Yes, they're called the 99%.

Some people think 99% of people are idiots.

HAHA!!!

Your presence would seem to confirm it.

Some people think other people's presence confirms that 99% of yet more people are idiots.

What's missing from Mr. Lutz' article is the list of demands. If you read them (as I did) you will see that this is more than a protest about the haves and have-nots. It's a socialist/green/wacked out agenda - the kind you'd more likely see from a group of naive young college students. The intent is "utopia" where everyone is the same, banks don't exist and we all operate on wind and solar energy. Go read the list - you'll be lucky if you don't die laughing.

"*These grievances are not all-inclusive."

http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/first_official_statement_from_the_occupy_wall_street_movement/

And it worked..when the people have a voice and they have to tough it out as the people in the 60's did. I wish I could participate with my fellow citizens of San Diego, unfortunately I cannot due to my husband having a liver transplant in Portland OR. I want to let everyone know who is participating my thoughts are there and good luck and stick it out..we have to win this war on greed.

Upon further review the list has shrunk to one.

They want a $20 per hour minimum wage, racial and gender equality, immediate forgiveness of all debts, open borders, free college and abolishment of private insurance companies?
I understand the anger, but they need a little focus and an economics class or two.

Ooo, ooo, I can't wait to display my "do away with the EPA" sign!

Don't bring your ID? What if you get smacked by a trolley? How they gonna call your momma?

Try anything else for a change. You already know capitalism sucks.

Here we go with the red baiting. How about good ol' capitalism with some good ol' regulation. You can't put the foxes in charge of the henhouse.

People who regulate are unlike people who produce.

What system do you choose, tom c? Communism? I will look for your sign.

Yeah, people who don't work for a living can do these things anytime they want.

AMEN!!!

Funny, Scott!

For those who haven't heard the protests, here's a summary of their "content":

"Hey, man!--like, down with, like, korporate Amerika, man. Like, we should be, like, totally giving power to, like, the ordinary people, man. And also, like, green power, man! Like, we need to be sustainable 'cause, like, the dudes in power--Republicans!--are, like total (bleep), man. They don't want anything green and they don't. like, give a (bleep), man. They're, like, total fascists, man. They're all goin,' "We just want to screw everybody over for like major bucks, man, so, like, get out of our way, man." So, like, I'm all goin' to them, (bleep) you, dudes!"

Corporate welfare and bailouts thrive in an environment of unregulated capitalism. TARP = ARRA

I agree with you somewhat on this one. Corporate welfare such as redevelopment should be done away with completely. The one good thing Gov Jerry Brown tried to do was dissolve all the redevelopment agencies. They didn't let him do it though. It seems he's a lot more conservative than the legislature.

Who do think is pulling the strings of government?? Are you and your ilk that naive?? We should all be occupying Wall Street. Tea baggers, liberals, everyone. This is good example of how they manipulate us into fighting each other rather than the real enemy. I hope this protest spreads.

So, Wall st is pulling Obama's strings on "green" legislation. Got it. But you and you ill ilk aren't mad at him? I don't get it.

It's ilk season.

Free market capitalism is bad. Phony capitalists get to define capitalism. Banks are unregulated. This isn't capitalism.

The "will of the people" can be just as fickle as the will of the "elite" but it does have the virtue of being more democratic which, after all, is what we still teach our schoolchildren we're suppose to be as a 'democratic' Republic.

Good first step to restore some fairness to the system but remember that man's is a restless and creative bugger who would soon bastardize whatever system is in operation to create a system that would advance his interests at the expense of others. "Eternal vigilance" is what is needed to keep in check our worst impulses as flawed human beings, whether we express these impulses individually or within a governmental system.

We should take money out of politics. Give us your money and we will fix politics.

Things you've learned--taking the money out of politics does not presume giving it to "us" who will fix politics. Who is the 'us'? Things you've concocted.

We can publicly finance campaigns without money.

Public financing? Oh yeah, stick it to the taxpayers!

I wish I could be among the protest. Unfortunately I have to be with my husband in Portland Or. He will be having a liver transplant. I think it is time for San Diego citizens to stand up and shout for their future. These greedy CEO's has taken enough from the citizens. Its time to show the world that San Diego, CA will not let it happen. Good luck to you all and be safe. Its time!!

