Forum Post: My opinon is just as valid as yours...
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 3, 2011, 9:34 p.m. EST by hmmmmm
(1)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I do honestly believe that there are people at these occupy movements that have a legitimate logical reason for protesting. I really do, but there are many flaws and problems I have. This is what i see. I am entitled to my opinion as you are to yours. I see people yelling about lack of jobs... --> There are jobs out there. You need to get off of your high horse, grab the stick out of your ass and realize that you are not going to get a high paying job with your degree in business right off the bat. You need to work for your life. This country was built not on hand-outs, but on hard work. I would rather take that $7.25/hr job flipping burgers than having no job at all. I see people with I Phones, laptops, digital cameras, Android phones, I Pads etc.... -->If you are against corporations and the rich...why use their products? When they were doing the Civil Rights movement, they at one point stopped shopping at certain places. Using products from corporations makes them stronger. If you want to weaken them or make your voice heard....DO NOT USE THEM. Spreading the wealth??... -->I have a real problem with this one. It's the most hypocritical point I see. If you have access to computers, laptops, you have cell phones, a home, an education....then you can afford a $10 blanket or coat. Just because you are living in a park out of your own free will, does not mean that you all of a sudden are handicapped and homeless. Why should I give YOU blankets, sleeping bags, food, money when you are doing this out of your own free will? Why don't you instead of using these items for your own selfish purpose...SPREAD THE WEALTH. It disgusted me to hear that the homeless were being turned away from getting food. They are the bottom of the 99%. To them, YOU are the wealthy. Give back. If you want the 1% to give to you, why can't you give to those lower than you? Civil rights.... -->Yes you have the right to protest. You have the right to say whatever you want and it is being heard loud and clear so don't say that you don't have the freedom of speech or press. What you don't have the right to do is to take away the rights of others. Many people are out of a job because of these movements. Many businesses are being trashed, the streets are trashed, those around you cannot sleep or go about their daily business because you are disturbing the peace. Those people walking the streets around you. Those in the apartments around you. Those businesses you are trashing...they are the 99%. Why hurt them? Love thy enemy. Police... -->Attacking the police is not going to help anything. Saying that you are a nonviolent movement and then rushing barricades, vandalizing police vehicles, throwing things at them, causing riots, fires and destruction in the streets is just ridiculous. You should be ashamed of yourselves to call yourselves nonviolent and peaceful.
All in all, I have an extremely hard time finding even a piece of evidence that I can support. I do not believe that everyone down there is a wacko nut-job. But those nut-jobs are hurting your movement. Fighting, destroying property, causing problems, costing the city millions of dollars, referring to yourself as a "charity" is not getting you anywhere. You need to get organized. If you are organized and peaceful yet forceful, you will be respected and heard. Martin Luther King Jr. is rolling over in his grave at this. He was a great man that had an amazing impact with his movement. Even when his people were being sprayed with hoses and thrown off buses, they stood together. They walked down the streets, they willingly went to jail....they were one. And guess what...they got what they wanted. No camping out, no asking for hand-outs, no....they were one people, one voice, one cause. If you think I'm crazy, so be it. If you think I'm a crazy nut-job, so be it. If you think I'm just part of the 1%, so be it. I know who I am. I'm someone who has worked 3 jobs at once. I am someone who pays out of pocket for my education, for my books, my food, my clothing. I have no been handed anything ,but have worked for it. I am proud to say that. Taking a helping hand is fine, but abusing it is horrible.. Just my thoughts.
Of course you have the right to your opinions & the absolute right to express them. However, that does not make your ideas 'right' or even 'conscionable', especially if they can not withstand ethical scrutiny.
"Taking a helping hand is fine, but abusing it is horrible..", sounds reasonable to me. So, if 'handouts' are not kosher or questionable at best, what is your take on Public BAILOUTS of 'Private Persons' (as Corporations are deemed to be), hmmmmm ?!
Consider that IF you live in a 'civilised country' with a truly 'civil society', then you should have Free Education & Health-Care, so as to maximise your potential as a person & as a citizen. Education should NOT be contingent on wealth & Health-care should NEVER to subject to The Privations of Private Profit.
ad iudicium ...
I am thinking of a family that, in 2007, bought a reasonable home on a reasonable mortgage in a neighborhood that was trending. Can you imagine how proud that family must have been? Their first home.
I am thinking of that same family in 2009, who, because a lot of their neighbors went crazy, ended up owing more on their mortgage than their home was worth. I am thinking of that same family in 2011, after the father lost his job, and their children are about to apply for college, and the family can't sell the house because there's no housing market, and they can't afford the loss they'd take on their underwater mortgage, so they can't move, but there are no jobs in their town.
You know? That's what I think about when I form my opinions.
remember the most important fact "its not me or you " its US
You seem to be a good person.
We're fighting because the standard of living of the middle class has been eroding for decades. That's what this is all about.
