PDA

View Full Version : Occupy Wall St. Kitchen Reportedly Set to Cut Back Meals Because of Freeloaders



Unified Serenity
28th October 2011, 09:08
Here is an interesting article that makes me question just what the problem is for the OWS people regarding vagrants and homeless wanting to be fed at the protests. I mean, aren't they all free loaders down there if they are expecting free food, shelter, toilets, etc?
From The Blaze:

"The revolution will be fed, but the food may soon be cut back and might not be as tasty.

It looks like the grub served to the Wall Street Occupiers will go from gourmet to gruel tomorrow in an effort to shoo away “professional homeless” people who have been feasting on the Occupiers’ donated dimes.

That’s right. The freeloading Occupiers are angry at all the random freeloading going on down in Zuccotti Park.

The grub down at Zuccotti has been written up in the past for exceeding expectations with its quality and variety.

Some out-of-work chefs have joined the ranks of the Occupiers, which clearly kicked the cuisine up a notch. But the OWS kitchen staff has had enough of feeding the homeless and random hangers-on.

“We need to limit the amount of food we’re putting out to curb the influx of derelicts,” a kitchen volunteer told the New York Post. Another volunteer said the cooks felt “overworked and under-appreciated” and worked 16-hour days."

[OMG.... they have issues with working hard, feeding people who don't appreciate it as in not there for the protests, just basic homeless people. WOW, sounds like a tax paying citizen tired of supporting able bodied people who just want to bang on drums all day.]

"It’s almost like the young Marxists want to be compensated for their labor!

Starting Friday, Zuccotti’s own top chefs will switch out their organic chicken, spaghetti bolognese, and roasted beet salads for brown rice gruel.

The plan is to change the menu for three days and hope that the “criminals and vagrants disperse.” At that point, the Occupiers may starting whipping up their artisan treats again. If the unwanted false-Occupiers don’t leave, it may be nothing but tasteless porridge and brown rice for the foreseeable future.

But since the story hit the papers, the Occupiers have denied that there plan is to “starve out vagrants.” Instead, the cooks claim they just need a few days to rest and get organized.

Either way, don’t head down to Zuccoti Park anytime soon for the cuisine."

From: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/occupy-wall-st-kitchen-reportedly-set-to-cut-back-meals-because-of-freeloaders/

Unified Serenity
28th October 2011, 16:30
Wow, not one response to this obvious hypocrisy of the OWS crowd. The same was evident on The Blaze as there really is no way to defend this attitude, but it is revealing how naturally conservative people are when others are just using them.

Providence
28th October 2011, 18:14
Wow, not one response to this obvious hypocrisy of the OWS crowd. The same was evident on The Blaze as there really is no way to defend this attitude, but it is revealing how naturally conservative people are when others are just using them.

I don't think this article was fairly written, as the talk in the GA seemed to concentrate upon the need to feed the protesters first and foremost. They are protesting, they are not a a governmental system, they don't have the resources, they brought their concerns to the GA and the assembly voted upon this. They have needs that must be met or it hinders their efforts and they don't have the time or the resources to always feed the hungry. Tough choice I'm sure, and one that is easily and understandably misunderstood. Kind of a damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Lord Sidious
28th October 2011, 18:47
What if they suspect that someone is trying to defeat them by using up their resources?
I mean, real homeless people should be fed, that isn't even arguable.
What if they are sending people down there to try and defeat them by eating everything?
Not saying it is probable, just that it is possible.
Oh and I have no interest in left v right arguments, that is the old paradigm that has us enslaved.

Maia Gabrial
28th October 2011, 19:37
How do they know that they're homeless people? Aren't the homeless as much victims of TPTW as anybody else? If the food is free, what's the problem? How do you USE someone when they freely give....? You can't.... Did any of them ask these supposedly homeless people to help cook or clean up or anything? Probably not. Everyone can pitch in someway to this cause.
I really didn't like the overall attitude of the Occupiers regarding this...