Now give the Tea Party that same leeway and benefit of the doubt and we have a starting point.
Everyone who is awake is POed, it is the solutions that differ.

@Dragonslayer: Tea Partiers or "Tea baggers" (don't you think that silly to use that term?), don't hate government. They want limited government that is less intrusive in people's live. They want the preservation of individual liberties and free market CAPITALISM (woo hoo!) that are inherent in a society with limited government. Do you honestly think that Tea Party people ever wanted or would want a bailout? No. Just because Bush signed that bailout or the Speaker wanted it -- that doesn't mean Tea Party people supported it. Where would you get that idea?

The standard of poverty and cost of living that applies to Uganda should apply to San Diego.

It's not a matter of the amount of money, it is a matter of what the money is worth in goods and services.

Chelsea, think about it for a minute.
Let's leave aside " the cost of living level" to make it easier to understand and say you make the minimum wage $ 20/hr or $100/hr for that matter, to raise everyones standard of living.
It would only be a matter of time ( a very short time) until the cost of goods and services would rise to the same proportion as before.
For instance a dairy providing milk would have to pay it's workers an amount proportionate to their previous salary compared to the minimum wage. If the worker is making twice the minimum wage now he will want twice the minimum wage after the " change". Unless you really think he would be willing to accept what amounts to a 50% cut in pay that for " the common good".
And the feed suplier would have to raise his wages which raise the cost of the feed, which will raise the cost of the milk and so on and so on until a gallon of milk costs $180.
Right back where you started .

The SEC, like most regulating agencies, is in the pockets of those it is suppose to be regulating. That's one of the main problems with the system, whether its the SEC the FCC, the PUC or what have you. The lack of prosecution is because we have a Justice Department that is more political than it is judicial and is therefore an elaborate farce. The Attorney General (Holder) is a political hack who puts political considerations ahead of justice; he does not serve the cause of justice or Bush/Cheney would be in the docket and even Obama for his exercise of extra-legal powers in assassinating American citizens. The system is corrupt period! Andthe biggest corrupting influence is money.

The NYPD is macing young women for doing nothing more than exercising their First Amendment rights and you are worried about my rhetorical civility??

“Dissent is the highest form of patriotism.”
― Thomas Jefferson

In that the Thomas Jefferson quote is fake, it is much like self-proclaimed rhetorical civility.

dragonslayer, you have mistaken Thomas Jefferson for Howard Zinn.

This is not about class warfare.

This is class warfare.

Tom, i believe i have a small step in the right direction.Only individual US citizens with a valid SSI # can donate $500 to any candidate (number up for discussion). No foreign or corporate money allowed. No PAC money, no union money.

If our motives are pure, we can repeal the law of unintended consequences and give to each according to their needs.

LOL.

Ok so everybody gets paid the same no matter skill, knowledge, work ethic or intelligence?
Sounds great.....but would you stand for it? Are you so altruistic to accept being paid the same as a person less qualified or skillful or intelligent than yourself ?
How would you like to go to a doctor that was being paid the same as a nurse?
The solutions you are talking about are contrary to human nature.

Kevin, it doesn't sound like Chelsea is saying that everyone should get paid the same amount no matter what job they do. Corporations are paying MUCH less for jobs right now, although they are financially able to offer more. People have to take them because they are deperate. They are being taken advantage of.

Two questions:
What "fixes" to the system do you propose?
Specifically how do we distribute income more evenly?

Where did you get the idea that this group is related to the right wing of the republican party, whatever that is? The agenda of the Occupy Wall Street has nothing Republican about it. It is quite the opposite -- left-wing, socialist, extreme environmentalist, etc. I don't know where Republican (small government, individual freedom, free market capitalism) fits into your theory.

Heard a good NPR segment on the history of "class warfare" as a saying. The original quote is actually translated "class struggle," but when the book was reviewed detractors against Marxian ideology used the "class warfare" label to make it sound more militant and negative. It's stuck since. Just found that rather interesting...

I am fairly certain that Doug was referring to the term "Class Warfare" that has been thrown around by the Republicans a lot lately. He was not talking about the Occupy movement. Am I wrong?

Modern political discourse is too beholden to the antiquated ideas of dead white European males.

