independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Fri 23rd Aug 2019 3:15am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Poll: More agree than disagree with Occupy Wall Street goals
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Author

Tweet     Share

Message
Thread started 10/26/11 9:46am

rudedog

avatar

Poll: More agree than disagree with Occupy Wall Street goals

A great way to start off the day!

http://news.yahoo.com/blo...03055.html

Substantially more Americans agree than disagree with the goals of the Occupy Wall Street movement, according to a new poll. And nearly two-thirds say wealth should be distributed more equitably.

Forty-three percent of respondents to a new CBS/New York Times survey said they agree with Occupy Wall Street's goals, while, 27 percent said they disagree. Thirty percent were unsure.

And 46 percent said Occupy Wall street represents the views of most Americans, while 34 percent said it doesn't.

Younger Americans, those with more education, and those who describe themselves as liberal were most likely to support the protests.

The movement, which began with demonstrations in lower Manhattan last month and has since spread to cities across the country, has inveighed against growing inequality and corporate influence in the political system.

Meanwhile, just 26 percent said that money and wealth are distributed fairly in America, while 66 percent say they aren't.

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #1 posted 10/26/11 9:56am

Dauphin

avatar

So much for "99 percent"

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Still it's nice to know, when our bodies wear out, we can get another

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #2 posted 10/26/11 1:14pm

Astasheiks

avatar

1999

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #3 posted 10/26/11 1:29pm

SupaFunkyOrgan
grinderSexy

avatar

Dauphin said:

So much for "99 percent"

Just because blind sheep campaign for the 1 percent does not make them non 99%ers.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #4 posted 10/26/11 2:21pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

It doesn't hurt that the violence inflicted against them looks like Cairo and Cairo is in solidarity with us.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #5 posted 10/26/11 2:24pm

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Wonderful, Veteran of Iraq war hit in the fact by pig cops:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/26/iraq-vet-oakland-police-tear-gas_n_1033159.html

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #6 posted 10/26/11 3:12pm

rudedog

avatar

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Dauphin said:

So much for "99 percent"

Just because blind sheep campaign for the 1 percent does not make them non 99%ers.

Right, ppl vote against their own interests all the time in this country, hence why its frustrating to see Tea Baggers hold signs that say GOVERNMENT, KEEP YOUR HANDS OFF MY MEDICARE! Then vote for ppl that want to get rid of it. It's moronic!

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #7 posted 10/26/11 4:47pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

that is not surprise. they do not even know what they want. They fail to see that banks act under the direction of the Fed (well in Dallas there was an END THE FED protest).

And as I said befor, they fail to see that if the got what they wanted then there would be no one to pay for the other things they wanted.

look how people that decided they do not want to pay back their loans are being treated as victimes of the BANKS.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #8 posted 10/27/11 11:37am

rudedog

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is not surprise. they do not even know what they want. They fail to see that banks act under the direction of the Fed (well in Dallas there was an END THE FED protest).

And as I said befor, they fail to see that if the got what they wanted then there would be no one to pay for the other things they wanted.

look how people that decided they do not want to pay back their loans are being treated as victimes of the BANKS.

Dude, you're blind. What about the 24 million people in this country that can't find a full-time job, 50 million that can't see a doctor when they're sick, or 47 million people need government help to feed themselves and 15 million families owe more than the value of their home.

How come you can't blame the bank for dishing out the bad loans, for crashing the market, for wanting fucking handouts for the problems they themeselves caused., didnt' they have a hand in it?

The economy is bad by Bush's, Republicans bad economic policies and the financial crisis caused by greedy banks.

Those ppl that CAN'T PAY back their loans (love how its spun as 'they don't want to'), had no idea the market would crash and their mortgage would skyrocket like it did. But no, its their fault and no one elses, right?

Get a clue Only, cause that's all you care about, ONLY YOU.

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #9 posted 10/27/11 5:40pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

actually I am struggling.... medical bills and student loans... but i am not asking for free stuff... it is about self responsibility. it is good they moved in to their parents home.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #10 posted 10/27/11 10:49pm

SUPRMAN

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

It doesn't hurt that the violence inflicted against them looks like Cairo and Cairo is in solidarity with us.

I see capitalism collapsing already.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #11 posted 10/27/11 11:01pm

SUPRMAN

avatar

rudedog said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

that is not surprise. they do not even know what they want. They fail to see that banks act under the direction of the Fed (well in Dallas there was an END THE FED protest).

And as I said befor, they fail to see that if the got what they wanted then there would be no one to pay for the other things they wanted.

look how people that decided they do not want to pay back their loans are being treated as victimes of the BANKS.

Dude, you're blind. What about the 24 million people in this country that can't find a full-time job, 50 million that can't see a doctor when they're sick, or 47 million people need government help to feed themselves and 15 million families owe more than the value of their home.

How come you can't blame the bank for dishing out the bad loans, for crashing the market, for wanting fucking handouts for the problems they themeselves caused., didnt' they have a hand in it?

The economy is bad by Bush's, Republicans bad economic policies and the financial crisis caused by greedy banks.

Those ppl that CAN'T PAY back their loans (love how its spun as 'they don't want to'), had no idea the market would crash and their mortgage would skyrocket like it did. But no, its their fault and no one elses, right?

Get a clue Only, cause that's all you care about, ONLY YOU.

And you reinforce the point by simply casting homeowners as ignorant victims who couldn't possibly know that prices go up and down! Gas prices go up and down but homes defy the laws of economics. Well, actually, your victims aren't bright enough to get that far.

There is enough blame to go around. Homeowner shouldn't have to read the documents they are signing? If they sign without knowing what they are signing, it shouldn't be their responsibility when it's no longer convenient?

Banks didn't crash the market. It was a loss of confidence caused by a credit crisis triggered by Lehman Brothers default.

Banks became protectionist. They wouldn't lend to anyone else because they didn't know what other banks' balance sheets looked like. How much exposure did they have to Lehman Brothers? What made it tricky was that Lehman Brothers insured other financial instruments. Impossible to guess who was or wasn't insured and how much they would have to write off as a result or sell into a down market by internal capital standards.

A lot of European banks had become reliant on short term cash. They used mortgage backed security instruments as collateral. The banks suddenly had two problems, no one would lend to them and what they thought was collateral had collapsed in value leaving them exposed and unable to cover their capital requirements.

So it's either refinance the banks and generate some confidence or watch banks fail around the globe and we enter an economic depression.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #12 posted 10/28/11 9:01am

rudedog

avatar

SUPRMAN said:

rudedog said:

Dude, you're blind. What about the 24 million people in this country that can't find a full-time job, 50 million that can't see a doctor when they're sick, or 47 million people need government help to feed themselves and 15 million families owe more than the value of their home.

How come you can't blame the bank for dishing out the bad loans, for crashing the market, for wanting fucking handouts for the problems they themeselves caused., didnt' they have a hand in it?

The economy is bad by Bush's, Republicans bad economic policies and the financial crisis caused by greedy banks.

Those ppl that CAN'T PAY back their loans (love how its spun as 'they don't want to'), had no idea the market would crash and their mortgage would skyrocket like it did. But no, its their fault and no one elses, right?

Get a clue Only, cause that's all you care about, ONLY YOU.

And you reinforce the point by simply casting homeowners as ignorant victims who couldn't possibly know that prices go up and down! Gas prices go up and down but homes defy the laws of economics. Well, actually, your victims aren't bright enough to get that far.

There is enough blame to go around. Homeowner shouldn't have to read the documents they are signing? If they sign without knowing what they are signing, it shouldn't be their responsibility when it's no longer convenient?

I'm not disagreeing with that point, but who's dweetle dee and dweetle dumber. The banks are dumber, why? They are the ones that gave out the loans KNOWING full well those 'idiot' homeowners wouldn't be able to afford it. So yes, blame goes on both ends, but what Only is doing is just blaming the homeowners, that's bullshit. They are dumb, but why take advantage of dumb ppl for profit? Oh wait, i just answered my own question.

But you can make the same argument for ppl for invested in Enron or ppl screwed by Maddoff, right? They saw what looked like a great investment, but they weren't really informed or made aware of what was really going on. Hindsight is always 20/20. Ppl got screwed, and the ppl in power did nothing to prevent it, on Wall Street or the Fed Res.

[Edited 10/28/11 9:04am]

"The voter is less important than the man who provides money to the candidate," - Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Rudedog no no no!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #13 posted 10/28/11 11:33am

Tremolina

It's so simple.

Banks ánd consumers are to blame for the mortgage fiasco that started the recession.

Banks just more than consumers. After all, THEY are the experts lending the money. Consumers SHOULD have known better, but banks KNEW better.

Simple, no use bickering about that.

[Edited 10/28/11 11:35am]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #14 posted 10/28/11 11:52am

SupaFunkyOrgan
grinderSexy

avatar

Tremolina said:

It's so simple.

Banks ánd consumers are to blame for the mortgage fiasco that started the recession.

Banks just more than consumers. After all, THEY are the experts lending the money. Consumers SHOULD have known better, but banks KNEW better.

Simple, no use bickering about that.

[Edited 10/28/11 11:35am]

Let's just go along with the meme that banks were FORCED by FannieMae/Freddy Mac/Barney Frank (this is the GOP talking point) to lend to people who couldn't pay.

Were they ALSO FORCED to create these loans that were designed to explode? People had their hous payments skyrocket into double and sometimes triple what they signed up to pay. The loan agreements did not have to be structured to multiply so egrigiously.

That is why people couldn't stay in their homes, not because they didn't have their rent payments for what they agreed to, they weren't prepared to pay mansion rents for regular homes.

The banks are entirely at fault and should have been taken down over this catastrophe.

2010: Healing the Wounds of the Past.... http://prince.org/msg/8/325740
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #15 posted 10/28/11 3:19pm

DarlingDiana

What are the goals of Occupy Wall Street? I think most people are angry that the banks got bailed out and there's still 9% unemployment. Most people do not like the wealth disparity and do think there is a seen injustice in Wall Street bankers with multi-million dollar incomes walking past a homeless person on their way to work. Most people realize by now that the government is bought and that angers them to. So on the frustrations that got all those protesters riled up in the first place, I would have assumed a lot more than the figures in that poll agree with Occupy Wall Street. But when you say they aree with Occupy Wall Street's goals, what goals would those be?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #16 posted 10/28/11 3:30pm

angel345

Yield not to temptation, especially if you cannot afford it, and always read the fine print. High interest on the principal at an unfixed rate? That spells robbery, and it doesn't take a masked bandit to do that. Banks know the psychological game. They know that the customers want that American dream: fast cars and houses with the white picket fence, and would sacrifice anything to get it. They play on that.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #17 posted 10/28/11 3:59pm

EmbattledWarri
or

DarlingDiana said:

What are the goals of Occupy Wall Street? I think most people are angry that the banks got bailed out and there's still 9% unemployment. Most people do not like the wealth disparity and do think there is a seen injustice in Wall Street bankers with multi-million dollar incomes walking past a homeless person on their way to work. Most people realize by now that the government is bought and that angers them to. So on the frustrations that got all those protesters riled up in the first place, I would have assumed a lot more than the figures in that poll agree with Occupy Wall Street. But when you say they aree with Occupy Wall Street's goals, what goals would those be?

It's a combination things that they're angry about.

It's finding out after going into 30 to 100,000 dollars in debt by going to college

That the degree that you bought is worth nothing.

They're bemoaning a broken system with several problems.

Problems that transcend partisanship, or an economic system, or the failure of both.

What amazes me is no one, not even the president wants to have this discussion.

And it's a good discussion to have.

I am a Rail Road, Track Abandoned
With the Sunset forgetting, i ever Happened
http://www.myspace.com/stolenmorning
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #18 posted 10/28/11 6:02pm

Tremolina

EmbattledWarrior said:

the degree that you bought is worth nothing.

are you serious or exaggerating?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #19 posted 10/28/11 6:17pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Tremolina said:

EmbattledWarrior said:

the degree that you bought is worth nothing.

are you serious or exaggerating?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #20 posted 10/28/11 8:11pm

EmbattledWarri
or

Tremolina said:



EmbattledWarrior said:



the degree that you bought is worth nothing.



are you serious or exaggerating?


Im pretty serious actually I learned that overseas. The bfa, I earned here in audio engineering wasnt shit, equivalent of a highschool diploma in britain.
I am a Rail Road, Track Abandoned
With the Sunset forgetting, i ever Happened
http://www.myspace.com/stolenmorning
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #21 posted 10/29/11 9:29am

SUPRMAN

avatar

rudedog said:

SUPRMAN said:

And you reinforce the point by simply casting homeowners as ignorant victims who couldn't possibly know that prices go up and down! Gas prices go up and down but homes defy the laws of economics. Well, actually, your victims aren't bright enough to get that far.

There is enough blame to go around. Homeowner shouldn't have to read the documents they are signing? If they sign without knowing what they are signing, it shouldn't be their responsibility when it's no longer convenient?

I'm not disagreeing with that point, but who's dweetle dee and dweetle dumber. The banks are dumber, why? They are the ones that gave out the loans KNOWING full well those 'idiot' homeowners wouldn't be able to afford it. So yes, blame goes on both ends, but what Only is doing is just blaming the homeowners, that's bullshit. They are dumb, but why take advantage of dumb ppl for profit? Oh wait, i just answered my own question.

But you can make the same argument for ppl for invested in Enron or ppl screwed by Maddoff, right? They saw what looked like a great investment, but they weren't really informed or made aware of what was really going on. Hindsight is always 20/20. Ppl got screwed, and the ppl in power did nothing to prevent it, on Wall Street or the Fed Res.

[Edited 10/28/11 9:04am]

There is a legal standard for that.

It's called due diligence. Do your homework before investing.

That's why court's are reluctant to intervene in contracts.

It may not turn out to be what was expected, but the expectation is that both parties consider what there position would be if the contract were changed by legitimate circumstances.

To think that investments only increase in value doesn't make sense since none of have experience with such investments.

Investors in Enron and Maddow are not the examples you want to use. Both were investing based on greed with the promise of returns no one else was getting. How realistic is that?

You can make me more money than anyone else using secrets no one else has? Really?

Bank lending to individuals is a two way street. You weren't obligated to buy a home you couldn't afford or take a mortgage with balloon payments or balloon interest rates after a teaser.

Banks can offer and people can say no. Why didn't they say no?

Banks were not being malicious in their loans either. They could look good by generating loans, sell those loans on to others and use the income generated to lend again. They could grow, being good community citizens and make money.

People did get screwed but what were the people in power supposed to do? Tighten the rules to prevent more people from buying houses?

I suspect the ORG would want to hang any government entity that proposed that, in say, 2006.

(How dare they prevent lower middle class families from becoming homeowners. Let them decide what they can afford, not the government.)

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #22 posted 10/29/11 9:34am

SUPRMAN

avatar

EmbattledWarrior said:

DarlingDiana said:

What are the goals of Occupy Wall Street? I think most people are angry that the banks got bailed out and there's still 9% unemployment. Most people do not like the wealth disparity and do think there is a seen injustice in Wall Street bankers with multi-million dollar incomes walking past a homeless person on their way to work. Most people realize by now that the government is bought and that angers them to. So on the frustrations that got all those protesters riled up in the first place, I would have assumed a lot more than the figures in that poll agree with Occupy Wall Street. But when you say they aree with Occupy Wall Street's goals, what goals would those be?

It's a combination things that they're angry about.

It's finding out after going into 30 to 100,000 dollars in debt by going to college

That the degree that you bought is worth nothing.

They're bemoaning a broken system with several problems.

Problems that transcend partisanship, or an economic system, or the failure of both.

What amazes me is no one, not even the president wants to have this discussion.

And it's a good discussion to have.

Define worthless please.

Is it that you can't get a job in your field of study?

College doesn't guarantee that.

Capitalism doesn't guarantee anything either. Socialism pretends to.

