Support NeoGAF

[The Albatross]

Nashville gathering:

What I did not get is why they were chanting stop paying your bills.

That's what got me into this debate. I was told, back on like Page 19 (50ppp) that because I paid my student loan debt and I'm not mad at the corporation that lent me the money, I'm not a worthy member of the 99%.

This movement claims to represent the 99% and seemingly wants to have a variety of voices. BUt, if you're somebody who believes in paying your bills, then they don't want to hear what you have to say.

 

[Marleyman]

Yeah, I think that we can both agree that for-profit colleges are sharks, take advantage of people, and aren't providing good services for the cost (or any cost). I am strongly against most for profits.

They aren't all bad but they used to use tactics that were unethical at best for years until recently. There is a ton of heat(lawsuits backed by the DOJ) on my company for these tactics.

But, I think that they're largely irrelevant to the issue of college loan debt, there just aren't enough of the schools and they don't represent a large enough pool of students to make any real impact on the industry at large.. You had said that you completely disagree with the idea that the people in most photos, stories, and so on, complaining about college loan debt are likely from non-profit colleges.

There aren't enough for-profit schools but they are relevant because the student body uses a much higher percentage of federal aid money.

I changed to say "99+%" to less than that, although I'd still probably say it's 90%+ of the people complaining about college loan debt in these stories are non-profit students. Would you still completely disagree with that?

... although I don't really know what we're disagreeing on, on this issue either way

I don't disagree with that at all.

 

[kame-sennin]

Nashville gathering:

What I did not get is why they were chanting stop paying your bills.

Thanks for the pics! It's really great to see how this is spreading.

 

[Bad_Boy]

Read all the posts next time.

Thats ironic.

 

[The Albatross]

There aren't enough for-profit schools but they are relevant because the student body uses a much higher percentage of federal aid money.

Even in spite of their sharking tactics in getting low income families, veterans, and others who instantly qualify for federal money, I still don't think that their numbers account for enough as to be a prime motivator for the rise in college tuition. I'm totally against the for-profit industry, but there are only about a dozen accredited four profit colleges in the US, and tuition increases at the nonprofits -- representing over 99% of colleges and universities in the US -- has been happening independent of the for-profit industry.

Although, I still think that their predation on low income families and the fraud that goes along with how aggressively they seek people who qualify for federal money is still, completely, a scam and has to be curbed (to some effect, it already has... Higher Ed is very awake to the for-profit scam now, more than it was five years ago, and it's well noted now how the for profits fail their students).

I hate to say it because I am a direct beneficiary of this, but the cost of college increases is primarily because of colleges paying professors more competitively to other industries, having excellent benefits, and increased competitiveness between similar colleges. I am paid very well as a College Administrator, and even just 10 or 12 years ago, it would have been absurd for my position to be making the money that it is. We used to have a perception that working in academia delivered an easy schedule at a paupers rate, but income equality motivated primarily by faculty, has brought an end to that.

 

[Divvy]

Being completely seriously, everybody has that right in the United States. The word that some may seem to be hung up on is the word "Adequate." What many in this movement are calling for is not for "adequate levels of food, clothing, housing, and medical care," or "adequate unemployment benefits" or "sickness benefits" in old age, but rather, exceptional levels of care, food, clothing, and so on. Further, the UN Charter lists "circumstances beyond his control." We do this a lot when we start movements, we make the mistake of thinking that everything is beyond our control and that we are completely helpless.

Unemployment benefit enrollment is the highest in decades, over 10% in most states. More people are on food stamps than have been for decades. More people are enrolling in government assistance and seeking medicare than anytime in the last 20 years.

But let's not, for a second, pretend that those programs don't exist and that we spoiled X-Box playing dot-commers have it anywhere nearly as bad as many groups in Libya, Syria, and the others in that post you were quoting.

Yeah I guess you're right, but I guess I just don't think comparisons between the two protests is something to get upset over.

 

[Deku]

Yeah I guess you're right, but I guess I just don't think comparisons between the two protests is something to get upset over.

There is a connection. Youth anger at the existing structures. And this is how I suspect historians will record these protests as a youth revolt similar to the 1960s youth movements.

But that's where the similarities end. I generally dislike relativist thinking so trying to twist these protest as somehow being similar to the Arab spring require leaps in logic and relativism to be applied on a massive scale to reach.

Obviously if you're on the ground and saw police pepper spray a friend, it might 'feel' like Egypt or Libya, but it's still not the same.

Great post by the albatross BTW. Needs to be quoted more as discussions on entilements and comparisons between these and other protests often ignore absolute differences in conditions.

 

[Dartastic]

No one forced them to take those loans or go to the schools that they did.

Don't you see your own hypocrisy? You are lucky enough to have gotten a job once you graduated, hence you are able to pay your loans back. There are thousands and thousands of students just like you who probably went to similar schools, and took out loans at similar interest rates and cannot find jobs.

Your generalizing a group of people who are struggling economically based on the fact that you haven't suffered. Is that right?

