Who were the 99% of ancient Rome?
Kristina Killgrove, shown here in the catacombs under Paris, is fascinated by ancient Rome.
November 11th, 2011
09:00 AM ET

Who were the 99% of ancient Rome?

Editor's note: Ed Yong is a freelance writer who blogs regularly at Discover Magazine's Not Exactly Rocket Science.

From Gibbon to "Gladiator," it might seem like we know a lot about Ancient Rome, but our view of this civilization is a skewed one. The Romans lived in one of the most stratified societies in history. Around 1.5% of the population controlled the government, military, economy and religion. Through the writings and possessions they left behind, these rich, upper-class men are also responsible for most of our information about Roman life.

The remaining people – commoners, slaves and others – are largely silent. They could not afford tombstones to record their names, and they were buried with little in the way of fancy pottery or jewellery. Their lives were documented by the elites, but they left few documents of their own.

Now, Kristina Killgrove, an archaeologist from Vanderbilt University, wants to tell their story by sequencing their DNA, and she is raising donations to do it. “Their DNA will tell me where these people, who aren’t in histories, were coming from,” she says. “They were quite literally the 99% of Rome.”

***

People have long been interested in the Romans, but most archaeologists only started paying attention to their skeletons in the last 30 years or so. There are currently anywhere between 10,000 and 20,000 skeletons knocking about in Italian warehouses, and most have been ignored because of lack of money and personnel. “It’s an untapped data source, especially about the common people, the ones we know nothing about,” says Killgrove.

Since 2007, Killgrove has been studying 200 skeletons recovered from lower-class graves excavated outside Rome’s city walls. As they went about their lives, these Romans incorporated chemical isotopes from their water, food and environment into their bones and teeth. By measuring the levels of these isotopes, Killgrove could reconstruct the lives of her subjects.

Carbon and nitrogen told her they ate different and varied diets, which included wheat, barley and fish. Strontium and oxygen revealed that a third of them had immigrated to Rome after their childhood, and had very similar lives to the locals. That was a surprise.

Ancient Rome lacked any formal census, so it is hard to pin down the dynamics of its population. Many people thought only young boys came to the city, but Killgrove found older men, women and children among her immigrants.

She thinks that some could have travelled to Rome from as far away as North Africa, but the isotopes cannot pinpoint a location. To do that, Killgrove wants to extract DNA from the bones of as many immigrants as possible.

This will mark the first time anyone has sequenced DNA from a Roman skeleton, and it is part of a growing field of “molecular archaeology,” in which scientists turn the tools of modern genetics toward ancient civilizations. Several teams have sequenced DNA from Egyptian mummies, both human and crocodile. John Dudgeon, one of Killgrove’s collaborators from Idaho State University, has been sequencing the DNA of Easter Islanders. Other societies, from the ancient Greeks to the Etruscans, are likely future targets.

But for the moment, Killgrove’s attention is squarely on Rome. She says, “I’m trying to fill in these huge gaps in history and piece together what life was like for the average people in Rome.” She will start with where they came from.

***

Killgrove’s own origin story, like many of the best, involves radiation. At the age of 7, she broke her arm and while discussing her X-ray, her doctor asked, “Do you want to know how tall you’ll be when you grow up?” As Killgrove writes: “Predicting the future from bones –that is how you blow a 7-year-old’s mind.” That incident sparked a longstanding and “slightly creepy” love for skeletons, which fused with a fascination for ancient civilization. Both interests are abundantly clear in her research and her personal blog, Powered by Osteons.

To finance her new project, Killgrove is looking for public donations. She is one of 49 scientists who are trying to persuade the public to fund their research as part of the SciFund Challenge. With more than a month to go, she has already raised more than a third of her $6,000 target. Her donors are mostly members of the public, and include several “weekend genealogists.” One generous individual has donated $1,000, earning an acknowledgement on the eventual research paper.

Killgrove says the crowdfunding model comes into its own for small pilot projects, which can provide the basis for larger grant applications. “I don’t think it could fund an archaeological expedition, which could cost tens of thousands of dollars,” she says. “But for these small-scale projects, I think it’s a great way of raising money and bringing the public into my science.”

Post by:
Filed under: On Earth
soundoff (484 Responses)
  1. JED234

    Well, would have went in there, but needed 2 more people, then a group smaller than us went down there, my uncle knows french well, but spoke in English because the officers in the french military where suppose to know English, long story short, French do not like Americans because we are apparently gun loving hillbilly rednecks to them. And no, we did not go get to see them.

    November 12, 2011 at 11:23 pm |
  2. Rod C. Venger

    The Romans may or may not have done a formal census, but surely they had tax rolls...we know they did eslewhere because Joseph and Mary had to add Jesus onto the tax roll in Nazareth. It makes sense that they did the same for people in Rome.

    November 12, 2011 at 10:51 pm |
    • eddie

      really you know that for sure ?

      November 13, 2011 at 5:07 am |
    • SixDegrees

      Add that they don't appear on the rolls.

      November 13, 2011 at 6:58 am |
    • mooseant

      Really, tax roles? Do you think slaves and gladiators (who were essentially slaves) paid taxes? I believe the point here is that forensic science can tell us about those who lack a voice in the historical record. We can learn quite a lot from analyzing the skeletons of the unrecorded such as their ethnicity, what their diet was and what diseases they suffered from. Using that information, we can infer similar conclusions regarding their lives as we can from the historical record. Both are biased, of course, but then everything is.

      November 13, 2011 at 8:14 am |
      • Will

        Gladiators were not always slaves. Quite often Roman citizens would sell themselves into that world to pay off whatever debts they may have had and would serve for a specific amount of time or until they were killed, in which, their families would still receive payment for services rendered. It wasn't surprising to find a son of a noble man doing the same in order to improve his dignitas to help progress his political prospects.

        November 13, 2011 at 9:49 am |
    • Mike

      Actually, a good question regarding the tax rolls and the like. Problem is, most of that information wouldn't have survived this long. The Romans certainly did do a census in the form of tax rolls, yes. but it's relatively rare that comprehensive documents written on paper survive – fragments sometimes do and we have a few surprisingly intact manor rolls from the middle ages (written on vellum most often). Complete ones are rare, though, because all kinds of things can destroy or damage them (beyond natural decay). Those also are from like 700 years ago, not 2000 years ago. So most things written down on anything other than stone probably are long gone from the Roman period (some fragments may survive, though certainly nothing comprehensive).

      November 13, 2011 at 11:50 pm |
  3. Sharp

    Has this researcher thought to contact the Mormon Church? Their self imposed mission is to trace the genealogy of all humanity. Surely tracing the common Romans would fit in there somewhere.

    November 12, 2011 at 9:59 pm |
  4. EA Marco Polo

    Is the Roman Empire the greatest empire at her time?

    More and more researches are conducting to a new conclusion:

    Possibly, the Han Dynasty (206 BC – 220 AD) of Chinese Empire has a bigger GDP and military force than the Roman Empire! Besides, the Han Empire is more civilized than the Roman Empire.

    November 12, 2011 at 9:38 pm |
    • Keerview

      That's in interesting point. Actually the Roman empire would attract more attention because it existed more recently and closer to the Western world. Rom get credits for the first water and sewer implementation. The Han Dynasty being more advanced as you say, did they have publicly available water and sanitation installations?

      November 13, 2011 at 3:40 am |
      • Ricky

        Actually, that's not quiet true (the part about water/sewage). The first civilization to have that was actually the Indus Valley Civilization. They had the earliest forms of flush toilets, sewage pipes, etc.

        November 13, 2011 at 8:33 pm |
  5. jon

    A more important comparison is that both Rome and the USA have moved away from from the very things that made them great. The quit making anything and had to import everything from food to clothes. Both became mired in sex and debauchery and turned away from spirituality. Politicians are bought and sold and there is no integrity in government. We on our way out as a nation

    November 12, 2011 at 9:34 pm |
    • Greyman

      Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire about a century before its downfall. And nations with greater numbers of atheists and agnostics than the United States (like Denmark, Sweden, Norway and Japan) are constantly rated more peaceful and prosperous by the Global Peace Index, Human Development Index, etc.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:41 pm |
      • danny

        those are nations with very strict immigration policies, do you suppose it could have something to do with that?

        November 13, 2011 at 7:37 am |
      • The Atlanteans

        Fascinating that you mention the ethos of Christianity precursing the downfall of the Roman Empire. I agree with this assessment, and I believe the "American Empire" will also crumble under the weight of this unfortunate cult.

        November 13, 2011 at 11:33 am |
      • Wyler Chesterfield

        ..Because everyone knows groups of people with official names all deciding something spew out undeniable facts. Quoting those groups of people sure make you sound smart, too! Just ask the Unimaginably Intelligent Council ( U.I.C. for short )!

        November 14, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
    • Will

      Ancient Rome was never known for manufacturing anything itself. It was a war machine and nothing more. Everything it had, it stole from some other nations, to include architecture, politics, and education. In truth, Rome itself was nothing, but the cities that eventually were allowed to be considered "Roman" were the farmers. Rome and Romans were able to sell an ideal to their neighbors that they were better in some way, when in truth, they had nothing to really offer. However, it worked and eventually "Rome" was able to grow in influence and continue to take from other nations.

      November 13, 2011 at 9:56 am |
      • Ry

        @ Will. Romans were the first to build roads they inherited their political and ideological philosophies from the Greeks. They didn't steal everything. Plus, they were the first civilization to have running water, and irrigation. They also were not catholic, they believed in animism which each civilization developed in the a different way. You must be Jewish or Muslim or just misinformed.

        November 13, 2011 at 11:38 am |
      • Mike Brooks

        The Roman invented cement. And, don't laugh. Specialized forms of concrete allowed them to build underwater foundations, piers, harbors, and grand lasting structures like the Colosseum! The Roman's invented engineering, as a formal science, medicine, metal working, the modern nation-state, public education, and pluralism. The Roman Republic, as opposed to the later dictatorships and oligarchy, so like our own, was a true democracy that was regulated by laws that applied equally to everyone. It produced works of literature, art, the sciences that have ever been eclipsed. Rome's downfall began with the ultra-rich reserving power and money for themselves. They placated the masses with bread and circuses or by the use of armies that answered to them, and them alone. Read about the Roman Senate during the days of Caligula and Nero and you will see the present United States staring at you.

        November 13, 2011 at 12:43 pm |
      • KeithTexas

        Actually that is all that is left of America, a war machine. We have been at war for close to one hundred years without a single year of peace.

        Like Rome, Graft and Corruption is all that is left of our once great experiment in Democracy.

        November 13, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
      • matt

        will, I like your comment. The responses to you, however, are very bad. The Romans were not the first to develop irrigation; I cannot stress that enough. Anyone unfortunate enough to have read that boneheaded comment should just take a minute to breath and recover. Please, as an Archaeologist, I beg you to not make up history. People work hard to figure out what really happened, and we don't need nihilists blathering nonsense in opposition.

        November 14, 2011 at 3:27 pm |
  6. Rigel

    Oh goodie! Ignorant plebes talking about what they think they know! Sorry to burst your bubble but we are an empire. The top 1% do not run it. Its more like the top 10%. And don't bitch about the government. You all voted them in. You all did. And those protesters are not the 99% less then 25 thousand of them out of 300 million citizens. Idiots. However the news was enjoyable.

    November 12, 2011 at 9:13 pm |
    • Greyman

      Still far more than the turnout for Tea Party rallies these days.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:44 pm |
    • Schmedley

      No kidding. People griping about Congress when they voted them all in. Here is a clue, politicians do what gets them votes. If being an obstinate roadblock makes their district happy, guess what, they're going to be obstinate roadblocks.

      This 99% is getting as old as it is false. Here are some numbers I got directly from the Congressional Budget Office website. It is all publicly available and is not slanted like a CNN article:

      The top 1% earned 19% of the taxable income and paid 28% of the TOTAL income tax burden for 2007
      The top 20% earned 55% of the taxable income and paid 70% of the TOTAL income tax burden for 2007
      The bottom 80% earned 45% of the taxable income and paid 30% of the total income tax burden for 2007

      Whatever the OWS is griping about, I don't understand because they have no coherent message. If it's the banks they hate, well no one is forcing them to use the banks and no one is forcing anyone to take out a mortgage.

      My wife and I work hard and if you combine our incomes, I think we are in the 1% and guess what, we have influence over jack squat. We can't even get our local town to pave the sidewalks. People claiming to be the 99% need to get a grip.

      November 13, 2011 at 1:11 am |
      • RP 2012

        I think we need a Coliseum and force the far right and the far left to battle to the end. The winner gets a private island far away from the rest of us. Really people, do you (the far right and left) have to hijack everything on the net and post. This is about DNA sequencing and analysis, and what it can tell us about the past.

        Now my 2 cents.

        You can not pay taxes with money you don't have! In other words the poor pay less taxes because they make so much less money. It income vs taxes paid! If you don't have income you can't pay taxes. A flat tax and/or a federal VAT would be a fair system. Tax everyone at the same rate. I'm sure that top 1% would pay even more taxes, but at least the tax burden would be removed from the middle class. The problem is that the left and right control the media and that the American public is too busy watching TV or surfing the net to really care.

        Please far left and right fight it out to the death so we (the middle class) don't have to deal with you any more. You're ruining the country.

        November 13, 2011 at 11:48 am |
      • Solara

        So there was a 1% that controlled most things in ancient Rome. If you look at North Korea today, there's a 1% (the politically connected class) that control most of the wealth and political power. And there's allegedly a 1% in the US too with that kind of power. So, whether it's today or in ancient societies, whether it's communism or capitalism there's always a 1%. The 1% 99% observation is as important as noting the sky was blue when Rome ruled as it often is today.

        November 13, 2011 at 12:18 pm |
    • dpnelson

      The US isn't an empire... look up the definition.

      November 13, 2011 at 1:18 am |
      • KeithTexas

        We have been trying our best to become one.

        November 13, 2011 at 6:42 pm |
      • Paul

        Tell me how we are not an economic empire, Companies go into 3rd world countries to start a business, seems innocent. They buyout a resource be it labor, oil, minerals and exploit the country giving it back bottom dollar.

        That same company 1. Pays taxes 2. Has lobbyists that payoff politicians

        It's very similar to what the north was doing to the south before the civil war except the northwas making all of the money off of the south's labor.

        November 13, 2011 at 9:01 pm |
    • mmi16

      Thing to remember about voting for Congress.

      The congressman for your district that you voted for is a local hero and brings home the pork – it is the OTHER 434 that are the problem.

      Wake up Boys & Girls – they ALL need to go down the latrine. You can't vote for or against the other 434 – you can only vote for you districts congressman – send them packing!

      November 13, 2011 at 5:44 am |
      • SixDegrees

        Completely agree. If there were ever a time to oust incumbents, it is now.

        November 13, 2011 at 6:51 am |
  7. Bill

    This 99% stuff is really getting old

    November 12, 2011 at 8:27 pm |
    • SixDegrees

      Completely agree. That "movement," such as it ever was, ended in Oakland with the smashing of small-business storefronts.

      November 13, 2011 at 6:59 am |
  8. Nancy

    Awesome

    November 12, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  9. Robert Igoe

    I think this is a very important field for serious researchers. We need to spend more (time / money) to give us a better picture of the past. I don't know if there is any movement to fund such research projects, but I would be one who would support such efforts.

    November 12, 2011 at 5:13 pm |
    • aaron

      WHO IS USING STATISTICS FOR THE 99% number – let's get real?

      7,000,000,000 people so, 1% of that is 70,000,000 people running things... wow that is a lot now let's think it is that true? I mean there aren't that many people running things, let's get it closer to 70,000 or say .1% of 1% or .00001% worldwide actually control stuff.

      Let's get real, there is not changing this, give thanks they give us a good world for those that are closer to the rest.

      So if you are in the 98th% you should be with the 99%'s? I don't think so, this is a total sham a waste of ideology, a truly sickening concept that doesn't even make mathematical sense. Neither did the tea party movement with their no solution and only lower taxes type discussion.

      I actually enjoy a technocratically controlled banker system where debts must be paid – get used to it folks, i think if you forget about it and just try to be a good happy person you will do well.

      November 12, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
      • Nanowired

        Math goes like this:
        307,006,550 in the united states. That leaves 3 million with absolute control of the wealth, yet not paying their fair share of taxes. If they don't want to support the rest of the country, than they should of kept investing in america instead of taking the first Reagonomics train to China.

        November 12, 2011 at 8:09 pm |
    • Dr.K.

      Indeed, Robert Igoe. Molecular archaeology is quickly growing field and it stands to shed light on everything from human origins, to historical migration patterns, to modern disease vectors. Not to mention the contribution to the better understanding of evolutionary processes in general. Show your support by standing up for funding bodies like the National Science Foundation.

      (aaron, I don't think the 99% perspective is an ideological bias behind the research, I think it is a journalistic devise to help readers relate to the subject. Try to pull yourself together.)

      November 12, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  10. Lola

    When Rome collapsed, 75% of Romans were on some form of welfare. We are headed down the same path. Keep people poor and controlled by keeping them dependent on government handouts.

    November 12, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
    • spkedoool

      typical socialist nonsense.

      November 12, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
    • DEAN ALLEN JONES

      For centuries, even before it became an empire, the members of Roman elite had used their control of the government, the military, the judicial system, and the tradition of hereditary privilege and entitlements to create a slave based economic system in which ordinary workers and laborers could not compete with the wealthy landowners who literally controlled nearly every scrap of arable land. The "welfare" which you criticize was actually a very complex combination of handouts and patronage which was calculated to divert the masses of the unemployed and under employed who lived in the cities, closest to those who were in power, and to contain their anger and frustration. It had nothing to do with altruism. As rigid and stratified as Rome was, even slaves could become free, prosperous, and relatively powerful. In this way, it was very much unlike the race-based chattel slavery which later developed in the United States and in the rest of the Americas. Rome, or at least the elite which ran it, became dependent upon waging continuous wars of conquest which, when they were successful, supplied new lands, raw materials, and most importantly, more slave labor to run their economy. This unsustainable policy of never ending military expansion in which the Roman army became privatized and owned by charismatic individuals such as Julius Caesar, had just as much to do with the slow motion "fall" of Rome as did the existence of any so-called welfare system.

      November 12, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
    • Drodsi

      Lola you are so right. History repeats itself and we on our way to being a fallen Empire unless something changes

      November 12, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
      • eddie

        History does not repeat it self people repeat history.

