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

[Acklander]

I don't know. The constitution doesn't spell out all of our laws. The laws have been enforced prior to this and they have carried penalties for years.

We don't get to choose what laws we abide by.

It's interesting the protesters have had these laws bent for them. The protesters could carry on during the day, go home, and return. It wouldn't be an infringement on their rights to do that.

The laws aren't bent for the protestors. It may be illegal to camp in a park overnight, but it's not illegal to protest over night. And the occupation is clearly a protest. They have the right to be there, and aren't breaking any laws. Forcing them to leave IS breaking the law. The right to protest our government is spelled out crystal clear in our constitution. The only way to take away that right is to amend the constitution. They don't need a permit - the constitution is their permit.

 

[OceanAnnie]

The laws aren't bent for the protestors. It may be illegal to camp in a park overnight, but it's not illegal to protest over night. And the occupation is clearly a protest. They have the right to be there, and aren't breaking any laws. Forcing them to leave IS breaking the law. The right to protest our government is spelled out crystal clear in our constitution. The only way to take away that right is to amend the constitution. They don't need a permit - the constitution is their permit.

Hi Acklander, I wonder about that. There is no protesting going on during the night. In fact, I saw some pictures on a UK website that used thermal imaging where something like 90% of the camps were empty. If I can find it I'll post it.

ETA- I looked for the images. That was in London. They do cover news in the states too. I don't know if there have been any thermal pictures in the states. It would be interesting to see.

 

[leahjade]

They are not against capitalism.

They are against our government allowing financial corporations to become "too big to fail" and then bailing them out instead of allowing them to suffer the consequences of their bad decisions.

Then why aren't they camped in front of the White House or the Capitol building - that's who bailed them out? Sad thing is when some of the protesters were interviewed, they didn't have a clue what about the issues. A lot of them are there to follow the crowd or get out of school or work for a few days!

 

[OceanAnnie]

I'm scratching my head over how this can be deemed a "peaceful" endeavor. What happened in Denver? Reports were the occupiers were storming the capitol. That's not peaceful.

 

[58cognac]

Hi Acklander, I wonder about that. There is no protesting going on during the night. In fact, I saw some pictures on a UK website that used thermal imaging where something like 90% of the camps were empty. If I can find it I'll post it.

ETA- I looked for the images. That was in London. They do cover news in the states too. I don't know if there have been any thermal pictures in the states. It would be interesting to see.

I would take every single report, from either side, with a grain of salt and skepticism. There are videos of protesters who supposedly rented the same kind of camera and allegedly debunked that report.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/10/thermal-imaging-empty-tents

I have my opinions, might not agree with OWS, but I do my best to research before posting.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I would take every single report, from either side, with a grain of salt. There are videos of protesters to supposedly rented the same kind of camera and possibly debunked that report. Check it out online. I will try to find the link.

I have my opinions, might not agree with OWS, but I do my best to research before posting.

I do too. Even at that, I'm human and do make mistakes. If I find I'm mistaken, I correct it.

I read a lot from a lot of sources. I'd like to see the link. I'm interested in all sides.

ETA- I am reading some of the debunking links now. I'm finding mostly blogs that challenge the equipment capability. I'm sure there is more out there. I don't know. I'm reading.

 

[OceanAnnie]

I would take every single report, from either side, with a grain of salt and skepticism. There are videos of protesters who supposedly rented the same kind of camera and allegedly debunked that report.

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/10/thermal-imaging-empty-tents

I have my opinions, might not agree with OWS, but I do my best to research before posting.

Interesting. Thank you for your link.

 

[58cognac]

I do too. Even at that, I'm human and do make mistakes. If I find I'm mistaken, I correct it.

I read a lot from a lot of sources. I'd like to see the link. I'm interested in all sides.

We've all been there.
Hopefully the link works right. I've just tried, for myself, to look more into some of the stories that are coming up about the whole thing.

 

[J. Galt]

here is an blurb directly from UF's site.. and my DD was also told this when she toured their campus...so as you can see, it is not totally doable with a full time job, as a matter of fact, it is not allowed period if you plan on going full time. I guess it all depends on where you are going and if you are attending school full time. While the example you gave, the student was not attending full time, but part time as they were working full time...You cannot attend law school "full time" at night..


http://www.law.ufl.edu/students/policies.shtml#employment

Student Employment
As a full-time law school, the College of Law adheres to American Bar Association policy requiring students to devote substantially all of their working hours to the study of law. Academic schedules and minimum load requirements are designed to reflect this policy. First-year students are prohibited from employment. Requests for exceptions to the prohibition on first-year employment should be sought through the Office of Student Affairs. No student may be employed more than 20 hours per week under any circumstances.

