use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. reddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
reddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
see the search faq for details.
advanced search: by author, community...
~22 users here now
Occupy Wall Street is a leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants.
READ THE GUIDELINES before posting
/r/OccupyWallStreet FAQ (Includes list of all current occupation sites)
MetaOWS (Got a concern/question about the community? Post it here!)
A full list of Occupy subreddits
reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›
I think this is what the 99% are talking about (i.imgur.com)
submitted 1 year ago by CanadianEhh
[–]Olivecloak 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
I think Paul R. Allen should be going to a Detox Center, truth be told.
Seems like he's found his own kind of Heroin; He needs million-dollar increments like food, water, and oxygen.
[–]Robocloud 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago
I can't find the state records that back up this article.
Does anyone have any?
[–][deleted] 1 year ago
[deleted]
[–]Volgyi2000 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
This picture has been posted a few times before on Reddit. If I remember correctly, the homeless man also had a long list of priors. Which is one of the reasons his sentence was so severe.
[–]SinfulDavey 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
Look at the bright side, he has a roof over his head and 3 meals a day
[–]halimsujanto 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Exactly. Its better than to starve on the street.
[–]MagCynic 7 points8 points9 points 1 year ago
OK. Let's do some actual research before we start making a big stink out of this.
This site has a report that states: "The real mastermind was Farkas, who kept Allen out of the loop on much of the company's day-to-day operations, according to trial testimony." Allen only got three years because he didn't act alone and wasn't even the main person involved in the fraud. He certainly was involved in the fraud (which is why he's going to prison), but by the time he became CEO the fraud was already occurring. It makes sense, then, that he would only receive half the sentence the prosecutors were looking for. Even then they were only looking for six years.
The guy pleaded guilty to 1st degree robbery. In Louisiana, first degree robbery is "the taking of anything of value belonging to another from the person of another... by use of force or intimidation, when the offender leads the victim to reasonably believe he is armed with a dangerous weapon." The homeless man admitted to pretending he had a gun in his coat. What he admitted guilt to fit the definition of the law precisely. The punishment is 3-40 years. Should the guy have received 15? Probably not. But at the minimum he would have been guaranteed to serve 3, the same as the above CEO. Had that happened you all would still be complaining that they got the same punishment despite the difference in dollar amounts.
So there you have it. The facts. One man received prison time for being one part of a much larger fraud. The other received a legal sentence to a felony he admitted to committing. There is nothing to be mad or upset about in this case.
[–][deleted] 73 points74 points75 points 1 year ago
Just because both of these were handled in a way fitting with a legal system, does not mean that the legal system is designed in fairness.
Evaluate them independently of the legal system. Whose crime was greater? Who deserves more punishment, or rehabilitation, or whatever we are claiming the prisons do?
Now, ask yourself this. If you swapped the crimes, with the homeless man helping steal $3B, and the CEO stealing $100 dollars, do you think the sentences would swap, as well?
[–]PedalPedalPedal 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
I think that the hang up is on value. The legal system values human life more than it values money. Robbery is, essentially, a "violent" crime, or one in this case involving the threat of violence, death, or serious bodily harm. To a system that places the ultimate value on human life and bodily autonomy, the robbery is a much more severe crime.
[–]mmaluff 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
It may not be as direct, but fraud can also lead to "loss of bodily autonomy". I don't know the specifics of this case, but if a few hundred lose all their savings and become homelesss because of a fraud, I'd say the fraud was the more violent crime.
[–]PedalPedalPedal 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago
A few issues for thought:
1) You're using a very attenuated and, at least to me, unreasonable definition of "violent crime." Applying this standard, any crime that caused a financial loss should be classified as a violent crime and punished severely.
2) It's not like he gets to keep that 3 billion dollars. Mandatory restitution is applicable for fraud cases. Those victims will receive both their money back and any expenses incurred in the recovery thereof. So, no, there is no loss of bodily autonomy, even applying your broad standard, in fraud cases like this one.
Fair enough. I was mostly playing devil's advocate. On point 2 though, that is only because he got caught. His intention probably was to keep the 3 billion dollars, I think he should be judged accordingly. Note that the bank robber had no intention of hurting anyone, he only pretended to carry a weapon. And even if the "loss of bodily autonomy" argument is bullshit, I still think that if we're going for punitive justice the degree of punishment should be proportional to total potential damage to society.
[–]PedalPedalPedal 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
I think that if you're going to make an equity argument, it's ultimately going to turn on actual damage, not potential damage. At the end of the day, the homeless guy still did considerably more actual damage than the banker. Asking courts to speculate about the potential damage that could potentially be extrapolated from a defendant's intent seems like a standard almost impossible, but definitely extremely expensive and inefficient, to administer.
How did he do considerably more damage? He only stole a hundred bucks and scared a cashier...
emotional damage resulting from threat to death or serious bodily harm > zero loss after restitution
I guess that may be fair. Without knowing much about the specifics of this case, I'll grant you that.
[–]zoomzoomz 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
No, the sentences wouldn't swap. The person's lifestyle and previous arrest record also matter during sentencing.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
I think you have it right there. The persons lifestyle matters.
That's the issue.
[–]Prancemaster -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
I read this as "I DON'T LIKE REALITY, SO I AM GOING TO REFRAME THIS TO SUIT MY ANGER"
How in the world did you get that from what I said?
[–]MagCynic -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
The CEO didn't steal $3 billion. The homeless man outright stole $100.
The lawyers prosecuting the CEO were only seeking 6 years. Even if they got what they wanted, most people here would still be complaining that the homeless guy received a longer sentence.
Frauding money by moving numbers around electronic systems is much different from going into a bank, pretending you have a gun, and robbing it directly.
[–]colorless_green_idea 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago
Yeah, one has a much more detrimental impact on the whole of society.
[–]MagCynic -6 points-5 points-4 points 1 year ago
How do you know that? Did you somehow "feel" that a combination of $3 billion was shifted amongst various electronic accounts? If you had a choice, would you rather live in a country in which all crime is online financial fraud or face to face robbery with a gun, which would you pick.
Note: Yes, I know the homeless man didn't actually have a gun. He threatened the teller as if he did, though.
[–]colorless_green_idea 11 points12 points13 points 1 year ago
I didn't personally feel it, but the two thousand people who lost their jobs surely felt it. The homeless man frightened a bank teller and took 100 dollars to feed himself, and he then felt guilty and turned himself in. The CEO caused overall damage to the financial system and caused a ripple-effect not easily seen to the naked eye. But just because it is a crime that doesn't involve a terrifying face-to-face encounter with a possible gun involved does not make it any less of a crime.
[–]TheRealHortnon -2 points-1 points0 points 1 year ago
How would you have punished the homeless man?
[–]colorless_green_idea 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Well, given the bounds of the law, I would have gone with something closer to the minimum of 3 years, maybe 5 years.
[–]Kni7es 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Seconding this. He was poor and desperate. He returned the goddamn money and surrendered to the police. You would think the idea was to get leniency, but apparently to this judge, 'leniency' is 'not maximum sentence for a homeless black guy.'
[–]SachmoRising 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
He's not homeless anymore. He now gets to live rent free, eat free, and have clean clothes for the next 15 years.
[–]Kni7es 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
I'm sorry, my feelings are not worth a 12 year differential in prison time, even if you scare the bejeezus out of me.
[–]MagCynic 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Fortunately for this country the law isn't based on feelings and emotion. Each person (located in different states with different laws) received a valid, legal sentence for the crime committed.
I can't help but think that conflicts with the sentiment of...
Did you somehow "feel" that a combination of $3 billion was shifted amongst various electronic accounts?
And while we're on the subject, to answer your question: I would rather live in a country where all crime was robbery at gunpoint than financial fraud. It's far easier to deal with for law enforcement, and in most cases, is realistically simple to survive. Just give them your money, don't give them trouble, then go to the police.
I know that being mugged is scary. There's that possibility of losing your life instantly. I also know that the prospect of losing your job, your home, and everything you ever worked for is terrifying. It eats away at you, day after day. It's that sick feeling in your stomach that doesn't go away. It's dehumanizing. And right now millions of people are going through that because of financial crime.
[–]MagCynic 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
I would rather live in a country where all crime was robbery at gunpoint than financial fraud
People die from robberies. They don't from financial fraud.
Yeah they do, bro. Just not directly. People commit suicide when they realize they can't support themselves or their families anymore. The financial crash killed people, and this time it wasn't investors jumping out of windows.
[–]rspix000 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
50K per year from uninsured medical deaths, how many suicides after losing everything from the Lincoln Savings and Loan fraud in the 1980's? Just dozens. Okay, must be their fault. I mean really, take personal responsibility for your actions you poor folk. But bail out the banksters when they want it. Yeah, capitalism is great isn't it?
[–]theodorAdorno 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
No. The banks do not steal. They don't have to. I'm sure you know the rest of the sordid tale: The Fed loans them money at 0% interest, printing it out of thin air in the process, which has the nice side effect of increasing our need for loans. The bank then loans us the money (not at zero percent) to make money off of the money we gave them to give to us. They then pay the Federal Reserve back the original sum (zero interest), and keep the profit.
All the while, we completely insure their entire risky investment operation, allowing them to make even more money, which they use to buy our lawmakers.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
This don't really answer my questions.
Does the homeless man deserve more punishment?
If you swap their crimes, would their punishments swap?
[–]MagCynic -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
Judging purely from the limited facts I personally know, the homeless man does deserve more punishment. He went into a bank, pretended he was going to kill the teller (by pretending he had a gun), and robbed a bank. I do not agree, though, that he should have received 15 years.