        November 13, 2011 at 5:13 am |
    • A-Roman

      The Roman Empire fell because Julius Cesar allowed the barbarians to become part of it...,

      November 12, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
      • Ry

        To become part of it by conquering it. The barbarians, you know "white people blue eyed people" conquer everything, right? You love to hate my white people when we do, at your advantage, and you love to misconstrue facts, when it doesn't seem fit for you. Barbarians "whites" have conquered hundreds of civilizations of the span of time. Never really been conquered. Sucks for everyone doesn't it. KMA

        November 13, 2011 at 11:45 am |
      • Darach

        It's actually a little ironic. Rome did fall to barbarians, but the incorporation of them into Roman society and the military were historically sound ideas. The implementation killed them. Look at the way they treated people like the Goths – just kept them above starvation levels in exchange for military service. They failed to take a lesson from Alexander the Great – he fully incorporated conquered peoples into his own society and military, treating them as equals and encouraging intermarriage. The Romans took the opposite tack, to their cost. Even the word barbarian is a slight: it comes from the Latin onomatopoeic word "baba" which represents the bleating of sheep. Romans thought the language of lesser people sounded like sheep. Treat people with contempt for long enough and they will rebel.

        November 14, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
    • west

      Hey Ry: I hope your thinking isn't as confused and convoluted as your writing. Plenty of white cultures have been conquered, by whites and non-whites. Why do you think the Caucasus (where the word "Caucasian" comes from) is majority Muslim?

      November 13, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
      • A-Roman

        Hey West, u r doing urself a disservice by trying to educate ignorants like Ry. Let him spew his Nazy garbage, so everyone can see how smart and intelligent he really is...

        November 13, 2011 at 3:10 pm |
  11. Gopherit

    There are numerous similarities between what the article reports about the situation in Rome and what is taking place in the U.S. today. Add to that the fact that the Roman empire overextended itself militarily and worked its way into an untenable situation economically leading to its collapse and being invaded by "barbarians," and it appears that the U.S. is moving towards a similar fate.

    November 12, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
    • Lucille

      There is talk of a revived Roman Empire or something similar to it. Does anyone know what the seven mountans are? "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, ..."

      November 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
      • Eutychus II

        Rev. 17:9. "The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits." Often the woman is identified with Rome of the writer's time or as a figure of some future metropolis or society of similar influence and wickedness, and, per Wikipedia ("Rome"), "The original settlement developed on hills that faced onto a ford beside the Tiber island, the only natural ford of the river in this area. The Rome of the Kings was built on seven hills: the Aventine Hill, the Caelian Hill, the Capitoline Hill, the Esquiline Hill, the Palatine Hill, the Quirinal Hill, and the Viminal Hill." Roman writers Virgil, Martial, Cicero and others used the designation city on seven hills, too.

        November 12, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
      • Elijah

        Rome is situated on seven hills. It escapes me to which Roman wrote about Romulus and Remus and the founding of Rome and the rape of the Sabine women. Google it.

        November 12, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
      • coriolana

        I was wondering when the xian jackboots would start tramping through here.

        November 12, 2011 at 7:08 pm |
    • Julia Dunphy

      If you read Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" you will see that he decided that the root cause of the Roman empire was adopting Christianity. When you tell everybody that the end is near and it is inevitable then they stop working. So if the US does go into decline, it could be a good parallel. Fortunately religion is declining in the US and we may make it through.

      November 12, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
      • Ry

        There were many many things that were the cause. To say the root cause may be accurate to some extent, but not really.

        November 13, 2011 at 11:46 am |
  12. Ibad Rehman

    A dynamic and most progressive political party in Pakistan raised the issue of 98% common class being ruled over by 2% of elite. That political party is Muttahida Quami Movement or MQM. The phenomenon was well received in Pakistan since last 25 years and with the mid-east up-spring and 1% v. 99% demonstrations in USA, it looks like something soon to pop up in Pakistan too. Its about time.

    November 12, 2011 at 3:26 pm |
  13. Researcher

    Kristina Killgrove,
    Crowd sourcing to fund your project is very innovative.. You also seem to have a lot of passion for your area of work. We will perhaps hear more about you in the future. Best of luck.

    November 12, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
  14. Jeff, Chicago

    It is a stupid article, and if the writer is trying to compare the economic stratification of Rome to US they are completely different. In Rome, you were born into a class and had no opportunity for movement. In the US, people can improve their economic standing. For those ignorant liberals who disagree, the facts are that most millionaires are self-made.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:42 pm |
    • okokokalready

      Blatant red herring.... the author never made that comparison. I cannot believe that politics in the United States is such that people will do anything to get their stupid political ideas broadcasted, even if it is completely irrelevant to what they're responding to.

      November 12, 2011 at 2:10 pm |
      • HappyMadison

        Exactly – just like Paris Hilton is rich because of her brilliant grasp of business, and Ashlee Simpson because of her incredible singing talent.

        November 12, 2011 at 2:41 pm |
    • Economist

      WRONG – The "fact" is that most wealth is not created or self made, it is infact inherited. Wealth is typically gained by marriage (marrying into money) or inheritance (being passed down from elders)

      There is a reason that stories about Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and other wealthy self made people are infact "news" and why we know their names. Because it's rare, and unlikely, thus we shine the spotlight on it.

      If you want to be rich, statistically, your only hope is to have a rich relative, or go marry your dream man (or woman) at the country club.

      Do your research before you repeat what you hear on foxnews. I'm an economist, I did my thesis on transfer and generation of wealth. Trust me I know what i'm talking about.

      November 12, 2011 at 2:37 pm |
      • s hill

        i think you have confused "wealthy" and millionaires. the original poster referred to millionaires. every year there are more and more millionaires in the US. obviously it is not from marraige or birth. it is typically baby boomers with large retirement accounts. millionaires really dont qualify as wealthy any more. especially if you dont reach that milestone until in your 50s or 60s.

        November 12, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
    • Ralph

      yea, most robbed someone in one way or another, others were born into it. then there are a handful of lottery winners. politicians, insurance companies, and banks have raped citizens for decades....and we're not standing for it any more.

      November 12, 2011 at 2:55 pm |
    • Ibad Rehman

      In the recent history, a dynamic and most progressive political party in Pakistan raised the issue of 98% common class being ruled over by 2% of elite. That political party is Muttahida Quami Movement or MQM. The phenomenon was well received in Pakistn since last 25 years and with the mid-east up-spring and 1% v. 99% demonstrations in USA, it looks like something soon to pop up in Pakistan too. Its about time.

      November 12, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
    • truth hurts

      What does this have to do with this article? Why do people like Jeff twist everything into some kind of political manifesto? Maybe its just that he can't read or worse, reads everything through a political filter. Sad.

      November 12, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
    • skytag

      The author made no such comparison. This is just you ranting about a personal issue as an excuse to disparage liberals.

      November 12, 2011 at 8:35 pm |
    • KeithTexas

      Jeff you are seriously deluded, most millionaires wouldn't know a hard days work if they saw it first hand.

      November 13, 2011 at 6:46 pm |
  15. Marty

    Who cares?

    November 12, 2011 at 1:24 pm |
  16. Peikovianii

    By the year AD 700 the 99% were barbarians. Keep up the good work, we can get there too.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:13 pm |
    • tensor

      Probably the best post on this entire article.
      And, btw, every empire and civilization throughout time and on every continent fell for disparate factors but ultimately for the same reason: greed.

      November 13, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
  17. Arnold

    why does the photograph say Paris -when the article is about Rome. Different countries..

    November 12, 2011 at 1:11 pm |
    • JeffinIL

      Google a map of the Roman Empire and you will see why. The Empire covered a vast area at its peak.

      November 12, 2011 at 1:44 pm |
  18. Martin

    The 1% in ancient Rome knew what they were doing. At one point, they had thought it might be a good idea to have the slaves wear some sort of symbol or something on their clothing to identify them as slaves.

    The reason that this didn't go through? They realized that the slaves were so many and they were so few, and that if the slaves figured this out there would be a rebellion.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:00 pm |
    • Ralph

      great idea for the revolution, bro.

      November 12, 2011 at 2:58 pm |
  19. GauisCaesar

    Is this a story to inflame emotions, with subtle text that we are the slaves as commoners paralel to that of Rome. I don't think so. We all have the opportunity to make a good living for ourselves, the Roman commoners really didn't. This story should be read to the OWS protesters, so they can see how good they do have it. But something tells me this story was written for them, but to inflame them.

    November 12, 2011 at 11:55 am |
    • Phil Hansen

      Some things never change. I've heard it said that during the time of Henry VIII 1500 people owned everything in the British Isles.That is what monarchy is all about. I don't think that the OWS people are camping out in the rain and snow because they have it soooo gooood. America went against the tide and helped everybody up for 200 years. Now it seems like we are falling into the old patterns. That is what unfettered capitalism does. It will eventually create a wealthy ruling class.

      November 12, 2011 at 12:58 pm |
      • Lucille Stanziale

        So what would you suggest...unfettered socialism. That is what Obama and the Democrats are all about.

        November 12, 2011 at 2:18 pm |
      • Greyman

        @ Lucille Stanziale "So what would you suggest...unfettered socialism. That is what Obama and the Democrats are all about."

        Just once I'd like to come on a CNN board where the right-tighties DON'T constantly set up false dichotomies. Enough of this 'if you're not with us you're against us' drivel, thinking that any criticism of the status quo is somehow a call to do away with capitalism altogether. No wonder the far-right Republicans are incapable of governing: they all have this childish black-and-white mentality.

