Occupy Wall Street finds money brings problems too

Comments (44)
thomasvesely wrote:

great big positive news !!

the real deal.!!

the people care!!

Nov 02, 2011 7:32am EDT  --  Report as abuse
thomasvesely wrote:

half a mill. to fight wall st. brave, admirable.

Nov 02, 2011 7:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
GA_Chris wrote:

$0.5MM?? That’s about what a good lunch entertaining a few corrupt politicians costs…

Nov 02, 2011 8:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whys wrote:

Today Occupy Oakland will have city wide general strike and march on the port in an effort to shut it down for the day. Show your support!

Nov 02, 2011 8:43am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Curly wrote:

OWS should run the stats on the BILLIONAIRES to find which party they belong to. It is my opinion from the little research that I have done that it will be found that most of the billionaires will be democrats and/or support democrats primarily. The same is true in congress, the democrats control more of the personal wealth than the republicans. Which punches a hole in the idea that the democrats are ‘just like us’.
This is funny because if one listens to the media it is the republicans who have gotten the most out of the Wall Street bailouts. Maybe this why more democrats supported the bailouts than the republicans have.

Nov 02, 2011 9:13am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Active0ldLady wrote:

Given how many people are unemployed and very needy at this point in time, I find it sad that people are so willing to donate to a group that has little direction, and virtually zero chance of effecting any change in policy, rather than helping people in need. This demonstrates how divided we are as a people.

Nov 02, 2011 9:28am EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

I would advise purchasing a lot of tents, sleeping bags and blankets – it’s going to be a cold winter.

Nov 02, 2011 9:53am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Crash866 wrote:

Anti-greed movement gets money? If they were anti-greed wouldn’t they not want $…wait til the violence starts…Tick Tock

Nov 02, 2011 10:08am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JamVee wrote:

I applaude Curly (above) for bringing it up, because it is commonly accepted that Republicans have all the money. However, the fact is, the majority of the extremely rich in the US are Democrats. Even Michael Moore admits that he is part of the 1%.

Nov 02, 2011 10:18am EDT  --  Report as abuse
WonderVenus wrote:

Curly:
The top 20 richest Americans (identified in Forbes magazine), and their companies, contributed an impressive $22.6 million to state-level candidates and political committees from 2005 through 2008. As a group, they gave nearly half ($11.2 million) of all contributions to Republican candidates and committees, with ballot measure committees gaining an impressive 35 percent of the total.
http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=437
The 1% actually give more to republicans, but they still give tons to both parties.
You are stuck on Democrats and Republicans. OWS is NOT. They are NOT in support of the Democratic Party, they are NOT in support of the Republican party. 77% of those polled at the Occupy’s define themselves as being independant.
What we DO deal in is facts, and you haven’t presented any. please provide links to your claims. The idea that “more democrats supported the bailouts than the republicans have” isn’t true at all. You are only talking about the corrupted leaders, not the people. The government has been BOUGHT by the 1%. That means ALL!!! Please stop feeding into this Dems vs Repubs NONSENSE. They all are in it together! Wake UP! Come to GA!

Nov 02, 2011 10:20am EDT  --  Report as abuse
john1513 wrote:

oc·cu·py

Verb: Fill or take up a space or time.

Nov 02, 2011 11:13am EDT  --  Report as abuse
GLK wrote:

Maybe they should start an IPO. LOL!

Nov 02, 2011 11:29am EDT  --  Report as abuse
GLK wrote:

Maybe they should start an IPO. LOL!

Nov 02, 2011 11:29am EDT  --  Report as abuse
bckrd1 wrote:

And it is the democrats who want higher taxes which means they will be paying more. At least they are willing to tax themselves.

Nov 02, 2011 11:32am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Tom443 wrote:

@JamVee – That is correct. Although it is commonly accepted that Republicans doggedly protect the interests of the 1% at everyone elses expense.

Nov 02, 2011 11:50am EDT  --  Report as abuse

Curly and Jamvee – took five seconds to find an article which refutes your unfounded statement:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonbruner/2010/10/29/billionaires-favorite-politicians/

I would be interested in seeing the numbers which you believe support your presumption, however, though ultimately I think billionaires are more concerned with their their own financial interests than any cause on either side, which is der, uh, kind of the point of the protests.

