MINNEAPOLIS (WCCO) — The Occupy Minnesota protesters are facing new rules this week — no more sleeping out and no more tacking up signs.

Some protesters said they aren’t too happy about the new rules and will try to defy the new restrictions Monday night. They’re planning a “sleep-in” at Government Plaza in Minneapolis, and plan to stay overnight, hoping that they won’t get arrested.

In addition to those restrictions, demonstrators are also no longer allowed to leave items unattended. Monday morning many protesters organized their belongings to be taken away before the items are confiscated.

Charles Geller said he started packing up Occupy Minnesota’s make-shift kitchen. It can’t stay at that location any longer, but he’s not sure exactly where it’s going.

“It’s been a place for us to serve anybody that’s hungry a hot meal. It’s also been a great spot to get a cup of coffee while it gets cold. It’s definitely served a lot of food to people,” said Geller.

County leaders have decided the changes are needed because of health and safety concerns and increased security costs.

Comments (135)
  1. Idiot Savant says:

    I wonder how much vacation and PTO these folks have built up that they can’t take this much time off away from their jobs… OH WAIT…they don’t have one!

    1. jackactionhero says:

      Dumb comment. I hope they occupy ever major city of every state in the union until the fat old white men with all the money stop perpetuating the system put into place with the sole purpose of keeping them rich on the backs of the actual workers.

      It is NOT ok that a CEO of a failing company can give himself a 15 million dollar bonus as their shutting the doors and laying off the real employees.

      How is it you disagree? Please be specific.

      1. jackactionhero says:

        I should have used the word “they’re” in the above comment.

        1. Idiot Savant says:

          Hey Jack – Can you wear a sign around your neck that says “jackactionhero” so when I’m down there laughing at you guys, I know which one you are.

      2. AntiTeabagger says:

        Oh, so now you are putting the race card on the table with your “white men” comment.

        Grow up, Jacka$$Hero

        1. jackactionhero says:


          I see what you did there. Very clever! With that type of raw intellect, I have no doubt you will have a very successful career in either the food service or hospitality industries. Good luck!

      3. Phid says:

        What a bigoted comment.

      4. Phidippides says:

        Jackactionhero – please provide me with the name of this “failing company” with a CEO that gave himself a $15 million bonus as the company was “shutting the doors and laying off the real employees”. Thanks.

        1. jackactionhero says:

          So you’ve never heard of AIG?

          Government had to take it over to keep it from folding entirely. Then the CEO gave himself a cool 10 million after the big bailout to save it.

          Of course, they needed the bailout because they kept keeping the money among the senior staff instead of hedging the company’s investments and diversifying their portfolio. Nice, right?

      5. Dear Hippies says:

        I wonder who has to pay for the protesters mess and additional police security? Oh yea, the taxpayer!

        I have 0 empathy for the protesters…

        1. jackactionhero says:

          Why? So protesting something people think is unfair should be illegal or what? Should our right to peaceful assembly be taken away and removed from the Constitution?

          I don’t understand why you hold the protestors in such disdain. No matter what sort of mess is there, and no matter who or what causes any mess, the same people are dispatched to clean it. That’s their job, sir. Your taxes are not affected by more people doing more cleaning. Sorry, but that’s just not how it works.

          1. KR says:

            I have no problem with a peaceful protest. But clean up after yourself, pack it up and go home at night.

            And the arrogance of “it’s their job” to clean up after you? Have some respect for your fellow man.

            Those individuals may be tasked with keeping the area tidy, but It is NO ONE’s job to clean up after you. You make a mess? YOU clean it up.

            It’s the type of attitude displayed in your post that causes me to hold the protesters in disdain.

            1. jackactionhero says:

              You’re wrong. It is somebody’s job to clean that area up, whether it’s cleaning up after you, or cleaning up after me.

              I agree, they should clean up after themselves. It also appears that is what is happening. So what exactly are you disdainful about again?

              Or are you the classic Shouter At the Wind Guy…

              1. KR says:

                Not a shouter, and not a guy. As I said above, I have no problem with the protest but I do think the folks should keep the area clean.

                Don’t try to make me believe that they are, because I’ve gone past it in the morning and there are signs and other items everywhere.

                We have a difference of opinion, and that’s okay.

                Still disdainful (especially towards an adult male who likes to call people names because it makes him feel good).

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  Signs and items everywhere? Well, duh, right? There are a bunch of people basically living there, so what did you expect?

                  The fact of the matter is that they ARE cleaning up after themselves, but nevertheless, there will still be evidence that they are there. That is unavoidable and acceptable and to be expected is it not?

                  I don’t care if you don’t like the name calling. If I encounter an idiot who is unaware of their idiot status, I feel obligated to clue them in on it. Feel free to find it distasteful, disdainful, rude and whatever else paddles your canoe.

    2. me says:

      Oh wait…Yes we do…we get days off you know. We don’t work 7 days a week 24 hours a day..we do get a day or two off in the middle of the week to protest…moron! I am very much employed in a very well paid position. Think before you speak, or better yet, have your facts straight first.

  2. comment says:

    Worried about security costs? Get rid of security.

  3. Jayne M says:

    These people are idiots!

