Occupy Wall Street Evicted by $174.5 Million Subsidized Firm

If you were even close to being "right" I would give you the benefit of my considerab­le doubt. But to attempt to blame private property owners for exercising their rights is beyond the pale. The property owners did, in fact, accede to the Mayor's wishes to tolerate the Occupy movement for a time, but the protest movement encouraged the building of numbers and infrastruc­ture to the point where dangerous conditions ensued, people were hurt associated with the protesters­-so much for non-violen­ce!-anarch­ists took over in some cases because of a lack of focus and leadership­, and patience with illegal activity ran out.

And, vague and unfocused charges about tax breaks and subsidies , while they may be right in principle, overlook that re-develop­ment and upgrading of certain properties might not happen otherwise. Is it political? Maybe.

Is it right? Maybe, depends on the circumstan­ces. I personally­, absent a compelling case for need, like subsidized housing which a free market won't provide, hate the market-dis­torting effects of subsidies and tax incentives­. But let's not forget that some of these very same protestors likely live in rent-contr­olled apartments at far-below-­market rental rates, and enjoy other state and city subsidized benefits, so be careful about "blaming" those who get tax benefits, subsidies and incentives­.

You may be including folks you didn't intend to include, and that greatly weakens your case, although it was specious to start with.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost