"Occupy Northfield has no designated leaders or formal goals..." I guess that about sums it up. Idealistic people, each with a different idea of Utopia, who want to effect change that cannot be accomplished by anyone admitting defeat and complying with their fragmented demands. In some respects, it's like a movement for world peace. Many would like it to happen, but nobody can make it happen. As an unbiased observer, the movement looks like blah, blah, blah, but not in unison, and each "blah" has its own unique meaning.

Occupy Wall Street is a method of “Calling Attention To.” Participants are willing to maintain a prolonged physical presence on public property. There is a great deal of unique education taking place in the streets during these events. This is an education in altruism and empathy, as well as in factual information. Participants in OWS are finding out how a wide variety of people are being deprived of justice. The reason for this deprivation is that one percent of the nation controls more than 40 percent of the wealth. I’m 59. I can clearly remember when America was much more fair to the people in the middle and lower classes.

Bill, I'm at least a contemporary, and I can remember when classes were not an object of social division and conflict. I think that was way back in 2008, maybe 2007. Certainly with more than half of America not paying income tax, many actually receiving dollars from other taxpayers, it's easy to see how fairness should come into play. Everyone should have skin in the game. Before demanding that others spend more, we should all be spending something. I think that the remaining Republican candidate from our state is a little weird, but I agree with her that everyone should have to pay something.

"...wide variety of people are being deprived of justice," Sorry, Bill, but there's a big difference between equal opportunity and equal distribution. Some would argue that Robin Hood and Jesse James were practicing justice, and some would not.

Here's what I posted on Patch's FB page about whether or not we should "Occupy Northfield":

"It would be a great way to drive business away from downtown. :P

Being in a large city in a park is one thing, but there really is no place in downtown Northfield for anyone that would want to do anything like this to not hurt local busi...ness owners by deterring traffic. If they wanted to do a demonstration, Central Park would be better...close, but won't hurt some of the folks they say they're trying to help...the small business owner."

Occupy is winning.

"Standing room only, unanimous vote against 'corporate personhood': Money is not free speech

Thanks to ground work by the U.S. Green Party, the wave of Occupy Wall Street empowerment and Human Rights Alert, today, Los Angeles became the first major U.S. city to vote against corporate personhood and call for a Constitutional Amendment asserting corporations are not entitled to constitutional rights and that money is not free speech. The vote was unanimous."

You can read the rest at
www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/no-more-corporate-personhood-la-unanimous

Greg, sorry for the 4% error in my statement. I'll stipulate that you are correct because it is not really a substantial difference. Fact is that there are a lot of people who don't pay anything complaining that others, individuals and corporations are not paying enough. Unlike you, I did not ask or expect taxpayers to assist me in my business investment. Unable to afford raising a family and pay college prices, I was only able to sneak in and out of classes that I felt would help me reach my goal of an adequate education. It worked, but there was no official record that I could show to an employer and be rewarded with a fat paycheck.

I hope the dollars spent by taxpayers on your schooling were rewarded with your actions to grow the economy and to create jobs for others. FYI, my mention of Robin & Jesse was in reference to the difference between equal opportunity and equal distribution. I hope you're enjoying your taxpayer provided success.

Greg, your characterization of my number vs. your number as misrepresentation is laughable at best, and a reckless accusation in my opinion. I don't know whether your source is better or more accurate than mine, but I can assure you that both are not 100% accurate. What seems correct is that somewhere near half of us don't pay federal income tax, and many actually collect a share of what the other half pays.

I am not against a reasonable amount of government spending and assistance, even in some cases where it is a handout to persons who have deliberately chosen to game the system by choosing to go to school rather than support themselves and their families. I do believe though that it is not an entitlement, but something that belongs to those crafty enough to pursue it.

Equal opportunity is a floor enhanced by the foundations laid by relatives and associates. I don't think you would expect Bill Gates' mother to have helped you start a business like she helped her son. So you are correct to some degree that equal opportunity is not 100% equal. I think that's the way it should be, or should someone with nothing protest because you use your savings to help your kids?

Mike's focus on the income tax distorts who pays taxes in America It is not unbiased. This is the same distortion that his weird hero Michele Bachman got caught making. Economists who look at all taxes, payroll taxes, regressive state sales taxes, property taxes, report that the US currently has a flat tax structure with the extremely rich and the extremely poor paying slightly less than others. Buffet pays a lower rate than his secretary.

The loss of progressive taxation, the original concept behind the 16th Amendment (authorizing income taxes), is one of several factors causing extreme inequality in the US which makes it an outlier in the developed world, and stagnates its economy. The US now ranks as the 41st most unequal country in the world - grouped with African dictatorships. As a result of the influence of money in politics and Mike's support there is nothing but Occupy to stand in the way of the US moving up the charts to become the #1 most unequal country in the world.

Mike may like living in a third world type system where corporations and the 1% rule by buying public policy for their own advantage. This is not the country the founders thought they were creating, when they said that government should have the consent of the governed. It now has the consent of the 1%, and the disdain of the overwhelming majority. Polls show that most Americans would prefer to live in a more equal country where every government policy is not rigged against them.

Occupy seeks to restore democracy under the Constitution where everyone, not just 1%, decides the kind of country we want to have. In a democracy the 1% robber-barons could not buy politicians to rewrite the rules for their own private profit. Without democracy no question unrelated to restoring democracy matters.

Occupy does not share Mike's obsession with taxes, but it is understandable. The Boston Tea Party principle that there should be no taxation without representation would exempt all but the 1% from taxes, because none but them control most representatives in Congress. The only skin most people have in their game of selling public policy for profit is the fleecing they get at tax time by a government that lacks the consent of the governed.

Occupy is an effective forum where 21st century patriots stand together for the Constitution against the 1% who have hijacked democracy, with the help of their politicians in robes they got onto the Supreme Court. Unlike Mike, Occupy is taking the time to get informed so as to avoid just such bad and impractical sound-bite ideas as Mike's constitutional convention suggestion. That idea would create many more problems than it could solve. If he had attended the Teach-in he would know that only ordinary legislation is required to get the Supreme Court out of elections and money out of politics.
Mike, get involved before deciding what Occupy is.

Larry is still whining about the Supreme Court's decision to break the tie between GWB and one of the only two humans who could not beat him. I'm not interested in attending a contrived jamboree packed with opinions characterized as fact. When Occupy comes up with a set of actionable items and a viable plan for their implementation, I'll take a look. Until then, happy camping.