        November 12, 2011 at 9:38 pm |
  20. Informer

    The Forbes 400 Wealthiest People In America (The Top 1%) as of 9/21/2011
    1
    Bill Gates
    $59 B 55 Medina, Washington Microsoft
    2
    Warren Buffett
    $39 B 81 Omaha, Nebraska Berkshire Hathaway
    3
    Larry Ellison
    $33 B 67 Woodside, California Oracle
    4
    Charles Koch
    $25 B 75 Wichita, Kansas diversified
    4
    David Koch
    $25 B 71 New York, New York diversified
    6
    Christy Walton
    $24.5 B 56 Jackson, Wyoming Wal-Mart
    7
    George Soros
    $22 B 81 Katonah, New York hedge funds
    8
    Sheldon Adelson
    $21.5 B 78 Las Vegas, Nevada casinos
    9
    Jim Walton
    $21.1 B 63 Bentonville, Arkansas Wal-Mart
    10
    Alice Walton
    $20.9 B 61 Fort Worth, Texas Wal-Mart
    11
    S. Robson Walton
    $20.5 B 67 Bentonville, Arkansas Wal-Mart
    12
    Michael Bloomberg
    $19.5 B 69 New York, New York Bloomberg LP
    13
    Jeff Bezos
    $19.1 B 47 Seattle, Washington Amazon.com
    14
    Mark Zuckerberg
    $17.5 B 27 Palo Alto, California Facebook
    15
    Sergey Brin
    $16.7 B 38 Los Altos, California Google
    15
    Larry Page
    $16.7 B 38 Palo Alto, California Google
    17
    John Paulson
    $15.5 B 55 New York, New York hedge funds
    18
    Michael Dell
    $15 B 46 Austin, Texas Dell
    19
    Steve Ballmer
    $13.9 B 55 Hunts Point, Washington Microsoft
    20
    Forrest Mars
    $13.8 B 80 Big Horn, Wyoming candy
    20
    Jacqueline Mars
    $13.8 B 71 The Plains, Virginia candy
    20
    John Mars
    $13.8 B 75 Jackson, Wyoming candy, pet food
    23
    Paul Allen
    $13.2 B 58 Mercer Island, Washington Microsoft, investments
    24
    Phil Knight
    $13.1 B 73 Hillsboro, Oregon Nike
    25
    Carl Icahn
    $13 B 75 New York, New York leveraged buyouts
    26
    Donald Bren
    $12 B 79 Newport Beach, California real estate
    26
    Anne Cox Chambers
    $12 B 91 Atlanta, Georgia media
    26
    Ronald Perelman
    $12 B 68 New York, New York leveraged buyouts
    29
    Abigail Johnson
    $11.7 B 49 Milton, Massachusetts Fidelity
    30
    James Simons
    $10.6 B 73 East Setauket, New York hedge funds
    31
    George Kaiser
    $10 B 69 Tulsa, Oklahoma oil & gas, banking
    32
    Len Blavatnik
    $9.5 B 54 London, N/A diversified
    33
    Harold Simmons
    $9.3 B 80 Dallas, Texas investments
    34
    Jack Taylor
    $9 B 89 St. Louis, Missouri Enterprise Rent-A-Car
    35
    Steve Cohen
    $8.3 B 55 Greenwich, Connecticut hedge funds
    36
    Harold Hamm
    $7.5 B 65 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma oil & natural gas
    37
    Rupert Murdoch
    $7.4 B 80 New York, New York News Corp
    38
    James Goodnight
    $7.1 B 68 Cary, North Carolina SAS Institute
    39
    Philip Anschutz
    $7 B 71 Denver, Colorado investments
    39
    Andrew Beal
    $7 B 58 Dallas, Texas banks, real estate
    39
    Steve Jobs
    $7 B 56 Palo Alto, California Apple, Pixar
    39
    Patrick Soon-Shiong
    $7 B 59 Los Angeles, California generic drugs
    43
    Samuel Newhouse
    $6.6 B 83 New York, New York Conde Nast
    44
    Ray Dalio
    $6.5 B 62 Greenwich, Connecticut hedge funds
    44
    Edward Johnson
    $6.5 B 81 Boston, Massachusetts Fidelity
    46
    Charles Ergen
    $6.4 B 58 Denver, Colorado EchoStar
    46
    Richard Kinder
    $6.4 B 66 Houston, Texas pipelines
    48
    Eli Broad
    $6.3 B 78 Los Angeles, California investments
    48
    Leonard Lauder
    $6.3 B 78 New York, New York Estee Lauder
    50
    Pierre Omidyar
    $6.2 B 44 Honolulu, Hawaii Ebay
    50
    Eric Schmidt
    $6.2 B 56 Atherton, California Google
    52
    Ralph Lauren
    $6.1 B 71 New York, New York Ralph Lauren
    53
    Jim Kennedy
    $6 B 63 Atlanta, Georgia media
    53
    Blair Parry-Okeden
    $6 B 60 Scone, N/A media
    55
    Donald Newhouse
    $5.9 B 81 Somerset County, New Jersey Conde Nast
    55
    Ira Rennert
    $5.9 B 77 Sagaponack, New York investments
    57
    Charles Butt
    $5.7 B 73 San Antonio, Texas supermarkets
    58
    David Geffen
    $5.5 B 68 Malibu, California movies, music
    59
    Jeffrey Hildebrand
    $5.3 B 52 Houston, Texas Oil
    60
    Richard DeVos
    $5 B 85 Holland, Michigan Amway
    60
    Richard LeFrak
    $5 B 66 New York, New York real estate
    60
    Frederik G.H. Meijer
    $5 B 91 Grand Rapids, Michigan supermarkets
    60
    Thomas Peterffy
    $5 B 67 Greenwich, Connecticut discount brokerage
    60
    David Tepper
    $5 B 54 Livingston, New Jersey hedge funds
    60
    Dennis Washington
    $5 B 77 Missoula, Montana construction, mining
    66
    Robert Rowling
    $4.7 B 57 Dallas, Texas investments
    66
    Stephen Schwarzman
    $4.7 B 64 New York, New York investments
    66
    Sam Zell
    $4.7 B 69 Chicago, Illinois real estate, private equity
    69
    Rupert Johnson
    $4.5 B 70 Burlingame, California Franklin Resources
    69
    John Malone
    $4.5 B 70 Elizabeth, Colorado cable television
    69
    John Menard
    $4.5 B 71 Eau Claire, Wisconsin Retail
    72
    Charles Johnson
    $4.4 B 78 Hillsborough, California financial services
    73
    Ray Lee Hunt
    $4.3 B 68 Dallas, Texas oil, real estate
    73
    Bruce Kovner
    $4.3 B 66 New York, New York hedge funds
    75
    Micky Arison
    $4.2 B 62 Bal Harbour, Florida Carnival Cruises
    75
    Leonard Stern
    $4.2 B 73 New York, New York real estate
    75
    Daniel Ziff
    $4.2 B 39 New York, New York investments
    75
    Dirk Ziff
    $4.2 B 47 North Palm Beach, Florida investments
    75
    Robert Ziff
    $4.2 B 45 New York, New York investments
    80
    Sumner Redstone
    $4.1 B 88 Beverly Hills, California Viacom
    81
    John Paul DeJoria
    $4 B 67 Austin, Texas hair products, tequila
    81
    David Green
    $4 B 69 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Hobby Lobby
    81
    William Koch
    $4 B 71 Palm Beach, Florida oil, investments
    81
    Roger Wang
    $4 B 62 Nanjing, Jiangsu retail
    85
    Leslie Wexner
    $3.8 B 74 New Albany, Ohio retail
    86
    Henry Kravis
    $3.7 B 67 New York, New York leveraged buyouts
    86
    Gordon Moore
    $3.7 B 82 Woodside, California Intel
    88
    Robert Bass
    $3.6 B 63 Fort Worth, Texas oil, investments
    88
    Jin Sook & Do Won Chang
    $3.6 B 56 Beverly Hills, California retail
    88
    Trevor Rees-Jones
    $3.6 B 60 Dallas, Texas Oil & Gas
    91
    John Arnold
    $3.5 B 37 Houston, Texas hedge funds
    91
    Dustin Moskovitz
    $3.5 B 27 San Francisco, California Facebook
    91
    Henry Ross Perot
    $3.5 B 81 Dallas, Texas computer services, real estate
    91
    John Sall
    $3.5 B 63 Cary, North Carolina SAS Institute
    91
    Charles Schwab
    $3.5 B 74 Atherton, California discount brokerage
    96
    Dannine Avara
    $3.4 B 47 Houston, Texas pipelines
    96
    Gayle Cook
    $3.4 B 77 Bloomington, Indiana medical devices
    96
    Scott Duncan
    $3.4 B 28 Houston, Texas Pipelines
    96
    Milane Frantz
    $3.4 B 42 Houston, Texas Pipelines
    96
    Bruce Halle
    $3.4 B 81 Paradise Valley, Arizona Discount Tire
    96
    George Roberts
    $3.4 B 68 Atherton, California leveraged buyouts
    96
    Randa Williams
    $3.4 B 50 Houston, Texas Pipelines
    103
    Ann Walton Kroenke
    $3.3 B 62 Columbia, Missouri Wal-Mart
    103
    Ronald Lauder
    $3.3 B 67 New York, New York Estee Lauder
    103
    Ted Lerner
    $3.3 B 85 Chevy Chase, Maryland real estate
    103
    Patrick McGovern
    $3.3 B 74 Hollis, New Hampshire media
    107
    Leon Black
    $3.2 B 60 New York, New York private equity
    107
    Ron Burkle
    $3.2 B 58 London, N/A supermarkets, investments
    107
    Paul Tudor Jones
    $3.2 B 56 Greenwich, Connecticut hedge funds
    107
    Stanley Kroenke
    $3.2 B 64 Columbia, Missouri sports, real estate
    107
    George Lucas
    $3.2 B 67 San Anselmo, California Star Wars
    107
    John A. Sobrato
    $3.2 B 72 Atherton, California real estate
    107
    Steven Udvar-Hazy
    $3.2 B 65 Beverly Hills, California aircraft leasing
    114
    Barbara Piasecka Johnson
    $3.1 B 74 Monte Carlo, N/A Johnson & Johnson
    114
    Terrence Pegula
    $3.1 B 60 Boca Raton, Florida natural gas
    114
    Stephen Ross
    $3.1 B 71 New York, New York real estate
    117
    Riley Bechtel
    $3 B 59 San Francisco, California engineering, construction
    117
    Stephen Bechtel
    $3 B 86 San Francisco, California engineering, construction
    117
    Barbara Carlson Gage
    $3 B 69 Long Lake, Minnesota hotels, restaurants
    117
    Martha Ingram
    $3 B 76 Nashville, Tennessee book distribution, transportation
    117
    James Jannard
    $3 B 62 San Juan Islands, Washington sunglasses
    117
    Kirk Kerkorian
    $3 B 94 Beverly Hills, California casinos, investments
    117
    Edward Lampert
    $3 B 48 Greenwich, Connecticut investments
    117
    Marilyn Carlson Nelson
    $3 B 72 Long Lake, Minnesota hotels, restaurants
    117
    Mitchell Rales
    $3 B 55 Potomac, Maryland manufacturing
    117
    Lynn Schusterman
    $3 B 72 Tulsa, Oklahoma oil & gas, investments
    117
    Steven Spielberg
    $3 B 64 Pacific Palisades, California movies
    128
    Haim Saban
    $2.9 B 66 Beverly Hills, California television
    128
    Donald Trump
    $2.9 B 65 New York, New York television, real estate
    130
    Robert Friedland
    $2.8 B 61 Singapore, N/A mining
    130
    Thomas Frist
    $2.8 B 73 Nashville, Tennessee health care
    130
    Victor Fung
    $2.8 B 65 Hong Kong, N/A Retail
    130
    Rodney Lewis
    $2.8 B 57 San Antonio, Texas natural gas
    130
    Warren Stephens
    $2.8 B 54 Little Rock, Arkansas investment banking
    130
    David Sun
    $2.8 B 59 Irvine, California information technology
    130
    Joan Tisch
    $2.8 B 85 New York, New York diversified
    130
    John Tu
    $2.8 B 70 Rolling Hills, California information technology
    130
    Steve Wynn
    $2.8 B 69 Las Vegas, Nevada casinos, hotels
    139
    William Conway
    $2.7 B 62 McLean, Virginia leveraged buyouts
    139
    Daniel D'Aniello
    $2.7 B 65 Vienna, Virginia leveraged buyouts
    139
    Malcolm Glazer
    $2.7 B 83 Palm Beach, Florida sports teams, real estate
    139
    Timothy Headington
    $2.7 B 61 Dallas, Texas oil & gas, investments
    139
    Nancy Walton Laurie
    $2.7 B 60 Henderson, Nevada Wal-Mart
    139
    James Leprino
    $2.7 B 73 Indian Hills, Colorado cheese
    139
    David Murdock
    $2.7 B 88 Los Angeles, California Dole, real estate
    139
    Steven Rales
    $2.7 B 60 Washington, District of Columbia manufacturing
    139
    David Rubenstein
    $2.7 B 62 Bethesda, Maryland leveraged buyouts
    139
    Jeffrey Skoll
    $2.7 B 46 Los Altos, California Ebay
    139
    Oprah Winfrey
    $2.7 B 57 Chicago, Illinois Television
    150
    Charles Dolan
    $2.6 B 84 Oyster Bay, New York cable television
    150
    Archie Aldis Emmerson
    $2.6 B 82 Redding, California timberland, lumber mills
    150
    Robert Holding
    $2.6 B 84 Sun Valley, Idaho oil, resorts
    150
    Pauline MacMillan Keinath
    $2.6 B 77 St. Louis, Missouri Cargill Inc.
    150
    Cargill MacMillan
    $2.6 B 84 Indian Wells, California Cargill Inc.
    150
    Whitney MacMillan
    $2.6 B 82 Minneapolis, Minnesota Cargill Inc.
    150
    Daniel Och
    $2.6 B 50 New York, New York hedge funds
    150
    Igor Olenicoff
    $2.6 B 69 Lighthouse Point, Florida real estate
    150
    Marion MacMillan Pictet
    $2.6 B - Hamilton, N/A Cargill Inc.
    159
    Stanley Druckenmiller
    $2.5 B 58 New York, New York hedge funds
    159
    Tom Gores
    $2.5 B 47 Beverly Hills, California private equity
    159
    Anthony Pritzker
    $2.5 B 50 Los Angeles, California hotels, investments
    159
    Jay Robert (J.B.) Pritzker
    $2.5 B 46 Chicago, Illinois hotels, investments
    159
    David Rockefeller
    $2.5 B 96 Sleepy Hollow, New York Standard Oil, banking
    159
    Donald Schneider
    $2.5 B 75 Green Bay, Wisconsin trucking
    159
    Alfred Taubman
    $2.5 B 87 Bloomfield Hills, Michigan real estate
    166
    Ray Dolby
    $2.4 B 78 San Francisco, California Dolby Laboratories
    166
    Randal Kirk
    $2.4 B 57 Belspring, Virginia pharmaceuticals
    166
    Julian Robertson
    $2.4 B 79 New York, New York hedge funds
    166
    Phillip Ruffin
    $2.4 B 76 Las Vegas, Nevada casinos, real estate
    166
    Ty Warner
    $2.4 B 67 Oak Brook, Illinois Beanie Babies
    171
    Nicolas Berggruen
    $2.3 B 50 Beverly Hills, California investments
    171
    Christopher Cline
    $2.3 B 53 North Palm Beach, Florida coal
    171
    Mark Cuban
    $2.3 B 53 Dallas, Texas online media
    171
    John Doerr
    $2.3 B 60 Woodside, California venture capital
    171
    Ken Griffin
    $2.3 B 42 Chicago, Illinois hedge funds
    171
    Tamara Gustavson
    $2.3 B 49 Malibu, California self storage
    171
    Amos Hostetter
    $2.3 B 74 Boston, Massachusetts cable television
    171
    H. Wayne Huizenga
    $2.3 B 73 Fort Lauderdale, Florida investments
    171
    H. Fisk Johnson
    $2.3 B 53 Racine, Wisconsin SC Johnson & Sons
    171
    Imogene Powers Johnson
    $2.3 B 81 Racine, Wisconsin SC Johnson & Sons
    171
    S. Curtis Johnson
    $2.3 B 56 Racine, Wisconsin SC Johnson & Sons
    171
    Helen Johnson-Leipold
    $2.3 B 54 Racine, Wisconsin SC Johnson
    171
    Winnie Johnson-Marquart
    $2.3 B 52 Virginia Beach, Virginia SC Johnson & Sons
    171
    Peter Kellogg
    $2.3 B 69 Short Hills, New Jersey investments
    171
    A. Jerrold Perenchio
    $2.3 B 80 Bel Air, California television
    171
    Richard Rainwater
    $2.3 B 67 Fort Worth, Texas real estate, energy, insurance
    171
    Ronda Stryker
    $2.3 B 57 Portage, Michigan medical technology
    188
    Peter Buck
    $2.2 B 80 Danbury, Connecticut Subway Restaurants
    188
    Jack Dangermond
    $2.2 B 66 Redlands, California mapping software
    188
    Fred DeLuca
    $2.2 B 63 Fort Lauderdale, Florida Subway Restaurants
    188
    Philip Falcone
    $2.2 B 49 New York, New York hedge funds
    188
    Bill Gross
    $2.2 B 67 Laguna Beach, California investments
    188
    William Randolph Hearst
    $2.2 B 62 San Francisco, California Hearst Corp
    188
    Diane Hendricks
    $2.2 B 64 Afton, Wisconsin roofing
    188
    Henry Hillman
    $2.2 B 92 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania investments
    188
    Mary Alice Dorrance Malone
    $2.2 B 61 Coatesville, Pennsylvania Campbell Soup
    188
    George Mitchell
    $2.2 B 92 The Woodlands, Texas oil & gas
    188
    William Wrigley
    $2.2 B 47 Lake Forest, Illinois chewing gum
    188
    Mortimer Zuckerman
    $2.2 B 74 New York, New York real estate, media
    200
    Lee Bass
    $2.1 B 55 Fort Worth, Texas oil, investments
    200
    Sid Bass
    $2.1 B 68 Fort Worth, Texas oil, investments
    200
    Israel Englander
    $2.1 B 63 New York, New York hedge funds
    200
    Phillip Frost
    $2.1 B 74 Miami Beach, Florida pharmaceuticals
    200
    Jeff Greene
    $2.1 B 56 Palm Beach, Florida real estate, investments
    200
    George Lindemann
    $2.1 B 75 Palm Beach, Florida investments
    200
    Michael Milken
    $2.1 B 65 Los Angeles, California investments
    200
    Sean Parker
    $2.1 B 31 New York, New York Facebook
    200
    Robert Rich
    $2.1 B 70 Islamorada, Florida frozen foods
    200
    Edward Roski
    $2.1 B 72 Los Angeles, California real estate
    200
    Wilbur Ross
    $2.1 B 73 Palm Beach, Florida investments
    200
    David Shaw
    $2.1 B 60 New York, New York hedge funds
    212
    Neil Bluhm
    $2 B 73 Chicago, Illinois real estate
    212
    John Catsimatidis
    $2 B 63 New York, New York oil, real estate, supermarkets
    212
    Edward DeBartolo
    $2 B 64 Tampa, Florida shopping centers
    212
    Doris Fisher
    $2 B 80 San Francisco, California Gap
    212
    Gordon Getty
    $2 B 77 San Francisco, California Getty Oil
    212
    Michael & Marian Ilitch
    $2 B 82 Bingham Farms, Michigan pizza
    212
    Mark Pincus
    $2 B 45 San Francisco, California online gaming
    212
    Stewart and Lynda Resnick
    $2 B - Beverly Hills, California agriculture, water
    212
    J. Christopher Reyes
    $2 B 57 Lake Forest, Illinois food distribution
    212
    Jude Reyes
    $2 B 56 Kenilworth, Illinois food distribution
    212
    Eduardo Saverin
    $2 B 29 Singapore, N/A Facebook
    212
    Richard Schulze
    $2 B 70 Edina, Minnesota Best Buy
    212
    Ted Turner
    $2 B 72 Atlanta, Georgia cable television
    212
    Romesh T. Wadhwani
    $2 B 64 Palo Alto, California Software
    212
    Kelcy Warren
    $2 B 55 Dallas, Texas Pipelines
    227
    Marc Benioff
    $1.9 B 46 San Francisco, California business software
    227
    David Bonderman
    $1.9 B 68 Fort Worth, Texas leveraged buyouts
    227
    Phoebe Hearst Cooke
    $1.9 B 84 San Francisco, California Hearst Corp
    227
    James Coulter
    $1.9 B 51 San Francisco, California leveraged buyouts
    227
    Alec Gores
    $1.9 B 58 Beverly Hills, California private equity
    227
    Austin Hearst
    $1.9 B 59 New York, New York Hearst Corp
    227
    David Hearst
    $1.9 B 66 Los Angeles, California Hearst Corp
    227
    George Hearst
    $1.9 B 84 Paso Robles, California Hearst Corp
    227
    Stanley Hubbard
    $1.9 B 78 St. Paul, Minnesota DirecTV
    227
    Jeremy Jacobs
    $1.9 B 71 East Aurora, New York sports concessions
    227
    Michael Jaharis
    $1.9 B 83 New York, New York pharmaceuticals
    227
    Jerry Jones
    $1.9 B 68 Dallas, Texas Dallas Cowboys
    227
    Richard Peery
    $1.9 B 72 Palo Alto, California real estate
    227
    John Pritzker
    $1.9 B 58 San Francisco, California hotels, investments
    227
    Sheldon Solow
    $1.9 B 83 New York, New York real estate
    242
    John Arrillaga
    $1.8 B 74 Portola Valley, California real estate
    242
    Alfred James Clark
    $1.8 B 83 Vero Beach, Florida construction
    242
    Leon G. Cooperman
    $1.8 B 68 Short Hills, New Jersey hedge funds
    242
    Jim Davis
    $1.8 B 68 Newton, Massachusetts New Balance
    242
    Bennett Dorrance
    $1.8 B 65 Paradise Valley, Arizona Campbell Soup
    242
    Ted Forstmann
    $1.8 B 71 New York, New York sports management
    242
    Bradley Hughes
    $1.8 B 78 Lexington, Kentucky self storage
    242
    Min Kao
    $1.8 B 62 Leawood, Kansas navigation equipment
    242
    Thomas Kaplan
    $1.8 B 49 New York, New York Investments
    242
    Herbert Kohler
    $1.8 B 72 Kohler, Wisconsin plumbing fixtures
    242
    Bernard Marcus
    $1.8 B 82 Atlanta, Georgia Home Depot
    242
    Clayton Mathile
    $1.8 B 70 Brookville, Ohio pet food
    242
    Thomas Pritzker
    $1.8 B 61 Chicago, Illinois hotels, investments
    242
    Leandro Rizzuto
    $1.8 B 73 Sheridan, Wyoming consumer products
    242
    Thomas Siebel
    $1.8 B 58 Woodside, California business software
    242
    Jerry Speyer
    $1.8 B 71 New York, New York real estate
    242
    Glen Taylor
    $1.8 B 70 Mankato, Minnesota printing
    242
    Dean White
    $1.8 B 88 Crown Point, Indiana billboards, hotels
    260
    George Argyros
    $1.75 B 74 Newport Beach, California real estate, investments
    260
    Drayton McLane
    $1.75 B 75 Temple, Texas Wal-Mart, logistics
    260
    Walter Scott
    $1.75 B 80 Omaha, Nebraska construction, telecom
    263
    S. Daniel Abraham
    $1.7 B 87 Palm Beach, Florida Slim-Fast
    263
    Ken Fisher
    $1.7 B 60 Woodside, California Money management
    263
    Brad Kelley
    $1.7 B 54 Franklin, Tennessee tobacco
    263
    Robert Kraft
    $1.7 B 70 Brookline, Massachusetts New England Patriots
    263
    Isaac Perlmutter
    $1.7 B 68 Palm Beach, Florida Marvel
    263
    Penny Pritzker
    $1.7 B 52 Chicago, Illinois hotels, investments
    263
    Henry Samueli
    $1.7 B 57 Newport Beach, California semiconductors
    263
    Frederick Smith
    $1.7 B 67 Memphis, Tennessee FedEx
    263
    Albert Ueltschi
    $1.7 B 94 Vero Beach, Florida FlightSafety
    263
    Elaine Wynn
    $1.7 B 68 Las Vegas, Nevada Hotels
    273
    Norman Braman
    $1.6 B 79 Miami, Florida art, car dealerships
    273
    Barry Diller
    $1.6 B 69 New York, New York IAC/InterActiveCorp
    273
    Glenn Dubin
    $1.6 B 54 New York, New York hedge funds
    273
    Gerald J. Ford
    $1.6 B 67 Dallas, Texas banking
    273
    Thomas Friedkin
    $1.6 B 76 Houston, Texas Toyota distribution
    273
    Noam Gottesman
    $1.6 B 50 New York, New York hedge funds
    273
    Bruce Karsh
    $1.6 B 56 Los Angeles, California money management
    273
    Joseph Mansueto
    $1.6 B 55 Chicago, Illinois investment research
    273
    Howard Marks
    $1.6 B 65 Los Angeles, California money management
    273
    Craig McCaw
    $1.6 B 62 Hunts Point, Washington telecom
    273
    Michael Moritz
    $1.6 B 57 San Francisco, California venture capital
    273
    Daniel Pritzker
    $1.6 B 52 Marin County, California hotels, investments
    273
    James Pritzker
    $1.6 B 60 Chicago, Illinois hotels, investments
    273
    Jean (Gigi) Pritzker
    $1.6 B 49 Chicago, Illinois hotels, investments
    273
    Karen Pritzker
    $1.6 B 53 Branford, Connecticut hotels, investments
    273
    Linda Pritzker
    $1.6 B 57 St. Ignatius, Montana hotels, investments
    273
    Kavitark Ram Shriram
    $1.6 B 54 Menlo Park, California Venture capital, Google
    273
    Herbert Simon
    $1.6 B 76 Indianapolis, Indiana real estate
    273
    Clemmie Spangler
    $1.6 B 79 Charlotte, North Carolina investments
    273
    Anita Zucker
    $1.6 B 59 Charleston, South Carolina chemicals
    293
    Ron Baron
    $1.5 B 68 New York, New York money managment
    293
    Edward Bass
    $1.5 B 66 Fort Worth, Texas oil, investments
    293
    John Fisher
    $1.5 B 50 San Francisco, California Gap
    293
    Daniel Gilbert
    $1.5 B 49 Franklin, Michigan Quicken Loans
    293
    Michael Heisley
    $1.5 B 74 Jupiter Island, Florida manufacturing
    293
    Reid Hoffman
    $1.5 B 44 Palo Alto, California LinkedIn
    293
    Joe Jamail
    $1.5 B 85 Houston, Texas lawsuits
    293
    Eric Lefkofsky
    $1.5 B 42 Glencoe, Illinois Groupon
    293
    Stephen Mandel
    $1.5 B 55 Greenwich, Connecticut hedge funds
    293
    Robert McNair
    $1.5 B 74 Houston, Texas energy, sports
    293
    Manuel Moroun
    $1.5 B 84 Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan Transportation
    293
    Jonathan Nelson
    $1.5 B 55 Providence, Rhode Island Leveraged buyouts
    293
    Bob Parsons
    $1.5 B 60 Scottsdale, Arizona web hosting
    293
    Michael Price
    $1.5 B 59 Far Hills, New Jersey investments
    293
    Donald Sterling
    $1.5 B 75 Beverly Hills, California Real Estate
    293
    Peter Thiel
    $1.5 B 43 San Francisco, California Paypal, Facebook
    309
    Joshua Harris
    $1.45 B 46 New York, New York leveraged buyouts
    309
    T. Boone Pickens
    $1.45 B 83 Dallas, Texas oil & gas, investments
    309
    Marc Rowan
    $1.45 B 49 New York, New York leveraged buyouts
    312
    Herbert Allen
    $1.4 B 71 New York, New York investment banking
    312
    Louis Bacon
    $1.4 B 53 Long Island, New York hedge funds
    312
    Ray Davis
    $1.4 B 69 Dallas, Texas pipelines
    312
    Tom Golisano
    $1.4 B 69 Naples, Florida Paychex
    312
    David Gottesman
    $1.4 B 85 Rye, New York investments
    312
    Johnelle Hunt
    $1.4 B 79 Fayetteville, Arkansas trucking
    312
    James Irsay
    $1.4 B 52 Carmel, Indiana Indianapolis Colts
    312
    Thomas Lee
    $1.4 B 67 New York, New York leveraged buyouts
    312
    Gary Magness
    $1.4 B 57 Magness, Colorado cable, investments
    312
    Richard Marriott
    $1.4 B 72 Potomac, Maryland hotels
    312
    Billy Joe McCombs
    $1.4 B 83 San Antonio, Texas radio, oil, real estate
    312
    Gary Michelson
    $1.4 B 62 Los Angeles, California medical patents
    312
    Henry Ross Perot
    $1.4 B 52 Dallas, Texas computer services, real estate
    312
    Evgeny (Eugene) Shvidler
    $1.4 B 47 London, N/A oil & gas, investments
    312
    Wilma Tisch
    $1.4 B 84 New York, New York diversified
    312
    Dan Wilks
    $1.4 B 55 Cisco, Texas natural gas
    312
    Farris Wilks
    $1.4 B 59 Cisco, Texas natural gas
    329
    Bharat Desai
    $1.35 B 58 Fisher Island, Florida outsourcing
    329
    Christopher Goldsbury
    $1.35 B 68 San Antonio, Texas salsa
    331
    Stephen Bisciotti
    $1.3 B 51 Millersville, Maryland outsourcing, football
    331
    Arthur Blank
    $1.3 B 68 Atlanta, Georgia Home Depot
    331
    Charles Brandes
    $1.3 B 68 San Diego, California money management
    331
    Austen Cargill
    $1.3 B 60 Livingston, Montana Cargill Inc.
    331
    James Cargill
    $1.3 B 62 Birchwood, Wisconsin Cargill Inc.
    331
    Steve Case
    $1.3 B 53 McLean, Virginia AOL
    331
    Leon Charney
    $1.3 B 70 New York, New York Real estate
    331
    Richard Chilton Jr
    $1.3 B 53 Darien, Connecticut hedge funds
    331
    Scott Cook
    $1.3 B 59 Woodside, California Intuit
    331
    Joseph Craft
    $1.3 B 60 Tulsa, Oklahoma coal
    331
    David Duffield
    $1.3 B 71 Blackhawk, California PeopleSoft
    331
    Vinod Khosla
    $1.3 B 56 Portola Valley, California venture capital
    331
    Kenneth Langone
    $1.3 B 76 Sands Point, New York investments
    331
    Marc Lasry
    $1.3 B 50 New York, New York hedge funds
    331
    Marianne Liebmann
    $1.3 B 58 Bozeman, Montana Cargill, Inc.
    331
    Bill Marriott
    $1.3 B 79 Potomac, Maryland hotels
    331
    Henry Nicholas
    $1.3 B 51 Newport Coast, California semiconductors
    331
    Stewart Rahr
    $1.3 B 65 New York, New York drug distribution
    331
    Richard Scaife
    $1.3 B 79 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania investments
    331
    Howard Schultz
    $1.3 B 58 Seattle, Washington Starbucks
    331
    Thomas Steyer
    $1.3 B 54 San Francisco, California hedge funds
    331
    Robert Stiller
    $1.3 B 68 Palm Beach, Florida coffee
    331
    Pat Stryker
    $1.3 B 55 Fort Collins, Colorado medical technology
    331
    Meg Whitman
    $1.3 B 55 Atherton, California Ebay
    355
    Edmund Ansin
    $1.25 B 75 Miami Beach, Florida television
    355
    Frank Fertitta
    $1.25 B 49 Las Vegas, Nevada casinos, Ultimate Fighting Championship
    355
    Alan Gerry
    $1.25 B 81 Liberty, New York cable television
    355
    Henry Swieca
    $1.25 B 54 New York, New York hedge funds
    359
    Alan Casden
    $1.2 B 65 Beverly Hills, California real estate
    359
    William Connor
    $1.2 B 61 Hong Kong, N/A logistics
    359
    James Dinan
    $1.2 B 52 New York, New York hedge funds
    359
    Lorenzo Fertitta
    $1.2 B 42 Las Vegas, Nevada casinos, Ultimate Fighting Championship
    359
    Sidney Kimmel
    $1.2 B 83 New York, New York retail
    359
    William Macaulay
    $1.2 B 66 Greenwich, Connecticut energy investments
    359
    Aubrey McClendon
    $1.2 B 52 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma natural gas
    359
    C. Dean Metropoulos
    $1.2 B 65 Greenwich, Connecticut investments
    359
    Nelson Peltz
    $1.2 B 69 Bedford, New York investments
    359
    Nicholas Pritzker
    $1.2 B 67 Chicago, Illinois hotels, investments
    359
    Kenny Troutt
    $1.2 B 63 Dallas, Texas Excel Communications
    359
    Todd Wagner
    $1.2 B 51 Dallas, Texas online media
    359
    Charlotte Colket Weber
    $1.2 B 68 Ocala, Florida Campbell Soup
    372
    Irwin Jacobs
    $1.15 B 77 La Jolla, California Qualcomm
    372
    Alexander Rovt
    $1.15 B 59 New York, New York fertilizer
    372
    Peter Sperling
    $1.15 B 51 Phoenix, Arizona education
    375
    Kenneth Adams
    $1.1 B 88 Houston, Texas Oil
    375
    Thomas Barrack
    $1.1 B 64 Los Angeles, California Colony Capital
    375
    Tom Benson
    $1.1 B 84 New Orleans, Louisiana New Orleans Saints
    375
    Jim Breyer
    $1.1 B 50 Woodside, California Venture Capital
    375
    Gary Burrell
    $1.1 B 74 Spring Hill, Kansas navigation equipment
    375
    S. Truett Cathy
    $1.1 B 90 Hampton, Georgia Chick-fil-A
    375
    David Filo
    $1.1 B 45 Palo Alto, California Yahoo
    375
    William Ford
    $1.1 B 86 Grosse Pointe Shores, Michigan Ford Motor Co
    375
    John Henry
    $1.1 B 62 Boca Raton, Florida sports
    375
    George Joseph
    $1.1 B 90 Los Angeles, California insurance
    375
    Jim Justice
    $1.1 B 60 Lewisburg, West Virginia coal
    375
    Alexander Knaster
    $1.1 B 52 London, N/A oil, telecom, banking
    375
    Michael Krasny
    $1.1 B 58 Highland Park, Illinois retail
    375
    James Leininger
    $1.1 B 66 San Antonio, Texas medical devices
    375
    Jeffrey Lurie
    $1.1 B 60 Wynnewood, Pennsylvania Philadelphia Eagles
    375
    William Moncrief
    $1.1 B 91 Fort Worth, Texas oil
    375
    Patrick Ryan
    $1.1 B 74 Winnetka, Illinois insurance
    375
    Bernard Saul
    $1.1 B 79 Chevy Chase, Maryland banking, real estate
    375
    Alexander Spanos
    $1.1 B 87 Stockton, California real estate
    375
    Mark Stevens
    $1.1 B 51 Atherton, California venture capital
    375
    Jon Stryker
    $1.1 B 53 Kalamazoo, Michigan medical technology
    375
    Jerry Yang
    $1.1 B 42 Los Altos Hills, California Yahoo
    397
    Darwin Deason
    $1.05 B 71 Dallas, Texas Xerox
    397
    Peter Lewis
    $1.05 B 77 Coconut Grove, Florida Progressive Corp
    397
    Steven Roth
    $1.05 B 69 New York, New York real estate
    397
    Dan Snyder
    $1.05 B 46 Potomac, Maryland Washington Redskins

