Occupy Wall Street Coffers Down To $170K From Over $700K

How much went to puppy expenditures? (bytegirl24)

According to the Wall Street Journal, Occupy Wall Street is down to their last $170,000 after raising more than $700,000 this fall. "If we keep spending at the rate at which we've been doing, we will probably go broke in a month," a member of the accounting group tells the paper. Where did all the money go? Housing, feeding, and clothing lots of people. On Saturday, the movement voted to freeze all spending except for bare necessities: housing, food, and clothing.

The tally is down somewhat from what Rosie Gray reported last week: $230K with another $100K bail fund, so the actual total is probably somewhere in between. Gray also noted that the movement is wisely interviewing accountants.

"With such an influx of donations, we'd begun to rely on economic capital," Jason Ahmandi, a protester who has been with the movement since its inception. Ahmandi deems the dwindling funds as a symptom of the "nonprofit industrial complex," which perpetuates a "trap that the mission becomes more about sustaining the organization than the message."

The cash shortage brings up a question that never had to be asked during those heady fall days: should Occupy Wall Street be courting donors? Michael Levitin, who marshaled $75,000 in donations for the Occupied Wall Street Journal, believes they should. "That money is there. Many people with money believe in this movement. I think we would be wise to tap into it." Ahh, those conniving capitalists at the OWSJ!

The spectacle at Zuccotti Park has been limited, and with winter's chill deterring many regular citizens from joining demonstrations, the nation as a whole and OWS are very much on the same page: a WaPo/ABC poll released yesterday shows the public despises Congress at record levels, and 75% of respondents disapprove of Republicans in particular, compared with 62% of Democrats. Asked which was more of a problem, "unfairness in the economic system" or "over-regulation" of the financial market, 55% stated it was "unfairness in the economic system."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Christopher Robbins in News on January 17, 2012 4:00 PM

Comments [rss]

Joseph G Gallagher Jr

Trying to get reform on Wall Street is not going to help with reform in the US Congress which has been one of the principal players in this wealth inequality. For Congress, we need term limits on both Houses of Congress, the US Senate ---- 2 terms (12 years), US House of representatives ---- 6 terms (12 years) or a total of 12 years total (1 Senate term and 3 House terms)... WITHOUT TERMS LIMITS ON CONGRESS YOU ARE NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING.... THE PROBLEM OF INEQUALITY MUST BE SOLVED BOTH WITHIN CONGRESS AND OUTSIDE CONGRESS..... THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL BACK TERM LIMITS ON THE US CONGRESS.... THE INSTITUTION OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS NEVER INTENDED IT TO
BE A LIFE TIME OCCUPATION. SO BESIDE OCCUPY "WALL STREET" YOU HAVE "OCCUPY LIMITS ON THE US CONGRESS" ...... IT CAN START THIS ELECTION YEAR.. VOTE OUT ALL MEMBERS THAT HAVE SERVED OVER 12 YEARS TOTAL IN US CONGRESS ......

Inconcievable de Impublishable

They're spending it to feed and clothe and shelter those old crusty con artists who ask me for a dollar outside the subway every time I walk past. That's draining a lot of resources.

Mac Donald

A list of expenditures posted on Occupy Wall Street's website shows the bulk of the group's outlays have gone toward everyday necessities, transportation and donations to other Occupy groups. But there have been less essential purchases, too. In October, the arts and culture working group spent $3,000 on "supplies for puppets for Halloween." The tea and herbal medicine working group spent almost $2,500 on tea leaves, herbs and related equipment in November.

Well there's your problem.

Detex

$2,500 for TEA?!?!? not only are they irresponsible with their money but they are bad shoppers too!!!

LICnative

Shouldn't they have hired an accountant 700,000 dollars ago?

canofpeas

$530,000 represents a lot of pizza and sleeping bags. How much of that money found it's way into select hipster "revolutionaries" bank accounts?

Mathieu

The most they can be criticized for is using a tactic that will force them to stop their revolutionary progress at the point at which the money becomes a necessity. However, i know that some of the organizers down there wish to put into practice various forms of alternative institutions in a very real, very serious revolutionary movement, but the main service OWS will provide the world is bringing the issues of capitalist exploitation back into the mainstream political discours; and for that, using money is perfectly reasonable.

cr17

Well I'm sure that's very comforting to all the people OWS said they were going to help, which was EVERYONE by the way.

Mathieu

OWS isn't selling their services, they're serving society at their own expense. They didn't take money from people who need their lives to be made better, they were given money by people who both benefitted from the system OWS wants to bring down, and see the unfair, destructive nature of the system OWS wants to bring down.

They don't have a responsibility to help people in the same way that CEOs have a responsibility to their shareholders. If they fail, the worst that could be said about them is good effort, thanks, at least, for trying. Criticizing them for going up to bat for humanity is ridiculous.

B

"
we will probably go broke in a month,""

Right back where they started, eh?

Detex

you see, this is why you can't just give people money! Look what happens when people win the LOTTO... So many of them are broke in a short time. OWS won the lotto on this one and appears to be spending just as fast!

blameus

Yikes! Certainly sets a bad precedent should the group continue into warmer seasons. Maybe JayZ should have had Beyonce give birth in Zucotti park and donate the cash to keep OWS going...and donate a few Occupy shirts while he's at it.

BrigidBernadette

" the nation as a whole and OWS are very much on the same page..."
Delusional.

ed_Ex2

September 17, 2011 – January 17, 2011

Spending roughly $175,000 a month—are they mocking themselves?

Mathieu

I immagine they need to pay large sums, in addition to the food, shelter, and clothing, for bail, legal fees, medical treatment, etc. I also get the feeling that they're spreading alot of that money around to less well-supported occupations around the country. I could be wrong though, but i find it likely.

In any event, you shouldn't judge (and i don't mean that to sound like i am attacking you); what they're criticizing Wall st for is Capitalist exploitation. OWS is not using the money to invest in corrupt, oppressive, exploitative business ventures in order to make a profit. Rather, they're using donated money to support the people who are trying to bring a serious, criminal issue to the forefront of political discourse.

cr17

Is anyone responsible for anything in OWS? Might that be why the movement failed?

Mathieu

I don't quite see how the movement failed. And what's more, your comments don't seem to address what is said in the comments you're responding to. Maybe you could clarify what it is you mean to say.

Detex

other than on the fringe there is little to no exposure out there anymore. I would call it close to dead.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

NewtonCreek

old tweet: "over/under at fin firms on accusations declared of financial impropriety w/in OWS movement is currently 60 days (from 1/1/12) Sat Dec 31 00:00:15 +0000 2011"