????然而，占領(lǐng)華爾街抗議活動目前已經(jīng)蔓延至美國數(shù)十個地區(qū)，它的口號“我們是那99%的人”可能會為它贏得動力，利希頓斯坦說。

????“這似乎是在重演18世紀的歷史，”他解釋說。他指的是美國憲法中所規(guī)定的財產(chǎn)所有者權(quán)利。白人、男性鄉(xiāng)紳可以投票。其他85%到90%的人群則沒有這項權(quán)利。

????“這不僅僅是收入問題，”利希滕斯坦解釋說 ?！坝蟹N觀點認為，在當今世界，有少數(shù)生產(chǎn)者，如史蒂夫?喬布斯或沃倫?巴菲特，是有德行的但還有占據(jù)人口總數(shù)1％人，他們是一幫寄生蟲。這種思想可以追溯至大英帝國時代“。

????“99%人群”表示，他們抗議的是一小撮控制著全美約三分之一財富，約20%收入的人。到目前為止，針對華爾街及其不端行徑的怒火尚未取得進展，但威斯康星大學麥迪遜分校（the University of Wisconsin, Madison）研究20世紀歷史的學者威廉?P ?瓊斯認為，占領(lǐng)華爾街的抗議者已經(jīng)對政治話語產(chǎn)生了影響。

????“抗議活動開始后的一周之內(nèi)，就有人提出要向富人征收附加稅。這有助于促使人們關(guān)注財富的急劇集中問題，”他說。

????目前還沒有哪位金融巨頭在祖可蒂公園露過面。鑒于此，占領(lǐng)華爾街的示威者上周把他們的訊息帶到了摩根大通（JPM）首席執(zhí)行官杰米?戴蒙和為保守派運動提供資金支持的億萬富翁、實業(yè)家大衛(wèi)?科赫的家中。此舉是效仿2008年金融危機爆發(fā)之后的做法。當時，一些獲得高報酬的銀行家的住宅被示威者團團圍住。

????花旗集團（Citigroup）首席執(zhí)行官維潘偉迪本周在接受《財富》雜志（Fortune）主編賽安迪采訪時，表示愿意跟示威者見面，但也僅此而已，而且會面時間和地點尚未確定。

????抗議活動到目前為止還相當文明，但令美國民眾大為不滿（尤其是在過去兩年中）的一個熱點問題有可能會再次露頭。這就是華爾街從業(yè)者每年獲取的高得令人乍舌的獎金：數(shù)十億美元的現(xiàn)金和股票紅利。

????華爾街發(fā)放獎金的日子通常在新年后，往往可能是在解雇通知書到達高盛公司（Goldman Sachs）、花旗集團和其他主要金融機構(gòu)較下層金融員工的案頭之后不久，因為這些金融機構(gòu)的營收目前已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)下降。

????然而，即使在最艱難的日子，華爾街的從業(yè)者每人平均獲得的獎金金額也在40萬至50萬美元，即使是這個數(shù)字也可以很輕松地達到任何一位示威者薪酬的99倍之多。

????譯者：任文科

????But the Occupy Wall Street protest, which has been burgeoning in dozens of other American locales, may gain traction with its slogan, "We are the 99%," says Lichtenstein.

????"It echoes back to the 18th century," he explains, referring to property-owner rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The white, male landed gentry could vote. The other 85% to 90% could not.

????"It's not just a question of income," explains Lichtenstein. "There was a view that there was a small group of virtuous producers, like Steve Jobs or Warren Buffett in today's world," he says, "and there was a parasitical 1% of the population, an idea that goes back to the time of the British."

????The "99 percenters" say they are rallying against the small sliver of people who control about one-third of the country's wealth and about 20% of its income. Thus far, the anger against Wall Street and suspected wrongdoing has made little headway, but the Occupy Wall Street protesters have made an impact on the political discourse, contends William P. Jones, a 20th-century historian at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

????"Within a week after the protest started, there was talk of a tax surcharge on the wealthy. That helps to focus attention on the dramatic concentration of wealth," he says.

????No financial titans have been milling about Zuccotti Park, so Occupy Wall Street demonstrators last week took their message to the New York homes of JPMorgan Chase (JPM) chief executive Jamie Dimon and billionaire industrialist and conservative movement financier David Koch, taking a page from the post-2008 financial crash where some residences of highly remunerated bankers were picketed.

????Citigroup (C) CEO Vikram Pandit went so far as to say he'd be willing to meet with protesters during an interview this week with Fortune's managing editor Andy Serwer, but a time and place has yet to be set.

????So far, it's all been quite civil, but one of the flashpoints of discontent around the country, especially in the last two years, is about to recur. It's the jaw-dropping billions of dollars in cash and stock bonuses awarded annually on Wall Street.

????The award period typically arrives after the New Year, not too long after pink slips are likely to be arriving on the desks of lower-down financial workers at Goldman Sachs (GS), Citigroup and other major financial institutions whose revenues have dipped.

????But even on the worst days, the bonus payouts -- averaging around $400,000 to $500,000 per worker -- are easily 99 times those of any protester's paycheck.