This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Occupy Wall Street: Is It Really The 99%?
By EconMatters
It looks like the initial public support and sympathy for Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is starting to wear thin. From CNBC:
"Occupy Wall Street may claim small-business owners as members of the 99 percent, but from Oakland, Calif., to New York, many local enterprises are asking the protesters to pack up.
....the problem with the movement is that it is not hurting the big banks, but rather, it is hurting the small-business owners that are fighting to survive in a recession, says small-business owner Carol Bloom Stevens."
About a month ago, we already opined in an article that
"While we do not believe the Occupy Wall Street movement is entirely constructive timing-wise with the already troubled U.S. economy, we do understand the elements behind the initiative."
We have pointed out some of the shady market practice going on on Wall Street. However, part of the reason for our "against-the-herd" view regarding the OWS is the observation of a lack of leadership and clear vision and goal(s) of the entire Occupy movement.
When an organized initiative is unable to articulate realistic goals, and solutions related to its cause, it is nothing more than a disorganized idealistic crowd leading to typically nothing constructive. Or worse yet, if the crowd is big enough as in the case of OWS, "mob mentality" would almost guarantee something destructive would take place.
OWS has now escalated into scary violent outbursts in several metro areas with some protesters reportedly carrying weapons such as AK-47, while others resorting to destroying public and private properties and vandalism. Regardless how frustrated the bankster situation (at least that was the original OWS cause) might be, there's hardly any excuse for that kind of bad behavior that could harm innocent bystanders, while not only disrupting day-to-day lives of business and private citizens, but also bringing about a "riot contagion." For example, if not for the OWS, it is doubtful the Penn State students would have resorted to rioting over a football coach who probably deserved to be fired in the first place based on reported accounts.
Another observation: As part of the 99% "worker bees", it is also very difficult for us to fathom how much free time these protesters seem to have to just camp out for days, weeks or even months without any concern in the world about family, work, and most importantly, the next paycheck. So either these people are
- Part of the 14 million unemployed, whose time probably would have been better utilized going back to school or sprucing up job skill and resume for the next gig, or
- Part of the 1% with riches able to subsidize idealism, or
- The term "Professional Protester" may not be that far off.
Some people equivalized OWS to the Arab Spring. America is far from perfect, but it is not Egypt or Libya where an outdated autocratic leader/government had ruled for decades either. The political and fiscal system in the United States most definitely needs an overhaul, and the entire congress probably needs to be replaced, but that's where voting and election comes in and what a democratic system is all about. Overall, USA is still one of the best countries in the free world despite its many problems. That is, name one country in the world that does not have similar or more serious problems....just take a look at Europe.
While the cause behind OWS resonates with many in the nation, OWS is not the path to a better America either. The longer it spread and goes on in a disruptive manner without a clear and definitive mission, and solution, the more likely other parts of the society will start turning against it. Time to regroup before falling flat on its face once the red carpet gets abruptly pulled out.
© EconMatters All Rights Reserved | Facebook | Twitter | Post Alert | Kindle
»
- EconMatters's blog
- 10469 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Quoting CNBC to lead off? <sarc> It must be true! </sarc>
OWS is just getting started up. First comes their winter of discontent, then they will be ready to rock by next spring.
Tyler, please lose this econmatters drivel.
Wakanda (whatever the fuck that is?), "then they will be ready to rock by next spring"...
OMFG, so you're telling me these lazy pigs can't do their "thing" through the winter right? Exactly! And they wonder why they can't hold a job..
I'll wait for the "climax", just like I waited for your attempted bank run last week, fucking brilliant!
OWSers are just getting warmed up for the 2 party conventions next summer!
Westmoreland thought he saw a light at the end of the tunnel, just wait for next summer, you will see what is behind that light!
That is if the whole damn thing hasn't imploded by then and all will be out with the OWser looking for food and fuel!
um.....i really hate to point out the obvious but "back to school" are f'ing kidding me right now? isn't that part of the complaint they DID go to school and now are so saddled with debt many will NEVER be debt free in their lives? so back to school to get more debt?
who's side is this author or "journalist' (journalism is dead in the USA they are now just parrots) on? the banks?
Looking pretty bad for the OWS people. Where were they when Sanelli and the T-Party went boinkers over the bank bailouts? They are late to the party and blowing it big time.
