47
   

Two weeks into Occupy Wall Street protests, movement is at a crossroads

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Dec, 2011 06:31 pm
@spendius,
You said that; I didn't. Are you also suggesting that all whites are trash? LOL
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  4  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 09:33 am
Regardless of what people think of ows protesters, they have a point about the widening gulf between the rich and the poor and a lot of is laid at the governments feet which seems to work for lobbyist rather than "We the People." Its a point that resonated despite conservatives best efforts to portray them as old hippies of the sixties as though that was something bad too.

Quote:
Since the housing bubble burst, nearly 4 million American homes have been lost to foreclosure. An estimated 1.6 million children will be homeless at some time during the year - 38 percent more than at the start of the recession. As CBS News correspondent Ben Tracy explains, unemployment has driven some families to the southern California desert, where a barren old WWII training ground in the desert has become a place for many to park their troubled lives. Click on the player at left for the full story of "Slab City".
About 97.3 million Americans fall into a low-income category, commonly defined as those earning between 100 and 199 percent of the poverty level, based on a new supplemental measure by the Census Bureau that is designed to provide a fuller picture of poverty. Together with the 49.1 million who fall below the poverty line and are counted as poor, they number 146.4 million, or 48 percent of the U.S. population. That's up by 4 million from 2009, the earliest numbers for the newly developed poverty measure.

The new measure of poverty takes into account medical, commuting and other living costs. Doing that helped push the number of people below 200 percent of the poverty level up from 104 million, or 1 in 3 Americans, that was officially reported in September.

Broken down by age, children were most likely to be poor or low-income — about 57 percent — followed by seniors over 65. By race and ethnicity, Hispanics topped the list at 73 percent, followed by blacks, Asians and non-Hispanic whites.

Even by traditional measures, many working families are hurting.

Following the recession that began in late 2007, the share of working families who are low income has risen for three straight years to 31.2 percent, or 10.2 million. That proportion is the highest in at least a decade, up from 27 percent in 2002, according to a new analysis by the Working Poor Families Project and the Population Reference Bureau, a nonprofit research group based in Washington.

Among low-income families, about one-third were considered poor while the remainder — 6.9 million — earned income just above the poverty line. Many states phase out eligibility for food stamps, Medicaid, tax credit and other government aid programs for low-income Americans as they approach 200 percent of the poverty level.

The majority of low-income families — 62 percent — spent more than one-third of their earnings on housing, surpassing a common guideline for what is considered affordable. By some census surveys, child-care costs consume close to another one-fifth.

Paychecks for low-income families are shrinking. The inflation-adjusted average earnings for the bottom 20 percent of families have fallen from $16,788 in 1979 to just under $15,000, and earnings for the next 20 percent have remained flat at $37,000. In contrast, higher-income brackets had significant wage growth since 1979, with earnings for the top 5 percent of families climbing 64 percent to more than $313,000.

A survey of 29 cities conducted by the U.S. Conference of Mayors being released Thursday points to a gloomy outlook for those on the lower end of the income scale.

Many mayors cited the challenges of meeting increased demands for food assistance, expressing particular concern about possible cuts to federal programs such as food stamps and WIC, which assists low-income pregnant women and mothers. Unemployment led the list of causes of hunger in cities, followed by poverty, low wages and high housing costs.

Across the 29 cities, about 27 percent of people needing emergency food aid did not receive it. Kansas City, Mo., Nashville, Tenn., Sacramento, Calif., and Trenton, N.J., were among the cities that pointed to increases in the cost of food and declining food donations, while Mayor Michael McGinn in Seattle cited an unexpected spike in food requests from immigrants and refugees, particularly from Somalia, Burma and Bhutan.

Among those requesting emergency food assistance, 51 percent were in families, 26 percent were employed, 19 percent were elderly and 11 percent were homeless.

"People who never thought they would need food are in need of help," said Mayor Sly James of Kansas City, Mo., who co-chairs a mayors' task force on hunger and homelessness.


source

Meanwhile corporations have been making record profits and have not been hiring citing some weak excuse such as fear for future profits. Those they do hire are not paid much one way or another and hardly any benefits. Its terrible times with blame to go all around. What beats me is all this time we have been living under low taxes. Conservatives keep saying that if you raise taxes, companies won't hire, well in any sane world, that theory should be put to rest, but we don't live in a sane world.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 09:45 am


Profit is good.

Occutards are not good.
Questioner
 
  3  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 09:48 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:



Profit is good.

Occutards are not good.


Profit is great. Profiting by pushing junk mortgages and knowingly grabbing what you can before the house of cards you built falls and then walking away with a sizable severance package is not.

