I guess it's everyone except the 1% so it might be easier to explain the 1%.

I was against the bailouts. Never should have happened. Just think, if Penn Square Bank had been bailed out, you know this time around they would be right in the middle of the stupidity, holding their hands out for more gov money. No one bailed them out and one stupid financial institution is not around to be stupid anymore.

I agree with this 100%. Why keep bailing out businesses who have bad business models? Hell a huge chunk or even half of that GM bailout went to union retirement funds and healthcare and had nothing to do with the actual business side of it. I say let GM and all the banks go in to bankruptcy, therefore they can get their crap together, restructure, and maybe come back with a better business model. But this is america, where we reward people for doing everything wrong and don't reward people who do things right. Self accountability and responsibility is gone for the most part.

As for the student loans going to College is a privilage, not a right. Should everyone get the opportunity though, absolutely. But forgiving student loans up to a certain amount or up to 20 years is telling people even if you have the cash flow don't worry about paying the full amount cause we'll let it slide after a certain point. It does a disservice to the people and students that follow you and it stiffs the people who actually paid their loans or paid in full.

While I still can't say that I know that the bailout kept us from financial disaster - am not educated enough in economics to understand - what cracked me up was the argument that salaries need to be high in the financial sector to attract high calibre, intelligent people at the entry level and keep them at higher levels. If that was the net effect of the high salaries pre-bailout, why weren't they smart enough to keep it from happening to begin with?

You are the 99%. you just haven't done the math.

If you go back to my post about it, it is the implication that they represent 99% of the people, meaning if I'm not in the 1%, I agree with them. I found that arrogant and irritating. That will turn people off, making it sound like they represent more people then they do. It is a mis-step for them to do so. Don't tell me I agree with your viewpoint. I will make up my own mind thank you very much.

What's their view point?

If you go back to my post about it, it is the implication that they represent 99% of the people, meaning if I'm not in the 1%, I agree with them. I found that arrogant and irritating. That will turn people off, making it sound like they represent more people then they do. It is a mis-step for them to do so. Don't tell me I agree with your viewpoint. I will make up my own mind thank you very much.
Of course you do. They're still doing this for you whether you care or realize it. You know how you have weekends? A bunch of curmudgeonly folks grumbled about the people who gave us those too. I bet they still took their weekends though. And if these people make the world better then the things they accomplish will just seem normal to your grandkids. Will you tell them that you ridiculed the people who made the world better?

I agree with this 100%. Why keep bailing out businesses who have bad business models? Hell a huge chunk or even half of that GM bailout went to union retirement funds and healthcare and had nothing to do with the actual business side of it. I say let GM and all the banks go in to bankruptcy, therefore they can get their crap together, restructure, and maybe come back with a better business model. But this is america, where we reward people for doing everything wrong and don't reward people who do things right. Self accountability and responsibility is gone for the most part.

As for the student loans going to College is a privilage, not a right. Should everyone get the opportunity though, absolutely. But forgiving student loans up to a certain amount or up to 20 years is telling people even if you have the cash flow don't worry about paying the full amount cause we'll let it slide after a certain point. It does a disservice to the people and students that follow you and it stiffs the people who actually paid their loans or paid in full.

College IS a privilege. And that's a shame. Do you think a country that maximizes ignorance for the sake of profits will remain competitive as the knuckle-dragged generations age?

Of course you do. They're still doing this for you whether you care or realize it. You know how you have weekends? A bunch of curmudgeonly folks grumbled about the people who gave us those too. I bet they still took their weekends though. And if these people make the world better then the things they accomplish will just seem normal to your grandkids. Will you tell them that you ridiculed the people who made the world better?


And the conservatives who are protesting for the government to spend less and get out of debt are doing it for the Occupy protesters as well, right? But somehow I don't think they would like to be told they are part of that movement.

And the conservatives who are protesting for the government to spend less and get out of debt are doing it for the Occupy protesters as well, right? But somehow I don't think they would like to be told they are part of that movement.

Austerity measures aren't going to fix the system and forcing a depression isn't going to pay off the debt.

And the conservatives who are protesting for the government to spend less and get out of debt are doing it for the Occupy protesters as well, right? But somehow I don't think they would like to be told they are part of that movement.

If they had stuck to that original goal then they would be on the same side, yes. Unfortunately their new goals, as shown by the examples of their candidates, are not anything like that original goal.

Education is too expensive...

Is education too expensive or is it just that the wrong person has to pay for it? Who is to blame for the high cost of tuition at the University of Oklahoma, the faculty for earning too much, the administration for earning too much, the student loan industry that makes the money available so faculty and administration can earn too much, the student for borrowing more than he can repay, or the State Legislature that doesn't subsidize enough of the cost.

Where is the incentive for OU to keep tuition low?

I guess it's everyone except the 1% so it might be easier to explain the 1%.

You didn't answer my question. If 99% of people are protesting, then nothing would be happening. NOTHING! And, I look out my window and people are working. So, who are the 99% that these people say they are?

You didn't answer my question. If 99% of people are protesting, then nothing would be happening. NOTHING! And, I look out my window and people are working. So, who are the 99% that these people say they are?

They people protesting are supposed to be a small part of the 99% who are protesting for us, the rest of the 99%. So I guess we won't have to. Or something. But they are doing it for us. No matter if we want them to or not. That is what I am getting from the recent posts anyways.

I thought the concept was obvious here. The 99% thing is a reference to the fact that the top 1% of the population controls most of the wealth in this country, while the remaining 99% of the population is left fighting for the scraps.

They people protesting are supposed to be a small part of the 99% who are protesting for us, the rest of the 99%. So I guess we won't have to. Or something. But they are doing it for us. No matter if we want them to or not. That is what I am getting from the recent posts anyways.
Correct.

when are you guys going to learn that money is debt? Get rid of the debt and you get rid of money. How will the economy work if there is no money? I know that sucks but it is the system we have. I prefer to get rid of the Federal Reserve System and go back to government issued money (which some of you think we already have).

The only reason I was OK with the bailouts was I thought it would keep the worker bees at those companies - and many others - employed.

I support the protesters.

They can stay at home and watch tv. I don't want them representing me. I drove by and they had signs saying "Audit Federal Reserve", NO NUKES, etc.

What is the point? They had nothing about rich people? Why are we just now targeting rich people? The bailouts were two years ago.

THIS IS SOCIALIST PROPAGANDA!

That's the thing about lefties, we'll help you anyways.

that's the thing about lefties, we'll force our views on you anyways.
ftfy :kicking:

That's the thing about lefties, we'll help you anyways.

Help? Really, I don't think redistribution of wealth will help society. It punishes people for working hard and makes people lazy.

when does a thread cease to be a current event thread and become a political forum thread. not complaining, just semi-sorta curious.

I have been though Kerr Park every day this week and the Occupy group has been great !!! I take back everything I said I was wrong and too judgmental...

Help? Really, I don't think redistribution of wealth will help society. It punishes people for working hard and makes people lazy.

Right. That's exactly what we do and nothing more.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/big_picture_solutions/methodology-for-ucs-clean-air-act-ticker.html
Now keep in mind they arrived at those numbers with science and I know you think this whole "science" thing is just a fad...

As I said, I have ONE issue I agree with them on. After that I haven't seen one other thing that I agree with. So no, I don't think I'm one of their 99%.


Thank God the founders agreed on the one issue of independence. Imagine the Continental Congress had decided the cause of independence was not worth pursuing because there was representation by slave states. One issue. That is all you have to agree on to effect change.

If you have stock in a 401k, you are the 99% because while the FED bought toxic assets off the banks, they left them embedded in millions of 401ks. http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/government-offers-buy-impaired-401k-assets/12386

The greatest financial crime in human history has been perpetrated on the citizens of the US and the world by the global financial elites. This is no time for partisanship. The 99% have been screwed. Just because some of us don't feel it directly at this time, doesn't mean we won't be feeling it in the near future.

Thank God the founders agreed on the one issue of independence. Imagine the Continental Congress had decided the cause of independence was not worth pursuing because there was representation by slave states. One issue. That is all you have to agree on to effect change.

If you have stock in a 401k, you are the 99% because while the FED bought toxic assets off the banks, they left them embedded in millions of 401ks. http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/government-offers-buy-impaired-401k-assets/12386

The greatest financial crime in human history has been perpetrated on the citizens of the US and the world by the global financial elites. This is no time for partisanship. The 99% have been screwed. Just because some of us don't feel it directly at this time, doesn't mean we won't be feeling it in the near future.


And you totally missed my point. I know they have some figures and that is where the 99% thing comes from. But the way they present it is that THEY are the 99%. Their group, their protest. Implying that if I'm not in the 1% (which I'm not) that I'm in the 99% (their protest) which I'm not.

It is an arrogant attutide and a turn off of those who aren't part of this protest. It gives the feeling that they feel they can pull you into their side whether you want them to or not.

I watched hour upon hour of coverage about the 10th anniversary of 9/11. The thought occured to me that Wall Street, the mega-banks and many American corporations have done more damage to this country than terrorist suicide bombers did.

anyone else think its ironic that they are protesting in a park donated by a large oil and gas corporation?

Right. That's exactly what we do and nothing more.
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/big_picture_solutions/methodology-for-ucs-clean-air-act-ticker.html
Now keep in mind they arrived at those numbers with science and I know you think this whole "science" thing is just a fad...

Once again you prove you have no idea what you are talking about. The topic is socialism not clean air.

anyone else think its ironic that they are protesting in a park donated by a large oil and gas corporation?

I didn't even realize it till you said something and now that you have, yes it is pretty ironic. ;-)

anyone else think its ironic that they are protesting in a park donated by a large oil and gas corporation?Interesting point.

Didn't they have a 3 day permit? Are they extending the permit?

I didn't even realize it till you said something and now that you have, yes it is pretty ironic. ;-)

Ogle mentioned something along those lines on his 2 cents piece the other night. One of the few times he's manged to get a chuckle out of me.

And you totally missed my point. I know they have some figures and that is where the 99% thing comes from. But the way they present it is that THEY are the 99%. Their group, their protest. Implying that if I'm not in the 1% (which I'm not) that I'm in the 99% (their protest) which I'm not.

It is an arrogant attutide and a turn off of those who aren't part of this protest. It gives the feeling that they feel they can pull you into their side whether you want them to or not.


I think you're taking this a little too literal and personal.

anyone else think its ironic that they are protesting in a park donated by a large oil and gas corporation?

Not if it was on purpose. If it was on purpose, it would be appropriate.

I think you're taking this a little too literal and personal.


No, I'm not the only one who feels this way about their 99% thing. It really is turning people off for the very reason I mentioned. To me it is an irritation, not a huge deal. But I have heard comments from other people and it really does bother them.

No, I'm not the only one who feels this way about their 99% thing. It really is turning people off for the very reason I mentioned. To me it is an irritation, not a huge deal. But I have heard comments from other people and it really does bother them.

I don't think they are claiming 99% support them. I think they are claiming nearly everyone is in the same boat. I agree that results in irritation by people who don't want to have anything to do with them and feel like this group is using them to further an agenda they don't support. Still, while I think some of them have ridiculous, unrealistic "demands," I can't help but feel sorry for the ones who are loaded down with student debt, no job and no real clue how they got there or how in the world they are going to overcome that short of dumping their debt on society. And many simply don't understand why that isn't a good option, ethically or practically.

If they got much of what they want, i.e., taxing the "rich," prosecuting people on Wall Street, blah, blah, blah, it wouldn't help them. They'd still be jobless and in debt. All that is a primal scream, seems to me. I am sincere when I say I feel bad for them. I had some small student loans when I went to school and in comparison, they were nothing (less than $4,000) but even that amount kept me awake nights for fear that once I graduated, I wouldn't be able to get a job and pay them off. It is like a lot of these kids ran up enormous bills and just assumed the job would magically appear. That strikes me as practically a mental illness, given the condition of the economy and the degrees many of them chose.

The student loan program is one of those sacred policies long supported by right and left that has helped a lot of people have a more prosperous life. But it has also had horrible consequences for quite a few individuals who leaped before they looked and who chose degrees based more on personal interests than as an investment. Short of forgiving the debt - which we can't afford and would effectively kill the ability of the next generation to take advantage of the program - there are no simple answers. And unless we are willing to take a position that the federal student loan program is causing more harm than good, I don't see it going away and I don't see kids not continuing to mortgage their future. In fact, in the downturned economy, kids have flocked to college, driving up their debt and enslaving themselves KNOWING that the jobs aren't there. Now, the kids are calling for "free" higher education because they can't imagine changing their goals even if they admit they personally can't pay for them. As I've mentioned in other threads, IMO, I think the best way to work out of this situation is to limit federal student loans to areas needed by society - math and the hard sciences, health care fields, etc. That isn't a perfect solution but what is happening, now, is out of control with no end in sight. And many of these kids are making decisions that burden them for life at an age where they really don't understand the consequences. Our universities should be ashamed.

