New York: Occupy Wall Street Hypocrites Cause 91 Workers to Lose Jobs

-By Warner Todd Huston

The Occupy Whatevers claimed they were all about “the little people.” They were about small businesses that stand against corporate giants. They were for the local shops that employ the middle and lower classes. And now the OWSers are responsible for the loss of almost 100 jobs for the very people they claimed they were trying to help.

Last June a small lunch spot was opened called the Milk Street Cafe. It was quickly becoming a favorite little eatery in the financial district — that is until the Occupy destroyers arrived to wreck the small start-up’s business.

A few weeks ago, struggling to survive the destruction wrecked upon it by the OWSers, the cafe laid off 21 people. Owner Marc Epstein had hoped that it would be enough to keep his little cafe afloat but to no avail. This week he has announced that he’s laid off his other 70 workers and is closing his business. That’s 91 workers that have lost their jobs thanks to the OWSers.

Read the rest at


Leave a comment
  • fb_avatar

    Warner Todd Huston is obviously a sellout to the system and the GOP. The article is nothing more than partisan rhetoric BS.

  • In reply to Mandy Cruz:

    Thank you for your lengthy and erudite reply. A typical, half-wit OWSer chimes in.

  • Looks like the reason for the loss of business was due to police barricades being set up and left up for weeks after the eviction of the encampment rather then any direct action by the occupy protesters, quote "Epstein blamed the barricades that remained in front of his restaurant even after the Occupy Wall Street protestors were removed from Zuccotti Park."

  • In reply to mikeraglass:

    But why were the barricades up in the first place? Because of the OWSers were infesting the area for months.

  • fb_avatar
    In reply to publiusforum:

    Occupy Wall Street has been gone for weeks from the park, and the barricades are still up. Occupy Wall Street doesn't control those barricades, the police and NYC does. And, how many other businesses are closing there? Did it possibly occur that the business in question wasn't that good, and suffered for other reasons?

  • In reply to publiusforum:

    Well, technically true, but it can be said that the reason for the occupiers occupying was the financial screwing around done by the major banks and corporate entities, especially in the years leading to the 2008 crash, so it looks like it would ultimately be their fault for the loss of these jobs. Haha, as a side note, I found it really funny that anti-occupy articles tend to attract occupy supporters, and vice versa, says something for the readership of the articles.

  • What kind of destruction was wrecked upon the cafe?

    Does everyone out there realize that there are no membership requirements for an Occupy? There is no list or vetting process. Everyone and anyone can "represent" an Occupy - that is part of the horizontal nature of Occupy. With that type of inclusion there will always be individuals that cause harm and disruption. A person that "comes in the name" of Occupy must be considered to represent only themselves as individuals and no one else.

  • In reply to Daniel:

    Nice excuse, Daniel. Things like this never happened with Tea Party events but using your "logic" they should have.

  • Not necessarily. The tea party protests operate through a different world-view. Though, as is my understanding, the tea party groups have similar procedures regarding membership, the tea party attracts a much different crowd. OWS is a conduit for the actualization of many of the most maligned and least understood portions of our population. There are fundamental disagreements on right/wrong, morality, behavior etc. that do not translate across world-views. In order to be brief and respond directly to your statement, I can write that regardless of the fact that the tea party and OWS agree on a great many points, they are not the same nor do they attract the same demographic.

  • In reply to Daniel:

    The OWS and the Tea Party agree on few points and they agree on no solutions. But this of yours sort of amused me:

    "The tea party protests operate through a different world-view."

    Yeah, the TP folks operate as law-abiding citizens and the OWSers do not.

    I was also amused by your claim that OWS "actualizes" people of the "most maligned and least understood portions of our population." What hogwash. The Old media and every Democrat in power fell in love with the criminals, deviates, and anti-Americans of the OWS. There was not a whiff of Most maligned" anything.

    By the way, with your use of the word "actualize," I wonder if you are in college or recently graduated? It sure sounds like the sort of meaningless "speak" that one finds in the ivory towers of our fetid institutions of "higher" learning.

  • It isn't necessarily an admirable strategy to obey the law. The United States of America is founded on criminal activity of the highest degree.

    We can all recall the Boston Tea Party, an event viewed as part of the catalyst that led to our war against the British. Those that participated in the Boston Tea Party, some of them disguised as Native Americans, forcibly trespassed onto ships that were not owned by them and proceeded to destroy over two hundred crates of tea. OWS has not even begun to approach this degree of vandalism; the only difference is that some of us believe that the actions of the Boston Tea Party were morally justifiable and those of OWS are not - there is no argument that both broke (break) the law.

    In the revolution we overthrew a government, it doesn't get any more illegal than that.

    I bring this up only to clarify that legality is not the same thing as morality. The Tea Party does obey the law, and though their fight isn't over, they now have a Republican controlled House of Representatives that passed a bill which effectively invalidates our right to a trial. I am increasingly convinced that no matter who is in office the government will grow, becoming more intrusive and oppressive.

    I used the word "actualize" because it is the most accurate word in this case. People, many for the first time, have the opportunity to be heard and voice their grievances. It is the same excitement experienced by members of the Tea Party. OWS, through the collective participation of its members, is bringing out the feelings of frustration and resentment citizens have that were previously suppressed for so long with no outlet.

    And I did attend university.

  • In reply to Daniel:

    I can agree with the basic concept that following every law regardless of its morality is not a good practice. But I have to say that the OWSers seemed to use that as an excuse as opposed to one of many guiding philosophical points! In fact. law breaking seems to have rather been the entire point of the OWS. On the other hand the Tea Partiers intended to use the law to their own advantage by getting involved in the system and using it to their advantage... and they did.

    All that aside, though, I can agree with your following statement:

    "I am increasingly convinced that no matter who is in office the government will grow, becoming more intrusive and oppressive."

    With this we can find 100% agreement. With Democrats we will get there at lightning speed as they have NO vestige of small governmentism, with the GOP we will get there slower as that party is half small govt and half big govt.

    Unless the American electorate awakens to a more true understanding of our founding principles, we might just end up having a major collapse of sorts and what comes after that depends on the flavor of the collapse and what forces gain power to "fix" it.

Leave a comment