Fiddlesticks!

I'm curious if the author has actually talked to any of the occupiers or did any research to understand these groups. The slogan “We’re the 99 percent” is exactly that, a slogan. Like all slogans, it's symbolic of something a whole lot more complicated than income or wealth. In fact, I've not seen any reference from the Occupy Wall Street crowd that talks about taking money from the wealthy. It's entirely unfair to say that they are.

From www.OccupyWallStreet.org:
Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.

This movement is about greed and corruption in corporations and politics and the interplay between the two. They explain this right on their front page. I for one am very concerned about exactly that, as are many other people. They are also not 'leftists'. Most of the people I've talked to on Wall Street have a lot more distaste for government than the Tea Partiers. They have such an active disgust for the corruption of government and banks and politics, they view it as unsalvageable.

They also have a call to action on their web site:

http://occupywallst.org/article/September_Revolution/

Here's one statement from that call to action:
If you agree that state and corporation are merely two sides of the same oppressive power structure, if you realize how media distorts things to preserve it, how it pits the people against the people to remain in power, then you might be one of us.

Does anyone not agree that the corporations, government and corporate media are doing a poor job of serving the needs of average Americans?

"According to the Federal Reserve’s most recent Survey of Consumer Finances, to be in the top 90 percent of income in the United States means to earn, as a household, $148,400."

Unless everyone else is a lot richer than I think they are, I think this quote is supposed to read the top 10 percent of income.

Typo aside, quality piece. While corporate greed is disgusting, equally so is hypocrisy disguised as populism.

Roger, the top 1% want you to feel like you belong to their "club" so you'll vote for things that benefit them, but the truth is you don't and never will. Being in the top 25% or even the top 10% is a great feat of accomplishment, and I'm glad you made it. But if you look at that curve, of 400 families owning nearly everything, yet bitching mightily at the mere thought that their taxes might return to the level of the '80s it's disgusting greed.

I've been down to the protest and they look like typical middle class kids, who've had enough. We are all being ripped off here (legally) thanks to the top 1% lobbyists, we've bailed out banks which we should own from our investments. You don't think they wouldn't have asked for 90% ownership if you came to them and asked for a bailout? You bet your bottom dollar they would, that's how some of them get rich.

Don't get suckered in Roger, take a lunch time stroll and wander over and talk to them. It's a trip back to the '60's without the smell of weed. (and no good protest songs yet.)

I grew up fairly poor too. My clothes were always from second-hand stores and I remember my mom telling me not to eat too much, because we didn't have much. My mom worked full-time and raised my sister and me without the most minimal of help from my dad. Then I grew up and became a single mom, with essentially no help from my ex-husband. The only way I was able to get my undergraduate degree was to work full-time - and my dad finally did help out with housing costs. And I had friends, growing up who were even worse off than me. The point about this, Roger, is that we, the 99% may not be at the absolute bottom now, but some of us know what it's like and we don't want anyone in America (or anywhere else at least from my perspective) to be there. The income gap and living standard gap is insane. And, corporate greed is completely out of control. Statistics show that poor people are more philanthropic than rich people, if you can believe that...so a lot of us (in the 99%) are already giving way more in proportion to those who are "behind us in line".

A few years ago, the University of Washington reported that Growth Management Act related regulations added $200,000 to the cost of a home in Seattle. If you cannot afford a home, it may not be the fault of greedy corporations, but greedy governments.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2004181704_eicher14.html

Richard Borkowski’s post is spot on. The protesters aren’t naïve, misinformed or ignorant. They’re people who are aware of the threats to our quality of life or who are suffering from the iniquities caused by those who have gamed the system, subordinated our government and are stealing the money with both hands in broad daylight. It’s an alarm calling for someone to do something, made more acute because the people we elected to watch our backs are no longer representing us.

And it’s late enough in the game that these problems can be easily seen through either end of your telescope.

I propose Luftballoons, dbreneman.

Proud to be poor??? The Communist Manifesto promotes EVERYONE to be POOR. The government owns everything, and doles out resources 'each according to their needs'. But history also shows the government decides what you need, and the quality of that provided - in other words, with Marxism you get minimal sustenance for a minimal life.

And the Manifesto doesn't reward hard work. If anything, it defeats exceptualism, and promotes mediocrity.

Hey Randy! Nobody got rich on their own...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcFDF87-SdQ

It's not communism to want an even playing field, it's justice.

Yea, I agree. Enough of the over the top, irrelevant comparisons to Communism. The author mentioned the Communist Manifesto, not the protesters.

The Occupy Wall Streeters are protesting some of the same things that the Tea Partiers and many of the Conservatives and Liberals are protesting.

Namely, the rewarding of failure by the banks and mortgage companies with over $1 Trillion in taxpayer money. Randy seems to think that the Communist Manifesto promotes mediocrity. The bank bailouts were farrrrrr worse. They promoted failure, incompetence and corruption.

"If you agree that state and corporation are merely two sides of the same oppressive power structure, if you realize how media distorts things to preserve it, how it pits the people against the people to remain in power, then you might be one of us.

Does anyone not agree that the corporations, government and corporate media are doing a poor job of serving the needs of average Americans?" RB

What was wrong with starting there Roger?

There are activists and there are shills; to tell the difference see Battle for Brooklyn, 7PM through Thursday

http://battleforbrooklyn.com/
http://www.nwfilmforum.org/

Here's another take on the message:

http://www.alternet.org/occupywallst/152683/5_conservative_economic_myths_occupy_wall_st._is_helping_bust/

I'm going to have to wait to watch the Battle for Brooklyn until it comes to Netflix.

Mr. Valdez points out the necessary ambiguity of what it really means to demonstrate against "Wall Street". As a society, in our everyday 'exchanges', we default to a position of being either a "have" or a "have-not". I used to wonder, back in the old days, when we were demonstrating for civil rights and against the Viet Nam war in the late '60's, realizing even then that most people were at the demonstrations to "be there", or "to have a good time", whether even Art and Religion would become commodified. The question of someone who finds himself even at a young age "at the edge of the crowd". And even now, it is much the same.

However, there is a difference - EVERYTHNG has been commodified, with art and religion, 2 seemingly ideal provinces that are supposed to remind us of "The Other" at the top of the commodities list.

And so, as Gilbert Ryle reminds us with his concept of "The category mistake", when we ranty against "Wall Street", and someone asks reasonably, "What do you really mean by that?", the answer might well be that we rant against our inner-most training, the kind that reminds us to be Good Consumers. However, the confusion reigns when we realize that the "Good Consumer" no longer should accumulate Stuff, even to keep the economy afloat, even as we periodically read the Sunday paper or the Web where everyone is compared with regard to their yearly income.

Nietzsche had it right in "Master and Slave Morality", where he describes the way the master is the reference of what is good and bad, and the slave judges himself in those terms. Mr. Valdez brings up a good question when he asks, "Who are these people [in charge] and how did they get to be that way?"

But it is even more pointedly relevant to as the wider but more comprehensive question: "Who are WE, as Americans, and how do we judge the new conditions that define how we will adapt to a new way of flourishing, beyond the confines of the old "Wall Street" mentality that has led us to fundamental questions about our assumed values which must be reconciled with a new persistent reality?

And so,

My case in point. The Corporate media refuses to cover events in this country accurately. The Occupy Wall Street movement is making it so perfectly crystal clear the slanted agenda of the corporate media, most especially the fox propaganda station.

Yesterday, American war veterans were beaten by Boston Police while peacefully assembling in a park in Boston. This movement will not be going away anytime soon.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SoqouAqPbcw&feature;=related

Well said, Roger.

The tea party demonstrations appeared to be organic events that grew out of a sense of outrage over the collusion of government and Wall Street to use America's assets as a piggy bank to bail out businesses that made horrific decisions. The Arab Spring demonstrations also appear to be organic uprisings that tapped widespread outrage over specific government actions in each country affected. The Greek demonstrations are focused on cuts in compensation packages for public employees.

The Wall Street demonstrations seem contrived and amorphous. What is the sin committed by the one percent? When did working hard and earning wealth become synonymous with evil? What did these people do to deserve having their homes picketed and their families harassed?

Most tea party folks seem to show up at political events, holler and emote, then go home to live their lives. The Wall Street demonstrators seem to want to create permanent anger parties in specific locations. Different approaches perhaps based on different values?

"Most tea party folks seem to show up at political events, holler and emote, then go home to live their lives. The Wall Street demonstrators seem to want to create permanent anger parties in specific locations. Different approaches perhaps based on different values?"

Or that one group works and the other doesn't.

"Or that one group works and the other doesn't."

Exactly. These kids played by the rules and don't have jobs. We need them to be working and paying taxes.

Here's another take on the whole crisis.

http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=195841

And yes the whacking of the protesters in Boston was wrong.

The fact that they've captured the attention of the national media and millions of citizens nationwide says that the OWS group has struck a chord. Thomas Friedman seems to have captured part of the concerns pretty well. Keep in mind these protesters are protesting more than just 1 thing.

Something’s Happening Here
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: October 11, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/opinion/theres-something-happening-here.html?_r=1&src;=ISMR_HP_LO_MST_FB

Side 1
Yes, the rich are getting richer and the corporations are making profits — with their executives richly rewarded. But, meanwhile, the people are getting worse off — drowning in housing debt and/or tuition debt — many who worked hard are unemployed; many who studied hard are unable to get good work; the environment is getting more and more damaged; and people are realizing their kids will be even worse off than they are.

