What Occupy Wall Street Gets Wrong

Wealth creation is not a zero sum game.


If you want to know what motivates the people involved in Occupy Wall Street, you can get a good idea from Think Progress, a left-leaning website. It offers a map of the continental United States labeled, "If U.S. land were divided like U.S. wealth."

In this representation, 1 percent of the people hold title to most of the West and Great Plains area. Nine percent have a swath about the same size stretching from Minnesota south to Oklahoma and east to Maine. The other 90 percent of the population get only a narrow slice along the southern rim.

It's a stark, dramatic representation of the problem as OWS sees it. It's also a perfect illustration of the movement's economic misunderstandings.

Land, after all, is more or less fixed in supply. I can't obtain more of it unless someone gives up theirs. If the top 10 percent owned most of the land and barred everyone else from it, the rest would be pretty squeezed.

But wealth and income are not like land. To start with, they are not limited in supply—they can multiply many times over without end, and they have done just that. And, unlike with patches of soil, everyone can get more without anyone consigned to less.

There is not much more land in America than there was 50 years ago. But there is far more wealth. Since 1960, the total output of the U.S. economy, accounting for inflation, has more than quadrupled. Total physical assets have done likewise.

The conviction among OWS activists is that the rich have improved their lot by taking money from the not so rich—that wealth has been cruelly redistributed upward. What they overlook is that the real gains come from the creation of new wealth.

(Article continues below video.)

Steve Jobs did exceptionally well for himself, but he made the broad mass of consumers, here and abroad, better off in the process. Same for Sam Walton. What Oprah Winfrey created made her rich, but without her, those creations wouldn't have existed to entertain and gratify her audience.

Ten years ago, the richest person on Earth couldn't buy a device that does what the iPhone does. Today, anyone can get one free upon signing a two-year carrier contract. Entry-level cars are vastly better in amenities and reliability than your father's Cadillac decades ago.

Lifesaving and life-changing medicines and therapies once unknown are now commonplace. Food costs a fraction of what it once did. TV viewers used to have three channels to choose from. Now they have hundreds.

The wealthy are far better off than they used to be. But their improvement has not come at the expense of those down the economic ladder. Economists Bruce D. Meyer of the University of Chicago and James X. Sullivan of the University of Notre Dame find that over the past three decades, both the poor and the middle class have made substantial material progress.

"Median income and consumption both rose by more than 50 percent in real terms between 1980 and 2009," they reported last month in a paper for the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington. Those in the bottom tenth of the income ladder enjoyed comparable gains.

Not that everything is copacetic. The Great Recession has wrought havoc on the middle class and the poor—eliminating jobs, reducing income, and slashing the value of homes.

But if it's any consolation, the rich have seen their take shrink as well. Between 2007 and 2009, notes Steven Kaplan of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, the share of all income going to the richest 1 percent of Americans fell by a full quarter.

The miserable reality today is not that the many are doing worse because our capitalist system is set up to fleece them for the benefit of the few. They are doing worse because the economy went through a cataclysm from which it has yet to recover.

When the economy crashes, it's those with the least education, fewest options, and slimmest resources who suffer most. That's true, by the way, in non-capitalist societies as well as capitalist ones. In either, people who have done nothing wrong often suffer.

At moments like this, it's not surprising that many Americans would resent the wealthy and feel the urge to punish them. But the OWS demand for action against them is the equivalent of honking your horn when you're stuck in a traffic jam. It makes a lot of noise, without getting you anywhere.


NEXT: A Simple Knock Might Have Worked

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. They get a lot more than this wrong, but it’s a good start.

    Well done, Chapman. I’m sure the rest of reason will enjoy the story when they get a chance to read it.

    1. Thanks for the dose of numbing denium, Reason.

      1. If you have to have a State protect your property, it’s very likely because your property is illegitimate, and needs the force of naked aggression to take and keep.


        White Indian embraces property, legitimate property, as human have for hundreds of thousands of years.

        What’s the difference?

        ? Legitimate property is the stuff one needs to survive or personally enjoy, honored for hundreds of thousands of years by non-state society.
        ? Statist-enforced abstract ownership of Earth’s resources well beyond what an “owner” can personally use or enjoy.


        Libertarians justify property as the things and resources that are necessary to human survival. Examples are as follows:

        ? …if he must use and transform material natural objects in order to survive, then he has the right to own [property]… ~Murray Rothbard
        ? [Property] Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. ~Ayn Rand


        The bait-and-switch chicanery that capitalists engage in follows:

        ? BAIT: I need to own some things on earth as property that I need to survive or would enjoy personally.
        ? SWITCH: I need government to protect my “right” to own endless amounts of resources, well beyond what would ever be needed to survive or enjoy personally.


        ? How do the 1% need 40% of the wealth to survive (or enjoy life?)
        ? How do the 10% need 85% of the wealth to survive (or enjoy life?)

        [5] CONCLUSION

        When poverty is present, yet others own more resources than they could possibly need to survive or personally enjoy, one may properly define such “ownership” as Statist-enforced Privation Property.

        1. Sheeyat, someone left the blender on again!

          1. dumbstruck Libertarians, unable to address their own property definitions in their own canon.

            But that’s a really clever joke about the blender. You deserve two stars for third grade jokes.

            When do we move up the scale of intelligent conversation?

            1. Awwww, I think I hurt it widdle wind-up doll feelings.

            2. When do we move up the scale of intelligent conversation?

              Once you leave, or even better, kill yourself.

            3. Do you support the Endangered Species Act, since you aren’t allowed to kill, or move certain species’ habitats.

          2. See what happens when you decide to go out for a walk?

            1. …about property?

        2. Seeing that most of the wealth that the 1% have is stored in stocks and a fiat currency that is some how keeping natural resources out of the hands of the 99%?!?

        3. Pixelated diarrhea, banhammer, registration.

          You know the drill.

          C’mon, Reason. This is your property. Act like it. Exercise the fundamental property right – the right to exclude.

          1. The N’s have superior strength. Must accommodate.

        4. Shut up nigger of the world.

    2. So, pretty much everything above and below this line is shit. Hell, this too.

      Hope that helps.

  2. The miserable reality today is not that the many are doing worse because our capitalist system

    Our what system?

    1. What you see is what you get.

      Just like the disaster of communism.

      We must judge the disaster capitalism by what we observe, just like we must judge the disaster of communism by what we observe.

