jacee

The rights exist within the cultures and on the traditional lands.You really can't separate them. And you can't separate them from the land either.

The environment that sustains human life is more critical than the profits of the few.That's not all I have to say about that ... and MANY agree ... too many to ignore. You do understand that without trees there is no oxygen for us to breathe? Despite popular myth, God didn't magically create the earth already for human habitation ... trees made it possible for humans to exist and evolve. And right now we have a great challenge to our existence, one created by the greed of the few. I believe humans are up to the challenge, because there are many more of us who see through the destruction of greed than are mired in it. You can't breathe money, can't eat it, can't take it with you when you die. It's the environment that needs long term protection. The economy serves the needs of the people, not the reverse, and not the greed of the 1%.

And we're not likely to wait that long are we?Ya peasants are uppity about keeping our heads these days. Something called "democracy" ...

Well yes, the oil and logging and mineral extraction industries would hope those pesky Aboriginal rights would just disappear, and the governments, Lib and Con, are doing everything they can to oblige. It's still genocide, still illegal, still just the greed culture pulling the strings. Now talking about a culture that needs to disappear ... the greed culture is the most dangerous element of 'modern society'.

So you could promote your view that Indigenous cultures and communities should just disappear into the Canadian 'mosaic'. Time to end the destruction of Indigenous cultures.

Oh I think he "understands". I guess he thinks he's 'protected' by the rich and powerful cabal.

Stay on top of environmental delinquents, Ottawa told. And in most cases, the auditors found little or no evidence Transport Canada had checked that the problems had been fixed. “Transport Canada does not know the extent to which organizations transporting dangerous goods are complying with regulations,” the audit says. The commissioner noted these problems are not new. An internal audit done more than five years ago flagged these same concerns. The National Energy Board regulates oil and gas that flow through pipelines. Mr. Vaughan’s team ooked at 56 compliance reports from 2007 to 2010 and found little follow-up. Nearly two-thirds of the agency’s files flagged violations. But inspectors only checked up on 7 per cent of those cases to see if corrective action had been taken. Mhmm ... and we're supposed to believe that new pipelines to the west coast, and shipping oil will be "safe"? I don't think so.

I guess you missed the point:"The occupiers said their action is “a call to stand in solidarity with the longshoremen of Longview, Wash., who are courageously fighting union-busting activities by the grain company EGT."

Tear gas, pepper spray, jail ...Next?

I get the feeling that this thread was started and continues to spread hatred and counsel genocide - extinction - of Indigenous Nations and cultures of Canada. That's a criminal offence. The Supreme Court rulings on Aboriginal rights are the law, increasingly so. The populations on reserves are growing, as are the populations in towns and cities. That happens when we stop killing Indigenous children in residential schools.

About 100 Occupy Vancouver protestors tied up traffic and Port Metro Vancouver as part of its ongoing crusade against inequality. ts ongoing crusade against inequality. The occupiers said their action is “a call to stand in solidarity with the longshoremen of Longview, Wash., who are courageously fighting union-busting activities by the grain company EGT. http://www.theprovince.com/touch/story.html?id=5844822 Police say "multiple" people have been arrested after dozens of protesters blocked an entrance to a Port of Seattle facility Police cleared a road near the entrance to Terminal 18 after about 100 Occupy Seattle protesters stopped traffic for about 20 minutes Monday afternoon. But a smaller group remained in front of the terminal, effectively keeping traffic from entering or leaving. The protest snarled nearby traffic during the evening commute and caused several bus routes to be rerouted or delayed. Protesters in Bellingham blocked railroad tracks Longshoremen at the Longview, Wash., port went home for the day, essentially shutting down the terminal after Occupy Wall Street demonstrators began protesting. International Longshore & Warehouse Union spokeswoman Jennifer Sargent says the union sent their workers home out of concerns for their"health and safety." Port of Longview spokesman Ashley Helenberg says the decision to shut down operations was made by both the port and the union. She says about 20 shifts were affected. The port had one vessel to work on Monday Sargent says that if union workers participated in the Occupy protest, they did so as individuals, not as part of the union. ILWU leaders have said they don't support Occupy's protest. Vancouver, B.C., and elsewhere Police say Occupy Wall Street demonstrators briefly blocked two gates at Port Metro Vancouver near downtown Vancouver, British Columbia. The Canadian Press reported demonstrators held up a large banner proclaiming solidarity with Longshore union members involved in a dispute at the Port of Longview, Washington. http://www.kplu.org/post/update-arrests-occupy-protesters-target-seattle-port-longview-longshoremen-go-home In many cities, protesters targeted terminals operated by SSA Marine, a shipping company that is locked in a labor dispute with some port truckers, and is partly owned by Wall Street investment bank Goldman Sachs. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-occupy-ports-20111213,0,67827.story

I think we'd better put them into third party management.

Really? How so? Thanks, no. I have no use for your dangerous genetically modified corn products. I'm proposing that it isn't your money until you've paid a fairer share of taxes to support those who have no jobs and need retraining, are disabled, elderly, illiterate, etc. I'm proposing that it's not our job to "improve your financial situation. I'm proposing that society's economic predators be treated as the criminals they are. A human conscience cannot be manufactured. Those born without one are the destroyers of human society and a danger to the public. Extreme wealth accumulation, beyond assets required to do business, should be considered proceeds of crime and be confiscated, first targeting all monies stashed UNTAXED in offshore tax havens.

7a.m.: Police break down their line at berths 30-32 In a surprising move, police regroup and break down their line at berths 30- 32, cheers erupt from the marching crowd. Good. Police aren't going to go ballistic. A lesson learned: Politicians must resist the 'orders' of the 1% to criminalize dissent. Now the real work can start. The most important weapons we have are truth and peace.

Blueblood is in favour of anything that makes him money but has great contempt for those who make that possible. Money is sacred. People are dispensable. That's the creed of the 1% who have forgotten that the wellbeing of humanity is the purpose and money is just a tool. Extreme inequality in the distribution of means is a perversion of purpose.

Schools already have anti-bullying rules and programs. I think the purpose of the legislation is to inform the broader public about what bullying looks like, and to make adults think about their own behaviour that might be bullying, or might be teaching their child to bully - eg prejudices against gays or other groups that might encourage bullying. I think MP's and MPP's need to learn this lesson too. Our legislatures are full of bullying behaviour. Lots of reasons beyond schools and gays that this legislation is a really good idea.

That's a pretty flimsy argument.You don't get or keep credit without a job. End of your story. The contempt of the 1% for the rest of us will be their undoing.

They are on Ontario Disability Support Program, not OW.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_Twenty-nine_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms "Section 29 is not the source of these rights but instead reaffirms the pre-existing special rights belonging to Section 29 is not the source of these rights but nstead reaffirms the pre-existing special rights belonging to Roman Catholics and Protestants, despite despite freedom of religion and religious equality under sections 2 and 15 of the Charter. Such rights may include financial support from the provincia governments."

It will never happen because of Constitutional guarantees at the time of Confederation. Research it.

Well, yes, you "would think" that, as you would ascribe your own ill intent to others.Those who lie, cheat, steal or victimize others suspect others of lying., cheating stealing and victimizing. Those who understand the interdependence of humanity do none of the above. Our current social problem is that we've allowed the liars, cheaters, thieves and predators to run the economy. We have to change that. Thanks for demonstrating the problem so clearly.

We've been subjected to arguments on this forum that any attempts to tax the wealthiest will result in 'capital flight' where they take their money and go offshore instead of investing in Canadian businesses and creating jobs. This article defeats those arguments as it shows that that extremes in wealth of a few do NOTHING for the economy and simply make the rich richer at the expense of the rest of us. Taking money OUT of the economy, out of circulation, enriches the rich and the banks while impoverishing the public coffers and the people. Inequality has grown exponentially as a result of deregulation, 'free' market excess and corporate welfare (tax cuts and subsidies). But there is no benefit to the economy nor to the vast majority of the people: It's a scam that only makes the rich richer. And as truth becomes widely known, the powers that be are busy criminalizing dissent (ie, truth). The US now labels OCCUPY protesters as "terrorists" and is mobilizing 20,000 soldiers to suppress dissent. Protesters can be detained without reason and incarcerated without charges indefinitely. http://blog.alexanderhiggins.com/2011/12/06/analyst-mobilizing-army-occupy-economy-deteriorates-80971/ Wait for it ... the worst is true ... the 1% will make war on the people.

The real problem, argues Prof. Cowen (and I agree), lies with the elites of the financial class who’ve grabbed a gargantuan share of the spoils by means of fancy financial engineering that creates no value, and sometimes destroys it on a massive scale. Nobody knows how to keep them from wrecking the system every so often. The financial lobby is the biggest and most powerful nterest group on Earth. Their ability to rig the system so as to enrich themselves has overwhelmed the ability of the politicians and the regulators to keep them in check. As Prof. Meyer puts it, “People don’t mind losing, but they don’t ike being cheated.” And that’s the inequality worth worrying about . http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/margaret-wente/the-poor-are-doing-better-than-you-think/article2266245/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Home&utm_content=2266245&service=mobile

More unequal, less complacent Suddenly, Canadians are listening. Last week, when the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) issued a stark report, Growing Unequal, the message hit home. The fact that Canada was singled out as one of the countries in which the rich were most rapidly increasing their share of income made headlines, filled the airwaves and got people talking. ... The complacent majority shrugged. They weren’t hurting. They couldn’t see themselves being jobless, their savings gone, their prospects bleak. What changed? The recession, first of all. It stripped people of certainty that they were beyond the reach of adversity. The anemic recovery, second. It didn’t bring back the solid jobs and reliable paycheques of the pre-recession era. And finally, the Occupy movement. It crystallized all the changes people were experiencing: their debts were mounting, their standard of living was slipping, their well-educated kids couldn’t find work, their friends and relatives were losing their jobs, and their political leaders were calling for more belt tightening — I'm glad if Canadians are paying more attention. We have issues here that may be slightly different than the US, with a government going the wrong direction.

Taxing the 1%: Why the top tax rate could be over 80% Because it makes no difference to economic growth The top 1% of US earners now command a far higher share of the country's income than they did 40 years ago. This column looks at 18 OECD countries and disputes the claim that low taxes on the rich raise productivity and economic growth. It says the optimal top tax rate could be over 80% and no one but the mega rich would lose out. ... ... there is no correlation between cuts in top tax rates and average annual real GDP-per-capita growth since the 1970s. For example, countries that made large cuts in top tax rates such as the United Kingdom or the United States have not grown significantly faster than countries that did not, such as Germany or Denmark. Hence, a substantial fraction of the response of pre-tax top incomes to top tax rates documented in Figure 1 may be due to increased rent- seeking at the top rather than increased productive effort. Naturally, cross-country comparisons are bound to be fragile, and the exact results vary with the specification years, and countries. But by and large, the bottom line is that rich countries have all grown at roughly the same rate over the past 30 years – in spite of huge variations in tax policies. Using our model and mid-range parameter values where the response of top earners to top tax rate cuts is due in part to increased rent-seeking behaviour and in part to increased productive work, we find that the top tax rate could potentially be set as high as 83% – as opposed to 57% in the pure supply-side model. Up until the 1970s, policymakers and public opinion probably considered – rightly or wrongly – that at the very top of the income ladder, pay increases reflected mostly greed or other socially wasteful activities rather than productive work effort. This is why they were able to set marginal tax rates as high as 80% in the US and the UK. The Reagan/Thatcher revolution has succeeded in making such top tax rate levels unthinkable since then. But after decades of increasing income concentration that has brought about mediocre growth since the 1970s and a Great Recession triggered by financial sector excesses, a rethinking of the Reagan and Thatcher revolutions is perhaps underway. atcher revolutions is perhaps underway The United Kingdom has increased its top income tax rate from 40% to 50% in 2010 in part to curb top pay excesses. In the United States, the Occupy Wall Street movement and its famous "We are the 99%" slogan also reflects the view that the top 1% may have gained at the expense of the 99%. In the end, the future of top tax rates depends on the public's beliefs ... Hmmm ... food for thought. But I know what the public believes ...