Retaliate and Destroy Police State."

As the Occupy Wall Street movement spreads to campuses, dramatic scenes of anti-student violence are becoming shockingly commonplace. The appalling pepper-spraying of peaceful UC Davis students which made headlines and spawned memes across the world is but one example of the brutal tactics now openly deployed against nonviolent protestors of the Occupy movement, both students and non-students alike.

But the Occupy Wall Street movement remains undaunted. In the words of one unnamed occupier: "The more they attack, the stronger we get. Fuck us, and we multiply."



Read the Rules
[-] 21 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

A bit of context about the history of tuition costs. This is relevant because a common argument is, "I paid for college, so can't these people do the same thing?" The answer is that the cost of college today is very different from the cost when I or most other older people went to school.


"2008: Tuition fees have increased 439% since 1982, while income has only gone up 147%."

In fact, I didn't even realize how much more expensive school had become until I went back for a master's degree this year and my jaw dropped when I saw the cost at $930 per credit, or roughly $2790 per course. This is at a private university, but I got my bachelors at a private university as well, so it's an apples-to-apples reaction.

[-] 21 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 12 years ago

I have no degree in anything, but I know robbery when I see it.

[-] 9 points by Thisisthetime (200) from Kahlotus, WA 12 years ago

Thumbs-up to Occupy CUNY, for standing up for what is right. Keep Learning, Keep Adapting. Fair-ness.

[-] 8 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

There is far too much emphasis placed on the degree, when in fact higher learning institutes have been reduced to industries that care little about education and a lot about making money....no wonder people are not learning much in school.

[-] 9 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 12 years ago

My meaning was it doesn't take someone with a fancy degree to know we all got ripped off by Wall Street.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

You have to have a Ph.D. to earn the right to rip people off while working on Wall Street. Indeed, college does not make people intelligent!

[-] 5 points by Maggiebo (12) 12 years ago

My post says basically the same thing. Education is misused by most colleges. They are just processing people for profit.

[-] 4 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

I totally agree. Most colleges exist to make money... period. That is evident from all the bullshit classes they make you take that don't even pertain to your degree. I wanted to take classes and maybe get a certificate or an associate degree in 3D animation and game art and design (already have a bachelor in graphic design and am a professional graphic designer) to further my career interests. I searched for a while to find a school that offers online classes and programs in those areas. I found several schools that do, but most of them require you to get a degree and take unrelated classes that I already took my first go-round. I refuse to spend more money taking classes I've already taken. I found just a few schools that offer programs where you can take single classes, get a certificate (which requires taking only related courses), or get a degree (associate/bachelor/master). One of them is a private art school in San Francisco and was my first choice, but it's so crazily expensive that I had to pass on it. I could buy a luxury car each semester for what it would cost in tuition each semester. I'm not open to taking out a loan and going into debt for this. I settled on getting a certificate from an online art and design school, because I can afford to pay for the classes out of my pocket and not go into debt.

There aren't many options out there for people wanting more than a certificate or an associate degree. If you want anything beyond that, then most likely you'll go into debt by getting a loan that you will have trouble paying for when you're done.

[-] 1 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 12 years ago

Agreed. The educators at the universities have gotten very greedy. No longer there to educate young minds. I went to Temple in the early 80's. $1200. a semester for three classes(4 credits each) for city residents.My parents and I paid for it out of pocket. When my youngest daughter attented Temple(out of state)from 2002-2007 it cost us $9200.00 for the first yr and climbing. Spellman was close to $20,000.What a pity, higher learning has become for profit only.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

It has become about profit for most institutions out there. It's flipping ridiculous.

[-] 3 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 12 years ago

I agree, I went to a Liberal Arts Quaker College in Richmond, Indiana called Earlham. While Earlham purports itself to be a Quaker school in principle and practice, they continue to ignore student pressure for divestment from unethical companies, and have made a pledge to raise total cost $4,000 a year for the next 5 years. The tuition increase $2000 a year while I attended.

They also lied to incoming students about all new "freshman only dorms." The school boasted it's multi-class living system in which all four years lived commonly during campaigns to entice new students. When they created "freshman dorms," they were so scared to tell all of the students who were already enrolled because they thought that many of the students might not come to the school and the school would lose money. The freshman dorms were created to help retention rates, which are remarkably low at the school because of its heavy-handed business practices.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

Quakers, huh? Is this a special sect of Quakers, perhaps the same ones that indoctrinated Dick Nixon?

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 12 years ago

I'm really not sure what the point of your post was. Clearly President Nixon did not follow the principles of Quakerism which include integrity. Quakers have a hard time indoctrinating people as they are so impressively passive in most cases.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

...and yet aggressively humorless, although that may only be you.

[-] 2 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 12 years ago

sorry to be aggressively humorless. Its hard on here to tell peoples tones: when they are joking around and when their just being rude. Most of the time I just get rude and tend to give rude back. Will work on it :)


[-] -2 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

Robbery? talk to the teachers union about it.

[-] 6 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Absolutely. They have no right to make a living! Damned teachers, all they do is try to give us a future. Fuck them, right? (Yes, that's sarcasm.)

OF course, the city and state, giving tax cuts to major corporations by the hundreds of millions of dollars while cutting funding back for the universities, combined with that teensy thing called THE RECESSION has nothing to do with it. Better to blame the union, the ever-convenient Boogie-Man of corporations and billionaires.

[-] 2 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 12 years ago

love the sarcasm! hehehhhh

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

of course they have a right to earn a living, but free medical for life after they retire, being paid for years of accumulated sick and vacation days at the current rate is the union game. if you have sick days uses them or loose them, same with vacation days.

[-] 3 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

I don't lose my vacation days. They accumulate year after year.... and I work in the private sector. A lot of companies do this. Quit lying.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 12 years ago

And was this a gift from your company OR from your union.

Either way you are coming out like a bandit. You have no vested intererst in an hour of vacation, yet that hour earned at say $15.00 an hour when you are first employed, could be worth say $100.00 an hour when you retire. Way to go - you would make any big banker proud.

[-] 1 points by djupp (1) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Status envy is easier for you when you're targeting teachers than when you think about the owners of corporations, banks and factories? There are two possiblities: you are a part of the 1% yourself, or you suffer from false consciousness.

[-] 0 points by ronjj (-241) 12 years ago

dujpp - Thanks for you running catch analysis of my situation.

My wife, myself, my son, my daughter-in-law, my daughter, my mother, all are or were teachers. My son-in-law and I are small businessmen.

So your point of judgement WAS::::::

PS: When do I get the bill for your superb analysis. Six references to me. I can only expect that this is going to cost a lot coming from someone with your insight into who I am envying, targeting, part of, and suffering from.

I will stick with the Bob Newhart analysis....."JUST TOP IT"

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

What do you do?

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

It is only due to the efforts of unionizing that teachers are able to make anywhere close to a living wage. Before teacher's unions were formed in the 1960s, teacher's salaries were below the poverty level.

Where do you get this drivel about unused vacation days? Vacation days are ALWAYS used and defined by the school year schedule. Everybody gets the same amount of vacation at the same time. There are no excess ones that teachers can accumulate. (You can't teach in a school that's closed for vacation and has no students.)

It's not true that all teachers have "free" health care: it depends on their contract in their municipality or state. But what if they did? They have worked, mostly 60-70 hours per week for as much as 30 years to get it, at a pay scale that pales in comparison to that of professionals in the private sector. They willingly sacrificed getting rich for the sake of that health insurance. (Actually for the sake of educating ungrateful brats you tell them they don't deserve anything). Should they sacrifice BOTH high pay AND health care? Would you?

The problem isn't that teachers have health care and pensions, but that the rest of us do not. A secure retirement after a lifetime of hard work, without fear of poverty, should be a right. Health care should be a right, not a privilege reserved for those who can afford it.

But let me state the obvious before we get into too much minutia: Teachers, teacher's unions, unions of ANY sort did NOT create the financial meltdown, the loss of democracy, the income inequity,the outsourcing of jobs for profit, the wars, the unemployment, etc. that we are going through today. Bringing them up as the source of our ills is at best uninformed. Rather, it is deliberately MISinformed by the right wing. The suggestion is obscene.

Now you may wonder why the right wing has spread disinformation and distortion about unions, getting ordinary people to attack those very organizations that work to protect their interests. The answer is simple; The right wing is those politicians who are COMPLETELY beholding to big Business, big money. Corporations HATE unions, because unions limit their power over workers to force them to work in unsafe conditions or for slave wages. That impacts PROFITS. And CEOs will do anything and everything they can to maximize profits. That's why they spend literally billions of dollars a year for lobbyists in Washington (not to mention on the state and city levels). Being bought and sold, legislators, governors, senators and presidents alike do whatever they can to limit the power of unions, of groups of people who come together to negotiate their work contracts. And make no mistake about it, newspapers, radio and TV stations are owned by those same corporations, and consistently report on unions in ways slanted to get them to look like the root of all evil. Judging from your posts, you swallowed the propaganda hook, line and sinker.

[-] -2 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

vacation and sick days always used? NOT in NJ. Their salaries are supplied by the taxpayers. If they willingly sacrificed why are they always complaining about not getting more and more of tax payer dollars?

[-] 4 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

How can you not use a vacation if THE SCHOOL IS CLOSED?

What's wrong with teachers wanting to be paid more? Their salaries have GONE DOWN BY 30% compared to everyone in the private sector over the last 20 years!

Those taxpayer dollars educate your community. The alternative is crime. Is that what you want?


Why the fuck aren't you complaining as loudly about corporations getting hundred of millions of dollars in tax breaks, forcing you to make up the shortfall? Do the Giants and Jets deserve hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize them, while those preparing the minds of the future (driving the economic engine) get less and less? (And are you aware that New Jersey spends less per capita income on education than any but the ten deep south states, despite having the HIGHEST per capita income in the entire country?)

TEACHERS DID NOT CAUSE THE RECESSION. STOP DEMONIZING THEM. The very, very little you know, however meager, you owe to them. Be a little grateful..

And one last time, since you clearly haven;t gotten it up to now: TEACHERS DID NOT CAUSE THE RECESSION!

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

how about accumulated personal days? Years of them. No forces anyone to be a teacher. NJ also has the highest taxes.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Holy Jesus Christ motherfucking shit. How thick are you????


Teachers did not crash the economy.

Teachers did not start two wars and kill and wound hundreds of thousands of people.

Teachers did not buy Congress.

Teachers did not illegally foreclose on people's homes.

Teachers did not sell toxic paper to investors.

Teachers DID NOT get bailed out.

Teachers did not give billions of dollars in tax breaks to the already wealthy while fucking everyone else.

Teachers did not invent credit default swaps, or engage is trillions of dollars of high risk derivative trading that wiped out state budgets, pensions funds and 401K plans.

Teachers have not conspired to make sure your income remained flat for the last few decades..

Teachers aren't even allowed by law to strike. They chose to be teachers to help kids, even if it meant getting less pay (by far) than other people with Masters Degrees. Instead of being grateful to them for their sacrifice, all you do is bitch and whine. It sounds like you would prefer them to be even more underpaid than they already are, Great: make sure that only those who CAN'T get work any other way, make sure only imbeciles and slaves fill the ranks of teachers, and gets entrusted to teach the children of the entire state. See where that leads. Or you could actually actually support a professional teaching staff to do it, at professional pay and professional level benefits. That;s YOUR choice. As to other choices, nobody is forcing you to live in New Jersey. Perhaps Somalia would be more to your liking.

New Jersey does NOT have the highest property or state taxes. Because its residents earn more per capita than residents in every other state, (it is the richest state in the country) they pay more FEDERAL INCOME taxes. They pay LESS on education than any state outside of the ten deep south states as a percentage of income.


You have swallowed the Christie propaganda, Apparently you don't like the taste, since all you do is vomit it up here. It's one thing to be uninformed - that's understandable - it's another to insist on your ignorance as truth. Willful ignorance is the definition of arrogance, that place where nothing can grow. It is stupidity.

Get a life.

[-] -2 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

time to wipe the spittle off your mouth. You must be a teacher or married to one.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

You must be a spoiled , ungrateful brat.

And you certainly are an idiot.

But that's another choice you have: you can keep spouting lies and distortions, and swallow them like a big fat dick, or you can actually open your eyes. Your choice, if you have the brain capacity to do it. (Which I seriously doubt at this point.)

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

Have you ever considered writing poetry ? Better yet, go into partnership with Joe Eszterhas.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Have you ever considered trying to understand anything? Or is belching right wing tropes in an effort to ignore the issues enough?

You have responded to absolutely NONE of the factual statements made to you repeatedly. Instead, you just keep repeating your unfounded slanders and disinformation.

After a while people simply lose patience.

But that's what you want isn't it? It is the goal of the troll: getting negative attention. Congratulations.

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

"Goal of the troll" See, you CAN write ( simplistic) poetry.

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

Yes, NJ has very high property taxes.

It also has the some of the BEST public schools in the nation and the highest SAT scores among public school systems.

Something we prided ourselves on when I was growing up in northern Bergen County.

Leave it to the Republicans, though, and the pissed off Fox-watching senior citizens who no longer need the public schools to fuck that up though.

Mark my words, our wonderful school system will be screwed soon if we keep electing people like Chris Christie.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

Abbot school districts,........wasted money

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

My sister worked in one for years - Newark.

Very complex problems there and I'll agree, money has not solved them.

Let's see what happens now with the Zuckerberg-Christie-Booker alliance.

Union City is a better example of an Abbott District that has done pretty well with the funding allotted to them. I was a taxpayer there for awhile.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

You're a fucking idiot. Just shut up. You and the other trolls on here just prove over and over what great big asses you are.

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

So, in answer to my question about what you do,...............you're a diplomat.

[-] 1 points by HarryCrew07 (433) 12 years ago

Unions may not be perfect, but public education will soon be a thing of the past if bargaining rights continue to be lost. New protocols turn even more people away from teaching.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 12 years ago

Awwww. Poor fellow.

You must have a really lousy job.

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

ME? I have a great life. Sorry to disappoint you.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 12 years ago

How nice for you.

Then quit yer bitchin'.

Not everyone does.

[-] 19 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

CUNY was free until the 1970s, imagine that.

Jonas Salk, who developed the polio vaccine, attended tuition-free CUNY and then medical school and gifted the world with his discovery, saying patenting the vaccine "would be like patenting the sun".

[-] 2 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

More distinguished graduates of the tuition-free CCNY:

Science and Technology

Solomon Asch – psychologist, known for the Asch conformity experiments

Julius Blank – engineer, member of the Traitorous Eight that founded Silicon Valley

Adin Falkoff – engineer, computer scientist, co-inventor of the APL language interactive system

George Washington Goethals 1887 – civil engineer, best known for his supervision of construction and the opening of the Panama Canal

Dan Goldin 1962 – served as the 9th and longest-tenured administrator of NASA.

Robert E. Kahn 1960 – Internet pioneer, co-inventor of the TCP/IP protocol, co-recipient of the Turing Award in 2004

Gary A. Klein 1964 – research psychologist, known for pioneering the field of naturalistic decision making

Leonard Kleinrock 1957 – Internet pioneer

Solomon Kullback – Mathematician; NSA cryptology pioneer

Lewis Mumford – historian of technology

Charles Lane Poor – noted astronomer

Howard Rosenblum 1950 BSEE – NSA Engineer; developer of the STU (Secure Telephone Unit)

Mario Runco, Jr. 1974 – astronaut.

Jonas Salk 1934 – inventor of the Salk vaccine (see polio vaccine)

Philip H. Sechzer 1934 – anesthesiologist, pioneer in pain management; inventor of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA)

Abraham Sinkov – Mathematician; NSA (National Security Agency) cryptology pioneer

David B. Steinman 1906 – engineer; bridge designer (Class 1906)

Leonard Susskind 1962 – physicist, string theory


Red Holzman 1942 – legendary basketball coach for the New York Knicks.


Andrew Grove 1960 – 4th employee of Intel, and eventually its president, CEO, and chairman, and TIME magazine's Man of the Year in 1997, who donated $26,000,000 to CCNY's Grove School of Engineering in 2006.

Melvin Simon 1949 – real estate developer, co-founder of Simon Property Group.

Is this enough ROI for ya now? Society got more than what it paid for.

[-] 2 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

More distinguished graduates of the tuition-free CCNY:

Nobel laureates

Julius Axelrod 1933–1970 Nobel laureate in Medicine

Kenneth Arrow 1940–1972 Nobel laureate in Economics

Herbert Hauptman 1937–1985 Nobel laureate in Chemistry

Robert Hofstadter 1935–1961 Nobel laureate in Physics

Jerome Karle 1937–1985 Nobel laureate in Chemistry

Arthur Kornberg 1937–1959 Nobel laureate in Medicine

Leon M. Lederman 1943–1988 Nobel laureate in Physics

Arno Penzias 1954–1978 Nobel laureate in Physics

Rhodes Scholars

James T. Molloy 1939

Politics, government, and sociology

Herman Badillo 1951, former Congressman and Chairman of CUNY's Board of Trustees, an architect of the University's academic rebirth

Daniel Bell – sociologist, professor at Harvard University

Bernard M. Baruch 1889 – Wall Street financier and adviser to American Presidents for 40 years, from Woodrow Wilson to John F. Kennedy

Abraham D. Beame 1928 – mayor of New York City, 1974 to 1977

Stephen Bronner – political theorist, Marxist, professor at Rutgers University

Henry Cohen 1943 – Director, Föhrenwald DP Camp; Founding Dean the Milano School for Management and Urban Policy at the The New School

Felix Frankfurter 1902 – justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, January 30, 1939 – August 28, 1962

George Friedman – founder of Stratfor, author, professor of Political Science, security and defense analyst

Nathan Glazer – sociologist and professor at Harvard University

Henry Kissinger – Nobel Peace Prize and Secretary of State, National Security Advisor (did not graduate)

Ed Koch 1945 – mayor of New York City, 1978 to 1989

Irving Kristol 1940 – neoconservative pundit

Abraham Foxman – National Director of the Anti-Defamation League

Robert T. Johnson 1972 – Bronx District Attorney

Melvin J. Lasky 1938 – anti-communist, editor of Encounter 1958 to 1991

Guillermo Linares 1975 – the first Dominican-American New York City Council Member

Colin L. Powell – United States Secretary of State (2001–2005; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1989–1993) and U.S. Army General; National Security Advisor (1987–1989)

Sal Restivo 1965 – Pioneer ethnographer of science, one of the founders of the sociology of mathematics, founding member and former president of the Society for Social Studies of Science.

Robert F. Wagner Sr. – United States Senator from New York, 1927 to 1949

Michele Wallace 1975 – a major figure in African-American studies, feminist studies and cultural studies

Stephen Samuel Wise 1891– Reform rabbi, early Zionist and social justice activist.

The Arts

Paddy Chayevsky – famed playwright and screenwriter, wrote Marty, Hospital and Altered States

Ira Gershwin 1918 – American lyricist, collaborator with, and brother of George Gershwin

Marv Goldberg 1964 – Music historian in the field of rhythm & blues

Sterling Morrison 1970 – Musician, co-founder of "The Velvet Underground"

E.Y. "Yip" Harburg 1918 – American lyricist (The Wizard of Oz, Finian's Rainbow, others)

Judd Hirsch 1960 – American actor

David Margulies – actor

Zero Mostel 1935 – actor

Faith Ringgold 1959 – artist and children's book author and illustrator

Edward G. Robinson 1914 – actor

Frank J. Sciame 1974– architect

Richard Schiff 1983 – Emmy award winning actor and a star of The West Wing (his character, Toby Ziegler, also attended CCNY)

Alfred Stieglitz 1884– photographer

Eli Wallach 1938 (MA) – actor

Ernest Lehman 1937 (BS) – Screenwriter ("North by Northwest", "The Sound of Music", "Sweet Smell of Success", "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?")

Literature and journalism

Alan Abelson 1942 – columnist, former editor, Barron's

Oscar Hijuelos 1975 – won the 1990 Pulitzer Prize for his novel The Mambo Kings Play Songs of Love

A.M. Rosenthal 1949, former Executive Editor of The New York Times.

Mario Puzo – bestselling novelist, screenwriter The Godfather

Montrose Jonas Moses (1878–1934) author

Upton Sinclair 1897 (BA) – Author ( The Jungle (1906) )

Dan Daniel 1910 – Dean of American Sportswriters

Gary Weiss 1975 – Investigative Journalist, Author ( Born to Steal (2003), Wall Street Versus America (2006) )

Jack Kroll 1937 – culture editor, Newsweek

Stephen Shepard 1961 – editor in chief, Business Week

Bernard Malamud 1936 (BA) – Author (won the 1967 Pulitzer Prize and a National Book Award for his novel The Fixer, and another National Book Award for The Magic Barrel, also wrote The Natural (1952) )

A.H. Raskin, former labor editor, The New York Times.

Anatole Shub, editor and journalist specializing in Eastern European matters.

Robert Sobel 1951 (BSS), 1952 (MA), best-selling author of business histories.



[+] -7 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

FREE? FREE!???? What are you talking about? it was never free. People were working hard everyday and sacrificing to pay for it. It is exactly this kind do selfish "make others work to pay for what I want" attitude that is At the heart of the GREED OWS claims to be against. Free? unbelievable...

[-] 7 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

The phrase "tuition-free" was specifically used here. This means that the cost to the student in the form of tuition was zero. We all appreciate the hard work of university professors, staff, taxpayers, and the public that make all this possible.

I believe powertoothepeople was using the example of Dr. Jonas Salk as a person who would use the gift from society in the form of his education for the benefit of the very society that educated him. The implication is that, had Dr. Salk had to focus on working in a factory or waiting tables instead of his studies, his development and research may not have been as successful, leading to a net loss to society.

[-] 3 points by Jezicka (8) 12 years ago

Not true. The California system was tuition free when my parents attended in the 40's and 50's. My mother got a BA and my father went all the way through to Ph.d. level without paying a penny. Later, in the 60's, my mother got her Ph.D. at another state school. The system was cheap enough that my father paid for her tuition, as well as my brother's and sister's - all at the same time out of his modest salary. Money was tight, but we had a roof over our heads and didn't starve. When I went to a private university later I paid for it with Pell Grants and a loan of a few thousand dollars. The older generation always, always, ALWAYS has an obligation to educate the younger. It's part of the social compact which has been a part of this country from the start.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

But it was not free. Someone else worked and paid for it. not a difficult concept.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

And those who got that education for free in turn paid for someone else to get an education for free. It's a cycle, dipshit.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

SwissMiss! IT DIDN'T WORK... I called the Chevy dealer and told them I want a car "for free" and that I would "in turn" pay for someone else to get one "for free". I explained the whole "cycle" concept but he called me a dipshit, also. Please explain further, I must have missed a step in the cycle.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Oh, I forgot about the dipshit cycle. That explains everything.

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

And society got the polio vaccine fo' free.

Heard of any cases of polio recently, Bradd?

[-] 2 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

Greedy Jonas Salk!

[-] 2 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

Why is OWS supporting the polio vaccine!? Selfish I tell ya.

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

lol I know!

Things I learned from right wingers who post on this site:

"Sam Walton of Walmart is a great man" but getting the polio vaccine and eradicating a deadly, crippling disease is not a good ROI for free university tuition.

Gee whiz!

[-] 1 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

This is what I'm talking about. Read and learn something beyond your own narrow world view:

"The City College of New York was originally founded as the Free Academy of the City of New York in 1847 by wealthy businessman and president of the Board of Education Townsend Harris.

A combination prep school and college, it would provide children of immigrants and the poor access to free higher education based on academic merit alone.

The Free Academy was the first of what would become a system of municipally-supported colleges. Hunter College, the second, was founded as a women's institution in 1870. Brooklyn College, the third, was established as a coeducational institution in 1930.

In 1847, New York State Governor John Young had given permission to the Board of Education to found the Free Academy, which was ratified in a statewide referendum. Founder Townsend Harris proclaimed,

"Open the doors to all… Let the children of the rich and the poor take their seats together and know of no distinction save that of industry, good conduct and intellect."

Dr. Horace Webster, a West Point graduate, was the first president of the Free Academy. On the occasion of The Free Academy's formal opening, January 21, 1849, Webster said:

The experiment is to be tried, whether the children of the people, the children of the whole people, can be educated; and whether an institution of the highest grade, can be successfully controlled by the popular will, not by the privileged few.

[-] 2 points by powertoothepeople (280) 12 years ago

The City College of New York was originally founded as the Free Academy of the City of New York in 1847 by wealthy businessman and president of the Board of Education Townsend Harris.

A combination prep school and college, it would provide children of immigrants and the poor access to free higher education based on academic merit alone.

The Free Academy was the first of what would become a system of municipally-supported colleges. Hunter College, the second, was founded as a women's institution in 1870. Brooklyn College, the third, was established as a coeducational institution in 1930.

In 1847, New York State Governor John Young had given permission to the Board of Education to found the Free Academy, which was ratified in a statewide referendum. Founder Townsend Harris proclaimed,

"Open the doors to all… Let the children of the rich and the poor take their seats together and know of no distinction save that of industry, good conduct and intellect."

Dr. Horace Webster, a West Point graduate, was the first president of the Free Academy. On the occasion of The Free Academy's formal opening, January 21, 1849, Webster said:

The experiment is to be tried, whether the children of the people, the children of the whole people, can be educated; and whether an institution of the highest grade, can be successfully controlled by the popular will, not by the privileged few.

[-] 1 points by jimmycrackerson (940) from Blackfoot, ID 12 years ago

I quit wasting my time and money at school five years ago and just started buying and collecting textbooks from 2nd hand stores ($1 - $3 per book) They may be 'outdated,' but you're still getting the same basic information. As an example, I scored an entire World Book encyclopedia set for $20.The Knowledge gained is like a 'snowball effect.' The more and more books I bought and browsed through, the more books I wanted. I'm not trying to toot my own horn. Because I have not read every single page of the thousands of books I have, but they are very helpful for reference. I'm just saying I've probably spent no more than $500 for all of my books and a good Education, as opposed to $40,000++ that many of us have wasted going to some greedy institution, many of which try to opinionize or institutionalize their pupils from the get-go. That's why I believe in freedom of information...ALL INFORMATION. I refuse to pay anyone anything for something I can just as easily do for myself. But don't take my word for it...Think for yourself and question authority...


[-] -2 points by superman22x (188) 12 years ago

Partly it's the students who don't do their own research and blindly follow what a college says, "Oh yes, you'll be able to pay off your debt, easy, once you get your high paying liberal arts job." And the students follow, the college just keeps raising the prices. It's not stealing. It's supply and demand. If people will pay it, the college will charge it. People need to wake up and smell the coffee. A "business" degree is nothing. A "liberal arts" degree is nothing. Sure, there are a few jobs. They aren't real high paying, and they aren't for everyone.
Want to know where there are plenty of jobs? North Dakota. You can make $80k a year there or more. With no education. You just need to work your ass off. But no one wants to do that. North Dakota, and the new oil line from Canada to Texas. The new potential oil refinery in North Dakota will employ tons of people.
Spring Hill, TN, new GM plant. 700 jobs. Hard working jobs.
You want a good job, prepare to work hard. There is no free lunch unless you were born into wealth (at some point that wealth was worked for).

[-] 5 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Do you feel that a change in the major people select in college or a change in willingness to work was responsible for 5% of the work force becoming unemployed in 2008? If so, why do you think there was such a dramatic change in such a short time period?

[-] 4 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

There are no jobs. You cannot become employed without a job no matter what your major.

[-] 1 points by superman22x (188) 12 years ago

I think a lot of people started graduating in degrees with little use. They found the cold reality, that if your degree isn't worth a lot, you have to start from the bottom.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Wall Street hires more Liberal Arts majors than any other ones.

Getting an education doesn't mean specifically job training: It's bigger than that. Seeing universities only in terms of training diminishes it to an industrial model wherein educational institutions become nothing more than conveyor belts churning out workers for industry, like cogs in a machine. It is 19th century model.

Education is supposed to be about learning how to think, not leaning what to think. In that way, as the world changes, as industries change, the learner is able to adapt to new circumstances. Simply training for a job doesn't do that.

[-] 4 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 12 years ago

You can learn how to think without a degree. Plenty of people have done it. My grandfather was a postal worker for 39yrs. He had an 8th grade education. He was a great thinker. A community organizer. He had no degree. However he thought enough to make sure his daughter and grandchilren got a college education. That man was a progressive thinker everyday...just like so many others who didn't go to college and made this country great.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

I agree: Wisdom and intelligence can be had with or without college. Among he smartest, wisest people I have ever had the privilege of meeting was a Guru from India who couldn't read or write. And my adopted father ran rings around all of my professors with his breadth of knowledge (real knowledge, not only information), yet he never graduated.

What I was responding to is the (seemingly) prevailing attitude that college is only about getting a job afterward. It was never supposed to be about that. It was supposed to be about learning. That it helped more people move from blue collar to white collar was a good thing generally, that it created opportunities for upward socioeconomic mobility from one generation to the next was, and is, a huge plus. But it's main goal was education itself, not gaining a middle management position in Goldman/Sachs.

[-] 1 points by IamMamaCas (21) from Norman, OK 12 years ago

I think we should do away with needing degrees totally, barring medical professions. Not get rid of degrees, but any need to really have them. Like HAVE to have them to get hired. Look at teachers. If you have a PhD, you get paid more - even if it has nothing to do with what you teach. Bachelor's teachers just as good (or better) as PhD teachers get paid less. Who cares if you have a Master's in engineering if a guy who's never been to college can do the same job?

It's supposed to be an assurance you know the job you're hired to do. But with standards so very low from the ground up, it isn't anymore. A man became my mom's boss at work because of his PhD. He literally, I kid you not, couldn't alphabetize. Besides - half the time the job isn't even what the degree is for. Now, my mom is a dean at the 'weather and earth' college. Her degree is in costume design, and obviously in no way prepared her for her job. I have a friend who works at a pizza place and has a degree in social anthropology.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

That, I'm afraid, is a naive and terrible idea. Although it is silly to hire someone exclusively because they have an advanced degree, and even sillier doing so in a field different from what that degree was in, the degree itself does mean something. It means significantly further scholarship in a given area. The amount of work need to get the degree, and - just as importantly - precision of work, increases exponentially with each stage, and, although guaranteeing nothing, increases the odds substantially that the person with the advanced degree under their belt simply knows a heck of a lot more than the one who doesn't. From experience alone, I can't attest to truth of that, at least generally. Simply put, I would feel MUCH safer knowing the person who designed the bridge I have to go over every day had something more than a Bachelor's degree to his or her name.

I would, however, agree that standards are too low at many colleges and grad schools. But that's a separate issue. And in terms of that problem the solution is to address the standards, not eliminate the degree or the requirement to have it for a variety of professions.

Besides, how would anyone go about eliminating those degrees or the need for them? It would be impossible and counterproductive. I think it would make more sense to make such degrees easier to obtain financially. That way, the wealthy wouldn't have a built-in advantage over everyone else in getting them. (They have other, more significant inherent advantages in education, but that's a much, much bigger subject.)

[-] 1 points by IamMamaCas (21) from Norman, OK 12 years ago

I really don't think it's a terrible idea, or naive, and it most assuredly needs to be examined. I know from experience it takes about a week to figure out if someone's capable of doing a job or not. Architects are usually part of a firm. If you don't have a degree, get vetted by the firm, and build cred. I also know that a degree isn't a guarantee of anything. The people with Masters degrees who designed the building my mom works in did such a good job that they had to then spend 1 mil remodeling the thing because people actually work there. If someone who worked there had seen these plans, they would of immediately corrected several mistakes. But they were never asked, because they are not architects. That's the stigma I'm talking about, right there. Let's get rid of that.

Half the time it seems experience is the main thing holding you back from a job. After I got out of school all the jobs in my area were '2 years min experience' '4 years min experience'. So even though I was certified, I couldn't get a job. Sometimes they will work with you, but really the only way you get experience is if someone 'takes a risk' on the young kid. So how much has the degree really helped? Could they not just take a risk on someone who didn't have a college degree?

I agree that college should just be affordable to all, but now that they make so much money...I just don't think they're going to give it up. So, I propose this solution. I think the standards are directly tied to the degree. If you knew it was hard as hell to get a degree in engineering from school x, and you could pay for a degree from school y, wouldn't you be much more likely to hire guy from school x? People don't trust degrees nearly so much anymore. And as silly as it is, about half the people I know with college degrees have a job that has nothing to do with the degree.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

I really don't want to argue this point with you. But I find it interesting that you should bring up Architecture as an example to bolster your point of view. Are you aware that getting licensed to practice Architecture is a mandatory 10-11 year long process? One MUST have a BA (In Arch that is often a 5 year full time program) an MA (2-3) years) and 3 years of professional apprenticeship before one's license to practice is valid. I for one, am sure as hell glad for it. I, for one, don't want houses, skyscrapers, bridges, etc, falling down on my head because the person you designed it couldn't figure out the stress loads or understand building codes. Architecture is a FAR more involved field than you think it is,

Frankly, you sound very young to me. That's obviously not a criticism, but only an observation. You out forth either/or scenarios and idealistic solutions to problems that you perceive, but might not exist, or exist for reasons beyond you personal experience. Your solutions are "we should" change the whole society's way of thinking and functioning - and make that change mandatory - on the basis of your own personal, and largely uninformed view, and present no mechanism with which to implement or enforce that culture-wide change, that "let's get rid of that". Again, I am not criticizing you, but noting these issues, and they present themselves most often by people who are in their early 20s or younger.