      But capitalist true believers don’t like that.

      Neither did communist true believers.

      1. A very quick analysis of a couple variations of agricultural city-STATISM are as follows:

        Officer, am I free to gambol about plain and forest, living a Non-State Society lifeway as humans did for 99% of time on earth?

        MARX: NO!
        MISES: NO!

        The Marx-Mises axis-of-evil.

        Gambol Lockdown. Aggression, applied even to day to restrict free people.

        1. Officer, am I free to gambol?

          Yes you are, but do you know how to gambol?

          You’ve got to know when to hold ’em
          Know when to fold ’em
          Know when to walk away
          Know when to run
          You never count your money
          When you’re sittin’ at the table
          There’ll be time enough for countin’
          When the dealin’s done

          1. …in the annuls of libertarian apologetics.

            But clever and thoughtful enough to say thank you.

        2. Under capitalism, man exploits man.
          Under communism, it’s just the opposite.
          John Kenneth Galbraith

          1. Under capitalism one man’s exploits benifit many men.
            Under communism one man’s exploits are stolen for the many.

          2. wwngd,
            rather than pabulum, please list the societal advances brought on by communism or any other collectivist economic form.

      2. Proof by redefinition.

        Simple fact is we do not have private ownership nor control of the means of production, therefore we don’t have capitalism.

        What we have is a hybrid of socialism (financial markets, education market) and fascism (almost everything else but health care, agriculture, and pharma is highly fascistic) and capitalism but that only really exists in the black markets. The tech market is probably the most capitalistic of the legal markets. They pay tax tribute but are largely unregulated.

        If you want to redefine capitalism and call fascism and socialism capitalism then what is fascism and socialism?

        The problem with arguing from this fallacy is that it just boils down to imbecilic name calling, because the words no longer have meaning.

        But on the plus side makes it perfectly suited to someone of your intellectual capacity.

  3. The Pacific Northwest? Yuck. The 1% can have it.

    1. I was thinking the same thing. The Gulf Coast is really quite nice for most of the year. Just make sure you have a portable generator and plenty of supplies come hurricane season!

  4. Well they actually are half right, if they want to make wealth a zero sum game, then it really can become a zero sum game.

    If they really do create the chaos they crave though, I would bet that they would be the first to lose out. Anyone who studies most revolutions, will quickly see a pattern, the most militant wings in the revolution in the end gain power, the Iranian, French and Russian revolution serve as best examples.

    1. Which is one of the reason I never got along with liberals, they tend to view ANY form of violence as an aberration that must be stamped down at all costs including such things as video games, sports, and competition. Even self defense is to be avoided (except for calling the cops). They have this view that everything will be just fine if we can find enough common ground and understanding.

      Sociologists, for the most, agree that the more “modern” a society gets the more liberal it becomes. There is disagreement over why this is but I’m of the opinion that liberals disgust at violence is the reason why they don’t do well in less advanced civilizations. If you don’t understand that power flows from the tip of the sword or barrel of a gun, then you’re always gonna get preyed upon by those who do. With a rare few exceptions, the group that is most willing to commit wanton slaughter is the group that’s gonna do best when a society collapses.

      Killing groups of people you don’t like, taking all their shit, and pretending it never happened is the way humans have been taking care of business since we crawled out of the caves. Those who ignore this tactic get confined to the history books (if their lucky). For all our “enlightenment” here in the US of A, we’ve been doing this since day one.

      And, no I’m not talking about the fucking Native Americans. I care as much about what happened to them as I care about the Hittites or the Prussians. What they had was gone long before my grandparents time; so adapt or die. What I am getting at is that we’ve had boots on the ground in foreign nations pretty much since George Washington was president. Tripoli, China, South America, and even Japan were places we campaigned in over trade. Commodore Perry was probably the most honest American in history when he told the Japanese “Let us do commerce here or we’ll massacre you and do business with the survivors”!

      It ain’t pretty and it ain’t right but it works pretty fucking well. Those who survive in any conflict are those who are willing to get the dirtiest.

      1. I care as much about what happened to them as I care about the Hittites or the Prussians.

        Frederick the Great was a pretty cool guy.

        1. Yes. Yes, he was. So was Crazy Horse. I meant the groups as a whole and not judged by individualistic merits.

          Otherwise, I would have stuck Caligula in there somewhere!

          1. Not sure I get the love for Frederick the Great. An enlightened despot is still a despot. Voltaire’s fawning on him is one of the great blots on his reputation.

          2. “Really, when I was a boy the Free World was anything that Phillip of Spain hadn’t gotten his paws on, and precious little there was of it too!”

            Tom Holt, FLYING DUTCH

        2. You know who else was pretty cool guy?

          1. Well, DUH!

            Everyone already knows how cool the Kool-Aid man is!

      2. …comes to reason.

        Just piss all over that Non-Aggression Principle.

        Ya really wanna do that?

        1. …and then say exactly what you did…

          …the fucking Native Americans. I care as much about what happened to them as I care about the Hittites or the Prussians.

          Again, do you really want to go there?


          You’re giving the fire-eater anarchists/revolutionists all the moral justification they need for violence.

          Your very own words.

          P.S. Don’t think they’re not watching here. MENE MENE TEKEL UPHARSIN (You know that story about discontents taking over a city, right? no?)

          1. SO? FUCKING? WHAT?

            Anarchists and Revolutionist are useful for getting the ball rolling; after that it’s a bullet in the back of the head and a ditch full of dye when it comes time to build the new country!

            Liberals should know all about that trick; its been in the Communist Manifesto Playbook since Comrade Lenin!

          2. P.S. Don’t think they’re not watching here. MENE MENE TEKEL UPHARSIN (You know that story about discontents taking over a city, right? no?)

            It never really works out too well for the discontents, either.

        2. Of course might makes right; didn’t you go to high school?

  5. When there are billions living in privation, even starving, the rich must need assuage their conscience.

    1. In China and India, more people have been lifted out of poverty because of capitalism and free market reforms than all the do-gooders such as yourself have ever achieved.

      Some raw numbers: 400 million in China and 300 million in India alone have been lifted out of poverty, because of free markets. They outnumber your “99%” by a million to one.

      1. Ignore it, NS. It’s not here for debate but attention.

        Don’t give it any.

        1. …is here to help you think and act in the correct political manner.

          Da, tovarisch, we must root out the enemies of the city-State.