Side 2
“We are living in a world where flow will prevail and topple any obstacles in its way,” says Hagel. “As flow gains momentum, it undermines the precious knowledge stocks that in the past gave us security and wealth. It calls on us to learn faster by working together and to pull out of ourselves more of our true potential, both individually and collectively. It excites us with the possibilities that can only be realized by participating in a broader range of flows. That is the essence of the Big Shift.”

"These kids played by the rules and don't have jobs."

Not, necessarily. Read some of the I am the 99% posts. Very many rang up huge credit card bills. For what, one wonders. A local sympatico "journalist" over at Publicola posted that she is the 99%. She wrote, " I have tens of thousands of dollars in credit card debt—much of it at interest rates of 25, 28, or 30 percent—that I no longer believe I’ll ever be able to pay off."

Playing by the rules? More like catered to their own personal greed and now, protest the bill.

A previous poster asked about nicknames. One could classify the groups thusly:

Tea Party = Ants
Occupy Wall Street = Grasshoppers

What do the Wall Street protesters want? They voice many valid concerns, but what do they ultimately want? They want money, other people's money.

The protesters are using a tried and true divide and conquer tactic. They are isolating a small group of us to convince the rest of us that it's virtuous to expropriate some or all of the wealth earned by that group for our own purposes. The protesters have many valid points in their arsenal but a concept of earned success and earned wealth isn't something they seem to understand or value.

crank -

You seem to have no clue what these people are protesting at all.

Once AGAIN... they do NOT want other people's money via taxation or legislation. I've talked to many of them and most of them hate every aspect of the government. In that way, they are farrrrrr more to the RIGHT of the Tea Party. They've taking the concept of small government and put it on steroids. They want government out of EVERYTHING. They don't want small government. They want NO government, pretty much in line with what Mitch McConnell, John Boehner and Eric Cantor are talking about.

Thanks Rich, if that's the case, you're absolutely right, I'm way off base. I'm confused by the 99 verses one percent slogan, the march on Rupert Murdoch's house, and the addition of the usual political suspects to the Wall Street protester mix. Those factors add a heap of nuance to the picture you paint.

One thing you need to do is not believe any of what you're seeing on TV. The corporate TV is so pathetically horrible that you should just turn it off. They have an agenda to portray these people as dumb, violent and unfocused.

The sad thing is that the Corporate media today is so accustomed to merely being scribes for the government officials, they're too dumbed down to actually interview a number of people and make an assessment themselves.

Outlets like CNN want the news served to them so they can just rebroadcast it, like so many slices of pizza.

Fox and the other corporate propaganda outlets like the Republican party are just completely lying when they say these people are violent and wanting to destroy all corporations.

What these corporate media outlets seem to forget is that fewer people are getting their news from the old school media so they are less able to get away with the lies and omissions that they used to get away with.

Excellent advice, the only news I routinely watch is the PBS newshour. Oh, and BBC America. Both excellent sources of thoughtful news.

I don't believe SEIU or UW professors would join a protest for "no government" (or even smaller government). Don't believe half the stuff you read on new media, either, cranky.

Bluelight, you just like the corporate media, seem to think that this movement can be summed up in 1 demand or 1 simple message point. Why do you think that? The group hasn't come out officially for ANYTHING.

Don't you think that when groups of people come together that they probably believe lots of different things? To me, it would seem more bizarre if all these hundreds and thousands of people had just 1 single belief.

"Once AGAIN... they do NOT want other people's money via taxation or legislation. I've talked to many of them and most of them hate every aspect of the government. In that way, they are farrrrrr more to the RIGHT of the Tea Party. They've taking the concept of small government and put it on steroids. They want government out of EVERYTHING. They don't want small government. They want NO government"

Who said that, Richard?

They've said nothing as a group. That's my whole point.

After listening to the protesters it’s obvious that they are upset, as is just about everyone else, by some or all of the following that occurred during eight years of Bush and two years of Obama, This is not complete, nor in any particular order: 2+ trillion dollars spent on a phony war and several questionable international police actions plus loss of life. A cheap stunt tax break for the top income brackets that surprised even the GOP that it ever passed is not rescinded as promised. Conservative estimates of 2.5 million mfg. jobs and 850K professional service and IT jobs intentionally shipped offshore in the last ten years by US companies who adjust their P&Ls; by firing Americans. A health care system that maintains profit margins by cleansing their rolls of people who are in the most need of care…then receives a sweetheart drug program handout that ensures hundreds of billions in excessive profits to pharmaceutical companies. And arguably the largest financial crime in the history of the world is perpetrated by our banks and Wall Street. The result is that they are made whole with your tax dollars and then they sit on the cash except for the payouts of record bonuses with accompanying news stories about the purchase of yachts, personal jets, and second and third homes in the Hamptons, etc. In the string section the Supreme court tightens the noose with rulings (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission) allowing corporations (people) to spend unlimited cash (free speech) to influence political agendas and legislative outcomes and on and on…

The world watches us like kids around a struggling turtle turned on it's back.

