Apparently The Cause Of Income Inequality Is Poor People Existing

That’s this week’s Occupy message from the LA Times, as the “Let’s get the Dirty Effing Hippies” counter-movement rolls on in cities like LA and elsewhere across the country.  AEI Junior Randian, Third Class Nick Schulz explains why America’s massive income inequality is reality, and it’s because of you bloody poor people.

The reason is straightforward. The role that human and social capital plays in helping a person generate income in an advanced economy has increased over the last half a century. And over that same time, the primary institution for inculcating human and social capital has badly weakened.

Social scientists routinely find that individuals raised in intact families are generally better equipped to thrive in the economy. Today’s 99% is teeming with tens of millions of Americans who were not raised in a stable home environment, and their earnings potential is compromised as a result.

If you had simply inherited your money from a rich, stable two-parent family (where dad’s on his third wife and mom’s on her second husband), you wouldn’t be poor.  Why can’t you peons understand this?  Because single women aren’t putting all their babies up for adoption by rich families, you’re doomed to a life of servitude and toil.  You might as well get used to it because that’s how the system works, and it’s run by people who will do anything to perpetuate the system.

Besides, if you hippies are so smart, why haven’t you fixed income inequality yet?  Taxation clearly has failed, people have been paying taxes since America started and income inequality still exists, so clearly taxation on the rich cannot be any part of the solution.  Immigration can’t work, we’ve been allowing immigrants since the 1600’s and look, income inequality!  Failed policies of a worldview relegated to the dustbin of history!

If only rich people were allowed to have kids, that would fix this problem you know.  Now stop using your sexual organs, you silly 99-percenters!

▲

It’s cleansing when it floods someone else’s house

It’s an old, old saying I know but it has a lot of truth to it: “minor” surgery means they operate on someone else. Likewise, floods are cleansing when they flood someone else’s house.

When elites talk about the beauty of pain and sacrifice, they mean someone else’s pain and sacrifice. They may think they mean their own, but no non-sociopath thinks that a 5% marginal rate increase on a 500K salary (and I’m probably underestimating the salary and overestimating the rate increase) constitutes pain or sacrifice.

I know we say this over and over and over again here, but one of the central truths of contemporary American politics it that media and political elites view the rest of us as pawns or worse in some insane morality play that goes on in their beautiful minds. Unfortunately when they start wars or cut spending in (very serious) jest, the rest of the country dies and loses jobs in earnest.

When they talk about humiliating and impoverishing millions of Americans, that’s serious and civil. But if one of us suggests that it would be better if Mike Bloomberg and Jamie Dimon were scared about the repercussions of shoving the peasants’ nose in the dirt too long, we are unserious nihilists.

▲

Tiny Violins: The “Homeless Halloween Firm” is out of Business

Feel that? That’s the sweet caress of schadenfreude.

Remember the foreclosure law firm that celebrated Halloween by dressing up like the homeless and mocking those whose homes had been foreclosed?

Well, looks like the firm, Steven J. Baum P.C., has had to shut its doors, and the firm’s named partner blames New York Times reporter Joe Nocera for the firm’s downfall.

From Talking Points Memo:

Steven J. Baum P.C., a firm that specialized in foreclosures, is closing its doors a month after photos showing employees celebrating Halloween by dressing like the homeless surfaced in a New York Times column by Joe Nocera. Nocera wrote a follow up column this weekend, in which he quoted an angry email he received from Mr. Baum himself. The firm announced the shuttering via press release and was reported by the NYT: More »

▲

But they have cell phones

Nothing wrong with this that deregulation and tax cuts can’t fix:

When the Census Bureau this month released a new measure of poverty, meant to better count disposable income, it began altering the portrait of national need. Perhaps the most startling differences between the old measure and the new involves data the government has not yet published, showing 51 million people with incomes less than 50 percent above the poverty line. That number of Americans is 76 percent higher than the official account, published in September. All told, that places 100 million people — one in three Americans — either in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it.

After a lost decade of flat wages and the worst downturn since the Great Depression, the findings can be thought of as putting numbers to the bleak national mood — quantifying the expressions of unease erupting in protests and political swings. They convey levels of economic stress sharply felt but until now hard to measure.

Cue Andrew Sullivan blockquoting Megan McArdle agreeing with Tyler Cowen that these statistics are flawed.

Thirty or forty years of muddying the waters and what do you expect? It’s probably not as bad in the midwest, though, where people stick together.

▲

In Your Base, In Fact Destroying The Credibility Of Your Doodz

Here’s the Up With Chris Hayes story that Anne Laurie was talking about earlier today:

A well-known Washington lobbying firm with links to the financial industry has proposed an $850,000 plan to take on Occupy Wall Street and politicians who might express sympathy for the protests, according to a memo obtained by the MSNBC program “Up w/ Chris Hayes.”

The proposal was written on the letterhead of the lobbying firm Clark Lytle Geduldig & Cranford and addressed to one of CLGC’s clients, the American Bankers Association.

CLGC’s memo proposes that the ABA pay CLGC $850,000 to conduct “opposition research” on Occupy Wall Street in order to construct “negative narratives” about the protests and allied politicians. The memo also asserts that Democratic victories in 2012 would be detrimental for Wall Street and targets specific races in which it says Wall Street would benefit by electing Republicans instead.

According to the memo, if Democrats embrace OWS, “This would mean more than just short-term political discomfort for Wall Street. … It has the potential to have very long-lasting political, policy and financial impacts on the companies in the center of the bullseye.”

The memo also suggests that Democratic victories in 2012 should not be the ABA’s biggest concern. “… (T)he bigger concern,” the memo says, “should be that Republicans will no longer defend Wall Street companies.”

It was pretty obvious that this was the plan and has been Wall Street’s response for some time now: demonize the Occupy movement among independents/swing voters to divide them from supporters (“They’re Dirty Effing Hippies and criminals!”) and further divide and demoralize the remaining supporters by trying to split them from the Democrats (“The Dems are just as much Wall Street lackeys as the GOP, there’s no difference!”)...all to avoid losing the “populist” mantle the Tea Party currently has, giving them license to happily loot the treasury and make the rest of us suffer.

It’s a pretty good plan from an Evil Overlord perspective, and it has made headway into reducing support for the movement.  Well, that was before the whole park evicting and pepper-spraying of grandmothers and college kids sitting peacefully on the sidewalk started happening.

I’m thinking that might change as a result.

▲

I feel like a solider, look like a thief

New polls show the public turning against the OWS movement (PPP via NoMoreMisterNiceBlog):

The Occupy Wall Street movement is not wearing well with voters across the country. Only 33% now say that they are supportive of its goals, compared to 45% who say they oppose them. That represents an 11 point shift in the wrong direction for the movement’s support compared to a month ago when 35% of voters said they supported it and 36% were opposed. Most notably independents have gone from supporting Occupy Wall Street’s goals 39/34, to opposing them 34/42.

Voters don’t care for the Tea Party either, with 42% saying they support its goals to 45% opposed. But asked whether they have a higher opinion of the Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street movement the Tea Party wins out 43-37, representing a flip from last month when Occupy Wall Street won out 40-37 on that question.

I don’t think this matters that much. Eventually, establishment media was going to turn the public against the dirty, thieving hippies. I do think this is why, for the most part, Democratic elected officials have been smart to keep a safe distance from OWS.

The purpose of OWS, as I see it, is to (a) get the topic of income inequality in the air and (b) scare the Galtians. It is succeeding well on both fronts so far. The Zuccotti park eviction keeps the momentum going.

I know that not everyone will like this analogy, but every movement needs its shock troops. You can’t expect people to love the shock troops. As long as you don’t let the troops nominate people like Christine O’Donnell or scream embarrassing things during debates, it’s all good.

▲

Hit by a Mink Car

Last night, Occupy Oakland protesters were run over by a Mercedes. Luckily, nobody’s 24-karat dead:

The incident happened when the driver was heading south on 11th and was blocked by streams of marchers walking along Broadway, witnesses said. He had a green light, but could not get through.

Hartwig said witnesses had differing accounts of what happened, with some saying the driver appeared to have gunned the Mercedes into the victims in frustration and others saying he had been provoked by activists pounding on his car.

In other disturbing news, soonergrunt pointed out this Occupy Tulsa footage of police pepper spraying protestors who were sitting on the ground with their arms linked:

Here’s the Tulsa World story on the arrests, which includes a lot more pictures and some raw video.

▲

I cover the waterfront

Those hippies in Oaktown shut down the port for the day, but happily things stayed peaceful:

Thousands of Occupy Oakland protesters expanded their anti-Wall Street demonstrations on Wednesday, marching through downtown, picketing banks and swarming the port. By early evening, port authorities said maritime operations there were effectively shut down.

“Maritime area operations will resume when it is safe and secure to do so,” port officials said in a statement, asking marchers to “allow your fellow 99% to get home safe to their families.”

Despite the disruption of work, the crowd at the port was peaceful.

Protesters had called for a citywide general strike on Wednesday, and asked other demonstrators in cities across the country to do the same, after violent clashes with the police here last week that included tear gas barrages and injuries involving both police officers and protesters.

While the city was not shut down by the protest, many businesses chose to remain closed Wednesday. Some that stayed open posted signs declaring their support for the marchers.

Also, let’s make this a late night OWS open thread.

▲

In Ireland, in Lebanon, in Palestine and Berkeley

If any of you live in the East Bay, let us know in the comments how this is developing:

After Oakland emerged as a new center for the Occupy Wall Street movement—largely because an Iraq war veteran was seriously injured in a clash with police—local protest leaders decided on a tactic with a storied history in the city: a general strike.

The strike, scheduled for Wednesday, aims to disrupt commerce, with a special focus on banks and other symbols of corporate America. Protesters will also try to shut the city’s port, one of the nation’s largest, in the late afternoon.

Local labor leaders, although generally sympathetic to the Occupy movement, say their contracts prohibit them from proclaiming an official strike. City officials say government offices are scheduled to be open; it’s unclear whether many businesses will heed the call to close down for the day.

What’s a good place to follow this? I lived there many years ago, but the relevant outlets have probably changed.

