Forum Post: Will you give up your personal bailout?
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 18, 2011, 6:50 p.m. EST by NotOccupying
(94)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I disrespect these protests because I have to get up and go to work every day to earn a living. I know that many of you who are out there are collecting money from the government in the form of unemployment, welfare, and social security while sitting in parks protesting bailouts. How many of you are actually willing to give up your government money (ie send back your checks to the government) in order to put your money where your mouth is on bailouts?
Actually, your premise is wrong. According to an editorial in today's Wall Street Journal:
"The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment rate (9.1%)."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204479504576637082965745362.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
You may want to withdraw your comment.
Are you personally employed or unemployed?
Self-employed.
Does your self-employment completely support you or are you also receiving a government bailout each month?
First, you are claiming that #OWS and Occupy is a bunch of unemployed bums and hippies, which is quite the stereotype. Don't let your anger narrow your understanding.
Second, you made that choice. Whether you are supporting just yourself or your spouse and several children, you made a conscious decision and continue to follow this routine. Do not confuse the movement's pushing for much needed societal change with the belief of ignoring the value of hard work.
I am working hard and i am not jelly of people so i agree with you we all cans be the 1% and has the moneys. I am playing the lotto every week for example
NotOccupying: I'm afraid that you're a bit misinformed. Most living on government assistance wouldn't have the motivation or concern to take part in something that might jeopardize their meal-ticket.
OWS consists of employees, self-employed, students, teachers, soccer moms, war veterans, retirees... virtually all walks of life. OWS is not about increasing public assistance.
This is less about the tax payer funded $700 billion bank bailouts as it is about the principles behind it... and that's not the only issue. This runs deep, straight to the Constitution in which is stated that Congress shall, solely, be in control of this nations currency (paraphrased but relevant). However, our nations currency is controlled by the Federal Reserve, a privately owned, privately operated central bank with owners that are literally taking our futures and the futures of our children away by manipulating the system they've created. They're holding this nations currency hostage, forcing our government to borrow its own money "with interest" that tax payers end up having to pay. You pay.
And it doesn't stop there. This isn't just a national crisis. This is a global crisis because the same owners of the Federal Reserve also own the Bank of England and a multitude of similar centralized banks around the world and, since they have access to all the currency, they can and do influence legislation which, in turn, creates more ways for them to keep their profits while taking more of our earned income. Behind all of it is the Rothchilds family, financial barons that practically own the world through their ingenious ability to gain control of nations' currency.
There's a lot more going on here than Mainstream Media would have you believe. I'm not asking you to join us. I'm asking you, for the sake of your own knowledge and for the sake of your family's future, to dig a little deeper than what you see on the surface. Ignorance may be bliss but knowledge is power, one thing that Mainstream Media would rather hold onto for themselves to protect their financial interests.
http://www.youtube.com/user/SilentNoMorePubs#p/c/0/9NrikN_09_U
Unemployment is insurance, not government handouts. Social Security is paid for by the citizens. Welfare is the only "handout" here (even then, still payed for by the citizens) and it has a very positive function of keeping people in the position of putting dollars into the economy when times are tough.
What's your point?
Which of the above do you receive each month as your bailout?
Exploiting poor people is not the same as working hard to earn a living. Exploiting poor people is actually counter economical because it burdens the system as a whole rather than adding to it and making it more efficient. That first line is a foundational fallacy in the premiss.
Bro, you are so uninformed. I pity your ignorance. Trust me. Welfare recipients could give a shit. They are perfectly happy suckling government teet. They are not the ones occupying. I work 40+ each week without overtime. I make a comfortable amount of money and if I didn't have to be there every day, I'd be right up there with the protesters. Why? because they stand for something you'll never understand.
i can hear the steam coming out of your ears already!
why not take the money when idiots like you are paying?. i'm just gonna have a beer you bought for me! cheers! hav'nt you got some model trains to go play with. you know, keep your mind occupied.
Look a it this way. Those who are indeed unemployed and are participating in the protests are actually doing valuable work for you. Suppose that the protests succeed in bringing serious attention to problems like the bloated and dysfunctional financial market, the irresponsible and unaccountable bank system, the excessive intermingling of politics and money. That would be of great profit to you, as a citizen. Certainly more useful than those unemployed who just sit around at home.
And really, what have the banks to whom your government gave billions done for you lately? "Giving it back" and "not collapsing the whole system they built and bringing us down with them" are not actually services.
'gave billions' What do you mean?
The bank bailouts. At the tune of 700 billions. I mean, even up here in Canada, where the banks were doing fine, our government insisted on giving them 75 billions.
It wasn't 'given' to them. They are paying it back. Do you understand at all what happened?
I do. And they already paid most of it back.