I don't see a broken system. I see a system going through its regular cycle. If in a year, the unemployment rate dipped to 5% and the economy were growing everyone would want to take credit and fail to acknowledge the cyclical nature of the world we live in.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #23 posted 10/29/11 9:38am

SUPRMAN

avatar

Tremolina said:

It's so simple.

Banks ánd consumers are to blame for the mortgage fiasco that started the recession.

Banks just more than consumers. After all, THEY are the experts lending the money. Consumers SHOULD have known better, but banks KNEW better.

Simple, no use bickering about that.

[Edited 10/28/11 11:35am]

What makes banks experts?

Nothing. More information doesn't make one an expert.

Insurers and hedge funds didn't know better either.
Goldman Sachs figured it out as did a few others, but, what they realized and reacted to was the contraction of a limited market. Eventually, this revenue stream would go dry because the pool of homebuyers is a finite one. At some point there would no loans generated, or only bad loans.

Sachs then made billions betting on the revenue drying up.

Banks were selling these loans onto others. They didn't need to evaluate the quality of the loans they were no longer holding. They didn't keep them long enough to have to evaluate them for their own books.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #24 posted 10/29/11 9:40am

SUPRMAN

avatar

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Tremolina said:

It's so simple.

Banks ánd consumers are to blame for the mortgage fiasco that started the recession.

Banks just more than consumers. After all, THEY are the experts lending the money. Consumers SHOULD have known better, but banks KNEW better.

Simple, no use bickering about that.

[Edited 10/28/11 11:35am]

Let's just go along with the meme that banks were FORCED by FannieMae/Freddy Mac/Barney Frank (this is the GOP talking point) to lend to people who couldn't pay.

Were they ALSO FORCED to create these loans that were designed to explode? People had their hous payments skyrocket into double and sometimes triple what they signed up to pay. The loan agreements did not have to be structured to multiply so egrigiously.

That is why people couldn't stay in their homes, not because they didn't have their rent payments for what they agreed to, they weren't prepared to pay mansion rents for regular homes.

The banks are entirely at fault and should have been taken down over this catastrophe.

If you saw that in a loan, would you take the loan?

Why couldn't people refuse to accept such loans?

Banks cannot be forced to lend. Making it easier to lend, imposes no obligation to lend.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #25 posted 10/29/11 9:43am

SUPRMAN

avatar

angel345 said:

Yield not to temptation, especially if you cannot afford it, and always read the fine print. High interest on the principal at an unfixed rate? That spells robbery, and it doesn't take a masked bandit to do that. Banks know the psychological game. They know that the customers want that American dream: fast cars and houses with the white picket fence, and would sacrifice anything to get it. They play on that.

People prey on other people.

The people who work in these banks are your neighbors, fellow commuters, orgers, church members, PTA members etc.

Chasing the American Dream and keeping up with the Jones' is nothing new and it will continue to get people into trouble. Then you die and leave it all anyway.

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #26 posted 10/29/11 12:28pm

angel345

SUPRMAN said:

angel345 said:

Yield not to temptation, especially if you cannot afford it, and always read the fine print. High interest on the principal at an unfixed rate? That spells robbery, and it doesn't take a masked bandit to do that. Banks know the psychological game. They know that the customers want that American dream: fast cars and houses with the white picket fence, and would sacrifice anything to get it. They play on that.

People prey on other people.

The people who work in these banks are your neighbors, fellow commuters, orgers, church members, PTA members etc.

Chasing the American Dream and keeping up with the Jones' is nothing new and it will continue to get people into trouble. Then you die and leave it all anyway.

They're just an representation of the true powers that run the show and make the rules, and it is your responsibility not to get preyed on. But, a sucker is born every minute. Everyone has played the fool. An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure. Don't fall for the American dream, if you can. That's all I could say.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #27 posted 10/29/11 12:53pm

EmbattledWarri
or

SUPRMAN said:

EmbattledWarrior said:

It's a combination things that they're angry about.

It's finding out after going into 30 to 100,000 dollars in debt by going to college

That the degree that you bought is worth nothing.

They're bemoaning a broken system with several problems.

Problems that transcend partisanship, or an economic system, or the failure of both.

