Driving my Son to school yesterday, I listen to some guys on a show called "Billy Madison." they said there are some famous musicians (didn't catch their names, sorry), who are writing a song for the occupy wall street movement. They say it's for the 99%ers. Here's the sick part. One is worth 30million, another 14m, and the third is worth 4m. Why the fuck don't they march their asses down to Wall Street, and give out some of that $ since they're obviously, into the entitlement theme? Only in America... Maybe they won't give out some of their wealth to these occupy shitbags, as they know deep down these people wont work, will never work, and would only squander the money.
So which of these goals do you disagree with ? Your moronic knee-jerk dismissal of them is something I would expect from the typical drooling Faux News watcher. You may want to change your bib now. OWS's goals include a reduction in the influence of corporations on politics,[50] more balanced distribution of income,[50] more and better jobs,[50] bank reform[32] (especially to curtail speculative trading by banks), forgiveness of student loan debt[50][51] or other relief for indebted students,[52][53] and alleviation of the foreclosure situation.[54] Some media label the protests "anti-capitalist",[55] while others dispute the relevance of this label.[56] Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times noted "while alarmists seem to think that the movement is a 'mob' trying to overthrow capitalism, one can make a case that, on the contrary, it highlights the need to restore basic capitalist principles like accountability."[57] Rolling Stone writer Matt Taibbi asserted, "These people aren't protesting money. They're not protesting banking. They're protesting corruption on Wall Street."[58] In contradiction to such views, academic Slavoj Zizek wrote, "capitalism is now clearly re-emerging as the name of the problem."[59]