Occupy Wall Street

Just a few highlights of things that reference the Millennial Generation. Read the whole thing here

• "most daunting challenge can be the cost of college. At a time when Americans owe more in tuition debt than credit card debt"
• "Congress needs to stop the interest rates on student loans from doubling in July"
• "Higher education can’t be a luxury – it’s an economic imperative that every family in America should be able to afford"
• "states also need to do their part, by making higher education a higher priority in their budgets"
• "After all, innovation is what America has always been abt Most new jobs are created in start-ups and small businesses" - true, many by youth

OWS

• "And we've put in place new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like that never happens again."
• "And I will not go back to the days when Wall Street was allowed to play by its own set of rules. The new rules we passed restore what should be any financial system’s core purpose: Getting funding to entrepreneurs with the best ideas, and getting loans to responsible families who want to buy a home, start a business, or send a kid to college.
• So if you're a big bank or financial institution, you are no longer allowed to make risky bets with your customers' deposits. You’re required to write out a "living will" that details exactly how you’ll pay the bills if you fail -- because the rest of us aren’t bailing you out ever again. And if you’re a mortgage lender or a payday lender or a credit card company, the days of signing people up for products they can't afford with confusing forms and deceptive practices are over. Today, American consumers finally have a watchdog in Richard Cordray with one job: To look out for them."

In response, the PIRGs put out a release regarding the impact of the President's speech and potential legislation on higher education:

"“In this economy, we cannot double the student loan interest rate. Without a new plan, millions of students will pay a crushing $5,200 more on their student loan than they otherwise would,” said Rich Williams, Higher Education Advocate for US PIRG. “Students are already weighed down by state budget cuts, struggling family finances and uncertain job prospects. We applaud President Obama for his proposal to keep student loan interest rates low.”

If Congress does nothing, borrowers who will takeout the maximum $23,000 in subsidized student loans will see their interest balloon to an additional $5,200 over a 10-year repayment period and $11,300 over a 20-year repayment period.

In addition to loans, many students work their way through college to keep their debt burden low. However more full time students are becoming full time workers. With the economic down turn, it is getting harder for those students to find and continue employment. Doubling the amount of work-study jobs, as proposed by the President, will help support needy students willing to work hard make it to graduation."

Here is a chart (PDF) from the PIRGs on how students would be impacted if the interest rate on student loans doubled in July.

Last week the Harvard Institute of Politics (PDF) announced that only 1/3 of young voters are following the OWS movement and that less (21 percent) align themselves with the beliefs and attitudes of the protesters and 44 percent aren't sure.

"One-third (33%) not supportive and 46% either unsure or refused to answer."

What seems to have gotten a little lost in the idea that 2/3 of young people aren't paying attention to the OWS movement - is the way the question was worded is "How closely have you been following Occupy Wall Street" and 2/3 of 18-29 year olds said "not closely" where as 1/3 said "not at all." Which means that the reality is that 2/3 are actually following it - just 1/3 of them aren't following it that closely.

This is interesting given the latest Pew survey that shows two-thirds of Americans believe there are "very strong" or "strong" conflicts between the wealthy and the poor. That number is up 19 percent from 2010.

According to Slate

"While the Occupy movement dominated headlines in recent months, a wealth of reporting and data on the issue of economic inequality also brought the topic front and center for many Americans. The AP explains: "In recent weeks, a slew of recent census data have illustrated a widening divide, including the share of overall U.S. wealth held by the top 10 percent of the population that increased from 49 percent in 2005 to 56 percent in 2009."

So it looks like we're not alone after all.

The following is a guest post by John Petro of the Drum Major Institute and originally appeared on the DMI Tumblr.

I was among the thousands of people cramming into Foley Square Wednesday evening, observing those who had come down to show their support for the Occupy Wall Street movement. I arrived at 4:30, and for the next hour roamed around the park. It had the energy of a festival, a celebration. The air was permeated by the sound of drums. Placards waved about in the air, many of them hastily written with marker on brown corrugated cardboard. And though the rally was organized by labor unions, those with union t-shirts were vastly outnumbered by those with no obvious union affiliation.

I could find no central focal point. If amplified speeches were going on, I could not hear them. Nearer to the drummers people were dancing. Standing on top of the fountain, I found it impossible to get a true sense of the size of the crowd. It was difficult to get it all within view.

This was symbolic, perhaps. The most frequent criticism of the Occupy Wall Street movement is that there is no central organized message. However, looking out over the amorphous crowd that evening, it was very simple to identify what the movement was all about. That is, thousands were gathering here to speak out about economic injustice—injustices dealt to them, their families, and to the entire nation. There was a palpable sense that our democracy is in danger, that the voices of the many are being drowned out by the few: those with vast fortunes and a certain political agenda.

“We are the 99 percent,” the protesters chanted. In contrast, those that make the decisions that affect our lives are the other one percent. They’re the ones telling us that we’re better off if we allow corporations to pollute our air, to ship our jobs overseas, to cut corporate taxes and those on the wealthy. They tell us that we’re better off if we cut health benefits for workers, if we get rid of pensions, if we do away with the social safety net. We’re better off without high-speed rail or universal health care. These things are unattainable, we’re told, because government is out of money. If we raise taxes on the wealthiest to help pay for these things then the whole economy will fail, we’re told.

The crowd at Foley Square wasn’t falling for it.

Student loan debt was a common cause. After all, we were all told that we must go to college to get a good job. For some this is no problem; their parents can simply write a check. For others, loans are the only practical solution. Now many are out of college and are tens of thousands of dollars in debt. There are few jobs to be had and those who haven’t found one are wondering just how they’re supposed to pay all this debt off.

“The banks got bailed out, we got sold out,” the crowd chanted.

These are big, institutional problems that don’t lend themselves to easy answers. The seductive power of the Tea Party is that it offers simple, easy answers. Cut government and cut taxes. Get government out of your life and maybe someday you will be rich. The real answers aren’t going to be that easy.

Earlier that morning a Republican presidential candidate told the protesters that they ought not to blame Wall Street for the fact that they’re not rich. But no one at Foley Square said anything about wanting to become rich. For the former CEO of a fast-food pizza chain this may be a difficult idea to understand. It’s also difficult for New York City’s billionaire mayor to understand. He called the protesters “ridiculous.” This is the same mayor who expresses no concern over the growing gap between the rich and poor in his city.

The crowd at Foley Square wasn’t concerned about amassing riches. They wanted economic security and a say in their political process. They wanted to end the injustice that they see all about them, to eliminate want in the face of greed.

An hour later, looking south on Centre Street, the setting sun reflected off of the silver façade of a new luxury apartment building. A two-bedroom apartment in this building rents for $72,000 a year, a sum greater than many of the attendees’ salaries. And then the crowd began to move forward for the march down to Zuccotti Park. I walked with the chanting crowd in silence. When the march met with those encamped at Zuccotti Park there were cheers. There was dancing. Later a small group tried to storm some barricades. A white shirt officer swung his nightstick at the group. Thousands of cameras captured the moment.