President Obama and “Occupy Wall Street”
By Randall Holcombe • Wednesday December 7, 2011 1:02 PM PDT • 25 Comments
I don’t get it. Here is an article saying that President Obama is “riding the populist wave” of the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, giving him ” his best chance to reconnect with the American people.” These Occupy Wall Street people claim to represent the 99% against the elite 1% who are getting rich by taking advantage of the other 99%.
Here’s what I don’t get. President Obama’s administration has bailed out big corporations (like GM and Chrysler), subsidized high rollers who have gambled away the tax dollars paid by the 99% (like Solyndra), and even directly supported the 1% on Wall Street by bailing out the banks. The Treasury and Federal Reserve continue to cooperate to pursue policies that produce profits for banks at the expense of the 99%. Meanwhile, the poverty rate stands at 15.1% under President Obama’s watch, up from 13.2% in 2008.
If there is anything to the protests of the “Occupy Wall Street” people (which is a whole separate subject), it appears that they should be protesting against the current administration’s policies. How can the “Occupy Wall Street” people possibly see President Obama as an ally?
Tags: Bailouts, Budget and Tax Policy, Corporatism, Economics, Elections, Federal Reserve, Free Market, Government subsidies, Media, Politics, Poverty, Presidential Power, Progressivism, Taxation, The State 
Don’t know what you’re talking about or where you’re getting your info.?We, the 99%, stand with no politicians......they may stand with us tho
Adam | Dec 7, 2011 | Reply
Because, like Muslims, they’re not into real cause and effect. Their philosophy and economics are not integrated with reality.
Brooks Imperial | Dec 7, 2011 | Reply
I’s not supposed to make sense. It’s Socialism. Or Communism...Marxism... It’s all the same in the end. No freedom, no prosperity. Big Brother owns your every breath.
John M | Dec 7, 2011 | Reply
If memory serves me, I believe it was G W Bush who set the bailouts in motion before he left office. I could be wrong, its been known to happen.
Doc Mitchell | Dec 7, 2011 | Reply
You don’t get it because it isn’t true. The Tea Party was usurped by the GOP, and there is a desperate effort to usurp the Occupy movement for the Dems. If the media manages to help them swipe this movement, the only remaining protest for the people to get this criminal two headed cabal to listen to us will be a Patrick Henry style yankee uprising, and this last time, it won’t be pretty.
Margaret | Dec 7, 2011 | Reply
Doc, it’s true that Bush first gave a bailout to the auto companies. After that wasn’t enough, Obama gave much more. The comparison is an interesting one, because I doubt that the OWS people would identify with Bush if he’d done the same things Obama did.
Adam, I’m getting my information from articles like the one I linked to in my original post. Maybe the press has it wrong (or wants to generate OWS support for Obama). But this seems to be the popular press’s take on the politics of OWS.
Margaret, you may be right about this. My original post was based on the media’s reporting. Your take on this is quite plausible.
Randall Holcombe | Dec 7, 2011 | Reply
Even Michael “1%” Moore knows Obama is Mr. Wall Street.
Moore: “Wall Street Has Their Man And His Name Is Barack Obama”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/12/07/moore_wall_street_already_has_their_man_and_his_name_is_barack_obama.html
I guess your confusion comes from thinking you’ll get accurate information from the MSM.
Paul | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
I guess your confusion comes from thinking you’ll get accurate information from the MSM.
True. I include the right-wing talk radio that dominates radio as part of the MSM, despite their protests to the contrary.
If one is to believe the Glenn Becks and Sean Hannitys of radioland, you would think that Obama is orchestrating the entire OWS movement. This fits nicely with the meme that all OWS protesters are Marxists on drugs that need baths when the purpose of the propaganda is to demonize the other side.
Much like the liberals tried to portray the Tea Parties as a monolithic group of racist right-wing Republicans, conservatives and many faux libertarians are doing the same type of thing to the OWS protesters.
Like the notions that the free market has failed or that the free market is working held by liberals and conservatives, respectively, both groups have it wrong as we don’t have what could be called a free market economy to begin with.
It’s unfortunate that most political dialogue in America centers around partisan myths.
