This post will be dedicated to examining the financial relationships between Occupy Wall Street’s financial section and the groups in OWS. I will warn you ahead of time, I couldn’t find any reputable sources aside from the NY Post article on this topic, so the material won’t be as factual as my last post, but it’s an interesting topic to consider nevertheless.
According to a NY post article, OWS was rather stingy with its funds in October of last year. In the article, a disgruntled member of OWS stated that the financial section of OWS “dives on whatever money is raised by OWS working groups, and doesn’t give it back.”
What are OWS working groups? Someone might ask. Well, in short, they are groups that take care of necessary functions inside the organization. For example, there is a kitchen group, who takes care of the necessary function of a kitchen, and there are other groups who fulfill other roles.
These groups raise money, which is then taken by the financial section of OWS, officially dubbed the Finance Committee. The Committee then re-organizes and redistributes the money how they see fit, much to the apparent chagrin of some of the smaller groups, such as the Comfort Working Group, who don’t receive nearly as much funding as some of the larger groups.
If you recall from my previous post, which looked at the funds required to keep OWS going, it stated how much OWS spends on different things. OWS grouped together different things for that report, there are roughly 30 OWS working groups, and not even 8 categories, which means that some of them had to be grouped together, because you can’t exclude things in a financial audit to the government.
According to my last post, OWS is running out of money. In fact, according them, they should have already gone broke.
If that’s not the case, then they have a few options
1.) Accept the money from MRG
2.) Cut costs and raise more money
3.) Raise enough money to keep going without cutting costs
They still haven’t accepted the money from MRG, so they’ve either done option 2 or 3. Personally, and there is no real way to verify this without another financial audit report, I believe they’ve done number 2 (no pun intended).
Judging from their last report, the amount of money they would have had to raise would have been staggering, but they haven’t completely ceased operations, so option 2 is the only real choice here. So was it a good move for them to be stingy with their money, and not give more to less essential groups? Judging from the financial state they’re in now, it sure looks so.