    1. just sayin says:

      Then maybe the government shouldn’t be giving them bailouts…

      But then again, I bet you didn’t know that the government, your little obammy – made interest off those bailout loans.

    2. Ralph Spoilsport says:

      Jack, there are only 2 things wrong with your posts, the style and the (lack of) content. What else is there?

      How much SHOULD a CEO make? Why should YOU decide. They are responsible to the BOD and stockholders. Much of their income is from stock options and thus based on the performance of the firm. That said, I don’t hink we should have use taxpayers $ to bail them (or anyone else) out. We should also get rid of foreign aid and welfare.

      So I guess you’ll need to get a job.

      1. jackactionhero says:

        There are many things wrong with your comment.

        A CEO should not be allowed to give himself the money that the workers should have gotten.

        Pre-Great Depression, the ratio of CEO pay to lowest FT salaried employee was 30:1. Now it’s closer to 3000:1 and the relative pay of the FT workers are around 10 cents per hour.

        So how much should a CEO make if their company is bankrupt and the employees are being laid off?

        I have a job. I’ll wager I have a better one than you do. But that doesn’t mean the wealthy should control all the wealth and the poor should remain poor. That makes families into self-proclaimed royalty.

        Don’t let the fact that you don’t have an Economics degree stop you from posting comments about things you don’t have the slightest background in, right, Ralph, you buffoon?

    3. AntiTeabagger says:

      Did you graduate highschool? I bet not. nice comments coming from a racist.

      1. jackactionhero says:

        College even. With a degree.

        How about you? Is your best friend also a black man? Probably not. 🙂

        1. AntiTeabagger says:

          Oh wow, another successful Phoenix University Grad! Proud of ya!

          Yes, I have friends whom are what you like to call “Black” I call them my friends, I don’t see in your “colored” world like you do.

          What was your degree in basket weaving? I think you should call them up and get your money back.

          You obviously have an issue with one CEO whom you claim gets this big bonus. Who is this mystery person, did he steal your wife too? Or just shoot your dog?

          1. jackactionhero says:

            Phoenix University? What is that weak insult even supposed to mean?

            You think because I asked if your best friend is also a black man, that I refer to him as my black man friend? LOL! That is really funny.

            Hey John, I want you to meet my black friend, Tom. Black friend Tom, this is my White friend John. LOL!!!!!!

            1. AntiTeabagger says:

              You make about as much sense as your ignorant posts.

              1. jackactionhero says:

                And you make as much sense as Sarah Palin in a spelling bee.

                1. KR says:

                  And you’re only happy when you get the last word.

                2. jackactionhero says:

                  Last word is legs.

                  Spread the word.

  4. Idiot Savant says:

    I’m right smack dab in the middle of the 99%, but I’ve come to peace with the fact that the rich rule the world. It has been and will always be like that.
    I’m not jealous, I don’t hate them, they probably worked hard for that money too.
    I’m happy they have given me a job and if they own or run the company, it’s none of my business what they do with the money.

    1. jackactionhero says:

      That’s like the slave saying that freedom really isn’t for them anyway.

      You sir, are the stupidest man alive.

      1. Idiot Savant says:

        Then tell me oh wise one, shoud I quit my $50K job and go down and protest even though I am very happy in life? *insert insult here*

        1. Idiot Savant says:

          and last I checked, the old saying “look out for yourself first” still stood strong…

        2. jackactionhero says:

          I make twice as much as you, and I would gladly go down there and protest with them if I felt it was going to do something other than get me fired.

          1. Idiot Savant says:

            I’m giving you one of those corny movie claps where they start slowly and speed up until the entire crowd is clapping…

            1. jackactionhero says:

              I have no interest in your envy. I was only making a point. I apologize if you felt like I was trying to upstage you.

          2. sam i am. says:

            Then you sir are part of the problem. Did you know that if you make twice as much as Mr. Savant then you are in the 1 percent. Go talk to Michael Moore – he understands your pain.

            HAHAHAHAHAHA that makes you a hypocrite.

            1. jackactionhero says:

              I’m not anywhere near your 1%, my friend. The top 1% make far more than my 97k which goes out as fast as it comes in.

              1. Phid says:

                The top 1% start at $343,927, so you are much closer than most.

              2. AntiTeabagger says:

                So your 97K is twice as much as 50K? I think you need a new college degree so that you can add. By the way, burger college, doesn’t count.

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  My apologies. My salary technically is not 100.0% more than yours. You are correct.

                  Perhaps I should have included overtime and bonuses. Then I would probably be at 105% of your salary. Is that accurate enough for you now?

                  I’d hate to disappoint you by again quoting an incorrect statistical reference.

                2. jackactionhero says:

                  205% is what my fingers should have entered. But really, at this point, what difference does it make, right?

          3. AntiTeabagger says:

            Anyone who outright says “they make twice as much as you” is not telling the truth.

            1. jackactionhero says:

              Anybody who says “I make 50k and am happy in life” is not telling the truth.

              See what I did there?

              1. AntiTeabagger says:

                jackactionhero = moron see what I did there?

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  Ouch, that’s some hard-hitting stuff right there. I think I need a tissue.

      2. Risk says:

        @jackactionhero…I was for the Occupy Minnesota until I came across the stupidity, arrogance and ignorance that is you.

