[StBernard] THOMAS SOWELL WRITES--Reaction to Occupy . . .PRICELESS

[Westley Annis]

I could not find anywhere online if Dr. Sowell actually said or wrote the
previously emailed commentary.  But below is definitely a commentary written
by Dr. Sowell and published on November 2, 2011.  I saw it online in the
Rapid City Journal (Iowa).  There's also a provided link at the very end of
the article.


DR. THOMAS SOWELL: Occupy movement demonstrates mob rule Rapid City Journal

| Posted: Wednesday, November 2, 2011


STANFORD, Calif. - In various cities across the country, mobs of mostly
young, mostly incoherent, often noisy and sometimes violent demonstrators
are making themselves a major nuisance.

Meanwhile, many in the media are practically gushing over these
"protesters," and giving them the free publicity they crave for themselves
and their cause - whatever that is, beyond venting their emotions on
television.

Members of the mobs apparently believe that other people, who are working
while they are out trashing the streets, should be forced to subsidize their
college education - and apparently the president of the United States thinks
so, too.

But if these loud mouths' inability to put together a coherent line of
thought is any indication of their education, the taxpayers should demand
their money back for having that money wasted on them for years in the
public schools.

Sloppy words and sloppy thinking often go together, both in the mobs and in
the media that are covering them. It is common, for example, to hear in the
media how some "protesters" were arrested. But anyone who reads this column
regularly knows that I protest against all sorts of things - and don't get
arrested.

The difference is that I don't block traffic, join mobs sleeping overnight
in parks or urinate in the street. If the media cannot distinguish between
protesting and disturbing the peace, then their education may also have
wasted a lot of taxpayers' money.



Among the favorite sloppy words used by the shrill mobs in the streets is
"Wall Street greed." But even if you think people in Wall Street, or
anywhere else, are making more money than they deserve, "greed" is no
explanation whatever.

"Greed" says how much you want. But you can become the greediest person on
earth and that will not increase your pay in the slightest. It is what other
people pay you that increases your income.

If the government has been sending too much of the taxpayers' money to
people in Wall Street - or anywhere else - then the irresponsibility or
corruption of politicians is the problem. "Occupy Wall Street" hooligans
should be occupying Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington.

Maybe some of the bankers or financiers should have turned down the millions
and billions that politicians were offering them. But sainthood is no more
common in Wall Street than on Pennsylvania Avenue - or in the media or
academia, for that matter.

Actually, some banks did try to refuse the government bailout money, to
avoid the interference with their business that they knew would come with
it. But the feds insisted - and federal regulators' power to create big
financial problems for banks made it hard to say no. The feds made them an
offer they could not refuse.

People who cannot distinguish between democracy and mob rule may fall for
the idea that the hooligans in the street represent the 99 percent who are
protesting about the "greed" of the 1 percent. But these hooligans are less
than 1 percent, and they are grossly violating the rights of vastly larger
numbers of people who have to put up with their trashing of the streets by
day and their noise that keeps working people awake at night.

As for the "top one percent" in income that attract so much attention, angst
and denunciation, there is always going to be a top 1 percent, unless
everybody has the same income. That top 1 percent has no more monopoly on
sainthood or villainy than people in any other bracket.

Moreover, that top 1 percent does not consist of the "millionaires and
billionaires" that Barack Obama talks about. You don't even have to make
half a million dollars to be in the top 1 percent.

Moreover, this is not an enduring class of people. Nor are people in other
income brackets. Most of the people in the top 1 percent at any given time
are there for only one year. Anyone who sells an average home in San
Francisco can get into the top 1 percent in income - for that year. Other
one-time spikes in income account for most of the people in that top 1
percent.

But such plain facts carry little weight amid the heady rhetoric and
mindless emotions of the mob and the media.


Thomas Sowell's website is www.tsowell.com.

Read more:
http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/opinion/sowell-occupy-movement-demonstrates
-mob-rule/article_584c2a5a-04cc-11e1-8531-001cc4c03286.html#ixzz1iVbtYS00