What Is The Occupy Wall Street Movement Of Recent Years?

The land of freedom, the United States, is the Promised Land for all. Its citizen can be much as prosperous as they want. Nonetheless, a phenomenon has occurred gradually that has changed the economy, social levels, income, and wealth of all Americans. This is called inequality. Inequality has become a social problem since people has not raised their voice take advantage of voting, large corporations as CEOs who take instead of give.

The Occupy New Hampshire movement stemmed from Occupy Wall Street, which began in September 2011. Tr.:16. The occupy movement generally consisted of staying in one place until the grievances of the participants are addressed. Tr.:33. Occupy Wall Street sought to address problems such as economic disparity, the growing gap between the classes, and the influence of money on politics. Tr.:13. Every Occupy movement focused on different issues and grievances, usually determined at the first general assembly. Tr.:111.

In the article “Of the 1%, by the 1%, for the 1%” Joseph Stiglitz, a noble prize winning economist, argues that the upper 1% controls about 40% of all wealth in America. This top 1% has taken about a quarter of all income in America, and has seen their income rise about 18% in the past decade. This has made the inequality between classes in the US expand. Eventually, this inequality gap will even hurt the top 1%, because the other 99% will either fight for a bigger piece or just stop working all together. The top 1% can buy anything they need, but their fate realizes on the other 99% to work hard and not fight back. If the 99% stopped working, there would be a simple way to gain back money… that would be to raise taxes on the rich. However, the rich get rich by capital gains, which have a low tax policy. So overall, the upper percent can eventually learn, but a majority of the time it is too little too late.

Chapter 7 of “American Democracy in Peril: Eight Challenges to America's Future” by William E Hudson. The author argues about Economic Inequality and its effect on people living in the United States. Economic Inequality has been a major issue in the United States. As countries, most of the wealth and income is accumulated in the hands of top 1 percent of wealthiest families in America. As in 2008 a financial crisis caused by top 1 percent of the wealthiest families in America which caused Great Recession from which most the 99 percent families suffered till 2011 and they hold top 1 percent wealthiest accountable for causing financial crisis But due to their economic status and strong political influence they were able to escape the accountability

This topic is incredibly relevant to today’s society in America, because that exact thing is happening all around us. Everything caters to the top one percent. This is being protested by the ninety-nine percent movement and more specifically, a former Democratic presidential primary candidate by the name of Bernie Sanders. Despite these protesters, America is slowly becoming a case of extreme

As we move closer to the 2016 national elections in the United States, claims of a growing wealth gap between the supposed “haves” and “have-nots” becomes more pronounced. Democratic Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton even went so far as to caution us that we are advancing towards a repeat of the “Gilded Age of the robber barons”. The insinuation in this claim creates a perception that there are a growing number of individuals within American society using questionable methods to increase their wealth, all at the expense of the not so fortunate. So-called culprits of these activities are often referred to as the “top 1 percent”; a term gaining a strong foothold in our current vernacular. Although the existence of an income inequality gap is evident, subjectively misinterpreted data is the primary culprit driving the perception that the income inequality gap is expanding.

When considering this, it is wholly possible to understand the saying that “the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer”, as it is true. This was brought into the spotlight by the Occupy Movement, and the slogan of “We are the 99%”. This, in turn, begs the question; who are the one percent?

There is no doubt that wealth inequality in America has been escalating quickly; the portion of total income earned by the top one percent has doubled since the beginning of the 1970’s. The wealthy are the main beneficiaries

To better understand where the populist movement, and the People's Populist Party came from you must first track back from the official formation of the party in 1892, to the real beginning, the Omaha Platform, which was drafted as a result of the crusade by the Farmer's Alliance in the late 1880s ( The Omaha Platform). The Farmer's Alliance took the place of The Grange after its decline in the late 1870s (Nash 430). Both of these organizations were created to fight for the "immense helpless mob" (429) of farmers in the post Civil War period. Both black and white farmers were beginning realize that the only way for them to improve their own lives was through banding together and taking collective action. Specifically, those included in this

Can a simple phrase ignite change? History gives us the answer. The essay, “‘We Are the 99 percent’ Joins the Cultural and Political Lexicon” by Brian Stelter tells us the succession of the protestors for the wage gap implementing the phrase into the minds of millions of Americans. Stelter then goes on to talk about the “we are the 99 percent” phrase used at rally's or protests to show how much the rich are outnumbered. Stelter explains the catchphrase and the different ways it is used and how it is impacting society. He then shows the history of what can be if something is said, especially if what is said is true. By utilizing rhetorical devices such as ethos, logos, and bandwagon the author conveys the message that the phrase “We Are The 99 Percent” is burned into the minds of millions of Americans.

At the heart of the rise of populism in the United States is the issue of inequality. The gap between the wealthy and poor has been growing at an alarming rate. In response, Americans have turned to populist leaders on both sides of the aisle, most notably Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, for a solution. Wealth inequality poses a serious threat to future generations like mine, who, in pursuit of the American Dream, will find upward mobility nearly impossible. Disenfranchised, desire for innovation and growth will cease.

Wealth inequality has become a hot-topic in recent years, this is because the return rate on capital, such as stocks or real estate, outruns that of economic growth which resulted in the wealthiest grasping a growing share of wealth, leading to increasing inequality. The unequal distribution of wealth has been a major hallmark of the U.S economy, and among its most notable and lasting results, but until it was brought to the awareness of the public by the Occupy movement’s catch phrase referring to “the 1%” of the populace who control half of the nation’s wealth, this issue had not been brought to the limelight of public economic and political discourse since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and almost every American is basically unaware of the true magnitude and character of the unequal distribution of wealth in our country. Inequality in wealth i.e. the sum of household savings, home equity, investments, and debts is

Capitalism has been the central force behind the growth of the United States’ progressive economy. Within such advanced economic system the chances of economic disparity are significantly high. In fact, over the past three decades there has being a steady increase in unequal wealth distribution among the economic classes. To sustain the current unequal wealth distribution among the classes of the American population, there are numerous factors that influence and shape this trend. For some members of the population it is alarmingly disturbing to know that recent statistics have shown that, “In the US [alone] the wealthiest 1% of its population owns more than the bottom 95 %” (Gutman). As for the difference in economic wealth, it resulted

The 99 percent consists of average Americans whose homes are being foreclosed upon, who have accrued colossal student loan debt and are most affected by economic setbacks. A definition of power is the “ownership, control, and distribution of resources”. In this way, the 99 percent is powerless in America because they lack the ability to exist independently of the one percent who has the power over the nation’s resources. The one percent has an advantage in its ability to influence the government and public policy. The protestors point to many societal problems as evidence of this inequality. Some of these examples are unequal access to healthcare, poverty, exorbitant student loan debt, unemployment, and unfair practices in the housing market. These are all indicators of the unequal distribution of resources and subsequently power that Occupy Wall Street denounces.

Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principles, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal