Occupy Wall Street?

This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only".

In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
3
4

Occupy Wall Street?
Topic Started: Sep 27 2011, 02:40 AM (1,156 Views)
Tristan da Cunha	Oct 9 2011, 04:50 PM Post #51
Science and Industry Posts: 6,792 Group: Veterans Member #86 Joined: November 1, 2004	Ulgania Oct 9 2011, 04:36 PM Tristan da Cunha Oct 9 2011, 04:11 PM "Underemployed" is a term of entitlement. The commonwealth does not not need nearly as many lib arts graduates as they suppose it does and certainly does not need to employ them all... Rather than being under-employed, you, (and I), are more or less "over-educated", "mis-educated", or "mal-educated." So, college should only be used to attain immediately marketable skills? Because that's not why I went to college. I went for the opportunity to learn things I wanted to learn, not to attain a certain tax bracket later in life. If not in comparison to the level of your formal education then by what standard do you judge yourself "underemployed"? I'm genuinely curious.



Ulgania	Oct 9 2011, 05:24 PM Post #52
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	Tristan da Cunha Oct 9 2011, 04:50 PM Ulgania Oct 9 2011, 04:36 PM Tristan da Cunha Oct 9 2011, 04:11 PM "Underemployed" is a term of entitlement. The commonwealth does not not need nearly as many lib arts graduates as they suppose it does and certainly does not need to employ them all... Rather than being under-employed, you, (and I), are more or less "over-educated", "mis-educated", or "mal-educated." So, college should only be used to attain immediately marketable skills? Because that's not why I went to college. I went for the opportunity to learn things I wanted to learn, not to attain a certain tax bracket later in life. If not in comparison to the level of your formal education then by what standard do you judge yourself "underemployed"? I'm genuinely curious. Despite vigorous job-searching (on the level that is on par with Nag's story of searching), I've only gained a job that does not cover the sum total of my expenses, repayment for a non-subsidized education being only one of them.



Rhadamanthus	Oct 9 2011, 05:46 PM Post #53
Legitimist Posts: 12,945 Group: Admin Member #19 Joined: January 13, 2004	Tristan da Cunha Oct 9 2011, 04:11 PM "Underemployed" is a term of entitlement. The commonwealth does not not need nearly as many lib arts graduates as they suppose it does and certainly does not need to employ them all... Rather than being under-employed, you, (and I), are more or less "over-educated", "mis-educated", or "mal-educated." While I accept your point about the term "underemployed," I do not agree about us (I have taken the liberty to add myself to the category) being "overeducated." A liberal arts education is not primarily an employment credential or a service to the commonwealth, though it can serve as either, but is valuable in itself.



New Harumf	Oct 9 2011, 08:50 PM Post #54
Bloodthirsty Unicorn Posts: 9,638 Group: Forum Mods Member #177 Joined: October 8, 2005	There is no better education than a liberal arts education. I would personally never hire anyone without a liberal arts education. I would want to hire thinkers - puzzle solvers - questioners. Technical skills can be learned easily. The ability to think critically requires practice. The best people I ever worked with had liberal arts educations and we accomplished great things. Look up St. John's College in Albuquerque and see the type of person I would want working for me! Edited by New Harumf, Oct 9 2011, 08:51 PM.



Al Araam	Oct 10 2011, 02:46 AM Post #55
Demigod of Death & Inactivity Posts: 3,486 Group: Global Mods Member #102 Joined: February 19, 2005	Ulgania Oct 9 2011, 04:36 PM So, college should only be used to attain immediately marketable skills? Because that's not why I went to college. I went for the opportunity to learn things I wanted to learn, not to attain a certain tax bracket later in life. If you went to college to learn things you wanted to learn, I assume you succeeded. I believe your reasons for going to college aren't being called into question. You learned things you wanted to learn. Well done. Does learning things you wanted to learn mean you're entitled to a well-paying job? That is effectively the question at issue.