    November 12, 2011 at 11:33 am |
    • Binny

      so i suppose that these people never robbed anyone? just because they own it doesn't mean they made it.

      the system allows a minority to profit from the work of others. but when people don't have the money to buy what they've helped produce, the economy collapses, causing social and political chaos. it's not that complicated.

      November 12, 2011 at 3:24 pm |
    • Schmedley

      Uh, do the math, if there are 220M taxpaying households, the top 1% is around 2 million people. The top 400 are the the top 0.0002%.

      November 13, 2011 at 12:55 am |
    • RamblinRosie

      Your cutting and pasting skills are magnificent. You couldn't have just referenced the source documents? Leave the wealthy people alone. They earned their money or at least invested it well.

      November 14, 2011 at 8:13 am |
  21. OneOfThe53Percent

    99% ancient Rome and the 99% (actually 47%) of the occupy morons today, your comparing apples to lemons.

    November 12, 2011 at 10:17 am |
    • palintwit

      "Morons" ? Don't you have some bagging or birthing you need to be doing somewhere today ?

      November 12, 2011 at 10:40 am |
      • LosersOnParade

        Palintwit – Did you think that up all by yourself...The occupy morons are exactly that...What even better is when the news interviews one of these cluless parasites...entertaining, yet scary on how some of you guys think....Maybe if 10 of you got together you could come up with a decent reason for your whining

        November 12, 2011 at 2:14 pm |
    • Martin

      no, they're not. The 99% represents most Americans that are not the richest 1%.

      The fact that you're choosing to ignore the protests doesn't mean that you're not part of the 1%. It means that you're probably one of the morons that votes GOP and doesn't realize that the GOP is ONLY working for the 1%, not the average American.

      November 12, 2011 at 1:02 pm |
      • Little Jeffy

        @Martin

        I get that your brain can't handle complex ideas. It's okay. It doesn't mean your worthless.

        Try to keep in mind that when you state a group of people like the GOP and it's bull!%^& is responsible for society's problems your just waiving a big flag saying "LOOKIE I'M WETODDED!"

        The problems in today's society are similiar to those that have been experienced time and time again by humans. Republicans and Democrats are both politicians and both of them are guilty of screwing the system and the people in it. Trying to lay blame at the feet of the other side to make yourself feel better accomplishes nothing.

        The only thing about this story that was remotely political was tying the phrase "the 99%" to it. Ultimately the more we know as a species about our history the better prepared we will be to understand the direction we are heading and HOPEFULLY make more profoundly useful decisions regarding the future outcomes.

        To Kristina Killgrove I say more power to you for putting your time and effort to a cause you believe in, hopefully we "100%" humans will make some use of it.

        November 14, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
    • Jeff, Chicago

      One, you are correct. The OWS kids are just a bunch of morons with too much time on their hands. They don't speak for the majority of the 99%, who realize what they are doing is a waste of time.

      November 12, 2011 at 1:38 pm |
    • deb

      They can't spend all that money!!!!!!!!!!! Yet the're employees live in poverity that's the american way RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      November 12, 2011 at 2:59 pm |
    • vinny

      History remembers the important people, not the peasants. It remmebers the leaders, the artists, the warriors, and those that innovate. Its called reality, people should learn that if they want to be special they need to do something special with their lives.

      November 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
      • ReneldaMoorehead

        Vinny your remarks indicate, among other things, that you don't have a clue re anthropolgy or history.
        Go, vinny, and do research before you post.

        November 12, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  22. Ryan in Canada

    How much effing research can be done for a measly 6 grand???? Gimme a break.

    November 12, 2011 at 9:40 am |
    • Dan in Colo

      Clean, running watter can be brought to a Canadian village for $6,000US.

      November 12, 2011 at 10:02 am |
      • Ryan in Canada

        We already have LOTS of clean running water, we invest in useful things like dog sleds, snow shoes, beaver pelt suits and igloo apartments. :)

        November 12, 2011 at 10:31 am |
  23. Xandax

    An attempt to give 100% of the 99% morons some sort of historical background. Its a stretch, its stupid, and its left-wing as all get-out. If these dunderheads put as much effort into working or finding a JOB, this country would instantly rise to the top again. Chances of THAT happening are well less than 99%,

    November 12, 2011 at 7:46 am |
    • bob,sc

      Since these people are, in all probability, your ancestors, I would suggest you show more respect.

      November 12, 2011 at 7:52 am |
      • David A Bowen

        Totally agree, show the respect by not tieing them to this so called 99% group that over 53% of us don't want to be associated with. When is CNN going to report actual facts and news and stop with this political agenda news reporting

        November 12, 2011 at 9:24 am |
    • Going In Circles

      I would love to work, but the republicans wont let me.
      Cant have jobs now, obama might get re-elected, so screw America.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:12 am |
    • Tom

      The moron is you Xanadax. So the only thing important in this life is making another buck any way you can and spending it on some beer. Get some class. Many conservatives value and support archeology. Taking a swipe at the "left wing" over this story shows just how ignorant you are.

      You also know absolutely nothing about the job situation here in the U.S. You think everyone who is not working, is just lazy. Get off your sofa, put down the Bud and do some research if you have half a brain.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:16 am |
  24. kornwhole

    I would say that the comparison of 99% of Rome's population near the end of that empire were almost exact clones of Americans of today! Now that should hold up pretty good in anyone's book of facts!

    November 12, 2011 at 7:43 am |
    • kornwhole

      and that comparison could certainly be stated in a vice versa manner!

      November 12, 2011 at 7:45 am |
  25. OneOfThe53Percent

    Why do they occupy? Poor economic & math skills along with a lack of common sense. Most of the “occupiers” are un-educated and the ones that are educated will most likely have a easy degree like (name any country or ethnic group) Studies, General education, philosophy, Music appreciation, Political science. Just having a degree does not mean that you will be successful; you have to have a degree that can put food on the table. Stop calling yourselves the 99 percent while I am not one of the top 1% I am not part of you, It is time to start calling yourselves the 47%. It must suck to have a bulls**t degree and a $25,000 student loan.

    November 12, 2011 at 7:20 am |
    • Dan, Tx

      Let's see. I'm smarter than you, I make more money than you, and I'm part of the 99%. So, you are wrong. You may be the one with the BS degree from a BS school.

      November 12, 2011 at 7:46 am |
      • Jeff, Chicago

        Dan, I am smarter than you, I make more money than you, and people like you work for people like me.

        November 12, 2011 at 1:40 pm |
    • SmartestFolksAreAtheists-Coincidence?

      What's with the random, unnecessary Capitalization? Are you some kind of failed English student trying to make "art" with your posts? And the "53 percent' thing is just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. It's no way part of reality! You are part of the 99 percent, period, you ridiculous bootlicker. Keep voting GOP against your best interests, and keep being a dunce... or not, and be part of a failed history.

      November 12, 2011 at 3:54 pm |
  26. doregroj

    The words Occupy and 99% are catchy but they are confusing. If you do a little research, in less than 5 minutes you will find out that there are 3.1 millionaires in the U.S. (as of 2010). So does that mean that the people that Occupy represent are those making from zero up to 1 million About 40% of the people make $50K or more. To me there is no big difference between someone making $250K or 1 million. How many pairs of shoes and how many steaks can you eat. How big of a house do you want. The truth of the matter is that in the United States there are plenty of middle class people who you are not associated with the Occupy crowd, yet the occupy crowd calls itself the 99%... But 99% of what?

    November 12, 2011 at 2:12 am |
    • chester wimbaugh

      honestly, this comment doesnt make any sense. think about what you just wrote.

      November 12, 2011 at 2:32 am |
    • The_Mick

      The top 1% made 9% of America's income pre-Reagan and make 24% now – even more than during the "Robber Baron Era" of the early 1900's. The bottom 99% are those who make 91% of America's income pre-Reagan and make 76% now, having lost $1 out of every $6 they used to make to the top 1%. THAT is who the bottom 99% are.

      November 12, 2011 at 2:56 am |
      • Harold

        They lost a dollar? No they failed to keep up. We live in a society where people can become whoever they want. Obama became president of the US. His parent's were not part of any "1 %" but he will be. They didn't lose a dollar they just didn't go get a job to get a dollar. The 1 percenters are constantly doing what they need to do to get us to give them another dollar. And we do it. Does every person NEED a smart phone? No they don't. They WANT a smart phone so they give their money to the rich who invent and sell such things. I'm not rich, but I demonize no one for being that way. I wish they would give some of what they make to the very less fortunate (who do not have cable tv or a smart phone). Many of them give plenty to charity and foundations. The 10 percent who complain, simply need to stop. By the same logic a person making miniumum wage or unemployed should complaing that someone else can make 35000 a year. That's just unfair, right?

        November 12, 2011 at 7:24 am |
      • OneOfThe53Percent

        So is it Reagan's fault? people use to blame Nixon for everything. I thought recently everyone was saying it was all Bush's fault.

        November 12, 2011 at 7:26 am |
      • Glenn

        To Harold's point on the smartphones, to some extent I would agree, however, some of the items thought by older generations to be extravagant have become vital to our society; I have a smartphone, but have no other phones. And by the way, a landline phone would cost about the same as my cell plan which does not include the long distance coverage offered by my cell plan. Yeah, I could use a cheaper VOIP, but then I would also then be committed to the additional cost of an internet provider. I guess I could just not have any phone, which very few employers would deem acceptable, but then how would I have found a job if the employer could not contact me in the first place? I know this sounds like a mindless rant, but not so much when you take a minute to ponder the logistics & costs of losing all your existing communications tools and having to start from scratch.

        November 12, 2011 at 11:33 am |
      • Time.ToThink

        I do not understand why people constantly bash those who are successful. If you are not, why not honestly look in the mirror and ask yourself why you are not. I started in a blue collar union job back in the 60's and soon realized that I wanted more. I was actually criticized by the shop steward for working too hard and making others look bad. When my peers were out drinking at night, I was in school. When my peers ran out the door at quitting time, I stayed and worked more hours. When my peers said they did not like the headaches and pressure of taking additional responsibility, I eagerly accepted. When my peers were spending money foolishly, I was saving and investing for the future. Now they (my former peers) are spouting it is unfair. Take money from those who are successful.

        November 12, 2011 at 12:05 pm |
    • Dan, Tx

      So, If I understand you correctly, although people used to make a good living by being employed by businesses, the fact that they don't make a good living as employees is their own fault. If you are an employee of someone else then you are a loser. So people should only be business owners and not employees. Have I got that right?

      November 12, 2011 at 7:51 am |
    • Lloyd

      @Harold. I agree with your philosophy, but not with your assessment of the current situation. We should not envy the smart, hardworking individuals who succeed. However, when those individuals use the wealth and power they accumulate to influence the legislative process and markets, then it should be resisted.
      Let's review the meaning of the words bribery and corruption. And then consider the word lobbyist.
      In a nutshell, the problem is not capitalism. It is perversion of markets and legislation by those with power and wealth.

      November 12, 2011 at 8:24 am |
    • Laura

      The difference between $250k and $1 million is easy.

      At $250k, you are still likely to go bankrupt if you become seriously ill. Your insurance will quickly reach its max, and your yearly medical bills are well over $250k. Plus, you likely have a job, which you will lose if you become seriously ill.

      At $1 million, you likely will NOT go bankrupt over medical bills even if you don't have insurance. You likely do NOT have a job, but rather make that money passively, so it keeps coming even when you are ill. Plus, medical bill likely do not exceed $1 million per year.

      That's the main difference, and that's why even people making $250k are part of the 99%. They can still lose it all over medical bills.

      November 12, 2011 at 10:19 am |
  27. dudley0415

    I don't even know who OUR 99% are.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:29 am |
    • doregroj

      I think the 99% are the ones that are not part of this Occupy crowd. I think this crowd is the 1% . yet I applaud them for using our freedoms to speak out. Other nations, like Cuba , North Korea, China don't have such freedoms.

      November 12, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
  28. Stella

    Ugh. Love the history, but can't stand mention of Caesar. Horrible man. And the library of Alexandria, to top it all off.... Bloody hate that man.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:24 am |
    • dudley0415

      Which one?

      November 12, 2011 at 1:29 am |
  29. Dan

    Whoever it was who said entertainment evolved into porn, you're wrong. Prostitutes / courtesans / escorts were popular even before Rome's legendary founding. You can see these prostitutes just by looking at art from the period, especially statues of Aphrodite / Venus. A number of the famous statues were sculpted in the image of prostitutes.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:19 am |
  30. SPQR

    God bless The United States of America.

    President Obama 2012 !

    Audaces fortuna iuvat.

    November 12, 2011 at 1:08 am |
    • Nelbert

      Fortune may favor the bold, but fools rush in where wise men fear to tread.

      November 12, 2011 at 8:15 am |
  31. Roman

    Check out this Roman documentary. bit.ly/t02KQR

    November 11, 2011 at 11:29 pm |
  32. Joe Two

    Muslims ended the Roman empire.....

    November 11, 2011 at 9:58 pm |
    • RobertC

      Well, that's just wrong. Nothing else, just wrong. Read some history. Preferably Roman history.

      November 11, 2011 at 10:15 pm |
      • Joe Two

        Don't tell me they fell from within..... This is not true.

        November 11, 2011 at 10:24 pm |
      • Cumulonimbus

        I think he refers to the fall of Constantinople–The last stronghold of the original Roman Empire. His assertion is absolutely true, that Constantinople fell to attack from a Muslim empire. On the other hand, the earlier sacking by Christian crusaders really dealt them a disabling blow.

        November 12, 2011 at 1:11 pm |
    • sonic10158

      The Roman Empire: it was divided (therefore the empire came to an end) in 395 AD, fall of the last Western Roman Empire leader: 476 AD

      Islam: Muhammad was born in 570 AD

      you do the math and you will see you are wrong

      November 11, 2011 at 10:26 pm |
      • Joe Two

        From Wikipedia..

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_empire

        The Western Roman Empire collapsed in 476 as Romulus Augustus was forced to abdicate to the Germanic warlord Odoacer.[8] The Eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire ended in 1453 with the death of Constantine XI and the capture of Constantinople by the Ottoman Turks led by Mehmed II.[9]

        November 11, 2011 at 10:30 pm |
    • Relictus

      Near the end of their empire, the Roman empire was split in two pieces. Western Rome fell to barbarians (not muslims). The Eastern empire became the Byzantine empire, for about a thousand years.

      November 11, 2011 at 10:36 pm |
    • Nadia

      The Byzantine Empire was conquered by the Ottoman Turks who were comprised from Muslim Turks AND Non-Turkish CHRISTIANS. The Western Roman Empire collapsed after being defeated by the Germanic peoples whose modern day descendants became the northwestern Europeans. Additionally, the plague helped to wipe out anyone left. Joe Mama don't know squat about history.

      November 11, 2011 at 11:19 pm |
    • BigRed

      No, sorry that is completely incorrect. Do a little reading and research before you post. Otherwise you appear to be an uneducated fool.

      November 12, 2011 at 1:08 am |
    • Mirosal

      No, the Muslims did NOT end the Roman Empire. There were NO Muslims until 200 years AFTER the fall of the empire, and it was in a different part of the world. Odacer and the Germanic barbarians overthrew the last Roman emperor, Romulus Augustus, in the year 476, but Rome had been sacked, burned, and looted many times before then.

      November 12, 2011 at 4:47 am |
  33. Daniel

    Rome's 99% were the ones that were appeased by the bread and the circuses.

    November 11, 2011 at 9:13 pm |
  34. Peikovinaii

    There's a difference between Spartacus and Ignoramus. That's why the public is forced to educate CNN, the OWS Network.

    November 11, 2011 at 9:08 pm |
    • Your Momma

      Burn on CNN!

      November 11, 2011 at 11:25 pm |
  35. WhackyWaco

    This is such a stupid article.

    November 11, 2011 at 9:08 pm |
    • Going In Circles

      *** WhackyWaco

      This is such a stupid article.
      --------------
      This is such a stupid comment.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:21 am |
  36. S.P.Q.R.

    Moritori te salutamus !

    November 11, 2011 at 8:40 pm |
    • Relictus

      Great quote! But my personal quote is "Relictus sum.", for I am the living damned.

      November 11, 2011 at 10:38 pm |
    • dudley0415

      Illegitimus non carborundum!

      November 12, 2011 at 1:31 am |
  37. Oranges12

    Are people seriously comparing the ancient Roman 99% to our 99%? Last time I checked we can vote, we are not held as property by our owners, we have a middle class (even if it is shrinking), etc. I'm going to guess that 98.5 of current day Americans have it better than the 99% ancient romans....

    November 11, 2011 at 7:34 pm |
    • Samuel Cohen

      Those who are too ignorant to know how fortunate we are will probably worship the makers of this article, how about writing about how great we are for a change?

      What a load of S**T

      November 11, 2011 at 7:43 pm |
    • mv

      "Strontium and oxygen revealed that a third of them had immigrated to Rome after their childhood, and had very similar lives to the locals. That was a surprise."

      They didn't immigrate, they were enslaved. This Killgrove person is an idiot.

      November 11, 2011 at 8:32 pm |
    • Ryan

      Um, Romans could vote and they did have a middle class. But like today, those voted in to office were all about themselves. Screw the hard working people. But at least back then, people actually worked. There was no welfare to live off of and people didn't leave their jobs to go protest and still keep their jobs. Anyone who leaves my business to go protest will lose their job in favor of someone who needs a job and is willing to actually show up and WORK!!!

      November 11, 2011 at 8:59 pm |
      • TheMan

        The people that should REALLY be protesting are too busy at their jobs.

        November 11, 2011 at 9:32 pm |
    • dudley0415

      Strontium and oxygen revealed that many more Romans than previously thought were named "Harold," and that they preferred a shade of blue a bit darker than Carolina blue but lighter than Royal blue, when available. Carbon 14 dating has determined that most women preferred men taller than 5'9" but shorter than 6'2", and that flamingo tongues were not necessarily that tasty...stuffed ice were horrid then, as now.

      November 12, 2011 at 1:35 am |
    • dudley0415

      Strontium and oxygen revealed that many more Romans than previously thought were named "Harold," and that they preferred a shade of blue a bit darker than Carolina blue but lighter than Royal blue, when available. Carbon 14 dating has determined that most women preferred men taller than 5'9" but shorter than 6'2", and that flamingo tongues were not necessarily that tasty...stuffed mice were horrid then, as now.

      November 12, 2011 at 1:36 am |
    • Harold

      The middle class is not shrinking, it basically stays the same. It is simply "the middle". Put everyone in a line from least money to most, draw a line at 20%, another at 80%, everyone in the middle is just that, "the middle". It never shrinks.

      November 12, 2011 at 7:27 am |
  38. JustObvious

    mike check

    November 11, 2011 at 7:18 pm |
  39. dcol

    The US is following to the letter the rise and fall of the Roman empire. If you know the political history of Rome it will frighten you as to how close it is to our own demise. What started the fall of Rome was all the soldiers returning from wars that could not be finaced anymore. All these soldiers came home with no jobs or hope to have a good life, so the rulers started the gladiator games to placate the soldiers. It didn't work for very long. These soldiers became the 99%.The rest is their history and soon to be ours as well.

    November 11, 2011 at 7:00 pm |
    • kkaatz

      Actually, the US is not following the same route as the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire in the West fell when it was invaded by large numbers of people. The Roman government couldn't keep up with it. And gladitorial games were going long, long before the fall and had nothing to do with entertaining returning soldiers.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:14 pm |
      • Cameron

        Finally, someone who actually knows Roman history.

        Kudos, kkaatz.

        November 11, 2011 at 7:23 pm |
      • borgware

        KKaatz, are you saying that Romans were invaded by illegal immigrants?

        November 12, 2011 at 11:45 am |
    • solarsails

      You just need to take a good diuretic.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:27 pm |
    • Issac

      You should be more concerned with the fall of the Roman Republic... which would more closely, but very loosely resemble our current political state. Hate Obama or Bush, but they are both far cries from Emperors ruling an Empire, let alone one about to be over run by large numbers of armed outsiders.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:28 pm |
    • Issac

      You are mixing your Empire and Republic up. Those "soldiers" that came home to no job, actually came home to... well no home. Their citizen army was not formed around the idea of wars that would last more than one season. As the Republic grew and fought more wars, further from home, they common solider was away for longer times. The rich were then able to gobble up the farmland, outright stealing it in many cases.
      But anyway, that was 500-700 years before the fall of the Western Empire. So if you are saying we are going the way of the Roman Empire, we've got a few hundred golden years ahead of us.. so why all the doom and gloom?

      November 11, 2011 at 7:32 pm |
    • Ted

      History never repeats itself, and those who claim it does are usually manipulating the story for some sort of political argument.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:39 pm |
      • Mainer

        Your right history never really repeats itself, but if you listen you will hear a rhythm and that is predictable.

        November 11, 2011 at 8:39 pm |
      • really?

        obviously you've never taken a history class

        November 11, 2011 at 9:40 pm |
    • Carole Clarke

      In some ways we are following the route of the Ancient Romans and in others not. In those days before Julius Caesar there were massive migrations from the east to less populated lands in the west, the large populations within striking distance of Rome. Look at our invasion of peoples from south of the border – there are millions of illegals here. While each senator had a vote in Rome, the backbenchers were not heard and this holds true with newbies in legislatures today. Romans were heard through their tribes and those were heavily manipulated. Rome progressed once anyone could join the legions, not just propertied men. For me, Rome fell because its people got tired of ruling and gave up the fight. With further invasions coming out of Asia they were outnumbered and "outgunned". This has happened to every great civilization. The smarter rulers after them built on their bones and did well, like Charlemagne. Being #1 is horribly exhaustive and cannot go on for ever – all good things must end. There's no shame in that.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:53 pm |
  40. Cheeseburger

    There has always been the rich and will always be the rich, no matter what the societal structure is. Quit whining and get a job. Happiness is wanting what you have, not envying or bemoaning what others have.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:57 pm |
    • Britney

      Yes lets just tuck tail and live off the crumbs that fall from the table of the "wealthy". Screw that you gotta fight for a living. Life is no easy. Why don't you show me the easy path to enlightenment.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:12 pm |
      • Relictus

        Hahaha! Yay for Britney!

        November 11, 2011 at 10:41 pm |
      • Joedon

        Here is the easy path. 1, find something you love (you pick because it's your life) 2, give it all you can. 3, watch your life get incrediibly cool.

        You can do it!

        November 12, 2011 at 2:03 am |
      • TehKitteh

        But Joedon, what if I like chasing balls of foil and napping for 18 hours a day?

        November 12, 2011 at 4:27 am |
    • TheMan

      Kind of hard to get a job when there aren't any, friend.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:16 pm |
      • Cameron

        There are jobs out there.

        Do they all pay $100,000 with full benefits? No.

        Sometimes it's better to work at Starbucks or other areas outside ones expertise to eventually get back on the path one chooses.

        The problem isn't that there are no jobs. The problem is that most Americans are unwilling to do jobs they deem "beneath them".

        Blaming the rich isn't going to help any.

        November 11, 2011 at 7:25 pm |
      • TheMan

        Actually, have you tried to apply to a Starbucks recently?

        "There are jobs out there if you look for them." Yes, but can you make enough money to survive off of? Rent? Food? Bare essential utilities? Student loans if applicable? And even if you make enough to scrape by, how do you plan for unforeseen circumstances like a major medical problem?

        I agree with you that there are jobs out there if you're willing to be scrappy and work hard. Personally, I have two jobs and work weekends and late nights so that I have enough income to live comfortably. I did not graduate from college expecting a job making six figures; it would be irrational to have that kind of sense of entitlement. I picked a good major with real-world usefulness and have been fiscally responsible. The recession slammed my industry and here I am.

        Working long days and nights is stressful but most of us have no choice until the economy turns around. Life goes on.

        November 11, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
    • Joedon

      Amen. I turned around one day and realized I was rich and from that moment on I give a lot of things away and still keep getting richer...Wierd eh?

      November 12, 2011 at 1:59 am |
  41. TJeff1776

    The relatively small Jewish group that slowly built up over a one hundred year period around Jerusalem 100 BC. It appeared to them that this was the start of something big. But it wasn't. They were ndustrious, but not military. The Greeks began menacing them and had no regard for religious freedom. The Jews made a deal; indeed, more of a bondage, with the Romans to avoid being consumed by the Greeks. This way gave them religious freedom. There were multiple denominations- Pharacees, Saducees, Herodites, and Essenes which made up the majority. The main reason for the explanation is this- except local, the Jews had no political or financial influence around the Roman Empire.
    They were not even counted as Roman citizens-a highly necessary qualification to navigate Roman society. SO the charge made herein that Jews were responsible for financial troubles that beset Rome is setforth only by the uneducated knowing nothing about Roman history.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
  42. Cheeseburger

    So, it wasn't the incorporation of what's known today as "diversity," sexual depravity, homosexuality, and an overall breakdown in societal mores that did the Romans in? Oh, I see, it was the "evil rich" who did them in too. How absurd. In all societies, there always has been and always will be the rich. How about we focus on the "I want what I want and I want it now and I don't want to work for it" class that is rampant in our country? You know, those – like many here – should be running things and controlling things because of their sheer intelligence. We don't need to mention that 99% of these people have accomplished nothing and create little. Except whining and moaning. And feeling entitled to doing whatever they want. Much like the Romans in the end.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
    • Nadia

      If you were not a de facto member of the 99% your screen name wouldn't be cheeseburger (as it shows no class) and you would have something way better to do on a Friday night than sit around online griping about other people.

      November 11, 2011 at 11:27 pm |
    • Going In Circles

      Republicans like to blame thier victims.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:28 am |
  43. nino

    Well we are finally understanding tha welath and income concentration has not changed very much since societies discoveres agriculture and trade, much before the Romans.
    The Gini coeficien , one of the many measures, varies to day from just above 0.30 in Western Europe, to 0.60 in some Latin Amercian countries. USA is about 0.40 , equal to China. China duirng comunism was about 0.10. I guess they prefer it as now.
    Would be interesting to know Roman coefficient at year 0 , including social transfers like the colosseum spectacle and free bread for all.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:44 pm |
  44. Peter Q Wolfe

    Who were the 99% in Roman times? They were nonproperty owners, slaves, children, disabled, and in general repressed folks of thier times. Who are the 99% in America today? They are the same type of people with somethings not changing in the direction they thought cause of being mislead or out right lied to about the "American Dream" which is just that a dream not real. Believe me my career starts off at $390000.00 a year with no experience mind you after college, and I have prospective employement almost anywhere in the states, however, L.A Times a few months back pointed at our downward mobility to beneath Canada, Britain, and other places. The affect is encouraging unlimited freedom (e.g unconditional loans for all majors, subprime morgages to minorities, speculation of morgages, broken families, lower education standards, uncritical society, religious fanatacism (e.g. Texas Bible creationalism) or anything else. The fact is that America needs to change our identity to something more critical of stupid asses and start waking up from a dream to wake up into competition and comparative advantage economics again. Finally, I'm an independent with no political message just saying we all need to wake the Hell up.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
    • TheMan

      Please tell me how you got a job making that kind of money without first learning to identify and split run-on sentences.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:19 pm |
      • He's

        .... almost assuredly a doctor. I have to read that kind of poor sentence structure daily

        November 12, 2011 at 6:05 am |
    • chucky Love

      You're just another jack ass with a little money. Cowards appear to prosper, but are always spoiled in the end. A man without integrity is a snake underfoot.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:57 pm |
  45. Fred S

    But don't we lknow who lived in Rome from contemporary accounts?

    November 11, 2011 at 6:38 pm |
  46. The Dude

    To me it's pretty simple: If you want to do something with your life... do it. If you don't like it here... leave. This GREAT country gives opportunities to all.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
    • Peter

      It is absurd when people say "If you don't like it, leave" in America. Anyone who knows even the most simplistic accounts of our country's founding knows that when true Americans don't like something, they stand up and fight to change what they see as an injustice. If you don't understand this, YOU should be the one that leaves.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:28 pm |
    • KeithTexas

      This country does not give opportunity to all. When I was a young man I believed that, but as an old man I know the truth. I did okay and lived my life pretty much as I pleased but I am part of that group that did all the things they said we should do and have squat to show for it. I will fight for the future of my children and grandchildren. America can be great again but I am afraid it will be very painful.

      November 13, 2011 at 7:08 pm |
  47. tif31

    @kikeslayer
    I sur doess't surprise me that the very first comment would be from a racist.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  48. Diogenes II

    If, as you say, they are all powerful, rich and influential then convert; you too then will be all powerful, rich etc.

    November 11, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  49. CA

    How you can make such a comment, where you devalue the life of a human being to the point of it being worthless based on generalities that any race, nationality, religious affiliation and what have you can be equally attributed to is scary. God forbid you ever make a mistake or have something assumed about you because of your gender, race, creed, nationality. You know, let's all just start killing each other........

    November 11, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  50. Mycology

    yep, me and my family are definitely "sucking america dry" you know, with that welfare we dont get, the food stamps we dont get, all the scholarships we don't use,

    oh, and that job I dont have. Yep, i'm sucking the teat dry. totally deserving of slaughter and removal of "yoke"

    November 11, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
    • Abhijit

      Not only you are not getting those benenit, you are probably giving your life to add to the Social Security so that this man here can get those.

      November 11, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  51. Thinker

    The more things change the more they remain the same
    1% controlling the 99% still the same
    Gladiator and other entertainment to keep the 99% occupied replaced by football and porn.

    November 11, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
    • Relictus

      Government-sponsored porn. :)
      I would vote for that.

      November 11, 2011 at 10:46 pm |
    • Glenn

      I don't disagree, but I can't imagine there are anywhere close to 3 million people in the US with enough political, social, economic & religious influence to make a widespread impact to our society. Obviously quantifying the number would be a bit arbitrary but I'm guessing you would have a hard time identifying even 300k individuals with anywhere near the level of influence that was possessed by Roman elites.

      November 12, 2011 at 9:04 am |
  52. Brian

    Too bad we can't bring Rome back. Europe entered a thousand year dark age when Rome was destroyed by barbarians. Rome started its decline when Constantine converted it to Christianity.

    November 11, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
    • Mosihasteen

      And yet, ironically, its because of Christianity that Europe flourished and became a beacon of hope and light for the rest of the world up until the eve of WWI

      November 11, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
      • Bill

        I'm not so sure that's true. The Roman Catholic Church was the only social force following the collapse of the western Roman Empire, and yet Europe was a complete wasteland for a thousand years until the Renasaince (sp?) which was strongly opposed by the Church.

