Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Why Are We Cleaning Up THEIR Mess?

by James Denison / October 13, 2011 10:27 PM PDT

Why aren't they cleaning up their own mess? Why not see if any of them would like payment to clean up the mess? If so, pass a hat or bucket around to collect the cost of cleaning up their mess. These people are like little children, expecting Mom to come behind them picking up their mess for them. Oh yeah, this is also privately owned land they are squatting on.

Messy People

Mayor Mike Bloomberg's people have announced
that the city would clean Zuccotti Park on Friday, the small area in
lower Manhattan where the protesters have been camping for four weeks.The
plan seemed like a reasonable compromise between Occupy Wall Street's
desire to stay in the park and the city government's need to ensure that
sanitation remain reasonable. Bloomberg
administration officials said the cleaning would not require an
immediate and complete withdrawal from the park. Instead, the city would
clean the park in sections, and protesters would be allowed to return
to sections once the cleaning was done. At all times, they said,
protesters would be able to maintain a presence in the park.Still,
many protesters don't trust the mayor. They note that his office said
protesters would be able to return to areas that had been cleaned
"provided they abide by the rules that Brookfield (the owner) has
established for the park."

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Why Are We Cleaning Up THEIR Mess?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Why Are We Cleaning Up THEIR Mess?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
We're ALL cleaning up "their" mess
by Josh K / October 13, 2011 10:40 PM PDT

And I'm not talking about the one left by the protesters.

Collapse -
Since the park IS privately owned
by TONI H / October 13, 2011 11:45 PM PDT

my feeling on this is that the owner has the legal right to demand the police remove the 'squatters' permanently and fine them all for the cleanup....and NOT allow them to return. Bloomberg shouldn't even have a say in any of this since it's NOT public land to begin with, and he should have never been allowed to make the statement last week that they could stay 'indefinitely' since that is now the basis for which the squatters are distrustful of Bloomberg.

Or do you believe that protesters have the right to trash private property and invade private property such as they did when they went to the home of the banker a few months back and refused to stay on public sidewalks and streets to do their protesting? They were literally on the man's front porch and all over his personal property, scaring his kid. Free speech can only go so far, Josh.......they have the right to protest, but not at the cost of others who have a right to their own property.

Collapse -
The owner has the right....
by Josh K / October 14, 2011 1:57 AM PDT

...but not the obligation. If they want to allow the protesters to remain there that's their business. My understanding also is that the owners of the property would take care of the cleanup and not expect the city to do it.

Collapse -
I agree
by James Denison / October 14, 2011 12:34 AM PDT

You no doubt remember the many times I railed at Greenspan's easy money policies, even before all the bubbles started collapsing. I also said a bailout was needed, but limited to the extent of backing deposits in banks, to keep FDIC from failing. I know even years before I felt ARM's were a trap that would come back to haunt people using them.

As for myself I used a standard conventional mortgage, and realizing I'd have expenses later when my children hit high school, driving, and college age, I opted to sacrifice early and use a 15 year mortgage to buy my home. While I was doing that, many of those now protesting were using ARM's to live better than they really could afford, like a time bomb on their future, just ticking, waiting to explode in their faces, and bank accounts. While I paid off my CC's each month, they were living beyond their means buying all manner of goodies they really couldn't afford without all the extra credit they kept piling up. While they were buying new cars, I was buying off lease vehicles. They lived the good life, we lived the sacrifice but sufficient life and secured our future through investing instead of wasting it away.

Now many of those same easy spenders are sitting on the curb in gatherings around the country crying, moaning about the end result of how they've lived during the good times so that they have nothing left in the bad times, and blaming everyone else but themselves. Even if they are willing to admit their earlier excesses and foolishness, that doesn't lessen the situation they find themselves in right now. It also means however they shouldn't try and blame everyone else while they were also taking advantage of the easy money policies and putting nothing aside for when it would all come crashing down.

How have the bailouts hurt them? It's not been through increased taxation. It's not been through excessive inflation. It's not even seeing the banks get more money from the govt than what they take on deposit from the public. In fact if the dollar had been inflated more during this time, it's likely some of the jobs that fled overseas would have remained here instead. So, why the complaints? It's because they spent the future and finally having arrived there discover that either they have to pay it back, or lose what's left to them while those who didn't get paid back by them must now turn around and lay off people due to the drop in public spending. Yes, they spent themselves into this mess and now have no more left to spend and the system is collapsing in on itself until it reaches a new point of equilibrium, which may take a while yet.

If the govt printed up tons of money and filled the banks with it, that would affect the economy not a bit so long as the money remains in the banks and isn't loaned out. They are neither helped NOR harmed thereby.

What's left then? Envy. Class warfare. Blaming someone else. Expecting a handout after the party is over. Wanting others to "share" with those who already lived to the hilt when times were good. To try and get the govt to fleece those with more saved over the years to bail out those who saved nothing, having spent it all instead on living above their means.

Who else are they blaming? Those who really need the help? Those who spent years contributing to their retirement? Yes, I mean those who get a pittance from Social Security, about $1,000 per month. That's right, those protestors in the prime of life, worried those who have already given their part to this country, might somehow keep them from getting all they want and demand.

While I also agree the economic situation in this country was badly mishandled over the past 2 decades leading to what we have now, I can't feel much pity for those who lived life to the utmost on borrowed money and now have reached the reward they now face for having done so.

Collapse -
I don't think anyone ever said.....
by Josh K / October 14, 2011 2:00 AM PDT
In reply to: I agree

....that people who borrowed beyond their means don't bear any responsibility for their situations. But many were hoodwinked into thinking they could afford mortgages that they really couldn't.

ARMs are like Russian Roulette. With interest rates as low as they are now, they're especially foolish.

Collapse -
Schooling is part of the problem
by James Denison / October 14, 2011 3:55 AM PDT

Do they still have "home economics" classes for high school girls? They gave up business math in favor of concentrating on math most don't even use when they leave school, like algebra and calculus. The dream of the 60's and 70's that every child would need the "new math" so they could grow up to be rocket scientist is shown to be bankrupt. Do you realize how few can even figure the percentage of gain or loss from an investment using paper or calculator? I see high school kids working registers all the time who can't even make change right. If you buy something for $1.36 and give them a dollar, 2 quarters and a penny, they are confused unless the register will tell them you want a dime and nickel back in change. The schools don't teach them about mortgages, real estate fees, loan origination fees, points on a loan, amortization, percents of gain and loss, compounding of interest, and all the other math that determines their lives after they leave school and enter the workplace. If you asked them what a 10% loss on $100 would be, maybe the majority would say $10, maybe. If you then asked them what percentage of gain was needed on what was left to have $100 again, the majority of them would say 10% not 11.1% If you asked them how long it would take for $100 to become $200 if it gained annual 10% interest per year, the majority would say "10 years!" instead of approximately 7 years. The majority couldn't tell you why the number one was needed in the equation added to the percentage to make the formula work.

The schools are failing the past generations and still the one there now by failing to teach them the necessary tools to function in a business or capitalist environment. Instead they get theoretical math skills most will never use, if those children even manage to master that.

That's just math. They learn nothing about contracts and torts. I think most college students even manage to avoid a course on contracts and torts. They learn nothing about principle and practices of real estate. Accounting? LOL, "accounting for what, I ain't done nothing to be accounted for..." Instead they have their heads filled with a lot of socialist concepts and other mush that's good for little else other than whining, complaining, protesting and expecting something they don't deserve. Teach them their "rights" but fail to teach them their responsibilities.

Yes, the schools act like they are all supposed to become rocket scientist, political science or social work majors and the ones who don't are left deficient in what they really need to meet what the real world demands from them. Sadly for many schools have become little more than a rite of passage and not a place of learning. It serves to keep them off the streets, babysit them while the parents work, and then dump them out at age 18 ill prepared for the world they are supposed to face. So, more money is needed in student loans for them to enter college and then how many still end up in some liberal arts degree that will never support them in the real world?

Collapse -
(NT) I don't remember them ever teaching this.
by Diana Forum moderator / October 14, 2011 7:24 AM PDT
Collapse -
Unless you're majoring in Law or something related....
by Josh K / October 14, 2011 7:28 AM PDT

....I don't know what kind of class you'd expect the colleges to make mandatory that would cover contracts and torts, or real estate law. And never mind that a lot of people never go to college, for numerous reasons.

The banks lied to people in order to get their business, pure and simple. Some may have been around the block enough times to see through it, but a lot of people trusted their lenders to tell them the truth. Silly, wasn't it.

Collapse -
Actually they would be harmed
by Diana Forum moderator / October 14, 2011 7:50 AM PDT
In reply to: I agree
If the govt printed up tons of money and filled the banks with it, that would affect the economy not a bit so long as the money remains in the banks and isn't loaned out. They are neither helped NOR harmed thereby.

If the government gave the banks all this money, the government (meaning you and me) still has to pay the interest on the money which leaves less for other programs. The banks aren't lending so small businesses can't expand and hire more people and people can't buy homes.

Of course, they're still foreclosing on homes that they can't sell because they aren't lending.

Diana
Collapse -
good for them!
by James Denison / October 14, 2011 2:00 AM PDT
In reply to: You're/They're not.

they must be reading this forum. Wink

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?