I think the problem people on reddit are having is the word "homeless". This always elicits an emotional rationalization to justify his actions. "He was poor, hungry, and homeless, so he had to do something to survive."
If I had done the exact same thing and received the same 15 year sentence, nobody on reddit would care because I'm a middle-class white guy with a house. The only difference is that some people think being homeless justifies either no sentence or a much lesser one.
That's impossible to say. Are you also swapping cities, lawyers, judges, and juries? There are too many variables to give any kind of legitimate answer.
[–]the_showerhead 14 points15 points16 points 1 year ago
Had that happened you all would still be complaining that they got the same punishment despite the difference in dollar amounts.
Yes, because you don't make minimum and maximum sentences to give everyone an equal sentence, or to give the minimum to those you favor. You assign it based on the size of the crime, and certain sentiments about the criminal. This man stole $100 to eat. You can assume he was a nice person because he only took $100 out of 3 stacks of bills. Paul Allen was the CEO of a large company, and wanted more. His corporation, Taylor Bean & Whitaker collapsed when the investigation went public, with over 2000 people losing their jobs because of it. Two other banks lost $2 Billion from buying unbacked papers from TB&W. This man took $100 from a stack of money and returned the rest.
You do not punish these two people equally. The only good thing about this, is maybe the homeless man wanted the 15 years. Now he has a bed, will be getting daily meals, and somewhat decent healthcare. I doubt he's going to a high-security prison, so wherever he's sent to will probably be less dangerous than living on the streets.
[–]melbosa 10 points11 points12 points 1 year ago
But this is just one example of a larger, looming trend.
[–]ne99ne 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
It illustrates that a "legal system" is not the same as a "moral system."
[–]benduffy 2 points3 points4 points 1 year ago
The CEO would have a fantastic lawyer who would negotiate it down to a lesser sentence, even if the CEO admitted to the police what he had done the same way the homeless guy did.
[–]RshAndRoulette 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
Also, if I remember correctly, this guy had a history of violent crimes. It is very likely that his previous crimes played a large role in his sentencing.
[–]ummmdude 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
I agree that is the law. I think the fraud is on par with the robbery.
[–]MyCarIsACamel 3 points4 points5 points 1 year ago
The way I see it, the guy has a home and food for the next 15 years. Just a possible motivating circumstance.
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
How fast is your car, if you don't mind me asking?
[–]MyCarIsACamel 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago
8-10 mph.
So going to prison actually improved his life? golly, it doesn't seem like its working...
[–]cdwillis 5 points6 points7 points 1 year ago
What does it say about the country when a man would rather go to prison than try to make a better life for himself?
[–]ne99ne 8 points9 points10 points 1 year ago
Try to make a better life? Or can't, or tried and failed, or...
[–]SachmoRising 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
It says to me that this country makes its prison systems too appealing. You get three meals, a bed, tv, clothing, activities, and recreation opportunities. Some inmates even get an education.
OR, you can sleep on the streets, cold and hungary.
[–]peas_in_a_can_pie 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
can i get a source? im a writing a paper about this
[–]lordrunningclam 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Not really. The threat of deadly force brings the homeless guy's crime into a different category. Not that I don't think the CEO got off way too easy, and the homeless guy were treated way too harsh. The fact that the homeless guy didn't really have a gun and turned himself in the next day would have probably gotten him a light sentence and counseling in most states other than Louisiana. Hell, I'm a white middle aged reasonably well off guy and I get nervous driving through Louisiana.
[–]scrambles57 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Look at the bright side. At least now he'll have shelter and 3 meals a day.
[–]RadioHitandRun 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Most homeless people prefer to be in prison. I knew a couple that would always get arrested because they needed a place to stay for the night.
[–]RedditGreenit 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
Put the CEOs in prison, house the homeless in their mansions.
[–]sanph -8 points-7 points-6 points 1 year ago*
He pretended to be armed. That's aggravated robbery. Having a deadly weapon or even pretending to have a deadly weapon can add 5, or even 7-10 years depending on the state you're in. There are vast differences in the crimes here. Nobody was scared and had their life threatened in the top case.
Since he seems to be a standup guy other than the fact that he threatened a womans life, he'll probably parole out pretty quick. Maybe even as fast as Mr. White Collar.
These two cases are being compared unfairly and without regard to criminal justice procedure. Basically, reactionary bullshit.
From a criminal justice standpoint there's a big difference between non-violently defrauding people out of 3 billion and threatening to take a girl's life over whatever was in the till.
The punishment is about the victim, not the criminal. Currency involved is practically a non-issue. I sincerely doubt all the people that were defrauded were ever in fear for their life.
P.S. Acting remorseful was very likely a cop-out as he probably realized his face was caught on security footage. It wouldn't be the first or last time. Humans will be as scummy as possible to save their own skin when it suits them.
