Occupy Wall Street

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

Go ahead and post where you got that stat from.

Seven hundred people experiencing or at risk of homelessness are killed from hypothermia annually in the United States. Forty-four percent of the nation’s homeless are unsheltered. From the urban streets of our populated cities to the remote back-country of rural America, hypothermia - or subnormal temperature in the body - remains a leading, critical and preventable cause of injury and death among those experiencing homelessness.

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/fact.../How_Many.html

Couldn't find specific stats for Chicago but in 2003 19 people died of hypothermia in Chi-town but that included people with homes as well. Admittedly that would be an extraordinarily high number for murders in a day.

I do know approximately 1,000 people in the U.S. are struck by lightning per year so at least in America, your chances of getting struck by lightning are greater than dying of hypothermia due to being homeless or at risk of being homeless. Something to be proud of.

In early 2007, the National Alliance to End Homelessness reported a point-in-time estimate of 744,313 people experiencing homelessness in January 2005.

700 dead per year seems like a big number but knowing that represents less than one in ten thousand, especially when considering the mental state and chemical addictions of many of the homeless, makes me think we're doing a hell of a job caring for them.

And it's private charities not the government who are caring for these folks, with a fraction of the money. Because like any other business/activity the private sector performs far better than D.C. could even dream of.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by geeker2

Dell let me help you out on this one ....

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts10002906.aspx

Thanks, I think?

[geeker2]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Thanks, I think?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/fact.../How_Many.html

Couldn't find specific stats for Chicago but in 2003 19 people died of hypothermia in Chi-town but that included people with homes as well. Admittedly that would be an extraordinarily high number for murders in a day.

I do know approximately 1,000 people in the U.S. are struck by lightning per year so at least in America, your chances of getting struck by lightning are greater than dying of hypothermia due to being homeless or at risk of being homeless. Something to be proud of.

700 dead per year seems like a big number but knowing that represents less than one in ten thousand, especially when considering the mental state and chemical addictions of many of the homeless, makes me think we're doing a hell of a job caring for them.

And it's private charities not the government who are caring for these folks, with a fraction of the money. Because like any other business/activity the private sector performs far better than D.C. could even dream of.

In other words, when you said, "In Chicago there are more people murdered in a day than the homeless who die of hypothermia in a year" you were just making it up.

Dell wrote: 700 dead per year seems like a big number but knowing that represents less than one in ten thousand, especially when considering the mental state and chemical addictions of many of the homeless, makes me think we're doing a hell of a job caring for them.

Yes, Dell. That's why all those folks are joining Occupy Wall Street. Because there are so many jobs, that the number of homeless are actually decreasing, not increasing as every organization thinks (as they run out of beds and food pantries out of food, and the number of mentally ill on the street increase, and a record number of people are on food stamps), and we are taking such good care of the starving and homeless in this country. According to you.

The nation’s homeless population increased by approximately 20,000 people from 2008 to 2009 (3 percent increase). There were also increased numbers of people experiencing homelessness in each of the subpopulations examined in this report: families, individuals, chronic, unsheltered.

God knows how many more homeless were created between 2009 and 2011 due to foreclosures and unemployment.



ttp://www.endhomelessness.org/content/article/detail/3668

National Alliance to End Homelessness: State of Homelessness in America 2011

Geeshus effing cripes. God save this country from itself and it's blind ignorance.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

In other words, when you said, "In Chicago there are more people murdered in a day than the homeless who die of hypothermia in a year" you were just making it up..

No actually I was going on recollection and came pretty damn close.

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, Dell. That's why all those folks are joining Occupy Wall Street. .

What a couple thousand? Yea that's huge!

They got a couple hundred in Chicago. More people show up for a pee wee football game.

Originally Posted by Riot

Geeshus effing cripes. God save this country from itself and it's blind ignorance.

You're right God Save this country but from the people that allow this to occur. Like the piece of crap in the following story, it's time to grow up and stop the f'n whining. Want a job? Look in the want ads. Don't want to work? Starve. It may have saved this guy's woman.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...=all#pagebreak

[dellinger63]

Give credit where it's due:

In Jan 2005 the National Alliance to End Homelessness reported 744,313 and as of 2009 that number had decreased to 656,129 of which 61% were sheltered (403,308).

We shelter, feed, heat and support far more than that, including people here illegally, including extended members of the President's family. Instead of demanding more give praise to all we aready do. We are and always have been the most generous nation on earth, period! So again stop your whining!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

You're right God Save this country

I don't think the Invisible Honey Badger in the sky gives a $hit.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

No actually I was going on recollection and came pretty damn close.

Yes, in your imagination.

What a couple thousand? Yea that's huge! They got a couple hundred in Chicago.

Hey, "couple hundred" in Chicago, or a couple thousand, all the same in Dell's mind

You're right God Save this country but from the people that allow this to occur.

Like those that want all the societal benefits of living in America, especially the freedom to complain about groups they don't like, but don't want to contribute a damn thing to the country?

There are no homeless, no unemployed, no uninsured: and if they are, it's entirely their own damn fault. Right Dell?

Evening news right now in Lexington Ch 27: a story about 1 in 5 people currently living in poverty in Lexington, KY, the amount of heating assistance available to the poor this winter has been decreased by over a million dollars, severe worry about increased deaths from hypothermia this winter because of all the poor people that will have to be kicked off heating assistance this winter.

But it's all their fault, and the churches will help them. "We" don't have to worry about those lazy folk.

[Riot]

Here's a new "Occupy" site for aggregating all news.

http://occupyitnews.org

OWS has over $400,000 in their bank account now, from donations. They purchase food daily, provide free medical care, and computer services, sleeping bags & blankets, and have websites. They hold daily general meetings. Have multiple committees working on items of interest to them. Also have downtown storage locker filled with donations.

Night before last, Occupy New York had to defend their medical tent (free health care for all Occupy residents in NY) in the middle of the night, from the police who showed up to try and take it down without warning.

Guess who happened to be there and stand in the way of the cops, joining arms with the protesters? (btw the cops went away and left the tent for now)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1...via=siderecent

Looks like Geraldo Rivera (twice) and Jon Stossel (once), both of GOP-TV Faux News, tried to go to Occupy Wall Street to interview protesters, but all three times they were hounded from the premises with chants of "Fox Lies!". Video all over the internet.

It's amazing how the mainstream media is completely not covering this story, but how much news is going on at Occupy locations nationwide (hundreds of locations) and internationally, that is being covered on YouTube, blogs, Twitter, Facebook,
etc.

And one of the coolest things was Saturday night in New York, in Times Square, that made the national news: a US Marine standing off against 25 riot police, talking them down for advancing upon peaceful protesters. The cops backed down (the cops had rammed motorcycles over barriers into crowds on the sidewalk, and pushed several horses into the crowd hurting peaceful demonstrators)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=WmEHcOc0Sys

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Here's a new "Occupy" site for aggregating all news.

http://occupyitnews.org

OWS has over $400,000 in their bank account now, from donations. They purchase food daily, provide free medical care, and computer services, sleeping bags & blankets, and have websites. They hold daily general meetings. Have multiple committees working on items of interest to them. Also have downtown storage locker filled with donations.

Night before last, Occupy New York had to defend their medical tent (free health care for all Occupy residents in NY) in the middle of the night, from the police who showed up to try and take it down.

Guess who happened to be there and stand in the way of the cops, joining arms with the protesters? (btw the cops went away and left the tent for now)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/1...via=siderecent

Looks like Geraldo Rivera (twice) and Jon Stossel (once), both of GOP-TV Faux News, tried to go to Occupy Wall Street to interview protesters, but all three times they were hounded from the premises with chants of "Fox Lies!". Video all over the internet.

It's amazing how the mainstream media is completely not covering this story, but how much news is going on at Occupy locations nationwide (hundreds of locations) and internationally, that is being covered on YouTube, blogs, Twitter, Facebook, etc.

Who opened a bank account? Seems counter-intuitive to the cause really. The "protestors" here are now negotiating with local officials for locations where they can be protected from the elements etc. This thing is beginning to trade in the street cred (what little it had) for some comfort.
A bank account? Seriously. While protesting banking.

Love it.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Who opened a bank account? Seems counter-intuitive to the cause really. The "protestors" here are now negotiating with local officials for locations where they can be protected from the elements etc. This thing is beginning to trade in the street cred (what little it had) for some comfort.
A bank account? Seriously. While protesting banking.

Love it.

They are not "protesting banking". They are not against bank accounts - that's ridiculous.

They have a bank account (at a credit union, actually, not a bank), they have an independent 501C administering it, they have unions that have donated free office space to them.

They have a New York City public approval rating of over 60%, a national rate over 55% (including 2/3 of Republicans).

And, a NYC (correction, not mayor, Governor) that just admitted today he's going against what they demonstrated against Saturday, what 65% of his public think about the NY millionaires tax, and he is going ahead with rescinding it against what his city and state thinks and wants him to do with it (keep it in place)

Occupy Wall Street is gonna be around for a long time with responses to public demonstrations like that. When the people you elect say they won't do what you want them to .... ?

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

They are not "protesting banking".

They have a bank account, they have an independent 501C administering it, they have unions that have donated free office space to them.

Wall St. is the home of the banking industry though. And while protesting banking is broad brush, it is certainly not false.
Office space and ready cash will lead to leaders emerging from the group, once this happens they will separate themselves from the rest and start their own little version of the big pyramid that is representative of the country and eventually it will fall apart.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

Wall St. is the home of the banking industry though. And while protesting banking is broad brush, it is certainly not false.

Yes, it's entirely false. They are not protesting banking at all. You clearly haven't been paying any attention at all to this protest.

Office space and ready cash will lead to leaders emerging from the group, once this happens they will separate themselves from the rest and start their own little version of the big pyramid that is representative of the country and eventually it will fall apart

Only if they think like you do.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, it's entirely false. They are not protesting banking at all. You clearly haven't been paying any attention at all to this protest.



Only if they think like you do.

"We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%." Who are the 1%? I lived and worked in NYC and happen to know they are the people running banks. Believe what you want. 1% = Banking.

"We are growing change in the shadow of the wealth, greed, and thievery that is Wall Street"

Power corrupts, thinking otherwise is foolish.

[Riot]

From www.occupywallstreet.com

(other good info with blogs, pictures on Daily Kos, MoveOn.org, etc.)

The Occupy Wall Street movement has galvanized the attention of the world by organizing the largest demonstrations in this country as a response to the Great Recession caused by our financial and political leaders.

Data from a survey of 1,619 respondents from a survey placed on occupywallst.org suggests that there is a huge undercurrent of mainstream dissatisfaction with traditional political party affiliations as well a huge amount of support for radical change in the United States of America.

* 92.5% of respondents either somewhat or strongly supported the protests with most respondents indicating strong support.

* 1/4th of the sample (or 24.2%) participated in the Occupy Wall Street protests as of October 5, 2011.

* 91.8% of the sample thinks that the Occupy Wall Street Protests will continue to grow.

In terms of demographic characteristics of the sample, we found that,

*64.2% of respondents were younger than 34 years of age.

*While the sample is relatively young, one in three respondents is older than 35 and one in five respondents is 45 and older.

* 7.9% of respondents have a high school degree or less.

*92.1% of the sample has some college, a college degree, or a graduate degree.

*27.4% have some college (but no degree), 35% have a college degree, 8.2% have some graduate school (but no degree), and close to 21.5% have a graduate school degree.

*This is a highly educated sample.

*26.7% of respondents were enrolled in school and 73.3% were not enrolled in school.

*50.4% were employed full-time and an additional 20.4% were employed part-time.

*13.1% of the sample are unemployed.

*2.6% of respondents were retired, 1.3% disabled, 2.6% homemakers and 9.7% are full-time students.

*47.5% of the sample earns less than $24,999 dollars a year and another quarter (24%) earn between $25,000 and $49,999 per year.

* 71.5% of the sample earns less than $50,000 per year.

*15.4% of the sample earned between $50,000 and $74,999.

*The remainder 13% of the sample earn over $75,000 with close to 2% earning over $150,000 per year.

*27.3% of respondents considered themselves Democrats, another 2.4% said they were Republican.

