Am I the only one who doesn't get the "Occupy Wallstreet" movements

[A Mickeyfan]

Yes some people who are protesting are wanting their student loans forgiven. I wish there could be some cut and dry reforms or help for student loans, but I don't think there ever will be. It understand how hard it is to lose a job and still have thousands of student loans to pay back. If and that is a big IF there is ever any "reform" or "help" it will benifit the banks instad of the consumer. That is just a fact of life. For me that is more than enough reason to have as little debt as possible.

I don't think they should be forgiven.. that would not be fair.. why should we have to pay for our children or ourselves and then others take out a loan to only have it forgiven.. then again, isn't that the same as when one walks away from their home same thing to a certain degree. The banks and courts allow those to walk away from their homes and start all over again...
I do think there should be a repayment program, and base it on income.. just as what O'Bama is saying now for the student loans.. and the same should be done with the foreclosures.
Many years ago I had to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure to a condo I owned. My DH was transferred down to FL due to his job back in 1991. Our condo in CT had dropped in value so we couldn't sell it. We rented it for 8 years to the same tenant. We had to put in money every month to make the mtg payment and common charge payment. Our interest rate back then was 13%. After all those years, the tenant left.. and they destroyed my condo. The value for the condo had dropped from $118K (what I paid 11 years prior) to $53K. I owed $73K at that point. There was over $50K worth of damage in the unit. I contacted the bank and did the deed in lieu of foreclosure. They fixed the unit and sold it at auction. They dropped ALL interest on the loan and held me responsible for principle only.. I paid them the difference in the amount from what I owed and what they sold it for.. I did not foreclose and walk away as many are doing today... I didn't want to ruin my credit. I own my home here in FL free and clear... I don't like hearing how someone purchased a home at such and such.. couldn't sell so they walked away.. and the same goes for the student loans.. I do understand about repayment, and all should be held accountable. You pay on a sliding scale with the student loans.. I think the O'Bama plan has some merit to it.. and I do think that the banks need to hold some of these home owners responsible as well.. they should not be allowed to just get away as they are.. that is part of the problem with the real estate market.. and we are all suffering due to it.. I would bet there are some on this very board who have walked away and continue their annual trips to Disney, and then you have others who are scrimping to get by and foregoing many trips because they live responsible... as student loans are a "choice" some say.. so are home mtgs... I have a small home, but it is mine.. not a banks...

 

[superme80]

I don't think they should be forgiven.. that would not be fair.. why should we have to pay for our children or ourselves and then others take out a loan to only have it forgiven.. then again, isn't that the same as when one walks away from their home same thing to a certain degree. The banks and courts allow those to walk away from their homes and start all over again...
I do think there should be a repayment program, and base it on income.. just as what O'Bama is saying now for the student loans.. and the same should be done with the foreclosures.
Many years ago I had to do a deed in lieu of foreclosure to a condo I owned. My DH was transferred down to FL due to his job back in 1991. Our condo in CT had dropped in value so we couldn't sell it. We rented it for 8 years to the same tenant. We had to put in money every month to make the mtg payment and common charge payment. Our interest rate back then was 13%. After all those years, the tenant left.. and they destroyed my condo. The value for the condo had dropped from $118K (what I paid 11 years prior) to $53K. I owed $73K at that point. There was over $50K worth of damage in the unit. I contacted the bank and did the deed in lieu of foreclosure. They fixed the unit and sold it at auction. They dropped ALL interest on the loan and held me responsible for principle only.. I paid them the difference in the amount from what I owed and what they sold it for.. I did not foreclose and walk away as many are doing today... I didn't want to ruin my credit. I own my home here in FL free and clear... I don't like hearing how someone purchased a home at such and such.. couldn't sell so they walked away.. and the same goes for the student loans.. I do understand about repayment, and all should be held accountable. You pay on a sliding scale with the student loans.. I think the O'Bama plan has some merit to it.. and I do think that the banks need to hold some of these home owners responsible as well.. they should not be allowed to just get away as they are.. that is part of the problem with the real estate market.. and we are all suffering due to it.. I would bet there are some on this very board who have walked away and continue their annual trips to Disney, and then you have others who are scrimping to get by and foregoing many trips because they live responsible... as student loans are a "choice" some say.. so are home mtgs... I have a small home, but it is mine.. not a banks...