        And also, I don't think the Europe of 1914 was all that much of a beacon of freedom. Most of Europe was ruled by absolute, dynastic monarchies and European immigration to North America was at its peak. It took WWI to destroy those monarchies and then WWII and the Cold War to establish that democracies could respond to a crisis and defend itself against dictators.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
      • mark

        Against the Rennisance? RU for real? Name any Scientist, Explorer, philosipher of the middle agesor Rennisance and I betcha they were Catholic. Newton, Gallaleo, Descartes

        November 11, 2011 at 7:55 pm |
      • Mosihasteen

        I never said Europe was a beacon of freedom, but hope. And it was the introduction of Christianity – which many of the old male dominated societies in Europe didn't like which created a new thought pattern allowing for the beginnings of equality between men and women and the gradual erosion of the large disparity class structure.

        Though agreeably Europe did languish in a mire for a few centuries, it didn't last a thousand years. The Roman Empire is considered to have fallen in 507 AD. The irony I mention is that when Rome became Christianized it was looked at disdainfully by the old followers of the pagan pantheon as a 'woman's" religion because of the equality the early church offered females. It is this notion of equality that allowed bold steps against the royalty by commoners and lower vassals to correct injustices (Magna Carta) By about 900 AD France and Germany were already becoming powerhouses and the eastern nations were beginning to follow suit. England took a bit longer.

        European colonialism was wrecked by the mass casualties and loss of authority in distant lands because of the first world war, which historians largely agree did more damamge to world social order and structure than WWII. A few more decades of bringing Christianity and European culture to the aboriginal peoples of Africa, Asia, and the Moslem middle east would have resulted in a much better world today.

        November 11, 2011 at 9:15 pm |
      • Relictus

        ... excepting the Inquisitions, and the persecution of Galileo and the persecution of Voltaire, and the abuse of power by many popes, and the church-run brothels.

        November 11, 2011 at 10:49 pm |
      • TTCUSM

        Germany was a power in 900 AD? They weren't united until Otto von Bismarck brought the country together in 1871.
        Or do you mean the Holy Roman Empire?

        November 13, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
  53. Steve

    Many Jews were among the elites, until the fall of Rome and Christianity was adopted.

    November 11, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
    • Mycology

      you clearly no nothing of rome, or roman history. the jews were fed to the lions until there were "christians" (Jews who believed their messiah had come and that he was Jesus Christ), and then the Christians were fed to the lions, with the Jews.

      once the Christians had the power, once again, it was the jews being fed to the lions. along with other slaves

      November 11, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
      • Abhijit

        It seems it was a golden age for lions. I am sure todays lions think that way... ;)

        November 11, 2011 at 6:41 pm |
      • Steve

        How little you "no"

        In the first century AD, Jews lived across the Roman Empire in relative harmony.

        Protected by Rome and allowed to continue their religion, everything was fine until rebellion in Judaea led to a major change in the practice of their faith.

        By the beginning of the first century AD, Jews had spread from their homeland in Judaea across the Mediterranean and there were major Jewish communities in rome, Syria, Egypt, and Greece. Practicing a very different religion from that of their neighbors, they were often unpopular. As a result, Jewish communities were often close-knit, to protect themselves and their faith.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:51 pm |
      • CZ

        How little you "no" part duex.

        You claim the Christians were "Jews who believed their messiah had come and that he was Jesus Christ". In the Roman Empire that couldn't be farther from the truth. The majority of Christians in Rome were Gentiles (converted pagans), not Jews converted to Christianity. "Know" your history before you start posting..........

        November 11, 2011 at 8:24 pm |
  54. YeomanDroid

    Please support this project. It will greatly help us understand population genetics. Anybody interested in this subject should pay a visit to DNA-Forums. Just Google it!

    November 11, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
  55. Popeye

    Ka ka kaaka...
    Roman's developed lettuce.

    November 11, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
  56. me

    Without the Roman Empire, Western Civilization would not exist. At the time, living under Roman rule generally meant a better quality of life, despite the inequalities in Roman society.

    November 11, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
    • Maude

      Without the Pigmies of Africa, you wouldn't exist ! This is a insult to America and you should be publicy flogged by a gang of GOP politicians.

      November 11, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
      • Mike

        You are too funny. In a sad way.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
    • Bill

      I don't know what Maude is complaining about but "me" has a point. Western civilization as we know it has it's orgins in the ancient Greek city-states. Rome emulated the Greeks and spread their influence westward (from Greece) into much of the European contintent. The basis of American culture comes directly from Europe, but augmented with the influences from the various cultures that immigrated here. As an American, I don't see why this would be offensive.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
      • Issac

        If you read the works of the Founding Fathers, they very heavily borrowed from the Roman Republic, its successes and its failings. They were all well versed in the classics, something we have sadly lost in education today.

        November 11, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
  57. Maude

    Cnn should cover why executives from Fannie May and Freddie Mac are getting millions of dollars in bonus money.
    Where is the coverage CNN ?

    November 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • Archived

      Obviously not in a science and technology blog, duh.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
      • Jon

        Most of what I've seen at this site is not science. CNN, can the picture of the guy playing Superman!

        November 11, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
    • RonnieReagan

      Take a look at the homepage you tool. Get over yourself.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
    • Erin

      Seriously, you want MORE coverage of that? During the time I commute home from work "Market Time" is on NPR and I would personally vote for a little less coverage of Wall Street. I hear that crap enough.

      November 11, 2011 at 6:15 pm |
  58. Copper's Donut Shoppe

    "She thinks that some could have travelled to Rome from as far away as North Africa"

    I know they came from North Africa and Central Africa and South Africa. With the zebras, lions and elephants for the colesium games.

    November 11, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
    • Nana

      Think again, Copper. Rome's most significant enemy and their greatest threat for centuries was the city of Carthage, which (oddly enough) is located in North Africa. It took three extensive wars, a couple of them lasting for years, before Carthage was finally defeated. It's a serious mistake to underestimate the Africans of that time by thinking of them as victims, slaves, or non-civilized. There were any number of great cities, kingdoms, and civilizations in various parts of the African continent. But it was Carthage that posed the greatest problem for the Romans.

      November 11, 2011 at 7:01 pm |
  59. Joe from CT, not Lieberman

    The results could be somewhat surprising. Rome had people there from all over their known world. Even discounting Colleen McCullough's romanticizing of the family, the Dictator Julius Caesar (he was never Emperor) more than likely grew up learning at least 5 languages other than the Latin and Greek spoken in his home. The Subbura neighborhood had inhabitants from Germania, Gaul (France and Switzerland), Illyria (modern Croatia), Syria, Africa (modern Tunisia), Judea, Greeks, etc. After Augustus, you would also have had Egyptians and Kushites (Somalia) in the mix. Two generations later would have seen people from Britania (England), and Arabia. Because Rome considered every newly conquered people (after the end of the Republic) to be "Romans" they were the true Melting Pot waaaay before America came into being.
    As to their government, even in the Republic era voting was a lot stranger than we are used to. First, you were divided into the 35 tribes (4 urban and 31 rural), then into one of 6 classes based on how much property you possessed, and the head count (capiti censi). The tribes would be selected by lot to vote. First the Senatorial class would vote, followed by the Equites (knights) followed by the other four classes. A tribe's vote was complete if four of the classes voted the same. Then it would continue through the tribes. It took 18 tribes to win an election (one more than half the tribes). Most elections were decided usually before the 25th tribal vote. If the first four classes (about 5% of the class population) voted the same, the rest of the tribe didn't vote. Once the 18th tribe was attributed to a candidate, the election stopped and the winner was declared. So while the Republic in theory provided for all Citizens to vote, in practice, less than 10% of the people in ancient Rome would usually decide the outcome of any election.

    November 11, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
    • BL

      "Anyone who can speak Latin is welcome to rob us. Just once, I'd like the chance to shoot at an educated man." Augustus McCrae, "Lonesome Dove"

      November 11, 2011 at 5:28 pm |
  60. Steven Brown

    Analysis of their bones would likely reveal a high content of lead, as lead cookware was commonly used.

    November 11, 2011 at 4:20 pm |
    • CZ

      As was their plumbing. In fact, I believe plumb is latin for lead.

      November 11, 2011 at 8:28 pm |
  61. bill johnson

    Occupy Rome?

    November 11, 2011 at 4:18 pm |
  62. jdun

    The Romans kept great books- they also brutalized their subjects, were fond of torture and only were interested in enriching Rome, and themselves, through their imperialism. The Empiree lasted over 400 years! Today, multinational companies that are supported by our government have been doing the same for the past 130 years or so. Exxon, United Fruit Company, Coca Cola, Apple, Alcoa, and NIKE are just some of the names that will someday be scrutinized by historians for their excesses and cruelties to indigenous peoples.

    November 11, 2011 at 4:08 pm |
  63. Maude

    Romans were from India 3000BC

    November 11, 2011 at 3:57 pm |
    • Abhijit

      NO! NO! We want nothing to do with those Romans... :(

      November 11, 2011 at 6:54 pm |
  64. sedersdr

    the first one is a choice, the next time it's A choice.

    November 11, 2011 at 3:44 pm |
  65. sedersdr

    I saw a sign by a church the other day that said, "the first one is a mistake," the second one is a choice"

    November 11, 2011 at 3:42 pm |
  66. H. Cain

    The question everyone wants answered is "Who created the first pizza?"

    November 11, 2011 at 3:36 pm |
    • Maude

      Genetalia restraunte, Italian place south of handsoff road, Neveda USA

      November 11, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
      • John Gabriel

        The Greeks created the first pizza. They created just about everything else. When Rome conquered the world, they simply continued the work of the Greeks. The Roman Empire was different only in that it built more roads and bridges. However, even the first device used to measure distance, was invented by Archimedes long before the Roman civil engineering feats were accomplished.

        November 11, 2011 at 5:02 pm |
    • Archived

      Aeneid, book VII

      "Beneath a shady tree, the hero spread
      His table on the turf, with cakes of bread;
      And, with his chiefs, on forest fruits he fed.
      They sate; and, (not without the god's command,)
      Their homely fare dispatch'd, the hungry band
      Invade their trenchers next, and soon devour,
      To mend the scanty meal, their cakes of flour.
      Ascanius this observ'd, and smiling said:
      "See, we devour the plates on which we fed."

      Cheesy translation, but there you go.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
    • Popeye

      Wrong again,

      Language was developed, including Greek, by Sanskrit. The concept of zero was Sanskrit. The numbers 1 to 10 was Sanskrit. It was the Hindu's developing civilization not the Greeks or Romans. I will give credit to the Greeks for developing goat cheese.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
  67. JRock

    Most people think the Holy Roman Empire collapsed, which couldn't be further from the truth. The Vatican is the Holy Roman Empire!

    November 11, 2011 at 3:34 pm |
    • DeeNYC

      That explains all the pedophiles running the Church.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:39 pm |
    • Bob

      The Holy Roman Empire was Charlemagne's German Empire, and at no point were the Romans referred to as the "Holy Roman Empire". I think you should get your facts straight. The Holy Roman Empire did collapse, The Roman Empire did collapse, but the church stayed in power. The church was not inextricably tied to Rome in the Western Roman Empire, and it was a function, but not THE function. That came during the church's struggle for dominance in the dark ages. Have you attended a history lesson before?

      November 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
    • Mat

      The Holy Roman Empire was not Rome. It was centered in Germany and not associated with the Roman Empire in any way.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:55 pm |
    • Robert

      The Holy Roman Empire had nothing to do with ancient Rome. It was an attempt in the middle ages to bring legitimacy to some rules by equating them with ancient Rome, but there is no correlation.

      November 11, 2011 at 4:06 pm |
    • 1nd3p3nd3nt

      the church wasn't rome, but there were deep connections. Rome is where they killed a bunch of christians. It's also where the roman orthodox church rose to power, sanctioned by rome, as their soldiers put the cross on their shields to guarantee victory. I guess it just had to work once.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:48 pm |
      • 1nd3p3nd3nt

        google:
        marcus aurelias for some serious persecution of christians under roman rule.

        constatine the great for roman recognition of christianity, including exempting some taxes and building churches.

        November 11, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  68. Goji Boos

    Hmmm, 1.5% of the population controlled all of the empire. I am so glad that the rich elite do not control America like that...er, wait it does!!!! DOH!

    November 11, 2011 at 3:30 pm |
    • Dr. Dr.

      At least Rome was 1.5% of the population, here in the US is only 1%..

      Bummer..!!

      November 11, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
  69. Gobsmacked

    jewellery? Oh, CNN, please!!

    November 11, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
    • Erin

      It's a real word: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/jewellery

      November 11, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  70. beowoofwoof

    DNA sequencing = credibility.

    November 11, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
  71. T

    The "immigrants" she refers to were probably mostly slave/captives from the territories the Romans invaded. I'd expect a varied mix of mostly middle eastern decent with some Celt & Saxon mixed in, though it does depend on just how old the bones are that she's studying. Current politics aside, all civilizations have, at some time, had their 1%'ers. Life is like that. I just hope we Americans can get through all this without falling apart or getting violent. Wouldn't that be a tribute to a real, working democracy and a sign of real social progress (like Romans compared to cavemen, perhaps?).

    November 11, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
  72. W. Churchill

    democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others

    November 11, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
    • Josh

      Democracies fall apart as soon as the representatives learn they can give things away for free, to themselves and to their constituents, just by voting for it. This is what we now call the National Debt.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:52 pm |
      • Ja

        The nation debt was thanks to Bush. He had a largest surplus in history going into his term and going out of it was hugh. Use common sense buddy. He had 2 terms so there is no way that you can blame obama for the debt. Bush is the worst president in history. Bush made wars that still cost us today. Doesn't matter if your demo or rep, if you had common sense you would see this is all Bush. Bush blames Clinton for this mess. Sorry when you have two terms in president and you take vacation the most in history you can't blame the president before you. Who is drinking the cool-aid?

        November 11, 2011 at 3:22 pm |
      • redeemer

        Ja and the dems are completely wrong blaming bush for the national debt. They apparantly forgot it was a democratic congress that planned and approved this debt. When bush tried to reign-in the spnding at the end of his second term, congress went over him to continue their spending spree. Obama blaming bush for this debt is obsurd. Clinton didn't produce the suprluss JA speaks of either. He got lucky. it was the boom of the .com businesses. revenue from taxes on these businesses casued the surplus, nothing more. then the dot coms when dot broke. not bush' fault. stop listening to one side of the story. the liberal media is controlling your brains. look it up for yourself. stop listening to rachael maddow. she is literally on the obama administration paycheck. not to mention, dems get their news from comedians like Jon Stewart (he is funny, but remember, he is a comedian, not a newscaster). dems need to wake up, take responsibility for themselves and shut the hell up. stop demanding money from others.

        November 11, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
      • Sam

        Rome was not a democracy, and neither is the United States of America. We are a Republic. Democracy means rule of the many, or majority rule. What that basically means is that, in ancient Greece, for example that every citizen would vote on every thing from the laws in effect to if they should go to war even if there should be an increase in taxes. In a Democracy there aren't any representatives, in a republic there are. In a Republic citizens vote for a select few who then in turn vote on everything. Here's a question, did you personally vote on the healthcare legislation? Did you personally vote to send troops to war? Did you personally vote to mandate the hours that kids are in school? So on and so forth, NO YOU DIDN'T, and you didn't because you don't live in a democracy, you live in a republic, that is you as a citizen of the United States of America elected, a.k.a. hired, someone to represent you, that is to vote on every single issue in your name and the name of all your neighbors. The United States of America is a federal republic. So read up on your types of governments and stop calling it a democracy, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS HAS NEVER BEEN AND IT IS NOT NOW A DEMOCRACY.

        November 12, 2011 at 1:06 am |
    • Joe from CT, not Lieberman

      Oh, Churchill, you have been reading too much Ambrose Bierce.

      November 11, 2011 at 4:12 pm |
  73. chris

    based off OWS. just look for those people rioting and being arrested.

    November 11, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
    • John Gabriel

      OWS is not violent enough. I can't wait for the time when they will begin executing the 1%. I am hoping they will take their ideas from the French Revolution.

      I would like to see the 1% tortured and put down like the filthy, despicable dogs they are. OWS should start with the pigs in Congress – Boehner, Cantor and all the other 1% lackeys.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
      • John C

        Most of the people who were fighting FOR the revolution ended up getting beheaded themselves. Thousands of other innocent people were beheaded as well.

        And in the end, France ended up with Napoleon as a conquering hero leader, re-instituting most of the ancien regime
        ( 1% back to controlling the 99%)

        If you just want to murder innocent people, that's fine I guess. Do it yourself.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
  74. Maude

    Reading all these blogs made me think why Jesus,Allah, Bhudda, Vishnu, Ewah left this earth and reside in heaven never to be seen or heard from again. The Pscho talk from all of you does not matter. Accept the fact that you are nothing and will never amount to anything ever. You will go back to dust and be inert forever more soon.

    November 11, 2011 at 2:33 pm |
    • mike hunt

      Maude....boy....WTF?

      November 11, 2011 at 3:17 pm |
    • Maryann

      There is no heaven. Sorry.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:20 pm |
      • Wisc Badger

        Prove it.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:50 pm |
      • PDXmum

        You can't prove a negative, Badger. The burden is upon the people claiming it's true to prove that it exists. You can't. It doesn't.

        November 11, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
      • Faustus

        You can prove a negative.

        1. If unicorns had existed, then there is evidence in the fossil record.
        2. There is no evidence of unicorns in the fossil record.
        3. Therefore, unicorns never existed.

        However, such arguments do work until they are found to be incorrect.
        A good example:
        All observed swans are white, therefore all swans are white looked like a pretty good inductive argument until black swans were discovered in Australia.

        I feel that relying on "you can't prove a negative argument" is intellectually lazy. While one is unable to disprove the existence of heaven, you can still state that given the current evidence it points to being non existent. However, you allow yourself to be potentially wrong given that there is still possibility of not being existent. However, if you are afraid of being wrong it means you are being dogmatic.

        November 11, 2011 at 5:32 pm |
  75. Respect

    What's so bad about being in the 1%? Living like a King, why not. So long as you do not do it at the expense of others, you earned it. To the Victor go the Spoils.

    November 11, 2011 at 2:17 pm |
    • Simon

      Yeah. The reality is that you do it others' expense.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:32 pm |
      • PHIL

        Not necessarily. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Jay-Z all are or were in the 1%. I dont see how they affected you.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:14 pm |
      • BriinNC

        but isn't that what is happening now? Aren't the protesters costing tax payers money? The extra costs associated with the OWS movements Vagrancy disguised as a protest.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:18 pm |
      • Maryann

        You sound so dumb when you comment on things you know nothing about.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:22 pm |
      • Maryann

        That reply was for BriinNC, not you Simon.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:23 pm |
      • Robert

        That is the great myth among those with little understanding of economics. In truth when someone becomes rich it does not require someone else to lose money. Wealth is created and destroyed all the time. The notion that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world to be spread around is just a myth. If you've ever bought a new car you should know this. You pay $30K for the car and 2 years later its worth $20K? Who stole the other $10K? No one.