*Interestingly, a very large proportion of the sample, close to 70.3%, considered themselves Independents.

*66.4% in the sample agree somewhat or strongly that they regularly use Facebook.

*28.9% in the sample agree somewhat or strongly that they regularly use Twitter.

*73.9% in the sample agree somewhat or strongly that they regularly use YouTube.

*Our data suggest that the 99% movement comes from and looks like the 99%.

Héctor R. Cordero-Guzmán, Ph.D.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

"We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%." Who are the 1%? I lived and worked in NYC and happen to know they are the people running banks. Believe what you want. 1% = Banking.

"We are growing change in the shadow of the wealth, greed, and thievery that is Wall Street"

Power corrupts, thinking otherwise is foolish.

Yes, that's not being anti-banking. It's being anti-corruption, anti-plutocracy. They want reinstitution of Glass-Steagall, control and regulation over unregulated derivatives markets, they want a tax of 0.1% on all trades (to slow down market volitility) and 0.01% tax on derivatives. They are not "anti-banking".

They are also not anti-government, but want 100% of the corruption and lobbyists out of Washington.

[Clip-Clop]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, that's not being anti-banking. It's being anti-corruption, anti-plutocracy.

As long as banks are people (like corporations) they will be evil. Separation of corruption and lending is never going to happen. The acts are intertwined and always have been.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Clip-Clop

As long as banks are people (like corporations) they will be evil.

They also want a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.

Separation of corruption and lending is never going to happen. The acts are intertwined and always have been.

They think differently than you do. That is exactly what they are trying to change. You think it is inevitable - they do not.

You can continue to mock their efforts, or you can support them if you believe as they do: that corruption and lending have to be separated.

Add: The Daily Show, Jon Oliver, had a funny segment when he went down to visit Occupy Wall Street, regarding who "comprises" the "movement".

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-epi...calvin-trillin

[Danzig]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Act


read up, on glass- steagall. of course you read quite often these days that republicans introduced legislation to repeal G/S, but you don't see many who mention it was clinton who signed it into law. actually, i didn't know who was president when it was repealed, til reading this.

[Danzig]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_201557.html


"Sooner or later, perhaps starting with the next serious economic downturn," he wrote, "the US will have to confront one of the great challenges of our times: how does a sovereign nation govern itself effectively when politics are national and business is global?"

Consumer protection advocate Ralph Nader, meanwhile, was far more succinct in his skepticism. "We will look back at this and wonder how the country was so asleep," he said at the time. "It's just a nightmare."

When the Senate voted to pass Gramm-Leach-Bliley by a vote of 90-8, it reversed what was, for more than six decades, a framework that had governed the functions and reach of the nation's largest banks. No longer limited by laws and regulations commercial and investment banks could now merge. Many had already begun the process, including, among others, J.P. Morgan and Citicorp. The new law allowed it to be permanent. The updated ground rules were low on oversight and heavy on risky ventures. Historically in the business of mortgages and credit cards, banks now would sell insurance and stock.

Nevertheless, the bill did not lack champions, many of whom declared that the original legislation -- forged during the Great Depression -- was both antiquated and cumbersome for the banking industry. Congress had tried 11 times to repeal Glass-Steagall. The twelfth was the charm.

"Today Congress voted to update the rules that have governed financial services since the Great Depression and replace them with a system for the 21st century," said then-Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers. "This historic legislation will better enable American companies to compete in the new economy."

"I welcome this day as a day of success and triumph," said Sen. Christopher Dodd, (D-Conn.).

"The concerns that we will have a meltdown like 1929 are dramatically overblown," said Sen. Bob Kerrey, (D-Neb.).

"If we don't pass this bill, we could find London or Frankfurt or years down the road Shanghai becoming the financial capital of the world," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "There are many reasons for this bill, but first and foremost is to ensure that U.S. financial firms remain competitive."

Looking back, members of Congress have tried to downplay the significance of their support. One high-ranking Hill aide notes that his boss, who voted for the bill, did so because banks were already beginning to merge with investment houses. It should be noted, additionally, that Dodd and Schumer were able to hammer out, as part of the legislation, the Community Reinvestment Act, which required banks to extend lines of credit to predominantly minority areas.