I don't feel sorry for them. There are jobs out there. If the people want to work hard there are jobs. Maybe not in Sociology or Anthropology, but there are jobs. The can move to North Dakota and work in oil and gas. They can go to McDonalds and flip burgers, or they can start their own company and do something creative. There are services and products that are not being produced or served.

Problem is we need a highly educated workforce to remain competitive in the global market...It's just crap that a large portion of those wanting a higher education are thrown out in workforce land already 40-50k in debt...Not an ideal way to start off when you are immediately struggling

I don't think they are claiming 99% support them. I think they are claiming nearly everyone is in the same boat. I agree that results in irritation by people who don't want to have anything to do with them and feel like this group is using them to further an agenda they don't support. Still, while I think some of them have ridiculous, unrealistic "demands," I can't help but feel sorry for the ones who are loaded down with student debt, no job and no real clue how they got there or how in the world they are going to overcome that short of dumping their debt on society. And many simply don't understand why that isn't a good option, ethically or practically.

If they got much of what they want, i.e., taxing the "rich," prosecuting people on Wall Street, blah, blah, blah, it wouldn't help them. They'd still be jobless and in debt. All that is a primal scream, seems to me. I am sincere when I say I feel bad for them. I had some small student loans when I went to school and in comparison, they were nothing (less than $4,000) but even that amount kept me awake nights for fear that once I graduated, I wouldn't be able to get a job and pay them off. It is like a lot of these kids ran up enormous bills and just assumed the job would magically appear. That strikes me as practically a mental illness, given the condition of the economy and the degrees many of them chose.

The student loan program is one of those sacred policies long supported by right and left that has helped a lot of people have a more prosperous life. But it has also had horrible consequences for quite a few individuals who leaped before they looked and who chose degrees based more on personal interests than as an investment. Short of forgiving the debt - which we can't afford and would effectively kill the ability of the next generation to take advantage of the program - there are no simple answers. And unless we are willing to take a position that the federal student loan program is causing more harm than good, I don't see it going away and I don't see kids not continuing to mortgage their future. In fact, in the downturned economy, kids have flocked to college, driving up their debt and enslaving themselves KNOWING that the jobs aren't there. Now, the kids are calling for "free" higher education because they can't imagine changing their goals even if they admit they personally can't pay for them. As I've mentioned in other threads, IMO, I think the best way to work out of this situation is to limit federal student loans to areas needed by society - math and the hard sciences, health care fields, etc. That isn't a perfect solution but what is happening, now, is out of control with no end in sight. And many of these kids are making decisions that burden them for life at an age where they really don't understand the consequences. Our universities should be ashamed.

I have said over and over, I know that isn't what they saying that the 1% and 99% is some statistic, but it is the implication. The perception. The appearance. That's why the workers at the Stock Exchange put up the "We are the 1%" sign (was it last week, or the week before?). They aren't the 1% from the statistic and they know it. They wouldn't be WORKING on Wall Street if they were. It was their little protest against the appearance of being lumped in with the "99%" label of the protesters. The protesters are doing themselves a disservice by using that 99% label. Because the implication and how it is being received. Just as you have said in your post.

I totally agree with the student loan thing. You don't borrow over 100,000 dollars to get a degree that will get a job as a social worker. That makes about as much sense as these people who bought more house then they needed and when the balloon came due were amazed that they couldn't pay.

Problem is we need a highly educated workforce to remain competitive in the global market...It's just crap that a large portion of those wanting a higher education are thrown out in workforce land already 40-50k in debt...Not an ideal way to start off when you are immediately struggling

There are alternatives. You can go to the army first. You can work your way through school, taking a couple of classes a semester. Live at home and go to a local school. Sure that will take longer but in the end you are in a much better position. But these kids wanted to "do college" as much as they wanted the degree. They wanted to be full time students, go to the football games, be a college kid with no resposibilities other then school.