As for what happened, it's pretty simple. The banks engaged, for quite some time, in some wildly irresponsible and risky activities. Eventually though, they screwed up. Big time. So they went to the government and this happened :
Banks : Look, we, hum ... well, sorta, kinda got into this position were we though we were making lots of money, but really we were just bankrupting ourselves.
Government : Well, that was pretty stupid and irresponsible of you. Lessons learned I hope? Harsh law of the market.
Banks : No see, we need you to give us hundreds of billions to keep us afloat. If you don't do it, we're burning the fucking house down.
Government : ... Fine. But we can't just have a few of greedy maniacs like you holding the whole financial system hostage, so I think we either need to severely regulate your activities or put you under public control.
Banks : HOW DARE YOU INTERFERE WITH THE SANCTITY OF THE FREE MARKET, YOU BLACK HEARTED OPPRESSIVE COMMIE MEDDLING BUREAUCRATS!
Government : ... Will you at least finance our reelection campaign?
Banks : Sure, whatever.
Government : Deal.
i applied for two jobs this week. i'm registered with seven recruitment agencies and received twelve hours work last week, you really are very narrowminded. you've obviously made up your mind so why bother to take up your keyboard. we are hear to find solutions, not criticise each other.
Really? 2 in one week, that's great!
Two jobs in an entire week? The average person works 8 hours per day so that is what an unemployed person should put into job hunting. So in 16 hours so far this week you have managed to submit 2 resumes? Here's a lead: http://www.mcdonalds.com/us/en/careers/working_here.html If you are not too good to collect free money from the government then you aren't too good to work at McDonalds.
I've yet to see one person respond to this post by saying I'll stop taking the money from the government. It seems like everyone is more than happy to live on handouts and make the actually 99% pay for your mess.
"They see me trollllinnnn...."
This is just morally incoherent. Let me ask you something.
If an aid agency is handing out malaria vaccines in Africa, and Pfizer shows up at the aid tent, hoovers up an entire shipment, and resells it at a profit, would you - with a straight face - tell the people that if they complain about it, they have to return their vaccinations, too?
PS - this right here, your post? Is the very reason why we need to educate surface-thinkers and enshrine into law the difference between corporations and persons.
I'll take that to mean that you are not willing to give up your government bailout either. By the way how many jobs did you apply for this week?
Your comments are only the result of preconception instead of intellectual analysis. Why are you argue against the Constitution ?
I'm not sure - but I guess, that the US Constitution is defining the US as a democracy, which includes a "right to demonstrate". This right isn't addicted to your acceptance of the topic.
None. I'm lucky enough to have a full-time job that pays well; I'm doing ok.
So now it's your turn to answer my question.
How about we phrase it this way; The villagers start complaining about the vaccines that they are getting for free. As they are complaining they begin pooping and littering on the porches of other poor villagers who then have to pay out of their hard earned money to clean their porches. The villagers who are having their porches littered on also have to chip in together to pay for police to come and make sure that their property doesn't get damaged any further and that their families are safe. This cost them a great deal of money. In addition, they have to pay for the vaccines for their families that the other villagers were complaining about getting for free.
Oh, I see what your problem with Occupy is. You're misunderstanding it; to be fair, it's not entirely your fault. The clarification process at the protest is a bit of slow-going.
But it is a little bit your fault, because you're using a preconceived prejudice to selectively filter the information (aka confirmation bias). So we'll call that a wash.
Your re-phrasing shows the difference in understanding. That's not what's happening. The villagers aren't complaining about the vaccines they got. They are complaining about the vaccines that corporations took to sell for profit. I think that's the fundamental misunderstanding, here.
My problem is more with the other villagers having to pay for the protest.
Ok, I can see how if you believe you are immune to malaria, you would be upset that the village nonetheless decided to buy malaria vaccines. I won't argue that point with you here.
But I don't see how you can be mad at that, but not be furious that those vaccines you unwillingly paid for were then taken by Pfizer and sold for a profit you won't see. You don't want to pay for the protest? You'd rather let the whole charade play out again?
It seems to me - and I won't decide this for you, but I will just leave this suggestion here - that it would be in your long-term interest to pay the relative pittance that this protest is costing to make sure the government no longer allows Pfizer or any corporation to just take the other shit you paid a lot more for.
There's a movement within Occupy to focus the protest's goals on getting moneyed interests out of government. Just gonna leave that here for you. Good luck, and live long.
If occupy wants to pick something worthwhile and do it then they need to do it. Otherwise they are just a group of people camping in a park on my dime.
Why don't you help us pick something worthwhile? We are not just some faceless "they." We're people, many of us working full-time, but still supporting the movement, getting the word out, and trying to build something worthwhile. I bet you wouldn't know the difference between you and me on the street.
