Bailouts instead for Occupiers:

The irony of what they are asking for rings loud and clear:

Why is it this frustration does not have more constructive outlets and messages?   Who are the current demonstrators and what are their goals?   It is certain that the Tea Partiers are no longer a part of this ill-defined and self-proclaimed movement.   

Some officials have tried to assist the Occupiers to little avail or positive outcome.  In cities where the mayor is sympathetic, the alliance has not resulted in any positive outcomes or increased rationality.

The Occupiers are dissatisfied with the economic distribution and the lack of work.   Many might not want to work given the support they are receiving from pro-Occupy factions. 

However the consideration that the government might be more of the cause of the problems they see than the cure, has not been openly recognized.  In the early stages of OWS there were some who were concerned about the alliance between government and big business, but that has not taken any serious consideration since.

 

So the OWS folks want to critique WS and its bailout propensity, and no doubt for good reasons.   Although around the country, OWS is also becoming known for its demands for free education and other things.  So frustration has morphed into a lack of respect for property rights and a call for the end of capitalism, and in effect bailouts for the poor. 

In DC it is now apparent that they exhibit no respect for public property, as they trashed a site that was a previous stimulus investment to the tune of  nearly $500K.    From Home Events:   Link

 
A key Republican lawmaker wants the Obama administration to explain its role in allowing "Occupy Wall Street" protestors to illegally camp in a Washington D.C. park that was recently beautified with nearly half a million dollars in stimulus funds.
 
Rep. Darrell Issa (R.–Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, asked the Interior Department this week to explain why protestors have been allowed to camp in McPherson Square illegally and destroy the public property.
 
And so it goes around the country:  much money lost dealing with the Occupiers’ burden on the local community.    In Oakland that cost is now well over $500K, and more than that in San Francisco.   The strikes at the docks in Oakland are hurting the truckers, leaving the truckers union as not supporting the demonstrations.
 
Why is it this frustration does not have more constructive outlets and messages?   Who are the current demonstrators and what are their goals?   It is certain that the Tea Partiers are no longer a part of this ill-defined and self-proclaimed movement.   

 

 

Appeasing the OWS does little to solve any problem:  Link

 

The mayor, a Democrat and former labor organizer, had patronized the group for months, offering them ponchos when it rained and vigorously supporting their message of "economic justice and restoration of balance to American society." The city council also passed a resolution endorsing the movement, and the police commander ordered officers not to step on any protesters' toes. But as the occupation continued with no end in sight -- and health conditions grew, shall we say, odious -- the mayor sought to negotiate with the group's ostensible leaders. He seemed certain that both the occupiers and city government shared the same aim to peacefully co-exist. He was mistaken.
 
Mr. Villaraigosa reportedly offered the occupiers a 10,000-square-foot office space, a patch of farmland to garden and housing for the homeless if the protesters vacated the City Hall lawn.  The protesters rejected the offer and its core assumption that they could be bought off.
 
The mayor, a Democrat and former labor organizer, had patronized the group for months, offering them ponchos when it rained and vigorously supporting their message of "economic justice and restoration of balance to American society."
 
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg also tried appealing to the protesters' supposed sensibilities by supporting their class warfare message. When Mr. Bloomberg finally resolved to clear out Zuccotti Park, occupiers sued the city for violating their First Amendment rights. Some rioted, and a large contingent picketed the mayor's mansion on the Upper East Side. The lesson in all this for Mr. Villaraigosa and other mayors is that trying to appease radicals is a fool's errand.

 

 

OWS calling for "economic justice and restoration of balance to American society,"
which presumably in turn requires an unjust confiscation of property just because.