Re: Occupy America College education is over priced, of poor quality, and provides decreasingly desirable prospects. But, banks being willing to loan you the money isn't the cause, except that it does make it easier for schools to jack up their tuition. Just imagine the outcry if banks stopped providing student loans. ...Don't know what that shit about education being a human right is all about either.
Re: Occupy America Well children are similar to veal, so about 11.95/lb and 13.95/lb for dark meat. Interesting, because the unemployment rate for college grads is 4.2% (which is where the economy hovers in a really good climate) and 9% overall. (Source) So it sounds like there are jobs out there, just not ones people want or may qualify for. Of course, location is also a big player as to availability.
Re: Occupy America Christopher Buckley did a take on A Modest Proposal, with an uprising among the youth over the broken social security system and generational robbing. Kids took to the streets, started trashing golf courses and country clubs, until a solution was reached: we'll waive your inheritance tax if you kill yourself rather than suck on the government teet for 20-30 years after retiring.
Re: Occupy America Just going out on a limb, but I'm guessing the 21-25 year old college grads have an unemployment rate somewhat higher than 4.2%, and the 55+ college grads are somewhat lower.
Re: Occupy America It's shit like this Goldman: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/11/goldman-sachs-interest-tax-avoidance?print" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011 ... ance?print</a> Goldman tries to dodge taxes (read: tax fraud), gets caught, and the UK government waives the interest owed on those taxes they never paid. If you don't think little shit like that goes on all the time, and that that's the real source of the frustration, then you're missing the point. Bill Gates is rich as fuck, and while I'm jealous of his immense wealth, I have no plans to "occupy Bill Gates" because he earned that money by creating a fuckton of value through Microsoft. But capturing profit by use of tax shelters and back room deals? Go fuck yourselves.
Re: Occupy America It is and by a large margin. This isn't the most recent numbers, but worth looking at: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/05/19/business/19gradsGraphic.html?ref=economy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/ ... ef=economy</a> The pay rates are painfully low, but I didn't expect to get rich right after graduating either. Edit: This is a little more recent. 10.7% for recent grads looks pretty ugly to me, and it's way worse if you decided to not get a degree. Edit 2: I want to point out as well that most of the stupid office gimp jobs that are so popular for recent grads don't really require a degree to learn how to perform one's duties. Can you go to the bathroom by yourself? Can you fill in a time sheet? Know how to not poop your pants? Congratulations, you're qualified! However, most of these jobs pay enough to get by and there is almost always applicants with degrees who have a significant edge over the competition.
Re: Occupy America <a class="postlink" href="http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wal ... 11-10?op=1</a> This is the best collection of graphs that explains the current economic situation. The scary part for me is social mobility and real wages. Why is the Fed keeping the interest rate so low? Why not allow some inflation to reduce the impact of debt and spur consumer spending? "Behind every great fortune, is a crime"-Honoré de Balzac. This quote rings especially true when looking at people like John Paulson, Goldman Sachs and the astonishing lack of prosecution for this whole mess. Edit: The Tea Party was funded and organized by corporate lobbying groups, which, in my own humble opinion, destroys their credibility as a "grassroots protest" organization. If this is conspiracy-theory bullshit, please give us some better info: <a class="postlink" href="http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tea_Party" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tea_Party</a> <a class="postlink" href="http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/04/09/37433/lobbyists-planning-teaparties/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/ ... eaparties/</a> Double Edit: According to the OWS.org site, there have been several lists of demands, but nothing offical or final. A few have been circulated as fake or via hijacked accounts. <a class="postlink" href="http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed- ... add-so-th/</a>