I'm just saying: You're not excluded unless you choose to exclude yourself.
Support getmoneyout.com, urge people here to support that as a central goal. It's on the list for the proposed declaration:
https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/
Sure, there are a couple things you probably won't support in there, but 15 out of 20 ain't bad. 15 "something worthwhiles" out of 20? You can't get it that good in any sport I know of.
I just read your document and I didnt' know it was possible to take the declaration of independence and turn it into a communist manifesto but somehow you all managed to do that. You all shoudl stop signing your documents the 99% because you dont' represent 99% of this country. You represent a small group of people who want a communist nation and that isn't the majority of America.
Oh boy. Now we have to go over what communism is.
Well, I tried in good faith. Je ne regrette rien!
Tell me how the insurance, social security and unemployment, that you pay for is a handout. Also welfare, general relief included, in this country is less than 1% of the total budget. By the way you are fortunate to have a job in today’s corporate environment.
http://www.mcstate.com/careers/jobs?stateid=31&type=all&locales%5B%5D=31%3AManhattan&Search= McDonalds in Manhattan has a full page of job openings. How many of the unemployed can't get jobs and how many dont' want the jobs that are open?
By the way they are a handout becasue you are abusing the unemployment system or the welfare system if you are sitting in a park protesting instead of going out and looking for jobs.
How many jobs did you apply for this week?
Your assumptions are arrogant; just keep attacking with no substance or facts. I am retired. Too many people are working several jobs now just to survive. Any job not paying a living wage is slavery!
give me one good reason why i should give up my "bailout money". i dont see the bankers giving up their bailout or their bonuses. we are doing this for everyone. i respect the fact that you get up every morning to go to work, i did the same myself for thirty eight years, getting up at crazy times of the early morning. thats right we're not all teenage students. i really hope you can keep your job.
38 year of work means you are probably not yet to retirement (aka full social security) age and are just unemployed. So I'll pose to you the same question I posed to the other response; how many jobs did you apply for this week?
If the french people 18th century and your forefather had the same thinking as you, you wouldn't know what democracy is.
I'll take that to mean that you aren't personally willing to stop taking your bailout from the government each month.
I don't get any bailout from anyone - especially not from the US government. But really do you really think that the activists of the independence movement, the french revolution, the civil rights movement had an other situation ?
i dont work for a bank and never took a bailout but people on welfare r being bailed out by me...that doesnt seem right.
What if you would loss your work. Would you like to get help - temporary - so you wouldn't loss your house,...?
well i wouldnt sign something i didnt understand or over extend my finances so i have no need for a temporary bailout
By the way it is a question of what you want for your future and the future of your kids democracy vs. plutocracy.
my kid will be fine bc i have saved for them as well and they have the ability to take my company or create their own or get a job. it use to be only land owners could vote bc they held a vested interest in the country doing well. people worked hard to get that right and it kept lot of uneducated and stupid people from voting. i dont see the harm in that. we made the mistake when we let everyone vote instead of testing their intelligence
What you don't seem to recognize is that some NGO's are already calling the US a plutocracy. But the plutocracy of the upper 0,0...1 % - what means less than 1000 persons.
Unless your name is Buffet you and your children aren't part of this small group.
I'm not sure - but as much as I know - the constitution of the US (as every constitution of the developed world) are defining the US as a democracy. What means that it is the duty of the state and of every citizen to defend this form of government.
By the way I work for a big company and owe my own business. My pay is defining me not as a part of the 1% but as part of the high-earners. But I'm still aware that it could be over tomorrow and that this could cause a temporary financial emergency.
And - perhaps this is the big difference between you and me - as a European I have the deep belief that we have the duty to do our best to live an independent life, to be a powerful and competitive part of our economy, but that we are still responsible for our fellow men. The belief is that you can see the value of a society can be determined by the way they handle with their weakest members.
Buffet isn't leaving his children money. well i liked ur third part til u got to the charity part. i believe in charity and whats best for the society but still i do not think a law should be made to force me to give away to help. if i want to help i will and that is what charity should be. most of the 1% do give away money and i think many of them are doing a lot more good with their money than the US welfare system is.
As I told you that I'm not an American and I think the system we call "Ask and assist" (hope my translation was quite good) is the better one.
It means that everyone is asked to do his/her best and that everyone is assisted if they need help. But assistance means to help them to stand at their own legs and to help them into a situation, where they are able to contribute. One of the results (in the region I live) is an unemployment rate of about 3% (in the middle of the actual crisis) and that I don't know anyone who has lost his house,...
But I think you should really recognize what this (worldwide) protest is about: For more democracy (especially the influence of the economy to every level of government - from a mayor to a president), for not socializing the loss (which is normally only done in communism).
If you think that there are only unemployed and poor people protesting, then you are wrong.