Sedulius	Oct 10 2011, 05:20 AM Post #56
Field Marshal Posts: 4,727 Group: Members Member #427 Joined: March 29, 2008	meh Oct 6 2011, 04:37 PM Siadhal Oct 6 2011, 12:34 PM I disagree with you guys. Still all thinking inside of the box, and thinking in absolutes. Not thinking of yourselves in the shoes of the downtrodden. Most of that list is just fine by me. The only thing I truly disagree with is their wish to ban fission power. Come on! What did nuclear fission ever do to you! Are you worried about the incidents in Japan happening here? I for one support nuclear fission, but I do believe we must figure out to advance to fusion power as quickly as possible, though we must minimize explosions. One fusion power plant has the potential to alone power the entirety of the western coastal states and more. Fusion! It is the future, gentlemen! The rest, none of it is impossible. All of it is reasonable, as much as some of it may sound unreasonable. The USA is way behind international standards for so much on that list, and people just want the USA to be brought up to standard. You really can't go around saying the USA is the best country in the world when Russia has free healthcare, education, and no national debt (rather, a surplus). I'm not saying Russia is greatest (it obviously is not), but I'm saying that when the USA is behind the standards of Russia, there's a big problem. Nothing is impossible gentlemen. And those that think otherwise obviously are no intj. Russia also has the 5th largest death rate. In fact, their death rate trumps their birth rate. Not the best comparison. Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US.



flumes	Oct 10 2011, 08:19 AM Post #57
CLEVELAND ROCKS! Posts: 2,429 Group: Veterans Member #142 Joined: May 22, 2005	Al Araam Oct 10 2011, 02:46 AM Ulgania Oct 9 2011, 04:36 PM So, college should only be used to attain immediately marketable skills? Because that's not why I went to college. I went for the opportunity to learn things I wanted to learn, not to attain a certain tax bracket later in life. If you went to college to learn things you wanted to learn, I assume you succeeded. I believe your reasons for going to college aren't being called into question. You learned things you wanted to learn. Well done. Does learning things you wanted to learn mean you're entitled to a well-paying job? That is effectively the question at issue. Bingo. It frustrates me when I see signs like "I have a masters and can't get a job..." Masters in what? Fine Arts? There is no problem with someone getting a Masters in Fine Arts. Going to college to learn what you want is perfectly acceptable, I even admire that desire for knowledge... Just don't feel entitled to a job. There are plenty of majors out there where graduates find it much easier to gain a job in their field... Edited by flumes, Oct 10 2011, 08:21 AM.



New Harumf	Oct 10 2011, 08:40 AM Post #58
Bloodthirsty Unicorn Posts: 9,638 Group: Forum Mods Member #177 Joined: October 8, 2005	flumes Oct 10 2011, 08:19 AM Al Araam Oct 10 2011, 02:46 AM Ulgania Oct 9 2011, 04:36 PM So, college should only be used to attain immediately marketable skills? Because that's not why I went to college. I went for the opportunity to learn things I wanted to learn, not to attain a certain tax bracket later in life. If you went to college to learn things you wanted to learn, I assume you succeeded. I believe your reasons for going to college aren't being called into question. You learned things you wanted to learn. Well done. Does learning things you wanted to learn mean you're entitled to a well-paying job? That is effectively the question at issue. Bingo. It frustrates me when I see signs like "I have a masters and can't get a job..." Masters in what? Fine Arts? There is no problem with someone getting a Masters in Fine Arts. Going to college to learn what you want is perfectly acceptable, I even admire that desire for knowledge... Just don't feel entitled to a job. There are plenty of majors out there where graduates find it much easier to gain a job in their field... Actually, there might be more jobs for someone with a master's of fine arts then, say, a masters in sociology. An MFA is considered a terminal degree, like a PhD.



East Anarx	Oct 10 2011, 09:32 AM Post #59
Anarchitect Posts: 4,788 Group: Multi Member #210 Joined: January 16, 2006	Posted Image



Quaon	Oct 10 2011, 12:54 PM Post #60
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later Posts: 8,837 Group: Forum Mods Member #209 Joined: January 11, 2006	New Harumf Oct 9 2011, 08:50 PM There is no better education than a liberal arts education. I would personally never hire anyone without a liberal arts education. I would want to hire thinkers - puzzle solvers - questioners. Technical skills can be learned easily. The ability to think critically requires practice. The best people I ever worked with had liberal arts educations and we accomplished great things. Look up St. John's College in Albuquerque and see the type of person I would want working for me! I'm not applying there, but St. John's does have a really awesome curriculum.



A.Q.	Oct 10 2011, 08:14 PM Post #61
Beautiful Snowflake Posts: 906 Group: Members Member #429 Joined: April 13, 2008	Norfolk has some kids marching around and sitting in, and the cops are being really surprisingly accommodating, to their credit. There's a few students at Appalachian State who're trying to organize an "Occupy Boone," which is incredibly stupid seeing as how this town is the leftiest you'll get in Carolina and banking-capital Charlotte is a short, cheap bus ride away. I'm all for the movement, but it's a protest, not a book-club meeting.



meh	Oct 11 2011, 04:22 PM Post #62
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Quote: Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US. Your idea of a solution to our problems is only your perspective on the matter. Other people would completely disagree. So what others would see as prgress, you would see as destruction. Simply because a government is reacting does not place it on a higher standard. Edited by meh, Oct 11 2011, 04:37 PM.



Sedulius	Oct 12 2011, 05:55 AM Post #63
Field Marshal Posts: 4,727 Group: Members Member #427 Joined: March 29, 2008	meh Oct 11 2011, 04:22 PM Quote: Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US. Your idea of a solution to our problems is only your perspective on the matter. Other people would completely disagree. So what others would see as prgress, you would see as destruction. Simply because a government is reacting does not place it on a higher standard. Well, I wish the US government would actually show itself doing at least as much as the Russian government shows itself doing. I mean, it's like the US government isn't even making an effort anymore. It's almost openly just saying "Fuck you!", it just hasn't quite gotten around to actually flipping the bird. Edited by Sedulius, Oct 12 2011, 05:56 AM.



Ulgania	Oct 12 2011, 06:42 PM Post #64
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	Arguably a lot of GOP banter revolves around the concept of choosing to do the ethical thing, or maintaining the plutocracy. Yeah, I feel like making vaguely broad and sweeping polarized statements tonight.



Tristan da Cunha	Oct 12 2011, 09:15 PM Post #65
Science and Industry Posts: 6,792 Group: Veterans Member #86 Joined: November 1, 2004	Siadhal Oct 12 2011, 05:55 AM meh Oct 11 2011, 04:22 PM Quote: Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US. Your idea of a solution to our problems is only your perspective on the matter. Other people would completely disagree. So what others would see as prgress, you would see as destruction. Simply because a government is reacting does not place it on a higher standard. Well, I wish the US government would actually show itself doing at least as much as the Russian government shows itself doing. I mean, it's like the US government isn't even making an effort anymore. It's almost openly just saying "Fuck you!", it just hasn't quite gotten around to actually flipping the bird. Russia has some nice surplus oil reserves. Praising the Russian government for its largesse made possible by oil is like praising Wall Street for being born with a silver spoon in its mouth!



Ulgania	Oct 12 2011, 11:29 PM Post #66
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	Cool, my write-up is gaining traction. It's a little dated though since I have a new job, but screw that, it's an every-man message.



Sedulius	Oct 13 2011, 05:52 AM Post #67
Field Marshal Posts: 4,727 Group: Members Member #427 Joined: March 29, 2008	Tristan da Cunha Oct 12 2011, 09:15 PM Siadhal Oct 12 2011, 05:55 AM meh Oct 11 2011, 04:22 PM Quote: Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US. Your idea of a solution to our problems is only your perspective on the matter. Other people would completely disagree. So what others would see as prgress, you would see as destruction. Simply because a government is reacting does not place it on a higher standard. Well, I wish the US government would actually show itself doing at least as much as the Russian government shows itself doing. I mean, it's like the US government isn't even making an effort anymore. It's almost openly just saying "Fuck you!", it just hasn't quite gotten around to actually flipping the bird. Russia has some nice surplus oil reserves. Praising the Russian government for its largesse made possible by oil is like praising Wall Street for being born with a silver spoon in its mouth! The difference is Wall Street isn't giving out money to people who have lost their homes or people having babies or students needing education or patients needing treatment. Look at it however you want to, Russia is going in the right direction.



meh	Oct 13 2011, 04:18 PM Post #68
1st Lieutenant Posts: 618 Group: Members Member #695 Joined: August 17, 2011	Siadhal Oct 13 2011, 05:52 AM Tristan da Cunha Oct 12 2011, 09:15 PM Siadhal Oct 12 2011, 05:55 AM meh Oct 11 2011, 04:22 PM Quote: Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US. Your idea of a solution to our problems is only your perspective on the matter. Other people would completely disagree. So what others would see as prgress, you would see as destruction. Simply because a government is reacting does not place it on a higher standard. Well, I wish the US government would actually show itself doing at least as much as the Russian government shows itself doing. I mean, it's like the US government isn't even making an effort anymore. It's almost openly just saying "Fuck you!", it just hasn't quite gotten around to actually flipping the bird. Russia has some nice surplus oil reserves. Praising the Russian government for its largesse made possible by oil is like praising Wall Street for being born with a silver spoon in its mouth! The difference is Wall Street isn't giving out money to people who have lost their homes or people having babies or students needing education or patients needing treatment. Look at it however you want to, Russia is going in the right direction. I thought Russia's oligarchs and Putin were extremely opposed. Last time I checked, Putin was imprisoning all those CEOs.



Tristan da Cunha	Oct 15 2011, 08:43 AM Post #69
Science and Industry Posts: 6,792 Group: Veterans Member #86 Joined: November 1, 2004	Siadhal Oct 13 2011, 05:52 AM Tristan da Cunha Oct 12 2011, 09:15 PM Siadhal Oct 12 2011, 05:55 AM meh Oct 11 2011, 04:22 PM Quote: Your statistic is correct, but your argument is a fallacy. The Russian government as well as several organizations are doing what they can to combat this problem. Hence, I would say the fact that a government is actually reacting to a problem and taking steps to remedy it gives points in that government's favor. I don't see the US government doing much to remedy the problems of the US. Your idea of a solution to our problems is only your perspective on the matter. Other people would completely disagree. So what others would see as prgress, you would see as destruction. Simply because a government is reacting does not place it on a higher standard. Well, I wish the US government would actually show itself doing at least as much as the Russian government shows itself doing. I mean, it's like the US government isn't even making an effort anymore. It's almost openly just saying "Fuck you!", it just hasn't quite gotten around to actually flipping the bird. Russia has some nice surplus oil reserves. Praising the Russian government for its largesse made possible by oil is like praising Wall Street for being born with a silver spoon in its mouth! The difference is Wall Street isn't giving out money to people who have lost their homes or people having babies or students needing education or patients needing treatment. Look at it however you want to, Russia is going in the right direction. Actually Wall Street is quite good to its own. Russia may be heading in the right direction economically but it's easy to head in the right direction when you're born with massive natural resources and a sparse population. Through no fault of our own we are living in America, a country with demographic problems and much scarcer natural resources. No surprise the problems here aren't cured as easily as throwing wads of cash at them. I love it when people express admiration for the shrewd socioeconomic policies of oil rich nations like Norway or even Russia or some of the Arab sheikdoms. That's like expressing admiration for the hard work of someone who just won the lottery. They may very well go enjoy their nice oil-funded welfare states but they contribute nothing to the history of human economic thought by pontificating about how great they are compared to those suckers in the rest of the world who weren't born with such nice birthrights as an endless oil field. When the day comes that Russia agrees to fund the welfare state of a resource-less mudslide shithole like Bangladesh then we can talk about how birthright "shouldn't matter."



Ulgania	Oct 16 2011, 08:15 PM Post #70
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	Had to cancel my OWS plans over car trouble/expenses. In other news I'm in the market for a car. I'll be hitting up Occupy Burlington and Occupy Manchester though, definitely. Edited by Ulgania, Oct 16 2011, 08:15 PM.



flumes	Oct 19 2011, 11:08 AM Post #71
CLEVELAND ROCKS! Posts: 2,429 Group: Veterans Member #142 Joined: May 22, 2005	Trouble in Cleveland. http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104668&article=9275253 Let me make it clear, I'm not saying that this is a representation of the Occupy movement at-large in any way, shape, or form (just like the antisemitic protesters are the minority) . However, with the way these camps are setup there could certainly be problems other types of rallies wouldn't see. I'm sure all other Occupy locations can dismiss this as a "Cleveland problem," not an Occupy problem. Poor Cleveland. :( Edited by flumes, Oct 19 2011, 11:09 AM.



Aelius	Oct 19 2011, 01:25 PM Post #72
Norman Warlord Posts: 2,137 Group: Members Member #523 Joined: July 17, 2009	flumes Oct 19 2011, 11:08 AM Trouble in Cleveland. http://www.wtam.com/cc-common/news/sections/newsarticle.html?feed=104668&article=9275253 Let me make it clear, I'm not saying that this is a representation of the Occupy movement at-large in any way, shape, or form (just like the antisemitic protesters are the minority) . However, with the way these camps are setup there could certainly be problems other types of rallies wouldn't see. I'm sure all other Occupy locations can dismiss this as a "Cleveland problem," not an Occupy problem. Poor Cleveland. :( Like I said, at least it's not Detroit. :P



flumes	Oct 22 2011, 02:53 PM Post #73
CLEVELAND ROCKS! Posts: 2,429 Group: Veterans Member #142 Joined: May 22, 2005	Does anyone else find this slightly ironic? http://online.wsj.com/article/AP1ad8063f8c3a427b92a69e3d55f982a1.html



New Harumf	Oct 22 2011, 06:53 PM Post #74
Bloodthirsty Unicorn Posts: 9,638 Group: Forum Mods Member #177 Joined: October 8, 2005	flumes Oct 22 2011, 02:53 PM Does anyone else find this slightly ironic? http://online.wsj.com/article/AP1ad8063f8c3a427b92a69e3d55f982a1.html I find it just wrong.



Ulgania	Oct 22 2011, 09:16 PM Post #75
A better Zarathustra has never rode a horse Posts: 4,041 Group: Members Member #450 Joined: June 3, 2008	http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1107/1107.5728v2.pdf This is worth a read, love it or hate. Essentially 40% of the wealth is controlled by a "super-entity" of 147 corporations (of 43,000 in the initial data set). These 147 corporations have essentially complete control of themselves (ie - they all majority owned by other corporations within the super-entity). 75% of corporations in the core are financial institutions, which are the major players you expect them to be. Also interestingly, 737 corporations accumulate 80% control over all corporations in the study. Altogether, control of the network is more centrally concentrated than the total wealth of the network. The authors don't say whether the existence of this super entity is stable or unstable for the global economy. However, it does mean that problems with one corporation in the super entity can rapidly spread to the other corporations, which would argue for instability. Perhaps during "good times" the entity is stable, or at least stable enough to develop in the first place and be robust, but during "bad times" the whole things shares systematic risk. The authors also do not comment on, but suggest that it needs to be further studied, whether the core companies have ever acted as a bloc. but it is apparent that the top members of the bloc are at least in a position to exert considerable control over the global economy.

Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums Learn More · Sign-up for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
3
4