People don't pay for a degree. The rigor involved is about the same from one college to the next who offer similar programs. The have to be in order to satisfy the accreditation boards of their states. Often (too often) schools that have more money have better facilities, better equipment, better, more up to date labs. So getting a degree from one of those schools tends to give one a better chance that one can take advantage of those facilities and the professors who are attracted to the institution by them.

Still, you keep talking about college as if its function was job training. It is not.The function of auto-mechanic technical school is job training. The function of college is education. Period. That's why, even in the most technical and specialized fields of study, one is required to take courses in the humanities: literature, history, philosophy, etc. I, for one, am glad of it.

Finally, none of this has much to do with OWS. It seems more like a private grievance to me than anything else.

[-] 1 points by IamMamaCas (21) from Norman, OK 12 years ago

That's a long winded reply for not wanting to argue.

You don't really seem to be reading what I'm saying. You're kind of acting like I'm some spoiled little kid, and really what I have to say is stupid, so we can just stop talking about. Education is power. If OWS is to succeed, the world needs to be educated significantly better than it is. I come into contact with college students regularly. Like I said before, 80% of them are dumb as shit...The kids in college now are our present and our future. 80% of them are in no way prepared for that responsibility...even if they do obtain degrees. No matter how 'silly' it seems to you, it doesn't make it any less true.

I don't understand how that is a private grievance, or why I am naive for bringing it up. My point could be boiled down to this: I could list dozen and dozens of men and women who were utterly brilliant, changed the world, and never went to high school, let alone college. But in about 400 years, it is unimaginable for you not to have degree. You are less if you don't have a degree. WHY?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

I said I didn't want to argue, that didn't mean I wouldn't. I felt you needed to hear something, even if it was something I preferred not to tell you.

You are essentially arguing against the value of higher formal education. I categorically reject that point of view. Yes, there may be a few students who are "dumb as shit", but that does not argue against attempting to provide them with scholarship and opportunities to learn from experts in various fields. Indeed, it could be argued that those who have less natural brilliance need education even more, certainly not less. There are as many, if not more "dumb as shit" people without degrees. But there is a far, far, FAR smaller chance they will succeed and grow without obtaining a formal education than with one. And those who have natural intelligence are far more often helped more by such education. Guarantees, no. Better chances, yes. How many Nobel Laureates do you know of without advanced degrees?

You bring up medicine as the only (or at least one of a very select few) professions in which an extensive education is necessary. What that tells me is that you know precious little about other professions.

There is no guarantee that an education means competence, let alone excellence, in any given field. It is, however the best way to increase the odds of competence and excellence.

Is one less if one doesn't have a degree? Certainly not if you are Steve Jobs. But for the overwhelming majority of people, it means you are less knowledgeable, less able.

One can be against the elites having the most access to education, or the high cost of it, but being against formal education per se is an unsustainable argument. Degrees, in and of themselves, may mean little to nothing, but the ability to grant a degree is conferred by accreditation boards comprised of education scholars and experts in various fields, who guarantee a minimum standard is adhered to. And that really does mean something. A lot, in fact.

I think this is a private grievance because you are complaining about "experience needed" in order to get a job in a field. I understand how tough that is. How does one get the experience unless someone hires you? It's a catch-22, especially when you're young. But that is STILL not a valid argument against education, which is also required. You seem to be objecting to job requirements, whether it is about having the necessary experience or having to have a degree. That's not an issue with the system: that's personal. And stating that 80% of all college kids are stupid "as shit" is nothing other being unwarrantedly judgemental. It is an assessment that does not come form any objective criteria, but personal animus. It confirms my impression that you are speaking from some personal grievance.

At any rate, formal education has value, whether you see that value or not, and a degree is a way to confirm the an individual has gained value from the experience of completing a course of study. It is a far from perfect system, but it is far from meaningless, as you seem to imply.

[-] 1 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I understand this concept, but the sad thing is in most public institutions, they are not even teaching the students to think critically, at all. Instead most business related and liberal art curriculums I see at the CUNY College I attend are all about rote learning in many instances, and not allowing students anytime for critical analysis, everything is test or deadline oriented, and it is a mess. Most times if you fall outside the box as a student of a generic teaching paradigm, the one size fits all, you are done! The so-called professors will fail you, even you may understand critically the information being taught more than those who score high on an exam. What a joke! Don Tapscott breaks it down in his book Grown Up Digital, Chapter 5 - Rethinking Education - The Net Generation As Learners. Check out the book, it really breaks down the model of how to teach to create thinkers. That is not what I see happening in many of the business related courses, or even the Liberal Arts for that matter in Public Education, Teaching to create critical thinkers. Moreover, it is true many successful CEOs were Liberal Arts majors.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

I agree completely that CUNY is a huge problem. It has been attacked by both the right wing (de-funding) and the left wing (open admissions without a concurrent rise in graduation standards in public secondary education). The combination has transformed CUNY into a place that used to regularly produce Nobel Laureates from its ranks to a place where many can barely read upon graduation.

CUNY, however, is not the template I used for my statement, but rather the sad exception.

[-] 1 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I hear that. I was not sure the template, but I would like to know what graduation standards you are speaking about? The so-called rise in standards right now is not producing anything special at all, so I am not sure your argument! Then in terms of 1999, CUNY graduated the most people of color ever, and so what are you saying those people are not productive. I disagree with that wholeheartedly! However, maybe I am missing your point somewhere along the way! However, I think this is off topic really, and I think that if you feel so strongly about the quality of education at CUNY vs. Private Institutions, then organize a conference, and invite some top experts on the whole thing, and see if your theory still holds water. We just recently had this debate in one of my courses, and the whole standardized test thing is like a scam in terms of measuring any real level of intelligence or capacity to think critically. Then there we had some talk about what is happening on the Ivy League scale too, where shutting down on admissions of folks just based on a test, well and perhaps tied to color and poor financial background indirectly, well it changes the whole playing field of the type of graduates that are coming out of these schools. Meaning, whereas those who may look to give back, uplift under-served communities, cannot get in, over some bogus standards. What a joke!

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

I'm absolutely not talking about people of color, not am I talking about standardized testing. Open admissions at CUNY was initiated for political reasons having to do with the civil rights era. People of color were definitely underrepresented at CUNY, and it was wrong. They were absolutely correct in opening up admissions.

However, the city did so at the same time as it underfunded elementary and secondary education, and as many as 50% of those kids graduating high school were functionally illiterate and couldn't do basic math. The new by-laws of CUNY meant they had to be admitted anyway, and the overwhelming numbers of those students were minority kids, since they were the one who were most short-changed by the public schools (as well as other institutions). The criticism is about the school system's failure, not the failure of people of color.

As a result, teaching practices, which up to then had been on the highest level, had to address remediation of poor high school education rather than providing college level education from day one in class. Teaching methods had to shift from critical thinking skills to cramming information to catch people up.

In the meantime, the Koch and Guiliani administration kept cutting funding for CUNY, (and raising tuition) and created a flight of highly qualified professionals from its ranks, putting further strain on the quality of education. This, by the way, is very well documented, and there are books written on the subject.

I attended CUNY, going for a PhD. I am sad to report that the level of education there didn't come up even to my high school senior year level (in another state) let alone anything in my college or graduate school experience.

The current mission of CUNY is both correct and noble. But it will never be the school it once was if elementary and secondary education is not markedly improved in the city. All the professors at CUNY I have spoken to (at length - I was an education major) have all said the same thing to me.

My high, school, believe it or not, didn't even have grades, and yet we had the highest college placement record in the state. There is a real and legitimate place for standardized test in education, but it belongs in the margins, as a supplemental education tool. The improvement the city's schools need is not about teaching to standardized tests, but real education, well-funded, and equal throughout the city. As of now, the right wing will never agree to that critically needed funding.

[-] 1 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

Now, I hear with what you are saying a little bit better. I did not get it at first. Well, I can relate a bit to where you are coming from, but even now CUNY supposedly went up on the basic math requirements, but fell back on English composition if you ask me, at least this is what I see at Baruch. Well to me that has to do with the fact that so many students who come from outside the Nation, and many Asian students seem to have problems with the writing portion of what is required in some classes. So, all of sudden you see a lax approach in some ways to writing, and all kind of remedial programs being drawn up on campus, so still seems like Baruch-CUNY is making a way for which students it wants to make a way for. Meanwhile I see black, brown and Native American youth being shut out, while the registrant percentages are going higher and higher for Asian and Foreign Students despite their numbers of population in the New York City, which is the smallest. I am saying to myself what is going on? I do not see CUNY really adjusting any standards with what they have done thus far at all, and what I am saying may be off topic to your piece, but I am just trying to clear my own thoughts here. I have no idea what CUNY is doing, and I have no idea what CUNY is supposed to stand for anymore. Really I don't.

In terms of CUNY Instruction, I wonder whose fault it is regarding courses that don't suit the needs of students in terms of true scholarship and inventive ways to teaching? Is that the fault of the student, or those in charge of the teaching, standing in front of the student, and those in charge of putting together the curriculums and remedial programs? I have to be honest I have seen so-called PHds taking students' research and parlaying with a lot of it, and claiming it as part of their own scholarship on my campus. I have seen some strange stuff, and heard some strange conversations in the academic elevators at Baruch, I say this, and it is no lie! There is a lot going awry at Baruch that I don't think is so cool. Then I did a survey of certain programs across CUNY, cultural, relating to Black and Latino Studies, and for some reason John Jay and Baruch stand out as the only colleges that do not offer majors in these areas of study, but they offer majors in other cultural studies. Something is wrong! Moreover, I am not trying to turn this into a race conversation, but there are some serious race issues too connected to what CUNY is putting down, and it is not right!
And there is way too much top heaviness at CUNY, the wrong folks are making the decsions, and the wrong folks are in charge, and enough scholarship is not being gathered from students' perspectives, and community perspectives, the public communities which I always thought CUNY was created to serve, their needs. I am at a lost, truly I am, and I don't think it is so much the students, as it is who is in charge making the decisions past and present. However, I really don't know, but I know what I see, and I know what I have analyzed over the past decade, and there is something very crooked and rotten in Denmark with what CUNY's new approach is. Frankly, I think it is all going to backfire. Thank you so very much for your input and candidness. I greatly appreciate it, and I am not beefing per se, but just trying to get to some better understanding of this all. Frankly, that is why more public hearings should be called as to what CUNY is doing, period! Not enough people know what CUNY is truly planning for some of the schools, because frankly I heard awhile back that Baruch was going to go private, and some dismissed the idea as rumor and speculation, but now I am not so sure.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Rest assured that the idiocy you see at the top in CUNY also exists in spades at private universities. Seriously, I could give you horror stories in terms of unqualified people making decisions, institutional racism, greed, deliberate dumbing down of class work (on orders from the president of the college) and just plain idiocy. All for $27,000 tuition per year!

Sadly, that's the way of the world right now, and it is not limited to CUNY.

[-] 1 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I hear that, but the point is that it is at CUNY, and CUNY does take Title IV funds, and should be held accountable for any racism, which is just unacceptable in these days. CUNY Professors should also be held accountable for taking students' research and claiming it as their own, not even giving students credit or compensation. I have seen my share of that on Baruch Campus too, and it is just a sham. Students are being used for everyone else's well being, except for their own, they are being used for everyone else's benefit, except for their own, they are being used for everyone else' research project, instead of being offered the opportunity to learn how to make their own assets work for them, not for some PHd or JD buzzards, or someone working on their PHd. Students are getting the shaft on many fronts at CUNY, not just even in tuition hikes, but in the quality of the education, even with so-called higher standards. There needs to be far more student participation for those who qualify to get involved in the re-structuring of the curricula period, which this is what is happening in the UK now. www.studentasproducer.lincoln.ac.uk

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

I hear what you're saying. But virtually all schools take Title IV funds. And many schools have a policy - that must be signed off on before being permitted to attend - that all student work is the property of the school, and the student has no rights to it whatsoever. There are some legitimate reasons for that, but it stinks anyway. And it is sometimes abused.

I agree that students get the shaft in a variety of ways. I certainly experienced it during my student days, and have no doubt abuses remain today. But I can tell you now: many of those wrongs are very minor things, generally, in the larger scope of things. Some distance will show you that. (I'm sure it feels exactly the opposite of minor now). In the future you could even find yourself grateful for the education you received there, warts and all.

I would also be extremely wary of demanding too much student input into curriculum decisions. It usually turns out to be a disaster. (I've seen it happen.) Curriculum are worked out by committees of professors, accreditors, professionals in given fields, etc. In general their experience creates programs of study that benefit the majority of attendees. I know first-hand how seriously and thoughtfully many of these people work at that in good faith. (I also know some glaring deficits of such thoughtfulness, but they occur more often at private institutions.) There are gaps, sometimes big ones, but usually students simply don't have the broader picture available to them (experience and life) to make wise decisions about that. There are certainly exceptions, but it is not the rule. I do, however, believe very strongly that individuals in some cases should be allowed, even encouraged, to devise their own curriculum in consultation with faculty advisors or mentors. For some students, a far more independent approach to education is warranted. I see that much too rarely.

My main concern, however, is not any of the ones you have listed. I'm not saying that your points are not real or legitimate: they are, and very much so. My main concern, and I believe the main concern of OWS in this area is COST of higher education in general. That cost can be crippling, and delay real participation in the broader economy for a decade or more after college. That hurts both the students AND the economy as a whole. And by being a drag on the broader economy, it indirectly effects those who never attended college in the first place.

That really needs to change, and is far more urgent an issue than those you bring up (again, legitimately). OWS is not a school reform movement, however much some schools need to reform, but a school financing reform movement, among other things. The issues you are addressing are more internal to specific schools rather than a society-wide problem. That said, I hope you keep plugging away at your efforts to reform CUNY's glaring flaws. Although I largely dismissed your suggestion about curriculum change, a great deal of positive change has happened at a number of schools throughout the country during my lifetime specifically and exclusively because of student pressure and input. Revising education to fit current needs is something I support wholeheartedly, and each generation must work hard to make that happen for themselves.

I hope you do not take what I'm saying as a dismissal of your grievances, which I am certain have a strong basis. My own beloved adopted father led strikes at two different colleges in his day, and I led one myself. And there is a good chance I will try to do so in the very near future at my alma mater. Although the reasons are different from the ones you cited, at least you should know how much I support, and have been engaged in, student activism.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

I searched for historical data on the numbers of students going into various majors. You can see it here (be patient, the site is slow to load):


Maybe I'm missing something, but I cannot find a significant change in the proportion of liberal arts and other majors you listed, especially in the period of 2007 - 2009, where unemployment changed dramatically.

Can you link me to the data source you are referring to?

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

I bet there is no data source. These same people who say these things will deny that the Bush 43 administration had anything to do with the surging unemployment and economic mess. But, if you look at the statistics about unemployment, it's always high when we have Republican presidents (I previously have found data about this dating back to Reagan).

[-] 0 points by superman22x (188) 12 years ago

Oh yeah, and low when it comes to people like Bill Clinton, because he's a dem right? Not because of the dot com bubble...
Bush was an idiot plain and simple.

Your own chart shows and increase in journalism majors, social science majors, and other degrees of the sort.
I know there are other reasons for unemployment rates. But a lot of students brought about their own unemployment.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

It's not my chart. I didn't post it.

I would agree that getting degrees in psychology (without going further toward degrees in something tangible relating to psychology), history, fine art, etc. with no other direction is not good planning. But there are plenty of people out there with degrees in tangible career fields who are having a hard time finding jobs.

Are you suggesting that only certain career fields should be able to provide livable working opportunities?

Also, I do know people who have degrees in history and psychology who have landed really good careers. I'm not advocating getting degrees in those areas, but blaming students for the economic situation is ridiculous.

[-] 1 points by superman22x (188) 12 years ago

Well, when there is an influx of students in history but not an influx of jobs... For example, 10,000 students graduate with a history degree and there are 5,000 jobs... well there will be some issues.

But go for an engineering degree, yeah you'll have to work harder, but you'll make money, and almost never have to worry about unemployment... unless you went to a bad school or are just lacking common sense.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Complete nonsense. Most jobs are not in engineering. Most white collar jobs require a broad knowledge base and critical thinking skills: the very things one gets from pursuing liberal art degrees. Prospective employers in most businesses look to hire entry level people who are flexible problem solvers, not specialists in a given field.

And there is nothing about engineering that makes it harder work than what's required in any other professional career.


[-] 2 points by lilacaraby (21) 12 years ago

most aren't going for liberal arts degree, if you check it out. As for working on oil rigs, we need to move off the fuel that is poisoning the world.

[-] 1 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 12 years ago

Then we should all leave our homes and go to S.D.!? NewsFlash...there are no jobs!!

[-] 1 points by superman22x (188) 12 years ago

North Dakota not South Dakota. And yes, there are jobs there. I work in the oil business.

[-] 0 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

"I work in the oil business."

Figures. So, should EVERYONE who is unemployed work in the oil business? Should they have to give up the life they have in order to just pay some bills and feed themselves? That is ridiculous.

[-] 1 points by superman22x (188) 12 years ago

You're think they should just be given that stuff so the people that do work oil and make good money and pay lots of taxes sacrifice for them? That is ridiculous.

[-] -1 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

There will be no new pipeline from Canada to Texas. 0bama stopped it. Thousands of jobs that will never be.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Republicans keep killing the jobs bill.

[-] 1 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

What jobs bill? The first one was a waste of taxpayer money. Didn't create one job. It's a union bill. Unions are money laundering operations for the dems. 0bama gave( wasted ) money on a phoney company,Solyndra. Now at tax payer expense, the ex Solyndra employees will receive $13,000 per person for job training

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

"The first one was a waste of taxpayer money. Didn't create one job."

Total bullshit. It saved between 3 and 6 million jobs from evaporating. All non-aligned economists agree. Although new ones weren't created, the unemployment situation would be far worse is that jobs bill hadn't have passed.

But there were problems with that bill (actually a series of bills). First, much of the money went directly to the states who, instead of using the money for local job creation as intended, used it instead to plug their own budget gaps. Second, the real problem was that the stimulus package (again, something agree to by all non-partisan economists) was less than half the size recommended and needed. Critical mass was not achieved, and this, too, was predicted by economists. In other words, the jobs bill was not nearly as effective as it could have been precisely because it was too conservative, not because it was too liberal or ill-conceived. But to claim it was not effective at all is simply a lie.

One more thing: Solyndra was NOT a phony company. It had a cutting edge approach to solar power. It was undermined by China's control and price manipulation of the raw materials needed for manufacture. More investment in new technologies and large-scale R&D, not less, is needed to revitalize the economy, not only in the short term, but the long term as well. The very internet you post your right wing regurgitated talking points on is a direct result of such investment.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

Do your reaserch on Solyndra, it was a phoney company from the start. Nothing more than a money launderding company for the dems.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Right wing bullshit.

You have some balls demanding anyone else do any research whatsoever, when the best you ever do is either parrot party propaganda, or simply troll.

Solyndra was always a legitimate company. It was undermined by the market manipulation of prices, control of raw materials, unfair trading practices, and massive subsidies the Chinese bestow upon their own solar and alternative energy manufacturers. Unless and until the US massively increases its investment in and subsidizing of such manufacturers here, combined with international trade sanctions against Chinese practices, bankruptcies like this are sure to continue.

About 40 projects have received loans under a clean energy program authorized by Congress in 2005 (George Bush administration, remember?) and incorporated in the Obama administration’s 2009 stimulus package. Only two have failed, Solyndra and Beacon Power, a battery company in upstate New York that borrowed $39 million. These defaults represent just 1.3 percent of the $37.6 billion loan portfolio.

The Republican inquiry into Solyndra has raised some valid questions, but it has also unfairly tried to exploit one bad bet to discredit public investments in renewable technologies. The distortions and lies they invent out of whole cloth and propagate are perpetuated for partisan party political gain alone, and you're too stupid to see it and so arrogant that you suggest others do the research you clearly haven't. All the while shilling for the most corrupt group of people on earth.

I have done the research. You, clearly, have not.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

I didn't demand. Soyndra was a set up from the begining. Given 500 mil by 0bama to create jobs. Bankruptcy anounced Nov. 3rd. BrightSource, another obama failure with an 0bama bailout of 1.4 billion in loan guarantees.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

"Soyndra was a set up from the begining."


[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

No, truth.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago


You are nothing but a regurgitating mouthpiece of the far right propaganda machine. You have addressed nothing substantial. You are dead wrong about Solyndra. And even if you were right (you're not) it is nothing but a distortion of the overall, overwhelmingly positive record of government investment in R&D and fledgling industries. Much, much more is needed.

Either you don't know that (and you should, simply by reading the investment record I posted above) it makes you an idiot for repeating your ignorance, or you do know it, it makes you a lying idiot. Either way, you wouldn't recognize the truth if it bit you on the ass.

Finally, what does Solyndra have to do with the creation of the worst recession in 80 years? Nothing. Your assertion is little more than a sorry attempt at misdirection. What's you purpose? Only a psychologist would know, but a desire for accuracy or veracity isn't it, clearly.

Post any more lying shit you want about this: I will no longer respond. You are just here to troll.

[+] -5 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

That is precisely why we need to empower people to determine the cost of education and get the government out of it. The market works; government doesn't, and never has.

[-] 6 points by filippo67 (10) 12 years ago

at BraddDavis Free market destroys any services that the government of a civilized nation should guarantee. Government does not work only because is corrupted by elements of the free market (private banks). Private insurance company have made a joke of the health care system here in the USA.

[-] 4 points by filippo67 (10) 12 years ago

i forgot to had that private financial institutions have made almost impossible for people to go to school without a loan!

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

History tells a clear and different story. The tyranny of socialism has only resulted in misery. The idea that it will work this time is born out of ignorance, arrogance, and pathetic naïveté.

[-] 2 points by Jezicka (8) 12 years ago

Who said anything about Socialism? Government setting the rules so that companies can't either cheat (by, for instance, buying up the competition and closing them down, as the car industry did with bus and streetcar systems, or create opaque 'products' and colluding with rating agencies to rate them triple A) or cause huge system-wide problems is hardly Socialism. It's called making Capitalism work. As to free education- unless you think our Founding Fathers were all rabid 'Socialists' this shouldn't be in any way controversial. This country was set up from the start to have free education- because an uneducated population can't support a democracy. In fact, it can't even support a modern Capitalist system. The only thing it's good for is providing cheap labor to plutocrats- and only in the short term at that, as fewer and fewer of the creative minds that any country needs to flourish are given the opportunity to share their gifts.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Are there any particular policy suggestions that you have, BraddDavis? I think if you have a policy that would result in better lives for people, everyone would take great interest in that.

[-] 0 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Do you forget that "private banks" work for YOU. I don't like how Bank of America does business so I chose to stop supporting them. if the 99 percent did the same thing, they would either change they way they do business or be nonexistent by Friday. let's stop the silly conspiracy theories and begin taking responsibility for our lives.

[+] -4 points by betuadollar (-313) 12 years ago

Private insurance has also served to promote medical care in making better (and thereby more expensive) care more affordable for the masses.

[-] 5 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

In the majority of countries in the world, "the masses" do not have to pay for their individual medical care at all (in most cases it is funded with a more equitable tax system and the government has the bargaining power to keep costs down, banning profiteering by pharmaceutical companies for example) In these (rational) societies, healthcare is commonly understood as a human right and any politician proposing to take this right away would be laughed at and swiftly shown the door.

The ideology of the free market has been widely promulgated in this country by precisely those interests that it serves. The free market is the ideal vehicle for these interests because an unregulated market inevitably leads to monopoly and oligarchy--that is to say, the status quo. Even Greenspan had to admit he was wrong about the market. We shouldn't even be having this conversation. Let's talk about building a better society instead.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Right on. But betuadollar won't get. They refuse to get it. They showed this via their comments under another article on this site.

[-] 1 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

All we can do is keep telling the truth. And keep welcoming them to take a look around at the world they live in.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago


[-] 4 points by meep (233) 12 years ago

Countries that do not support higher education are not nearly as successful as those that do. The greatest impact on the wealth of a nation, and the greatest investment that it can make, is education. If you don't agree with that then why is China, not even just a socialist nation but a full-fledged communist nation, rising so rapidly and turning from low cost production to tech industries? Okay, so maybe you could blame monetary manipulation etc. But then how is India also rising so rapidly? And before you start blanket attacking all forms of socialism, take a look at the Scandinavian countries. They have fairly extensive social programs and per capita GDP comparable or even exceeding that of the US. If Socialism was a blanket wrong then they would be at the bottom of the pile, not the top.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Exactly. People who bad mouth socialism so much use the USSR as an example.... hardly even accurate.

[-] 1 points by meep (233) 12 years ago
The problem with the USSR was Marxism. I'll bet murdering your own citizens would work just fine it capitalism!


[-] 2 points by uftscott (26) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

When has the market worked?

[-] 0 points by agnosticnixie (17) from Laval, QC 12 years ago

I have no clue what he's going on about either, since private universities have even worse tuitions making them unsuitable for all but the 0.1% of the best and brightest or the 1% of the wealthiest.

1.1% of the population college educated = good luck running a modern economy.

[-] 2 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

What level of government? The government of the Universities that aim to charge more and have tuition caps done away with? Plenty of people who should not attend college are able to go because their folks can pay the tuition.


[+] -7 points by klh34 (-21) 12 years ago

more people are going to college than at any time in history. It's called supply and demand...more people want a degree the cost of getting it goes up. It's not that complicated.

[-] 9 points by gtrabbit (11) 12 years ago

By your logic, bread should be more expensive than gold...

Education isn't of limited supply. Actually, universities are growing with the rising demand just fine-- except for a few pockets, but still more people are going into school than ever. What you say about supply and demand would only make sense if admittance had stayed exactly the same...

And at the same time, the quality is dropping. Larger classes, overworked adjunct faculty, less counseling, etc. so then it should be cheaper, right?

This is an open forum for people to share thoughts, but please make sure your thought is well developed first. Thank you.





[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

So, because more people want a degree, that means schools have the right to up the cost dramatically, just because they can?


[-] 14 points by mygarza (15) from Clifton, NJ 12 years ago

@BraddDavis Although I dont blame you for being misinformed, viewers need to read in depth before making faulty opinions. There was no temper tantrum of any kind, students were simply standing still and peacefully voicing their resentment of the tution hikes when the police lined up in military fashion and stormed us. I would know i was in the front line. Also these students made a rational and thoughtful decision to exercise their fundamental right in a "public" university. Standing still and using your vocal cords by no means constitutes being assaulted by cuny "peace" officers.

[-] 1 points by lilacaraby (21) 12 years ago

it amazes me that every time there is a demonstration and the NYPD come, behave very badly, people come on these forums and blame the protesters. HELLO? Please read the Constitution. It is the right and duty of the citizens of this Democratic Republic to voice their concern and dismay when they see the country going down the wrong path. IT IS OUR RIGHT!


[-] -3 points by Libertarianliving (149) 12 years ago

The price of EVERYTHING is rising due to the transformation of America into a European-Socialist type nation causing drastic inflation along with the price of just about EVERYTHING being high because of the price of OIL! Why do you think your tuition costs shouldn't rise too. YOU are the ones who will benefit from buying/earning a "degree". Do you feel your costs should be subsidized by taxpayers who WON'T benefit one bit from YOUR education?

[-] 4 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 12 years ago

Since when are the banks that control the economy and government "European/Socialist"? That's the transformation of America that has occurred in the last 40 years. In case you haven't noticed, Clinton eliminated welfare, and all other services have diminished, not keeping up with inflation (which today, by the way, is far too low, according to most economists.) Far from becoming more "European/Socialist" we have become far more Darwinian/Capitalist, in which those who already have the great wealth survive and prosper at the cost of everyone else.

So, instead of bemoaning state subsidized higher education, which constitutes a tiny fraction of one's state taxes, you ire should be focussed on those so-called free market oligarchs who have made sure you and me and everyone else has far, far less to begin with.

Tuition has risen over 400% in the last twenty or so years, and is totally unrelated to to standard inflation. outpacing it more the 3 times. It is related to greed, not inflation.

[-] 3 points by lilacaraby (21) 12 years ago

European-Socialist? is it "European-Socialist" to be able to go to the doctor? To keep your home? To demand that criminals who put the entire country and the world at risk for their "hedge funds" and other schemes? HELLO? Where have you been? It's not JUST oil!

[-] 3 points by centerofmass (3) 12 years ago

You DO get a benefit. They get degrees, go to work, and create things that help everyone. They pay taxes that buy services for everyone.

Call it "trickle-up economics".

[-] 11 points by Socrates469bc (608) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Bloomberg has turned NYC into a police state.

Osama Bin Laden is dead. End the Patriot Act Now.

Please sign the petition:


[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Is anyone else unable to sign the petition? I locate the petition, create a log-in, sign-in, and then I get "404 Not Found". Yet I am still able to sign in and browse petitions, as long as I do not try to sign one.

[-] 10 points by Scooby (11) 12 years ago

The police dogs are out of control. WHAT are they DOING? This is insanity and it is caused by the uniforms NOT anyone else. I sadly am coming to the realization that something is going to go very wrong, very soon. It will not be by the OWS. It will come from the side of the same ones who hurt Scott Olson and all our other brothers and sisters. Sad. I wish it wouldn't happen. But it will. My heart hurts. This is not the america I was raised in. It is a disgrace to humanity and a collection of lies.

[-] 2 points by Libertarianliving (149) 12 years ago

I have to say that this is one thing I HAVE TO support you OWSers on. In America you are supposed to be able to express your feelings and opinions under the PROTECTION of the law. Even the dumbest, most nonsensical opinions as expressed by OWS.

[+] -7 points by ComunistUSA (58) 12 years ago

I hear mexico is nice this time of year ; )

[-] 10 points by chrispy (11) 12 years ago


Why dishonest? Just search for other clips, also taken by protesters. The protest certainly was noisy, but nobody appeared to be doing anything violent. It was a protest, not a tea party (the real kind).

It was a public meeting; many were showing student IDs. They did have a right to be there up to the capacity of the room. A video feed should have been set up outside for the overflow and comments moderated in the standard manner.


[-] 9 points by wupta (25) 12 years ago

I am older and I remember when I didn't have to pay anything. This was at Queens College. In fact at a recent get together I heard sixty somethings making the argument that they should have to pay for others education. I reminded every single one of them there who were college grads that they got a free ride, who paid for their education, which did shut them right up. As the article states, in the end this will only get strong because the true face of our state of affairs is being revealed and it is pretty disgusting

[-] 6 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Agreed. I don't have kids and own a house, so I pay taxes that go toward public education.... however, I don't bitch about this. Someone paid for my public education, and it's my choice not to have kids. I am fine with paying taxes that go for something that I am not/my non-existent kids aren't benefitting from, because I believe in socialism where it's necessary.

Furthermore, I received a full, four-year academic scholarship from my university, and someone had to pay for me to attend the school via that scholarship.

[-] 9 points by DrGonzo71 (44) from Beijing, Beijing 12 years ago

As a whole-hearted supporter of OWS, I really, REALLY wish we could tone it down on the "annihilate capitalism" bit. I'm all for the anti-corporatist rhetoric, but let's remember corporatism is NOT capitalism, and by painting itself as anti-capitalist, OWS is taking on a whole lot of enemies it doesn't want, and making hypocrites of all its members and supporters. I can support and defend anti-corporatism. I can neither defend nor support anti-capitalism.

[-] 5 points by corbini157 (91) 12 years ago

I think people do want capitalism. The problem is we've been experiencing such a bastardized form of it for so long, we've become turned off to it.

[-] 6 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 12 years ago

No, I think we're seeing capitalism at its finest, meaning, carried to its logical conclusion.

[-] 9 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

Exactly. This is what capitalism does (and has done throughout history): it creates debt slaves and oligarchs. Always has, always will.

When most people say that our capitalist system is devolving, they are looking back to the relatively brief period of stability and prosperity after WWII through the 1960s and 70s (which has gradually waned until the present day). It so happens that this was the the period of time following the New Deal and it was the most regulated period of capitalism's entire history. This is not a coincidence.

Saying you are against capitalism doesn't mean switching to a planned economy tomorrow. It means that we need to start looking into other options, and be aware of history and the inevitably self-destructive nature of an unfettered "free" market. Regardless of what we come up with together, I think we can all agree that this isn't working.

Maybe a better way to articulate it would be against "free market" capitalism, or "neo-liberalism." But seeing how easily capitalism in its neo-liberal form arose from the prior epoch (originally during the Reagan era), I have my doubts about the viability of simply regulating capitalism. That being said, I'm certainly willing to give it a try, and maybe with changing cultural conditions it could work this time.

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 12 years ago

Thanks very much, and you remind me of yet another statement I remember from years ago when I was in the Socialist Workers Party. Someone said that if capitalism could keep providing workers a good, comfortable standard of living, wage increases, etc, you could never have a revolution.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

That assumes work and money are the only reason people would revolt. I would never revolt over money, but murder... corruption... oppression... I will die to stomp those out.

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 12 years ago

I agree with you, but I think the statement meant that it wouldn't be possible to organize masses of people to overturn a system that continued to provide them with a decent standard of living. Thanks for the reply.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Well stated, Sir!

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

How do you know if SeaChange is a guy? Just being nitpicky here.... because I see people assuming left and right that all people posting on here are guys. I take offense to that. I just want people to think more before assuming things.