          1. Can you debate the points, no, all you can do is childish prattle. Like I said the Chinese and Indians outnumber your “99%” by a million to one. Capitalism succeeded, you failed, play all the sophistry games you want, you are a loser, trying to make others losers is not going to make you a winner.

            1. So yeah, it “won.” Just like a rapist has “won” after using initiation of force.

              Nice to see how Libertarians are picking up on the Neo-Con “Might Makes Right” argument.

              For that is exactly how the agricultural city-State works: aggression and occupation.


              Libertarians love it as much as Dick Cheney.

              1. It won, because most people prefer the comforts that capitalism produces, not living like savages that you prefer.

                Trade is not aggression, the only one who supports aggression is you, preventing people from buy and producing what they want is aggression, forcing people not to grow crops is aggression, exactly what your savage world would require.

                Anyway if you can’t bang the females know, what exactly makes you think they will bang you in your savage world ? It is more likely you will die within the week in your Utopia.

                1. Opium Wars, anyone?

                  Ever read Confessions of an Economic Hitman?

                  1. We just wanted to get a little taste before the Chinese smoked it all away!

              2. For that is exactly how the agricultural city-State works: aggression and occupation.

                That’s exactly how human nature works–you just can’t bring yourself to accept it. The scale of the aggression makes little difference to the actual principle.

              3. Submitted to General Assembly for Consensus Vote:

                Stop responding to this stupid twat and ruining all the discussions by generating obscenely long thread of retarded crap that one has to scroll thorugh in order to get to something worth reading.

                Up-twinkles, anyone?

                1. *barf*

      2. Not “free markets” but “markets” in the case of China, and “freer” markets in India than before.

        1. Clearly China did not embrace completely free markets, but compared to what they had before, definitely much freer. One can call that free market reforms.

          1. …is FREE to be exploited now, even if it drives them to commit so many suicides they have to string up nets outside the windows.

            That’s the FREE in your market.

            1. You can give me some shocking story about a factory imprisoning its workers, for each one of those there are a thousand companies where workers eagerly work, making more money than their ancestors ever made, and they do it with pride and willingly. Your xenophobic insults against the Chinese only shows how little you know about China.

              1. Our system of private property in land forces landless men to work for others; to work in factories, stores, and offices, whether they like it or not. Wherever access to land is free, men work only to provide what they actually need or desire. Wherever the white man has come in contact with savage cultures this fact becomes apparent. There is for savages in their native state no such sharp distinction between “work” and “not working” as clocks and factory whistles have accustomed the white man to accept. They cannot be made to work regularly at repetitive tasks in which they have no direct interest except by some sort of duress. Disestablishment from land, like slavery, is a form of duress. The white man, where slavery cannot be practiced, has found that he must first disestablish the savages from their land before he can force them to work steadily for him. Once they are disestablished, they are in effect STARVED INTO WORKING for him and into working as he directs.

                ~Dr. Ralph Borsodi
                This Ugly Civilization (1929)

                You’ll know you’re among the people of your culture if the food is all owned, if it’s all under lock and key. But food was once no more owned than the air or the sunshine are owned. No other culture in history has ever put food under lock and key?and putting it there is the cornerstone of your economy, because if the food wasn’t under lock and key, WHO WOULD WORK?

                ~Daniel Quinn
                The Story of B
                “Food Under Lock and Key”

                1. In China the farmers owned land, they willingly moved to the cities and gave up their land. Nobody forced them, they were offered better oppurtunities, which most rational men would take.

                  Since you are neither rational and have ever suffered poverty, being brought up in a pampered household with coddling parents, you would never understand why a person would rather earn more money in the city and not want to remain living like a caveman.

                  1. Is this before or after they “willingly” made steel in woks for the Great Leap forward? Today the government owns ALL land in China. Has been that way since Mao took over.

                    1. The steel works lunacy lead to the death of millions, as farmers had to give up their farm work for steel furnaces, the ultimate display of command economy stupidity.

                      After Mao died, the economy was freed up, compared to what came before, there was infinitely more freedom and unsuprisingly no millions of people dying like under Mao. So yes, most people now in China willingly work where they work, unlike under the Mao days.

                      To openly claim that China is simply one big slave labour camp, is pure ignorance. Yes the CCP is vile and still dominant, but real enterprise and oppurtunities now exist more than ever before, the average Chinese person is no more communist than the average American.

                    2. Once the Communists take over it does not matter what the “average” person is, they are a slave. Don’t even talk about this if you are still ignorant of the fact that the government owns all real estate in China.

                    3. “The steel works lunacy lead to the death of millions, as farmers had to give up their farm work for steel furnaces, the ultimate display of command economy stupidity.”

                      According to Lieberthal, it was worse than this.
                      The farmers had to melt their farm tools to make the steel quotas.

                  2. Comforting, isn’t it? Did Uncle KOCH whisper it in your ear at bedtime, so you could sleep?

                    Time to wake up.

                    China’s forced urbanization puts land before people
                    By Zheng Yongnian
          , November 26, 2010

                    1. Hey moron, I suggest you read the articles before you link them here. I am sure you think that google makes you an expert, but if you actually read the stuff you post you would realise that you have zero idea of what is happening in China. This article is simply about corrupt local muncipalities, this does not imply that the millions of Chinese that left for the cities were forced to, the fact easily proven by the laws that the CCP is trying to pass to keep the people from flooding the cities.

                  3. Since you are neither rational and have ever suffered poverty, being brought up in a pampered household with coddling parents, you would never understand why a person would rather earn more money in the city and not want to remain living like a caveman.

                    NotSure. It’s not just the Chinese who will give up an impoverished life out in the fields for a better life in the city. Even people living in tribes will accept modernity if it’s offered.

                    1. impoverished life out in the fields

                      Out in the fields (agri in agriculture = fields) is indeed an impoverished life.

                    2. You of course have a magic totem pole that allows you to surf the net and act like a ten year old?

                2. You’re assumption that you would be one of the few to survive your gAMbOlInG paradise is priceless.

          2. No, all they have is slavery with a choice of fast food.

          3. Technically, Hong Kong and Singapore are “freer” markets than the US. Ask Jim Rogers.

            Asian agricultural real estate, bitchez. You can’t eat gold or silver.

            1. Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea are all freer markets than we have, for now.