        Please give the laptop back to your parents, put on your McD’s uni and go flip a burger. Or better yet, go to college, get an education and then a job and stop free-loading off of others.

        It takes a special kind of stupid to be you.

        1. jackactionhero says:

          Very brilliant response. I’m not on a laptop, my parents are retired and moved away, and I never worked at McDs, even 20 years ago when I was a teenager.

          I have a college degree and a better FT job than you do.

          It takes a special ed kind of stupid to comment as buffoonishly as you.

          1. Sam I am says:

            Prove it Captain Obvious.

            1. jackactionhero says:

              Wow, you seem to have taken a shining to me, eh? I’m flattered by your attention, and appreciate your comments.

              What shall I prove for you, sir? You seem to be so upset with me that I’m not even sure where to start. 😉

              I worked at Hardee’s in Hudson, WI back in 1990-1991. Does that count?

              1. Risk says:

                He, jackactionhero…so you are omnipotent? You know what I do for a living and how much I earn? That is a neat trick. I know magicians don’t like to reveal the tricks of their trade but…if we ask really nicely will you tell us?

                Let’s evaluate: jackactionhero makes 97K, FT employed and now ridicules the disabled…winner. No bigger doooosh could possibly post here.

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  Ridicules the disabled? I think you’re reading the wrong comments, sir. Unless you consider the lack of intellect displayed by the above idiots. Then yes, I agree with you, they are definitely disabled in some mental capacity.

    2. Jay says:

      This comment is typical of self proclaimed idiots.

      You sir, are a sheep. BAAAAH….BAAAH!!

      In case you weren’t aware, we do not live in Iran or North Korea. This country is a Democracy. The people protesting are being what are called “citizens”. You can sit there and talk sh1t but, until you get out and fight for what you believe in, you’re nothing but a pile of it.

  5. gomer says:

    They close down a kids lemonade stand in St. Paul but leave this “kitchen” in place for over a month. I’m sure this “kitchen” had a food permit right? Funny how if you are of one political side, the laws don’t apply to you.

    This is following the text book of Leftists, selective enforcement of laws.

  6. bobby says:

    Break the rules, get arrested.

    I hope everyone that spends the night gets thrown in jail.

    I am curious though, what is the curfew? At what time can they no longer be out there, and at what time can they reconvene?

    So, go home get a few hours of sleep in a bed, then come back bright and early to protest again.

  7. Ralph Spoilsport says:

    The Occupy MN movement should be converted to the Occupy Prison movement. It’s time to stop coddling these “people.”

    1. jackactionhero says:

      It’s their legal right to protest. Are you suggesting protestors be silenced and imprisoned, Mr. Ahmedinejad?

      1. Ralph Spoilsport says:

        They have become a public nuisance, littering and disturbing the peace, and guilt of criminal trespass. They should be removed, as should you.

        1. jackactionhero says:

          No. They haven’t. And you stating that they have doesn’t make it true.

          You want to remove them, why don’t you go down there and try?
          You want to remove me, why don’t you come over here and try?

          That’s what I thought. Now sit down and shut up.

          1. Ralph Spoilsport says:

            Where are you and I’ll be more than happy to remove you. Will take about 5 minutes of my valuable time.

            They all should be arrested and thrown in jail. You need to have your retromingency treated by a qualified vet.

            1. jackactionhero says:

              Arrested for what? Irritating you? I don’t think that’s a crime.

              I’d love to see you try to remove me from anything, anywhere at any time. Boy would you have a surprise coming…

              1. Ralph Spoilsport says:

                You aren’t irritating me. I am concerned only that my cardiologist says I should avoid too much laughing.

                Where would you like to meet to have me remove you? What time? What color dress will you be wearing, if you can find anyone interested in dressing you.

                I can spare the 2 minutes it would take to shut you up, but what would be do for amusement?

                Everything you know is wrong. And I GUARANTEE you that I make far more money than you do, plus I earn it.

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  I would love for you to try. See you at Gabe’s By the Park in St. Paul tomorrow at 4? I’ll be wearing dress slacks and a pressed shirt.

                  After you’re done trying, I can buy you a beer and hold the straw between your broken teeth for you as the medics are using the jaws of life to get your foot out of your a55.

              2. AntiTeabagger says:

                Mr. Tough guy on the internet. I bet you couldn’t fight your way out of a wet paper bag. All talk.

  8. Mother Jones says:

    Some say why do I go to Occupy MN after work, and I ask them why aren’t you going ?
    There is a great saying: ” if you don’t use your rights, they will go away”.
    So many have sworn to Uphold the Constituation and defend the 1st Amendment rights but those are just empty oaths if you don’t defend the 1st Amendment rights when they are attacked.

    1. AntiTeabagger says:

      How are they being attacked? Your saying your freedom of speech is at threat so that is why you are protesting? Again, people, get a clue, you have no agenda, you have no clear objectives and you have no legs to stand on in terms of your so called protest.

      You have no backing of “the people” your backing is abut 40-50 homeless people. Do they have a voice, you bet they do, but I bet more than half of them are that way because of booze and drugs not because the big man “whitey” is holding their heads underwater.