I also went to a "full-time" only law school and students were able to get exceptions to the "no employment first year" rule... more so during the second semester. For sure, by the first summer you would be working and then into 2nd and 3rd year... not full-time, but you can work. As a previous poster demonstrate, there are law schools that offer part-time programs where she could work a full-time job during the day and then attend nights/weekends. My other suggestion... before launching into an expensive legal degree, your daughter should really consider what she wants to do with that degree. I mention this because, for her dream career, her paralegal training might be enough... coupled with auditing a few target classes at a law or business school. Each state has different definitions of "legal work" for licensure purposes. There are many, many "legal" jobs that don't require you to be a licensed attorney (ie, you graduation from an accredited school and passed the bar in that state). I am licensed in WI and I worked in health care compliance for many years. When I moved to MN, I did not need to be licensed in that state b/c the type of work I was doing did not require my licensure in that state - at the time I was there they only required licensure if you were doing traditional legal work (ex. representing clients in court). Might save your daughter some money to have an "end game" in sight before dishing out all that money for a degree she might not need to get the job she really wants.

 

[KBoopaloo]

Though I can appreciate and even support what the "Occupy" movements stand for in theory, I have a harder time understanding how they are achieving their goals in practice. Here is Boston, its just a whole lot of marching through the streets yelling, getting in the way of tourists or people trying to get to work. Most everyone I talk to in my day to day life just looks at the marches as an amusing nuisance more than anything else. It is hard to see what their goals are.

I check in pretty regularly on the tweets coming from the Occupy Boston camp and with the winter weather we've had this weekend, there have been lots of tweets about the donations the occupiers need. Some tweets even asked if people knew of non-profit groups that provide warm clothing items to the poor and if they could be hooked up with the Occupy Camp. Though I know there are people in the camps who are truly in need (here in Boston they do have some homeless in the camp), there are also a fair to large amount of occupiers who have the resources for smartphones, live video feeds, laptops, and actual homes when they are not in the camp. There is no reason that they should be asking for donations of warm clothing to help them through the winter when those donations could be going to the truly needy.

Additonally, a good amount of the tweets seem to be about what musical performers will be appearing at the camp. Though I don't doubt the commitment and dedication to the cause of a good chunk of the core occupiers, there is also a good sized segment of people showing up because it is the cool thing to do and that definitely hurts their cause.

 

[WheelCEO]

 

[robinb]

Here is an interesting audio story about the the difference between the 99% and the top 1% and how much wider the income gap between the two has become in the last 30 years:

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/29/141823761/the-income-gap-explained-with-candy-corn

 

[OceanAnnie]

I hear and read stuff like, "Collapse Wall Street" (yea, there are other things chanted too, but this has not been disavowed). What will that accomplish? Do people stop to think about what that would mean?

 

[A Mickeyfan]

Here is an interesting audio story about the the difference between the 99% and the top 1% and how much wider the income gap between the two has become in the last 30 years:

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/29/141823761/the-income-gap-explained-with-candy-corn

I like the way they used the candy corns.. and loved that they will need the dentist.. and they will be the only ones able to afford a dentist unless the others have some type of dental insurance...

 

[A Mickeyfan]

What law have they violated?

I am all for OWS, but there have been some who have violated the law.

They do camp out in areas where they know it is illegal and that is not what OWS should be about. That is what gives it the sour taste in the mouths of some who don't understand it. I know down by me they are getting fines of $135 a night for remaining in the park and staying overnight. The local LEO have not resorted to arresting them. There are some in other areas that I have seen on the news where they were disrupting traffic, sure they should be arrested, that is a safety hazard. So yes, some are violating the law. When this all started, OWS was not to be a bunch of people just protesting to cause problems. It was to be have our middle income voices be heard. There are some who have jumped on the band wagon and are making it look bad and overshadowing the real meaning of the protesting.

 

[Kate and Pete]

We soooooo need a "like" button. People just need to wake up and do some digging - but they're too busy watching Keeping up with the Kardashians....

The only reason people cannot "get" OWS is b/c they didn't know what was really going on beforehand. I mean really going on.

You cannot get your information from a 2 second story on the nightly news. You need to dig deep for the corruption that ruined this country. You need the internet to get that kind of news. I think MSNBC does a good job- I don't watch MSNBC news- I watch shows like Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow. I like Keith Olbermann. I also love to hear Van Jones speak. A LOT of OWS think all of those people are bs. They think both sides are corrupt. I lean more to the left- I am comfortable there.