▲

Back in the hippie days

How much did anti-Vietnam War protests do to end US involvement in Vietnam, or at least to turn public sentiment against the war? It was before my time.

Also use this as an open thread to discuss OWS.

▲

Occupy East and West

Out West, Police arrested protesters in Denver and Portland last night. I didn’t see any mention of serious injuries in either of those local reports.

In the East, a big winter storm hit New York City and OWS is calling for donations of winter clothing.

What’s going on in the occupation in your part of the world?

▲

“Why Our Generation is Screwed”

I’m at a conference where a twenty-something student is giving an OWS presentation with this title, and he included this graph (click to embiggen). I can’t really argue with him.

Last night, Rochester Police arrested 32 protesters at Occupy Rochester. I have to believe the violence in Oakland influenced the police approach, which included multiple warnings and spaced-out arrests, led by the Chief of Police.

Update: Southern Beale has details on the Nashville arrests, which were thrown out of court.

▲

Five Bucks, Chucked

After being rightfully pegged as the poster child of Wall Street greed in a lousy economy, Bank of America is reconsidering that whole $5 a month debit card fee for its customers.

Bank of America is considering softening its controversial policy of charging some customers for making purchases with their debit cards, according to a person familiar with the bank’s plans.

In September, the bank announced that it would begin charging most customers $5 a month if they used their debit cards to make purchases.

The fee, which would begin in January, set off a barrage of public outrage at the bank.

Now, under proposals being considered by the bank, Bank of America would offer customers new ways to avoid having to pay the fee.

Currently, only customers with certain premium accounts would be exempt from the fee.

Unless one of the ways B of A is planning to have customers avoid the fee is “are you a customer?” then the damage is already done.  The whole concept of knifing people in the back for $5 a month was the best thing to happen to efforts like the Move Your Money project since the financial crisis, and hey, let’s remember that a week from today is Bank Transfer Day.

They must be scared if they’re backtracking already on the plan.

▲

What costume shall the poor girl wear?

Humorless libruls just don’t get foreclosure mill humor:

Let me describe a few of the photos. In one, two Baum employees are dressed like homeless people. One is holding a bottle of liquor. The other has a sign around her neck that reads: “3rd party squatter. I lost my home and I was never served.” My source said that “I was never served” is meant to mock “the typical excuse” of the homeowner trying to evade a foreclosure proceeding.

A second picture shows a coffin with a picture of a woman whose eyes have been cut out. A sign on the coffin reads: “Rest in Peace. Crazy Susie.” The reference is to Susan Chana Lask, a lawyer who had filed a class-action suit against Steven J. Baum — and had posted a YouTube video denouncing the firm’s foreclosure practices. “She was a thorn in their side,” said my source.

A third photograph shows a corner of Baum’s office decorated to look like a row of foreclosed homes. Another shows a sign that reads, “Baum Estates” — needless to say, it’s also full of foreclosed houses. Most of the other pictures show either mock homeless camps or mock foreclosure signs — or both. My source told me that not every Baum department used the party to make fun of the troubled homeowners they made their living suing. But some clearly did. The adjective she’d used when she sent them to me — “appalling” — struck me as exactly right.

Check out the pictures at the link above. And be glad that Nocera doesn’t say it’s all the libruls’ fault for not confirming Robert Bork.

▲

Confessions of an Obot

I’m an Obot. I think he’s a better president than Hillary or (the candidate I initially supported) Edwards would have been, and much better than whoever Cornell West and Ralph Nader would support. But this post gets to my concerns about the upper echelons of the Democratic party, more broadly:

This belief that New Deal liberalism is obsolete is combined with a belief that good policy-making is inconsistent with democratic institutions—that you need to rely on policy experts operating in good faith in the best interests of the country, without elbows being joggled by cranky neo-populists or nutty movement conservtives. And those experts, who can be found at the highest reaches of successful corporations should be brought into government, because they understand how this new global economy works. These leaders need to be brought into partnership with the US government, and hard-headed, realistic policy crafted, so that the US can continue to be the dominant world power.

Note that a central theme here is that it is above partisanship—that the experts, left alone, will best do their work. When you use that frame, then the health care negotiation makes sense. These negotiations took place not with politicians, but with the large service providers, because those stakeholders are the real experts and will keep us out of distracting, distorting partisanship. It makes sense that we turn to the money center banks as the mechanism for minimizing the contraction—they’re the pros who have risen, through merit and diligence, to their positions.

It’s not about Obama per se. It’s about a political philosophy, an ideology that rejects core Democratic values about the government’s role in protecting the citizenry from powerful private interests.

Our society faces two grave threats, the outright insanity of conservatism and the ostensible reasonableness of “centrist” corporatism. There’s a lot of overlap, obviously, but they aren’t the same thing. I’ve reached the point where the corporatism scares me more, because it apparently has the power to seduce many Democrats.

I also have a bit of a darker view than jayackroyd, I think that industry could have killed a health care bill that was less corporate-friendly. So maybe health care is not the best example here. Yes, a bill with a public option would have been better and more popular. But I don’t think it ever would have been possible to pass one.

▲