            2. And used the aggressive dominationist term bitchez, quite unsurprisingly.

              The Greeks recognized agriculture’s domination and rape of the soil via their mythology of the Rape of Demeter, the goddess of grain and agriculture. Later this story because the Rape of Persephone, Demeter’s daughter.

              You think Mother Earth and her beautiful female children like it rough, eh, Mr. Whipple, just so you can profit a dime or two?

              1. You think Mother Earth and her beautiful female children like it rough, eh, Mr. Whipple, just so you can profit a dime or two?

                Apparently so, considering how much they provide when raped on a rotating basis.

                1. It’s STILL fucking the threads.

        2. …is a human resource to the Capitalist, just as Capitalist Slave Labor once was in the US.

          But enjoy that iPod.

          Remember, they have to put nets out to keep people making your iPods from killing suicide.

          Need a dose of denium?

          Come visit your KOCH dealer.

      3. Let’s not let this jackoff shit all over another thread… please. I like coming here, the troll feces have made it hard to stomach.

        1. I wish he would just go back to masturbating to the finale of Battlestar Galactica.

          1. Battlestar totally jumped the shark after you found out who all of the Cylons were. The finale was pretty anti-climactic if you ask me.

            1. Still beat the shit out of the original version.

      4. …a thing, but thanks for parroting your particular city-Statist apologist canon.

        But isn’t China communist?

        I love how Libertarians are SO duplicitous:

        ? We don’t have capitalism in the U.S.
        ? But China has capitalism.

        It’s as dumbfuck stupid as the Xians who say:

        ? Christianity is a wonderful influence in the world.
        ? No true Christian participated in the Inquisition, Wars, Crusades…..

        Try again, Fundamentalist Libertarian.

        1. Yeah, and it was a common practice for Natives to send their excess young men over to the nearby tribe to kill, kidnap, raid and rape.

          But you don’t like to talk about that since they were just a “few bad apples”, right?

          1. White Primitard deals with contradictory facts about as well as he accuses libertarians of doing.

            1. And the “history” you got from a coloring book is better?

              Tell me, are you a REAL native or are you just one of the millions of honkeys who claim that they’re great grand something or the other was a native?

              Oh, wait! You’re handle already explained that!

              1. Dude, White Primitard is the name I call White Indian and his little group of Rousseauian dirt-eaters.

                1. Sorry about the friendly fire!

                  I’m getting a little trigger happy with White Indian popping up all over the place like a game of schizophrenic wack-a-mole!

      5. China still does not have a free market of any kind. They have crapitalism.

        1. Crapitalism. I like that. That is what we are about to have I think

          1. We have a lot of it too. I did not coin the word, I got it here or at Mises.

            1. What you see is what you get.

              That’s the way we judged communism, right?

              Be just as honest about crapital/capitalism, True Believers.

              1. Milk plus bacteria equals sour milk. Therefore all milk should be seen as sour milk.

                u good at lojic!1

                1. Did the Politburo pay you for that analogy? Or just reverse engineer it?


            2. I’ve seen it on a few FB threads.

              Look on the bright side, it could be worse, we could be like Europe.

              1. A spoonful of sewage in a barrel of wine… is sewage.

                A spoonful of wine in a barrel of sewage… is sewage.

                Pasty Woo-Woo Man is sewage.

        2. …anywhere.

          “Free Market” a secularized relgio-economic Savior, meant to save mankind from the very real hell-on-earth that is a consequence of the agricultural city-State.

          It’ll probably work just after the astro-theological magician HayZeus comes again in the clouds.

  6. New troll on duty I see. Last night it was rather and closeted gay guy. They tend to be less disciplined and more genuinely disturbed. This guy sticks to the script. Expect to see large text walls of cut and paste material.

    1. Morning links can’t get here fast enough…

      Dear ___________(fill in the blank),

      Please print, and check off appropriate box

      choice #1 Stop using my handle, you piece of shit___

      choice #2 Stop using my handle and link,  you piece of shit___

      choice #3 fuck off, I’m not ___________(fill in the blank), you stupid piece of shit

      For you reference, I’m sure he meant to include anyone with a vagina too:

      Matt Welch|6.29.10 @ 12:16PM|#
      *I* am the thin-skinned crap weasel. I don’t want people spoofing *anyone* here, but since that’s not going to happen until we waste precious time overhauling the comments process, then the least I will ask, particularly at this sensitive juncture, is to not spoof Weigel, so as to completely eliminate the possibility of people confusing a spoof for something he is written. If you don’t like it, get off my lawn, etc.

      BTW John
      My post today is in your honor

      1. Stand by for shocker: I’m backing rather on this one. She has said and done a lot of things here that irritated the fuck out of me, but this ain’t her MO.

    3. You know what that means.

      Ted Haggard syndrome is in the house!

    4. Not enough CAPS LOCK and [brackettz] though…just sayin’

    5. Prediction: it is all the same old troll(s) talking to themselves. Epi, MNG, etc.

      1. Amazingly, Epi has not appeared today.

  7. AND YET Another thread bites the dust.

    1. …on your intellectual defeat.

      And you thought chanting your catechism was all that was necessary to assuage your conscience about the benevolence of city-STATISM (civilization.)

      1. …with a smile.

        1. …have to eat shit and like it!

    2. I think they have over played their hand. Reason will do something about it. It is as simple as banning Rather and Closeted gay guy and who ever else has posted as WI’s IP address. That would slow them down a bit. They would have to change IP addresses and at least couldn’t do it from home anymore.

      1. The library has to close sometime…

        1. Is this what you do when your mind is so empty it can’t argue about a definition of legitimate property?

  8. On Sunday, October 23, a meeting was held at 60 Wall Street. Six leaders discussed what to do with the half-million dollars that had been donated to their organization, since, in their estimation, the organization was incapable of making sound financial decisions. The proposed solution was not to spend the money educating their co-workers or stimulating more active participation by improving the organization’s structures and tactics. Instead, those present discussed how they could commandeer the $500,000 for their new, more exclusive organization. No, this was not the meeting of any traditional influence on Wall Street. These were six of the leaders of Occupy Wall Street (OWS).…..ll-street/

    One of Dostoyevsky’s better novels is The Demons. This is right out of that. The real vanguard must take the money from the less enlightened.

    I am starting to think OWS was just a scam to re-fund ACORN.

    1. Read the whole article. It is like a real life animal farm. The leaders now want to use a fire hose and clean out the Park. Communists eat their own first.