        November 11, 2011 at 4:09 pm |
      • John Gabriel

        PHIL: Bill Gates and Steve Jobs etc are the swines who caused a lot of the economic troubles in the US. Gates and Jobs are behind the H1B1 visa program which outsourced IT jobs abroad.

        The 1% got rich by stealing public money. How? They lobbied DC to change the rules so they could. If they paid fair taxes, I doubt they would have been nearly as rich.

        I also have a good laugh when I hear the 1% praising their "skills and hard work" – most of them have very little skill and just happened to be in the right place at the right time. Gates and Jobs exploited many of their top employees. So do all the 1%.

        No one, I repeat, no one deserves to have as much money as the 1%. They DID NOT earn most of it. They stole and exploited the 99%. I hope to see them pay with their lives in future.

        November 11, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
    • Gobsmacked

      Well, yes, the whole problem is that it is usually done at the expense of others.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:09 pm |
    • DeeNYC

      The police watching the area is costing millions on MY tax dollars. The small businesses around the park has suffered greatly and some had to let their employees go. So he's right OWS just keeps hurting the working class, first by being bums, now by costing us working people money.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:43 pm |
      • DeeNYC

        This is meant for you Maryann.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:44 pm |
      • KeithTexas

        Send the police home, we don't need them there. All they do is start trouble anyway.

        November 13, 2011 at 7:17 pm |
    • Jon

      If your the victor, it's at the expense of others.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
      • John C

        If someone can rob you and get away with it, they will, and always will. So would you. That is life.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:10 pm |
  76. bocephus

    I want be rich and screw the 99%.

    November 11, 2011 at 2:08 pm |
    • John Gabriel

      You'll be glad you are not when the time comes for the 1% to pay for their crimes against humanity.

      November 11, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
    • Jon

      I want to be rich so I can screw the 50%, or the good-looking members thereof.

      November 11, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  77. kalikim

    This article tells us nothing about nothing!!! Stupidest effing article ever!!! The 99% were slaves...used and abused by the rich, just like we are today!!! Post articles by "real" scholars from now on!!!

    November 11, 2011 at 2:04 pm |
  78. palintwit

    Most people don"t realize that among her other talents, Sarah Palin is also an authority on ancient Rome. In fact, she just boarded a plane to Rome, Georgia so she can continue her research.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:50 pm |
    • Willa

      Tell her not to forget her hat , So we'll know her!

      November 11, 2011 at 1:55 pm |
    • Funny, you're not

      Ha ha (not). Don't quit your day job... oh wait... you don't have...

      November 11, 2011 at 3:08 pm |
      • palintwit

        Your trailer park manager letting you use the computer again today?

        November 11, 2011 at 3:15 pm |
    • Wisc Badger

      Now that you got that out of your system you can go change your diaper.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:55 pm |
    • Dr. Doctor

      Ladies and gentlemen......the indominable Palintwit. Never met a message board or subject they couldn't use to advance their Palin-centric worldview. Kinda like a stalker, eh? I still think you're mad she won't return your calls or acknowledge your flowers, Mr. Moore....I mean Palintwit.

      November 11, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  79. Michael

    These skeletons were dug up from "Lower Class Graves" outside Romes Walls....................Now they are in a warehouse. What disrespectful treatment of the dead. I hope after they do their studies, they are properly reburied with dignity.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:48 pm |
  80. YoureADoofus

    Who gives a crap who the "99% of ancient rome" were!? I care about as much as I care who the dirtbags in the "Occupy" "movement are – and in case you arent catching my tone, the answer is, not a lot!

    November 11, 2011 at 1:47 pm |
    • rick perrytwit ... slack jawed bible thumper

      Ever thought of moving to Texas ? You'd fit right in.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:53 pm |
    • Chris

      Perhaps you should read some history (assuming you can actually read). The US today is strikingly similar to the Roman Empire at the start of their downfall. That same 99% below the wealthy elite, a crumbling international position, an overstretched military facing an enemy it has no idea how to fight, an economy crumbling.

      Perhaps if we understood the past better we could prevent it from repeating itself.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:08 pm |
      • Mike

        time to sit back and let it all burn down.

        November 11, 2011 at 2:21 pm |
      • ADiff

        Bull. That old 'similarities' argument is SO lame. There's almost no similarity.

        November 11, 2011 at 2:38 pm |
      • Cameron Poe

        Yes but what you are failing to mention is that their 99% had no upward mobility. What you are forgetting is that here in America our 1% and 99% are constantly changing. As people become more educated and more immigrants come to take advantage of opportunity people flow in and out of the 99% and 1%. Check your history. America is much different than ancient Rome.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:02 pm |
      • Maryann

        Adiff either does not know history, or does not know what is going on in the present.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:26 pm |
      • thoshebebutlittle

        Cameron – social/economic mobility in the US is at its lowest point in decades, at least. You name pretty much any other developed nation, and people born poor have a better chance of making it than they do here.

        November 13, 2011 at 9:10 pm |
    • Maryann

      Well, Mr. Doofus, you took the time to comment about it, so why do you want to lie to us?

      November 11, 2011 at 3:25 pm |
  81. noneyabusiness

    God’s Wrath Against Sinful Humanity
    18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
    21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

    24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.

    26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.

    28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

    I do not agree with your terms.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:46 pm |
    • thatdude

      You can't use the Bible for everything especially to prop up your anti 99% veiled speak.
      Rome and the US are so much alike the 99% is out there just trying to chase their childhoods what they saw their folks doing and trying to get a little bit more which is what most people do try to give their kids more then they had.
      IF there is something wrong with that or sinful then really I think your that 1% that is only out to keep everyone else down.
      I'm a Christian and I approve this message.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:03 pm |
      • Cameron Poe

        Thatdude,
        You seriously must be that dude. If you think the folks claiming to be the 99% are just trying to do as their parents did. If this were true they would out working any job they instead of claiming they are entitled to one. They would make their way based on their own merits. Come on. Let's be serious. People got lazy thought they could spend thousands on college and get a crap useless degree and then expected someone to hire them just because they showed they could complete college. This happened too many times. The workplace became more competitive. And people started hiring folks with relevant degrees in relevant fields. If the OWS people wanted to be like their parents they would have no problem starting as the low man and working their way to the top. There is no substitute for hard work and dedication. Get a little dirt on your hands you will learn the satisfaction of an honest days work and sweets of life will be so much sweeter because you earned them. This is a lesson our parents learned. But some how OWS missed it along the way.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:08 pm |
      • Jon

        You must be a holy roller because you're talking in Tongues.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
    • Religious Nonsense

      #1 nobody reads this as it is way too long and not in context with the rest of the article. Religion is a scam and you've been duped!

      November 11, 2011 at 2:15 pm |
      • holy guac

        There may be a God, but I sure hope if there is, God is not religious. Its just too depressing.

        November 11, 2011 at 5:08 pm |
    • Dog the Riteous

      Which god were you referring to?? There are so many, it's hard to keep track. Almost astounding that people actually believe stuff like that. That sounds like just about the most hateful thing you could say, I mean, imagine if you actually said that to the person you are referring to. Who would that be, by the way?? These "slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; that disobey their parents." These people with a "depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips." And all because they don't believe the same thing you do.....

      If I were a God (which I am), I would be angry at you for saying such shameful things about my children. You are the deceit and the malice, for you know that despite your quoting of an old book, you don't really believe that either. The only difference is you're too scared to admit it. Think about that the next time you read whichever book you took that hateful speech from. Every time you read it, you think about how it's fake, don't deny it.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:43 pm |
    • veronica

      Dude...get some help!

      November 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
    • whocares

      Mr. Religion, you're an idiot.

      November 11, 2011 at 4:19 pm |
    • KeithTexas

      You are such a loser. That same god says it is okay to sell your daughter as a prostitute if you can't find her a good husband.

      November 13, 2011 at 7:23 pm |
  82. svann

    The plural of elite is elite.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:46 pm |
    • bill212

      Or elites, depending on usage. As a class, elite, as a member of the class, elite, as members of the class, elites.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:58 pm |
      • TheMan

        Heh, never thought about the breakdown of it. Just kind of, used it the right way without thinking about it.

        November 11, 2011 at 9:41 pm |
  83. Joseph J. Brazauskas

    I have never yet in my entire 35 year career as a classical philologist and scholar read such a grossly inaccurate article concerning the Romans, or indeed concerning any other ancient people. Clearly we moderns are more interested in securing ancient precedents for our own execrable social conditions than with ascertaining the truth about classical antiquity.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
    • orrigionalbettina

      Ditto...

      November 11, 2011 at 1:42 pm |
      • holy guac

        Took the words right out of my mouth...

        November 11, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
      • PulTab

        mega dittos

        November 11, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  84. FRANK

    i'm still waiting for a list of the 1% from today. Please, no vague definition, I need to see names. I'm tired of OWS trying to scare us with boogy men in the dark.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:37 pm |
    • Willa

      The 1%, I'm sure has a registry, but you'ld most likely have to be a member to get a copy. That is if they are really smart enought to be in the 1%!

      November 11, 2011 at 1:48 pm |
    • thatdude

      All you have to do is go down to your current country club, and check the registry. IF the club is losing membership then you know the 1% is getting hit hard too.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:05 pm |
    • Scott

      Well, you might start by Googling "400 richest American families". No bogeymen. Real people. Real issues. No easily dismissing those who threaten your world view.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:48 pm |
  85. Roland

    Funny the 1% are only the ones who can fund her research.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:37 pm |
    • Stacy

      I am not part of the 1%, but I can donate to her cause.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:43 pm |
  86. Rachel

    A lot of those immigrants were Jews who were enslaved by the Romans after the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in the year 70ad. They took all of the gold from the Temple gold leaf walls and golden implements used in the Temple service including the Menorah which can be seen on the Arch of Titus, as the Romans are carrying the Menorah through the streets of Rome along with the people they enslaved. They took the gold and used the money to build the Coliseum in Rome. Interesting facts.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:36 pm |
    • Chris

      I don’t believe what you are saying, Jews were still powerful around 70 AD after crucifying Jesus. They killed many more around that time and believers were along with the book were hiding since Jews were capturing and killing them one by one.

      November 11, 2011 at 3:41 pm |
  87. narcosis70

    Fascinating story about using modern science to learn more about the ancient world. And most of the comments ignore that and instead totally politicize it. Disgusting! Not everything in the whole wide world HAS to be about politics! Only in America....

    November 11, 2011 at 1:28 pm |
    • Lorri

      Thank you. I thought it was an intersting article on studying an ancient culture thru science.

      November 11, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
      • Fred S

        That is what I thought. And I had hoped that the comments would deal more with what the pointof the DNA testing would have been. That is to say, we know when the peopke lived, We also know that the ancient Romans had visitors from as far away as China, thought surely you would mainly be finding Roman/Etruscan/Italian DNA, mixed in with some othe rmiddle eastern types-but this would be devoting a lot of money to basically conform some very believable eyewiness accounts which have survived. If you were going to test anybody's DNA, I would check the DNA of ancient Jews versus modern Askenazi Jews. These European Jews claim to be directly descended from the ancient Israeli's, the theoruy being that after the Temple was destroyed in 70AD, all of the Jews were expelled, soem went to Italy and other parts of Europe, wjhere they collected, eventually in Eastern Europe and Geermany, with samtterings elsewhere. This sounds a little unbelievable in a couple of ways-the first being that this diasporrah did not necessarily happen. Of course, the ringleaders of the Jewish wars were executed and a significant number of Jews were enslaved to pay for the war (those were the good old days when guys only went to wars that paid for themselves). But the bulk of the population just stayed there in an expanded province. In effect, they lost their autonomy, but little else. So where did Europe's large Jewish population come from? People have pointed out two possibloities. One would be the Khazars, a tribe of about 600,000 people who were dominant in Central Asia about 800 AD. That tribe supposedly converted from paganism to Judaism because their King wanted to head up the state religion. The people wanted to switch to monotheism, but christian Church's at that time were either headed upo by the Pope (in the West) or the Roman Emperor (in the East). The European Jews may also have just been European who converted. Although Judaism did not accept converts, about 1AD a number of Roman cities had clubs which read the Torah, believed in one G-d and practised Jewish customs. What had happened is that Romans found the moral and social codes found in the Torah to be attractive and a good way to live, so they formed these so-called Chapter houses. Or, they could have been Jews. Anywya, interesting question-and a lot less well documented than who the Romans were. I think-am I missing something?

        November 11, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  88. Willa

    History doesn't repeat it self, People just keep making the same mistakes..

    November 11, 2011 at 1:25 pm |
  89. CDaeda

    Roman 99%; the ones fed to the Lions for sport; all slaves; everyone hung on crosses; etc.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:10 pm |
    • M2ball

      You cannot judge a first century society by 21st century standards, you have to look at them in the context of their own time. If you do some research you will see the 99% of ancient Rome were not so bad off.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:03 pm |
  90. Wyobob

    The 99 percent were slaves to the 1 percent, just like the republican plan. At one time we got away from them, and then the church took over. Wasn't that the reason that the colonists came to america to get away from that? The "christians" and the slave owners are trying to take us back to the middle ages.

    November 11, 2011 at 1:02 pm |
    • JihadJoe

      I think our bigger problem is not Dem or Rep its crazy radical opinions that are not anywhere in the realm of reality. Like the comment you just made for example.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:04 pm |
    • Nah

      wyo: "Wasn't that the reason that the colonists came to america to get away from that? The "christians" and the slave owners are trying to take us back to the middle ages."

      *yawn* Troll alert.

      The colonists came to America to get away from oppressive government, lack of freedom of speech and religion, etc.

      It's ironic that you say "christians" (presumably you mean "republicans") are trying to drag the world back to the Middle Ages when it's quite clear that liberals intend to have the government control every aspect of your life, so long as it doesn't involve sex or drugs.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:08 pm |
      • really

        Actually....Nah.... the colonists that came here were, for the mostpart, misfits. Everyone wants freedom, free speech, etc. Europe would be empty if America was the only place to get freedom!! Don't be so stupid. They were escapists. Instead of working in their own country to improve conditions, they ran away!

        November 11, 2011 at 2:16 pm |
    • whataworld88

      Unfortunately no, by the time colonists came to the New World it was to take a chance on a new start or, in the Pilgrims case, freedom of religion from their rulers. By this time the Roman Church had lost its influence as the predominant force in Europe (the Church's influence declined even before the Renaissance). Kings ruled, not the Church, although many were smart enough to use the sway of the Church to achieve their own ends. Sad but true.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:14 pm |
      • Roto

        I fear a movement to move us back toward a religion based government (Christianity). That's the last thing we need. Government should be secular. Then worship whatever you want. But don't do it through government.

        November 11, 2011 at 1:32 pm |
      • whataworld88

        Either way the central truth is that government is easily corrupted. Secular, as well as Christian governments are responsible for social atrocities.

        November 11, 2011 at 1:39 pm |
    • Ronald Hussein Reagan

      Ideologues on the right fail to take into account that for the U.S. economy to thrive what is really required is balance. For the right wing ideologues who are either too lazy or stupid to grasp this truth I'll put it very simply – if the rich have too much of the wealth then there's no one to buy the stuff that is produced – which, in turn, hurts the economy and ultimately, the rich.
      BTW – For people waiting for the 1 per cent to realize this – it will be a long wait – they feel ENTITLED to what they have – after all, they're only playing by the rules (they've made.)

      November 11, 2011 at 1:27 pm |
    • RightOn

      Really? It's all the Republicans fault? What about Democrats who own businesses and swing through the same loopholes? John Edwards got a $400 haircut when he was running for VP, how is that any different? Please tell me how a person like that understand what the "99%" are going through.

      Get a job and maybe you'll get away from the "99%."

      Loser.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:34 pm |
      • Stacy

        I believe the OWS protestors ARE complaining about politicians of all parties who use their power to influence policy to benefit corporations who give them perks in return (e.g., campaign contributions, cushy jobs for their friends and family, "working vacations" and other free travel). You can complain about a man who became rich through his law practice and who later became a politician getting a $400 haircut–paid with his own money, mind you–but that is not the same scale as a John Thain who spent $1.22 million of corporate funds in early 2008 to renovate two conference rooms, a reception area, and his office, spending $131,000 for area rugs, $68,000 for an antique credenza, $87,000 for guest chairs, $31,000 for a commode, and $1,100 for a wastebasket, after becoming CEO of Merrill Lynch–which in July 2008 announced $4.9 billion fourth quarter losses for the company from defaults and bad investments and, between July 2007 and July 2008, llost $19.2 billion, or $52 million daily. During this same time period, Thain was paid a total compensation of $83,785,021, including a base salary of $750,000, a cash bonus of $15,000,000, stock grant of $33,013,151, and options grant of $35,017,421. Not only did this company participate in the destruction of the economy, the 1% who made the decision leading to those losses got paid ridiculous sums of money to do it. It's the way executives can finance their lives by adding ordinary daily expenses to their company's "expenses" that then come out of company "profits" which then lower their tax obligations. See how easy it is to live in the lap of luxury–cars, meals, housing, etc.–all get paid for and written off as "corporate expenses." Not only are these people getting the company to cover expenses that ordinary workers who actually produce the goods and services don't get to enjoy they do so even though they have the means to pay for themselves and in the end it lowers the obligation of the company to support the community in which they operate–cheating those workers out of the community services they could enjoy.

        To summarize, the rich write the rules, buy the loyalty of the politicians to enact them, and profit more because of it. They get ridiculous sums of money, pay for their extravagant lives off of the back of the workers who actually produce the wealth generated by the company, lower the obligation to the community in which they work, and attempt to eliminate social programs that actually benefit their workers (as they have no need to use these programs). Ordinary workers exchange their labor for stagnant wages, out of which they have to pay for their decidedly non-extravagant lifestyles, increase their productivity to enhance the wealth of their companies of which they don't get to share in the extra profits generated by their efforts (see "stagnant wages" vs increased productivity across the past three decades), don't have the ear of elected representatives to enact legislation to benefit themselves, and are faced with increased economic pressures when social programs that benefit them are cut back, restricted, and/or eliminated.

        November 11, 2011 at 2:23 pm |
      • RightOn

        Stacy, that's a great example, but what do you want him to do? Give away that money? Don't get me wrong, I don't believe that these people should make millions of dollars, but rather make a competitive wage for the work they do.

        The BIGGEST problem with our country is not the fact that these corporations are throwing money away at an alarming rate. It's the fact that all our manufacturing jobs are over seas. If we had jobs here in America, we wouldn't be in this predicament. However, until the "99%" stops buying their IPods and IPads made in China, they have no one to complain to.

