In light of the receipt occupy *insert city here* protests, here is a controversial but interesting piece by Kris Adams. Have a read here or find the original HERE.
First Against The Wall
I’m not an alarmist…but (unreputable way to begin a sentence) Is the treatment of Gaddafi at the hands of the mob a portent of what is to come for the tyrants of the West that produce nothing but wealth for themselves at the expense of everyone else? We produce jobs they say – I call bullshit, where they rule – unemployment is rife and these companies seem content to execute mass sackings to maximise their profit. Where are the shareholders with a conscience? Where is the Government of the people? Occupation of financial districts is the beginning and I hope and pray that this fight will not descend into bloodshed. But so much blood has already been shed for the God of greed and that’s why drawing a bow between Gaddafi and the heads of Wall St Type Players isn’t that far-fetched. They steal, they oppress and they are mad enough to believe they have a right to do so and that everyone will love them for doing so. Heed the warning, don’t find yourself cowering in a drainpipe, find a conscience.
You’d think that the whole 1% as opposed to the 99% issue would mean that garnering public support to see the 1% as the first against the wall wouldn’t be so hard but the problem of greed goes deeper than that. On graphs I saw recently regarding the distribution of wealth in the U.S. 1% owned 40% of the wealth and if you stretched out to the top 5% you’d find 70% and to the top 20% you’d find 85-90% of the wealth. I find it disturbing that 80% of the people own 10-15% of the wealth. So my point is that the movement against the rich is not against 1%, it’s against 20%. And judging by comments on news articles and opinion pieces it would seem that those on the side of the rich is greater even than that number. Is that because so many still believe that they can break into the top 20? Well with the gap between rich and poor widening, that is getting more and more out of reach and besides, why would you want to do that if you could only get to the top by climbing over others to get there? Or is it because people like the comfort of being ruled?
In Australia the differences are not as marked as they are in the U.S. But unless we support action to see real change the gap between rich and poor could grow here too. I don’t want to discredit the slogan that is the 99%. It is a powerful argument and I’m encouraged to see that on October 29 there is a call for a global march to send a message to the upcoming G20 Summit in France. I like the synergy that is the 99% asking the 1% to pay a 1% robinhood tax on all financial transactions and currency trades. The robinhood tax claims that were this tax implemented it would raise over a trillion dollars and fund every social program and environmental initiative in the world. Is that asking too much? The 1% would have to be greedy evil bastards to shout this down would they not?
All these numbers are doing my head in.