You and your right wing fcktards are all about guns and gun rights. . . how about you go find a few ex-CEOs and put them to the firing squad? That'll be the quickest way to shut the 'occutards' up.
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 10:40 am
@H2O MAN,
You know I bet the depraved aristocrats in the time before the French Revolution thought they keep getting away with starving the people and telling them to eat cake, right up until the time they got their heads cut off.

I am not advocating any at all similar along these lines, but I do think it is time that people quit being gulled by politicians and the corporate world into thinking "profits good" even if it means that people have to work for less money or not work at all.
woiyo
 
  0  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 11:53 am
@revelette,
Too bad the occypriors were not smart enough to know how to get their point across.

Unlike the Tea Party folks, the occupriors made there cause look foolish.
Questioner
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 12:19 pm
@woiyo,
woiyo wrote:

Too bad the occypriors were not smart enough to know how to get their point across.

Unlike the Tea Party folks, the occupriors made there cause look foolish.


Right, because if one word is often associated with the Tea Party folks, it's 'smart'.

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/5496/slide_5496_74976_large.jpg
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 12:59 pm
@Questioner,
What's telling is that the occupy movement is now a global phenomenon. Outside America the tea party is a joke. Enjoy.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 02:39 pm
@izzythepush,
And that last quote, "I've got a human brain," is questionable about many who vote in this country. I think some pigs are more intelligent! At least they're good to 'eat.'
izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 02:44 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Glad you enjoyed it. One of the most popular panelists is an American, Reginald D Hunter.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 15 Dec, 2011 02:48 pm
@Questioner,
I thought that the Tea Party looked foolish as soon as its leading spokesperson drew breath to speak.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 09:08 am

http://img1.ranker.com/user_node_img/6400/1000173098/full/lt-john-pike-person-photo-u1.jpg

What REALLY happened that morning

0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 10:51 pm
@Questioner,
Forget about silly signs.

Let's just compare the influence of the Occupiers on the 2012 elections with the influence of the Tea Party on the 2010 and 2012 elections.

It may not say anything about "smarts" but it sure will say something about strength and effectiveness.

hingehead
 
  3  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 11:01 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Which way should occupiers vote to have influence?
Questioner
 
  2  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 11:03 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Forget about silly signs.

Let's just compare the influence of the Occupiers on the 2012 elections with the influence of the Tea Party on the 2010 and 2012 elections.

It may not say anything about "smarts" but it sure will say something about strength and effectiveness.




Which lead to one of the lowest rated Congresses in the history of our country. Yup, when bunch of idiots get together and get a bunch of idiots voted into office it can absolutely be effective in lowering the bar impossibly further.

roger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 11:35 pm
@Questioner,
Am I mistaken that the changes in the last election were the real results were a reflection of our collective opinion of Congress then?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 11:51 pm
@hingehead,
Clearly they are more closely aligned to the Democrat Party than the GOP, but they needn't support establishment Democrats to demonstrate effectiveness.

They need to support candidates who win.

The Tea Party backed a number of "outsiders" in Republican primaries, quite a lot of whom went on to win in the general elections.

Of course it won't happen because there is no Occupy organization and they dream of revolution rather than elections.

The next and final hurrah of the Occupiers will be at the Republican and Democrat conventions. I would not want to be the mayor of Charlotte or Tampa in 2012.



ossobuco
 
  2  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2011 11:52 pm
I've not been fully open to the occupiers. I'm for what I think the the Occupiers are for, see that Naomi Wolf article a poster mentioned - but I don't like park takeovers, whatever quasi judicial foo foo runs the parks. Fine with gatherings.

I worry about some site degrading and am pleased by examples like ehBeth's showing me improvement, and I'll admit the structure of who owns and maintains is a thicket.

So, I have these views that I wish people would only gather in daytime and then go home. If home is too far, they should be protesting there. Why all go to the big city... why not be everywhere? I protested in front of a small municipal building, with others, for an hour, on a highway, a couple of times. Others did it many more times.
I get it that presence is impact, or can be.

I question the occupier tactics - I think the whole camping thing, which I'm not for anyway, is not a useful tactic.

But I'm also about parks being for all.

In years past, I was not liking university takeovers; that enraged me, whatever of their views I sympathized with, which I mostly did. The university at best is about free expression, and I was opposed to trying to shut it down. Of course I hated the government shutdown more. Complicated.

Same here, I am not for park takeovers whether or not I agree with the points of view of those who gather. I'd not be for sweeping people up violently either.

But this is the way of it.. I've just been reading McCullough on Paris in 1870/71.

Looking at that, I'm way too prissy, wanting to keep up urban communal space.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2011 12:00 am
So, I am drawn to piazzas, gathering spaces, because they make sense, but I also fear them, the famous mob rule.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
Amanda Knox - Discussion by JTT
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 05:44:58