» *UPDATED* #OccupyWallStreet: The Rap Sheet, So Far - Big Government
Breitbart.tv » Police: #OccupyPortland Protesters Crafting Makeshift Weapons As Midnight Deadline Looms
Breitbart.tv » Flashback: Biden Admits First Thing Obama Admin Did Was Call Jon Corzine For Economic Advice
By some estimates, 30% of the tea-party crowd are retired and obviously older. So yes, they are late to the party. They will never be able to retire nor are they likely to receive SS.
So OWS will enjoy the privilege of paying in but getting nothing out. Has it occurred to you they may have no intention of joining the party?
Some interesting comparisons between OccupyX and the Tea Partiers...
Faceoff: Occupy Wall Street vs. Tea Party Movement (Infographic)
so if carol bloom stevens says so it must be true? WTF?
she's a public relations hack and who put her in charge?
CNBC - please... pure propaganda. TPTB are starting to sweat over the growing revolt against lifetimes of indentured servitude.
And those people that can afford to camp out are there because there are NO JOBS. Period. Nevermind all the part time employed and underemployed supporters ignoired by the media. They're focusing on ANY negative aspects trying to discredit the all too valid complaints about the lack of accountability for those who made such a mess of our economy. for all those demanding PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILIT try demadnnng the same of Wall Street and the too big to fail banks. Why was a guy like Mozilla allowed to go free, keeping $500 million dollars after paying 1/10 that in fines when he admitted his company was acting illegallly........ we bail out nbanks and brokerages yet the execs keep their jobs and STILL collect hundreds of millions in 'bonuses' - for what?!??? FAILING? You or I screw up we get FIRED! Why not these clowns?
CRONY Capitalism, dpeneding on buying off governmetn and using connections - laying off losses on others while keeping fraudulently 'earned' profits is NOT the 'free market' at work. CNBC andd the other Wall Street cheerleaders should be asking hard questions about what's gone wrong in this country, not denigrating those who ARE doing so.
This close to 1%er who worked damn hard to get here supports OWS - I worked on Wall Street (on the operations side) and saw up close and personal how ethically and morally bankrupt that place is. I walked away - with no regrets.
heh, even the usual ZH sockpuppet OWS detractors didn`t bother to show up to comment on this one, it was that bad.
To all the will-nots that did make it though, thanks for coming out. Noted.
We're here, just don't bother with OWS anymore, it's cannabalized itself long time ago. Thought everybody already got the memo that TPTB now occupy OWS.
What started out as a good thing went off rails. They never mention Goldman Sachs, JPM, Federal Reserve or Obama. Those people don't even know who they are..... OWS must be under orders from the SEIU, Moveon.org, and George Soros to keep them all clean and out of it -- total fail.
And Nancy Pelosi, Obama, the MSM and TPTB endorsing he OWS? Says it all. Members of the MSM (Dylan Ratigan, et al) are even helping them write their messaging. So, yeah, what a bunch of rebels OWS turned out to be.
It is now the premiere organization for the preservation of the status quo and to re-elect Teleprompter Dog. Good luck with that.
I think it is more than just elections.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
You're kidding, right? I gotta admit that line sounds funnier every time I hear it.
Fixed it: From each according to his ability (if free to choose and if properly incentivized), to each according to his needs (so long as the beasts of burden can keep dragging the plow).
pffft.
Wishful thinking, all.
I heard Ralph Nader rec'd money from them GOP in an attempt to split the Dem vote; did that make Ralph their accomplice, or them his useful idiots?
It's like you're saying that if the MSM claimed to discover some writings of Newton questioning the existence of gravity we would all instantly be flung into space. Stupid.
Just because someone tells you that they are my friend, doesn't automatically mean I want to take them bowling.
The only 'fail' here is you.
But when OWS claims to represent 99% of the population you know it's true even though it isn't. Fuckin' brilliant.
YEAH! ....er, uh, I said the what now?
And the brilliance just keeps on coming.
Meh, enjoy spewing your vitriol at those worse off than yourself while you still can CA.
"First came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up."
-Pastor Martin Niemoller
I have little doubt your tune will change, and right smartly too, when you and yours' turn comes. I sincerely hope it won't be too late.
Regardless of any deliberate nominal misrepresentations made by you, the MSM, or even the placards carried by some OWS'ers, the fact is that they represent a helluva lot more than 1%. I think even a foaming at the mouth detractor like youself will have to cede that. And though obviously you don't recognize it yet (for whatever reason-$$$?) they are sticking their necks out on behalf of even a grovelling Babbitt like yourself. Ingrate.
Hell, if you really think you're such a big man and know so much better than ANY of the OWS'ers do, why not head down yourself, get on your soapbox and set them straight with your bright shining illuminating oratory of perfect enlightenment?
What's that? You're lacking the what....? <cough>worthless recreant puke<cough>
Why do you believe that those who do not agree with the philosophy expressed by a random group of strangers are guilty of a moral failing? I don't insist that you live your life by my rules. I would expect the same courtesy from you.
And did it ever occur to you that maybe it will be recruits from the OWS crowd that will be setting up the guillotines and coming for you? There can only be one Robespierre and it probably won't be you.
"Why do you believe that those who do not agree with the philosophy expressed by a random group of strangers are guilty of a moral failing?"
And what 'philosophy' is that exactly? You mean the bell that the MSM likes to constantly ring because they know how well it sets off a Pavlovian response in highly trained dogs like you? Don't be so easily duped, OWS is for all who have been/are being raped by the WallStreet/Lobbyist/Demublican circle jerk. I've been informed that you can break one of those up at any point in the ring, and after that the daisy chain that remains isn't so messy to deal with.
"I don't insist that you live your life by my rules. I would expect the same courtesy from you."
Again, what 'rules'? You have to admit there are some that are pretty basic and that practically everyone can agree upon. Not many human beings think fraud, psychopathy, or sociopathy are cool, except of course the frauds, sociopaths, and psychopaths. Are you saying you have a problem with that?
"And did it ever occur to you that maybe it will be recruits from the OWS crowd that will be setting up the guillotines and coming for you? There can only be one Robespierre and it probably won't be you."
Shit maybe, but with the status quo me and mine's demise is practically guaranteed eventually, as the good Pastor quoted above discovered much to his dismay. It's unfortunate, but you gotta break a few good eggs to make an omlette and all that cal. Sycophants are far more at risk though; you should take note of that.
"Courage my friend, it's not too late to make the world a better place." T.Douglas
That's where you're wrong. As long as government exists those holding the reins of power will use that power to exploit the productive members of society. Anarchy is the only solution and a devolution of government power through the long term shrinking of the state is the most logical path to success.
The only law worth mentioning is this: Each person owns himself. No one may cause harm to another person or his property. Each person may protect himself and his property from threat by use of force in proportion to that threat.
You just worry about yourself.
Thanks for the moonbeam ride. 'Anarchy'? Seriously? What are you, fifteen?
The endgame of Marxism is 'Anarchy'; Kropotkin topped it off for him neatly. But the problem with the ideologies of those two, Say, and Adam Smith is that they all hinge on the same ridiculous premise: all men must always behave honourably.
That one thing breaks down and this happens, without fail. Exactly as described by Marx. Too bad his solutions offered the same dead end.
Grow up. 'Anarchy with everyone respecting everyone else without having to coerce anyone' is a childish pipedream.
Dreams are nice, but pragmatic ideas are better.
I'm 48 years old. Please consider the extreme error in your estimation of my age as a indicator of just how wrong you can be when you make arguments without having first obtained the relevant facts.
Regarding your disdain for anarchy and a voluntary society: if you believe that people are too ill behaved to respect each other's rights then how can a government which is comprised of those same ill behaved people but which is invested with vastly more power than any individual create a just society?
How can you not realize that government gives near infinite power to a few of the most flawed human beings and that is what has actually created the monster which OWS claims to oppose?
/Sideshow on
"I'm 48 years old. Please consider the extreme error in your estimation of my age as a indicator of just how wrong you can be when you make arguments without having first obtained the relevant facts."
So you're entering your second childhood at 48? Ouch. I guess you shouldn't have eaten all that lead paint when you were a child.
/Sideshow off
"Regarding your disdain for anarchy and a voluntary society: if you believe that people are too ill behaved to respect each other's rights then how can a government which is comprised of those same ill behaved people but which is invested with vastly more power than any individual create a just society?"
"One bad apple..."
Sure most people will tell a lie once in awhile when there is no call to (Mark Twain), but I never said that all people are too ill behaved to coexist in some reasonable state of mutual respect. But enough, around ~1% of the world's population, or roughly 70million end up as psychopaths, and they spend their lives making the world as much of a nightmare for the rest of us as they can. Mind you, these are not necessarily the same 1% the OWS are referring to, although doubtless the cleverest ones are in there near the center of the situation that we're in today. These are the creatures that make anything close to yours, Marx's or anyone else's idea of utopia impossible because they must be coerced to behave. Which means everyone has to lose a piece of their freedom thanks to those fuckers.
But clinging desperately to outdated ideological dogma that has obvious, fatal flaws that outrightly enable these cretins is plainly not the answer. Fiscally responsible mixed economies with diligent civil oversight, and reasonably well educated, politically active, healthy populations are the only nations showing signs of success. It's a bit of a mouthful, but chew on it for awhile.
PS After noticing your comment further up the thread about your fervent desire to grant total impunity to the financial sector, I realize that you are actually one of the sociopaths that are part of the problem. Any futher responses I make to your disingenuous comments will reflect that knowledge.
Self ownership is not an outdated dogma. You can forget about whipping me and calling me Toby because the slave owner's day is done.
I occupy myself.
Who do you believe owns you?
Simply screaming 'Obligation is the bane of freedom!!', or "I'm all right so fuck all the rest." doesn't negate responsibility, Babbitt. Fulfilling a duty owed isn't 'slavery'.
Tell you what: once you're self sufficiently existing alone and incommunicado on an island that you hold soley by your own force in a house that you built with your own hands, look me up and I'll cede that you actually believe this anarcho-unicorn crap you've been spouting. Until then you owe your bit for the maintenance of the infrastructure, built by the labour of others, that you enjoy having at your disposal on a daily basis. Until then I'll know that the real reason you're disingenuously pushing this hollow ideology is only because it is a convenient vehicle for your 'all regulation and civil oversight is bad, especially for the financial sector' agenda.
Society and government aren't the same thing. How could you make such an obvious error? Individuals who interact on a voluntary basis are more productive than those who are obligated to perform by force.
Anarchy does not require that one build one's own house on a desert isle. But I can see that you enjoy ordering me to live that way. Such tyrannical tendencies go a long way in explaining your support for government and its cronies on Wall Street. But why do you continue to pretend that you oppose the oligarchy when you spend so much time defending it?
"Society and government aren't the same thing. How could you make such an obvious error?"
Never made that error. You see much that isn't there oh delusional one. Gov't is subject to the sovereign however, which are the people it is supposed to represent. Were you able to connect those dots? Give it some time...
Individuals who interact on a voluntary basis are more productive than those who are obligated to perform by force."
Yeah, so? That doesn't mean that sociopathic predators like yourself don't have to be coerced.
"Such tyrannical tendencies go a long way in explaining your support for government and its cronies on Wall Street. But why do you continue to pretend that you oppose the oligarchy when you spend so much time defending it?"
'I know you are but what am I' is that really the best you've got? At 48 years old? Yikes. You're the one promoting the status quo by advocating absolute free rein for Wall Street, not me.
If you never made that error then why did you insist that I move to a desert isle to practice anarchy? Is your self contradictory style a rhetorical device or are you simply self deluded?
What makes you believe that I am a sociopathic predator when I assert that no person has the right to force any other peaceable person to act against his own interest and will? As you are the one who believes that individuals don't own themselves and must be coerced by imprisonment and violence doesn't that make you the sociopathic predator?
"What makes you believe that I am a sociopathic predator when I assert that no person has the right to force any other peaceable person to act against his own interest and will.."
Then as you must agree, fraud may not go unchecked against 'someone's peacable interest and will' . So there is justification for those dreadful 'Regulations' you so abhor..If you disagreed I would feel obligated to ask about the crazy thing. I mean, that would require some sort of enforced regulations; disagreeing sounds a bit loopy, no?.
A private system of adjudication has the ability to far outshine the governmental system of "justice" currently in use. The US has more of its citizens imprisoned than any other nation on Earth, many for "victimless crimes." Free market courts would focus on restitution for real crimes and not expensive, long term methods of retribution which only serve to strengthen the criminal element. Retribution is only profitable in a governmental system where workers can be taxed so that the jailers can make a profit. A free market system would not tolerate such nonsense.
Fraud would have far less of an impact on an anarchical society as the perpetrators can not bribe politicians in order to continue and expand their crimes. The bailout of the banks in 2008 was perhaps the largest fraud ever perpetrated and it only happened because the government ordered it to be so. No free individual would have willingly allowed themselves to be defrauded in such a matter.
You didn't have me at,
"A private system of adjudication has the ability to far outshine the governmental system of "justice" currently in use."
Says who? You're suggesting that the people shouldn't, through their elected reps, be able to write laws or even have jurisdiction over how they are implemented, just private interests with no civil oversight? Real bright idea,that. Justice the cash, and the more the better too, said a spokesperson.
The people can express themselves directly in words and actions. Why would you limit people's expression to that delivered by one representative out of half a million individuals? Society requires the input of all 7 billion people on the planet if that society is going to serve the needs of all 7 billion people on the planet.
We are not owned. We can not be silenced. We are not "the people," we are individual human beings.
The irony in this thread is that it is you who has become the idealist... The modern day idealogue.
Nobly, you discredit any "soviet style" diagnosis of mad, while so quick to claim others delusional. "Fairness" is the ugly word, yet you preach your own brand of the fairytale... And to which the death of slavery owes no thanks.
You've become the mirror to the oxymoron, liberal tolerance. "Free to think as I do." "Go Ahead, back to..."
We've all been let down by this system. But you need to prepare for serious disappointment. Unless, of course, we go apocalyptic... Then maybe you'll have your happy ending.
Why do you oppose self ownership? How do you expect to overthrow your masters when you insist on being owned?
Regarding me... you went light on facts, heavy on assumptions. Believe it or not, I stand by many of your principles. I simply question the practicality in our real world, and find myself much more tolerant of we, the mob, who have discovered ourselves to be "owned." And this overthrow will require much more than the self-reliant hermit contingent can ever hope to offer. I welcome the progressives protesting against war and their wall-steet.gov owners, while "o" clings to office. I've found common ground and so have many of "them." The dichotomy in our society has and will more than likely remain. The hope is for a more honest and uncorrupted form of representation that actually follows a rule of law... So that the bickering can continue in our better interest. Anarchy, should it come, will be short lived... technology itself will contribute to its impracticality. None of this means I don't value many of your posts, and i obviously don't discard them at first glance. It's just these two non-overlapping parts, in which you play a role, leads us nowhere... imo.
So you stand by your principles by declaring that they don't function in the "real world" even though they do? That's one hell of a plan.
Being as self-reliant as possible functions... Pretending anarchy is the answer doesn't. But twist and shout, hero.
Enjoy your servitude and feel free to do a little twisting and shouting yourself. If your owners permit it, that is. Better ask permission first.
"Enjoy your servitude but feel free..." Is that how you kept ole Tom in line?
How's that, Ringo?
Fantasy is fun.
Anarchy is all around you. Government simply takes credit for the achievements of individuals. Government wants you to believe that your neighbor would stove your head in and steal your wallet in if they didn't protect you even though government kills more people and steals more money that private individuals every could.
That's the truth.
Society can function without the application of force. All "services" provided by government can be provided more efficiently by the market. People own their own bodies and no one has right to force another person to commit acts against their own will or interest. That's the way it is.
Government is a failed fantasy.
Here are our goals. I dare you to watch, listen and learn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w&feature=player_embedded
Liposuction? Ge real.
?
"America is far from perfect, but it is not Egypt or Libya where an outdated autocratic leader/government had ruled for decades either. The political and fiscal system in the United States most definitely needs an overhaul, and the entire congress probably needs to be replaced, but that's where voting and election comes in and what a democratic system is all about."
Are you honestly this naive, they got 'democracy' in their back pocket without a Violent Revolution nothing will change
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qk12ALX9fz8
I voted for kodos
A humourous phrase uttered by Homer Simpson during an arguement with Marge after their planet has been overrun by aliens and all humans had been pressed into slavery. Homer is suggesting by this statement that the world would be a better place if the rest of the world had voted Kodos (another alien) into power. In truth if either alien had been voted into power the outcome would have been the same. "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos" - Homer SimpsonBeautiful clip, thanks :-)
Weak article, nothing but propaganda. EconMatters is afraid because 99% of the population is irate, and it cannot be easily co-opted. This is just the beginning, no matter what your TV tells you.
But OWS does not represent 99% of Americans. If you believe their cause is just and true why promote it with an obvious falsehood? Why commit yourself to a line of reasoning which simply isn't true? What good can can result from self delusion?