How so? Today, the middle class has central air, flat screen tv's, smart phones, several cars per family, computers, increased life expectancy, etc. They did not have any of those even 30 years ago.
Smart phones and flat screen tv's did not exist 30 years ago.
No, but you get my point. When those things first came out, the wealthy were obviously the only ones who could initially afford them.
That happens with EVERYTHING. I paid almost $400 in 1985 for my first pair of contacts! Now they cost $14 and we throw them away. Whenever something "first comes out" only the rich can afford them because they cost a fortune. Until there is a demand large enough to manufacture something in huge quantities-which decreases the cost of the supplies to make them-ALL things cost a lot more.
Right, the standard of living increases for everyone.
You'll never convince them of that.
Hell yeah! I'm middle class. If you use Obama's definition of middle class, I'm probably LOW middle class. I live in a better house, on a better piece of property, in a better neighborhood, and enjoy a FAR better standard of living than my parents could have dreamed of. I never went to college. I have no credit cards, and the only debt we have is our house.
So much for erosion huh?
Exactly. It makes me laugh when people actually suggest that people have a worse standard of living today than in previous generations.
And yet America's most impoverished have just hit a record high:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/8589851-418/poorest-poor-in-us-hits-new-record-1-in-15-people.html
They still have a higher standard of living than the poor did in previous generations.
Not to sound crass, but do you ever deal with the poor? Many, but certainly not all, are poor due to their own accord (or lack thereof).
Yes. But I have a natural tendency to worry about the "certainly not all" population before I worry about the "many" population. You know? That's my priority.
I thought this was about money and corruption in politics? Besides, our middle class live like kings compared to much of the rest of the world while our working poor are equal to most of the middle class of the rest of the world. We have been brought up to think that we have it so bad, but go see the world and you will see what true hardship looks like.
The standard of living for the middle class has been eroding for decades. In inflation adjusted dollars, most of the American middle class earns about one half of what they earned in 1960. Personally, I think that's a cause worth fighting about.
Again, a source?
I don't know where you get your info from...."In 2006, the "real" (adjusted for inflation) median annual household income rose 1.3% to $50,233.00 according to the Census Bureau.[4] The real median earnings of men who worked full time, year-round climbed between 2006 and 2007, from $43,460 to $45,113 (about 3.6 time minimum wage in 2006 to 3.7 time minimum wage in 2007)" wikipedia
Please note the words "rose" and "climbed" in the quote.
Oh God, you're hilarious. You want to take a small snapshot from one Quarter or one year and use it as some sort of evidence that the standard of living for the American middle class has NOT been eroding for decades? Are you kidding me?
Please see above article I just posted with figures from the CBO. That good enough?
Then keep the Dems out of the White House as the disparity has grown the greatest under Clinton and Obama.
http://news.investors.com/Article/590383/201111030805/Income-Inequality-Rose-Under-Clinton-Obama.htm
http://www.cnsnews.com/node/436793
I don't care if the article is from a right or left source. I'm just posting it because the information in it comes from the CBO.
"On Tuesday, Oct. 25, (2011) the Congressional Budget Office released a report entitled, “Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007.”
The very first sentence of this report revealed a fact that may run counter the impression Americans get from the establishment media about what happened to the average American’s income in the approximately three decades that preceded the year that Obama was elected president.
It said that after deducting federal taxes, accounting for government transfer payments (redistributions of wealth) and adjusting for inflation, the income of the average American household had grown significantly in the 28 years from 1979 to 2007.
“From 1979 to 2007,” the report said, “average household income, measured after government transfers and federal taxes, grew by 65 percent.”
Now, someone given to a class-war interpretation of American society might suspect that this number showing that the inflation-adjusted, after-tax income of the average household increased by 65 percent from 1979 to 2007 must cloak a darker reality: i.e. that middle-class Americans in fact saw their after-tax, inflation-adjusted incomes go down, while the wealthiest Americans saw their’s massively increase, thus yielding a higher overall average even as the average middle-class income declined.
But that was not the case, according to CBO.
It is true that the inflation-adjusted, after-tax household income of the wealthiest Americans did massively increase between 1979 and 2007. In fact, said CBO, for the wealthiest 1 percent of households it went up a remarkable 275 percent.
“For the wealthiest 1 percent with the highest income,” the report said, “average real after-tax household income grew by 275 percent between 1979 and 2007.”
But this incredible growth in the income of the wealthiest Americans did not cloak a decline in the real after-tax income of middle-class households—far from it.
“For the 60 percent of the population in the middle of the income scale (21st through 80th percentiles),” said CBO, “the growth in average real after-tax household income was just under 40 percent.”
STOP wasting everyone's time with the tired and FALSE statements about the middle class income "eroding" for decades and blah blah blah. All it does it reveal that you prefer sound bites over facts.
[Removed]