Now that is change I can get behind. I'm not completely heartless, just mildly. I understand how difficult it is to payback the loans, but they need to be paid back. A sliding scale based on income insures they will be paid back. The only thing on the article you posted I did not agree with was forgiving after 20 years. I'm sorry, but they HAVE to be 100% paid back. That is my thinking on it. Now if they would just take that last part out I would be happy.

 

[58cognac]

So instead of having their loans forgiven after 25 years of minimal payments, the administration is proposing that loans will be forgiven after 20 years. Lower payments over a shorter period of time with the taxpayer on the hook for the balance.

Sounds like a sound fiscal policy to me.

Sure makes me wish that we took out every last possible dime in loans to pay for our childrens' educations instead of sacrificing vacations and new cars to cover tuition cost.

is it just me, or does this discussion resemble this classic commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fordPXp06h4

"the American people need help..... let's take it to our government leaders..... who get contributions from corporate America..... who screw the American people......"

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Now that is change I can get behind. I'm not completely heartless, just mildly. I understand how difficult it is to payback the loans, but they need to be paid back. A sliding scale based on income insures they will be paid back. The only thing on the article you posted I did not agree with was forgiving after 20 years. I'm sorry, but they HAVE to be 100% paid back. That is my thinking on it. Now if they would just take that last part out I would be happy.

I think they are forgiven now at 25 years.. and I agree, they should not be... They should be held accountable until all is repaid or you are dead, period.. no if and's or butt's..

 

[superme80]

I think they are forgiven now at 25 years.. and I agree, they should not be...

We agree!!!! See this is what congress should be doing! Finding ways to agree and get stuff DONE!

 

[A Mickeyfan]

We agree!!!! See this is what congress should be doing! Finding ways to agree and get stuff DONE!

that is because we don't make the big bucks they do.. that is why we can come to a conclusion on something.. Maybe they should take a step down and look at what us "common folk" do.. and they can give it a shot..

 

[superme80]

that is because we don't make the big bucks they do.. that is why we can come to a conclusion on something.. Maybe they should take a step down and look at what us "common folk" do.. and they can give it a shot..

And admit they are overpaid?????

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Exactly.... and there are no guarantees of getting a job at any time after taking those loans out that have to be paid back regardless..... although these times are extremely tough, but I'm still trying to figure out how school loans are getting wrapped up in the debate..... I didn't consult/seek the advice of a corporation before taking out my loans????

here is how the student loans started...


Yesterday, 07:10 PM #9
Phlip
Mouseketeer

Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 148

I also find it provoking that some of them are whining about their college loans. Just who the heck put a gun to their heads and made them borrow so much money to go to college?


after I read this comment, I took a stand for those who did happen to take out student loans.. I tried to show that it costs money to attend a university, and not everyone is lucky enough to have gotten a scholarship or have the funds to go.. without loans, they could not have attended.. so that is how it started.. from the above post.. and then me... and I was basically "flamed" for standing up for those who took out loans.. mind you, I (with the help of my DD) paid for my DD's 5 years of college and am now paying for my younger DD's college (she helps when she can too). While my children do not have loans, I still took a stand for those who have taken them out.. for without them, many could not have gone to college...

 

[A Mickeyfan]

And admit they are overpaid?????

that would be a nice first step for them.. just to admit it.. maybe then they could start to see eye to eye on things once in a while.. You can bet they as well as their children all went to Harvard or Princeton as well as some other elite schools....
hmmm wonder if they have student loans and if they paid them back...

 

[superme80]

You can bet they as well as their children all went to Harvard or Princeton as well as some other elite schools....
hmmm wonder if they have student loans and if they paid them back...

Now those are skeletons that will stay in their closets.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Now those are skeletons that will stay in their closets.

yep .....