Tom Blanton | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
When politicians do things to win votes it doesn’t have to make sense.To some it’s too obvious, the problem is many people don’t do their home-work or listen to the liberal media forgetting they have an agenda. If the media suits you and you agree then you must be a liberal. What people do and how they act tells us pretty much all we need to know, it’s not the label put on them by the media. I had a problem with how the OWS acted, lets try to act civialized. I like the debates it allows us to see what we’re getting, sometimes we have to push the dirt away to get to the truth
Irene | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
no, adam... you people just poop in the street.
Hoot McVie | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
BECAUSE THE PROTESTERS KNOW SO LITTLE TO BEGIN WITH ...............!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
bernard coyne | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
You hear nothing of the $16 mil. in campaign contributions he has taken from Wall Street this year alone. More than twice the amount any other candidate has in their entire campaign fund.
Mike | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
Amen!
TexasLady | Dec 8, 2011 | Reply
OWS started with orderly, peaceful, even dignified way. What I see lately is disorder, hatefulness, and mindeless mob behavior in some cases. This mode will burn out the rigteous and spontaneous cry of the people for just and equitable change. It is pitiful.
Henry Spelter sr. | Dec 9, 2011 | Reply
I’m surprised that neither the author nor the commenters have paid attention to what the OWS participants have been saying. They have been very critical of Obama. Most (if not all) would not agree with the von Mises economic right wing faction of philosophical Libertarians. It is true that the media has wrongly claimed OWS support for Obama and it is also true that various orgs supporting the Democratic Party have tried to claim that OWS and Obama are in sync. It is also true that the same orgs have tried to co-opt the movement. However they are just as wrong as anyone else who makes the claim. The NY OWS general assembly and the vast majority on the line do not support what Obama has done.
As libertarians we should stick to truth, evidence, logic, and reason.
While on the topic of capture (or co-opting) of movements, the Koch brothers, the Republican Party, Glenn Beck etc. tried (with substantial success) to co-opt (and infiltrate) the Tea Party movement in much the same way that powerful interests would like to control the 99% (Occupy Wall Street) movement.
Nuff Said,
Jay
Jay Marg | Dec 12, 2011 | Reply
One more thought. I think it would be accurate to say that the OWS movement might never developed if Obama had prosecuted the Wall Street criminals that caused the whole economic mess, taken over the government, eliminate democracy, and neutralized our Constitution. Almost all OWS protestors blame Obama for not doing anything about the ongoing organized crime of the financial institutions. Had Obama not acted like a wholly owned subsidiary of the financial institutions there would be no OWS (99%) movement of any consequence.
Jay
Jay Marg | Dec 12, 2011 | Reply
The cult of the nanny state is not about logic:
http://tinyurl.com/cm8ntzw
Henry Bowman | Dec 12, 2011 | Reply
It’s crazy to think that anyone could ever think that Obama is a supporter/front man for the 99%.
Obama turned his back on the protesters and the Constitution when he made a statement that MUNICIPAL governments can handle the protests and that
“We would hope and want, as these decisions are made, that it balances between a long tradition of freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in this country, and obviously of demonstrating and protesting, and also the very important need to maintain law and order and health and safety standards, which was obviously a concern in this case”
It’s not small government’s job to defend the Constitution, its the Federal Government, and the Presidents. He’s turning around and saying “they’ll deal with it, and they’ll hopefully do it right”, while the municipal police forces pepper spray and arrest peaceful protesters.
Obama is just another politician purchased by big corporations who don’t care about social issues, they just want to secure a corporate-friendly economy. Just look at his top campaign contributors!
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638
Obama is not, and will never be, a friend of the 99%.
Nick T | Dec 12, 2011 | Reply
Clinton to Bush to Obama
Who Dug the Deep Hole? Who Fumbled the ball?
Numbers rounded
Clinton left Bush an 1800B Budget
Bush Left Obama a 3500 Budget
Clinton left Bush a 240B Surplus as far as the eye can see
Bush left Obama a 1400B Deficit as far as the eye can see
Clinton left Bush 5,700B of Debt
Bush left Obama 11,800B of Debt
Clinton left Bush a 237,000 net new jobs created per month
Bush left Obama a 31,000 lowest number since Hoover.
