CHARTS: Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry

CHARTS: Here's What The Wall Street Protesters Are So Angry About...

The "Occupy Wall Street" protests are gaining momentum, having spread from a small park in New York to marches to other cities across the country.

So far, the protests seem fueled by a collective sense that things in our economy are not fair or right. But the protesters have not done a good job of focusing their complaints—and thus have been skewered as malcontents who don't know what they stand for or want.

(An early list of "grievances" included some legitimate beefs, but was otherwise just a vague attack on "corporations." Given that these are the same corporations that employ more than 100 million Americans and make the products we all use every day, this broadside did not resonate with most Americans).

So, what are the protesters so upset about, really?

Do they have legitimate gripes?

To answer the latter question first, yes, they have very legitimate gripes.

And if America cannot figure out a way to address these gripes, the country will likely become increasingly "de-stabilized," as sociologists might say. And in that scenario, the current protests will likely be only the beginning.

http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wal ... 11-10?op=1


This one is particularly interesting:

That 9% rate, by the way, equates to 14 million Americans—people who want to work but can't find a job.



So what does all this mean in terms of net worth? Well, for starters, it means that the top 1% of Americans own 42% of the financial wealth in this country. The top 5%, meanwhile, own nearly 70%.

And remember that huge debt problem we have—with hundreds of millions of Americans indebted up to their eyeballs? Well, the top 1% doesn't have that problem. They only own 5% of the country's debt.

As the nation's richest people often point out, they do pay the lion's share of taxes in the country: The richest 20% pay 64% of the total taxes. (Lower bar). Of course, that's because they also make most of the money. (Top bar).

Banks have also been collecting interest on money they are NOT lending—the "excess reserves" they have at the Fed. Back in the financial crisis, the Fed decided to help bail out the banks by paying them interest on this money that they're not lending. And they're happily still collecting it. (It's AWESOME to be a bank.)

And so, in conclusion, we'll end with another look at the "money shot"—the one overarching reason the Wall Street protesters are so upset: Wages as a percent of the economy. Again, it's basically the lowest it has ever been.


So, for the knuckle-draggers whose only comment is "Go get a job", the problem is that there are 14 million people chasing 100% of the available jobs...and not finding one. (And if you look at the rest of the charts, it's obvious that the failed "trickle-down economics" hasn't created jobs since the Bush tax-cuts went into place; and if their only solution is "let the rich keep more--it will trickle down in the form of new jobs," they are as empty as they have been since they took over a booming economy in 2001 and destroyed it.)

This was my fav chart from the article.... LOL
http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wal ... 11-10?op=1

I knew it would be...

Yet the party they are supposed to support, the Dems are going to get hundreds of millions from Wall Street, who do you think they will listen to?

Looks like money is its own kind of power. Clinton was a very smart politician, but he really sold the soul of the party to the money men.

It doesn't matter which party wins other than a few sideline issues. Wall Street will win no matter what. They own the office.

Then again, who gets more of the federal budget payouts, peoplew/ entitlements or corporate welfare programs? In many ways, the poor still have a lot of control on the pursestrings.

SS109 wrote: Then again, who gets more of the federal budget payouts, peoplew/ entitlements or corporate welfare programs? In many ways, the poor still have a lot of control on the pursestrings.

Really? how do you figure that?

archer wrote:

SS109 wrote: Then again, who gets more of the federal budget payouts, peoplew/ entitlements or corporate welfare programs? In many ways, the poor still have a lot of control on the pursestrings.

Really? how do you figure that?

A much higher percentage of the federal budget goes directly to Social Security & people on disablilty programs than go to corporate welfare, even when you have Obama writing checks to failing solar manufacturers.

SS109 wrote:

archer wrote:

SS109 wrote: Then again, who gets more of the federal budget payouts, peoplew/ entitlements or corporate welfare programs? In many ways, the poor still have a lot of control on the pursestrings.

Really? how do you figure that?

A much higher percentage of the federal budget goes directly to Social Security & people on disablilty programs than go to corporate welfare, even when you have Obama writing checks to failing solar manufacturers.

so people collecting social security and disability are considered "the poor", I think I take exception to that.

OK, retraction, the 99% get more goverment payments than the corporations.