[-] 2 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Good point. I don't mean any offense, but I am assuming just as you described. I guess when I read text on the screen, the voice in my head sounds like my own voice, and I mistakenly make assumptions.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

No problem. I just wanted to point it out, because I see a lot of people doing this. Most screen names don't tell whether someone is male or female. I enjoy reading your posts, BTW.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

That use of " comma Sir" is colloquial and artistic. It really doesn't matter if the recipient is female.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Yes it does. It matters a lot to me and other females. Do you think males would be OK with being called "gals"? Why should we have to be called "guys", "boys", "sir"?

And I don't give a shit about tradition.

[-] 0 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

Oh, you're female? Glad you told me, because I was going to call you an "it" until I knew for certain.

SwissMiss is a GIRL, everyone! Please be chivalrous and gentle with her delicate emotions.

[-] 0 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

Except, Capitalism and debt having nothing to do with eachother!

So no, not well stated sir/madame/commie whatever.

[-] 2 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

Interesting... Last time I checked this country was in the midst of a debt crisis dating from 2007 - 2008. Rather similar to the debt crisis of 1929 in fact.

China would be interested to hear your theories about capitalism and debt, by the way.

[-] 0 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

I'm sorry, did you refute my statement? And check your dates, "this country" has been in a rising debt crisis for almost 100 years.

Capitalism is capitalizing on labor and materials.

Debt is money you have yet to pay someone.

They can exist in the absense of eachother; they are independent of each other. They are not the same thing

To put a very fine point on it, you said "capitalism [sic] creates debt slaves and oligarchs." -- Well, that is false. Debt slavery is not "created" by capitalism. It is created by promising more than you have to spend.

The person who runs this website is named "Justine Alexandra Roberts Tunney", and they have published the source code for the website on github.com here:


The headline, or "motto" for the project there reads as follows:

"Stomping out capitalism, one line of code at a time"

You can verify this is true by scrolling down to the bottom of this page and looking to the right. You will see a link which reads 'github'. Click it. At the top of that page, underneath the smiley face, underneath the word 'Code' with an orange underline, you will see the project headline.

NOTE: I am fully aware that I am discussing the views of J.A. Robert Tunney, and NOT the OWS as a whole. -- However, it is time for the schizophrenia within the OWS movement to cease and for them to actually discuss, debate, and come to consensus on, what is their purpose and a sane solution to the majority's complaints.

The doubletalk about "we are not really socialist but yeah we are but not really but DOWN WITH CAPITALISM!" is being used as cover for the co-opting of a huge mass of genuinely concerned people.

Since the ideology which most vociferously speaks out against "Capitalism" is Socialism, it is quite likely that the maintainer of this website is a Socialist.

I would be quick to point out that Capitalism is not an "ism" at all, rather an unavoidable result of the consequence of possessing things.

Note also that "possessing" is not a legal construct which can be debated -- but a physical fact having to do with who's hands an object is within or controlled by.

Wether an individual capitalizes upon his own labor, the state capitalizes upon it, or a wealthy entrepreneur does, they are all forms of capitalism -- and have quite blurred lines.

Consider this:

If you have a broken car, and you employ my expertise in fixing cars, trading me two ears of corn for my labor... Then I have 'capitalized' on my labor.

If you then turn around, and trade that newly repaired car for two fat pigs... Then, lo and behold, you have capitalized on my labor, in much the same way that I did.

The difference being, you possessed the car itself, which repsresents a much greater amount of labor input than my repair, and were therefore able to obtain a higher price for it.

Question is this: Did you ''exploit" me?!

And, another question:

How could you, OWS, the Socialist Party, or ANYone, ever successfully prohibit this transaction, or everything like it? If you outlaw money then only outlaws will have money!

Isn't opposing and "stomping out" capitalism futile?

Socialism is not neccessary, nor even preferred. Simply return to sound money, and prosecute fraud.

The existing American system, if enforced by its people, is capable of that. Enforcement may require revolution, but do not seek to bring down capitalism. That is futile and impossible.

Bring down corruption, conspiracy and political deception -- and your goals will have been met.

End the Federal Reserve and the Fractional Banking System.

They have devalued our currency and widened the gap between the 1% and the 99%. They are the cause of the problems Occupy Wall Street is in protest of. They have empowered the political system which conspires with Wall Street to commit banking fraud and rob the people of their wealth.


[-] -2 points by Libertarianliving (149) 12 years ago

So WHAT would you be supportive of, SOCIALISM???? That has shown itself to be a disaster!!!

[-] 5 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Um, you mean like in Norway (and several other countries), where it actually works VERY WELL??? Using the USSR as an example of socialism (as so many people do) is completely inaccurate.

[-] 3 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

Socialism works well in Germany too.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Yep! It works well where people want it to work well.



[-] 5 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

The New Deal was a compromise between capitalism and socialism to avoid the spectre of revolution following the turbulence that the Great Depression brought. As mentioned, the New Deal also lead to the longest period of prosperity and stability in capitalism's entire history. Judging from your moniker I suspect you are against social security, unemployment compensation, bank regulation and other aspects of the New Deal (if I have assumed this in error, my apologies), so I don't know how much we can agree on.

The free market ideology in America has been very successful at presenting an alternative explanation of what capitalism is doing. It acknowledges certain "flaws" (Greenspan), but says that it is nevertheless "the best of all possible worlds."

You may be able to look around truly believe that this is the best of all possible worlds, I think another, better world is possible. I don't know exactly what that world would look like, but I think it's for all of us to figure out together. This same free market, or neo-liberal ideology has also been remarkably adept at shutting down debate over any alternatives. Its adherents tend to follow it with an unflinching religious fervor. This is unfortunate because it seems that a sustained, rational conversation is our only hope in finding ways to fix a system that is obviously broken. We won't get anywhere by shutting down and shouting political labels at one another.

[-] 2 points by looselyhuman (3117) 12 years ago

Amen. Please keep repeating this, ad nauseum, especially in all the RP fan posts.

"I think another, better world is possible"

Props for the Voltaire, too.

[-] 1 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

Well said.

[-] 0 points by Libertarianliving (149) 12 years ago

Why do you feel this way? Because there are "rich" people, "poor" people, and many on all different levels in between? DO you feel that nobody should be "poor"? I look around and say to myself, "gawd we have the richest "poor" people in the world!" Do you feel everyone should be "comfortable" or be "given" enough money to have security, even amounts equal to people striving to EARN it? I look around at the public and see very few people, even those who can't (or don't want to) work going without very much. Everyone has a cell phone, PC, warm bed, plenty of food, etc. And if one doesn't, especially a woman, all she needs to do is have a baby and the government will make sure she can live relatively comfortably. Really, what is so bad? I feel we have never had it so easy as a society. We may not have huge bank accounts, but everything that is available to make life far more easy than in the past is affordable to all but the "poorest" people. And EVERY society is going to have "poor" people. There is NO WAY AROUND IT.

[-] 3 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

We'll all be poor pretty soon if the 1% have their way. Look back to the 1930s.

This is again the ideology of the 1% that your espousing. Think about it: who benefits when you begrudge the poor a minimum standard of living, rather than going after the system that is making all of us poorer and poorer with less and less stability every year?

Maybe you don't like to think of yourself grouped in with those that are in poverty, but statistically speaking the chances are that you are much closer to them than the 1%. To the 1% you are just another mark to squeeze money and labor out of. Sad but true.

[-] 1 points by Libertarianliving (149) 12 years ago

Funny how I continually see people who study hard in school and go for post-high school educations, then work really hard and end up much higher on the socioeconomic ladder than their parents. Sure they have some very lean years financially, but the do not spend beyond their means and eventually have nice sums of disposable income. How do THEY continue to do so?

[-] 1 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

They have enormous loan debt, that's how. Everything is beyond your means when you have a ton of debt.

Look around you, we're talking about a broader socio-economic trend. Today, a huge amount of the people that studied hard in college can't find more than a minimum wage job when they graduate (if that). The same goes for returning war vets. After rent, utilities, transportation and groceries (and medical insurance if you're lucky) there is no money left to pay back the loans. You simply can't work your way out of it.

What you are referring to is what some would call "the American dream" and it's broken. We are creating a generation of debt slaves who will resent this system for the rest of their lives (or until we can overthrow it).

[-] 3 points by lilacaraby (21) 12 years ago

Libertarianliving, it would be wise for you to take the blinders off your eyes and consider how many families are living in poverty and how high those numbers have risen in the last few years. Are you counting all the people living in their cars as those "rich poor people?" Do you know how many homeless there are? How many children are at risk of not having enough to eat? We've never had it so easy, as compared, say, to the late middle ages?


[-] 2 points by lilacaraby (21) 12 years ago

Actually, I agree with SwissMiss, if you look around you, at Norway, or Sweden, or Germany (who, by the way, is doing quite well, in spite of the fact that the bankers drove so many countries into bankruptcy) socialistic systems are doing quite well. By the way Libertarian, I hope you don't call the socialist fire department if your house (heaven forbid) catches fire, or the police, in an emergency, or drive on those socialist roads....just sayin'...

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Australia and other countries have more socialism than we do as well (real nationalized health care for all as one example), and it works much better there.

[-] 1 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

There is a BIG difference between having social services funded locally by the people likely to benefit from their existence, and vast national redistribution of wealth on the scale of socialism!

Given your example of the Fire Department, I might be more -than-willing to pay a share of the cost of maintaining my LOCAL fire department, since my house, and my neighbors houses might catch fire; creating a dangerous situation I would rather avoid.

But, would I support a byzantine national "Federal Emergency Management Agency" and expect them to be able to adequately handle a local emergency?


It comes down to, what percentage of your income pays for public services, and how much of a say you have in how your portion is spent.

[-] 1 points by newearthorder (295) 12 years ago

Capitalism is when I make more money by paying you less money.

[-] 0 points by ScrewyL (809) 12 years ago

No, capitalism is when you capitalize on your possessions.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by corbini157 (91) 12 years ago

perhaps you are right.


[+] -4 points by ComunistUSA (58) 12 years ago

Make this person your leader NOW!

[-] 9 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

It was so like a military operation. I wish I had a camera, but the NYPD was lined up outside of Baruch College up and down both sides of the block outside of the 25th Street Library building and Vertical Campus, my school, in riot gear, full military stance, and NYPD Helicopters flying over. It was like Fort Dix, and then they had all these like NYPD, some type of special forces surrounding the CUNY Students while they protested non-violently, and these special forces with these cameras were filming. I said to myself what is NYPD the Mainstream Media now, which you can't find Mainstream Media anywhere filming any of these student protests, which are major news! So NYPD Special Unit was out there filming, but no one was allowed to get any zoom in or zoom out shots of how the whole campus was on lockdown outside by NYPD. It was frightening, and I guess we have the Mayor to thank, the funder of Baruch's Financial Center MockTrading Floor for Students. This is what Privatization of CUNY looks like, this is where we are going! This is a crime shame, I say, just a shame. How are the locals, struggling citizens of NYC supposed to educate their children? Someone tell me. This city is going, I tell you, between this and all the tickets they write for people, one way or the other Bloomberg will suck you dry! I think more of us should go outside his crib and protest more, let him know what it feels like to live under siege, when you just trying to voice non-violently the right to fight for your rights. We should do silent sit-outs, don't say anything, just sit and let our numbers grow, and just sit, do a Ghandi on them! This is so bad, and I am so hurt by what I saw. All this time I thought Security Forces at Baruch was better than that. I have nothing to say to them anymore, we see their true colors!

[-] 3 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

I agree. The show of force is excessive and designed to intimidate us from excercising our First Amerndment rights.

Go outside Bloomberg's crib and protest more? I was at the protest at his residence on 11/20 -- last Sunday. He created a "frozen zone" around his brownstone. No one -- protester or person who did not live on the block -- was allowed to walk on the block at all. Residents were allowed through the barricades upon production of identification.

The protest was forced to take place on Fifth Avenue in front of Central Park. The police out numbered protestors 2 to 1. All of a sudden at around 9 pm, with no provocation, flashing cop cars and van paddy wagons came screaming around the corner. Cops dressed in full riot gear got out and lined up accross from us. It was an incredible show of force. (Btw, there were only about 60 people at this protest, and we had all been cordoned off behind barriers off the sidewalk onto the green next to Central Park.) This one fat cop got on a bullhorn and started barking out to us that we were making too much noise and that it had to STOP now. He and his back ups in riot gear were incredibly confrontational. I was and still am in utter shock.

Frightening? Yes. By design. And yes, we can thank Tsar Bloomberg. He wants us to be so scared that we stay home and let he and his peeps continue to rape the country.

[-] 2 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

This is what I am saying, what is with all this show of force, like that. I am appalled. Therefore, my thing is if students are supposed to act in some different manner in terms of a peaceful protest, than what they already are doing, then I would like to know what that is, exactly. When I was at Madison Avenue Park, students were given specific instructions on how not to get into any conflict with Security folks, how to listen to whatever they say, and no provocations, so this was the same group that went on to Baruch College. I think we need some sessions on what are students supposed to do differently, and I want to know why no one was permitted to get the aerial shots of all that show of force outside of Baruch College. That was the scariest scenario I ever walked into in my life. I could not believe it. It took me a couple of days to re-group. I had to just stand down at home for a minute, just unreal! Talk about censorship, and none of those type of show of force clips made it on to any of the broadcasts about the protests, none. Only the angles, which from what I could see those Special Task NYPD Force Filming Crew did, that was what made it on to TV, those shots. So those Special Forces, whoever they were, don’t know the logo I saw on their backs, it was a different acronym than what I had ever seen before, think it started with a T, well anyway they did these zoom in shots on that tight space all the student protesters were confined to, and no one was able to see from those kind of shots how they were surrounded military style. That is what I call sneaky news reporting, because what was captured on mainstream media was an optical illusion, because that was not the look of it at all, what went down outside the Baruch Vertical Campus or even across the street for that matter! CUNY Baruch College was totally surrounded, and under siege by this huge show of force-NYPD. Unreal!

[-] 2 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

There may not be anything the students are supposed to do differently. If the police are under orders to provoke violence, then that is what the police will do. It is in the 1%'s best interest to have acts of violence at every protest so they can justify squelching the OWS movement with ever increasing amounts of force.

I find that the younger the protester, the more apt the police are to be violent with them. This makes sense. Imagine the imagry of that young man with the bloody head on TV. Now replace that imagry with a middle-aged white female attorney (me). I am much, much less likely to be attacked simply because of the media blowback.

I understand how scary it must have been. I know what you mean by needing a few days to regroup. Unfortunately, this is exactly their intent. To scare every one away.

If they want to provoke violence, a good method is to cram all of the passionate protestors into the smallest space they can.

The mainstream media is in the pockets of the 1%. They report mainly what will make the 1% look good.

This is a big war. I wonder whether the American's are ready to fight it.

[-] 2 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I am ready to stand up for what is right! But, I am not trying to get my head bashed in, that is not cool. I still plan to attend law school, so I can pick up the fight from that angle. I got ideas, plans and solutions, and I think every little bit counts, what everyone has to contribute to fix an extremely broken system. However, with that said, I will always stand in soladirity, but I am concerned for these young people. I am in my ealry forties, but I am a CUNY Student, last term, and I what I have seen going down at CUNY is just wrong. I have attended part-time on and off since 2000(enrolled in 1999), and at one time I took a long hiatus(5 years) around 2003 from CUNY, well to do something else, as I figured out how I would end my studies, well because Baruch College was not even up to par when I decided to enroll in their CIS Program, and I came out of the IT Industry into Baruch. That was unacceptable! Now, you take for example Baruch College, who took all these private donations, and now they want to shut out the low-income student, slowly privatize, what kind of nonsense is that! This after they stood up so long on what Title IV funds? I say that I have never seen such blantant disregard for working class youth, this is just wrong! And I say it hurts, it really does. I feel for these students, and the generation after them. They are our future just as much as the 1%. I don't understand for the life of me this so-called American Democracy, this is nothing but Capitalism, and a push to control the remaining institutions, what they may produce that is anti-establishment, anti-capitalism, so let the 1% start to seize Public Institutions, same is happening with placing Charters Schools inside Public Schools. This is a real mess!

[-] 1 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

I graduated from Hunter College in 1995. Since then tuition has skyrocketed. The problem with Hunter at that time was that instead because the public grammer school was so bad and because the City allowed any NYC public student to enroll regardless of the level of educatin they actually possessed upon graduation, Hunter College spent much of its funding on remedial classes -- trying to bring these people's education up to a high school level so they could begin college - level classes. This was unfair for those who came to Hunter College and wanted to take college level classes, because classes at the college level were often not available, because the funding went to the non college-level classes.

[-] 2 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I hear you, but I am going to respectfully see myself out of this conversation. This is off base, and it is going to a not so nice place, and I don't have the time to break out in a full-scale debate, as the problem you speak of goes a little bit deeper than what appears on the surface, how remedial even comes into play. I guess it is the people who are victimized by Mass Incarceration, the idea of being locked based on the color of your skin, well it is their fault for the system set-up, and all the past monies shifted from Education to Incarceration. I do understand your point, but I am not qualified really to engage in this debate right now. I think the person who really knows the history on this is Donald H. Smith, and from the way he breaks it down, well all of the failures in public high schools, many folks were prepared to nip that problem in the bud, but certain programs were not sanctioned due to political and racial reasons. However, still I am not qualified to debate this topic, but even today with the so-called la creme de la creme at Baruch College per se, the students can pass an exam, do well at rote learning, do well on math exams, and still not walk away with any critical thinking or analysis skills, and frankly that is not progress what so ever, just turning out a lot of young minds to follow someone else's lead, and there is no empowerment in that.

[-] 2 points by jssss (71) 12 years ago

yeah, it is major news when people are protesting higher tuition rates. get this message out to the public. make signs. flyer. email chains. etc.

[-] 0 points by Raulduke (14) 12 years ago

Why not just go to a different school? Semesters almost over right? I don't like Target so...I just don't go there and spend money.

[-] 1 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

CUNY is a public institution, and students have the right to attend where ever they like in CUNY! This is public education. So, that is the solution, just run, if you are being pushed out, just go with the status quo. Okay, lovely solution, that is putting on your thinking cap.


[-] 8 points by Garybryant2 (42) 12 years ago

We are moving into a Kent State situation very soon. Our enemies have too short a fuse to do anything less.

But this time, it will make Kent State look like a beautiful dream. A massacre comparable to Tiananmen Square. Or worse.

Regardless, keep those camera phones warm my friends and keep posting. Failure is impossible.

[+] -6 points by klh34 (-21) 12 years ago

I love how people who can afford "camera phones" think they are victims of economic inequality...if you can afford a camera phone you are probably one the top 10% richest people in the world.

[-] 3 points by TH3W01F (180) from Ottawa, ON 12 years ago

Really? Seriously? I love you trolls use that tired old argument, when you know that most camera phones now are so dirt cheap now. You sir, are not too bright. I have a camera phone, and it didn't cost me 80$ CDN.

I just find it ironic that we live in an era of affordable tech, but the price of food keeps going up!



[-] -1 points by fuzzyp (302) 12 years ago

Lack of competition and increased costs of production cause food prices to rise.

Technology is highly competitive so it helps keep prices low.

So its actually not ironic at all.

[-] 2 points by llf (144) 12 years ago

Yeah, they are lucky to have food and shelter and should feel priviledged. What an ingorant fool. I spit in your face.


[-] 2 points by richardkentgates (3269) 12 years ago

paid troll

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Camera phones are a dime a dozen now.

"...if you can afford a camera phone you are probably one the top 10% richest people in the world."

That is such a foolish statement. Even people in "3rd world" countries have camera phones. I know. I've been to many. Have you?


[-] 8 points by Var (195) 12 years ago

From Zucotti, in all directions.

[-] 5 points by lasinger711 (5) 12 years ago

I am anti-capitalist. By default, and especially the way it's exercised in this country, it is inherently discriminatory and oppressive to women, the poor and minorities. For a better explanation/perspective on this view see http://www.socialism.com/drupal-6.8/?q=node/291

[-] -3 points by ComunistUSA (58) 12 years ago

Basically you are saying anyone who is not a white male does not have the capability (for whatever reason) to be successful in America?

www.socialism.com is your link.....OWS is awesome!

[-] 5 points by siddsg (6) from Pune, Maharashtra 12 years ago

The solution to the Corporate greed problem is simple:

  • Avoid buying from the big guys who source their products from overseas while firing locals.
  • Buy from local small shops in your neighbourhood
  • Buy locally produced goods from the smaller guys who dont have their heads in the clouds.
[-] 6 points by easinelephant (32) 12 years ago

I agree that those of us who have the privilege of choice as consumers and can afford local products should do our best to buy local goods. But we must remember that citizens' rights must be divorced from their role as consumers: consumer boycotts can be very effective, but we must recognize that in order to cast your economic vote as a consumer, you have to have money in the first place. By that logic, only those with money have a voice.

[+] -6 points by klh34 (-21) 12 years ago

"Choice" also means people should be allowed to shop at Wallmart if they choose to...something this group doesn't seem to want to even be an option in this country.

[-] 5 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

Conversely, people should be free NOT to shop at Wal-Mart, which is difficult when they keep destroying small businesses and the economies of the towns they infiltrate purposely. No one is keeping you from entering and shopping at a Wal-Mart.

[-] 4 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

Sorry, but that's just a cliche. I shop at Walmart sometimes (but mainly because I can't afford other places.) I don't have the money to be a PC consumer.

[-] 1 points by JMAdventure (4) 12 years ago

good point ... now realize that the system you support has 'forced' you to shop in their stores because they limit your resources to shop elsewhere.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

The common person doesn't choose when and where corporations put their stores. They do it on their own... and when they do, they usually crush out the mom-and-pop shops. The consumers didn't create this problem. The corporations did.

[-] 2 points by anon5fnord (7) from Freeport, NY 12 years ago

when the choice of one, enables the hurt the group, intervention is called for to end the source of hurt.

[-] 2 points by Loucipher (18) 12 years ago

I like your idea, but local prices are absurd, we need the farmers help too!!

[-] 1 points by CorpSlave (2) 12 years ago

Anyone know where I could get a locally produced ipod?

[-] 1 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 12 years ago

When you buy from a local merchant, an average of 70 cents of every dollar spent stays within the community. When you buy from these giant stores, only about 15 cents stays within the community.

It isn't a choice of whether I can afford to shop somewhere else... our communities thrive when we support them, and it's all a little better for everyone. Small book stores, independent clothing and grocery stores and auto parts stores, etc. etc. etc... when you shop at WalMart, you're saying that you don't want options and you don't care if money stays within your community. Don't believe me? Ask the owner of your local sporting goods store... if you still have one.

[-] -1 points by klh34 (-21) 12 years ago

The lifestyle of the 99% consumes 25% of the worlds resources while you make up 4% of the population...America does not have the resources to provide the "American Dream" without purchasing from overseas.

[-] 4 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

Who says gross consumption IS the "American Dream"? That phrase was a marketing campaign to promote conspicuous consumption and the hierarchy that we live under...work and you'll get this quaint reality...right.

[-] 2 points by monjon22 (508) 12 years ago

Yes, true. The entire world has turned into marketing messages designed to make us shop, shop, shop and borrow, borrow, borrow. The American Dream was cooked up by the 1% so they could profit off us while we worked to death to buy their products.

[-] 2 points by anon5fnord (7) from Freeport, NY 12 years ago

the american dream is my nightmare- Paisley Straenj


[-] 4 points by SeaChange (134) 12 years ago

Shipping goods all the way across the world is a large part of what is consuming those resources. Even though it makes economic sense, it makes absolutely no sense in terms of the resources consumed. That's just one other example of the insanity of our system, but we would have to change the whole system to get at the root cause.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

That's complete bullshit.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

I think both SwissMiss and klh34 are both correct, but each is seeing things from a different perspective.

From klh34's perspective, he is right. Take energy for example, the USA is consuming 26.6% of it, and it is only possible through massive importation in addition to local production.


From SwissMiss' perspective, she is also right. Most Americans are hard working, and do not consume such a disproportionate amount of resources pursuing their American Dream.


I think the disagreement stems from different views of the American Dream. If is to aspire to be to the top and be like the super wealthy, then klh34 is correct. If it is to live a just and prosperous life through hard work, then SwissMiss is right.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

" If it is to live a just and prosperous life through hard work"

That's my goal. I don't need to be super wealthy, because that won't make me more empowered or evolved. It would just make me greedy having that as a goal.



[-] 4 points by brooklyn4life (18) 12 years ago

students = paychecks

acknowledging and protesting against this equals arrest and dispersal.

'go to class or go to jail' being the message to the "students" of america.

[-] 4 points by jgiardin (4) 12 years ago

I graduated in 2008, I'm 100g's in the hole with school loans from a private college. I'm one of the lucky ones to begin and obtain a job that my degree is actually for. Still my fiancee and I live in a small apartment and struggle to make ends meet, let alone live somewhat comfortable. I can't even remember the last time I went on vacation. I basically have made the decision in trying to save little by little to afford a house in a few years while paying off my loans and forgo having my dream wedding. We will most likely be married in front of a judge which I have come to terms with. I've been planning this out for the past few years, and yet try not to cringe when the government hands out millions upon millions of dollars to companies to bail them out, so they can use thousands of those dollars given in charity from the government to treat themselves to a day at the spa, while I sit at home hoping I have enough money next month to pay the electricity bill and basic cable. I support the OWS 100%. Wish I could be there! I can't afford to take off from work and protest and put a room on an american express card of $700 dollars like Dutro can. With the money that was raised, why not make it fair and split it even. Who deserves more or less shouldn't be the issue. No one is more or less deserving of it, too old or too young. Split it even. I know, I wish it was that simple.

[-] 2 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

A wedding with the Justice of the Peace is far more tasteful than any expensive wedding, so good for you guys.

[-] 1 points by Raulduke (14) 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Don't feel bad about not getting a dream wedding, especially if it's not your dream, but the dream of the TV and marketing. My parents were married in court and did not even use wedding rings. They're still happily married to this day.


[+] -9 points by klh34 (-21) 12 years ago

Why did you think it was a good idea to go 100k in the hole to get a degree from a private university and not a community college? This lack of personal accountability among OWS is why so much of the nation thinks you're entitled crybabies.

[-] 5 points by JayWalker (29) from Portland, OR 12 years ago

The definition of a entitled crybaby isn't someone who's working their ass off, living frugally and speaking the truth about the injustice in this country.

I'm gonna have to dock you some points for that one. kthxbye

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

So, are you saying that most people should go to community colleges, because those are the only things that are affordable to most? In that case, most universities would disappear. And, to put things into context, a Canadian can go to one of the best private Canadian universities for the same cost that an American can go to a community college which offers ONLY associate degrees.

Are you suggesting that people should only be allowed to obtain associate degrees or certificates? Do you think this cost comparison is fair?



[-] 4 points by Crimzon (91) from Arizona City, AZ 12 years ago

you shouldnt post Annihilate that way... that symbol almost looks like the Anarchy sign. The media could really use it against OWS and twist words around!!

As for the rest of it! More people more masses how many hired thugs of the city can there be compared to the oppressed? Together we stand! United we stand! Remeber this don't become divided in cause!!!

[-] 3 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Can someone please explain to me the difference between Anarchism and Free-Market Capitalism? Both of them seem to say that there should be no government involvement, all relations should be voluntary, and in private property.


In Free-Market Capitalism, what does the government do? Pardon my confusions, but after all the "pro-market" "down with government" rhetoric here in the USA, I'm left unable to distinguish it from anarchism.

[-] 0 points by agnosticnixie (17) from Laval, QC 12 years ago

Anarchism opposes private property and believes in class as a mover. Private property is a creature of the state and in the absence of the state, the capitalist libertarian understanding of property makes it function like a state. As such we also advocate for the workers to own the means of production.

Anarchists work on a slightly different, more anthropological understanding of the state than marxists (not any form of human group with rules is a state).

Anarcho-Capitalism is more or less a 60s abberration which is not really anarchist; there is a market anarchist thing that's a bit like titoism was for marxism, and which also doesn't recognize private property of the means of production (only possession based on use), called mutualism

(EDIT - For anyone who sees it and thinks "private property" means owning stuff, private property is not the shirt on your back, it's not your computer, etc)

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

I don't want to over-simplify, but my understanding is thus so far:

  • Individualist Anarchists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualist_anarchism) believe the state should not police and protect private property. A person should protect their own property.

  • Free-Market Libertarian Capitalists believe in a state, and the protection and policing of private property should be a socialized cost.

Is that correct?

[-] 0 points by agnosticnixie (17) from Laval, QC 12 years ago

I would also add that Individualist Anarchists are one of many schools of thought in anarchism (but they also fall under socialist anarchism, as most forms of anarchism do). Anarcho-Syndicalism is not really individualist, for example.

The only "aberration" branches are primitivism and anarcho-capitalism, both of which tend to be relatively reactionary. Well and there's anarcho-nationalism which is essentially as anarchist as fascism can be (i.e. not at all) and is one more fascist ploy to take the trappings of a semi-popular left wing ideology to peddle their dope. It's also a very recent phenomenon that's mostly limited to a group of California neonazis.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

I think this would be more clear from an example; I'm not so great with political philosophies and broad sweeping terms.

The Setup Let us suppose there are 10 farmers and there is a river that they draw water from. One farmer buys from the state (or other default owner) water rights to greatly expand his operations, and the 9 farmers downstream no longer have water. They decide to revolt.

Individualist Anarchist Reaction (I think) That's the farmer's problem. If he makes his neighbours angry, he must deal with the consequences.

Free Market Capitalist Reaction (I think) The state should send in the police and use necessary force to stop the 9 farmers. All 10 farmers should contribute to pay for the police force.

Is this correct?

[-] 0 points by agnosticnixie (17) from Laval, QC 12 years ago

It's the farmer's problem: if he fucks the community, then the community has more than a right to have a voice in that. I admit that a number of anarchists would argue that the first farmer is in fact stealing the community's commons and has no right to this.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Does that mean that Individualist Anarchists and Free Market Capitalists are the same?

[-] 0 points by agnosticnixie (17) from Laval, QC 12 years ago

No, it means that you're defining terms too vaguely to be useful. Also stop talking about Individualist Anarchists as if all anarchists were individualists.

We don't believe in private property, we don't believe in enclosing the commons, we don't believe in rents, in wage slavery. I would not be opposed to the first farmer getting shot because what he is doing is claiming as his everyone else's water. This is true of all serious anarchists, except maybe the violent bit, pacifist anarchists would be content with the farmer being reprimanded and having his ass kicked.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Ah, I wasn't clear what perspective you were speaking for. What is the Free Market Capitalist position then, is it as I stated?

[-] 0 points by agnosticnixie (17) from Laval, QC 12 years ago

It's that it's the farmer's property and that he has the right to do as he pleases. Also crush the uppity commies (ie the other 9).

In the anarchist position, the first farmer is usurping the common property of the other farmers of the community.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

In other words, anarchists have a view like that of the indigenous peoples of the USA, correct.... that no one owns the land and its resources and that it all should be shared among everyone? I agree.

It was white man who brought the idea of land and resource ownership to this side of the world. Before they arrived, that and disease did not exist at all. And look where all of that has gotten us!

[-] 1 points by zoe (67) 12 years ago

The banner used the circle A symbol, so its inclusion was appropriate.

[-] 1 points by oLs8c5iupw (7) 12 years ago

That entire paragraph's inclusion is appropriate if the intention is to disenfranchise the part of the movement that doesn't agree with either sentiment.

[-] 3 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I think that something totally needs to be done about the amount of student loan debt that college grads are amassing. It seems like it will be on line with the #subprime mortgage crisis fallout if you were to ask me! So many college grads are graduating now with insurmountable debt, which will probably saddle them for a good portion of their lives! Then depending on what type of industry you are lucky to get into, well you can't do #non-profit work, and pay off some of these loans in a reasonable fashion, some students will be forever paying off #debt. Then, you better not even think about doing any type of #federal loan default, well because your credit will be wrecked for life!

[-] 3 points by grapes (5232) 12 years ago

Businesses get depreciation allowances for their capital assets. Should the students try to get depreciation allowances for their educational loans, too, to be fair? Perhaps we should make college costs tax depreciable like business assets.

[-] 3 points by Garybryant2 (42) 12 years ago

A bit off topic, but, not really, huh?

Today was another disappointing day.  I applied for something I thought I had a pretty good chance at getting.  But, I got another rejection in the form of no phone call or notification at all.

In other words:  I wasn't worth the 30 seconds necessary to tell me I was undesirable and unwanted.

December 26 will be the fifth anniversary of the loss of the last actual job I had.  Of all the jobs I applied for in that time, I never got one phone call back.  Not one.

I suppose I deserve it.  I have OCD and panic attacks and the previous four jobs I had were lost due to panic attacks.  The word has been out on me for a while.  They won't give the dignity of a job to a 43 year old mentally handicapped man.

Right now, I'm dealing with the pain, humiliation, fear and anger of another rejection.  My family doesn't care how I feel and, because I'm self-conscious about my afflictions, I have no friends to call just to talk about how I feel.  

I am an island.  Marginalized and secondary to all.  A God forsaken creature.

That's my story.

Gary Bryant Riverside, CA garybryant30@gmail.com

[-] 5 points by Coreupt (294) 12 years ago

You are well spoken and compelling. There are many in your shoes who would benefit from knowing that they are not alone. You can use your experience and intellect to advocate for them. The world will be better because of you.