It certainly seems like he is.

Manos. You said you wouldn't shit up these new threads. Please stick to what you said earlier, and STOP SHITTING UP THIS NEW THREAD.

 

[The Albatross]

Yeah I guess you're right, but I guess I just don't think comparisons between the two protests is something to get upset over.

In terms of superficial things, like the demographic of protesters -- students, disenfranchised professionals, and so on -- is comparable. But, comparing the plight of the American female college student who has $20,000 in student loan debt to the plight of the woman who was sentenced to 30 lashes for driving a car in Saudi Arabia, is an embarrassing disgrace. It makes us look even that much more arrogant.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

In terms of superficial things, like the demographic of protesters -- students, disenfranchised professionals, and so on -- is comparable. But, comparing the plight of the American female college student who has $20,000 in student loan debt to the plight of the woman who was sentenced to 30 lashes for driving a car in Saudi Arabia, is an embarrassing disgrace. It makes us look even that much more arrogant.

I could be wrong but didn't some of the Arab Spring protesters in Egypt (Libya? I don't remember) voice support for Occupy Wall Street?

 

[The Albatross]

All of which our politicians are just itching to chop up in the name of austerity.

...? Nearly all of those listed have been expanded.

C'mon man, you can't just make things up j because it fits some idealized story of hardship.

 

[Marleyman]

Even in spite of their sharking tactics in getting low income families, veterans, and others who instantly qualify for federal money, I still don't think that their numbers account for enough as to be a prime motivator for the rise in college tuition. I'm totally against the for-profit industry, but there are only about a dozen accredited four profit colleges in the US, and tuition increases at the nonprofits -- representing over 99% of colleges and universities in the US -- has been happening independent of the for-profit industry.

Oh no, I don't think they are at fault for a rise in tuition; that is up to the particular college and they know people will pay it so they do it.

Although, I still think that their predation on low income families and the fraud that goes along with how aggressively they seek people who qualify for federal money is still, completely, a scam and has to be curbed (to some effect, it already has... Higher Ed is very awake to the for-profit scam now, more than it was five years ago, and it's well noted now how the for profits fail their students).

I wouldn't even be surprised if my company isn't around this time next year, or at least my job. There is one particular lawsuit that got picked up by the DOJ that is going to be a huge factor in whether we stick around or not, I think.

 

[The Albatross]

I could be wrong but didn't some of the Arab Spring protesters in Egypt (Libya? I don't remember) voice support for Occupy Wall Street?

Yeah... maybe...? Perhaps there's somebody who survived the Gulag or Great Leap Forward who voiced support for it as well, but that doesn't make the storied Plight of the American Post-Grad comparable.

 

[Foffy]

Nashville gathering:

What I did not get is why they were chanting stop paying your bills.

Some think that because the country is in debt, why should the citizens be the one who still have to pay money when the government is essentially using negative dollars. It's an interesting point, but one I don't follow personally.

Don't you see your own hypocrisy? You are lucky enough to have gotten a job once you graduated, hence you are able to pay your loans back. There are thousands and thousands of students just like you who probably went to similar schools, and took out loans at similar interest rates and cannot find jobs.

This is why I am trying to avoid bigger colleges. Community college for me. At least I won't go into deep amounts of debt even if things fail for me. I worry because I'm avoiding the debt game that I'll get very little options in my life though, if only because society at large embraces that shit. ):

 

[Baraka in the White House]

...? Nearly all of those listed have been expanded.

C'mon man, you can't just make things up j because it fits some idealized story of hardship.

Oh come on, of these ideas currently being tossed around Congress, which one do you think is getting the most consideration right now?

A) the millionaire tax

B) general tax increases for the wealthy

C) tax reform (specifically, closing tax loopholes)

D) cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and public services

There is no making this up. It's been the conversation on Capitol Hill for the past few months.

 

[The Albatross]

Because:
- young people don't vote

I made this image yesterday but didn't want to be seen as trolling. But...

(for people who don't know what that is, it's one type of a polling station. They don't just come around every four years and they're just not for national elections that elect presidents from the two major, corrupt parties. They have them every year, in your neighborhood, and they make real changes and you have a real voice in them every year, about things that actually effect your every day life. You may be disenfranchised to the national elections, you might not like the candidates or issues or don't feel like they represent you. That's why, if you vote and participate in local elections, you start electing people who do represent you in elections where you have a real voice.)

 

[marrec]

Yeah... maybe...? Perhaps there's somebody who survived the Gulag or Great Leap Forward who voiced support for it as well, but that doesn't make the storied Plight of the American Post-Grad comparable.

I love it.

White whine indeeeeeeed.

Just to reinterate, I'm completely for protesting the corruption of Congress and Wall Street... less for telling people they shouldn't pay their bills or they aren't responsible for their student loans.

 

[SolKane]

In terms of superficial things, like the demographic of protesters -- students, disenfranchised professionals, and so on -- is comparable. But, comparing the plight of the American female college student who has $20,000 in student loan debt to the plight of the woman who was sentenced to 30 lashes for driving a car in Saudi Arabia, is an embarrassing disgrace. It makes us look even that much more arrogant.

Nobody has made that comparison except yourself. But try and get some perspective on the issue, and why people feel the need to compare the movements. Take a look at the unemployment rate, look at the increasing cost of education, look at the size of student loan debt, look at healthcare costs - this generation, the younger generation, is seeing its future stolen from it more and more rapidly. These people are literally the future of the nation, and they've been systematically deceived, sabotaged and lied to, and then they are called "ungrateful" for refusing to put up with it any more. They are angry, they are resentful, and they have every right to be. These people at the end of the day, want to pay off their student loan debt, they want to pay their taxes, they want to participate in this nation. But we have not let them, we have held them down, we have put barriers before them, we have gambled away their future. This is the first American generation that has seen a net decrease in their wealth. Why do we act bemused that this is happening?

 

[ColonelColon]

I made this image yesterday but didn't want to be seen as trolling. But...

People seemed to believe they were voting for "change" with Obama, and since he took office, he's been a pro-military, pro-war, corporatist president. What value does a vote hold when politicians aren't beholden to the desires of voters?

 

[akira28]

People seemed to believe they were voting for "change" with Obama, and since he took office, he's been a pro-military, pro-war, corporatist president. What value does a vote hold when politicians aren't beholden to the desires of voters?

You don't only vote for the President. That's the problem. They voted for change and then elected the people to keep it from happening on the next turn. Or didn't bother to go vote the second time and just let it happen. I was out there. It was almost empty when the Congressional elections came around. I guess we thought we won?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

You don't only vote for the President. That's the problem. They voted for change and then elected the people to keep it from happening on the next turn.

Very true. You can't vote for a progressive(ish) President then hand him pretty much the same Congress we've always had and expect change.

 

[The Albatross]

Oh come on, of these ideas currently being tossed around Congress, which one do you think is getting the most consideration right now?

A) the millionaire tax

B) General tax increases for the wealthy

C) tax reform (specifically, closing tax loopholes)

D) Cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and public services

There is no making this up. It's been the conversation on Capitol Hill for the past few months.

Social Security is not being cut. Aside from Ron Paul, find a serious national presidential candidate who supports it or any group of congressmen who support it. Even Rick Perry, the great White evil from evil Texas who drinks the blood of indebted undergraduate virgins, backed off of his social security rhetoric from the early 2000s as soon as he became a national figure. Social security is rhetorically known as "the third rail," and social security cuts are NOT coming.

Medicare and Medicaid has been expanded, unemployment benefits have been expanded, and most public services have increased over the last 10 years, and even in the last three years.

Where you are only half right is in education. The federal government still spends in education (No Child LEft Behind, Race to the Top, etc), but because day-to-day (or, year-to-year) education policy is still largely set on a local basis (and this is a good thing generally), it is much more at risk during a recession. Local programs are always at risk during a recession and not because of evil congress people, senators, and presidential candidates, but because cities and towns actually have real budgets that they have to balance.. unlike the Feds.

 

[Dude Abides]

You heard it here first, folks. Want to make sure the SS retirement age isn't increased? Make sure to vote next time your town elects a comptroller!

 

[J.ceaz]

You heard it here first, folks. Want to make sure the SS retirement age isn't increased? Make sure to vote next time your town elects a comptroller!

you're pretty silly.

 

[water_wendi]

Yes because thats worked so well thus far. Voting is a joke when the votes of the people are circumvented by bribes.

 

[Something Wicked]

Oh come on, of these ideas currently being tossed around Congress, which one do you think is getting the most consideration right now?

A) the millionaire tax

B) general tax increases for the wealthy

C) tax reform (specifically, closing tax loopholes)

D) cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, education and public services

There is no making this up. It's been the conversation on Capitol Hill for the past few months.

And guess what? Enacting all of those policies would simply close the budget gap of our existing annual deficit of $1.2 trillion- and we're going to need another few hundred billion or even up to a trillion to pay for the upcoming national healthcare act. No reasonable tax increases will provide free college tuition to most Americans given how we currently spend our tax dollars and the inherent high costs of US tertiary education.

 

[The Albatross]

People seemed to believe they were voting for "change" with Obama, and since he took office, he's been a pro-military, pro-war, corporatist president. What value does a vote hold when politicians aren't beholden to the desires of voters?

I tried to ninja edit my post seconds later to add more context, but it might not have been in time.

There are probably 2 or 3 elections every year in your district. If you're only voting once every four or eight years, you're missing about 20 - 30 chances to make real change. It's not just senators and congressmen, or presidents and governors, it's your district rep, your city rep, your state rep; your mayors, judges, it's real ballot issues... Last year marijuana legalization was a ballot question in my district and I live in a Democratic, but still pretty conservatively democratic district (hell, I vote at a retirement home). Yet, like less than 1,000 people came out to vote at my polling station, and very few were 18 - 25. YEt, if I went around and asked the tens of thousands of 18-25 year olds in my district what some of their major issues are, what they feel strongly about? They'd all say legalizationm they'd all support it.

But, if you're part of the crowd that thinks that change is going to come from On High, from a president, get real.

I'm always amazed at the number of young people who will be quick to point out that "trickle down economics" is a fairy tail and doesn't work, but yet, acts in the way that "trickle down elections" are the only way to vote in change.

 

[Jak140]

Sorry to sidetrack a little here, but did no one else growing up have adults of all sorts – teachers, parents, relatives – drilling them throughout their adolescence that you just had to study hard, go to college, and a good job was almost guaranteed – even your major hardly mattered because most peoples' jobs had jack all to do with what degree they had anyway? Because I sure as fuck did. For the most part the people who raised this generation came of age at a time when jobs for the low and highly skilled were plentiful and higher education was affordable. Most of this generation was not raised to be prepared for the shit that has unraveled over the past several years. Like some people here I lucked out and got a job in the area I majored in (though I’m far from having job stability) and had parents who were willing and able to help pay for my education, but just because I’ve been lucky so far doesn’t mean I’m going to just fucking thumb my nose at everyone who wasn’t so lucky. Some people did everything right and just got utterly screwed by this recession, not to mention the many other things that can just go totally wrong that are outside your control. If you think you’re good now because you have a job and can pay off your loans, just wait and see what happens if things get worse and you lose that job and can’t find another. That ivory tower won’t seem so high anymore.

 

[Timedog]

I tried to ninja edit my post seconds later to add more context, but it might not have been in time.

There are probably 2 or 3 elections every year in your district. If you're only voting once every four or eight years, you're missing about 20 - 30 chances to make real change. It's not just senators and congressmen, or presidents and governors, it's your district rep, your city rep, your state rep; your mayors, judges, it's real ballot issues... Last year marijuana legalization was a ballot question in my district and I live in a Democratic, but still pretty conservatively democratic district (hell, I vote at a retirement home). Yet, like less than 1,000 people came out to vote at my polling station, and very few were 18 - 25. YEt, if I went around and asked the tens of thousands of 18-25 year olds in my district what some of their major issues are, what they feel strongly about? They'd all say legalizationm they'd all support it.

But, if you're part of the crowd that thinks that change is going to come from On High, from a president, get real.

I'm always amazed at the number of young people who will be quick to point out that "trickle down economics" is a fairy tail and doesn't work, but yet, acts in the way that "trickle down elections" are the only way to vote in change.

Great post.

 

[bounchfx]

Yes because thats worked so well thus far. Voting is a joke when the votes of the people are circumvented by bribes.

that, and when all of your choices are absolute garbage.

 

[kame-sennin]

Yes because thats worked so well thus far. Voting is a joke when the votes of the people are circumvented by bribes.

Exactly. The reason these protests are necessary is because both parties have been co-opted by Wall Street. In 2008, McCain received donations from Goldman Sachs... and Obama received even higher donations from Goldman Sachs. Which politician do you vote for if you want to see Goldman prosecuted?

 

[Marleyman]

Sorry to sidetrack a little here, but did no one else growing up have adults of all sorts – teachers, parents, relatives – drilling them throughout their adolescence that you just had to study hard, go to college, and a good job was almost guaranteed – even your major hardly mattered because most peoples' jobs had jack all to do with what degree they had anyway? Because I sure as fuck did. For the most part the people who raised this generation came of age at a time when jobs for the low and highly skilled were plentiful and higher education was affordable. Most of this generation was not raised to be prepared for the shit that has unraveled over the past several years. Like some people here I lucked out and got a job in the area I majored in (though I’m far from having job stability) and had parents who were willing and able to help pay for my education, but just because I’ve been lucky so far doesn’t mean I’m going to just fucking thumb my nose at everyone who wasn’t so lucky. Some people did everything right and just got utterly screwed by this recession, not to mention the many other things that can just go totally wrong that are outside your control. If you think you’re good now because you have a job and can pay off your loans, just wait and see what happens if things get worse and you lose that job and can’t find another. That ivory tower won’t seem so high anymore.

Good post.

 

[Timedog]

Sorry to sidetrack a little here, but did no one else growing up have adults of all sorts – teachers, parents, relatives – drilling them throughout their adolescence that you just had to study hard, go to college, and a good job was almost guaranteed – even your major hardly mattered because most peoples' jobs had jack all to do with what degree they had anyway? Because I sure as fuck did. For the most part the people who raised this generation came of age at a time when jobs for the low and highly skilled were plentiful and higher education was affordable. Most of this generation was not raised to be prepared for the shit that has unraveled over the past several years. Like some people here I lucked out and got a job in the area I majored in (though I’m far from having job stability) and had parents who were willing and able to help pay for my education, but just because I’ve been lucky so far doesn’t mean I’m going to just fucking thumb my nose at everyone who wasn’t so lucky. Some people did everything right and just got utterly screwed by this recession, not to mention the many other things that can just go totally wrong that are outside your control. If you think you’re good now because you have a job and can pay off your loans, just wait and see what happens if things get worse and you lose that job and can’t find another. That ivory tower won’t seem so high anymore.