[–]Cindarin 9 points10 points11 points 1 year ago
It's strange that you think losing ones home isn't potentially life threatening.
All the people with pending foreclosures weren't scared?
[–]melbosa 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
Or suicidal?
[–]sanph -9 points-8 points-7 points 1 year ago
None of them were threatened at gunpoint with an immediate termination of their life if they didn't comply with the terms of the lending agreement. You are being intellectually dishonest and deliberately obtuse. Quit it.
also, read the thread more http://www.reddit.com/r/occupywallstreet/comments/li3vb/i_think_this_is_what_the_99_are_talking_about/c2swlpo
[–]Cindarin 6 points7 points8 points 1 year ago
And no one was threatened at gunpoint by the homeless man either. It's quite unfair and childish of you to attempt to attack my intelligence. I'm not trying to argue that armed robbery deserves a shorter sentence or that we should take pity on the poor homeless man for it was the evil corporation that caused him to act this way. He committed the crime, he'll do the time. I don't know the specifics of the Mortgage Fraud committed, but the larger dollar amount is a factor. It's quite likely that in $3B worth of fraud, hundreds of lives were affected negatively. His crime shouldn't be taken lightly, even if he was just one person involved in a tiny multibillion dollar fraud that didn't involve any guns.
[–]PedalPedalPedal 1 point2 points3 points 1 year ago
In the eyes of the victim he may has well have had a gun. Every time a robber tells a teller that he has a gun, should the law require that teller to verify that he does, in fact, have a gun? Probably not. The teller should probably be allowed to be absolutely terrified that he/she is going to be shot in the very near future.
Conversely, it is equally, if not more likely that the man convicted of mortgage fraud will be required to pay both restitution to those who were harmed and fines. In that case, the bank teller is far worse off, having suffered intense emotional trauma, than the person subject to fraud, who will likely never learn that they were a "victim."
[–]Cindarin 0 points1 point2 points 1 year ago
When people in the Banking Industry screwup, do they have a track record of providing adequate restitution to all involved? I'm just curious why you assumed this.
It seems as if you're arguing that a crime is okay as long as you're subtle about the threat to peoples lives and you might have the money to give them after the trouble is done.
Yes. Restitution is required for fraud crimes. See the decision for U.S. v. Bergman for lengthy discussion on the matter. There are many others, but that is the one I can think of off the top of my head.
Neither of these crimes were "ok," which is why both criminals were punished. The distinction is twofold.
First, threat of bodily harm vs. mere theft. The law treats violent crimes, or crimes involving a threat of violence, more seriously than non-violent crimes. I'm ok with this. If someone steals from me non-violently, I want to be made whole and want them punished as a deterrent to future crime. If someone violently threatens me, I want them both detained as a deterrent and I want them to be incapacitated. That person is a danger to society and ought to be removed from it.
Secondly, there is the issue of being made whole. The hypothetical "everyman" being harmed by fraud can and is made whole by just being given back what was taken from him. The bank teller threatened in a violent manner cannot similarly be made whole. That emotional trauma is much more significant because it can't be "given back" like money.
I've been threatened at gunpoint by police officers at a routine traffic stop, twice. What's your point?
[–]Marrz -1 points0 points1 point 1 year ago
New Chant:
This is what class warfare looks like!
apples and oranges! yay!
all it takes is a username and password
create account
is it really that easy? only one way to find out...
already have an account and just want to login?
login
[–]Olivecloak 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]Robocloud 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–][deleted] ago
[–]Volgyi2000 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]SinfulDavey 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]halimsujanto 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]MagCynic 7 points8 points9 points ago
[–][deleted] 73 points74 points75 points ago
[–]PedalPedalPedal 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]mmaluff 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]PedalPedalPedal 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]mmaluff 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]PedalPedalPedal 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]mmaluff 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]PedalPedalPedal 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]mmaluff 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]zoomzoomz 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]Prancemaster -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]MagCynic -2 points-1 points0 points ago
[–]colorless_green_idea 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]MagCynic -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]the_showerhead 14 points15 points16 points ago
[–]melbosa 10 points11 points12 points ago
[–]ne99ne 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]benduffy 2 points3 points4 points ago
[–]RshAndRoulette 1 point2 points3 points ago
[–]ummmdude 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–]MyCarIsACamel 3 points4 points5 points ago
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]MyCarIsACamel 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points ago
[–]cdwillis 5 points6 points7 points ago
[–]ne99ne 8 points9 points10 points ago
[–]SachmoRising 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]peas_in_a_can_pie 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]lordrunningclam 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]scrambles57 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]RadioHitandRun 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]RedditGreenit 0 points1 point2 points ago
[–]Marrz -1 points0 points1 point ago
[–]Prancemaster -2 points-1 points0 points ago