  9. Mother Jones says:

    Today is a good day and night to defend your !st amendment rights. There will be a march and rally at 5pm and then we stay overnight. The plaza is on the light rail line.

    1. Idiot Savant says:

      great, I’ll be down there handing out $1 bills because that’s what everyone wants right? Free handouts?

      1. frozenrunner says:

        Idiot yes, savant no. The crux of the protest was laid out by Jack above with the CEO pay. ( A point you had no comeback for) They are not out there for wanting something free. The second thing you might not understand is multiple agenda. While agreeing on the inequity of life and the top 1% there can be other points presented that are not agreed upon

        1. Sam i am says:

          My response is – who are YOU to determine what CEO make. A CEO of a failing company a.k.a. Solyndra should not get a bonus or bailout, a.k.a. Obama administration.

          Don’t shoot the messenger – have the conversation with your president.

          1. frozenrunner says:

            Solyndra raised a billion in venture capital. More than the US government got snookered by a good sales pitch. Solyndra’s fault was they did not figure cheap Chinese products into the equation. I have no clue what their CEO made.
            I never posted my opinion on what CEOs make other than to as what did Helmsley ever do to earn 100 million. Perhaps you need to as Jack that question. You and Jack can each have your own opinion. By judging how you and Jack post I would expect a more reasoned and thoughtful answer out of Jack

          2. jackactionhero says:

            “My response is – who are YOU to determine what CEO make.”

            A legitimate question, and thank you for posing it.

            Indeed, who should determine the CEO’s salary and bonus structure? Should the same person or people determine the lowest paid FT salaried employee? What should the ratio of incomes be? What would be appropriate? Or is it not necessary for it to be appropriate? Should a FT Admin Asst make $12/hour, and the CEO earn 27 million, plus a 7 million dollar bonus and stock options for an additional 9 million?

            What if the CEO took 30 million, a 10 million dollar bonus, and 12 million in stock options, and the FT Admin Asst is forced to take a cut in pay down to $11/hour and has to pay for her own benefits now as well.

            You do understand that the more the executive staff takes home, the less is available for other places on the Balance Sheet, including salaries, right?

            So, indeed, how much should a CEO make, and who is to say? Should there be no expectation of fair distribution of the company’s wealth to its employees, and rather just the leadership execs should enjoy it all?

            Is that what you’re arguing, sir?

            1. sad but true says:

              Go get’em Architect…..you are a man of wisdom among those who are ” synapse ” challenged “

              1. jackactionhero says:

                I’m amazed that you recognized my writing. Seriously.

                Well done, sir.

                1. AntiTeabagger says:

                  You seriously have a hard on for CEO salary debates. Are you just jealous that you will never make as much as a CEO and to be honest with you. Why should you care what they make. I don’t care, as long as I get my check every week, pay my bills and put a roof over my families head. I don’t sit and wonder and worry about what the CEO of my company is making and how I can devise an evil plot against it.

                  You people have too much time on your hands and you are not taking the time to enjoy life, but living in a fantasy world.

                2. jackactionhero says:

                  I’m jealous that there isn’t a level playing field, and the people in charge of the playing field have initiated rules that only they get to play by. Further, they create the rules to keep themselves in their position, and us in ours.

                  Whether you care or not does not make their greed less reprehensible, or more appropriate.

                3. AntiTeabagger says:

                  If you are jealous of not having a level playing field, then make your own field. Just because a guy is more educated and has more potential than you, doesn’t give you the right to cry about the game not being setup fair. The game is there, your just not smart enough to be on the winning team.

  10. Tom says:

    I’m way too busy. Vikings vs. Packers, big bowl of chips and a coke.

    1. What Next? says:

      But, (said tongue in cheek) aren’t the players part of the 1%? We should hate them and protest them by Occupying something!

  11. me says:

    Football sux, and they make more money then they need to just to play a sport. They make more than a police man or fireman who puts their life on the line everyday to keep us safe. They make more than healthcare workers who put up with degenerate patients. I wouldn’t be heartbroken, and would have a better weekend train commute, if they just did away with food ball all together.

  12. me says:

    note I purposly said food ball because that’s the only thing successful happening at any vikings games, is the fans successfully eating their way to unhealthy weight gain

  13. Happily in the middle says:

    Wow, this has created quite the virtual shouting match….

    I am not a fan of calling each other the names of our youth but prefer constructive conversation.

    I am in favor of the 1st amendment, I am in favor of free markets and I am in favor of freedom for all.

    We all have the right to protest and the CEOs have the right to competive salaries. The Boards of Directors are the organizations that offer the compensation packages, the CEOs can accept it or go elsewhere.

    I am in favor of a country that does not dictate how much or little money I choose to make and does not dictate how I spend it (taxes).

    I am also in favor of a country that doesn’t dictate how I live my life, whether it’s protesting with OccupyMn or marrying whoever I choose.

    So go sleep outside as long as you can stand it and enjoy the privilege of protest in this great country of ours. Just don’t try to take away my rights to “be all I can be” in everyway including financially.

    1. Bravo says:

      first intelligent comment on here today, but I’m sure someone will call you a name or two..

    2. John Doe says:

      Happily in the Middle that was an outstanding comment! This is the first comment that makes sense and has real thought to it. Thank you, may be the others in this conversation will read this and say hey…that is what the Constitution was all about!