[-] 3 points by JMAdventure (4) 12 years ago

you are only undesirable and unwanted to a system that values only on how much you can contribute to financial goals. humanity is waking up and seeing value apart and outside this inherently flawed system of thinking. hold on ... help is on the way

[-] 3 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 12 years ago

I have OCD and also Attention Deficit Disorder, and, no doubt about it, it is much harder for people who have these conditions. I just hope you're getting the best medical care you can; and, obviously, I have no idea whether your panic attacks can be controlled with the right treatments (therapy and meds, I wouldn't know your specific situation), but they could help. I'm sorry if it sounds like I'm giving advice inappropriately, but isolation is so typical of many psychiatric problems, and I'm sure it would help if you could find some kind of support group. And even if it's not a group specifically for your particular issues, some of the 12-step programs are great. Don't let the bastards get you down!

[-] 1 points by Garybryant2 (42) 12 years ago

I suppose...

[-] 1 points by anon5fnord (7) from Freeport, NY 12 years ago

You are not alone Gary, hang in there. I feel the same way you do, for a long time now, for years I have felt all alone in my struggles with life in this system. But for the first time I have heard the cries from the movement and have heard my thoughts, and fears, and cries of anguish echoed, even though I was not there to speak them. Have hope Gary, we are being heard.

[-] 1 points by tsdevi (307) 12 years ago

Sorry you feel this way.

[-] 3 points by oLs8c5iupw (7) 12 years ago

Banners reading "Ⓐnnihilate Capitalism; Retaliate and Destroy Police State" do nothing but harm.

[-] 1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 12 years ago

destroy police state yes.....not capitalism

[-] 1 points by oLs8c5iupw (7) 12 years ago

Entertain me, How does a violent sounding slogan like "Retaliate and Destroy Police State" help a supposedly non-violent peaceful movement?

[-] 3 points by StevenRoyal (490) from Dania Beach, FL 12 years ago

Things can be destroyed without violence. Segregation was destroyed. Apartheid in India was destroyed.

[-] 2 points by icfmike (173) 12 years ago

In usa segregation was destroyed in law, not really in life. Apartheid was in S Africa, Gandhi showed how to get the great british empire to walk away.

[-] 2 points by oLs8c5iupw (7) 12 years ago

Sure, things can be destroyed without violence. But the word itself has a violent and negative connotation especially in this case where it is preceded by the word retaliate.

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (23799) 12 years ago

It is up to you kids to fight for your future. Don't give up. We older folks are with you 100%.

[-] 2 points by i8jomomma (80) 12 years ago

why do you let the pigs push you around? take the pepper spray away from them and shove it up their asses

[-] 1 points by jimmycrackerson (940) from Blackfoot, ID 12 years ago

I agree with jomomma!

[-] 2 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

Six U.S. senators and six members of the U.S. House of Representatives — who make up what’s known as the Supercommittee — face a Nov. 23 deadline to cut the deficit by a staggering $1.5 trillion. Pell Grants help millions earn their way into the middle class and strengthen our economy, yet Pell is a prime target for crippling cuts. On Twitter you can tweet the following to support #CUNY Students in the fight against #Tuition Hikes and saving what is left of #Financial Aid:

Pell Grants are under attack! Stand up for students and America’s future by visiting this action center. #SavePell

Hard-working #students deserve our support! #SavePell to save our future. @Clyburn @ChrisVanHollen @RepBecerra

Do you care about America's long-term economic health? Then #SavePell! @RepFredUpton @RepDaveCamp @RepHensarling

Don’t dim the future for millions of #college #students! #SavePell to open the doors to #edu. @JohnKerry @PattyMurray

Unless we #SavePell, America will fall behind in the global economy. Don't cut #Pell! @SenJonKyl @RobPortman @SenToomey

New norm for college students: Many are older; ¾ work. #SavePell to help them out of poverty.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Pell Grants are counterproductive and exacerbate the problem of unreasonable tuition.

[-] 2 points by resistance14 (2) 12 years ago

It would be great if you had footage showing the peaceful protest first and the cops coming in to violently break it up. Or were the cops there already? More context will definitively show how our First Amendment right to peaceful protest is being systematically underminded by the 1% through their directives to the police to quell this movement immediately. When are we going to protest consistent police brutality in front of Bloomberg's office? It's time for another rally.

[-] 2 points by Maggiebo (12) 12 years ago

Love the quote at the end of this article. Education should be a right. Institutions of Higher Learning have become big business. Education used to mean enlightenment, though not necessarily a road to riches. Most "educated" people know that a fulfilled life is more important than a life full of "stuff." I am thankful that I got my education before MBA was the mark of a successful person. I went to universities in California before they went into the toilet of big business. The OWS young people deserve no less.

[-] 2 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 12 years ago


Bird's eye view - Shows what really happened. It's pretty clear the students were trying to hold a truly public hearing outside of the 'public hearing' they had been denied access to. They were going to sit down and have a hearing, but rather than take a chance that the real issues would get discussed, the university chose to use their police force to silence their students (& alums, & faculty).

[-] 2 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

Students need legal assistance, that is number one. That which went down last nite, should not happen again. I was there, and I don't know how that happened! When I left at 5:55 PM on Baruch Campus to go to class, those folks where there peacefully, surrounded by security, but peaceful! That is number one. Number two, where are the #mainstream media folks, you can't get one camera crew out to these civil disobedience protests. That is just such a level of hypocrisy. We need all the high profilers to come and support students of CUNY, join the movement to speak out, enough is enough!

[-] 2 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

I think that we need to get more lawyers involved to help students protect their constitutional rights! What happened last nite at #CUNY need not happen again in that vain! I was there at #Baruch College on Campus up until about 5:55 PM waiting for an elevator to get to class at 6:00 PM and the students in the lobby were protesting in a non-violent manner when #Baruch Security Forces surrounded them, but still everything was peaceful, just the students were under seige while they practiced their civil rights afforded them in the Constitution, but when it escalated to that violence I saw in the video clip posted, I don't understand how Security Forces took it there. This must have happened once I got on the elevator. However, what I am saying is that the students since they started rallying at #Madison Square Park were constantly confined to these small spaces by the #NYPD, as they were outside of #Baruch College too, so then what happens when those type of security tactics are used, that is where the problem lays. And what I am saying is that this is not fair to the students who are excercising their rights, and they are getting shut down from having a voice from the onset! We need Lawyers, We need #Michael Moore, We Need #Oprah, We Need #Reverend Al Shaprton, We Need #Russell Simmons, We Need Some HIGH PROFILERS TO COME OUT AND SUPPORT US, BRING YOUR FILM CREW, WHERE IS #SPIKE LEE, WHERE ARE OUR MAINSTREAM FILMAKERS, OUR INDEPENDENT FILMAKERS, HOW ABOUT #SOLADID OBRIEN, OR WHATEVER THAT CHICK'S NAME IS? NO #ANDERSON COOPER? HE WAS ALL OVER THE UPRISINGS IN EGYPT, BUT NOW HE CAN'T REPORT ON #OCCUPY WALL STREET AND ALL THE SPAWNIGS? WHAT IS THAT ABOUT? WHY ARE THE BIGGIES NOT OUT CAPTURING ALL THESE #OCCUPY RELATED #CUNY STUDENT MOVEMENTS AS THEY ARE IN THE MAKING, AND WHAT ABOUT BILL COSBY! HE ALWAYS HAD SO MUCH TO SAY, WHERE IS DENZEL WASHINGTON, THE NAACP, DANNY GLOVER AND DEMOCRACY NOW! These students need help behind their cause, which is a righteous one, and they need help securing that their rights are protected! Enough already, you can't have young folks getting their heads bashed in like this! It is not right, they deserve better, they are our future! THE YOUTH ARE THE FUTURE, WHAT IS TO BECOME OF THIS AMERICAN NATION!

[-] -1 points by Raulduke (14) 12 years ago

The video looked like an angry mob causing a disturbance. Wasn't there a meeting taking place? I'm sure civilized rational voices would have been heard at said meeting. All the shouting and mic checks only communicate anger. The cops cleared out an angry mob from a building. Nothing unconstitutional about that. Stick with the main message-getting corporations out of politics and vice versa. This is fringe. Don't like that school go somewhere else.

[-] 1 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

First of all, when you walk onto a public campus surrounded by police in riot gear, and police helicopters flying over top, there is already friction put in the air. So let us get that right, first and foremost. I cannot speak for why the altercation in the Baruch College building, but I was there and the students were peaceful when I left to go to class at 5:55PM, so how it escalated to what appeared on that video is beyond me and totally uncalled for, I don't care what the crowds were. Baruch has so much space, they should have known people were coming to the hearings, and arranged for a larger room. A sense of being proactive would have been nice, and the smart thing to do! Now, I was there outside Baruch College around 5:30PM or so, and it was like a fortress, and the only ones seemingly able to film were some Special Police Ops, and I don't even know who they were, and why the need for all of that type of Police/Military Style Presence outside of a Public Institution. So now if you come to protest peacefully, in a civil disobedience manner, why the need to be backed up into some small size corner of all that open wide space outside of Baruch College, and surrounded by NYPD police officers armed, looking like they were ready for some type of war, that brings a sense of uneasiness from the onset. This was the tactic used on the students outside of CUNY and Madison Park. So, I think the police were the ones who came out in anger, just by the mere presence of that type of show of force, totally unnecessary!

[-] 2 points by GetAngry (35) from Warren, MI 12 years ago

Aligning against capitalism as a whole will not help the movement unless more people are educated that socialism isn't this evil political system.

[-] 2 points by sufinaga (513) 12 years ago

it's OUR COMMUNITY v this psychopathic society! they are making money out of our children's education, making money out of our sick, making money from private prisons, making money out of our boys' deaths, and none of it can be justified! see the money they are spending on policing our peaceful protest. see the money they are spending to suppress the Egyptian people. see the money they plan to spend on bombing iran, see the money they are spending on a doomed mars colony. just see the money they are spending on security to protect their property from FAKE terrorist attacks. just see their "community policing" stop and frisk to instill fear. we are facing an armed gang of psychopathic thugs! aint that the truth?

[-] 2 points by moutainhiker1 (5) 12 years ago

1 word tells all the problem GREED!

[-] 2 points by jssss (71) 12 years ago

this is great and the right direction the movement needs to go! some nay sayers before were saying, "don't hate the loan companies" etc. yes, oppressive interest rates are a prob, but having to take thousands out to get a degree when tution cost have risen at all time rate AND there is a week market for jobs it unacceptable.

fight tuition hikes! occupy tuition.

[-] 2 points by exLAinTampaBay (2) 12 years ago

The real question is why has tuition become so expensive. What has made the costs skyrocket? It appears to me that government intervention into the free market causes increased cost because it is subsidized market.

[-] 6 points by llf (144) 12 years ago

Tax cuts for the rich lead to less state revenue which leads to under-investment and passing more costs to students--many low income-who have to then spend a higher share of that low income on school. That can also lead to higher droputs among talented kids earning minimun wage that just can't affort the tuition they need to pay to get out of poverty...this actually ends up costing the taxpayers more over the long run and leads to loss and under-utilization of talents and skills...

[+] -4 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

OMG. We can't have students paying for their own tuition.

[-] 3 points by llf (144) 12 years ago

Not if the costs is so high that it prevents them from going to college in the first place. A true genius, eh.

[-] 0 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

LOL. Government subsidizing of education is WHY cost are so high, genius.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago


[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

You made me change my mind, We desperately NEED TO SUBSIDIZE EDUCATION FOR FOLKS LIKE YOU beginning with economics then moving on to history and the US Consittution.

[-] 3 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

What is your opinion on the steady and affordable costs for university education that were the norm from the 1950's through the 1990's?

For example, large government intervention in the form of the 1944 G.I. Bill and the 1965 Higher Education Act should have increased tuition considerably if your analysis holds true. What is your view as to why tuition remained steady in the face of such large-scale intervention?

[-] 1 points by Sinaminn (104) from Sarasota, FL 12 years ago

Demand, the weak dollar, inflation, cuts to education funding, big fancy buildings, higher insurance premiums and benefit costs, ridiculous salaries for staff and administrators, expansive cultural programs, luxurious athletic facilities, utilities, digital age enhancements, statues, gardens, parking lots... should I go on?

[-] 1 points by BreadLandPeace (359) 12 years ago

Staff in colleges and universities are not well paid, compared to the private sector.

[-] 2 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago



[-] -1 points by RufusJFisk52 (259) 12 years ago

you are correct...others ignore that connection and just demand free stuff....but nothing is free in this world

[-] -2 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Exactly! it is the free market, and individual freedom to decide, that will align tuition with the value of the education.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 11 years ago

In compliment - as this problem has not gone away - in fact has gotten worse - and the denial of education by economic means or by terrorism - is still denial of education.

There's a new petition taking off on Change.org, and we think you might be interested in signing it:

Stand with Malala: End the Education Emergency

By Malala Y. London

Sign Malala's Petition

On 15 June fourteen girls were murdered in Pakistan simply because they wanted an education. Many people know my story but there are stories every day of children fighting for an education. The basic right to education is under attack around the world.

We need change now and I need your help to achieve it.

You can help me and girls and boys across the world. We are asking the United Nations General Assembly to fund new teachers, schools, books and recommit to getting every girl and boy in school by December 2015.

This July 12th is my 16th birthday and I am personally delivering this petition to the United Nations Secretary General Bank Ki Moon.

I became a victim of terrorism after I spoke out in favour of education of girls. These innocent girls killed in Pakistan have nothing to do with politics and only wanted to empower themselves through education.

If we want to bring change, if we want progress, if we want development, if we want the education of girls, we should be united. We should not wait. We should do it now.

Sign Malala's Petition

The person (or organization) who started this petition is not affiliated with Change.org. Change.org did not create this petition and is not responsible for the petition content.

[-] 1 points by KnaveDave (357) 12 years ago

It didn't look in the least like the police created the melee. The crowd was screaming and pushing from the very beginning of the video, and the police were slowly and deliberately pushing them back from the inner doors. Whether the crowd had a legal right to get inside the doors, or whether the room was already exceeding its maximum legal occupancy under fire codes, I have no idea; but the police look far more restrained in that video than the crowd! FAR more restrained!

So, there is something wrong with the eye sight of the person who initiated this post. I'm thinking denial that causes them to only see what they WANT to see. If I were the police, I'd be frightened to be in their position in the center of all of that.

Of course, if the police had no legal right to crowd control in that instance (such as the meeting being legitimately a closed meeting or the occupancy limits of the building), that's a different story.

--Knave Dave http://thegreatrecession.info/blog/2011/11/occupy-wall-street-now-unoccupied-but-stronger/

--Knave Dave

[-] 1 points by journalgo (1) 12 years ago

CUNY's organization inside organization, like Math learning center that separated with Math department, just ask the directors of these centers and their cronies how much they pocketed the money and their ambitious attitude to put the real dedicated people down.

[-] 1 points by mreyes603 (2) from New York, NY 12 years ago

i just wanted to add that STUDENTS UNITED FOR A FREE CUNY are the organizers of this event. and we also have another protest on 11.28 when the board of trustees "votes". This is also a public event and we would like as many students there possible. for more info fin us on the web STUDENTS UNITED FOR A FREE CUNY.

[-] 1 points by RepublicanForSinglePayer (8) 12 years ago

I started attending CUNY in 1975 when tuition was FREE. While attending tuition increased to the point where I could not attend without getting a student loan. The total amount of my loans were equal to a down payment on a house. It's even worse now. The cost of education is turning into a form of financial terrorism. It will control you, enslave you, impoverish you.

[-] 1 points by TexasThunder (68) 12 years ago

U.S. Const. Article 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

[-] 1 points by CorpSlave (2) 12 years ago

Whens occupy 5th ave going to happen I'm not big on Occupy wall street but 5th ave I'm in

[-] 1 points by pinker (586) 12 years ago

College degrees are overrated. Educate yourself - that way you don't have to pay for all the BS courses that have nothing to do with your studies.

[-] 1 points by OurTimes2011 (377) from Arlington, VA 12 years ago

Wow! These college kids are onto something.

[-] 1 points by CUNYStrikeVet89 (2) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

The City University of New York was FREE for almost 125 years; through two World Wars, the Great Depression and numerous recessions. In the words of founder Towsend Harris: "Open the doors to all . . . Let the children of the rich and the poor take their seats together and know of no distinction save that of industry, good conduct, and intellect." It was not until the 1970s, when the population of the university reached 50% people of color, that the City University instituted tuition.

[-] 1 points by CUNYStrikeVet89 (2) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

For some background on how CUNY turned security into a paramilitary intelligence gathering organization, which is currently run by retired FBI agent William G. Barry, see: http://www.geocities.ws/ccnymess/oct2000/elique.html

[-] 1 points by OneVoice (153) 12 years ago

My brother graduated from Cornell University in the mid 1980s. His debt was $10,000. The idea behind making higher education affordable for those wishing to continue college programs is turning into just that. An "idea". Wasn't always like that.