      1. The true commies wait in the wings and shoot those troublesome revolutionaries later.

      2. Totally not surprising, but fascinating nonetheless. Make sure to read the original Global Research article in full.

      3. How long is this going to last? And who the hell would donate money to these con artists?

  9. What Occupy Wall Street Gets Wrong

    Economics? Business? Finance?

    There’s too many to list. Do they know the difference between price inflation and monetary inflation?

    What happens when Capitalism gets fucked up? The Commies come out of the bushes.…

    1. An article about what they got right would be too short.

      1. They know something is wrong, they just do not have a firm grasp on what it is, exactly, or what to do about it.

        Many on the left are driven by their emotions, instead of logic, and the indoctrination runs deep.

        1. It’s because they’re Marxists

          1. They also do not believe in Sanity Clause.


            1. Are you sure? Who else is going to provide all the free stuff they want?

          2. Marxism of the Right
            by Robert Locke
            March 14, 2005

            Then again, so are conservatives. So are any agricultural city-STATE (civilization) reformers.

            That is: failed, debunked, intellectually bankrupt.

        2. Many? I’d say most if not all.

          If they engaged in rational thought instead of simply justifying their emotions, then they wouldn’t be leftists.

          1. Don’t forget, many of them are young, and it’s a big, scary world out there.

          2. What’s that again about those who are still liberal after a certain age not having a brain?

            1. What’s that again about those who are still liberal after a certain age not having a brain?

              I dunno. Is it the White Indian disease?

              1. I’m not liberal.

                But you’ll call yourself a classic liberal.

                You’re liberal.

            2. I don’t know if you want to go down that road. I believe ti was Churchill who said that, and at a time when liberal meant something more like libertarian than the contemporary meaning.

              1. Point taken.

                However, it would be nice for the left to use their brain for something other than to keep their heads from caving in.

                At least once in a while.

          3. If they engaged in rational thought instead of simply justifying their [greed] emotions, then they wouldn’t be leftists libertarians.

            1. Greed is good!

              And better than trying to make believe that the lives of Natives were just like a Disney movie!

              NOTE: Pocahontas meant “little mischief” which was her tribe’s way of calling her a SLUT!

      2. It MIGHT be just long enough for a fortune cookie…

  10. Hey, Steve, at least OWS aren’t a bunch of crazy gold bugs, amirite?

  11. Regarding White Indian.

    We are libertarians and for the most part believe people can solve problems by themselves with minimal authority/rules. We constantly claim that people will band together to act in their own best interests. Here is an idea…let’s prove it.

    Instead of pushing for moderators or registration… let’s treat this WI situation as a libertarian experiment. Let’s stand by our libertarian ideals and solve the problem on our own. Let’s ALL agree to NOT interact with WI at all. Would you post all day, every day if no one would respond to you? I doubt it.

    Let’s all agree to NOT FEED THE TROLL!

    Problem solved…in a libertarian manner.

    1. Hell yes. I was going to write up something very similar to this myself. We should be able to walk the walk and fix this without an appeal to authority.

      1. No pirate celebration would be complete without music … This “party atmosphere” is how many ethnographers have described the everyday life of hunter-gatherers and other primitive tribes, such as Jean Liedloff’s description of the Yequana in The Continuum Concept.

        A Pirate’s Life for Me II: Opening the Map
        by Jason Godesky | 22 May 2007…..g-the-map/

        Today, at civilization’s peak, we dream of the free life once enjoyed by pirates?the primitivists that plied the waves in the age of exuberance. They lived in the empty spaces of the map before it closed. But the decline of civilization will run many of its historical processes in reverse, and the map will open up again…

        A Pirate’s Life for Me
        by Jason Godesky | 7 July 2006…..fe-for-me/

    2. For the love of money [POLIS’ property values] is the root of all evil[POLICe brutality.]

      The city-State (civilization) cannot allow bums on the streets, and must use aggression to remove them.

      While they’ll often tell you different, Libertarians are quite eager for aggression when it comes to defending the city-State‘s (civilization’s) value:

      Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment … unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? ~Murray Rothbard

      P.S. How’s that for a more revealing money speech, Francisco d’ Anconia?

    3. My laptop for one will be grateful for this.

      Poor thing was crying tears of pain over the weekend from that high-speed trainwreck of a thread.

      [It also helps to have Reasonable’s ignore button too.]

    4. I’m on board.

    5. That’s what I’ve been doing. I tried replying a couple of times but quickly learned that it was futile.

      WI’s mental masturbations are easy to spot and add nothing to whatever article I’m reading, so I scroll right over them.

  12. It makes sense to defend free market capitalism when we actually have free market capitalism.

  13. Guys, for all those of you who weren’t around for the double-kilo thread, please just ignore the trolls. Just walk away.

    Oh, and not threading your comments helps too.

  14. I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I never post for the sake of WI.

    1. “… that I WILL never post…”

    2. Mr. Mowen stared dazedly about him and whispered to Paul Larkin, “Something’s gone screwy here.”

      “Oh, shut up!” snapped Larkin.

      “I am sure, Mr. White Indian,” said the eldest libertarian, “that you do not really believe – nor does the public – that we wish to restrict your freedom to forage and hunt in a Non-State Society lifeway. If anyone has been laboring under such a misapprehension, we are anxious to prove that it is not true.”

      The judges retired to consider their verdict. They did not stay out long. They returned to an ominously silent courtroom – and announced that a fine of $5,000 for trespassing was imposed on White Indian, but that the sentence was suspended. Streaks of jeering laughter ran through the applause that swept the courtroom. The applause was aimed at White Indian, the laughter – at the Statist-enforced privation property judges.

      Indian stood motionless, not turning to the crowd, barely hearing the applause. He stood looking at the judges. There was no triumph in his face, no elation, only the still intensity of contemplating the enormity of the smallness of the enemy who was destroying the world. He felt as if, after a journey of years through a landscape of devastation, past the ruins of great forests, the wrecks of powerful rivers, the dead zones of once-bountiful oceans, the bodies of invincible men, he had come upon the despoiler, expecting to find a giant – and had found a rat eager to scurry for cover at the first sound of a human step.

      ~Adapted from Atlas Shrugged

  15. A comedy sketch from the headlines: Imagining how it all went down:

    Van Jones: Okay, ideas anybody.