You have to start somewhere- get your info and then research it for yourself. But, as I said- if you just watch the news. You won't "get" anything.

 

[eliza61]

Though I can appreciate and even support what the "Occupy" movements stand for in theory, I have a harder time understanding how they are achieving their goals in practice. Here is Boston, its just a whole lot of marching through the streets yelling, getting in the way of tourists or people trying to get to work. Most everyone I talk to in my day to day life just looks at the marches as an amusing nuisance more than anything else. It is hard to see what their goals are.

Additonally, a good amount of the tweets seem to be about what musical performers will be appearing at the camp. Though I don't doubt the commitment and dedication to the cause of a good chunk of the core occupiers, there is also a good sized segment of people showing up because it is the cool thing to do and that definitely hurts their cause.

LOL, in montgomery Alabama they "marched" every day for over 365 days and pretty much ending segregation on buses, shut down business in the downtown area to the point of changing the states segregation laws.

Protest is supposed to make your life difficult. NOTHING changes from sitting on the coach and watching.

I guess they guys in Egypt and Libya should have said "hey let's not protest guys, the tourist may be upset". LOL

Sorry but pretty much every positive change in this country, starting with the American Revolution started because protestors made themselves a "nuisance".
Gay rights, civil rights, anti discrimination all came about because people no longer allowed the "Status quo" to continue to ignore the problems and sorry unless some thing directly hassles you, we ignore it

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” ~Martin luther King.

So basically you are saying that the protest has no merit simply because it is annoying you.

 

[OceanAnnie]

The only reason people cannot "get" OWS is b/c they didn't know what was really going on beforehand. I mean really going on.

You cannot get your information from a 2 second story on the nightly news. You need to dig deep for the corruption that ruined this country. You need the internet to get that kind of news. I think MSNBC does a good job- I don't watch MSNBC news- I watch shows like Ed Schultz and Rachel Maddow. I like Keith Olbermann. I also love to hear Van Jones speak. A LOT of OWS think all of those people are bs. They think both sides are corrupt. I lean more to the left- I am comfortable there.

You have to start somewhere- get your info and then research it for yourself. But, as I said- if you just watch the news. You won't "get" anything.

I'm all for doing some digging, but the names you listed are all extremists. I've watched their shows and read some of their stuff. Way, way out. Sometimes quite nasty.

 

[A Mickeyfan]

This is not Obama's fault. I don't care if someone likes or dislikes him as a President, he has nothing to do with the economy going down. Free food lines have been around longer than me, I am going to be 55 this year.

The down fall of the middle income started years before he came into play. I am not sure where you got this from but it is wrong. Do some research in history.. The recent housing market starting to slide downward in 2006. The largest drop in the housing market history hit in Dec 2008. That was before O'bama was sworn in This downward slide of the middle income has been going down for many many years. It is not something that has just started. In fact, Pres G. W Bush gave out the first bailouts to the big companies. That should show the slide in the economy happened before O'bama .. so when you post something, at least check out the references before doing so..
I am sure you did't type this up yourself.. you must have found it on the net.. but check the facts before putting up what appears to sound great..


This note sounds nothing more than a threat from the upper income stating that if they get taxed at a higher bracket, they will take it out on the middle income.. Guess what, they don't purchase those $80K cars, then their counter parts will go under too.. they are the heads of those large corporations who manufacture the $80K cars. it will become a catch 22! I guess they could not see past their nose when this was getting written up In the long run, they will hurt themselves too. As far as them doing their own yard work, that is another idle threat.. and a joke at that. Those in that super high income bracket may not even know how to operate a lawn mower Oh, and are the wives going to forgo their diamonds and furs.. hmmm didn't see that in this note.. This is not meant to offend you, but just pointing some things out to make it more "real"....

 

[katie26]

Then why aren't they camped in front of the White House or the Capitol building - that's who bailed them out? Sad thing is when some of the protesters were interviewed, they didn't have a clue what about the issues. A lot of them are there to follow the crowd or get out of school or work for a few days!

Wait, what? Is there some "get out of work/school free" card one gets for protesting that I wasn't aware of? If people want to get out of work for a few days, they take a few days off. Then if they decide they want to take that time to go join in the protesting, that's their time to protest with. It's not like camping out in Zucotti Park gets you out of anything.

And folks are camping out in our nation's capital - there's a strong Occupy D.C. movement going on right now.