 

[Planogirl]

So you're essentially saying they are doing their jobs. They're hired to make the company money in good times and bad. Their jobs are to do what's necessary to achieve measurable results over the previous period. Anyone who takes a job working for another person/company has to know the reality that in a down economy, the bosses are not obligated to anyone below them. If you were born a Hilton, it's great. Heavy profit focus is by no means a new idea of thought. I would think most anyone who starts a business, big or small, is wanting to focus on profit. Now if the division leader still has his Mercedes, so be it. That is his choice to keep the car, but I'm not sure why someone would have to downsize if their situation hasn't changed.

If you still have your job, I'm glad, that is truly a blessing for you. My husband has been laid off twice. It's impossible for anyone to not see the ordeal people are going through with unemployment, having less money for life needs and paying quadruple for essentials. I also live in an area where, long before the down economy, I watch the abuse of social services everyday at the grocery store. That is one drop in a very large bucket of why you have to see hard working people lose their jobs.

So if we really start to dissect the mess we're in now, the blame can be shared by more than business and politicians.... people have their share in this situation.

It's not his choice to keep the Mercedes. I wasn't clear but the company is leasing it for him. They also pay for retreats at fancy resorts and other nice perks but of course only for the top guys. Those under them have taken cuts of all sorts. I will never agree that that's fair.

I have lost two jobs and DH one. I do know what it's like to struggle. Downsizing caused much of our trouble and I will also never agree that that's fair. I do agree that companies should do their best to make profit but when it's record breaking profit on the backs of struggling employees, then something is wrong.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

She is working in Hawaii.. she isn't a bum? what do you think she is doing there? she cannot find work in communications or as a para legal so she took a serving job, actually 2 of them.. she holds an AS in Para Legal Studies (certified with the bar association), AA, and BA in communications.
So far in the last month she has interviewed with Fox news (she interned at our local FOX when in college and hopes that helps out there), Disney Vacation Club HR position, Ghirardelli Chocolate's (HR), Honolulu's School District, PF Chang's office HR (where she is currently a server). She is also waiting to hear back from the Navy where she has spoken to a Recruiting Officer about enlisting in the service. With her degree, she can take the Officer's test and enter as an Officer. She is 23 years old. She owns her own car, 2011 fully loaded Sonata, free and clear, paid for by her own money she earned as a server while attending college. My DD is no bum... She has her own apt in Hawaii.. not sure if you have heard, but jobs are really hard to get now a days... especially for those who are recent college graduates.. hence, the many young adults you see at these sites protesting...

my end goal? to explain why some are in debt from student loans... not sure if you read these threads..did you? if you did, you would have seen that... I love when some jump in half through and not see all and just asssssume things.. all I tried to do was show why and how some have debt.. why some cannot see that is beyond me

I don't mean to assume or anything....

but if she cannot find anything in Hawaii, why is she there?

Sometimes, when one can find NOTHING where they are located, they go to where they can find jobs in their field. Living in a high cost of living state just doesn't seem wise for the new graduate.

Now, I know nothing about her of course. Perhaps it is her dream? Perhaps she is already married? Perhaps she went to school there.

When my husband was laid off--we had very little options but to move to where his experience was in higher demand. (And I still kick and scream about it as I sit her freezing my toes...but we had to do what was necessary even though the preference was to remain in a warmer climate.)

 

[Svhadden]

Wait, wait, wait...if I'm understanding this correctly (and it's entirely possible that I'm not ), some of the occupiers are saying student loan debt should be forgiven if you lose your job???

To follow that logic, if I get a home loan and the real estate market goes down the bowl, I should be given all of that negative equity back, right???

People, debt is a RISK. Period. Yes, the economy is in the tank right now, and yes a lot of people have lost jobs. I'm terribly sorry for that. But it is NOT the governments job (or a banks) to underwrite my life.

What did good ol' Thomas Jefferson say about a gov't big enough to give you everything you want?

 

[Acklander]

I think the easiest way to "fix" the student loan program is to cut out the middleman at the bank. Instead of the bank loaning the money (which is guaranteed by the Feds) the Feds should directly loan the money. That will cut down on the interest portion, which will make it more affordable for those repaying. Also, figure out what the heck is going on with tuition rates. There is no logical reason why tuition should be skyrocketing so much faster than the rate of inflation. I was able to work my way through school, can't see how the current students can do it.