So we don't have educated social workers or should they be limited to kids whose parents can pay their tuition?

You don't have to drive up 100,000 debt to get a degree that enables you to be a social worker.

There are alternatives. You can go to the army first.

So the poor can go to Afghanistan in harms way to get a college degree...Definitely an enticing alternative

Problem is we need a highly educated workforce to remain competitive in the global market...It's just crap that a large portion of those wanting a higher education are thrown out in workforce land already 40-50k in debt...Not an ideal way to start off when you are immediately struggling

I don't buy this, for the most part. You don't have to go into huge debt and mommy and daddy don't have to pay for it for you to get a college degree. As a matter of fact, at least in Oklahoma, the poorer mommy and daddy are, the better their kids chances of going to college completely free.

I got my degree with zero debt when I got out and I know many others who did the same thing. You simply have to be willing to go to an affordable school (depending on what you can afford), work instead of sitting on your ass and live modestly.

Our son graduated from Del City and a large portion of his classmates qualified for FREE college (minus books and fees) under the OHLAP. Problem is, only a tiny percentage of the kids signed up.

The real problem, IMO, is that kids think college is a party and they want to live in the dorms, or their own apartment or fraternity/sorority, not work and let mommy and daddy pay for it or just borrow the money and worry about it later.

The average student leaves college (I didn't say graduates) with $10K in debt. The average public university is $13K per semester and the average private university is $28K. At those prices, if you want a degree, any degree, you're going into big debt. Not all degrees are going to pay well, e.g., teaching. Those people are also graduating with big student loans. I graduated undergrad debt free, and ended up racking up almost $100K in law school loans at ~$1K per credit hour plus fees. It's fairly upsetting to know that the quality of the law school experience really hasn't changed much in 30 years, but 30 years ago, the cost of a legal education was in the $50-$75 range. Tuition has outpaced inflation at all institutions and the quality hasn't gotten better. This has only happened because we have a student loan system which schools are milking for as much money as they can get. To heck with the consequences for the students who have to pay it back. The answer is not just to scoff at the young who unlike you, actually have to pay a hell of a lot more for an education. The answer is to realize that the status quo isn't working and something needs to be changed. I'm not asking anyone to pay off my debt. I'll manage it just fine. I would, however, like to have the government protect the students taking out these loans more than the banks and universities on the profit side of the equation.

Some of these programs are just inexplicably expensive. For example, want a teaching degree from Sarah Lawrence College? That'll be $55K per year.

I'd say most students are not looking to be doctors or lawyers. And I have little sympathy for those that choose expensive schools or degree programs and complain about debt they got themselves into. You don't have to go to a $55K+ a year school to get a good job and you don't have to be up to your eyeballs in debt to be successful. I also don't have a problem with people who choose to go that route, they just need to make wise financial decisions.

I would also certainly say that being a lawyer is no certainty of wealth or even making a good living. I work primarily for lawyers, and while a few are millionaires, most I work around are perpetually broke and the worst at paying their bills. This is not a lawyer jab or hijack, just using a real world example. My dad is a retired lawyer and my best friend is a high profile lawyer in OKC and I have great respect for both of them.

I went back to college in the early 2000's and didn't acquire any debt. My mom graduated OCU in probably the late 90's debt free.

So basically your college was paid for and you can't understand why everyone else can't do the same...ok

As a current law student I can tell you that the source of most of the student frustration is that the much of the high tuition cost is diverted to main campus. It is simply unfair to charge so much for law school when there is little cost for equipment and supplies as compared to the sciences. This is not a "woe is me" commentary, as I knew the cost going into school. I am just stating the student perception.

Personally, I was fortunate enough to receive a fair bit of scholarship funds; however, I will still graduate with a decent bit of debt. If I were in some of my classmates' shoes, I would be considering working for the government for a decade for the loan forgiveness. An out of state student without the assistance of scholarship is looking at six figures of debt at a public university. The in-staters not on scholarship are likely looking at close to six figures, too. That'd make anyone frustrated.

I went through college very cheaply, going local. But I have relatives who seek certain jobs on the east coast where an Ivy League or MIT degree is pretty much the bare minimum to get hired. A local degree was fine for what I wanted to do with my life and career. But I recognize that people who want to work for Google, for example, probably need the benefit of a higher-end education.

So basically your college was paid for and you can't understand why everyone else can't do the same...ok

I didn't say that. I'd think your education would have taught you some comprehension. I said I was fine with people who take on debt for the education they personally desire. But I don't think they have a right to then later complain about it - as in not so far or loudly as to want the debt they chose to take on forgiven.

I also disagreed with they idea that one has to take on debt to get a degree.

True, but educational loans aren't even dischargeable in bankruptcy. I feel like they should have the same status as other debts as far a bankruptcy is concerned. If we're going to make the "pay for your mistakes" argument, it should be equally applied to all debts.

Not saying that that was your point, Brian. Just giving my unsolicited opinion.

True, but educational loans aren't even dischargeable in bankruptcy. I feel like they should have the same status as other debts as far a bankruptcy is concerned. If we're going to make the "pay for your mistakes" argument, it should be equally applied to all debts.

Not saying that that was your point, Brian. Just giving my unsolicited opinion.

If they were, you'd have a rush of students who file for bankruptcy the week after graduating - just because they can. Thankfully, bankruptcy is not the golden ticket for deadbeats it used to be. Not being dischargeable though is just life and the loaners don't hide that fact.

At least three of my son's friends went out and got student loans and then used the money to buy cars and furnish apartment and even go on vacations. I wonder how stupid they are going to feel when it comes time to pay it all back.

If they were, you'd have a rush of students who file for bankruptcy the week after graduating - just because they can.

Student loans haven't always not been dischargeable. That never was a problem.

Student loans haven't always not been dischargeable. That never was a problem.

You're neglecting to disclose that to be discharged the student load had to be in pay status for at least 7 years. If not for that, I'd imagine it would be an issue. Also, student loans can be discharged if the loan creates an undue hardship.

If they were, you'd have a rush of students who file for bankruptcy the week after graduating - just because they can. Thankfully, bankruptcy is not the golden ticket for deadbeats it used to be. Not being dischargeable though is just life and the loaners don't hide that fact.

I understand your point, but how is this any different than someone who racks up a lot of credit card debt? Certainly large purchases can be repossessed if the jurisdiction allows, but not the credit spent on living and entertainment. (If the paucity of my knowledge in this area is showing, please feel free to correct. I have yet to have taken bankruptcy coursework, though I intend to, and my only experience in the area is anecdotal from acquaintances.)

Nonetheless, to me, universities are just capitalizing on the unduly elevated status we have given a bachelor's degree in this country, especially at the expense of belittling the trades.

I understand your point, but how is this any different than someone who racks up a lot of credit card debt? Certainly large purchases can be repossessed if the jurisdiction allows, but not the credit spent on living and entertainment.

To me, universities are just capitalizing on the unduly elevated status we have given a bachelor's degree in this country, especially at the expense of belittling the trades.

Oh, I see where you are coming from. I agree a college education is way too expensive. From my perspective, the degree is often overrated for most professions. It helps you meet a company's minimum requirements but so much more is required to actually get the job and be successful. I know people with masters degrees that - because they have the social skills and personality of a door knob - they can't get well paying jobs in their field.

Back to your question. I don't see it as being that different from racking up credit card debt and I have little sympathy for either instance. I just don't think people who rack up student loan debt have much of an argument that it should somehow be dischargeable when they signed up for the debt to begin with. I also don't think people should be able to file bankruptcy and discharge personal debt either.

Problem is we need a highly educated workforce to remain competitive in the global market...It's just crap that a large portion of those wanting a higher education are thrown out in workforce land already 40-50k in debt...Not an ideal way to start off when you are immediately struggling

Let them be highly educated in the hard sciences and health care.

So we don't have educated social workers or should they be limited to kids whose parents can pay their tuition?

A social worker with $100,000 in student loan debt is ridiculous. Why should we be a part of setting up young kids for financial suicide?

So the poor can go to Afghanistan in harms way to get a college degree...Definitely an enticing alternative

You think everything should be free and easy, Easy. The thing is, that is a fantasy. These kids who have indebted themselves are paying the price for that attitude.