People should realize that the 99%-1% thing is a dramatic demarcation to emphasize the point that US policies disproportionately benefit the wealthIEST few over the increasingly strapped many. The protesters are in the right place, because currently it is these interests which currently dictate policy, particularly financial policy, not the other way around as the right would have the naive believe. It is the corrupt individuals within the 1%, the political puppet-masters, big polluters, warmongers etc… among their ranks who get and deserve a huge heaping of OWS scorn.

Even if you are correct about Democratic representation among billionaires, wouldn’t those people be more admirable for putting their money where there mouth is, ala Warren Buffet? Wouldn’t that give them more credibility if they say the correct solution is the one which is less financially advantageous to me, rather than the only solution is the one that is most financially advantageous to me, as the Republican billionaires would say?

Nov 02, 2011 12:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
DrJJJJ wrote:

Whatever you do, don’t protest our 65,000 page tax code the favors the rich in every way! Also, the 50,000+ IRS we spend deficit dollars on to chase us for our taxes-ya that makes sense! Let’s stay the course and attack any flat/fair tax model that is exactly the radical change we need!!

Nov 02, 2011 12:10pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
chli wrote:

where do they put the money, in a BANK? they don’t have mattress!

Nov 02, 2011 12:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Please DrJJJJ, for your own good, reduce your intake of the Ron Paul Kool-Aid. A flat tax would be more of an unfair, unjust give-away to the rich at the expense of the poor, working and middle class than the current tax code at it’s worst.

You set off two of my biggest alarms – the frankly babyish “lots of pages” complaint as if every one of those pages are applicable to every circumstance and as if a big complicated society does not require big complicated governement.

Second, and I disagree with morons to the right and left here, we do not need “radical” change and no one wants that other than simpletons and idealogues. We need fundamental accountability and fairness to keep our system accessible, credible and productive on all levels. We need to preserve both the integrity and sustainability of both our free market capitalist economic system and our social safety net. It is not an either/or, false choice, whatever. “Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others”

I wish people would cool it with the hyperbole.

Nov 02, 2011 1:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Please DrJJJJ, for your own good, reduce your intake of the Ron Paul Kool-Aid. A flat tax would be more of an unfair, unjust give-away to the rich at the expense of the poor, working and middle class than the current tax code at it’s worst.

You set off two of my biggest alarms – the frankly babyish “lots of pages” complaint as if every one of those pages are applicable to every circumstance and as if a big complicated society does not require big complicated governement.

Second, and I disagree with morons to the right and left here, we do not need “radical” change and no one wants that other than simpletons and idealogues. We need fundamental accountability and fairness to keep our system accessible, credible and productive on all levels. We need to preserve both the integrity and sustainability of both our free market capitalist economic system and our social safety net. It is not an either/or, false choice, whatever. “Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others”

I wish people would cool it with the hyperbole.

Nov 02, 2011 1:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
LEEDAP wrote:

With their money and the communications equipment they bought, they need to get together and come up with some principals, a mission statement, and some goals. Right now the media is doing that for them.

I propose a campaign against “person-hood” for corporations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood) and it’s big brother, campaign finance reform (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_reform).

Nov 02, 2011 1:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bobo_9 wrote:

I’m a conservative (NOT a Republican mind you, a conservative) & although I agree we need major tax reform we do NOT need the “fair tax” as it’s currently advertised. Go through the actual calculations & you’ll see the main beneficiaries are those making over $500,000 per year. In the fact the more you make the more you save by $$$ millions.
Why do you think so many wealthy people are pushing it ?? Because they’re the ones who make out like bandits.

Nov 02, 2011 1:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ConradU812 wrote:

“–choosing a bank that shares the movement’s philosophy–”

LOL! I’ve yet to hear their philosophy! Unless to reiterate that they believe they should have more money because someone else is rich…..

Nov 02, 2011 1:35pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Start a NEW BANK!

Occupy Bank

Nov 02, 2011 1:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

“choosing a bank that shares the movement’s philosophy”

Start a new Bank for the people

Occupy Bank

Nov 02, 2011 1:57pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SparkyP wrote:

Sooo… Have they hired any lobbyists yet?

Nov 02, 2011 3:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ElliottInIA wrote:

Uh oh, I don’t think they’re in the 99% anymore.
They might have to start protesting against themselves!

Nov 02, 2011 3:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Ted123 wrote:

It the banks are not provinding a good standard banking services for the Public, then a Goverment option should be sought for. It’s a DMV service, Car insurance, Telephone lifeline, they are necessary utilities for the public. SOme Banks/ credit cards companies / industry are not trust worthy at best.

Nov 02, 2011 3:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
UnPartisan wrote:

53% of Americans pay federal income taxes. 47% pay no federal income taxes. The tax code favors the poor and lower middle class, the bottom 47%, not the top 1%. To say otherwise shows the ignorance of the covetous entitlement generation.

Nov 02, 2011 4:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
MatthewBrown wrote:

ElliotinIA….before you make an idiotic comment like ‘That trucks red daddy, its on fire!’ how about doing some math. Lets assume there’s only 500 people at OWS, that’s 1000 dollars a person. now subtract the 40,000ish they’ve spent already. That’s 920 per person. Now because they no longer have generators for heat or food, lets assume they have to spend 20 dollars a day for food, shelter or supplies to stay warm, and maybe transit money/bribes to use bathrooms in the area.(That’s a very conservative estimate based on Chicago prices, which are probably higher in New York). That’s 46 days right now every person there can afford to feed themselves. Now if everyone just took their 920 dollars and left to ‘be better off’ than they were before. That couldn’t even cover a months rent on an apartment(except maybe a studio) in Chicago, let alone how far it would carry you in New York. Now, have you ever had to make living decisions based on a budget that small? Let alone one that has no guarantee of a steady continuing income? If not, I suggest you keep your mouth shut, and think before you speak.

Nov 02, 2011 4:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
paulsur wrote:

I can see it now, the OWS PAC, time to hire a high profile lobbyist to represent the groups interests in Washington. :)

Nov 02, 2011 4:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
UnPartisan wrote:

@MatthewBrown

Protesting is not a job. I would assume that the people that go there have their own money or source of income as they would not be given a paycheck for being their. So this $500,000 is not distributed to the people their. It is kept by the leaders of the movement, even though they say they have no hierarchy. I would suggest to you, that you should think before you speak.

Nov 02, 2011 4:40pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Jeffrey_Gross wrote:

I love how Dutro calls Ross and Burkle “vultures,” simply b/c they’re rich. Now, am I expected to believe that if Dutro has the chance someday to get rich, he’ll turn it down? Moreover, I have to wonder who’s created more economic value, Dutro, or Ross and Burkle. A movement based on stereotyping and over-simplification? Include me out.

@Chevalier: your “refutation” of the “number of pages” argument is even more unconvincing than the argument itself. Are you saying the tax code shouldn’t be simplified at all? “We’re a big complicated country therefore we need a big complicated tax code” – yeah, that’s real convincing. It’s not the # of pages per se, and it’s disingenuous to act as if it were. It’s an issue of transparency, accountability, and efficiency. “Make things as simple as possible, but not more so” — Einstein

Nov 02, 2011 5:26pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
MatthewBrown wrote:

@ UnPartisan One, with winter coming that money is going to be spent on insulation/food/possibly legal action to reclaim their generators. Which from what I’ve read of the new york firecode, they confiscated illegally as the gasoline and containers were the only thing I understood as governed by the firecode. Two, that money was given to them by people of their own choice, so quite frankly what gets done with it gets done. Its the same thing as a business investment in that sense. And three, yes of course people on top are in control of it, and they will use that money to feed protests, keep them in some rudimentary form of shelter to keep them warm, and purchase/maintain whatever equipment is necessary to continue enabling communication and public interaction. Which is why these people gave them the money in the first place. And on the topic of a hierarchy developing, good. A hierarchy needs to develop, with subgroups consolidating individual opinions and bridging them with others. A hierarchy needs to develop to give an organized public presence that someone will listen to for a complete message instead of confusing everyone by a thousand people shouting the same thing essentially. The only reason I broke it down like that was to illustrate the personal assets available to each person if you broke it down instead of making collective expenditures. Which is to say not a damn lot there at all.

Nov 02, 2011 6:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

You know they’re not eating take-out, no public toilets. And you know what a table in NYC costs.