Precisely. If things go even more to shit a lot of people are going to be singing completely different tunes.

 

[The Albatross]

Nobody has made that comparison except yourself. But try and get some perspective on the issue, and why people feel the need to compare the movements. Take a look at the unemployment rate, look at the increasing cost of education, look at the size of student loan debt, look at healthcare costs - this generation, the younger generation, is seeing its future stolen from it more and more rapidly. These people are literally the future of the nation, and they've been systematically deceived, sabotaged and lied to, and then they are called "ungrateful" for refusing to put up with it any more. They are angry, they are resentful, and they have every right to be. These people at the end of the day, want to pay off their student loan debt, they want to pay their taxes, they want to participate in this nation. But we have not let them, we have held them down, we have put barriers before them, we have gambled away their future. This is the first American generation that has seen a net decrease in their wealth. Why do we act bemused that this is happening?

First of all, I am not the one making that comparison... My post was in response to people making that comparison. I wouldn't have made it otherwise. There's like 3 people defending the idea that the two movements are comparable over the last two pages (50ppp).

I think that I do understand the perspective of the angsty American youth who is graduating with a degree in Art Theory with $80,000 in debt and they're waiters and waitresses at Chili's and they have no realistic way to pay down the debt that is soon coming.

It's a shame, it's a shame that we -- as a generation -- are becoming more spoiled than the generation that preceded us. We've accepted that our parents' generation (I'm 27), the baby boom generation, is the one that can accept no compromise and has traded their children's future for the sake of their own; the ones who are setting up government programs that aren't sustainable; the ones who wanted to move into McMansions and live a lifestyle that they couldn't afford; and the ones who complied in rigging a system where in Wall Street was as corrupt as Washington.

And it's a shame that our generation, the one that our parents planned would just be the generation to tough it out, are becoming more spoiled than them. Where my parents' generation was spoiled to think that they have a right to everything, a right to a giant house, a right to not have to save money for retirement, a right to not have to budget in health costs, our generation of young people is exanding that to everything. I have a right to study whatever I want at whatever college and then NOT pay for it; I have a right to be taught by some vastly intelligent people in mideival archaelogy and then when I cannot get a job in that field, I have a right to not pay those people.

This wouldn't come off as such a spoiled brat movement if the voices of idiocy weren't the loudest ones and if there were an actual direction. I am 100% on board the movement that wants to curb the cost of higher education; I am on board with those who feel like our parents generation has sold us out: But, the parts of this movement that are being heard are the ones who are doing EXACTLY what the generation before us did, selling out the next generation because they don't want to pay their college bills now.

If you're mad as hell about the 50, 60, and 70 year olds who sold you out and traded away your future, and you're demanding reparations without sacrifice, then you're just doing what that generation did.

If you're mad that your parents or your 4th grade teacher lied to you -- that you lived based on the lie that going to college, getting $80,000 in loans, and majoring in English Theory (a field that I LOVE) was going to get you a $100,000 cushy job and a nice condo on the East Side -- GROW UP. Accept that you've been lied to and stop trying to cry to the government, or wall street, or anybody else, to make changes to make it so that the LIE is a reality. If you've accepted it's a lie, then stop asking people to make it true.

 

[Fenderputty]

Very true. You can't vote for a progressive(ish) President then hand him pretty much the same Congress we've always had and expect change.

He had the majority for the first part of his presidency. Political ideology doesn't matter if both republicans and democrats are bought prior to election.

 

[richiek]

It also doesn't help when Republicans put up obstacles (Voter ID laws) that make it harder to vote in the name of "combating voter fraud".

 

[Keru_Shiri]

Nobody has made that comparison except yourself. But try and get some perspective on the issue, and why people feel the need to compare the movements. Take a look at the unemployment rate, look at the increasing cost of education, look at the size of student loan debt, look at healthcare costs - this generation, the younger generation, is seeing its future stolen from it more and more rapidly. These people are literally the future of the nation, and they've been systematically deceived, sabotaged and lied to, and then they are called "ungrateful" for refusing to put up with it any more. They are angry, they are resentful, and they have every right to be. These people at the end of the day, want to pay off their student loan debt, they want to pay their taxes, they want to participate in this nation. But we have not let them, we have held them down, we have put barriers before them, we have gambled away their future. This is the first American generation that has seen a net decrease in their wealth. Why do we act bemused that this is happening?

Excellent post, especially the bolded part.

 

[empty vessel]

That's what got me into this debate. I was told, back on like Page 19 (50ppp) that because I paid my student loan debt and I'm not mad at the corporation that lent me the money, I'm not a worthy member of the 99%.

