I made my way down to Occupy LA yesterday. The movement has for all practical purposes surrounded City Hall in Downtown Los Angeles. To my eye, it looked as if there were hundreds of tents. Some of the protesters were a bit scruffy, but the area was peaceful and calm.
Unfortunately, a tour of the scene quickly revealed a BIG PROBLEM: Occupy LA lacks a uniform graphic indentity. It has a common, unifying slogan: "We are the 99%." But the leaderless Occupy Movement has so far resisited a common signage.
As a result, there's a serious proliferation of slogans, to go along with the 99%er complaint. I photographed a few, so enjoy the slide show! If I have a criticism, it's that they were all over the place. But the ad-hoc nature of the slogans, taking issue with everything from nuclear power/weapons (I guess) to Congress, fits with the spirit of the Occupy protest. I suppose I can say I was there before they sold out the movement's original, inclusive energy in the interest of talking points.
Eric Richardson / blogdowntown
Those participating in Occupy Los Angeles march toward City Hall.
Ah, the Wall Street Journal. It serves capitalism, but it's also a newspaper, so it wants to jump on trends. Add some nifty, number-crunching online technology to that and you get this calculator, which will swiftly tell you just where you fall in the U.S. income distribution.
Give it a try! But don't get hung up on income! Remember that much of the top 1%'s wealth comes from capital gains, not wage income. So you might be looking pretty good as a household if you bring in $200,000 per year and rank in the 94th percentile. But remember that you're then taxed at the 28 percent IRS rate, while a true 1%er — which I define as a member of the U.S. financial elite, making money from money rather than from labor — is seeing their capital gains taxed at 15 percent.
There are plenty of people in the U.S. who think they're rich, but they aren't. And even if they're in the 1% as set by earnings ($506,000 annually), the gulf between you and a 1%er who makes the same off less heavily taxed investment and divident income is vast.
Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Sheila Collins protests with others outside of U.S. Senator Charles Schumer`s office to demand more jobs on April 1, 2011 in New York City.
America loves entrepreneurs. And in the current dreadful economy, we're looking to the risk-takers and idea-guys more than ever to get us out of our unemployment rut. In some respects, you could call the entire Republican economic platform a formula for spurring entrepreneurship, with its combination of tax cuts and reduced regulation. Then again, you could say the same thing of the Democrats, who want the government to spend more money to stimulate demand for the products that entrepreneurs would create.
KPCC's Shereen Marisol Meraji reported from Los Angeles' entrepreneurship central today on the Madeleine Brand Show. She visited a co-working space and investigated the process of business-building at its most grassroots level. I'm energized by stuff like this, but I also have to throw a small amount of cold water in the face of the idea. The fact is that as important as entrepreneurs are to the economy, it's unlikely that they'll be able to create enough jobs to hammer down a 9.1 percent unemployment rate nationally and a 12-plus-percent unemployment rate in LA County.
PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images
Welcome to your friendly neighborhood investment bank. Do you want them to leave room for...return on investment?
Here's an idea that's going to get people talking — and funding small businesses. The New York Times' Joe Nocera writes his column today about Starbucks' plan to partner with microfinance organization Opportunity Finance Network to solve a major American problem: a lack of small-scale lending. The project is called Create Jobs for USA. It's a great idea, but it has at least one significant problem: return on investment for the Starbucks customers who would be putting up their money.
Starting November 1, while waiting for you nonfat vente caramel latte, you can donate, say...$5 to the cause. You'll receive a red, white, and blue "indivisible" bracelet (the bracelet is an inevitable piece of viral marketing these days). Starbucks will seed the fund with a $5 million donation. As Nocera points out, this will enable Create Jobs for USA and OFN to borrow against this fund, utilizing a 7-to-1 leverage ration. Presto! Your $5 becomes $35.
Today's tweet comes from @Slate. In an effort to make up for last week's terrifying BlackBerry outage, Research in Motion is giving away $100 in apps to users. You can get Sim 3, Bejeweled, Bubble Bash 2...
Um, look, I'm a BlackBerry loyalist — meaning I haven't joined the 4 million people who lined up to buy an iPhone 4S over the weekend — and I literally have no interest in any of those apps. I mean, I have a BlackBerry. The whole point if using this device is to not play games on it. Except for BrickBreaker. But I never even play BrickBreaker. I'm too busy using my BlackBerry to get stuff done!
In the entire time I've been a BlackBerry user, I've browsed the games section of the app store maybe...once? How about this: a $100 credit toward a BlackBerry PlayBook. And don't restrict it. Let me combine it with other offers. Somehow I think it's more imporant for RIM to get its underperforming tablet in the hands of people who have its smartphones than to get apps on those same smartphones that users won't really use.