Why Would The Occupy... 99% Not Identify With The Homeless?

reply to post by Schkeptick


NYpost?
Wow really?
A murdoch publication, the one who found the fatal flaw in the job bill (Hint: it was the paper clip), prints a critical OWS story?

So, did they get this story with actual phone hacking, or did they just make it up?

What's next? Murdoch hacking the phone of a murder victim? (Oh, no, wait, already did that)
Murdoch having 75% of non family shareholders vote for him and his sons to leave the board? (Oh, wait that was last friday)
Smearing a mother of 4 adult kids for not making them breakfast? (Oh no, that was last sunday)

reply to post by Ferris.Bueller.II


Probably because it's people not really there for the protest, just there for the show, attention and or free food. Note the article states "professional" homeless, not homeless. Every major city has professional homeless, people that live on the streets on purpose, not because any situation forced them to.

I highly doubt that if these were legitimate homeless people, they would be turning them away. I know here at the occupation that we're organizing in my city right now we're discussing a way to try to have homeless people more involved and helping them get there voice heard if need be. You shouldnt just take a few examples of something you assume is them doing wrong and speak for the entire movement.

People who are living in public space, in make shift homes or just sleeping on the ground and benches in blankets, taking free goods and food, taking money donations - tax free, wandering around, some causing trouble, some being peaceful, some doing drugs and alcohol, some selling ...... some there just because life and wealth isn't fair....some lost their home, car, job, family.... some just have a point to make....
Seems the occupiers have some things in common with their undesirables.
Where is compassion? Where is love? Where is justice?
What if... just a what if... a truly needy person is standing in that food line and they deem him undesirable and turn him away from their camp?
Will you be any better than the 1% at this point?
Many vagrants are living outside the system these occupiers see as so corrupted. Perhaps, if they open their mind to a different view of life, they may learn something from these people.

reply to post by mnmcandiez


Damn straight, best homeless rant ever. You got money, you got a house/apartment, a place to be a place to go, many have jobs, most are educated...

Why live like slobs, worse even than normal homeless people? The OWS protest in my town is disgusting, overflowing latrines and buckets of feces, trash everywhere, the smell is horrible.. They wonder why we don't take OWS seriously? Whoever thought of the camping aspect of this protest is a complete and utter moron. This movement could have been big, it could have been massive even, it could have easily swept the entire political climate of the country is they had followed the Tea Party's method of huge protests all over the country without the occupation. Because the longer you are constantly in the public's eye, the more ridicule you get, the more the people will turn on you and tear you apart. Living in a park, costing the middle class even more money to fund the shenanigans of the ignorant few... disgusting.

I support the movement but this is terrible.Makes me wonder what the movement actually is?Is it a charity?It must be if it is receiving donations.Or is it a political party?An organization?....I just looked,so they use a charity called Alliance for Global Justice.Its based in Washington and it deducts a 7% administrative fee from the OWS donations. ( OWS would be a good client ) The IRS must ensure that all donations are used for charitable purposes.In the article I read it mentions poncho's and printed t-shirts.It didnt mention high end meals that that are refused to the needy and ex-cons.I bet the IRS could argue some of these donations were not used for charitable purposes.And if the OWS stands for ending political donations why would they themselves accept donations when they are a politically focused movement ? Justin Bieber didnt need donations he had youtube.If they want the money out of politics they should play by their own rules.I was sad when I heard they were taking money,I knew that it would be their achilles heel.Now they are being questionable in the way they use the funds.I am starting to think this may be a false start.I still support the movement but it does need to do more and change tactics.So I havent read much criticism of the whole donation thing,if I was a critic,that would be a focus.The 7% admin would add up to a nice big outrageous looking figure Anyway,the movement needs to withstand all criticism and welcome ex cons,the homeless and even the professional homeless.If being homeless is professional,the NY 'tent city' protesters are well paid superstars.