    Professor #1: I think I could get some of my hippie students and their friends to protest Wall St.

    Professor #2: Great idea, I’m going to text some of my students from my iPhone and tell them they should be protesting evil corporations whose products are made in China and sell stock on Wall St.

    Van Jones: Excellent!

    Andy Stern: I can get some of my people there.

    Trumpka: Me too.

    ACORN: We’ll have our people there, they might get rowdy and create a mess but they’ll be there shilling for Obama.

    JournoList: Hold back boys we wouldn’t want it to look like astroturf.

    Debbie Dolberman: Once the MSM sets the narrative about how spontaneous and grassroots the OWS crowd has sprung up we could get Nancy and Barrack to comment on it.

    Nancy: Okay.

    Tumpka: That’s the cue for us to come in Andy.

    Van Jones: Excellent. A very productive meeting on this one. We wouldn’t want another CBS incident. Has anyone admonished CBS and that reporter yet?

    Nancy: My husband and I need a distraction

    Al Sharpton: When will we tell them it should be about redistributing the money?

    Bill Keller: I’ll start setting the narrative that the Tea Party is finished.

    Charlie Rose: I’ll coincide with that and and call OWS a growing phenomenon.

    JournoList: Once all that’s rolling we’ll keep pounding the talking points.

    Harry: I’ll prevent the Senate from voting on Barrack’s jobs Bill while all this is going on. I’ll need help blaming Republicans since the bi-partisan support is against us.

    JournoList: No problem and no different than business as usual.

    Al Sharpton: Money…when will we tell them it should be about redistributing the money?

    David Axelrod: Al follow my cue and then organize. Barrack will say “Republicans Don’t Want A Place Where People “No Matter What They Look Like” Can Succeed”

    Nancy Pelosi: I will stir up their passions with stuff like they’re voting to let women die on the floor.

    JournoList: Great idea Nancy. That one helps get out the feminist vote every time. Women like “shiny things”.

    Whoopi: I can tell women George Bush er….Republicans want to steal their uteruses.

    Sean Penn: Garofalo and the rest of us will set the meme the Tea Party is the “Get The N-Word Out Of The White House Party”.

    Bill Maher: Excellent Sean! Most excellent! I will call Cain and republicans racist and poke fun at them.

    Al Sharpton: I will add to the meme: “We Will Get The Jobs Bill Done In The Street”.

    David Axelrod: Excellent guys. The WH messaging will be OWS “Will Be An Issue In This Campaign”.

    Valerie Jarret: We need to crush the idea MLK would have supported Cain. Barrack will tell the people at the ceremony that MLK Jr. Would Have Supported Occupy Wall Street.

    Lawrence O’Donnell: I will imply a brilliant man like Cain should have been drafted, or perhaps volunteered to be considered a patriot – rather than work for the Navy in a private capacity on rocket science where the Navy wanted him solving problems on an important project. I can also push the meme that he’s an Uncle Tom for thinking for himself and unlike 90%+ of African Americans he’s a traitor to his own race. I will do this from atop my white horse. Perhaps MSNBC should hire Al to provide me cover.

    Al Sharpton: That’s what I do, I know how to crack the whip on those who dare leave the Democrat plantation. How much are they going to pay me?

    Van Jones: Shut up Al! One last thing. Can you JournoList within the press corpse please keep ignoring the Fast and Furious scandal.

    WH Press Corpse: Indeed!

    JournoList: We concur, and don’t worry Nancy. Tell your husband too.

    David Axelrod: Once all this is rolling Barack will hop on the bus and hit the road with the standard organizing talking points like “GOP Wants “Dirtier Air, Dirtier Water, Less People With Health Insurance”.

    Martin Bashir: David, I’ll follow your lead with “Cain Doesn’t Want To Be “Associated With African-Americans.”

    Comrade Brzezinski: I’d suggest a Bolshevik type appraoch like “Make Rich Known Publicly To Pressure Them To Give Back”

    Eugene Robinson: I’ll call my meme “Defend Wall Street” and go with the theme is not likely to be a winning campaign slogan in 2012. For Republicans, this is an obvious problem.

    Bernie Sanders: We Need To Address The Issue Of The Rich Getting Richer

    Lawrence O’Donnell: I’d like to add Republicans still don’t have a jobs plan, they’ve never had a jobs plan because Republicans are lying liars that lie even when lying about lying that’s the kind of liars the lying liars are.

    Rachel Maddow: I’ll push this one “Republicans vote against employing more teachers and first responders” and since we believe the American people are too stupid to figure out the locals already pay taxes to cover those type of things in their cities and states.

    Van Jones: Very good Rachel.

    Al Franken: Also remember people, we are good enough, smart enough and gosh darn it, people like us. We are wonderful people…..just ask us.

    Rachel Maddow: I’ll also go with Republicans think poor people are scam artists.

    David Axelrod: Excellent Barack will use the standard Alinsky playbook on his bus tour which we can film for campaign ads. Barack will also tell the people not to believe their lying eyes and that all the choices he made were the right ones. I’ll try and keep a straight face and plant a seed that the election is going to be a close one.

    Debbie Dolberman: I will project all our demagoguery onto republicans.

    E.J. Dionne: I’ll add that: Operation Wall Street Is “Disciplined,” Has “Wonderful Signs”

    Eugene Robinson: I’ll keep pounding the following talking point “GOP Wants to Deprive Poor & Middle Class”

    Michael Moore: Will Barrack be using the styrofoam columns again? I will make a documentary of all this with a similar name as my Fifth but I’ll call this one “Bowling for Columnlike.”

    Mechelle O: I will insert myself into the narrative with “The GOP Would Curb Freedom of Speech, Religion…”

    David Axelrod We’ll have the speech writers script some OWS language for Barack to read from the TOTUS.

    Michael Moore: I will rally the crowds and tell them that I’m not of the 1% with my multi-millions and that capitalism is evil. They can buy my book and DVD to find out why.

    Robert Reich: This is brilliant. Once its all rolling the Next Phase Of “Occupy” Movement Should Be “Political Action” which obviously means supporting Obama and Democrats. We shall overcome the gains the Tea Party has made.

    Nancy Pelosi: I can’t wait to get my ego sized gavel back. If Republicans think I was a witch last time wait until they relearn old sayings are true and payback is a Nancy.

