Two weeks into Occupy Wall Street protests, movement is at a crossroads

I dont feel sorry for these protesters at all.
They wanted to protest, here is their chance.

They have the right to protest, but I hope the owners of the fast food restaurants decide to not allow them access to the restrooms.
I hope that they do run out of their basic supplies, things like tents, sleeping bags, and shoes.

While I dont want any of them to get hurt or sick, I do want them to realize that their right to protest does not mean that we have to support them.

Let them survive a NYC winter with only what they brought with them, nothing more.

These Occutards are Obama's children - they are Obama's pawns.

Smith observed that all production required 3 things. Land, Capital, and Labor. A very simple example would be a brick factory. The building and oven needed to create the bricks are the “capital” – the owners are the capitalists. The people making the bricks is the “labor” – the people doing the actual work. The Land the factory occupies and the clay used to make the bricks is the “land” – the owners of the land are the “Rentiers”. Any money made by selling the bricks is then divided up between these three groups: the rentiers, the capitalists, and the workers.

Adam Smith observed that only 2 of the 3 groups made any real contribution to the production process. The workers contributed their time. The capitalists contributed their capital that they either bought, but is now used and worth less than before it was used. The Rentiers contributed their land, but have lost nothing. Once the manufacturing of the bricks is done, they get their land back and it is still worth the same as it was before. Any income they made by renting out their land was made without work, and without risk to their assets. There is a word for someone that only takes, but doesn’t give back: a parasite. Smith and those who carried on his work used the nicer term, Rentier. This is where the phrase “economic rent” originates. It originally described a no value-ad landlord.[1]

Unfoutunately for your argument,

But the value of raw land comes as an endowment from nature. It isn't value added by landlords, only appropriated by them.

No. For the past few centuries at least the land has been purchased and sold - and at values determined by a free market.

Even if we confiscate ALL of the assets of the "rich", and then redistribute that to everyone else, how long do you think that would last?

I don't think DrewDad denies that---or Adam Smith for that matter. But just because you can buy or sell something on a free market, that doesn't mean you created the value it has. For just one obvious counterexample, stolen goods have been purchased and sold for centuries as well, at prices determined by a free market. But I think even you would agree that the thieves didn't create the value of those goods. Your argument doesn't refute what DrewDad said.