Declaration of Occupy Wall Street

Status
Not open for further replies.
No doubt it's symbolic..... But being that it is a 9/11 statue I have a problem with it.

eeerrrrrr..... it's not really a 9/11 statue. It just happened to be a "shrine" for 9/11 because it seems appropriate for post-9/11 when people cleared thru rubbles.

This sculpture is called "Double Check" created by J. Seward Johnson.

A Second Chance for 'Double Check' - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com
On Sept. 11, 2001, with everything in ruins, one figure remained in Liberty Park across the street from the World Trade Center. He was sitting hunched over, staring in his briefcase, a businessman who seemed to be in shock and despair. Rescue workers, it was reported, approached him in the chaos to offer assistance, only to discover that he was not a man at all, but a sculpture.

The sculpture, created by J. Seward Johnson Jr. and placed downtown in 1982, was titled ''Double Check.'' It was named for what it depicted: a businessman making final preparations before heading into a nearby office building. Before 9/11, the sculpture was simply part of the downtown landscape. Afterward, it became an icon, as newspaper and magazine photos showed it covered in ash and, later, by flowers, notes and candles left there by mourners and rescue workers. ''Double Check'' was a memorial to all those who perished. It was also a fitting metaphor for the city: though the sculpture had been knocked loose from its moorings, it had endured.

250806rubble1.jpg
250806statue.jpg
 
0fe58a9e8edae3d55d162018950c0482.jpg


417732660_6fd4ecf53f.jpg


is that defacement too, TXGolfer?
 
What did you correct? :lol: The Statue is symbloic or a "shrine" because of what? :ugh2:

that it's not a 9/11 statute.

It's just a lifelike-size sculpture of a businessman making final preparations before heading into a nearby office building.

In short.... it's more of a Wall Street statue than 9/11 statue.
 
that it's not a 9/11 statute.

It's just a lifelike-size sculpture of a businessman making final preparations before heading into a nearby office building.

In short.... it's more of a Wall Street statue than 9/11 statue.

It just happened to be a "shrine" for 9/11 because it seems appropriate for post-9/11 when people cleared thru rubbles.

*shrug* I find it disrespectful......you are welcome to your opinion
 
*shrug* I find it disrespectful......you are welcome to your opinion

I've never stated my opinion about it nor questioned your opinion. Again - I corrected your statement. and also that it wasn't defaced... just decorated. :dunno:

btw - see my Post #422. was it defacement too?
 
that it's not a 9/11 statute.

It's just a lifelike-size sculpture of a businessman making final preparations before heading into a nearby office building.

In short.... it's more of a Wall Street statue than 9/11 statue.
"Before 9/11, the sculpture was simply part of the downtown landscape. Afterward, it became an icon, as newspaper and magazine photos showed it covered in ash and, later, by flowers, notes and candles left there by mourners and rescue workers. ''Double Check'' was a memorial to all those who perished. It was also a fitting metaphor for the city: though the sculpture had been knocked loose from its moorings, it had endured."
 
Person A:
He goes to relatively expensive colleges to get his B.S. and M.S. in engineering. He gets a good stable job debt free because his well off parents took out the student loans for the undergrad college. They paid for it shortly after the son got the job after getting his master's. Now everyone is debt free and stable.

Person B:
He goes to relatively expensive colleges to get his law degree. His parents cannot afford to help out, so he himself took out the loan. 8+ years after graduating, he is ALMOST finished with paying off the loans despite getting a good career as a lawyer. If he got laid off, he would have serious debt problems if he couldn't find another job. He is currently raising a family.

Person C:
He goes to community college to get an Associates degree. He nor his parents cannot afford to go to college to get a B.A. and he decides not to take out a loan in fear of being in debt. Today, he works as a painter. He is not in debt at all, but still doesn't make enough money to live comfortably nor continue college.

Person D:
He went to college to get a B.A. in accounting and took out a loan. Parents were extremely poor and could not help out, but he managed to get and keep good jobs and pay off loans while raising a family to finally live comfortably. He even paid for his son's college education (who is Person A).

All of these people are people I know. I am Person A. My step sister is Person B. My girlfriend is Person C. My mom (and dad too, for that matter) is Person D.

Some people could call certain people I've mentioned as "smart", but to be quite honest... to me, it's really luck. All of the people I've mentioned who now lives comfortably all had TWO things in common: they went to college AND were able to keep their jobs.

I don't think it's fair to say to someone "Oh you went to college and took out a loan without having rich parents, you screwed yourself over." because that's how many people did it before the recession. One difference, they simply didn't lose their jobs (or obtained jobs easily).
 
I've never stated my opinion about it nor questioned your opinion. Again - I corrected your statement. and also that it wasn't defaced... just decorated. :dunno:

btw - see my Post #422. was it defacement too?

Decorated? :lol:
 
that it's not a 9/11 statute.

It's just a lifelike-size sculpture of a businessman making final preparations before heading into a nearby office building.

In short.... it's more of a Wall Street statue than 9/11 statue.

Hence very appropriate. That statue wasn't made in honor of 9/11.

The way I see it, that "defacement" is an artistic statement to all Americans and I find it very powerfully symbolic.

I mean, what's worse? A bandana on a statue or millions who lost their homes and jobs because of Wall street bankers - like that statue.

Perspective.
 
Person A:
He goes to relatively expensive colleges to get his B.S. and M.S. in engineering. He gets a good stable job debt free because his well off parents took out the student loans for the undergrad college. They paid for it shortly after the son got the job after getting his master's. Now everyone is debt free and stable.

Person B:
He goes to relatively expensive colleges to get his law degree. His parents cannot afford to help out, so he himself took out the loan. 8+ years after graduating, he is ALMOST finished with paying off the loans despite getting a good career as a lawyer. If he got laid off, he would have serious debt problems if he couldn't find another job. He is currently raising a family.

Person C:
He goes to community college to get an Associates degree. He nor his parents cannot afford to go to college to get a B.A. and he decides not to take out a loan in fear of being in debt. Today, he works as a painter. He is not in debt at all, but still doesn't make enough money to live comfortably nor continue college.

Person D:
He went to college to get a B.A. in accounting and took out a loan. Parents were extremely poor and could not help out, but he managed to get and keep good jobs and pay off loans while raising a family to finally live comfortably. He even paid for his son's college education (who is Person A).

All of these people are people I know. I am Person A. My step sister is Person B. My girlfriend is Person C. My mom (and dad too, for that matter) is Person D.

Some people could call certain people I've mentioned as "smart", but to be quite honest... to me, it's really luck. All of the people I've mentioned who now lives comfortably all had TWO things in common: they went to college AND were able to keep their jobs.

I don't think it's fair to say to someone "Oh you went to college and took out a loan without having rich parents, you screwed yourself over." because that's how many people did it before the recession. One difference, they simply didn't lose their jobs (or obtained jobs easily).

I would guess those people had a little more in common.(just a guess) 1) They had direction 2) They chose stable career fields.
 
I would guess those people had a little more in common.(just a guess) 1) They had direction 2) They chose stable career fields.

didn't you just say earlier that it's people's fault if they take out expensive loans to colleges and find themselves in great debt when the economy collapses and there's no work?
 
I would guess those people had a little more in common.(just a guess) 1) They had direction 2) They chose stable career fields.

Hmm....

Let me ask you something.

There are two people of the exact same educational background. One decides to work in a public sector (lower salary) and the other decides to work in a private sector (higher salary). The person who works in the private sector got laid off due to the economy, but not the one in the public sector (a VERY VERY common scenario here in Huntsville). Do you think the person who worked in the private sector made a bad decision of not choosing a "stable career"?
 
didn't you just say earlier that it's people's fault if they take out expensive loans to colleges and find themselves in great debt when the economy collapses and there's no work?

Yeah. and?
 
Still not addressing the issues. Side squabbles only distract from the real issues. People who derail discussions with personal attacks and strawmen don't have a real argument. Don't take the bait.
 
Hmm....

Let me ask you something.

There are two people of the exact same educational background. One decides to work in a public sector (lower salary) and the other decides to work in a private sector (higher salary). The person who works in the private sector got laid off due to the economy, but not the one in the public sector (a VERY VERY common scenario here in Huntsville). Do you think the person who worked in the private sector made a bad decision of not choosing a "stable career"?

Not enough information to answer the question. School loans are gambling. The key to gambling is managing risk. People who have direction have lessened their risk. People who have chosen to Business degrees or Engineering degrees have lessened. That still doesn't guarantee success.

IMO it's better to work through college than gamble. Even if it takes a year or longer to graduate at least you have 5-7 years of work history to go along with your degree. That is the person I would want to hire.

So to me it's simple. If one choses to gamble....be informed. And if they fail, that's part of gambling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top