Nov 02, 2011 7:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
USAPragmatist wrote:

@Unpartisan, please stop with the ’53% don’t pay federal income taxes’ stuff, your better then that. You know full well that they do not pay income taxes as they do not make enough money. They do pay FICA, sales, gas, state taxes, etc.

Nov 02, 2011 7:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Oswann wrote:

Jeffrey_Gross, vultures are those who purchase distressed assets and pick off the investors, employees, developing nation citizens, or whoever else is holding onto the “assets” real-world manifestation.
We do not call them vultures because they are rich; they are vultures because that is what they are. I suggest that you read a book, or if that takes to long for your obviously short attention span then just a newspaper every once in a while.

Nov 03, 2011 1:34am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Farmmm wrote:

Lol, even if it is a position on the finance committee, it’s pretty funny that a finance student is in the leadership of the Occupy Wall Street movement. What next, a feminist studies student becoming president of a men’s right organization? A bio-engineering student becoming chairperson of an anti-GMO group?

Nov 03, 2011 7:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Wackass wrote:

Seems as though people here in Calgary are about to give up this occy protest. Any others whom are close to giving up????

Nov 03, 2011 11:00am EDT  --  Report as abuse
be512 wrote:

Down with the banks and there goes America! Good job.. now we can be like Cuba, where everyone is equal!

Nov 03, 2011 11:02am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Jeffrey_Gross wrote:

@Oswann: ad hominem is certainly a very convincing form of argument. Oh wait, it’s not. So, you’re saying, “We do not call them vultures because they are rich; they are vultures because that is what they are.” In other words, “I’m right b/c I say I’m right.” Again, very convincing. Here’s a news flash for you: if a company is indeed “distressed” and can’t turn itself around, it’s better that someone try to turn it around – even at a cost – than for the thing to run aground and sink w/ all hands. Bad, as opposed to worse. People like you who go around screaming “vultures!” live in a black or white world w/ easily identifiable villains. Meanwhile the real world contains many shades of gray – you might want to look into it.

Nov 03, 2011 11:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
manfredkwg wrote:

-There are MORE than 600 people occupying wall street. 6 people are holding all the funds. It is ironic that less than 1% of the people in this movement are controlling 100% of their wealth. Can’t they at least set up a democratic vote system for use of the funds?
-All the $500,000+ of donations were made online with credit cards. The high interest rates from the credit card companies, and increased debt of the ‘real 99%’ donating, will further shift wealth and power to the 1%.
-Occupy Wall Street is costing the real 99% billions of dollars in taxes to pay officers to police the crowds… additionally they are directly costing small businesses near their camp grounds thousands a day as their regular patrons are now avoiding the area.
-Can’t the protesters take one day and actually discuss what they want to accomplish? Hundreds of people, but not one good idea. How can this this protest succeed/end if they have no goal? The only thing I can think of that hundreds of poor people camping in a park can attempt to accomplish is influence politicians and/or voters. Unfortunately, it appears politicians, voters, the 1%, and the real 99%, go about their lives like normal… slightly distracted, but without change.
-Can Occupy Wall Street at least move their money into a credit union so that they’re not completely hypocritical?
-I want to support this movement, but it is unorganized, non-creative, and non-productive. The movement is doing more bad than good as they try to help the imbalance of wealth in the US. Though, perhaps a younger generation is paying attention…

Nov 03, 2011 7:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Oswann wrote:

Gross, it is not a fallacious ad hominem to use established terminology, so I am going to assume that our references to Vulture Funds are not lost to you. Those who target them are vultures. Since we are doing logic, here’s one for you: If some Bs are As then is B an A?

Like I said, read something.

Nov 03, 2011 10:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Jeffrey_Gross wrote:

@Oswann. It’s disingenuous of you to base your comments on an ambiguity: namely whether “vulture” is a term of art or a pejorative. And telling people to read is indeed ad hominem, esp. when your own literacy is in doubt. You see what I did there? In any case, the fact remains that vultures create economic value, that sometimes the only options for a company are the bad one and the even-worse one, and that a vulture-driven turnaround is often better than a complete liquidation if there’s something to salvage.

Oh, and the answer to your would-be brain-teaser is “not enough data” or “maybe yes, maybe no.”

Nov 04, 2011 11:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.