I understand that, Selina; but have you read the list of demands by the Occupy Wall Street group? That list has nothing to do with getting a fair shot. It's about bringing the top income earners down, not raising the lower end up.

Kelly, I read the demands from the website. (http://occupywallst.org/forum/proposed-list-of-demands-please-help-editadd-so-th/) I did not see anything in there about bringing down the top income earners. What I saw was a call for stronger Wall Street regulations, stricter bank regulations, not allowing coporations "personhood" status, and stronger lobbying regulations. The only thing I saw related to specific individual income earners was to have them pay more in taxes than what they do now. I think it is only fair that the tax cuts, which were supposed to be temporary, are allowed to expire.

Fari vagnari a pizzu

Let me write that down.............I'M taking things to an extreme..........got it.
Thanks

That seems to be the name of the game these days.

"Is the earth 5,000 years old and did man co-exist with dinoaurs??"

If you are espousing the qualities of the manifesto , yes you are extreme.

I don't have the time or space to explain it precisely so I broke it down to that level.
But if you are talking about compensting people because of their needs instead of what they bring to the table it will never work.
It's been tried a couple of times and it ends up even more corrupt than the government sanctioned mess we have today.

Ann you are wrong to accuse this administration for the economic disaster we are now stuck with.
Try Factcheck.org or the CBO homepage instead of Fixed News.

Doug, it's not that simple. You can't lay this economy on President Bush and we can't put it on the current administration, either. There are a lot of factors that have contributed to the problem - bad loans that crushed the housing market and deeply wounded the banks; yes, wars that have cost a bundle; government spending gone berserk, etc. etc. The problems started years ago, and as educated as you are, you know that it's not just a president that is responsible for the country's spending. There's that thing called Congress. The spending problems of our government have been accelerating over the years, but it is THIS administration that made an exponential jump in our debt and deficit.

Blechhhh....I sure do get tired of people who berate the Tea Party. Tea Party people aren't your enemies. They want smaller government, reduced government spending, less infringement on personal rights, free market capitalism...How are those bad things?

Spending bills originate in the executive branch.. George Bush is so powerful that he was able to extend his tax cuts after he left office, but Barack Obama is so weak that a handful of fringy extremists hamstring his efforts to tax us out of a recession.. Fortunately we are only fighting five wars now..

Hey look Kevin, no hands! ;-)

@ Things I've Learned...no, spending bills actually originate in the House, then they go to the Senate for a vote or for amendments, reconciliations and what have you. Back and forth and back and forth till agreement is reached. Then on to the Executive for a signature or veto. President Bush was only as powerful as Congress allowed him to be. Same goes for President Obama.

Doug, care to comment on the effect of Clinton repealing the Glass- Steagall Act?
History doesn't end at 2001.

The guy with the slurpee concession?

way to lighten things up, Craig! Love that! (you were making that up, right???)

Thank you, Kelly.
And yes, that was an imaginative exercise to plumb the "depths" of the typical protester's "mind" (...using the word "mind" in the loosest possible sense).

We're in the worste economic downturn since the Great Depression, unemployment is at record levels with no relief in sight, the Fed indicates we are likely headed for a double dip, and people are struggling to just meake ends meet. Finally, this begins to manifest itself in the form of open protest on the streets. And you sit in your cozy little bookstore in the burbs and belittle those who actually have the gumption to get out there?? Unbelieveable. And I voted for you for mayor.

Totally uncool, Dragondude!
'Cause, like, when you dis on people like that, it, like, messes up your Chakras; or, like, I mean, your Chi; or, well...whatever eclectic Eastern thing it is that get's screwed up when you're uncool.
Energy, Dude!--I swear that's, like, all we need to defeat Korporate Amerika, man. Don't deplete our energy, Bra! Be cool. Hang loose.

@dragonslayer: There is no sense in responding to someone's mockery and disdain. Clearly Mr. Maxwell is not willing to look at the other side, he just enjoys stirring the pot. He has it in his mind that there is one particular "type" at these rallies. He is wrong.

There are many types at these rallies. More photos and video uploaded above.

Warning: guttural Saxon spoken here.

Selina's bummin' me out, man!--gonna' have to go play my bongo drums at the protest to restore my karmic equilibrium.

Don't be intimidated by the "dragon" Maxwell. Yeah, the lefties love the poor, and there inlies the problem. They are so fond of the poor they want EVERYONE to be poor, except themselves, of course. It's a "fiendish fondness", an "evil empathy" that gives them that "ultimate power in the universe" they so crave.

@ Jay'me: That's the question on many minds, "What is this protest about ?" Do you know?

Serra Mesa is a suburb of San Clemente.

Jimmy Carter signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, aka the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 into law.

Who signed the repeal again ?
President Clinton must have had Gramm and Leach twisting an arm each.
Regretably I was a Republican briefly in the 90s. I don't know what came over me, oh oops I do....... it was Clinton.
Except for that period I have been a Libertarian an Independent and a decline to state. This Country has been run through the ringer by both sides and I find fault with both.
What happened to your speech about being " right down the middle" like all the others in the newsroom? That last comment reaks of partisanship. You always sounded like a liberal and nothing has changed.

This list sounds like communism on steroids. But of coarse the leaders will all be able to live the high life and have their own private lane on the freeway. What about actors that work at the old globe VS big star actors. There is about a 1000 to 1 difference in pay.

I want to start a movement that takes iPhones and big screen TV's from anybody on welfare.

Forgiveness of all debit? That means if you have ANY money in the bank you won't get it back. The money doesn't belong to the bankers, it belongs to the people who deposit it.

Consensus is elusive. From the NYCGA minutes:
"Let me address that: We have gotten 3 or 4 sleeping bags donations. We are trying to get the word to the people that we need sleeping bags. Let me repeat this is an emergency proposal. Because it’s COLD and it will get COLDER!
Stack for concerns- Is now open.

Roney: How will we maintain the higene of these sleeping bags?

The hygine of the bags is up to the people using them, but we are trying to organize laundry runs.

My concern is distributing these sleeping bags and then having people take them, so maybe there could be a system where these bags need to be returned every day..

We are discussing a similar system for distrubiting and keeping track of the sleeping bags.

POI: Coming medical a lot of them are sick. I don’t want any of you using the sleeping bag that I was sneezing in. I don’t think that’s a good idea.

We are also discussing assigning sleeping bags but we need to figure out a way to do that.

POI: This is a time for concerns. To address concerns, not to discuss them.

Concerns are held by the group and addressed by the group.

Concerning the point that our friend from medical brought up… Just kidding. He will speak to them later.

Any more concerns???

(cont.)

"Justin: I’m concerned that buyig new sleeping bags is against the principles that people came here for.
WHY?
Justine: I was under the understanding that there is an anti capotalist part of this movement and consumptions when we feel emergency need is how we deal with issues in capoticalsm. Should we address issues the same way.
ON that point, it has been brought up before. On the point of consumption. It will be next to impossible for us to operate without buying some of the things we need. We try to balance our principles with our need without making it too difficult.

I’ve been visiting salvation armys stores and buying as many sleeping bags as I can. So I believe it is possiblefor us to get our supplies from charity stores and the like.
He believes people here now might get sick or more sick if they are subjected to the cold. He would like to see them move on.
Are we okay with closing stack? Which means we hear the four concerns that are left and then see if we can reach concensus if we don’t have blocks.
STACK IS CLOSED
(cont.)

I think it’s really important that we get the sleeping bags. As far as how to distribute them I think that can be figured out after we get them. As far as buying material and making them ourselves making a sleeping bag a warm onefor under 20 bucks is gonna be real difficult.
If numonia sets in, the movement is dead.
Retailer: I buy things whole sale. We’ve got to buy these whole sale. Maybe not the first wave, but we have 80 cities to think about. And there are ways we can get them very cheaply. So I would like to start working on that.
STACK IS FINISHED.
Do we have any blocks?
There is a block.
Chris: Blankets are cheaper than sleeping bags.
I want to clarify what a block is. A block is if you have a serious ethical concern with the proposal (or a factual check) remember, if we reach concensus despite your block you are choosing to walk away.

Concensus does not exist if there is a block.

I’m sorry, we use a system of modified concensus. So it is a 9/10 majority.

Don't buy the sleeping bags. You'll be sleeping on the ground a lot when capitalism is dead, get used to it.

So what DO they want, specifically?

http://snipurl.com/whattayagot

@ Things...funny little video snippet there!