Carmody
28th October 2011, 20:08
Over time I've learned that I can't even trust my own mind, and essentially, neither can anyone else. However, people decide that they are going to do this thing, every day. This so the body's egoic system can feel complete. It is a natural push by the egoic system of incarnation.

Thus I recall a considerable number of times that I witnessed arguments or situations first hand and then found out that I had no idea of the real given reasons behind the given situation. That even though I was a direct witness, I was incapable of forming a direct opinion in context.

In the same way, someone who is trying to disarm support for a given group or persons, can then bring forth such a statement I see here...... about an occupy group being some sort of 'sham' of integrity, in order to tear down support and/or arm it's enemies.

This is entirely possible to be a subtle tactic of psychological warfare, regarding any widespread reporting of this situation, and it can ONLY be taken out of context, IF one was not specifically living 'in situ' (latin: in situation/act) and in witness to the entire pre,during... and post situation, as a participant.

spiritguide
28th October 2011, 23:08
If it is true, shame. If it is false then be warned of the condition.

music
29th October 2011, 05:49
WOW, sounds like a tax paying citizen tired of supporting able bodied people who just want to bang on drums all day


Well, this is an issue, and all sides have been presented here already. I would just like to address your aside (above). Putting oneself at risk of being pepper-sprayed, hit with trunchoens, dragged across tarmac, having one's head smashed into a car, undergoing the humiliation of arrest, etc, all for one's beliefs, commands my respect.

ponda
29th October 2011, 09:05
Is it the protesters responsibility to feed NY's homeless people ? It sounds like they have been feeding them and then more and more kept showing up and it became overwhelming.The cause of the large numbers of homeless people looking for a meal is a part of what the protesters are protesting about.The system favors the haves at the expense of the have nots.

What are j p morgan and goldman sachs doing to help the homeless ? What is the establishment doing to help them ? The article is trying to paint OWS as the bad guys just because they don't have enough food to keep NY's homeless from hunger.

Mad Hatter
29th October 2011, 09:29
An interesting conundrum for all those with the 'The world owes me a living' mentatlity...

Could be smarter to shut down the kitchens altogether and rely on the 'Loaves and fishes' approach as an adjunct to reinforcing the concept of sharing.

ponda
29th October 2011, 09:34
An interesting conundrum for all those with the 'The world owes me a living' mentatlity...


So you are saying that the system works fine and is not flawed and that if you are marginalized then it is you own fault ? Do you know that the article is correct ?

spiritguide
29th October 2011, 09:41
As one can see the ego is still present and well when one or the other finds need to label and divide. We are all one, and as I see it the only difference between an unemployed person with resources and a homeless person that is destitute is about six months. If the OWS movement doesn't transend the barrier and exist for the common good then surely it will falter. We are overcoming fear as a society but greed stilll has a strong foothold to our detriment. We have a lesson to learn with this experience and I hope everyones eyes are wide open and seeing beyond the illusion presented. IMHO

:peace:

Mad Hatter
29th October 2011, 11:51
Interesting that from what I said...

An interesting conundrum for all those with the 'The world owes me a living' mentatlity...
you percieve I said this...

the system works fine and is not flawed and that if you are marginalized then it is you own fault ?

Based on that, would it not be considered presumptuos of me, to say you believe the world does owe you a living by mere dint of the fact you where born here?

In point of actual fact I could have laid out quite a diatribe on what I perceive is wrong with the system, not the least of which is the need for a paradigm shift in thinking from one of scarcity to one of abundance. It may have potentially been seen as derailing the thread, not something I wished to do.

I do however still think that it is an interesting conundrum...

By way of example in this country we had a bloke who started of his working life as a cleaner and through sheer hard work he retired after having achieved the position of CEO of a major corporation. The second example is one of the organisers of the occupy Melbourne brigade, commuted in daily, lives in an expensive inner suburb, who has completed multiple degrees, the latest being a PhD and has never done what most would consider an honest days work in his life.

So putting the nature of the system aside, of the two, which opinion about how to change the world for the better would come from a place of more integrity. The one that has worked within it and succeeded enabling others to succeed along the way or the the one that has lived of the system and succeeded anyway??

I realise that the occupy movement want change, the difficulty they seem to be having is an ability to explain what those changes should be and a coherent proposal for how they might come about. Standing on the streets screaming it's all the fault of greedy capitalists shows at best an alarmingingly misplaced understanding of the real issues that are the cause of the present problems and at worst a complete inability to comprehend why that is so.


Do you know that the article is correct ?
No. Do you? If it is would you not find it ironic that the movement is unbale to deal with one of the major issues they are complaining about...thus begging once a again the question of what are the proposed solutions. In point of actual fact the type of thinking being employed to come up with solutions such as discourage the homless from turning up doesn't really give me much room for hope of significant change being perpetrated by that particular sector, but thats just me...

markpierre
29th October 2011, 14:13
Those bloody homeless people. They rain on everyone's parade. Now they're gonna have to eat sandwiches everyday until the Federal Reserve says' 'okay, you guys are right, we're going to hand it all back to you now.'

They'll never be able to eat egg salad or tuna again.

I wouldn't expect your everyday Joe protester to necessarily be a Posterchild for the paradigm that's coming. The irony is there's a strong possibility that all those dirty vagrant parasites may hold the knowledge that could keep Joe alive under certain extreme circumstances. Being numb to protocol may be more useful than a cause and a bullhorn. Knowing how to eat when there is no food might be helpful too.

I think I'd be nice to pretty much everyone right at this point in the game.

Maia Gabrial
29th October 2011, 14:26
What's not being shown is what the homeless are doing within the OWS movement besides eating the free food. Aren't they doing their part? Aren't their voices joining in with the rest of them? Many of them probably found themselves homesless because of the System; so, they have a right to voice their protests too. Afterall, this movement seems to be covering a wide variety of complaints.

Carmody
29th October 2011, 21:05
Is it the protesters responsibility to feed NY's homeless people ? It sounds like they have been feeding them and then more and more kept showing up and it became overwhelming.The cause of the large numbers of homeless people looking for a meal is a part of what the protesters are protesting about.The system favors the haves at the expense of the have nots.

What are j p morgan and goldman sachs doing to help the homeless ? What is the establishment doing to help them ? The article is trying to paint OWS as the bad guys just because they don't have enough food to keep NY's homeless from hunger.

We know what JP Morgan did. They gave money to the NYPD. This is not surprising, this is the history and character of JP Morgan.

ponda
29th October 2011, 21:47
Mad Hatter said:

Based on that, would it not be considered presumptuos of me, to say you believe the world does owe you a living by mere dint of the fact you where born here?


The 'system' owes me nothing but that doesn't mean i have to go along with it and accept it.


Mad Hatter said:

By way of example in this country we had a bloke who started of his working life as a cleaner and through sheer hard work he retired after having achieved the position of CEO of a major corporation.

That story is one of the 'carrot's on a stick" of capitalism.This 'illusion' is what keeps the slaves happy and content to slave away and perpetuate the system.Yes it is possible to come from humble beginnings and work hard and get lucky and become one of the 'haves'.What about the majority of the world who are hungry,sick and wanting ?



Mad Hatter said:

So putting the nature of the system aside, of the two, which opinion about how to change the world for the better would come from a place of more integrity. The one that has worked within it and succeeded enabling others to succeed along the way or the the one that has lived of the system and succeeded anyway??

Probably neither.They both rely on the system as it is and have benefited from it but i would still listen to what they have to say.



Mad Hatter said:

I realise that the occupy movement want change, the difficulty they seem to be having is an ability to explain what those changes should be and a coherent proposal for how they might come about. Standing on the streets screaming it's all the fault of greedy capitalists shows at best an alarmingingly misplaced understanding of the real issues that are the cause of the present problems and at worst a complete inability to comprehend why that is so.

The problem is that no one knows exactly what changes are needed and what will work.It is probably going to be a gradual change over time as new ideas are tried out.No one knows all the answers but many are starting to realize that something is drastically wrong.

I would doubt that every protester thinks that all the problems are caused by 'greedy capitalists'.There probably is a variety reasons why each person is protesting and what the causes of the problems and solutions to them are.



Mad Hatter said:

No. Do you? If it is would you not find it ironic that the movement is unbale to deal with one of the major issues they are complaining about...thus begging once a again the question of what are the proposed solutions. In point of actual fact the type of thinking being employed to come up with solutions such as discourage the homless from turning up doesn't really give me much room for hope of significant change being perpetrated by that particular sector, but thats just me...


Nope.It could be pure propaganda for all that i know.

I don't think the protesters are suggesting that discouraging homeless people from turning up is a solution.The homeless people just emphasize the inherent flaws of the capitalist system.

I don't really feel that it is the protesters responsibility to provide working solutions 'before' they protest.They are saying something is wrong and it needs looking at.At this point in time no one knows the answers.No one.If change comes the best type of transition might be a gradual one rather than a dramatic one.

______________________


The more comfortable that one is inside the system the less able that it might be to see any problems with it.At the moment i would imagine that most of the people protesting have already been effected by the system's flaws.Some are in pain and suffering because they can't afford medical care because the medical system has been turned into profit for big business.Some students are in big debt because the education system has been turned into a business for profit.Some people have lost their jobs because the corporations have shipped the jobs overseas because it is more profitable.Some have lost their homes.Some are against big money corporations bribing politicians and then getting favors.Some might be against the wars.Some against GMO foods or big pharma or whatever.Many different reasons and no one has any answers....yet.

My guess is that it is early days for OWS.Once the middle class starts to become effected in large numbers things will change quickly.There won't be people just protesting at Wall st.


One answer to some of the problems might be to take the profit out of the money system.No more private banks charging the world interest on digital money etc.Take the banks etc out of the equation.

Darla Ken Pearce
29th October 2011, 22:41
The homeless are the FIRST occupiers of Wall Street. They just never got any attention or food before. They weren't deemed worthy and it seems they are still not considered of value. So what's to protest? Make peace with these ~ first line battlers ~ or end the occupation now.

Some of us still do not get it or this article would never have been posted. It has an elitist attitude about free loafers and nothing could be further from the truth. Are you a freeloader. Do you have a job and a house? Just because you sold yourselves into slavery doesn't mean everyone should do it, too. By your complacency, this inequality has been able to fester for decades. It's just more media hype and BS to divide everyone ~ that much should be obvious to all of us. The writer put words into the cooks mouths that never existed. It's BS or they are all done. With a capital DONE. This hatred and pettiness must end now. Do you see it?

Feed the homeless first! Wall Street took their homes first or do you still not get it? Maybe when your home is taken you will get with the program and protest. I say again, feed the homeless first. The rest of you are just newbies to this battle. Carry on...

craig mitchell
30th October 2011, 02:12
The homeless are the FIRST occupiers of Wall Street. They just never got any attention or food before. They weren't deemed worthy and it seems they are still not considered of value. So what's to protest? Make peace with these ~ first line battlers ~ or end the occupation now.


Feed the homeless first! Wall Street took their homes first or do you still not get it? Maybe when your home is taken you will get with the program and protest. I say again, feed the homeless first. The rest of you are just newbies to this battle. Carry on...



Darla,

You always "get it" at the most basic level.

He hoists his drink and says, "Here's to you babe!"

Regards, Craig

music
30th October 2011, 05:57
The homeless are the FIRST occupiers of Wall Street. They just never got any attention or food before. They weren't deemed worthy and it seems they are still not considered of value. So what's to protest? Make peace with these ~ first line battlers ~ or end the occupation now.


Feed the homeless first! Wall Street took their homes first or do you still not get it? Maybe when your home is taken you will get with the program and protest. I say again, feed the homeless first. The rest of you are just newbies to this battle. Carry on...



Darla,

You always "get it" at the most basic level.

He hoists his drink and says, "Here's to you babe!"

Regards, Craig

Here, here! Well said Darla, spoken from the heart.

Warlock
30th October 2011, 07:47
WHAT!!!!!!????????

The politicians are going there to eat!!!!????


Warlock