For example a former business partner of mine - who has definitely no need to work anymore (normally he lives at his yacht) - is protesting in London, a friend of mine a freelancer in management consulting - with a higher 6 figures income - is protesting in Frankfurt. Sure they are not the average protesters - but to blame the protester to be sponger is a miscast of the topic (Sorry, but only my opinion).
i think ur system over there sounds great! i understand what ur fighting for and i must agree, however i think the US protest of law changing to redistribute is wrong. More democracy in the world would be great but i think the protestor r not exactly on the same page
I'm sure that some of these people want only a bailout or redistribution. But most of them want to have their democracy again - plus a bit more social security.
For beeing sure to NEVER need any bailout would mean never have any credit card, never buy a house on credit,... As you never can be sure to don't loss your job. Without a job and without any income (but perhaps with hungry children) you can get into this situation - without signing anything you don't understand and without extending your finances.
no that would mean i took out loan and paid it back without govt help. and as for the job security i happen to have it since i work hard and created my own business to sustain my needs
What you say means, that there are no unemployment that isn't the fault of one's own.
What you say means, that you will ever find a new job with the same or higher pay.
Sorry, but the as the official unemployment rate is 10 % ( according to figures of the financial times and some NGO's the real unemployment rate in some regions of the US is 22%) there are several possibilities to loss your job and get (caused by this unexpected unemployment) into a financial emergeny - even when you had a conservative financial planing. If you then have hungry children at home and a credit on your house you have the choice of getting criminal, get bankrupt or using welfare.
no im saying i dont have to find a job with better pay, not that they dont exist. and unemployment is in many ways ur own fault.
i think u forgot create ur own job, downsize, sell a car, there are many other options
Think you are ignore the financial reality of many people and the reality in many regions.
You answer to this question is still outstanding:
What would you do ? You have a house in a weak region - unemployment rate of 20% - and have a student loan, a credit on your house, you are having a wife and 3 children. You loss your job (as the company you are working for is closing / or as the customer of your small business don't spend any money for your product, as they are unemployed) - according to the rate of 20 % your chances for a job are not very good (perhaps you are a consultant for something and your only talent beside of this is to roast burgers and there you are in a competition with many teenager). Everything was calculated in a very conservative way, it would be even possible with e.g. 70% of your income - but now you don't have any income.
Would you take temporary welfare or would you get criminal or would your children stay hungry ? Please, take a moment and think about.
this happens to people bc of life choices, they wanted to do that and live there and take those risks. many people r living like this and i no but i dont get why they can sell paintings online or such. instead they travel all the way to places such as nyc to protest instead of making their lives better
" I think you did only had luck - you success can't be an achievement of a good education or something like this." what does this even mean? im saying if ur unemployed and looking to make money u can easily turn a hobby into something profitable. even if u dont want to own a business forever, it can help u get back on ur feet. also if ur living in an area with only on one or two industries it can be riskier bc there is no job diversity, thats a choice.
You are retarded. Do you know how many people live from pay check to pay check worrying about medical mishap's, their cars breaking down, being laid off, or any unforeseeable emergency that topples them over the edge? How many people live out of austerity out of necessity just to keep their family afloat. And some of them, a lot of them work more than one job just to live from pay check to pay check tip toeing around perceived emergencies and cutting corners in every way possible.
You you seem to be advocating, hey look i did it why cant you? That is such a naive understanding of the way this world works.
I think you are having really no idea of the real world. Your comments are only the result of preconception instead of intellectual analysis.
I think you had luck - but some people had the some level of bad luck - without any influence.
For example: How many people do you think could live from selling painting online ? Could very one of these 31 million americans sell paintings ? Don't you think that someone selling art should have a talent in it ?
When you say: "this happens to people bc of life choices, they wanted to do that and live there and take those risks" that means "It is irresponsible to buy a house in a region with an unemployment rate of 4% - as you alway have to calculate that it could be 15% some years later and you always have to live as you will loss your job tomorrow" - so you should never spend your money.
This is the worst (beside of a to high level of debt) what could happen to an economy - everybody with a minimum of economical education is able to prove this.
well im just saying if life is that terrible that there are no jobs then make one instead of complaining. and if u all hate money so much why r u protesting to have it be redistributed to u?
you are an ignorant person. you are blind to point that is being laid out right in front of you. what makes you think people want to be on welfare? people don't want welfare, and banks don't give loans to people with no credit anymore. Maybe you need to take a walk in the little persons shoe for one day. Or how about that struggling father or mother that you have employed? ask them how life is and what money means to them. And another thing. The money you have saved for your kids will not be enough. and sir, I hope you get a glimpse into the real world one day-- NOT EVERYONE WANTS TO OWN A BUSINESS!