Branch Dravidians did not go home. They died in a fire blaze of unimaginable pain and agony caused by ATF agents using incendiary devices. ATF denies using the devices but video footage shot by the press clearly shows the blue jacket "ATF" agent launching incendiary devices.
I know it is hard to believe but Gov't officials often do not tell the truth.

That's because the Branch Davidians were already home. Just think of the trouble we'd be in if we so much as tossed a fircracked into this crowd.

Jim, what do you care if these people are protesting against Wall Street? Does it somehow affect your personal life or your business? Is your livelihood being threatened? Why on earth would you support the those who received tax payer funded bailouts but still continue to practice business as usual? Why would you support multi-million dollar corporations paying less than 3% in taxes, just so they can ship half their jobs overseas? I just don't understand the hostility some people feel towards the protesters.

We only have Two Minutes' Hate. Let's focus on the 1% of the population that only pays 25% of all federal tax receipts. They need to pay more so the half of us who pay no income tax can get some relief.

@Selina - we all, even you, support these corporations, whether you like it or not. Every time you put gas in your car, turn on a light in your house, buy a box of laundry detergent, read these posts on your computer, make a call on your cellphone, eat an Oreo cookie...you are supporting the corporations you dislike. Whatever little they pay in taxes, and even the small percentages are a lot, you have to remember that they employ thousands of people. Whether they pay or don't pay (see GE) federal income taxes, they certainly do pay plenty of employee payroll taxes and benefits. And whatever profits they make -- yes, they may seem obscene - they are not taking money out of your pocket. It's not like you have a pie with limited servings and the big corporations are taking your piece from you.

About the bailouts - the problem there is not so much with the corporations who took the bailouts. The problem is the government that was and is willing to take taxpayer money to bail the companies out.

Back to the tax question...do some of the corporations pay little or no taxes just because they want to? No, it's because they can. Because the federal government has written a tax code that enables corporations to pay whatever they do or don't pay. Do you see that?

Kelly, first of all, I don't dislike corporations. I am not so naive as to believe that our whole economic system could survive without them. I dislike corporate GREED. Yes they pay employee taxes... the same ones the employees pay. Furthermore, I don't take issue with making a giant profit. Good for them. But they do not make profits by themselves. It is American soil, infrastructure, roads, etc., that allow them to do business here. Secondly, I agree with you that it is government that allows the corporations to get away with robbery. And so you have arrived at, in my opinion, the heart of the whole movement. A lot of Americans are willing to publicly voice their displeasure over current policies. Instead of referring to the protestors as a mob, thugs, or goons, they should instead realize that people are tired of the inequality. That it has long been time to do something about it.

We shouldn't belittle the protestors with snide descriptions. They are upset about the bailouts, tired of crony capitalism, want to reform the tax code and are mostly white. How 'bout a nice neutral name, like "Tea-baggers"?

Selina, I would be interested in knowing what you define as greed. And I'm also interested in knowing what you'd like these corporations to do to make them appear less greedy.

I'm not being snarky. I would like to hear your opinion. The problem with blogs and emails is that you can't see the person's face, can't hear the intonations in the voice. Words on a page can come across with an unintended tone. But I most sincerely -- because I believe we are in very different philosophical camps -- would like to hear what you have to say. You seem very much in earnest with your beliefs.

Here is how I define corporate greed: companies that pay little (or no) taxes, pay their workers the minimum they can get away with (or force them to work twice as hard so as not to hire more employees) all while paying millions to lobby government. For example, GE paid $0 federal in taxes in 2009 but managed to spend 2.03 million for campaigns. BofA and Exxon both paid $0 federal taxes in 2009 and combined, spent over 4 million in campaign contributions. They are trying to buy the government that will allow them to continue the way they do business. However, an average married American couple whose combined income is $70,000 is put into the 25% tax bracket. I don't understand how this is fair. The tax breaks for the corporations were supposed to be an incentive to create jobs and economic growth. All three corporations I named above choose to send jobs overseas. That is greed to me. They cannot and won't self regulate themselves and will always take advantage of every loophole they find.

The average American couple making $70,000 will pay a 25% marginal tax rate on ALL their gross income. They have no deductions, personal exemptions or credits.