This movement claims to represent the 99% and seemingly wants to have a variety of voices. BUt, if you're somebody who believes in paying your bills, then they don't want to hear what you have to say.

Utterly ridiculous. The point is not that you are a problem because you pay your student loans back. The point is that the mechanisms by which we provide higher education are stupid and, up until recently, exploitative of students on behalf of financial corporations. Now that reform legislation has at least removed the financial middlemen who did nothing but siphon money, we are left with a mechanism that many believe is suboptimal.

Nobody is telling you not to pay your student loans or that because you do your opinions don't matter. But that the system prior to the recent reform legislation exploited citizens on behalf of financial institutions is an empirical fact. It was designed to funnel money from people to banks for no value added. Your insistence that people who complain about that are stupid or petty is rooted in complete ignorance. Moreover, that some people would prefer a different system from the one we have now in which higher education is completely or substantially publicly funded is not remotely a basis for ridicule. There are real social benefits to not creating a debtor class of people with college degrees. That you reject those benefits does not make the people who want them stupid, lazy, irresponsible or anything else.

 

[AndyD]

Some think that because the country is in debt, why should the citizens be the one who still have to pay money when the government is essentially using negative dollars. It's an interesting point, but one I don't follow personally.


This is why I am trying to avoid bigger colleges. Community college for me. At least I won't go into deep amounts of debt even if things fail for me. I worry because I'm avoiding the debt game that I'll get very little options in my life though, if only because society at large embraces that shit. ):

I don't buy into it. When I was poor and in college I used credit cards, that was like using negative dollars for me, I was spending money I did not have. Now I have to pay it back, and I am not complaining.

When I went to college and law school I took out loans and no one forced me to do it, I did it so I can go to the schools of my choice. Now I am paying off those loans and not complaining.

I think just as I chose to spend money I did not have to better myself, so I can pay it off now, so the country is spending money it does not have to better itself, to pay it later. Not everyone should work on a balanced budget all the time.

I don't see anything wrong with spending more than we earn if we make that decision rationally and pay back our debts. Within reason of course. Cut waste, cut frivolous spending, but if that's not enough, then borrow to stay alive and pay it back another day.

Utterly ridiculous. The point is not that you are a problem because you pay your student loans back. The point is that the mechanisms by which we provide higher education are stupid and, up until recently, exploitative of students on behalf of financial corporations. Now that reform legislation has at least removed the financial middlemen who did nothing but siphon money, we are left with a mechanism that many believe is suboptimal.

It actually started with me hearing the protesters today say stop paying your bills. The chant was along the lines of "credit cards to the big banks, mortgages to the big banks, corrupt banks, corrupt government, stop paying your bills, stop paying all your bills..." I may have missed one or two types of bills in the middle. But the chant and signs were clearly stop paying bills.

 

[Cat Party]

Albatross man, wow. I'm really enjoying your posts.

 

[The Albatross]

It also doesn't help when Republicans put up obstacles (Voter ID laws) that make it harder to vote in the name of "combating voter fraud".

Guess what would happen if everybody voted in local elections? Those Republicans and frauds who push for inherently racist programs would never see office, they'd never be able to get voter ID into areas.

A major reason why social security will NEVER be cut and will probably be financed for all time, is because the elderly come out and vote. They're the least able people, the least mobile, the most dependent, yet somehow they get their ballots in. But, young people like you and I (presuming here) are too busy playing another round of Horde mode to make it to the ballots before 8:00pm.

And I am NOT talking about presidential elections or national elections. The crooks who are in Washington started somewhere; they started at some local election where only 800 people in a district came out and voted, and only 500 people voted for them. These crooks went from that district rep seat to a city rep seat, where, say, 12,000 people voted for them. They then went from the city rep to a state legislator, where 230,000 people voted for them, and then to a federal legislator, where a million people voted for them. There are 50,000 views in this topic in the last week or two, if the people who view this topic were only so engaged to go out during their local election and elect candidates who really represent their views -- progressive, liberal, conservative, monarchic, demogoguing, tyrannical, or whatever your views may be -- those are the people who would march up.

It's just that nobody really cares.

 

[discoalucard]

If you're mad that your parents or your 4th grade teacher lied to you -- that you lived based on the lie that going to college, getting $80,000 in loans, and majoring in English Theory (a field that I LOVE) was going to get you a $100,000 cushy job and a nice condo on the East Side -- GROW UP.

Legitimately curious to see if this "everyone vastly in debt with a college degree and no job must've gotten a useless degree" meme has any factual basis in reality and not just bullshit rhetoric.

No one with their heads screwed on expects to become millionaires when they major in something legitimate but generally low paying like, say, Communications, but most at least expect to have some hope of earning enough money to pay it back afterwards while still being able to account for food and shelter, and eventually enough to start a family. This whole argument does nothing but divert attention from the actual issue - the whole unemployment thing - and anyone using it should automatically fail at whatever awful point they're trying to make.

I do think anyone asking for total student debt forgiveness is a lunatic though.

 

[Deku]

Utterly ridiculous. The point is not that you are a problem because you pay your student loans back. The point is that the mechanisms by which we provide higher education are stupid and, up until recently, exploitative of students on behalf of financial corporations. Now that reform legislation has at least removed the financial middlemen who did nothing but siphon money, we are left with a mechanism that many believe is suboptimal.

Nobody is telling you not to pay your student loans or that because you do your opinions don't matter. But that the system prior to the recent reform legislation exploited citizens on behalf of financial institutions is an empirical fact. Your insistence that people who complain about that are stupid or petty is rooted in complete ignorance. Moreover, that some people would prefer a different system from the one we have now in which higher education is completely or substantially publicly funded is not remotely a basis for ridicule. There are real social benefits to not creating a debtor class of people with college degrees. That you reject those benefits does not make the people who want them stupid, lazy, irresponsible or anything else.

How is he ignorant for pointing the obvious? Asserting it doesn't make it so. You usually write long winded well argued posts that I don't agree with.

This one is just an assertion that I don't agree with.

And obviously, falling on the 'my one example invalidates your entire premise' crutch can be tempting considering a movement as broad as this one will probably have more than one hardship story for the ages. Protesting about post-secondary education and its associated costs with placards of how much debt these spoiled brats have is not very convincing.

This also ties into the broader suspicion that some of the policy arguments are just retreads of things that didn't fly bfore. The 'university/post-secondary for free' movement has been around since I was in university and probably existed in the 60s as well. That doesn't mean arguing that point in stealth via these protests make the points any more valid.

 

[Keru_Shiri]

I think that I do understand the perspective of the angsty American youth who is graduating with a degree in Art Theory with $80,000 in debt and they're waiters and waitresses at Chili's and they have no realistic way to pay down the debt that is soon coming.

I see this type of thinking thrown out a lot, but do we have any numbers that show the actual number of indebted students who went into less lucrative fields? Also, a majority of the students I went to school with in fields like Poetry and Theater were under no such illusions of the employment issues they faced, so I wonder if any formal studies have been conducted on that matter. I point this out, in the face of all the pat on the backs that Albatross is receiving (and to be fair, you are articulating your points well) because it seems like a common, easy, and ultimately insidious way of discrediting the Occupy movement, and I can't help but feel it's a notion that's ultimately incorrect.

I am prepared to see any numbers that prove me wrong, however.

 

[The Albatross]

Utterly ridiculous. The point is not that you are a problem because you pay your student loans back. The point is that the mechanisms by which we provide higher education are stupid and, up until recently, exploitative of students on behalf of financial corporations. Now that reform legislation has at least removed the financial middlemen who did nothing but siphon money, we are left with a mechanism that many believe is suboptimal.

Nobody is telling you not to pay your student loans or that because you do your opinions don't matter. But that the system prior to the recent reform legislation exploited citizens on behalf of financial institutions is an empirical fact. It was designed to funnel money from people to banks for no value added. Your insistence that people who complain about that are stupid or petty is rooted in complete ignorance. Moreover, that some people would prefer a different system from the one we have now in which higher education is completely or substantially publicly funded is not remotely a basis for ridicule. There are real social benefits to not creating a debtor class of people with college degrees. That you reject those benefits does not make the people who want them stupid, lazy, irresponsible or anything else.

I didn't reject those ideas at all, I actually think that I replied to a point that you made about this a few pages ago. I would never ridicule public institutions of higher education or increased public funding for colleges, and I don't think that I did, it's something that I largely agree with and I probably assented to this back a couple pages ago in reply to one of your posts from yesterday.

What I mostly ridiculing, though, is that we can afford to do that now and that the way to make that happen is to cry like a bitch that you have $20,000 in college loans and only work 4 - 7 at starbucks.

Sorry, I've got to run a meeting.

 

[Deku]

I see this type of thinking thrown out a lot, but do we have any numbers that show the actual number of indebted students who went into less lucrative fields? Also, a majority of the students I went to school with in fields like Poetry and Theater were under no such illusions of the employment issues they faced, so I wonder if any formal studies have been conducted on that matter. I point this out, in the face of all the pat on the backs that Albatross is receiving (and to be fair, you are articulating your points well) because it seems like a common, easy, and ultimately insidious way of discrediting the Occupy movement, and I can't help but feel it's a notion that's ultimately incorrect.

I am prepared to see any numbers that prove me wrong, however.

He was making a rhetorical point since people were complaining they were lied to by their parents or whatever.

 

[AndyD]

I see this type of thinking thrown out a lot, but do we have any numbers that show the actual number of indebted students who went into less lucrative fields? Also, a majority of the students I went to school with in fields like Poetry and Theater were under no such illusions of the employment issues they faced, so I wonder if any formal studies have been conducted on that matter. I point this out, in the face of all the pat on the backs that Albatross is receiving (and to be fair, you are articulating your points well) because it seems like a common, easy, and ultimately insidious way of discrediting the Occupy movement, and I can't help but feel it's a notion that's ultimately incorrect.

I am prepared to see any numbers that prove me wrong, however.

I agree.

My question is why would people go to a school and rack up huge debt if they don't have hopes of a sufficient earning potential? Either they never thought of it, and went to school for the fun of it, or they actually went in thinking I am racking up debt that I effectively do not expect to be able to pay back in a reasonable time frame, but screw it, college has girls and booze and its away from my parents.

Who is to blame in those situations? The parents? The students? Media? Society as a whole?

 

[Foffy]

Precisely. If things go even more to shit a lot of people are going to be singing completely different tunes.

I know my life isn't too bad. Recently got a job (writing for a site and making no money, but it's something!), dealing with classes (my dad paid for tuition, he never went to college), and I have time to do what I want. But I don't roll my eyes at all of the people who are clearly struggling. Hearing stories about uninsured people is just petrifying, and that's what I am scared of most with living in America. I'm sure I'll have a roof over my head, even if I have to bunker up with someone, but the nightmare of getting sick and being in financial ruin is almost as bad as a cancer in my eyes. Maybe worse, because something like that will cost you a hell of lot more than an illness you survive.

Maybe it's this economy that has me aspiring for very little. I don't want a car, a house, or a family. But I know there are many people who have to struggle with what little they really have, and it may not even be those things that are their necessities. That's why I'm all for the idea of this protest.

Some of their demands are a bit absurd, though. As people have mentioned, the student loan bit seems a bit much as the students are the ones who jumped in that loop themselves. I do think education should be free, but that evolves into a different issue and a massive overhaul of the sinking system we have in this country.

 

[Keru_Shiri]

I know my life isn't too bad. Recently got a job (writing for a site and making no money, but it's something!), dealing with classes (my dad paid for tuition, he never went to college), and I have time to do what I want. But I don't roll my eyes at all of the people who are clearly struggling. Hearing stories about uninsured people is just petrifying, and that's what I am scared of most with living in America. I'm sure I'll have a roof over my head, even if I have to bunker up with someone, but the nightmare of getting sick and being in financial ruin is almost as bad as a cancer in my eyes. Maybe worse, because something like that will cost you a hell of lot more than an illness you survive.

Maybe it's this economy that has me aspiring for very little. I don't want a car, a house, or a family. But I know there are many people who have to struggle with what little they really have, and it may not even be those things that are their necessities. That's why I'm all for the idea of this protest.

Some of their demands are a bit absurd, though. As people have mentioned, the student loan bit seems a bit much as the students are the ones who jumped in that loop themselves. I do think education should be free, but that evolves into a different issue and a massive overhaul of the sinking system we have in this country.

This. Hell, I work full time and I'm still struggling to make ends meet, thanks to paying back my loan debt, and helping my dad with his mortgage, since he was laid off. I guess I should have "researched" that my Dad was going to be unemployed when I was planning my major, like other gaffers have, since that's apparently all that is needed to avoid debt. But even then, I don't necessarily count on the government to bail me out, I'll get that better job eventually, as I was already able to escape Papa John's, but I will sure as fuck throw my support behind any movement that's looking to capture even a tiny bit for people in my situation.

And if that makes me a spoiled brat, well, so be it.

 

[empty vessel]

How is he ignorant for pointing the obvious?

He claimed he "was told ... that because I paid my student loan debt and I'm not mad at the corporation that lent me the money, I'm not a worthy member of the 99%." What he actually said back on page 20:

A corporation fronted the money for me to go to college, and now expects me to pay it back at reasonable rates that I agreed to. I am the 99%.

Doing it right?

He was mocking people who are unhappy with the way we finance higher education in the US. That ridicule was rooted in his own ignorance about how the system worked until very recently (and which still robs people paying off student loans today), because he did not understand that financial institutions provided no actual services with respect to financing his higher education. He was under the misimpression that the financial institution from which he received a loan provided him some kind of service, when, in fact, it was the public that provided the service. The financial institution's only role was to receive interest on a loan that the public made. If one understands that, one would understand why somebody would be mad that they had to pay money to a financial institution without receiving anything in return as a condition for obtaining a college degree. Moreover, if he is "not mad" that he had to pay money to a financial institution for no services in order to obtain his own degree, he is a fool.

He doesn't get to pretend as if he's the one being verbally knocked around in here given that he came in mocking people who are unhappy about having been required to be exploited in order to access higher education.

And obviously, falling on the 'my one example invalidates your entire premise' crutch can be tempting considering a movement as broad as this one will probably have more than one hardship story for the ages. Protesting about post-secondary education and its associated costs with placards of how much debt these spoiled brats have is not very convincing.

Its not very convincing to people who have no interest in improving things. I don't really care about those people. They're unreachable and unnecessary. Access to higher education is an important issue that many people care very much about, especially those in the bottom half for whom cost is a primary obstacle to higher education. Calling people "spoiled brats" for calling for better access to higher education that isn't mediated by financial institutions is obscene.