Re: Occupy America A couple of points: 1. A lot of people are falling into the trap of: just suck it up and get a minimum wage job, stop being so prideful. I was really lucky when I graduated and came out with a great job, but three of my friends weren't as fortunate (two had offers with companies that had to rescind due to the economic climate, one majored in a field hit hard by the recession). You better believe they were applying at every McDonald's, Target, clothing store they could find. Even those jobs didn't exist. This was a few years ago, but I remember my friend, who graduated with a great GPA and had her offer rescinded two months before graduation, couldn't get a job at Starbucks. I think it's better now, or at least the city where I'm living has more minimum wage jobs, but for awhile even fast food wasn't an option. Judging so broadly is almost always a bad idea. 2. Yes, there are the silly protesters, but I think a lot of them have legitimate grievances. They aren't protesting, but take my parents, who are a pretty generic example. Saved their entire lives, never went into debt, modest house, we went on a family vacation every two years. Had themselves set for retirement, owned their home, but when the recession hit they lost over a third of what they had saved. And then my dad was fired. He eventually found another job, but he's in his 70s now and he and my mom will probably be working until one of them is at least 80 to make up those losses. And they're lucky because they are both still employed. I'm not saying the banks are evil or that my dad's company was corrupt for firing him, shit happens. But, I don't think that situations like that should be prevalent in a functioning society. Not just because it's not fair (life's not fair, etc.), but because it removes any incentive to "do the right thing" or behave responsibly. I think that this element is what these (OWS and Tea Party) protests are often about: control. I want to know that I can control, by playing by the rules and behaving responsibly, the comfort of my future. Shit happens, but if it happens frequently enough that it's not worth it for me to forgo pleasure or behave responsibly, something's wrong.
Re: Occupy America Like someone said before, even if there is funding, does that really delegitimize the issues brought to light? Astroturfing does undermine the message but ultimately if there is popular support for a cause why get in a dick waving fight to show just how grassroots you are? Material support seems like a logical step in any movement.
Re: Occupy America My stance is fuck both sides, they're both full of shit. I see three major problems common to every sector of the community: 1. They overvalue themselves. 2. They lack self-responsibility. 3. They swallowed the lies, especially the convenient ones. I'm not talking conspiracy theory stuff here, I'm talking the basic things. And they all bleed into each other. Does the high-priced CEO deserve every dollar in his pay packet? No. But, by the same token, does the person who works a menial job that they don't put any degree of effort into and simply "go through the motions" deserve a big car and a nice house? No. Both of those things are bullshit. As a society, we waste so much it isn't funny. The sad thing is, people don't see the true waste going on. We don't place value in the right degrees. We tend to pay only for the value of the work performed, and often overlook the value derived from the effort. Accordingly, some of the positions that are the most valuable to society are underpaid and end up populated by unsuitable people. A clear example of that is grade school teaching. We pay our teachers peanuts for the work they perform, and overlook the immeasurable value that society gains when they do their job well. We expect them to give a shit when, over time, all we've done is reinforce how little we value them as a whole. The same goes for most publicly paid jobs, whether it's garbage men, police, nurses and so on. How valuable do they become when their job isn't being done? Should anyone have the right to go and get a free education, on the public dime, in some obscure or relatively useless field? Hell no. An education is supposed to better yourself and society. Having a degree in pygmy anthropology when the field is saturated and you have no intention of ever leaving your mother's basement is useless. Expecting the public to pay for it should be criminal. The demands of the students are half-right, and half woefully wrong. Education should not be free, with one major exception. Education for fields that are needed should be free or heavily subsidised (which must go hand in hand for the "pay for value" idea). Education in any other field is on your own dime. For example: - Want a degree in ancient Norse mythology? Sorry, we've got a glut of fucktards, so you'll have to pay. Don't complain about it later. - Want a degree in medicine? Why, we need more doctors. Here's a contribution to your education. The same principles go all the way to the top. You're a CEO of a major corporation and spent the last year plowing it into the ground, only to receive a government handout? You shouldn't be getting a bonus or a raise, you should be on a show cause notice as to why you shouldn't be out on your ass with nothing. Ultimately, it's the shareholders who are to blame for this. If you own shares in any publicly listed company and haven't taken an active role or at least paid attention to what they're doing - you're part of the problem. Companies can only do what their shareholders authorise them to do. "They" rely on shareholders not giving a shit, or being fragmented, to allow them to control everything and make these problems. The CEOs were hired because they're good at what they do - make money. Blaming them for doing what they're good at when the ultimate owners, collectively, let them have their own way is blatant stupidity. If you buy an attack dog and let it roam the streets, don't start complaining when it bites someone; you're the dumbass. Sure, it's easy to sit back, get fed on crap and believe everything you get told. Well, guess what. People lie, and it's damn easy to believe when it gets served to you on a platter. The sooner that everyone realises that everyone else has an agenda, the better. Some of them are honest about it. I have one. I want people to think for themselves. I want this because I have a nice job, with a good income, which I worked long and hard for. I don't want someone coming to me and trying to take it away to pay for the mistakes of someone who was too lazy to get off their ass in the first place and earn what they want. The majority of CEOs and politicians? They're greedy, self serving bastards who will do anything to hang on to what they don't deserve, and will tell lies to make sure that they can while shirking responsibility for the situation they find themselves in. The majority of the so-called 99%? They're greedy, self serving bastards who will do anything to hang on to what they don't deserve, and will tell lies to make sure that they can while shirking responsibility for the situation they find themselves in.
Re: Occupy America This is 'Merica, and in 'Merica factual correctness and moral superiority are determined by group size.
Re: Occupy America I thought lawyers and suing' were the Merican way? I thought of what the old Bl1yDog was thinking when I saw this: Law Students sue law schools, claim indentured servitude. For a board that always talks up not living the traditional roles like past generations (delayed adolescence and such), I am surprised it hasn't been brought up more in this debate.
Re: Occupy America I heard there was going to be an Occupy Paris protest, but they fell afoul of EU trademark laws which claimed that Germany had trademarked the phrase.
Re: Occupy America This is amazingly simplistic. There are huge sums of money in what I'll call "aggregate funds". Please, economists, feel free to give these their proper name. I'm talking about 401(k)s, pensions, money market funds, etc. If you have money in such an investment vehicle, go get your paperwork. Look at how many individual stocks you own. For example, I have the money in one of my 401(k)s in a couple of moderately aggressive accounts. Each of these invests my money in dozens if not hundreds of companies. Let's say I have 100k in a particular 401(k) retirement fund. That money is invested in probably 200 different entities. My total investment, through these financial vehicles, is so miniscule that no CEO in their right mind would give a flying fuck about my opinion. I know that one of the companies included in my portfolio is Exxon-Mobil. Let's imagine that half my money is tied up in E-M, which it of course it is not. Do you think a company that makes 10 billion a quarter in profit gives a crap about me and my $50,000? Of course they don't. The very idea is laughable. I'll give you one guess who holds the highest percentage of shares in any one of these companies. Five seconds . . . time's up. The CEOs and other corporate officers. THEY are the ultimate owners. And if you think they are goingto alter a status quo whereby they haul away wheelbarrows full of money, you are a fool.
Re: Occupy America I'm actually presently engaged in a multi-year boycott of a company that I own stock in. ...I think I'm doing capitalism wrong.
Re: Occupy America Because you know who is the right spokesperson for denouncing greed, arrogance, disproportionate attention to financial gain, and selfishness? Kanye West. As someone who advocates for a fair bit of substantitive financial reform*, these people make me shake my head. Their understanding of basic economics is so thin that they really don't deserve a place at the table of ideas/discussion, yet everyone financially left of Limbaugh is going to get branded as an "occupier" now. They've effectively tarnished any and all financial reformers as a bunch of rabble rousing idiots. ...And yet the average unemployment rate is the post-Reagan years is not appreciably lower than in the preceding decades, and probably even higher, despite massive declines in the upper bracket income levels. Why do you keep saying these things that sounds like empirical facts, when they are not? The Laffer curve has been repeatedly shown to be wrong empirically and has little support amongst economists. Every recent study of the Laffer curve has put the point of declining marginal returns well below the national average rate. Your posts (included the laughably misguided narrative of where MBSs and ABSs came from) are in need of a giant one of these: *Off the top of my head, the Volcker Rule, limits on portfolio leverage for firms above a certain size, stringent liquidity requirements for firms above certain equity threshholds, elimination of "carried interest" categorization of income, increased capital gains tax, elimination of tax loopholes in both personal and corporate taxes (did you know that GE paid no taxes last year on $14.2 billion in profits? And those various hedge funds based in the Caymen Islands can go fuck themselves).
Re: Occupy America Not quite. The largest shareholders of most individual companies are mutual fund companies and other investment firms, typically through passive investment or indexing vehicles. You'll see Vanguard, State Street, Fidelity and the like at the top of most lists, though I agree, usually the single largest individual owners are officers and managers. Two big issues, as I see it, have driven the huge growth in exec pay since the 1990s. First, the Clinton Administration saw this trend, and exacerbated it by eliminating the tax deductibility of CEO salaries beyond $1,000,000, so now options have become a far higher component of total compensation. Yes, it ties the manager's comp to stock performance, but also does so via leverage, encourages volatility to enhance option value, and all other kinds of financial reporting shenanigans (look at the research that shows how much more likely a firm is to barely exceed analyst estimates vs. barely miss). Also says a lot about the decline in dividend payouts relative to stock buy backs. When stocks go ex-dividend, price goes down. Not good for option values. Second, Mutual Funds and other huge institutional, passive, fund managers, don't seem to give a shit about what the execs get paid. They are the shareholders, and if their mandate is to merely reflect the performance of an index, don't have a clear mandate to be actively voting in proxy issues the way the average Joe retail investor necessarily would.
Re: Occupy America Dude, I think you're either selling protesters short or giving the general public too much credit. Of course their grasp of economics is thin. Fucking 90% of the country's is. It's part of the reason we're in the mess we're in. You're obviously knowledgeable on the subject. All that shit you listed at the bottom of your post? I'd wager almost none of the general populace even knows what 3/4ths of that means(Edit: I just graduated in the spring, and took a few econ classes as part of my degree, and even I had to look up a couple of them). I don't think it invalidates much of their sentiment. Nor do I think that the average person who disagrees with the protests are smart enough to formulate the response you just did. Nearly any movement is going to be made up mostly of average people, and the average person doesn't know shit about the details of our economic system. Just to pile on more anecdotal evidence (cause that's the best kind, right?) I just graduated in the spring with a bachelor's in MIS (yeah I know, if I had to do it over again, I would've just went with CS), and a good half of my class (myself included) is either still unemployed or severely underemployed. And this was a major that, when I entered a few years ago, was being trumpeted as recession-proof.
Re: Occupy America Damn straight it is, but I wasn't going to write a thesis about it or how much blame the individual is to wear. Or how much they can do to affect it on their own. You're right about aggregate funds and the way they invest. Who's going to rock the boat as long as their nest egg is accumulating? It's a different story when it comes crashing down. We're all too eager to take the benefit and turn a blind eye, but wear none of the blame. Individual shareholders are like ants. On their own the don't make too much of a difference. Collectively, it's a different matter. There are ways to show corporations they have to reign in their practices, and CEOs for that matter (especially if the CEO is a major stock holder - the corporation's fortune is their fortune). The problem is that it takes the collective group to be motivated in the same direction at the same time, and that's something rather difficult ordinarily. It's even more difficult in times of financial stress when people start becoming very conservative and self-interested. But if you do want to change things, you do it from grassroots. Even in an aggregate fund, there's power; and probably more than you expect. Change where the fund is investing and you can make a change that may be noticed. It's not easy, it's not quick and it's not practically possibly at the individual level. This is what people like the bastard CEOs rely on, and they know how the process works.