Corporate income is static so one year can't be cherry-picked in a misleading fashion. For example Exxon did not pay federal income taxes of $4.5 billion in 2007, $3.4 billion in 2008, or $1.3 billion in 2010. They should hire more workers in the United States where drilling and refining opportunities are unlimited by federal regulations.

Our 1st Amendment right to petition the government should be limited by the way we exercise our right of free association, and proportional to how much we pay in taxes.

"rock ribbed Republican" is a neutral, objective and meaningfully descriptive term when applied to a group that includes a former Democrat (Gramm) and one (Leach) who, "according to Wikipedia":
"authored legislation on a range of issues including: the creation of an international AIDS Trust Fund, debt relief for the world’s poorest countries, authorization of an International Monetary Fund quota increase, making the Peace Corps an independent federal agency, [and] requiring the federal government to use soy ink."

Leach, again "according to Wikipedia", chaired the Ripon Society, the "first major Republican organization to support passage of the Civil Rights Act", normalizing relations with China and ending the draft.

Leach ("per Wikipedia") supported a comprehensive test ban and nuclear freeze, full funding of the U.N., abortion rights, stem cell research, public financing and opposed the second Iraq War.

The mineral content of Bliley's ribs is unknown.

A biased observer would have answered Kevin's question about Clinton signing the repeal of Glass-Steagall by pointing out that most serious economists on both sides of the aisle believe that this lessened the severity of the economic downturn.

Only the purest middle-of-the-road non-partisan could so skillfully deflect that question into an impugnment solely of the Republican sponsors, based on their ability to time-travel back to 1980 and impersonate William Proxmire.

Of course, Wikipedia could be wrong..

Bill Lockyer was one of the Democrats who made things worse..

I would like to see term limits for ALL elected offices. Government should not be a career choice.

Garnering support is part of the selection process, whether it's monetary contributions or the sweat contributions of volunteers putting up campaign signs. I don't believe in any limits on what people can contribute as long as they are American citizens and not convicted felons. I don't believe in term limits either. If the people don't like a politician they can vote him or her out.

Nicely done.
The fact that the candidate with the most money usually wins has always fascinated me.
How is it that there is a segment of the electorate that would be swayed by the amount of signs or a stilted and manipulating TV commercial ?
The positive thing about blogs like this is that you realize that other people are involved enough to have an opinion. We seldom totally agree but at least we are dealing with people who have there head in the game.
I would much rather someone armed himself with information and hold an opinion that I don't agree with than a person who votes because of the last campaign sign he had seen.

Hilarious.

Can't protest simply be the point in and of itself? "I've had enough and am not going to take it anymore!" style. I think those that nitpick and demand some focused, small solution are missing the point that there's a lot to protest about and it must be done on a general level that all can agree on, if the people's voice is going to mean anything. Also- I don't really think the majority of protesters out there are "crapping on police cars and trashing the city with used condoms." I saw none of that in San Diego. Both of these methods of dissecting the protests and casting them in a negative light seem like an immediate reaction by those that can't wrap their minds around what's going on, and might be a bit frightened by it. My two cents.

Either you've forgottten about 29' or you're not old enough to remember it. That was before credit cards and there were many more in the streets then than there are now.
With all the abuse surrounding the business end of credit cards they still allow most of the public to live well above their means. I went hungry many times because there was no such thing as credit. How many of us would have homes if we had to come up with the cash?

My point exactly. Now do you appreciate the valuable service bankers provide? Do you still want to put them out of business? If a massive number of people don't pay back their loans that's exatly what will happen.

As an American you do have the power to change things. If you "stick it" to the bankers hard enough they will go away. And you will be paying cash for everything.

Jim, because you hate them, do not do business with the IRS anymore? If so, please tell me how to get around them.

That's my point. You don't HAVE to do business with any private corporation. But government is a whole different matter. The IRS is the outfit with the heaviest boot on the neck of the common man. Why are the protesters not protesting the IRS?

Actually, I have the answer to my own question. The protesters need the IRS to take our money away from us to give to them. Re-distribution of wealth, AKA grand larceny.

I have been around many years and have never had an IRS audit or any interaction with them. They are charged with collecting taxes. Do they do it illegally and collect it based on poor or biased judgement? Do they have the power to deviate from the law? I know some people who hate the IRS, but it's usually because they were caught not paying their just dues.
Please enlighten me Why do you hate them?.

It is interesting that you would quote a collaborator of Karl Marx. And, correct me if I am wrong, the quote was taken from his writings about early Christianity. So either way, I really don't see the correlation.

Why Orwell and Engels? Only to show that observations of left's nuttiness are not the sole domain of conservatives. The quote is taken from Engels' "On the History of Early Christianity." But he is referring to the alienated working class of his day who, according to him had (like the early Christians) "come to the end of their tether with..the official world" (and thus their attractions to Utopian quackery).
The Orwell quote is from The Road to Wigan Pier (which, by the way, I highly recommend.)

You can't judge a book by its cover. (or title)

Good points, Kevin (...and Dennis!).
Totalitarian governments weren't picky about who they liquidated. Out of the eleven million people Hitler slaughtered in the camps, six million were Jews. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc., murdered many more poor than rich.

Those words could only be spoken by a true anti-humanist.

I know.

Not true. Where did those statistics come from?

87.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

The purpose of education, as I understand, is to improve one's material quality of life. If 99% of young educated people can't repay their student loans I'd say the education system has failed them, badly
And, you'd be surprised how fast money stacks up when you don't waste it. And, a blue-collar salary goes a long way with no rent or mortgage payment.
Observe the 1% and take note. Then try it yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42qg-sdcB2I

I'll buy them hating Obama, but the EPA ?
I need some back up on that one.

The protesters themselves claim to be the 99%. And one of their chief complaints is their inability to repay student loans. They wouldn't lie, would they?

The two fellas I described earlier really are the unique 1%. Very few have the discipine and patience to plan ahead and save, something the education system can't seem to teach anyone.

Thanks for your opinion.
My hobby is casting pearls to swine.

People who cite Ayn Rand have no argument. Ayn Rand was opposed to corporations buying influence just like I am.

TIL, it's obvious that some here have never read her.
He, like most of her detractors, operate on hearsay.

“I swear-by my life and my love of it-that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”

This is her "selfishness". You put your own wellbeing first. However, you should not take away another's wellbeing just to further your own, nor should anyone take away your wellbeing to further their own. Selfishness, Rand-style, is not the same as the common use. She meant it as helping yourself to flourish, knowing that others will be able to flourish with you, as opposed to taking what you want, to hell with everyone else. Quite the opposite of tunnel vision, I think.

Recapitulation is assent.

The IRS is the government monopoly that has half my money before I even get my paycheck. Why are you not bashing the IRS? Are you afraid of them? The Kochs can't do anything to you no matter what you call them. But the IRS can make your life miserable, if you so much as P them off.

As for the protesters, I think they are a bunch of losers, but not by fault of their own. They have been misled by the likes of Mr. Comeau, Mr. Lutz and others.
I am trying to point out an alternative way for them and others to succeed. We all like "alternatives", dont we? Well, working and saving is a proven way to succeed. The biggest obstacle to saving is the IRS who takes half your money right off the top.
Many have used education to become successful, and that's great! But where education doesn't work there are many other ways to go.

The only place I hear about the Koch brothers is on MSNBC, usually portrayed as public enemy #1.

People cannot entertain two thoughts at the same time. Extreme conservatives should not focus on OWS.
(SF 11:50am on Wednesday, October 5, 2011:
"If you really want to know why this movement has captured the imagination of people all over the country, then you should visit this website:
http://wearethe99percent.tumblr.com
These are real people - with real stories - that just want a fair shot of getting their piece of the American Dream.")

The billionaire Koch brothers, whose Dutch immigrant grandfather was a printer's apprentice, are hardly representative of the American Dream. Let's talk about how a foreign subsidiary sold oil equipment to Iran in compliance with US law. The Kochs did not later ban all affiliates from dealing with Iran.

They also did not discover the bribery on their own and fire the guilty employees, paying severance under European law.

The Kochs haven't won over 400 environmental awards since Barack Obama took office. Their 2005 purchase of Georgia-Pacific (which is not the world's largest recycler of wastepaper) makes them responsible for claims that were waived in 1997, others that were dismissed from court in 2011, and yet more that the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality found to be completely without merit.

We should not call people who want to take rich people's money "socialists." When the Khmer run out of one-percenters, other people also have money.

Do not use metonymy.