        November 11, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  91. Madhu Thangavelu

    Fascinating !...one more way to inspire and fire up the imaginations of the next generation of explorers and scientists. Modern technology, especially computers, allow such wide data gathering, that when coupled with new and more refined lab tools allow insights that are.....magical !

    November 11, 2011 at 12:59 pm |
  92. DeeNYC

    Strange how the west modeled their government to a failed society

    November 11, 2011 at 12:43 pm |
    • JihadJoe

      Every society will eventually fail, but how well the society lived is more important then their failure.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:00 pm |
    • whataworld88

      I assume you are talking about Rome. If so, what would a successful model be? The old Republic gave rise to the Empire which lasted until the 400's A.D., and centuries longer than that if you count the Byzantine Empire.

      November 11, 2011 at 1:04 pm |
    • Bryan

      America is a great nation. No other system has worked better. What do you propose? Communism?

      November 11, 2011 at 1:09 pm |
      • B

        Seriously! Are those the only two options that exist- the American System (whatever that means) and Communism? How shorted sited are you?

        November 11, 2011 at 1:47 pm |
    • El Kababa

      Rome lasted as a center of power for centuries. It morphed from a village to a city to a city-state to a regional power to an empire. Then it sort of fell apart in chunks. Many Roman institutions are stll alive, such as the Catholic Church, which is much more Roman than Jewish.

      Pick another society that provides a more reliable model. Ancient Egypt? The British Empire? Modern day China?

      November 11, 2011 at 1:21 pm |
      • Maude

        Rome survived because they murdered, raped and pilliaged all the virgin people around their neighborhood. It took hundreds of years for people catch on and destroy this evil empire.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:54 pm |
      • Harrybutt

        Wolf Blitizer from ran the Roman Empire from his offices in New York City. He filed for divorce in 1999 and was expunged from the Catholic Church. The Roman Empire collasped shortly thereafter. Some say the Wolf purposely let the Roman Empire fall apart for he did not want split the empire 50/50 with his x-wife. At discovery hearings after filing bankruptcy, Wolf's apartment was searched. Many Roman bones were found in Wolf's apartment. Apparently the Blitizer's were eating these indviduals and storing there bones in their apartment. Many of the left over bones had Blitzers teeth mark when examined closely.

        November 11, 2011 at 4:07 pm |
  93. xdougx

    Throughout human history there have always been the wealthy and elite, and the masses of poor and common folks being ruled and oppressed. Dont think for one second that just because we have technology means our society is any different.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:42 pm |
    • Ronald Hussein Reagan

      Technology has made our society different – not completely different, but different. The most obvious ways are the existence of labor saving devices has eliminated many tasks that used to be done by humans. World civilization has been struggling with issue this for a couple hundred years.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:47 pm |
    • Nah

      So the poor have been oppressed throughout history, therefore the poor are oppressed now.

      Brilliant illogic.

      And what does technology have to do with it?

      November 11, 2011 at 12:53 pm |
    • Ronald Hussein Reagan

      He mentioned technology because it's probably the biggest difference between then and now – he brought it up because he was making the point that even with technology the basic societal equation hasn't changed (an idea I don't totally agree with) If you'd get your head out of your ideological straitjacket you'd have an easier time grasping ideas.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:42 pm |
      • James

        Technology HAS changed the equation dramatically. In the Roman times 99 men with swords or farm implements could be reliably depended upon to dominate 1 man, however well equipped and trained, in battle.

        Now 1 man in a tank can easily defeat 99:1, a pilot in an F22 can easily defeat 999:1 or the dude with his finger on a big red button at Vandenburg can obliterate 9,999,999:1 with ease...

        Good luck with any proletarian revoluation nowadays if the 1% truly take the gloves off.

        November 11, 2011 at 8:59 pm |
  94. Ronald Hussein Reagan

    a good story – it's nice that this woman figured out a way to proceed on her own.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
  95. Mr Ed

    Coming soon to America. There will be no middleclass under Obama. One percent will be over the rest of us and you aren't going to like it.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:40 pm |
    • Ronald Hussein Reagan

      MR Ed – why don't you go someplace and hold hands with John Galt?

      November 11, 2011 at 12:43 pm |
    • maharbal

      The republicans are to blame for the disappearance of the middle class.That was the conservative master plan all along, to make all of us plebeians while they play the role of patriarchs.President Obama is trying to save this country and the middle class. Too bad these tea partiers can't even buy a clue.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:49 pm |
      • Mike McCarthy

        Wow, the Republicans wanted to be father figures? ... It's ok. You made an honest mistake. It's Patricians, not patriarchs. And last I checked, neither Republicans nor Democrats control the economy. It's only the Democrats that want to control it.

        November 11, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
      • Nah

        mahar: "The republicans are to blame for the disappearance of the middle class.That was the conservative master plan all along, to make all of us plebeians while they play the role of patriarchs."

        Yes, yes. The Republicans are evil simply because they hold opinions that are different from yours. It's inconceivable that they could hold their beliefs on reasonable grounds.

        "President Obama is trying to save this country and the middle class."

        Ah, yes. Hero worship of politicians.

        You're smart.

        November 11, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
      • Nah

        mike: "And last I checked, neither Republicans nor Democrats control the economy. It's only the Democrats that want to control it."

        You can't argue with a partisan moron. His political beliefs (and intelligence) are limited to the soundbites and slogans he knows.

        November 11, 2011 at 12:57 pm |
      • GaryO

        True. The Bush administration started the "No Child Left Behind" program for education to make sure that the masses could no longer think independently and turn the 99% into a bunch of worker bees. Ask any teacher who now has to teach to the test, rather than employ teaching methods that will foster the use of creativity and independent thought. The rich will send their children to private educational institutions, where they will be groomed to rule the 99%.

        November 11, 2011 at 1:16 pm |
      • really

        Hey Nah.... if the shoe fits.....the Reptilicons have tried to tear down the middle class at every possible turn! That is a fact! Are you rich? Do you want the rich to have tax cuts? You have been brainfoxed, my friend!!!

        Got brains?...Nah!

        November 11, 2011 at 1:20 pm |
      • Nah

        really: "Hey Nah.... if the shoe fits.....the Reptilicons have tried to tear down the middle class at every possible turn! That is a fact!"

        Conclusory statements aren't proof of fact, you do realize that right?

        Much less, whether you hate the Republicans or not, they premise their political positions on the "fact" that their policies will help the economy and the middle class.

        Hence, the burden is on you to show and why they're wrong based on the "facts". Ad hominems aren't going to cut it.

        November 11, 2011 at 3:52 pm |
    • Aaron

      Mr Ed was much more intelligent when he had his own tv show back in the 60s. Since he joined Fox News, he hasn't made much sense.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:57 pm |
    • really

      I agree with everything ....except the Obama thing! What did he do to exacerbate this situation that has been festering since the 'great one', RWR? The only President since Nixon to even try to care about the 99% is vilified by the very group that HAS perpetuated this stratification!!!
      Get your head out of your 'best attribute'!!!

      November 11, 2011 at 1:15 pm |
  96. Jonathan Galt

    damn iphone, sorry about typos. Daggerz.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
  97. bristoltwit palin... America's favorite dancing cow

    Now that I've joined the circus, I'm hoping you all will come to watch me perform. I'll be easy to spot. I'm the only cow wearing ballet slippers.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
    • Tracy Hayes

      Will your Backwoods Simpleton Mother be there to watch you? With her prom hair and her "where am I?" look on her face. Idiot woman, and a disgrace to our gender...

      November 11, 2011 at 2:20 pm |
      • palintwit

        "Prom hair" !!! Ha ha.

        November 11, 2011 at 2:47 pm |
  98. jim

    It's good to get some info on the plebs. I only really know the style of clothing they wore, nad I generally pride myself on knowledge of the Roman Empire.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:28 pm |
    • Eduardo

      Good for you. You are obviously one of the rich Romans and you worked real hard to get there – and didn't steal anything either. Congratulations!

      November 11, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
  99. Jonathan Galt

    This is the stupidest stor ever...its like saying "Oh ok the US is going to fall just like Rome, but its because Rome had rich people." Rich people employ people, rich people get rich through hard work. Take them away or villigy them, and poor people lose jobs. Keep it up, see how it works out for everyone. Idiots.

    November 11, 2011 at 12:28 pm |
    • jim

      You are oblivious to the point of the story. This is about HISTORY not the present day.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:29 pm |
    • Jim

      I Every now and then I'll see "Who is John Galt" on a car, usually one full of stuffed animals on the back shelf. Evidently John Galt is a troll.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
    • Ronald Hussein Reagan

      Galt – it must be difficult to absorb any information when your ideology changes everything into the same thing. What makes it even worse is that you probably aren't even aware that you're doing it. s far as your iphone is concerned – nobody's really interested in your ideological spouting anyway.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:39 pm |
    • Cyrus

      Jonathan: As much as you attempt to simplify the growing discontent, and reduce the general populace to a rabid mob who wants to punish success, the facts speak for themselves. First of all, "rich people create jobs" is an economic fallacy, propagated by the supply-side theorists, whose premise is based on the early-industrial America. Plenty of empirical evidence show that rich people increase their consumption of "luxury goods" or invest abroad, instead of re-investing their riches to create jobs. It also implies that the rich people, out of benevolence, are going to keep re-investing to create jobs. That's also not true. The rich invests in businesses when there's sufficient demand for goods and services. If they don't see enough return on their investment, they won't invest. It's the pragmatic business principle. As a small business owner, I live that simple principle every day.

      Secondly, neither the OWS participants, nor the general public have ever said that punish the rich for their success. Instead, they have campaigned for ending lobbying, and against back-room deals in the financial market, market manipulation that brings down the economy, and activities as such. They haven't asked for a hand-out. They have asked the govt. to stop bailing out financial market manipulators, who in turn passed the costs to the consumers in these difficult times, costing the general public more. I can go on and on about the economic injustices that exist. Unless you are a mover & shaker and a "-aire", you are being royally screwed by a few. The saddest thing that I get from your comment is that you are being violated and screwed, and you don't even know it.

      November 11, 2011 at 12:41 pm |
      • Ronald Hussein Reagan

        Cyrus – you're right – but John Galt is incapable of absorbing information – much less changing an opinion.

        November 11, 2011 at 12:55 pm |
      • Nah

        cyrus: "First of all, "rich people create jobs" is an economic fallacy, propagated by the supply-side theorists, whose premise is based on the early-industrial America. Plenty of empirical evidence show that rich people increase their consumption of "luxury goods" or invest abroad, instead of re-investing their riches to create jobs ... The rich invests in businesses when there's sufficient demand for goods and services."

        Brilliant contradiction.

        The rich don't create jobs, but they do invest in businesses. Businesses which *gasp* create jobs.

        Much less, no one said every rich person creates jobs, the contention is that most businesses, large and small, are owned by people who (under many tax plans) would be considered the "rich". It's tautological that businesses are the employers of employees. Hence, the "rich" create jobs.

        "Instead, they have campaigned for ending lobbying, and against back-room deals in the financial market, market manipulation that brings down the economy, and activities as such."

        Vague assertions with loaded language are not arguments.

        Which lobbying? You mean the government should silence a part of the population, and prohibit them from lobbying Congress, simply because they make more money than you or support a position you disagree with?

        Or should businesses - the ones directly impacted by economic legislation - merely have no voice when it comes to supporting or opposing that legislation?

        As for market manipulation, etc.: you're right, there should be regulations. But saying there "should" be regulations doesn't tells us whether 1) regulations now exist, or 2) that the market failed because of them.

        November 11, 2011 at 1:03 pm |
      • Ronald Hussein Reagan

        Nah uses the standard "New Logic" perfected by the Bush/Cheney team – i.e. you start with a conclusion and work backwards from there – gathering factoids, opinion and half truths that support your conclusion. The strength of this system is that it always yields the answer you want – the weakness is that it has no grounding in reality.

        November 11, 2011 at 1:14 pm |
      • Nah

        ronald: "Nah uses the standard "New Logic" perfected by the Bush/Cheney team – i.e. you start with a conclusion and work backwards from there – gathering factoids, opinion and half truths that support your conclusion."

        *yawn* Good rebuttal?

        Care to show how and why I'm wrong? :)

        November 11, 2011 at 3:53 pm |
      • Ronald Hussein Reagan

        Nah – it basically boils down to the fact that the economy – like the society of which it's a part – has to have balance – the idea of "Rich is Good Poor is Bad" or "Poor is Good Rich is Bad" are equally wrong. Historically the pendulum has swung back and forth – in my opinion the pendulum started swinging back in favor of capital during the Reagan years – now, it looks like it's going the other way – what I call a "correction" and what Righties call "Armageddon, Communism, Socialism, etc."
        BTW – I have two very bright very Conservative brothers so I know some on the Right have solid philosophical underpinnings to their conservatism. You seem like a bright guy so you do yourself a disservice by posting bumper sticker size thoughts about "job creators." Those type of things are easy to remember (which is an important element of propaganda and which can help in a debate) -but things just ain't that simple.

        November 11, 2011 at 4:18 pm |
    • Hate the rich

      The rich are disgusting! They really don't fulfill any function except to leach off the other 99 PERCENT. The sooner we either tax the h3ll out of them or do a little French Revolution action on them (off with their heads! – literally, that would be some-what satisfying to see!)
      I think you are thinking of the small business man-woman or the entrepreneur, most often they are NOT super rich or part of the 1PERCENT (GOP lies and fairy tales). I don’t believe you either read the mainstream media or you haven’t been trying to get by on a teachers salary for the last 30 years. Since 1979 the richest 1 percent has increased their share of the wealth at least 250 percent (that is from the US government's estimates, but it is also verified in many independent sources – so screw the rich!! Let us tax their inheritance about 80 PERCENT!
      The only thing the rich are good at is screwing each other over (both figuratively and literally, since none of them have any morals or values – just ask the ExxonMobile victims in Alaska, the shrimpers of the Gulf of Mexico after BP got done, or anybody that has been laid off in the last 30 years because of NAFTA or our jobs leaving for China!)
      What kind of jobs do they really create? Lobbyist for their tax shelters? Lawyers planning new ways to screw the 99 PERCENT, pool cleaners, or did you line up to wash their lexus?
      I support OWS and I hope it spread to every damn rich neighborhood from Wall Street to Main street, Oakland Cali to Dallas, (especially Plano, TX) on to Madison WI (get rid of that Koch brother stooge they have for a governor) back to Washington and NY.
      The GOP got their head handed to them in OHIO – RIGHT, you right wing stooge!

      November 11, 2011 at 1:01 pm |
      • Nah

        Honestly can't tell if you're trolling or if you really are this stupid.

        November 11, 2011 at 1:06 pm |
      • Cheeseburger

        I vote "that stupid."

        November 11, 2011 at 6:55 pm |
      • Time.ToThink

        Exactly! Look how Lenin took care of eliminating the rich and how great the life was in the old Soviet Union! After the revolution only the communist leaders were rich. Look at Castro in Cuba, he, his family, and other govt leaders live in the palaces the rich lived in before.

        November 12, 2011 at 12:14 pm |
    • EricinOhio

      Wow, someone has issues! Nowhere in this story did he say even one word about current US society, let alone anything about its demise or any parallels with ancient Rome. However, now that you bring it up, you're probably right...there are some pretty amazing parallels between 21st century US and 2nd/3rd century Rome....

      November 11, 2011 at 1:05 pm |
    • GaryO

      The US will fall because our government has become as corrupt as the Roman senate had become. We need to flush the toilet and get rid of the the senators and congressmen who have served more than 1 term, give a 2 term limit to congressmen, as it is for the president, impose strict limitations on lobbyists, institute election report where every candidate who get a certain number of signatures to run a fixed amount of campaign money and outlaw the use of personal or donated funds, eliminate pensions for politicians, revoke their lifelong health benefits, make them participate in social security, and make their salary that of the average US citizen while they are serving and nothing thereafter. Politicians voting their own raises and benefits! Tell me our government isn't corrupt!

      November 11, 2011 at 1:23 pm |
      • GaryO

        I meant to say "election reform" (not "report")

        November 11, 2011 at 1:25 pm |
    • really

      The rich do NOT employ the poor, they EXPLOIT them! You sound like the rich are hiring people out of the kindness of their hearts! It is greed. They hire to make a profit, nothing else! If the poor do not benefit the rich, they can starve!

      November 11, 2011 at 1:52 pm |
  100. tony

    "Rome lacked a formal census" . But the Bible (New Testament) says they bothered to have one in Judea???

    Wow!!! Is this yet another "Christmas" fable?

    November 11, 2011 at 12:26 pm |
    • Kristina Killgrove

      Tony – There were censuses around the Empire (as in Egypt), but no formal one in Rome itself. Weird, huh?

      November 11, 2011 at 12:32 pm |
      • Tom In Dallas

        Not so odd. They had to know how many subjects were in their conquered lands so they could tax them appropriately. :P

        November 11, 2011 at 12:38 pm |
    • shut_up

      when the devil is giving you a steam bath lets see if you think it is a fable. it will last forever, you might move to the middle east to train for hell............

      November 11, 2011 at 1:03 pm |
      • Doug

        So much anger.... and you sound like you're judging this fellow? How mighty are you?

        November 11, 2011 at 1:43 pm |
      • SixDegrees

        Right. I keep forgetting what a Loving God Christians have. Maybe that whole "Worship me or you'll burn for all eternity!" isn't the best marketing slogan. When God made man in His image, I guess he was acting more along the lines of that yahoo whipping his daughter with a leather belt. Should be all wear wife-beater shirts to Church?

        November 13, 2011 at 6:55 am |
      • Fred Evil

        Sorry, I recognized the Devil was a fable about the same time as Santa and the Tooth Fairy.
        Why are you so obtuse?

        November 14, 2011 at 10:04 am |
    • jj

      Very odd

      November 11, 2011 at 1:05 pm |
    • Scott

      Yep, there were censuses in parts of the Roman Empire, and people generally reported to locations of ancestry (According to rules I'm not quite clear on.) As jewish descendants of King David, Mary and Joesph reported to the "City of David", and viola! our Christmas story. But yeah, I'm surprised to hear they didn't have a census in Rome itself.

      November 11, 2011 at 2:44 pm |
      • Carole Clarke

        Rome kept a careful census of the nations it conquered for obvious reasons. For itself, most of the Roman populace were people who didn't count in the sceme of things. Those who did matter knew exactly how many there were of them. The closest census was the grain dole kept by the treasury – chits were handed out to qualified Romans who could then collect their ration of grain from the city. Rome was never able to feed itself and spread outward in its conquests to obtain grain lands. One season was so bad they had to buy in grain from beyond the Black Sea to the east. And most Romans lodged a will with the Vestals, giving you a different kind of count.

        November 11, 2011 at 8:06 pm |
1 2

Contributors

  • Elizabeth LandauElizabeth Landau
    Writer/Producer
  • Sophia DengoSophia Dengo
    Senior Designer