Government has become almost irrelevant. Special interests are the problem. There is growing anxiety that it may be too late to get the toothpaste back into the tube.

Great Cynic's take on what OWS wants:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT8YW3cIAKg&feature;=relmfu

Essential short read on how we all got here:
Boomerang by Michael Lewis

Still no word on what to do about it.

There are millions of African that would gladly trade places with the 99%. Bet there aren't to many 99% willing to make that trade. Perspective is everything.

jmrolls - I tend to be in tune with your list of grievances.

Many years ago when Japan had an economic melt-down, I read somewhere that as a 'rule of thumb' in Japan at that time (don't know about now), no company executive earned more than 5 to 7 times what the lowest paid worker in the company earned. In the U.S., at that time, the executives were making an average of 110 times what their lowest paid worker earned.

Around that same time, I began to perceive what I felt was a subtle change in focus on the part of U.S. companies; from catering to their customer as their No. 1 priority, to catering to their stockholders as the top priority. Even though I was a stockholder, I was not pleased about that.

Those two items have been stuck in my craw all these years since.

Henry Blodget did a nice graphic piece on what's wrong with the economy:

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1

So Calvert, your feelings about the inequity of things is perfectly aligned with the data.

If you're not among the 1% (like say, Rupurt Murdoch is) then doesn't that make you among the 99%?

I'm not part of the 1% or the 99%. There's something wrong with their math.

Here's more of what the 1% at Goldman Sachs is up to. Buying a city's infrastructure.

America for Sale: Is Goldman Sachs Buying Your City?

http://www.dylanratigan.com/2011/06/16/america-for-sale-is-goldman-sachs-buying-your-city/

Prices for Privatized Parking Meters go through the roof:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/43415983#43415983

Privatized Road Tolls go through the roof in Indiana:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/43432085#43432085

Seattle and WSDOT had better not be this stupid.

ST page A14 today: the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey complain toll cheats are costing them $14 million of necessary "steep toll increases that the Port Authority says it needs to finish building the new World Trade Center."

Look East for how a city's infrastructure justifies and pays for redevelopment (maybe)—motto: one pocket's as good as any another, just as long as it is someone else's.

The Tea Party events are about as organic as the Republican Party.

If Roger Valdez is an activist, the meaning of that word must have changed quite a bit.

Yawn

Here's the official web page for Occupy Wall Street in NYC. They are basically against greed and corruption. Is anyone not in sync with this goal in politics?

http://occupywallst.org/

Occupy Wall Street is leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.

all these comparisons with the Tea Party, tend to miss several points. The Tea Party was against any bail outs, for any reasons. The Tea Party fervently believed that Wall Street banks and brokerage houses should fail. The auto company bail outs were also a no no to the Tea Party. Essentially, the Tea Party seemed to be against money spent to assist any institution. I would have LOVED it if all the banks and brokerage houses collapsed, but I am not sure the public would have. In this day and age, citizens are VERY connected to Wall Street, whether they want to be or not, ie: personal and business checking accounts, lines of credit, savings, mortgages, stocks, mutual funds, IRA's and 401K's. Because of this connection, people can only HOPE that Wall Street has their interests; unfortunately they do not. There are 2 basic ways to reform a corrupt system, left it fail and collapse, or write laws and regulations designed to keep these corporate clowns in tow. Our country chose the latter. Politicians are involved only in that they write the laws that protect us; or are supposed to, or benefit the corporations, as they often do. If we don't like certain politicians, we can vote them out. We cannot as easily vote out CEO's or other executives. Voting out politicians is not as easy as it sounds either. Both parties have contributed to the laws allowing this financial mess and it will probably take the rest of this decade to sort out, no matter who runs the House, Senate or sits in the White House. OWS firmly believes that since Wall Street was bailed out, there is a specific responsibility to help those with mortgages, lending capital for small business and moving forward with increased employment. When these are not done, movements like OWS occur because the public is sick and tired of businesses sitting on their cash and doing nothing. Wall Street, by nature, does NOT have the public's interest at all. Doubt me? For all of you who have retirement accounts of any kind check out the current value of those accounts, pay special attention to the fees assessed to your account for managing it. See for yourselves how much you have been charged for fees, etc. Wall Street LOVES fees, remember WAMU? Don't forget for 1 minute that we are all at the mercy of Wall Street. That is why I applaud and salute those protesters. We deserve a better society then the one being given us now.