      1. Citizen says:

        @in the Middle, “Just don’t try to take away my rights to “be all I can be” in everyway including financially.” Explanation needed. Does that mean you don’t want to be taxed or “pay to play” to support the United States of America? It almost sounds as though you are advocating anarchy here. America will dictate how you can live in that you cannot break laws, you cannot be a pedopile, or an abusive spouse, a murderer, a thief, I think you get the picture. Your statement was so dumb as to be unintelligible. But, hey if you want no rules, people will be on your doorstep tomorrow to claim your land and home.

        1. John Doe says:

          Citizen, Happlily is not proposing anarchy. Happily is only refering to our basic rights that are outlined in the bill of rights. Obviously we have to have laws, but when the laws infringe on our basic rights, that are outlined in the bill of rights, will cause issues. When it comes to taxes, that is a refrence on “sin taxes.” These sin taxes are used to persude people away from stuff as a consumer by the will of the government. These examples would be trying to tax junk food, pop and what ever else.

  14. tompoe says:

    I had to laugh, thinking about the cluelessness of our corporate media, and our Hennepin County Clowns that call themselves Commissioners, today. I watched the segment on the elimination of our right to assemble and speak down at the Government Plaza. The anchors reported the reason was the health and safety of citizens. Then the segment highlighted the young children sleeping in a cardboard box to raise money to feed the homeless. Where else than Minnesota for total lunacy?

  15. A Voter says:

    I’ll bet the British are feeling pretty stupid about now. Why didn’t we think of telling those American Tea Baggers they couldn’t revolt because it wasn’t safe, or healthy to do so.

  16. jackactionhero an idoit says:

    whats the point the government never going to change… its a excuse for homeless people to sleep somewhere ….

    and jackactionhero is bored because he out in the cold with them lol hahaha

    1. jackactionhero says:

      “whats the point the government never going to change… its a excuse for homeless people to sleep somewhere ….”

      As demonstrated by our knuckle-dragging friend who can barely put a sentence together, some people have been taking it in the tailpipe so long that they don’t even feel the thumping on their backside anymore, and they don’t want you to point it out to them either.

      Now that’s just sad. Grow a spine, sir.

  17. Ordinary Guy says:

    It’s worse than greed or jealousy, let’s draw an analogy:

    Say you got the neighbor’s kid to mow for $4 to replace your kid’s work at $5. And your wife pays yours $3 for allowance instead. Did you save a buck?

    Well, if you’re divorced, yes. If you’d rather teach your kid a moral lesson about competition, maybe you can. But if you consider all as your family, you cheated yourself by $2, right?

    That’s what our import economy does. The tax shift from domestic production labor and salaries and profits to the backs of all the others at home, make them a very bad deal for all but the importing billionaires and despots.

  18. Ordinary Guy says:

    It’s worse than greed or jealousy:

    Say you get the neighbor’s kid to mow for $4 what your kid did for $5. Then your wife paid yours $3 allowance, did you save a buck?

    Unless you’re divorced, you cheated yourself. Our economy does the same thing by shifting the responsibility to our surviving domestic workers.

  19. bobby says:

    Does anyone else see the irony of all of this?

    Occupy wants the government to help control and distribute wealth, put restrictions on companies profits, and how much money top level execs can make…these all equate to more government control.

    But as soon as the government says you can’t do something, you cry that your rights are being violated.

    All the while, the Anti- Occupy people don’t want the gov’t to control salaries, tell companies how to operate, and generally want the gov’t to stay out of our daily lives,

    But then they have no problem when they gov’t tells people when and how they can protest.
    There is massive hipocrisy on both sides of the issue.

    Everyone seems to want it both ways, and no one seems to be able to step back and look at the issues logically and without bias.

    1. jackactionhero says:

      You are the one who is not understanding the situation.

      Occupy is not trying to get the government to distribute wealth. That has never been said.

      1. bobby says:

        Are you serious Jack?

        what the He!! have you been spouting off about on here every day about? Unequal distribution of wealth, CEO’s making too much money, workers not making enough. Taxing the rich more.

        This is EXACTLY what you are saying everyday….that is wealth distribution!

        1. jackactionhero says:

          Wrong. That is NOT what I am saying. I’m not surprised you didn’t understand my point though.

          I do NOT want the wealthy to give me their money. I have NEVER said that.

          I want the laws to not protect the wealthy on the backs of the workers. I want a level playing field. There’s a huge difference there, kiddo.

          1. bobby says:

            So, you want the GOV’T to make laws that say how much a CEO can make? Does this level playing field you speak of involve some manipulation of salaries? A level playing field is what we have right now, companies can pay workers whatever they want. If it is too low, they will get bad employees, or no employees.
            What laws are protecting the wealthy here, SON?

            1. jackactionhero says:

              Again, you don’t understand the situation or what I’m saying. How much longer do you plan on trying to get it?

              If you don’t know what laws protect the wealthy, then this debate is officially over, little man. I’m not going to waste my time trying to get you up to speed, when it’s clear you can’t get there anyway.

          2. dan says:

            Please give me one example of a law that protects the wealthy on the backs of workers.

            1. jackactionhero says:


              I mean wow, dan. Where have you been, buddy?

            2. jackactionhero says:

              The fact that corporations are a creation of the government is not debatable. In the absence of government intervention, individuals are free to do any sort of business deals they want. They trade goods, buy and sell labor, lend money, form partnerships, and engage in an almost infinite variety of transactions. But they cannot form a corporation — a legal entity that exists independently of its owners. This requires the government.

              Corporations are a great invention of government. They make it possible to raise vast amounts of capital for major business ventures like building car factories, laying telecommunications lines, or operating an airline. Corporations can raise capital far more effectively than business partnerships because the government gives them the privilege of limited liability. This means that the owners of the corporation, its shareholders, only stand to lose what they have invested in a company’s stock. They cannot be held personally liable for any debts of the company if the company ends up in bankruptcy.

              This means, for example, that if a company that engages in accounting fraud, like Enron or WorldCom, ends up owing its suppliers and creditors billions of dollars more than its assets can cover, the individual shareholders do not risk losing their homes or bank accounts. Their only loss is what they invested in Enron stock. The same principle applies to companies that may have destroyed their workers’ health by exposing them to asbestos, while concealing evidence that the material was extremely dangerous. Stockholders also don’t have to worry about their personal assets if General Motors, Ford, or United Airlines can’t make good on their commitments to their workers’ pensions and retirement health care benefits. They can only lose the money that they have invested in the company’s stock, and not a penny more.

              If these companies had merely been groups of individuals, not corporations with stockholders, then all of the owners would be personally liable for making good on contractual commitments that they had made and the damage they had caused. They could be forced to surrender their home, their personal assets, and their savings in order to pay off debts resulting from their business operations. It takes a conservative nanny state to create an institution, like a corporation, that allows investors to cause harm and not be held accountable.

              1. bobby says:

                So we should abolish corporations and make anyone who owns stock personally and financially accountable if the company goes under? So i own 100 shares of Bank of America, i should lose my home if the go out of business?

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  Why are you stuck on this theme of “So then you’re saying we should…”

                  I am not proposing what you suggested. Why are you incapable of figuring this out?

              2. jackactionhero says:

                As it stands, there are already extensive sets of rules regarding corporate governance. The government imposes a long list of requirements on corporations regarding issues such as financial disclosure, elections of corporate boards, and protection of minority shareholders. Most of these rules are not controversial; they are seen as laying the groundwork for the effective operation of a modern market economy. There would be few people anxious to buy shares in a company if they couldn’t obtain financial information on the company and have some assurance that its reported profits, assets, and liabilities were accurate measures of its financial situation. In the same vein, if the majority of shareholders (or whoever happened to take control of the company) were able to seize the wealth of the company, and leave nothing for the rest of the shareholders, few people would want to risk buying stock. Government rules on corporate governance prevent such events, and thereby give the public assurance about the soundness of investing in shares of stock.

                This is useful background in thinking about high CEO pay. What is it that allowed Michael Eisner to earn $680 million in the years from 1998 to 2000 when he was the CEO of the Disney Corporation, or Robert Grasso to pocket $140 million from running the New York Stock Exchange? The conservative nanny state crew wants us to believe that it was their incredible skill and hard work that allowed these CEOs to earn such vast sums. The more obvious answer is that badly designed rules of corporate governance allow CEOs to pilfer large amounts of money from the corporations they manage, because there is no one with both the interest and power to challenge them.

                CEO pay has exploded in the last quarter century, rising far more rapidly than either the pay of typical workers or the overall rate of productivity growth. The average pay of a corporate CEO was less than 40 times the pay of a typical worker in the late seventies. This ratio rose to 300 to 1 at the peak of the stock bubble in the late nineties, as the value of compensation packages heavily laden with stock options went through the roof. But even as the stock market has fallen back to more reasonable levels, CEO pay is still close to 200 times the pay of a typical worker.

                This explosion in CEO pay is not tied in any obvious way to their effective management, even by the narrow measure of increasing corporate profits. A recent study that examined the pay of the top five executives in 1500 corporations found that the pay over the period 1993-2003 increased almost twice as rapidly as could be explained by profit growth or other standard measures of corporate success (Bebchuk and Grinstein, 2005).

                CEO pay in the United States has exploded for the simple reason that CEOs largely get to write their own checks. CEO pay is determined by corporate compensation boards, most of the members of which are put there with the blessing of the CEOs themselves. Usually the CEOs have a large voice in determining who sits on the corporate boards that ultimately have responsibility for the operation of the corporation. These corporate boards then appoint a committee that determines CEO pay. In effect, we allow the CEO to pick a group of friends to decide how much money he should earn. When they are sitting on the boards of corporations that control tens of billions of dollars in revenue, their friends are likely to be very generous.

                In principle, the shareholders can organize and put in place directors who will take a harder line on CEO pay, but organizing shareholders is a very time-consuming process, it’s just like running a campaign for public office. Furthermore, most corporate charters stack the deck against anyone seeking to challenge management’s plans. They allow the company to count stock proxies that are not returned as votes in support of management’s position.

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  The key to containing CEO compensation is not laws from Congress that mandate lower pay; the best route is changing the rules that determine the accountability that corporate directors have to shareholders. Congress has changed these rules often in the past. For example, in 1995 it passed legislation that made it more difficult for shareholders to sue corporate directors or officers for stock manipulation, in effect substantially increasing the power of corporate management relative to its shareholders.

                  If the law explicitly stated that corporate boards have an obligation to contain CEO pay to market levels, and that directors could be held personally liable for failing to take this responsibility seriously, then the growth of CEO pay would likely be much lower in the future. This would not involve the government stepping in and determining CEO salaries. Rather, shareholders would use the courts to obtain compensation from corporate directors who did not take their responsibilities seriously, and who wrote a blank check to the CEO.

                2. dan says:

                  Not sure if you have ever owned stock or even a mutual funds, but the share holders vote in the Board of Directors. Get a clue before posting your ramblings on line.
                  You invest or not invest based on current management, if you dont like it pull your money out. Just because you are a minor share holder doesnt give you the right to direct the company.
                  Your mom just yelled from upstairs that its time for you to come up and do your chores.

                3. jackactionhero says:


                  So you disagree with what I posted (even though it’s all factual and easily demonstrated) so you tell me my mom is calling for me? Seriously? Have you ever considered growing up, Dan?

                  Get a clue? Are you serious? I’ve got a clue. As a matter of fact, I have much more than that. I have an Economics degree. What do YOU have?

                  I’ve owned stock in dozens of companies and do the trading myself, as well as the analysis and portfolio management. I know what I’m talking about, Dan, but to be honest, I really don’t think you do.

              3. dan says:

                So being a shareholder in company stock should not cause you any risk? Here’s a tip, invest in a bank that will insure your deposit accounts up to $100,000 each. Stay out of the stock market if you cant handle the risk associated with the rewards.
                Novice investors who rely on 1 company stock to build a retirement portfolio are fools!
                If you think your little Occupy protest are going to change the way corporations are formed in the US, good luck sport.

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  Number 1 – I am not trying to change how corporations are formed. Why did you come to this conclusion? What is wrong with you?

                  Number 2 – You said “So being a shareholder in company stock should not cause you any risk?”

                  I NEVER SAID THAT. You are coming to the most bizarre and inane conclusions I could have possibly imagined.

              4. Betty says:

                So jacko,

                The employees of ENRON were given company stock for retirement. That was their only choice as an employee. Are you saying they should be personally responsible for the accounting fraud that occured at ENRON? Are you saying they should be personally liable for all the losses caused by ENRON? Be careful who you direct your hate towards. Many successful working class people invest in stocks and should not be held personlly liable for corporate fraud.

                1. jackactionhero says:

                  “The employees of ENRON were given company stock for retirement. That was their only choice as an employee. Are you saying they should be personally responsible for the accounting fraud that occured at ENRON?”

                  For about the 5th time – NO. Please learn to read, Betty. I mean seriously. I have explained this so many times now on this thread that anybody with an IQ over 100 understands what I said. You, somehow, still don’t. Why? Nobody knows…

                  “Are you saying they should be personally liable for all the losses caused by ENRON?”

                  How many times do you think I should have to say NO to this question before you stop asking?

                  “Be careful who you direct your hate towards. Many successful working class people invest in stocks and should not be held personlly liable for corporate fraud.”

                  Be careful when you learn to read. It’s a powerful tool that you have not grasped even the fundamental concepts of yet. I mean, I’m honestly really, really embarrassed for you right now.

              5. AntiTeabagger says:

                Nice cut and paste from the internet moron! http://www.conservativenannystate.org/cns.html#3

                Whats wrong cannot come up with your own debatable information on your own.

  20. bobby says:

    So, does anyone know what happened last night? Did people sleep overnight? Were there any arrests?

    1. jackactionhero says:

      Yes – Yes – No

      1. bobby says:

        Any details on any of this jack?

        How many people spent the night? were there any interactions with police etc?

        apparently, CCO doesn’t want to do a follow up report on this. Thanks

        1. jackactionhero says:

          According to what I saw on Channel 9 this morning, there were a couple dozen who spent the night there. No police action was taken.

          1. AntiTeabagger says:

            What you saw on Channel 9? You mean you didn’t stay down there jackmehoff?

    2. Betty says:

      I am sure they got right up bright and early this morning to head to work! Oh wait a minute they dont have jobs! They are too busy making a garbage dump of private and public property. I wonder where they go to the bathroom??

      1. bobby says:

        There are porta pottys out there, that they actually pay for themselves. Some have jobs, however, I walk by there almost every day on my way to work, and there are always people sleeping on the sidewalk at 9am.

      2. jackactionhero says:

        Betty, what makes you think they don’t have jobs? Because you decided it was so? LOL

        Wake up, Betty. I mean really. Your posts are embarrassing.

        Have you been there? It’s not a garbage dump either. Basically, nothing you’ve said on this thread has been true. Why is that, Betty? Do you fear the truth?

  21. bobby says:

    You have resorted to name calling….very mature of you.

    And let me just say, your comments are well thought out, and usually very rational. I actually agree with some of the points that Occupy stands for. My major issue with you, and the entire movement in general is that there is NO CLEAR objective. It seems like a bunch of people who are upset that want to get together and voice everything that they are upset about without having any idea what they want to acctually accomplish.
    As for you, jack- you change your points, and message. First it’s CEOs get paid too much and employees don’t get paid enough, then it is corporations ar evil which means that government is evil. It is a bi+ch session more than anything. You have some good points, but until you come up with a SOLUTION, you will not be taken seriously.

