“The message is coming out. It’s pretty simple. We are at Wall Street, and Wall Street controls our government, and we would like the people to control it. Simple.” More here.
Mrs. S and I dipped into our meager retirement savings — again — in an effort to bridge the gap between now and whenever we can land jobs that will help us return to what historians refer to as the “middle class.”
As I am on the phone with the people who oversee our retirement fund, deciding how much we are going to need to survive in the near term and how many more years we are willing to work (assuming jobs exist then), the woman tells me that there is a low-funds fee of $35, to which they will be helping themselves before they send us a check.
Can someone tell me the purpose, or at least the rationale, for these fees, other than to set up a barrier for have-nots who are on the cusp of becoming have-somes, another hurdle for the poor who just don’t get it and insist on trying to live like the well-to-do, with accounts and savings and financial people and portfolios and such? I don’t see how accounts with less money cost a company more money or more time or more effort to maintain than those with more money in them. Seems to me that accounts with less money probably have less activity than larger ones and, therefore, should cost companies less to maintain. If that’s the case, shouldn’t they charge an “excess funds fee” for accounts with lots of money and lots of activity? I understand that companies don’t want to create a deterrent for people looking to open large accounts. But they don’t mind deterring poor people from having retirement accounts, mutual funds and other sources of capital gains. Fuck them, right?
Of course, these companies could charge fees based solely on the amount of account activity, without regard to the amount of money in the account.
Not discriminating against the poor? Gee, there’s a novel thought.
What will it mean to American voters that Barack Obama has signed into law three trade deals that will destroy up to 159,000 American jobs at approximately the same time he promised to get serious about job creation at home? More here.
Fox news perpetuating the “news” that someone hassled and spit on a woman in a Coast Guard uniform “near” the OccupyBoston site. Because, you know, hippies are famous for that kind of imaginary thing.
Remember all of the stories about Vietnam vets being spat on — that people just made up? I’ll take this one with a large grain of salt.
Cops beating hippies. Who could have predicted it?
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork) – Just a few hours after protesters learned they’d be able to stay in Zuccotti Park indefinitely, violence has broken out as a group marched away from it.
A group of protesters were headed south on Broadway toward the New York Stock Exchange. The group swelled quickly and wound up in a confrontation with police as they tried to gain access to Wall Street. A standoff occurred.
Police motorcycles were shaped like a V and moved toward the protesters in the stand off. One man lost his balance, and was run over by a police motorcycle. Police descended on the protester and got him out from under the bike, but violence broke out.
1010 WINS’ Steve Sandberg reported police descended on some protesters, wielding their night sticks and batons. A police captain reportedly hurled his megaphone and wound up rolling around in the street with a protester. Sandberg reports he himself was pushed around by police.
What’s so freakin’ good about it?
Well, for one thing, Mayor Bloomberg called off the dogs, maybe because of the more than 300,000 people who signed a petition asking him not to push out the occupiers of Zuccotti Park.