What amazes me is no one, not even the president wants to have this discussion.

And it's a good discussion to have.

Define worthless please.

Is it that you can't get a job in your field of study?

College doesn't guarantee that.

Capitalism doesn't guarantee anything either. Socialism pretends to.

I don't see a broken system. I see a system going through its regular cycle. If in a year, the unemployment rate dipped to 5% and the economy were growing everyone would want to take credit and fail to acknowledge the cyclical nature of the world we live in.

It's worthless in the sense that it doesn't adequately prepare you for the job market.

Thats the reason job's aren't quick to hire graduates.

Cause they'd have to spend time training and helping them unlearn everything they learned in college.

In addition, because public schools are in such a decline, college's now have waste alot of time teaching kids the basics.

I was a kid that got A's and B's throughout highschool. And when I went to college, I realized I didn't even know how to write a proper essay.

Most of the basic academic skills i learned, were in the first two years of undergrad.

This is something High Schools do overseas.

I learned that the hard way, when I was getting my MA at Thames University in Britain.

I struggled the first year, because the native kids over there where way more advance than I was.

Luckily some of the professors over there offered to tutor me free of charge to catch me up.

Our educational starndards in the U.S. are extremely low.

My MA, from London is the equivalent of a PHD here.

I am a Rail Road, Track Abandoned
With the Sunset forgetting, i ever Happened
http://www.myspace.com/stolenmorning
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #28 posted 10/29/11 4:00pm

SUPRMAN

avatar

EmbattledWarrior said:

SUPRMAN said:

Define worthless please.

Is it that you can't get a job in your field of study?

College doesn't guarantee that.

Capitalism doesn't guarantee anything either. Socialism pretends to.

I don't see a broken system. I see a system going through its regular cycle. If in a year, the unemployment rate dipped to 5% and the economy were growing everyone would want to take credit and fail to acknowledge the cyclical nature of the world we live in.

It's worthless in the sense that it doesn't adequately prepare you for the job market.

Thats the reason job's aren't quick to hire graduates.

Cause they'd have to spend time training and helping them unlearn everything they learned in college.

In addition, because public schools are in such a decline, college's now have waste alot of time teaching kids the basics.

I was a kid that got A's and B's throughout highschool. And when I went to college, I realized I didn't even know how to write a proper essay.

Most of the basic academic skills i learned, were in the first two years of undergrad.

This is something High Schools do overseas.

I learned that the hard way, when I was getting my MA at Thames University in Britain.

I struggled the first year, because the native kids over there where way more advance than I was.

Luckily some of the professors over there offered to tutor me free of charge to catch me up.

Our educational starndards in the U.S. are extremely low.

My MA, from London is the equivalent of a PHD here.

If they needed them, they would train them. Lawyers coming out of college have to be taught on the job, how to do their job. Law school doesn't teach them that.

Hard science jobs go begging for want of applicants. Colleges don't regulate according to the supply and demand in the marketplace. Students do. If there is an oversupply of people with similar skills, jobs will be hard to come by,

I don't want you to think like me. I just want you to think.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #29 posted 10/29/11 4:31pm

DarlingDiana

SUPRMAN said:

If they needed them, they would train them. Lawyers coming out of college have to be taught on the job, how to do their job. Law school doesn't teach them that.

Hard science jobs go begging for want of applicants. Colleges don't regulate according to the supply and demand in the marketplace. Students do. If there is an oversupply of people with similar skills, jobs will be hard to come by,

That's an interesting point. I wonder if there was a way to base college education more on the job market's demand for qualified graduates of certain fields. That's certainly an interesting thing to ponder. I do think a lot of students choose the wrong courses to study. There is a 4.5% unemployment rate among college graduates, which is pretty good. So if you aren't finding a job it might because instead of hard sciences you studied sociology and liberal arts. A fair amount of the people at the Occupy events are college graduates who are angry that they have so much student debt yet they can't find a job. But when you ask these people who what they have a degree in, they never say "Mechanical Engineering" or "Computer Science".

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 1 of 2 12>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Poll: More agree than disagree with Occupy Wall Street goals