[-] 1 points by redteddy (263) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Watching that was frankly depressing. There is very little I respect about this country anymore.

[-] 1 points by MiMi1026 (937) from Springfield, VA 12 years ago

Just how long can the police keep beating up on the own citizens. The stress will kill them. Convert NYPD before its to late.

[-] 1 points by lilacaraby (21) 12 years ago

It is astounding how much colleges charge for degrees now at the same time they employ horrible tactics against their employees. That's all employees--not just the pitiful amount they pay adjunct professors--and most are hired on as adjuncts. Get this: AND they want you to have a Ph.D. to boot! Imagine that? What's the word for that? I got my M.A. late in life, went deep into debt, and now I work at a job where I make barely, just barely over the Federal Poverty level. At my age I'm lucky I have a job. I am the 99% and I'm SICK of it, sick of the arrogance of wealth, the rapacious greed that has stripped us, and the planet. JUSTICE! FOR ALL! The 99% movement, OWS has only begun in this world wide campaign. I SALUTE YOU! Thank you, for the inspiration and HOPE! My Thanksgiving is KNOWING you are out there and I am not alone.

[-] 1 points by nich (57) 12 years ago

10 million people marching in Washington. Every student venue demonstrated against. A natural alliance between OWS, 2 million non profits devoted to social justice and private sector cooperation to raise money for small business and employ people as a counterweight to the corporate elite will do the trick of creating a new humane paradigm with distributed, humane, and trustworthy goals..

The political system will fall in line or risk dissolution. All are separately in place and working. Who will make it into a movement and put the 1% in its place?

[-] 1 points by jimmycrackerson (940) from Blackfoot, ID 12 years ago

I quit school five years ago and just started buying and collecting textbooks from 2nd hand stores ($1 - $3 per book) They may be 'outdated,' but you're still getting the same basic information. I scored an entire World Book encyclopedia set for $20.The Knowledge gained is like a 'snowball effect.' The more and more books I bought and browsed through, the more books I wanted. I'm not trying to toot my own horn. Because I have not read every single page of the thousands of books I have, but they are very helpful for reference. I'm just saying I've probably spent no more than $500 for all of my books and a good Education, as opposed to $40,000++ that many of us have wasted going to some greedy institution, many of which try to opinionize or institutionalize their pupils from the get-go. Think for yourself and question authority...

[-] 1 points by rocket88doowop (30) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

The cost of college goes up faster than salaries and than inflation. Paying for college for the older two of my three daughters left me with no money thus I have no food no matter how many hours I work. My oldest daughter graduated from the CUNY college called Brooklyn College this year but my middle daughter still goes to Brooklyn College and she will find that she will not be able to find a job when she graduates and even if she finds a job upon graduation, she will not be able to afford to pay back her student loans. My youngest daughter is in yeshivah high school but I cannot afford to pay her tuition and I will not be able to afford to send her to college. All this is one of many reasons why college aught to be free of charge for everybody in the USA and the rest of the world and is also one of many reasons why money aught to be raised to create decent jobs in the private section for everybody in the USA and the rest of the world too. Who would like to help me make all this possible?

[-] 1 points by rocket88doowop (30) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

The cost of college goes up faster than salaries and than inflation. Paying for college for the older two of my three daughters left me with no money thus I have no food no matter how many hours I work. My oldest daughter graduated from the CUNY college called Brooklyn College this year but my middle daughter still goes to Brooklyn College and she will find that she will not be able to find a job when she graduates and even if she finds a job upon graduation, she will not be able to afford to pay back her student loans. My youngest daughter is in yeshivah high school but I cannot afford to pay her tuition and I will not be able to afford to send her to college. All this is one of many reasons why college aught to be free of charge for everybody in the USA and the rest of the world and is also one of many reasons why money aught to be raised to create decent jobs in the private section for everybody in the USA and the rest of the world too. Who would like to help me make all this possible?

[-] 1 points by jamierson (3) 12 years ago

FINALLY some of those officers looked like they wanted to be on our side #OfficersForOccupy

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 12 years ago
[-] 1 points by ShaneSpaulmaster (36) 12 years ago


This is an interesting idea, doesn't seem to have much of a following yet though.

Good luck and God speed.

[-] 1 points by RomCath (24) 12 years ago

Effrayants progrès de la dictature!

[-] 1 points by renasansman (1) 12 years ago

Why would anyone want capitalism? Has it done us any good?

[-] 1 points by freecorvus (22) 12 years ago

CUNY staff and board are really dangerous and my suggestion to you is stay away from this school. They invited me (Gender: Male) for a meeting at CityTech, Brooklyn, now please see attached e-mail how Director of this school and special council at office of President (Gender: Both Female) had communication about me by their official CUNY e-mail and they sent a copy of their dirty mind plan to my e-mail!


They were in contact with chief of Public Safety too!

[-] 1 points by NonParticipant (151) 12 years ago

annihilate capitalism? That's going to win over alot of the Joe-Schmoe 99%.

[-] 1 points by bigbangbilly (594) 12 years ago

Next year I am going to college.


[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

It was never "free" The taxpayers of NY paid for it.

[-] 0 points by raines (699) 12 years ago

No occupy harvard ? they have a 32billion endowment

[-] 1 points by Raulduke (14) 12 years ago

They kicked em out already. The whole thing was pretty ridiculous.

[-] 0 points by foxla (39) from Queens, NY 12 years ago

There is a #mainstream media blackout, and we need to strategize about that too, and how might we #OCCUPY mainstream media. The #mainstream media blackout must stop! We need #media coverage from all angles to tell the truth coming from the people, the students, the boots on the ground, championing for fairness, and #do the right thing in this #American Nation.

[-] 0 points by clydecatskills (17) from Stormville, NY 12 years ago

Wow, I see protesters shouting angrily and the cops are simply holding back the unruly ones.

Nice "spin".

[-] 2 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 12 years ago

The protesters are shouting "Rise Up! Take A Seat!" It's a cry of non-violent protest letting everyone know to sit down so they could conduct their own hearing outside of the 'public hearing' they were being illegally barred from attending. Watch the bird's eye view for the real story.


Best mic check from the video: At 2:55 - "I am an alumni and a teacher here. It breaks my heart to see the school that I love Threatening my students"



[-] 0 points by edwinre (1) from Newark, NJ 12 years ago

If the government didn't give out loans, the prices of universities would be so much cheaper because the majority of people wouldn't be able to afford it without the loans. Also who were thinks that capitalism is the problem? Because it honestly isn't. The the bail outs was a socialist act, in real capitalism the government would have just let the banks fail. I believe that capitalism is the way to go, but it has to be regulated so the working class isn't taken advantage of.

[-] 3 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

None of what you've said is accurate at all. The government doesn't give out student loans. Corporations like Sallie Mae do.... you know, FOR-PROFIT corporations!!

[-] 1 points by edwinre (1) from Newark, NJ 12 years ago

Sorry I meant subsidized loans. The government pays for the interest. If this wasn't available, then we would be paying less.


[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 12 years ago

They have to raise costs across the board because medicaid costs are killing the state.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Tuition has to go up because medical costs are so high.... really??? Wow.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 12 years ago

Well, duhhh... medical costs consume 40% of the New York state budget. Medicaid is our greatest expense.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

So, what about tuition in other states?

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 12 years ago

Allotments for Medicaid are on a sliding scale basis; poorer states receive a greater percentage of the Federal pie but in many cases they also have a greater percentage of illegals and poor. All of these things effect the state budget as dollars available for education.

[-] 0 points by JosephCouture (45) 12 years ago

Are you trying to understand how such wanton violence could be perpetrated against peaceful men and women? It’s really not that hard to comprehend. It seems we are born that way. Read about how entertaining it can be to make lesser creatures suffer-

“Cruelty: Great Fun For the Whole Family” www.josephcouture.com

[-] 0 points by inca (42) 12 years ago

From what I've observed, sadism seems to run in families.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

In my own experience, I've often found that sadism in adults (I feel kids don't often realize what they are doing), stems from two different reactions to negative experiences. On one end of the spectrum, people feel negative experience and think, "Wow, I wouldn't want anyone else to feel the way I did." On the other end of the spectrum, the reaction is, "Well, I had negative experience, so I deserve to get back at others to make it even."

I suspect that sadism might stem from a aberration of the parts of the brain responsible for justice, individual/group identity, and personal self worth. To a sadist, I think, they see their own needs as vastly more important to the needs of others, and it "makes sense" to harm complete strangers in order to "get even".

[-] 0 points by alrodabaugh (0) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

And so it goes...

Next time you won't be pushing them anywhere.

Who do you think you are?

[-] 0 points by KahnII (170) 12 years ago

"Ⓐnnihilate Capitalism"

And you wonder why you're not gaining the much needed support of middle America....

[-] -1 points by ComunistUSA (58) 12 years ago


[-] 0 points by Misenka141957 (61) 12 years ago

Sssso true! Screw with us and we eat them alive!


[-] 0 points by RockyJ (208) 12 years ago

All I can say is the RepubliCON Party doesn't have a clue & you're going down!

[-] -2 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Barack, Joe, Nancy are playing you like a fool.

[-] 0 points by JosephCouture (45) 12 years ago

The Occupy movement may represent the 99 percent, but not all of the 99 percent will be present. A homeless man wanted everyone to know he thinks you’re great, but he won’t be there with you. “I’m just trying to stay alive,” he told me.

Read his story here: www.josephcouture.com “Preoccupied In Hell”



[-] -1 points by CorpSlave (2) 12 years ago

Personally I find the hypocrisy of the Occupy movement fascinating the irony is this example of skyrocketing tuition costs is one I can agree on. You say wall street is greedy? No kidding its how all your pensions are paid for in your beloved public sector jobs you so proudly demand..yet the institutions you demand be free for everyone raise costs higher than anything else...stop for a moment and think are really protesting the financial greed fairly? are you treating all greed equal? or like the same people you claim are immune from punishment do you also "allow" certain greed but shame others?

[-] -2 points by ComunistUSA (58) 12 years ago

Once all of the parents of these children learn that their kids are preaching anti-capitalism they will stop supporting them financially and this will be over in a week.

[-] -2 points by ComunistUSA (58) 12 years ago

People who think this "movement" is going to anything but die a short silent death with slogans like "Annihilate Capitalism" remind me of all the people who sold off their worldly possessions when the end of the world came and went not that long ago.

[-] -3 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

If you don't like the tuition being charged, go somewhere the is charging a tuition that you are willing to pay. temper tantrums will not make the world a better place to live, thoughtful decisions and positive actions will.

[-] 2 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

My understanding is that CUNY, City University of New York, colleges are on the same level as community colleges. For people who live in New York, I am unaware of any college that has lower tuition than CUNY schools. I'm still learning myself, it's a big city, but I think this is the case.

[-] -3 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

I just checked. The tuition is VERY reasonable and, no doubt, heavily subsidized by the the payers, aka, the 99 percent. We need to take personal responsibility and stop demanding everyone else work and pay for what we want. time to grow up.

[-] 2 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Could you please clarify your position on the relation between tuition and personal responsibility? Do you feel that there is a limit on what it should cost for people to enter the work-force with a college education, or would your position remain unchanged if prices went up another 100%?

[-] -2 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Individuals should pay what it honestly cost for their education. Not complicated. That will be the driving force that keep costs reasonable. I learned that in Economics 101 which I paid for without government loans or subsidies; I worked hard and earned it.

[-] 2 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Does your statement imply that you would support legislation that removed all government assistance for colleges? State funded schools, loans, or otherwise.

What is your position on the cost of K-12 education, specifically, who should pay for it?

[-] 0 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Don't you see, it is the government "assistance" that is driving up tuitions making it unaffordable to go to school without government "assistance"? but the government doesn't have any money except for what it takes from us; and the vicious cycle continues. We will only by empowered if we say NO to this manipulative nonsense and take responsibility for our lives. Isnt what we are really seeking, freedom? the more we empower government, the less free we are.

[-] 3 points by subugu (3) 12 years ago

"the more we empower government, the less free we are"-- I assume you find the constitution repugnant? It is a pure delineation of powers. Me thinks you generalize a wee bit too much.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

I don't understand;, the Consitution LIMITS the power of the central government and reserves powers "to the states ...or to the PEOPLE.". The wisdom, kindness, and genius of this country resides in the hearts and minds of the people, not in the congressional subcommittees of central beaurcratic government institutions.

[-] 2 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Excuse me if I'm slow to catch on, but I like to think over things very thoroughly. Even though there was heavy government involvement in college fees, take the 1944 GI Bill or the 1965 Higher Education Act, prices stayed in line with inflation all the way through 1975. College prices still remained within the realm of median income all the way through the early 2000's.

In recent years, government funding in the form of scholarships and school funding has gone significantly down, but the cost to students has gone significantly up. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_education_in_the_United_States#Finances)

Do you have an explanation for the increase of prices despite the declining role of government?

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

Federal government spending on higher education has INCREASED every year since WWII to the current 7% GDP.

[-] 2 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Can you show a causal relation, or link to a study, between increased fraction of GDP spending and higher education cost to students? We already see that a recent decrease in government spending is linked to an increase in cost to the student. Is your position that spending on education, in and of itself, is a policy we should reverse?

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

Take out inflation and the effect of lowered GDP - what do the numbers look like in more rational terms?

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

In the first two years of the Obama administration "SPENDING ON STUDENT AID HAS GROWN BY NEARLY 50% to 145 BILLION.". Nuff said.

[-] 2 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

While the states have cut back and cut back. The net effect has been skyrocketing tuition.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

No question, tuition has been skyrocketing. And will continue to skyrocket as long as federal government subsidies continue to drive them up.

[-] 1 points by cmt (1195) from Tolland, CT 12 years ago

And government support cuts drive up tuition.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

No, they do not drive up tuition, they drive up the cost to the purchaser who in turn determines the value of the education. That is what controls the cost of higher education.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Are you speaking of spending on elementary education? If so, what does THAT have to do with college tuition?

[-] 1 points by StevenRoyal (490) from Dania Beach, FL 12 years ago

I used to believe in all that hard work stuff too. I used to work 14 hour days with a full-time and part time job, but I got sick of never seeing my daughter, not having any time for myself, and just relaxing. Now I just trade momentum for my account, my uncle, and a few others. I sit in front of a computer, watch the monitor a few hours in the morning and the afternoon and make more money in about 15 hours or less a week than I used to do in 14 hours per day. I made 7% on my triple DOW long overnight for me and my friends on Wednesday! Hard work is truly for suckers! True, my dad worked long hours to give a middle-class life for us, but I hardly ever saw him, and that sucked, and when had that heart attack at 54, that really sucked. But hard work now-a-days? Seriously? I'm done at 4PM EVERYDAY. Some weeks, I'm good by Monday morning!

I really can't help but laugh at this Hard Work pity party crap

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

Are you in favor of an uneducated society, because that is exactly what your comments make me think.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

My bad. I am absolutely for an educated and enlightened society. I think it is so important, we need to take responsibility to ensure high quality affordable higher education. My point is that the path we are on is obviously taking us on a downward spiral. We can do better, we must.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

I agree with you here. I just don't see how government subsidies would drive tuition up. Subsidies make prices do down.... not up.

[-] 1 points by BraddDavis (10) 12 years ago

NO, NO, NO! Did I say no? give it some thought. I don't have time to explain but government subsidies in the long term ALWAYS result in increasing costs for the product or service subsidized.

[-] 1 points by vnayar (289) from Brooklyn, NY 12 years ago

Just for context, I thought I'd put the numbers up for people to see.


Estimated Annual Cost for 4-Year Student (tuition + other costs):

  • NY Resident Living at Home: $11,788
  • NY Resident Away from Home: $22,032
  • Out of State and Away from Home: $30,702

For comparison, I lived on campus during my bachelors at a private 4-year university. I worked every summer and paid about $4.5K with about $2K in loans per year. Combined with a grant, that covered my costs, tuition and housing together.

[+] -5 points by JohnMarsden (47) 12 years ago

Hey look another video that starts at the police action but not at what caused the whole confrontation. You guys are so dishonest it's disgusting.

[-] 4 points by nickhowdy (1104) 12 years ago

Well prove it..

[-] 3 points by nimbus22 (106) from Chaska, MN 12 years ago

oh look another video that ends with police using force to stop people from speaking. You guys are so fascist it's disgusting.

[-] 1 points by llf (144) 12 years ago
[-] 0 points by JohnMarsden (47) 12 years ago

I wasn't there but I was at a similar protest at Hunter College and the protesters walked around demanding free tuition and they were cursing out all authority figures. Basically acting like spoiled children which is what you all are.

[-] 2 points by llf (144) 12 years ago

Did you read the accont in the WSJ that students sat down and were beaten by police? So you admit that you talk without knowing and that you generalize without any evidence. So you are basically an idiot. And, you are asking anyone to "grow up?"

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago