Turning tables on Occupy Toronto
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 Next
Brenda @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:30 am
eureka eureka:
Minimum wage going up by 9% compensates for the huge gains of the 1% (it is more than that number, really)?
The income wealth gap is greater now than at any time in the history of Capitalism in North America, unless you want to consider the .1% of "Robber Barons."
The gap in North America is, by far, the widest in the world. The ills of poverty are, accordingly, most common in North America compared to the rest of the developed world.
It is iironic is that in that disparity lies the seed for the destruction of Capitalism. The 'ism that the continent purports to defend.
The income wealth gap is greater now than at any time in the history of Capitalism in North America, unless you want to consider the .1% of "Robber Barons."
The gap in North America is, by far, the widest in the world. The ills of poverty are, accordingly, most common in North America compared to the rest of the developed world.
It is iironic is that in that disparity lies the seed for the destruction of Capitalism. The 'ism that the continent purports to defend.
I think you are talking out of your ass when you are using the phrase "North America". There are 23 countries in North America, and they all differ. You can not compare the Mexican system with the US or Canadian, nor can you compare the Canadian system with the US.
You also cannot compare the Canadian or American one with any European country, not with the EU.
Like I said, I can understand why the Americans are complaining.
But there is no reason for Canadians, nor Europeans to follow this OWS movement. Unless you are going to compare Canada with Greece and go protest because the Greeks are, for their reasons.
EyeBrock @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:31 am
If this movement was so credible, why are only the usual renta-mob taking part?
Why hasn't this 'message' gained any traction with the masses?
Because its a load of old bollocks.
OnTheIce @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:42 am
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
If this movement was so credible, why are only the usual renta-mob taking part?
Why hasn't this 'message' gained any traction with the masses?
Because its a load of old bollocks.
Why hasn't this 'message' gained any traction with the masses?
Because its a load of old bollocks.
You mean OCAP doesn't lend the movement some much needed credibility?
Bruce_the_vii @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 8:57 am
Brenda Brenda:
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
The OWS made a legal protest, broke a few bylaws, were tolerate by the police and politicians and two months later have made there point. Some right wing pundits tried to make principles out of the infraction of the bylaws. The protestors had a lot of issues and were quite popular, especially given that the banks have created a deep recession. I spoke with some of the protestors and found they each had pet points which were perfectly rational. The most intellectual thing I read about the protestors is they the real theme is that people the cause these problems should take responsibility. That's like corporate responsibility.
What IS their point exactly?
I understand why the Americans were protesting (I use past tense for a reason. When you are camping out somewhere and you still have not made a point, your protest failed), but why are Canadians, Dutchies etc etc protesting? I don't get it. The gap between the American 1% and the 99% is far larger than the gap between the Canadian 1% and the 99%.
I talked to about ten of them and they tended to have legitimate points. One person was concerned about the lack of democracy in Parliament, another about the rich paying their share, a third about the dwindling supply of non renewable resources and a forth about the level of consumerism in society. Of course the underlying complaint is the management of the banks.
So these are are things that I think about, that we all think about and the extreme leftie sentiment was missing in my quick survey.
In particular the lack of democracy in the Parliament is an old chestnut. My personal opinion is the West is run by small elites with access to the Prime Minister and out side of that that you are out of luck. A long this line in The Economist is that guy that advised Cameroon but was tainted by the phone tapping scandals was tolerated because of the inner group he's the only one that had street smarts - cleaned from be a journalist. It's damn interesting The Economist's opinion is the inner circle maybe without anyone with street rapport.
All in all a pretty interesting phenomenon and a match for the tea partiers.
Brenda @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:01 am
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
Brenda Brenda:
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
The OWS made a legal protest, broke a few bylaws, were tolerate by the police and politicians and two months later have made there point. Some right wing pundits tried to make principles out of the infraction of the bylaws. The protestors had a lot of issues and were quite popular, especially given that the banks have created a deep recession. I spoke with some of the protestors and found they each had pet points which were perfectly rational. The most intellectual thing I read about the protestors is they the real theme is that people the cause these problems should take responsibility. That's like corporate responsibility.
What IS their point exactly?
I understand why the Americans were protesting (I use past tense for a reason. When you are camping out somewhere and you still have not made a point, your protest failed), but why are Canadians, Dutchies etc etc protesting? I don't get it. The gap between the American 1% and the 99% is far larger than the gap between the Canadian 1% and the 99%.
I talked to about ten of them and they tended to have legitimate points. One person was concerned about the lack of democracy in Parliament, another about the rich paying their share, a third about the dwindling supply of non renewable resources and a forth about the level of consumerism in society. Of course the underlying complaint is the management of the banks.
So these are are things that I think about, that we all think about and the extreme leftie sentiment was missing in my quick survey.
In particular the lack of democracy in the Parliament is an old chestnut. My personal opinion is the West is run by small elites with access to the Prime Minister and out side of that that you are out of luck. On line in The Economist is that guy that advised Cameroon but was tainted by the phone tapping scandals was tolerated because of the inner group he's the only one that had street smarts - cleaned from be a journalist. It's damn interesting The Economist's opinion is the inner circle maybe without anyone with street rapport.
All in all a pretty interesting phenomenon and a match for the tea partiers.
Ok, and that is enough reason to set up tents in a park?
How exactly do they want to change it? Change the system to a dictatorship? Communism?
What you say here has been around since the 60's, since the hippies. What is the reason for them to be a part of OWS?
I'm sorry, but these points are ALWAYS made by professional protesters (who mostly live on welfare...)
Lemmy @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:02 am
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
But the protests are in direct violation of city by-laws. They aren't legal. Could i come in and squat in your office to protest the fact i lost money on RIM shares?
That's why this is an interesting legal question. This is a situation where various laws conflict. It seems pretty clear to me that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms supersedes any municipal by-law. Our constitution is, after all, the supreme law of the land. And if you want to squat in my office, you're more than welcome. You can deal with the daily line-up of grade-grubbing undergrads.
Bruce_the_vii @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:06 am
Brenda
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
Gunnair @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:20 am
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
Brenda
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
How many voted? How many are trying to affect real political change at the grassroots level either by entering municipal, provincial, or federal politics?
How many opted, instead, to set up tents in a public park?
Yeah, that's effective.
Brenda @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:25 am
Gunnair Gunnair:
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
Brenda
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
How many voted? How many are trying to affect real political change at the grassroots level either by entering municipal, provincial, or federal politics?
How many opted, instead, to set up tents in a public park?
Yeah, that's effective.
EXACTLY!!
But hey, not agreeing with the protesters = looking down and ignoring it...
CDN_PATRIOT @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:29 am
Bruce_the_vii Bruce_the_vii:
Brenda
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
These are young Canadians protesting the way the country is run. It's good to see they are well focused if not exactly full of solutions. My opinion? Maybe a discussion could lead to fix one or two of the problems. Most of them need money. You keep backsliding and the country becomes a mess like the USA.
When I was much younger (just becoming voting age at the time) and had a beef with the current government, I researced which political party felt right for me, joined up at the local campaign ofice and became involved, and then voted. I didn't have a job at the time, but did I blame everyone else for that? No, it was my own responsibility to find employment and start pulling my weight.
Some of these 'protesters' have admitted to newspapers and/or other media outlets that they quit their jobs and have come from local areas, or across the province to protest. Who in their right mind does that? Sure, I felt like I deserved to earn more money and make it better for myself, so what did I do? I found an oppotunity two months ago to advance my career even further, and went somewhere where I can earn more money and worry less than I do already.
Compared to other countries right now, we have it pretty goo, and take it for granted far too easy. These people want change? Tell them to look in the mirror first before they look for a scapegoat. We all conrol our own destiny.
-J.
andyt @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:36 am
Brenda Brenda:
What's unfair about a CEO making $180k/yr?
That's the 1% here, according to Andy's link.
That's the 1% here, according to Andy's link.
Brenda logic strikes again. Take the least amount it takes to be a 1 percenter and then treat that as the average. The average 1 percenter income is 482k.
$1:
While In adjusted dollars, the median market income of Canadian earners as reported by Statistics Canada has decreased slightly over the years, from $31,778 in 1976 to $31,044 in 2008...Statistics Canada numbers show that the share of income received by the top one percent of Canadian earners increased from 7.4 percent in 1982 to 12.3 percent in 2007. That number has since declined due to the recession, so that in 2009, the top one percent of tax filers earned 10.9 percent of all the income in Canada.
Read it on Global News: Global News | Study shows that Canadian rich are getting richer
Read it on Global News: Global News | Study shows that Canadian rich are getting richer
Read it on Global News: Global News | Study shows that Canadian rich are getting richer
From those radical pinkos at the Conference Board of Canada:
$1:
After improving to a “B” grade in the mid-1990s, Canada’s grade once again dropped to a “C” in the most recent decade. Canada is the only peer country whose relative grade dropped between the mid-1990s and the mid-2000s, owing to its significant increase in income inequality (the second-largest of all the peer countries). Finland had the largest increase, but income inequality there is still much lower than in most peer countries and so retains its “A.”
Denmark, Finland, and Sweden have consistently been the leaders on this indicator, scoring “A” grades for each decade. The U.S. and Italy have been consistent “D” performers.
Denmark, Finland, and Sweden have consistently been the leaders on this indicator, scoring “A” grades for each decade. The U.S. and Italy have been consistent “D” performers.
$1:
Is there other evidence for growing income inequality in Canada?
Statistics Canada recently released data on earnings and income from the 2006 Census revealing an increase in income inequality.3 Based on the median earnings of full-time, full-year earners between 1980 and 2005, the data show:
earnings increased by 16.4 per cent for those in the top income group
earnings stagnated for those in the middle income group
earnings fell by 20.6 per cent for those in the bottom group
A similar pattern exists when the more recent period (2000—2005) is isolated:
earnings increased by 6.2 per cent for the top group
earnings increased by 2.4 per cent for the middle group
earnings fell by 3.1 per cent for the bottom income group
Statistics Canada recently released data on earnings and income from the 2006 Census revealing an increase in income inequality.3 Based on the median earnings of full-time, full-year earners between 1980 and 2005, the data show:
earnings increased by 16.4 per cent for those in the top income group
earnings stagnated for those in the middle income group
earnings fell by 20.6 per cent for those in the bottom group
A similar pattern exists when the more recent period (2000—2005) is isolated:
earnings increased by 6.2 per cent for the top group
earnings increased by 2.4 per cent for the middle group
earnings fell by 3.1 per cent for the bottom income group
http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/details/society/income-inequality.aspx#improved
Brenda @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:40 am
andyt andyt:
Brenda Brenda:
What's unfair about a CEO making $180k/yr?
That's the 1% here, according to Andy's link.
That's the 1% here, according to Andy's link.
Brenda logic strikes again. Take the least amount it takes to be a 1 percenter and then treat that as the average. The average 1 percenter income is 482k.
I didn't take ANYTHING as an average. When I first bitched about the income difference between the 99% and the 1%, YOU were the one giving me a link saying the 1% started at $180k.
Seriously Andy?
EyeBrock @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:42 am
Money for nothing and yer chicks for free.
andyt @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:45 am
Yes, the top 1 percent start at 180k. What do you think the bottom 1 percent of earners start at? Doubt you'll find that figure anywhere, but maybe 18K?
You're making it out like there's no problem in Canada. There is. It's less than in the US, and we didn't need to bail out our banks, but we still have high unemployment that looks like it's going higher. We still have only a C grade on inequality. So, are you doing one of those "it's better here than in Afghanistan to quit yer bitching" numbers? At what point in your mind do people in Canada have a right to complain?
EyeBrock @ Sun Nov 20, 2011 9:52 am
We will always have a right to complain. That's freedom of speech.
The issue is that these OWS copy-cats don't have a real foundation to their complaining and lack credibility with anyone except those on the outer fringes of the mainstream.
Really, these protesters are just another 1%. That's about the total of the population that supports them and would rather be in a tent than vote.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 11 Next