    Lawrence O’Donnell: If Cain rises to frontrunner status we’ll Swiftboat him with a settled harassment claim from his days with the NRA of which he nor our useful idiot can speak about because of a settlement agreement and teach the GOP payback is a …. Hopefully the victim won’t realize we will dump her like Cindy Sheehan once she is no longer useful to us. All we know is there is a contract so we’ll apply Napoleonic Law along with our comrades in media and demand he is guilty until proven innocent. I’ll call for Occupation And Boycott Of Restaurant Association to punish them for ever hiring the conservative Uncle Tom Herman Cain to lobby congress against unConstitutional anti-smoking laws. We will airbrush history and use innuendo and Napoleonic Law to our advantage with a politically correct version of the story and appeal to feelings over critical thinking and common sense in the electorate as per usual.

    Roger Simon Politico: Most excellent Lawrence! The Soviet Union would still exist today if the PolticoBuro or Pravda had you writing the script. We’ll have a few of our yellow journalist prepare the story if Cain does indeed surge we can stop him in his tracks with Swiftboat attacks.

    Trial Lawyers: Cain and Perry must be stopped at all cost they are not members of the lawyers club for growth.

    Lawrence O’Donnell: Indeed Roger, this man should have volunteered if he was not drafted for service in Viet Nam just like my hero John Kerry did. I don’t care if he worked on missile ballistics in a private capacity where the Navy wanted him apparently. I will forever look down on this conservative upity Black man for dare thinking independently of the racial identity we’ve assigned to him.

    Van Jones: Very productive people. I mean that..Workers of the world unite!! The world will finally realize the greatest peace ever known to man!

  16. This story is a good example of why I fucking hate liberals.

    Oh sure, I hate conservatives. Some of them are homophobes. They love war. They are the dogs in Animal Farm. They have small cocks. They get a hard on when they sing the pledge of allegiance. They live the drug war. They get a hard on when they watch the pigs on Cops slam someone to the ground and put that knee to the neck. Conservatives are assholes.

    But liberals, they are fucking stupid assholes. They are too fucking stupid to understand the concept of zero sum. These fuckheads actually believe that if you don’t give a costs of living allowance, you are cutting someone’s entitlement. They have no qualms about stealing your stuff to give it to their arbitrary definition of entitlement. They mock other races with affirmative action premised on enlightened racism.

    The final examples is when these idiots calls us libertarians republicans. I guess I can understand that the first few times that they come to this board they might think that because, sometimes IMHO, it seems that it is mostly liberals that we are bashing. However, it is liberals that are doing a much more cooridinated job of trying to fuck up this universe. Maybe that is why we give them more attention. But, in the end, it is simply liberal stupidity and/or intellectual laziness to understand them premises and motivations of libertarians versus conservatives.

    Liberals are too fucking stupid to understand that it the government that is the problem, not Wall Street. Apple just want to sell you an Ipod. Safeway just wants to sell you some bread. The government (especially the federal government), however, is for sell to the highest bidder. Getting the “right people” isnt’ going to change that. It’ll just change the cock the feds have to suck.

    And of course, I bet $10.00 that it is fucking liberals or progressives that have been anal fisting this site for the last few days.

    1. …you might want to try it. He’s obsessed with gay talk again this morning.

      Just like a liberal would be.

    2. Just a side note about what happened to me. I’m a daycare owner in Canada six months in – start up. The building I rent from was reevaluated by the city and property taxes incidentally went up. No surprises there and I have to pay it as it’s stipulated in my commercial lease. The tax itself is okay but they hit me with it and then expect me to fork over half the amount – about $2600 – by the end of the month.

      As some of you may know, liquidity is always an issue in the first couple of years. Sooooo, I figured. No sweat. I’ll go talk to them and come up with a rational payment plan. I mean, the government is there to help growing small businesses right? I mean, I do employ four people and plan to be 10 within six months.

      Yeah right. They want the full amount. The bureaucrat I spoke to even when as far as to suggest I borrow – of which I’m over extended anyway. Carrying costs kill.

      So she told pay in “installments” but there will be interest. Oh, there will be interest.

      And here’s the main point of my comment. Know how much interest is?

      3%? 5%? 10%

      18%! Just like a credit card company.

      So. Will a rep from OWS come and defend my case? Should someone forgive my debt? Would they dare ever look at things from another perspective – that is, the state can impose itself with “unfair” practices as well?

      Thought not.

      I have no choice but to take it.

      Guess what? I have to find a way and plough on.

    3. Wait-who *sings* the pledge of allegiance?

  17. Damn, looks like the thread died. My guess is it choked on its own vomit. Or someone else’s. You can’t really dust for vomit.

    1. No, my mistake – it’s wheezed back to life. A sickly one, to be sure, but life nonetheless.

  18. Wealth is not specifically money, idiots.

    Think Progress made a good point without realizing it: Land makes much better “wealth” than money, and it has much better distribution.

    1. The value of those dollars in your savings account is a whole new argument, though. Let’s take this one step at a time. They won’t get high school economics until they get elementary school economics.

  19. “What Oprah Winfrey created made her rich, but without her, those creations wouldn’t have existed to entertain and gratify her audience.”

    A very gullible and stupid audience, indeed.

    1. Hate the game not the player!


      1. There’s no way that paycheck has enough bread to make me want to reach under your ass.

        1. I’d do it just so I could get a book deal!


          What did you want me to do with her ass?

  20. OWS loves to fixate on the disparity between rich and poor increasing.

    1. Disparity HAS to increase if the economy is going to grow, because by definition the poor in any economy have either no income or very low entry-level income.

    2. Disparity has to increase if an economy is going to technologically advance and diversify. If energy and information are going to become more available to more people, it takes lots of money and intelligence to innovate and manage that diversification. The best people at doing that should receive more resources so they can do more of it.

    The OWS people are so consumed with envy that they either don’t understand where those iPhones and cars that go 200,000 miles came from, or they want to take all of them away and go back to the caves because they just can’t stand any type of inequality.

    It’s a narcissistic ascetism…they want the rich to have no more than they have so they can have that serene, controlled, kindergarten feeling that if everyone can’t have something, then no one should have any. It’s an infantile, fairy tale wish for a benevolent dicator to hand out goodies equally. How utterly pathetic and sickening an ideology to have for an adult. They need to be ignored, unless they get violent, then they need to be shot.