Clinton left Bush 17 Million Manufacturing Jobs
Bush left Obama 11 Million Manufacturing Jobs
Clinton left Bush a 10,800 Dow
Bush left Obama an 8028 Dow
Clinton left Bush Peace on Earth Good Will From Most Men
Bush left Obama Hell on Earth Two disastrous wars. Enmity of 1500 Million Muslims
Clinton left Bush a President most highly rated of any peacetime President in Asia, Africa, Europe.
Bush left Obama the most hated President in history
Bush left Obama an Housing Tsunami and Financial Volcano
Bush left Obama, in 2008, an 8500B Bail out commitment Yes! 8500 not just 700
Bush left Obama his Takeover of Fannie/Freddie, AIG, and first bailout of Chrysler
Bush increased maximum loan by Fannie/Freddie from $300,000 to $729,000
Bush increased FDIC maximum deposit coverage from $100,000 to $250,000
clarence swinney–political historian–lifeaholics of america burlington nc
author-Lifeaholic–Life story of Workaholic failure to Lifeaholic success
Best seller list in haw river nc population 200 and growing
comments welcome at cswinney2@triad.rr.com facts -numbers not opinion
clarence swinney | Dec 13, 2011 | Reply
10% own 70% net wealth——–80% own 15%
10% own 70% financial wealth–80% own 7%
10% get 46% individual income-70,000,000 get 13%
That is why we rank in bottom 5 on Equality in Oecd nations
Cause: We rank third in lowest taxed nations in Oecd nations.
Our corporations rank second as least taxed.
Since 1980, We borrowed 14,000B instead of taxing wealth enough to pay our way. Spending requires revenue. We spend we should tax enough. Wealth controls our media and propaganda machines.
We have a Total National Income of 12,000B and 3800B budget requires 32% of it . We tax 17.5% of our income and borrow borrow borrow.
In 2009 the top 50% paid 12.5% tax rate.
They got 87% of individual income.
Cut their taxes? Is we dumb?
If we cut spending by 10% it still takes 28.5% of our Total Income. We still need a tax increase from 17.5% of Total Income to 28.5%.
To cut Spending (3800) to match our 2100B of Revenue means a cut of 45% or 1700B. To increase our Revenue (2100) to match our 3800B Expenditure means a tax increase of 80%. 2100 to 3800.
clarence swinney | Dec 13, 2011 | Reply
WRECKONOMICS II REV 7-12-10
COURTESY :WALL STREET OF AMERICA
LEADERSHIP VIA CONSERVATIVE POLICIES
THANKS TO RONALD REAGAN AND G W BUSH
From 1946 to 1980 the period was known as the GREAT MIDDLE CLASS YEARS
Each President worked to reduce the Debt from WWII.
In 1980 Debt was less than 1000 Billion and Government Spending was 600 Billion per year.
Reagan boastful Cut Taxes plus Cut the size of Government was a Trojan Horse, per his OMB Stockman, to cut Taxes for very rich.
Reagan was Governor for 8 years during which he increased Taxes on many items.
He increased the state revenues more than any predecessor.
By Far. Cutting Government? Ho Hum. Blarney Baloney once more.
Reagan policies increased Spending by 80% .
Debt by 186%.
9-30-81 Debt was $999.9 Billion and 9-30-89 at $1,859 Billion
Conservatives use Spin: It was Congress.
From 1930 to 1980 we spent $6066 Billion.
Reagan 8 Budgets totaled over $7000 Billion.
Congress? Ho Hum.
Blarney Baloney.
Congress returned Reagan 8 budgets for his signature with
fewer total dollars on them.
Haynes Johnson in “sleepwalking” said Reagan administration was “most scurrilous in history”
138 were investigated /charged/fined. More than total for all preceding Presidents in 20th century.
There were scandals in 27 Departments of the Federal Government.
Most involved money fraud.
The book “Ronald Reagan-There he goes again” documents over 300 incorrect statements by good old Ron.
Each President from 1945 reduced the Debt then came Spend-Borrow Reagan
to increase government by 80%.
THEN-Here comes GHW BUSH.
No braggart here. Nice Gentleman.
He increased Debt to $4411 Billion.
A 54% Increase.
Give him credit for increasing Tax on Rich due to out of control Deficits.
He had courage to put America first over ideology and party.
THEN-Pay your Way CLINTON ARRIVES
The Debt on 9-30-1993 was $4411 Billion.
The Debt on 9-30-01 was $5807 Billion.
An increase of $1396 or 31%
He ended with a surplus.
HERE comes old King of Spend-Borrow GW BUSH
Debt was $5807 Billion and on 9-30-09 it was $11,909 Billion.
105% increase.
Reagan-186%
Bush I-54%
Clinton-31%
Bush II-105%
Reagan-Bush I-Bush II did not pay down a penny of debt in 20 years
Those Three Famous Conservatives added $10,946 Billion to our Debt.
Three so called Famous “conservatives” promoted cut government
Up = Down to them.
INTEREST ON DEBT
9-30-81 to 9-30-09 we paid $8400 Billion in Interest.
87% Interest Paid on Debt incurred by the Famous 3.
Is it not possible(no) that without Reagan + Bush Tax Cuts we would enjoy a Surplus?
REDISTRIBUTION DOWN TO MIDDLE CLASS
Increase Unearned Income Tax to 40%. Make Gamblers pay.
Increase Top Income Tax Rate to 40%
Increase Estate Tax big time big time biggie
Eliminate Loopholes on Corporate profits—Set a Minimum
2008 -16% average payment-(top rate 35%)
In 2003 distribution of corporate profits by CBO report revealed
Bottom 80% of Income earners got 8%–Top 5% got 67%—Top 1% got 49%
2009 Tax Return of Exxon pays no tax on billions in profits. Wrong. Sad.
2007—Exxon paid no tax. Got a Refund.
2010—Exxon Profit 45 Billion. Let us see if pay a tax?
Renew Revenue Sharing to return cost to rich from middle class
Clarence Swinney
Political historian since 1991 on Reagan-Clinton-Bush II administrations.
Lifeaholics Of America — old n ugly but honest mad mad mad at Inequality in Amrica
Author-Lifeaholic-Work for a Life not just a Living—Workaholic to Lifeaholic
Author-forthcoming– title not decided—How Democrats created a Great Middle Class and Wall Street Rich Conservatives are determined to destroy it
Many Stats from 12-6-09 polidose.com article by John Lucia “The National Debt:Betrayal and Devastation
Comments and corrections welcome at cswinney2@triad.rr.com I do err.
clarence swinney | Dec 13, 2011 | Reply
Your points are well-taken, Clarence. I don’t think George W. Bush is an OWS ally any more than is President Obama. But, I also don’t think the press would make a case that Bush and OWS are allies. That’s what they are doing with Obama and OWS.
Randall Holcombe | Dec 13, 2011 | Reply
Clarence, many of your figures are distortions. Last time I looked, the 10% included the middle class and anybody who sold a home would fall into that. Only counting 1% is more honest.
@Nick T: The YouTube vids I’ve seen that claim to be from the Occupy movement makes capitalism, ownership, and a system that makes you earn money is the enemy. It is possible that those vids are fake as some claim. However, the actions of late by individuals solidifies that a statist perspective is very prominent and possibly dominant in the movement.
@Jay Marg; the only criticism I’ve seen on the YouTube vids aimed at Obama is like Michael Moore’s complaints that Obama isn’t doing enough. The Occupy movement still represents the ideals of the “change” movement from 4 years ago even though Obama seems on a different wave-length now.
Henry Spelter sr.: Amen. I used to support them until it became clear they were a crowd that probably was being manipulated by a man behind the curtain.
Fluidly Unsure | Dec 17, 2011 | Reply
Right now the American people are in desperate need of guidance and hope to carry them out of this recession. Barack is definitely fulfilling his role in providing for the American people his praises to the lower and middle class. He’s keeping the emotional levels at a norm. However, one can’t forget all he bailouts he did with Freddie, Fannie, GMC, Ford, AIG; but I think the general undertone for Americans is longing for the past. Obama is still giving hope to Americans as the biggest supporter for middle class is the President
JeffS | Dec 19, 2011 | Reply