    1. jackactionhero says:

      I did not say corporations are evil, bobby. I didn’t say government is evil either. You invented that all on your own.

      I like name calling. It makes me feel better, and it makes me laugh.

      I haven’t changed my points or my message. I’m not offering a solution either. I’m saying that this is a problem, and we, as a country, need to come together to fix it. Do you disagree?

  22. notsodumb says:


    do you know what all those guys with economics degrees are doing up oin their offices above you as they look down from 30 – 50 stories above, they are laughing at you for wasting your time. i know because i hear the ralk from them as they ride the bus home or as they go out for a walk at lunch or go for a meal or to the theatre.


    1. jackactionhero says:


      But since I haven’t been there, that really isn’t a possibility now is it?

      In any case, I wouldn’t care the least bit what some suit in an office thought of what I was doing there. That isn’t my motivation in life – to be loved and accepted by strangers in office buildings.

  23. bobby says:

    jack- I agree that some things are messed up, and need to be changed. Everything is not perfect.

    But complaining, as the Occupy group is doing (and with all due respect) that you are doing is not helping anything.

    CEO’s make a lot more money than the average worker, and make more than they probably deserve…Most people would agree with that. And most people’s response would be “so what?” If my company is profitable, and i make a decent living, and the CEO takes 20 million a year, so be it. the only way it’ll change is if people stop wanting to work for what the company is paying.

    1. jackactionhero says:

      “the only way it’ll change is if people stop wanting to work for what the company is paying.”

      That is false and that is a defeatist attitude, and it’s the result of the situation THEY have created for you and me.

      You choose to allow it because you feel powerless to stop it. I choose to get ticked off about it and speak up.

      1. bobby says:

        Okay….so, come up with a solution, rather than getting ticked off and pi$$ing people off on a message board. I
        f you want to rally people in your cause, you really should try to come off less like a pompous a-hole, and try explaining WHY you are upset, rather than just quoting a bunch of random useless facts, and calling people names.

        People on the boards are attacking you, because you sound like a jerk. imho

        1. jackactionhero says:

          A solution? That’s what the Occupy Movement is doing. I’m not part of it. I support it.

          I DID clearly explain why I’m upset about the imbalance between mega wealthy and middle class.

          I didn’t post “random useless facts” either, although I would wager that most of what I said went so far over your head that you barely heard it go by…

          The commenters here had no concept of why the Occupy Movement started or what they’re protesting for and against. I’m merely trying to educate the folks that comment here so cluelessly day after day.

          I really couldn’t care less what the people on these boards think. Making friends here is not a goal of mine.

  24. bobby says:

    Jack- are you such a complete moron that you don’t realize i am trying to help you? You say you are trying to educate the folks on here, I am trying to give you some tips as to how to come across in a way that people will listen to you, and you attack me.
    I’m not talking about making friends, but if you call people names and threaten people…it doesn’t matter how good of a point you make, no one will listen.

    No useless facts huh? how about “Pre-Great Depression, the ratio of CEO pay to lowest FT salaried employee was 30:1. Now it’s closer to 3000:1 and the relative pay of the FT workers are around 10 cents per hour. ”

    Occupy is giving solutions? tell me one solution that they have proposed. All I have heard is complaining, and whining.

    1. jackactionhero says:

      I don’t want or need your help, bobby boy. I don’t require any tips on how to get through to people. I close this page at 3:30pm and don’t open it again until morning, basically because I just DON’T CARE about any of you or your opinions or your feelings about me. Let’s be clear on that.

      Those facts I gave were not useless. They are a red flag that is waving that you are blind to.

      I didn’t say the Occupy movement is giving solutions. That wasn’t what I was saying there. I was saying that’s their goal with this, not mine. Their job is to become more coordinate and cohesive with their message and with their goal with their Occupation movement.

      See, calling me a moron made you feel good, didn’t it? I bet you even smiled and/or chuckled at how much of a moron I am, and that you got to deliver the news, right? I’m not offended by it, really. It simply doesn’t matter.

      1. bobby says:

        I didn’t call you a moron. I asked if you were a moron. See the difference?

        You say you want to educate people, yet you alienate people and pretty much force them to disagree with you because you are so abrasive.

        The facts are useless unless you have a point to back them up. So, by definition, they are useless, because you state facts, without connecting them to a conclusion, or making a point.

        You didn’t say the Occupy movement was giving solutions? Are you serious? re-read your post…you said “A solution? That’s what the Occupy Movement is doing”

        Try having a rational thought once in a while. It would be a refreshing change.

        1. jackactionhero says:

          I’m sorry you didn’t understand my context, bobby, but it doesn’t change it.

          Perhaps I should have worded it differently?

          See if this version makes you feel better about yourself.

          A solution? That’s the aim of the Occupy folks. Their whole purpose is to find it and move on it, right?

          1. AntiTeabagger says:

            Noone can understand your babble, you jump the fence so many times, I am sure you just get on here to see how many people you can get going on here.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE