Why Baby Boomers Don't Understand Occupy Wall Street

[The_Dude 1,142]

Too funny: (May be NSFW)

http://bigjournalism.com/abreitbart/2011/10/20/source-abc-reporters-life-allegedly-threatened-at-occupy-oakland-we-shoot-white-bitches-like-you-around-here/

lol, more breitbart homage Bill? I would think there was more of a risk of it not being funny whatsoever than being safe for work. Either way, I appreciate the warning

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Who Occupies? A Pollster Surveys the Protesters

Douglas Schoen, a veteran Democratic Party pollster who has also worked for Mayor Michael Bloomberg, sent a researcher from his polling firm down to Zuccotti Park last week to conduct what appears to be the very first professional survey of the protesters in New York. The face-to-face interviews with 198 people informed an essay by Schoen in The Journal’s opinion pages.

Putting aside Schoen’s analysis — the subhead on his piece pegs the protesters as “leftists out of step with most American voters,” if you’re curious — let’s focus instead on the raw data, which he was kind enough to publish on his personal website. The findings are quite surprising.

The protesters as a group are young, but Zuccotti Park is not nearly the youth-only movement depicted in the media. While 49% of protesters are under 30, more than 28% are 40 or older. Only one-third of the crowd considers themselves Democrats — nearly the same portion who say they don’t identify with any party. (Zero respondents labeled themselves Republican.)

Schoen finds reason to be skeptical of the protesters’ professed motivation: the inequities of the U.S. economic system. “The vast majority of demonstrators are actually employed, and the proportion of protesters unemployed (15%) is within single digits of the national unemployment rate (9.1%),” he writes in his essay. But those numbers might not be the best way to assess the economic health of the protest group.

Schoen’s survey found that, in addition to the 15% of protesters who are jobless, another 18% consider themselves “part-time employed/underemployed” — for a combined total of 33% who are struggling in the labor market. That percentage is double the U.S. Labor Department’s broader measure of unemployment, which accounts for people who have stopped looking for work or who can’t find full-time jobs. As of September, this so-called “U-6″ measure rose to 16.5%, the highest rate this year.

The pollster has a curious reading of his data when describing Occupy Wall Street’s previous support for President Barack Obama. “An overwhelming majority of demonstrators supported Barack Obama in 2008,” Schoen writes.

But according to the survey data, just 56% of protesters voted in 2008, and of those 74% voted for Obama. Crunching the numbers, it would appear that only 42% of the Zuccotti Park crowd has ever cast a presidential ballot for Obama.

The president looks likely to improve his standing with the protesters in 2012. The survey found 48% would vote for his re-election, even though a slim 51% majority of the protesters disapprove of his job performance.

Finally, the poll sheds some light on the protesters’ underlying policy agenda. The polling falls short of consensus, but some clear themes emerge.

When asked whether the U.S. should increase taxes on the wealthiest Americans, more than three-fourths of the protesters said yes. More taxes on everyone? A smaller majority, 58%, said no.

And then there’s this interesting open-ended question from the poll: What would you like to see the Occupy Wall Street movement achieve? Here are the responses (emphasis added):

• 35% Influence the Democratic Party the way the Tea Party has influenced the GOP
  
• 4% Radical redistribution of wealth
  
• 5% Overhaul of tax system: replace income tax with flat tax
  
• 7% Direct Democracy
  
• 9% Engage & mobilize Progressives
  
• 9% Promote a national conversation
  
• 11% Break the two-party duopoly
  
• 4% Dissolution of our representative democracy/capitalist system
  
• 4% Single payer health care
  
• 4% Pull out of Afghanistan immediately
  
• 8% Not sure
  

The two answers in bold seem sufficiently similar as to constitute a single answer — energizing populism on the left — with 44% support.

So the survey tells us that the Zuccotti Park protesters are underemployed at twice the national rate, lukewarm to warm on Obama and broadly in favor of taxing the wealthy and encouraging a Tea Party-style populism on the left.

http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2011/10/19/who-is-occupying-wall-street-a-pollster-surveys-protester/

[slim 1,533]

You might think about searching for a low premium high deductible plan in case of a major illness or injury.

I honestly could care less about major illness or injury since most insurance companies still leave you with several thousand dollars worth of medical bills anyway.

For me, $10,000 is the same as $100,000. "Bill me."

Are you sure you qualify for the VA system? You have said previously that you were not honorably discharged, which can restrict the benefits you would be eligible to apply for beyond injuries incurred during service.

I'm sure I qualify.

Man, you sure are an expert on my life. Did you miss the part about "under honorable conditions" when we were discussing my discharge? I remember you ignored it and even implied that I was purposefully trying to mislead people but those who actually know about such things would've understood it as what it really is. I didn't lose any of my VA benefits as a condition of my discharge.

Since you're probably wondering, I did lose my GI Bill. That's about it though. Pretty much everything else I retained.

A modest student loan, apparently. There are only appr. $250.00 that aren't accounted for in your above breakdown.

The student loan is more of a technicality and I actually am not paying it.

See what had happened was University of Phoenix mislead me into taking a "free" class to get started on their degree program. I got a nice fat loan from Fannie Mae and started going to school. A few weeks into it I realized I was wasting my time and dropped the course. At that point, they hit me with a $657 bill for the "free" course which was no longer free since I didn't complete it.

Fannie Mae also charged me several thousand dollars for the loan. I never actually got any money from them yet somehow, I owed them money. UOP claimed they returned all the money to Fannie Mae and that's why I owed them for the class. Fannie Mae got the federal government to keep all my tax return last year to pay them back for whatever money I owed them and UOP is still charging me for the class that Fannie Mae paid for but didn't.