 

[katie26]

For folks who are wondering what exactly Occupy Wall Street is all about, or think that people are out there protesting things like "capitalism" or "corporations" or "rich people," I'd suggest that you read this article from Rolling Stone: http://www.rollingstone.com/politic...all-street-isnt-winning-its-cheating-20111025

The Cliffs Notes summary of that article is this:

People aren't jealous and they don’t want privileges. They just want a level playing field, and they want Wall Street to give up its cheat codes, things like:

FREE MONEY. Ordinary people have to borrow their money at market rates. Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon get billions of dollars for free, from the Federal Reserve. They borrow at zero and lend the same money back to the government at two or three percent, a valuable public service otherwise known as "standing in the middle and taking a gigantic cut when the government decides to lend money to itself."

Or the banks borrow billions at zero and lend mortgages to us at four percent, or credit cards at twenty or twenty-five percent. This is essentially an official government license to be rich, handed out at the expense of prudent ordinary citizens, who now no longer receive much interest on their CDs or other saved income.

CREDIT AMNESTY. If you or I miss a $7 payment on a Gap card or, heaven forbid, a mortgage payment, you can forget about the great computer in the sky ever overlooking your mistake. But serial financial [screwups] like Citigroup and Bank of America overextended themselves by the hundreds of billions and pumped trillions of dollars of deadly leverage into the system -- and got rewarded with things like the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, an FDIC plan that allowed irresponsible banks to borrow against the government's credit rating.

STUPIDITY INSURANCE. Defenders of the banks like to talk a lot about how we shouldn't feel sorry for people who've been foreclosed upon, because it's their own fault for borrowing more than they can pay back, buying more house than they can afford, etc. And critics of OWS have assailed protesters for complaining about things like foreclosure by claiming these folks want “something for nothing.”

This is ironic because, as one of the Rolling Stone editors put it last week, “something for nothing is Wall Street’s official policy." In fact, getting bailed out for bad investment decisions has been de rigeur on Wall Street not just since 2008, but for decades.

......

When was the last time the government stepped into help you "avoid losses you might otherwise suffer?" But that's the reality we live in. When Joe Homeowner bought too much house, essentially betting that home prices would go up, and losing his bet when they dropped, he was an irresponsible putz who shouldn’t whine about being put on the street.

But when banks bet billions on a firm like AIG that was heavily invested in mortgages, they were making the same bet that Joe Homeowner made, leaving themselves hugely exposed to a sudden drop in home prices. But instead of being asked to "suck it in and cope" when that bet failed, the banks instead went straight to Washington for a bailout -- and got it.

There's a lot more in the actual article, and I didn't just want to cut and paste the whole thing - especially since there's some strong language in the article - but I really think it's one of the strongest, most concise and fact-backed explanations of the Occupy Wall Street movement I've seen. I really, really encourage everyone to read it.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

I don't mean to assume or anything....

but if she cannot find anything in Hawaii, why is she there?

Sometimes, when one can find NOTHING where they are located, they go to where they can find jobs in their field. Living in a high cost of living state just doesn't seem wise for the new graduate.

Now, I know nothing about her of course. Perhaps it is her dream? Perhaps she is already married? Perhaps she went to school there.

When my husband was laid off--we had very little options but to move to where his experience was in higher demand. (And I still kick and scream about it as I sit her freezing my toes...but we had to do what was necessary even though the preference was to remain in a warmer climate.)

she has been there since the last week of Aug.. this is Nov..
I do agree with you on the high cost of living there, I warned her about going. She graduated in May. She went out to California for the summer and her serving job transferred her to their place there. She looked for work there from May to then end of Aug, she went onto Hawaii.. She is giving it till Jan/Feb she said.. it ran her $2000 to ship her car over there and she doesn't want to "run" home yet. It will cost her $4000 to ship it home
One of the places she applied to did call her today.. I am not thrilled. They called and offered her a position that was different than what she interviewed for.. The Ghirardelli Chocolate Company called her and offered her a position in one of their stores. She interviewed for an HR position They told her after the holidays they would put her into their management training program, and she would have room for advancement.... still not what she applied for.. She said she was going to consider it since that was all she was offered so far. She is keeping her serving job at PF Chang's with the hopes if anything opens up in their HR department, she can go there, beside the fact, the money she makes serving is going to help out since the pay won't be what she thought it was going to be at Ghirardelli's since she'll be in a store.
Personally, I think she is there because her boyfriend is there (I think I put this in my other post). He is a Navy Seal and is going to be deployed soon for Afghanistan. I don't think she would have gone there had he not been there. I think she would have stayed in California longer, gone to New York (where we have family & I think would have been her best bet) or come home here to FL. Where we are in Fl, there are no jobs.. but she could have gone to Miami, Tampa and Orlando..even Jacksonville.... Orlando.. would have been the best for me.. then I wouldn't have to pay for a hotel when I went up... but on a serious note.. I do agree, Hawaii is a very expensive place to live.. She isn't complaining about the cost of living though. She is working two jobs (both as a server) and getting by. Not what I like to see her doing, but she is working and not living or sponging off of anyone... and has no loans to repay..

and yes, I do remember you had to move.. you were down here.. weren't you on the East Coast of Fl?? Hey, I ended up down here in FL from NY 20 years ago this November because my DH was transferred down by his job.. but that was a real easy move for me to make.. I was more willing to go than he was

 

[MikeSF]

I don't think that the 18-24 is the "only" age group protesting.. where did you hear they were???????

Never said they were the only group protesting, just pointing out to how little they actually vote... since these are the next of those "in debt" they should be a little more proactive about their voice getting heard. Some of the other age groups have equally pathetic voter turnout as well, I could point out how almost 2/3s of those 25 to 44 (a good cluster of the "99%") don't care about voting either.

Bottom line, if I'm a politician, why would I care about a group who has historically shown they are unwilling to vote me out of office? No I'm pandering to the elderly vote, raise SS premium, raise medicare premium, give them all the drugs they want on the taxpayers dime.. let the 18-44 year olds pay for it.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Never said they were the only group protesting, just pointing out to how little they actually vote... since these are the next of those "in debt" they should be a little more proactive about their voice getting heard. Some of the other age groups have equally pathetic voter turnout as well, I could point out how almost 2/3s of those 25 to 44 (a good cluster of the "99%") don't care about voting either.

Bottom line, if I'm a politician, why would I care about a group who has historically shown they are unwilling to vote me out of office? No I'm pandering to the elderly vote, raise SS premium, raise medicare premium, give them all the drugs they want on the taxpayers dime.. let the 18-44 year olds pay for it.

but are they going for the elderly vote when they talk of ending social security, cutting medicare funding, raising costs of health insurance and health care period. Medicare alone doesn't cover all of health care for the elderly, they still need a secondary company and they must pay out of pocket for that coverage. Some senior citizens cannot afford their prescriptions their med's are so overly priced. I know for a fact prior to my mother's death, one of the script's her doc gave her was for a pill to supposedly get her body ready for the round of chemo she needed.. $2800 was her portion for a 30 day supply.. sound like something the average person can afford.. never mind a senior citizen fighting a terminal disease who is on a fixed income???? Do you know what it costs when you have Cancer? I should say, do those looking for votes know what it costs..

The majority of those that need good health coverage are the elderly. So taking all of that into consideration, just who are they going after for their votes? Doesn't sound too impressive for for getting the elderly.. since many of them are on fixed incomes.. and the economy is hurting them more than ever before...

 

[becpee]

and I'm a bit of a lefty. I DON'T GET IT. I want them all to go home and get a job or an education and quit complaining.

Over here they've taken the parts out of it that they want and are protesting, what I love about it is when they get interviewed for the tv they look like losers who have no idea what they're on about.

Over here they have pretty much made it all about capitalism, what I want to yell at them is "Capitalism pays your unemployment! I could protest against the rich people too but I have to go to work!"