  21. Fucking idiot hippies are still fucking idiots. That is all.

  22. The problem is that it’s hard to distinguish true value creating activities from economic manipulation that is essentially a form of rent-seeking. The creation of complex “new financial products”, for example… is that speculation in the positive sense, providing liquidity and channeling resources to where they are needed, or just a way to make complex leveraged bets against ignorant/gullible investors?

    1. No, it’s easy. Positive financial products generate profit; bad ones end up running people out of business (if the government lets them…)

  23. What does Occupy Wall Street get wrong?

    The only answer necessary is:


  24. The frustrating thing for me is that they see one half of the problem, rent seeking companies, without even considering or deliberately ignoring the other half, the politicians dole out favors to said rent seekers.

  25. While it’s true that people have many more shiny new distractions than they used to, political influence IS a zero sum game unlike material wealth. Hence as the rich gain a larger percentage of total cash, they gain a larger percentage of political power. What do you guys think of Wolf PAC? Is trying to eliminate the influence of corporate money in politics a bad idea?

    1. Doomed to failure, davidstvz.

      Money and power will always find each other.

      All previous attempts to regulate corporate/big money influence out of politics have failed, and, by creating regulatory barriers, have made the problem worse.

      Why would anyone expect the next attempt to turn out any different?

  26. @davidstvz

    A Constitutional Amendment? McCain-Finegold is retarded enough we don’t need constitutionally dictated campaign finance reform. All most efforts to enact reforms have done is to tilt the table further in favor of incumbents.

    And how are we defining corporation? When two or more people pool resources and donate to a campaign?

    1. Shrink the fed gov’t to it’s enumerated powers and the corporations will find other ways to spend their money. Corporations can’t buy favors if the gov’t can’t sell them.

  27. It is truly amazing how many takes can come from 1 single topic. I did a post on my blog yesterday and my conclusion is a horse of a totally different color. I am not saying that I don’t agree with this post but there are many different things to be observed and learned from these protests. If you would like another view on these protests you can view my blog post at

    1. OWS has 99 percent legitimate grievances and 1 percent sensible, coherent solutions….okay, maybe those aren’t the exact figures. I just thought that had a neat, Herman Cainesque ring to it.

  28. Thanks for the input.

  29. Thanks for the replies guys. So if we have no hope of solving the problem through legislation and money will always buy power, does that mean the only solution is to tax the hell out of the rich until they aren’t quite as rich anymore? Limiting government doesn’t seem like an option when the rich are paying specifically for government services. The whole problem is that we elect politicians who go on to do what rich corporations want rather than what the people that elected them want. Of course, the rich have somehow created a climate where the idea of taxing them a lot more has not had enough public support to actually occur so… maybe it’s all too little too late anyway. What indication do we have that people are ever going to wake up and decide to start shrinking government by significant amounts?

  30. This is a most myopic and simplistic way to be dismissive of the OWS movemnt. If you were truly informed you would know that OWS…is born out of an international movement that is broad and inclusive of Negative unregulated Capitalism throughout the world. All you mention is America…that shows you have no grasp of the problem…Go to youtube and type in Crisis of Capitalism RSA…that will illustate it for anyone here clearly!!! Wake up people…Capitalism is failing…Do I say Communism is better…hell no!! But you can’t look at this so myopic. Its like US politics..Left wing Right wing…It is all the same. Truly it is.

  31. Once upon a time, I was drowning and a guy near me had a canoe. He let me into his canoe, but I had to pull my weight.

    Then, he worked hard and I worked hard, too. He got a better boat, and I needed a boat to stay afloat, so I used the wages he gave me to buy his canoe.

    So, now, he had a bigger boat and I had my own canoe. He worked hard with his bigger boat and I worked hard with my canoe.

    After awhile, I bought his bigger boat and kept working, but he got a yacht, and he stopped working because he didn’t need to anymore. Then, he got an even bigger yacht, but I was still stuck with his old boat.

    I’m much better off than when I was drowning, and I could work much more wisely and double my efforts and get a yacht, but his yacht is so much better than his old boat that I don’t how to get it. And, when I think about it, it was unfair way back when he had a canoe and I was drowning. Also, when I got into the canoe, and he was bossing me around, I found his attitude to be condescending, and that made me feel bad.

    So, now that I have the boat that I didn’t think I could dream of having at the time, I think that his latest yacht is ten times better than this old boat of his that I now own.

    So, when he’s sleeping tonight, I’m going to vandalize his yacht, because I hope that will make him realize that we should both have boats that are more equal.

    1. …meanwhile in Sweeden…

      Everyone’s got a pretty decent boat.

      Not a bad deal, because after the guy pulled me out I kept wondering how he kept getting bigger and bigger boats. I mean, I was doing all the right things; in fact I was working harder than him. Then I realized: the only real difference, when you REALLY think about it is just luck (he never told me how he got that boat) and a system that is gamed for him to get bigger and bigger boats.

  32. Article is brilliant, thank u for sharing with us!

  33. “But the OWS demand for action against them is the equivalent of honking your horn when you’re stuck in a traffic jam. It makes a lot of noise, without getting you anywhere.”

    So then actually taking action against them–say raising their taxes–would be analogous to what? Building more lanes?

    It’s not at all surprising that those that have a large portion of their wealth invested in the US economy would stand to lose more in a downturn.

    But this is not really the point, those in the middle and below are not seeing equivalent gains that the top x% are. The recent relative changes really don’t matter that much compared to the differences that has happened over the past four or five decades.…..igure5.png

    Yes, yes, I’m sure there should be a dip on the end of this curve, but that’s not really the point. The point is the gains of the past few decades have gone disproportionally to the top.

    All that is being asked is that that those so well off (comparatively) pay into an investment for the middle and lower classes to move them into 21st century jobs to get the middle class back on track.

    This may involve some *gasp* taxation, but lets be honest, those way up at the top really didn’t ‘earn’ their keep all by themselves anyways. I mean if we threw them into Kenya at birth do we really believe they would be where they are today by pulling themselves up by their bootstraps? Do we really think they are 2000x more productive as a low-class worker that is trying to hold down two jobs (they sure as heck get paid 2000x more). These things seem almost obvious, and of course no one should begrudge them their money. But lots of people (for whatever reason you want to give) need a help up these days, so lets make sure the lucky ones invest in the future so that we all benefit from the future. (Yes, even if it means a lower GDP growth; that’s how important this is.)

  34. thank you a lotsssssssssssssssssss

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.