I obviously didn't finish the program, but I'm smart enough to realize somewhere along the way, someone's money disappeared and since I never actually touched any money, it wasn't me that took it.

Fannie Mae can suck a big fat one.

University of Phoenix can suck a big fat one.

[mawilson 2,133]

For me, $10,000 is the same as $100,000. "Bill me."

How do you reconcile this attitude with the belief that people should live within their means?

"Bill me for $100,000" is not living within your means.

So, let me get this straight... instead of getting a job - any job - and paying for things they use, they decide to not work and rack up tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt?

And that's someone else's fault how?

How about, instead of worrying about making a bunch of money, we encourage people to live within their means?

People wouldn't need to constantly move up and make more money if they lived within their means.

Edited October 20, 2011 by mawilson

[slim 1,533]

How do you reconcile this attitude with the belief that people should live within their means?

"Bill me for $100,000" is not living within your means.

Insurance is a what if. What if I don't get sick or injured?

[mawilson 2,133]

Insurance is a what if. What if I don't get sick or injured?

So you're ok if people live within their means only 95 percent of the time? (Or whatever the probability of not ever getting sick or injured is.)

[^_^ 5,021]

Insurance is a what if. What if I don't get sick or injured?

You should have stayed in school... would've done you some good

[slim 1,533]

So you're ok if people live within their means only 95 percent of the time? (Or whatever the probability of not ever getting sick or injured is.)

I believe people should pay for the goods/services they choose to buy. If they don't ever need insurance, why have it?

The American people have been duped into thinking they have to have insurance. (They also think they have to go to the doctor all the time and take medication for everything.) Some even believe someone is irresponsible if they don't have it.

What's wrong with paying cash for services needed?

Often, a catastrophic injury or illness - even with insurance - will leave someone in debt they can't afford. How is the person with insurance more responsible?

You should have stayed in school... would've done you some good

You should buck the system sometime. Why do you have to have insurance? Are you going to get sick?

[mawilson 2,133]

What's wrong with paying cash for services needed?

Nothing - if you have a million dollars to pay your medical bills if you do get struck down by a catastrophic illness such as cancer or chronically bedridden by a long-term disease requiring hospitalization.

Often, a catastrophic injury or illness - even with insurance - will leave someone in debt they can't afford. How is the person with insurance more responsible?

If you have insurance, you will owe no more than your deductible - usually no more than a couple of thousand dollars.

You should buck the system sometime. Why do you have to have insurance? Are you going to get sick?

Yes, and so will you. Everyone gets sick sooner or later.

[Marilyn. 340]

a few months back my husband had surgery and a one night stay in the hospital.. total cost that was billed to my husband's insurance was around $20,000.. we only have to pay around $1000 of that..

a few years back we had a baby who had to be in the NICU for 12 days... insurance was billed over $100, 000 , we payed nothing because at that time everything was covered 100% by our insurance... now they cover 80% after a $200 deductible

I am sure glad we have insurance.. you never know what could happen

Edited October 20, 2011 by Marilyn.

[^_^ 5,021]

If you have insurance, you will owe no more than your deductible - usually no more than a couple of thousand dollars.

Well and your coinsurance if you have one. Also, there are a lot of ####### plans out there. Check out the Basic and Essential plans by Horizon NJ. They pay the first $600 for preventative, the first $700 for non-preventative and then you're on the hook for everything else until you end up in the hospital.. they will pay the first 90 days in the hospital but only the hospital charges (not the doctor charges if they exceed the 700 limit).

[mawilson 2,133]

Well and your coinsurance if you have one. Also, there are a lot of ####### plans out there. Check out the Basic and Essential plans by Horizon NJ. They pay the first $600 for preventative, the first $700 for non-preventative and then you're on the hook for everything else until you end up in the hospital.. they will pay the first 90 days in the hospital but only the hospital charges (not the doctor charges if they exceed the 700 limit).

I think choosing a plan that doesn't leave you on the hook for thousands of dollars should be a part of the "living within your means" pledge.

[^_^ 5,021]

I think choosing a plan that doesn't leave you on the hook for thousands of dollars should be a part of the "living within your means" pledge.

Ask the average consumer what coinsurance even means. Yes, people should know... but most don't. They see 'insurance' and an affordable premium and think 'security' and don't bother to read the fine print.

Edited October 20, 2011 by \

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Nothing - if you have a million dollars to pay your medical bills if you do get struck down by a catastrophic illness such as cancer or chronically bedridden by a long-term disease requiring hospitalization.

If you have insurance, you will owe no more than your deductible - usually no more than a couple of thousand dollars.

High Deductible Plan and HSA to cover the High Deductible and any co-pays. That way, you're not throwing away your money for insurance but rather put it into a dedicated savings account - tax free - and accumulate it for when you need it.

I started this last year and paid as much each month as I did the previous year for my regular medical plan. Only now, I have several thousand dollars in my HSA which will cover a full year's worth of deductibles and then some. Going forward, I really only need to replenish whatever I think I might use. Or I can save up for medical expenses for my old days - not sure that I want to do that at this point. Anyway, having built a sufficient balance in my HSA last year, I can now reduce my monthly HSA contribution. That saves a couple hundred a month right there. Additionally, my premium actually goes down 30% next year (that was quite a nice surpise). All said, I'll pay a pittance for health care coverage and do not have to worry about medical bills at all. And I actually live responsibly taking care of my family rather than just sitting there demanding that everyone else does while doing no such thing myself.

[Alex & Rachel 78]

Very glad for high deductible plans! Yes, in a good year I may not hit my deductible. But bills can accrue so quickly for even the smallest things, and it's very reassuring to know I shall never pay more than my deductible in any one year. (100% coverage after deductible - very fortunate my company provides this).