jacee

Democracy isn't just voting every 4 years. You can speak up about each issue too, email Harper and your MP and let them know that you don't agree with this crime bill. [email protected]'s important that progressives who voted for Harper let him know that you don't agree with everything he proposes. They at least count the emails for/against. Sometimes I despair that people who care enough to discuss issues at length here, still think that all they can do about it is vote once and a while. That's not our only democratic responsibility: We can and should let them know how we think they're doing along the way too, especially when we think they're going off the rails. We're the ones who have to live with the results.

I don't know ... maybe ... I know some grumpy old union workers/pensioners too ... But this crime bill bothers me a lot. I'm not in eyeball's 'natural governing ideology' corner either. The entrenchment of corporatism as virtual king has plagued administrations of both imo. Canada exists to facilitate the merchants of profit. Always has. Are they all grumpy punitive old men? I should get off the "men" kick, though it's most often true ... but ... These folks aren't simply grumpy old men.They are angry old men. Even Minister of Labour Lisa Raitt, when she muses about declaring the economy an essential service, sounds like an angry old man. The Prime Minister of Canada -- at the ripe old age of fifty-two -- is an angry old man. One gets the impression that he was an angry old man when he was in diapers.

Harper’s crime bill is government by angry old uncle I've read this article by Brian Topp over and over because it really struck a chord with me, seems to capture a thought that's been in my head for quite a while, and some truths that aren't unique to this era but pervasive through all eras perhaps. The context of this article, of course, is the so-called 'Omnibus crime bill' now in the House of Commons. However, I think the 'angry old uncle' syndrome is relevant to many other issues as well, certainly any question of war or police action or social justice of any kind: There's always the 'angry old uncle' perspective ... 'life is tough ... punishment is good ... people are all out to get me/everyone else ... it's a dog-eat-dog world so be a big dog ... get over it' .. etc etc etc. This is rule by angry old uncle. A character in many families not without his charm and soft side, who shouts his angry views for the hundredth time demanding firm measures and an end to many abuses, even if the facts all p oint the other way. Unfortunately, the angry old uncles are now in charge of the government of Canada ... We can laugh off our particular family 'angry old uncle', and avoid him as much as possible, but in the larger context of our society ... how do we ensure balance when they are in charge or very influential in laws, wars, responses to protests, etc etc etc?

Currently this is happening in Vancouver, not because of a lawsuit but because of the city applying for an injunction.The constitutional battle will be quite interesting. It is also possible that there could be class action lawsuits by evicted protesters. Because of a precedent set a few years ago, people can now sue for damage$ resulting from violations of constitutional rights as well. This makes it a whole new era for the 'power of the people'.

Omigod ... I LOVE that! Do it to HARPER!!! Do it to HARPER!!! I don't believe, however, that 'Anonymous' is an organization at all. I think they're just independent hackers who choose to identify themselves as 'Anonymous'.

As rallies continued, the report from the bipartisan Congressional Budget Office ndicated the nation's highest earners saw their household income almost triple in the years between 1979 and 2007 After tax income increased by 275% for the wealthiest 1% of Americans but by just 18% for the poorest 20%, the report said. In addition, the report revealed that in 2005- 2007, the years immediately preceding the financial crisis, the top 20% of the population earned more after-tax income than the entire bottom 80%. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15469096 I think those who began their careers 15-20 years ago or more really can't assume that their experiences are relevant to those starting out today. The ballooning inequality of today makes it a very different world for those starting out. Parents finances are squeezed as expected raises and promotions evaporated or they were 'downsized'. Students are bearing the full cost of education, jobs are scarce as those previously done by students are held by laid off/downsized older workers. With massive educational debt and limited employment opportunities, today's graduates aren't becoming 'consumers' upon graduation so the impact on the economy is apparent in the lack of 'recovery' of 'consumer confidence' in the market. The 1% and their 'supporters' who use their power and influence to widen and entrench income inequality and who dismiss, denigrate and destroy the middle and working class ... are coming face to face with the results of their actions: The consumers aren't consuming. Economic recovery isn't happening. And what trust their was in corporate, banking and political classes is forever destroyed. This is not a blip: it's a forever changed awareness of the predatory nature of 'the ruling classes'. If 'the ruling classes' can thrive without professionals, workers, small business and consumers, then they're immune to the changes ... But I doubt that.

Check out the picture ... Despite his fears for his own safety from the SCARY protesters ... DEREK GOES DOWNTOWN!! I sure hope he doesn't have to deal with THE SCARY BARREL FIRE!! a violent confrontation between police and protesters over a barrel fire ... http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/cause-of-death-announced-in-occupy-vancouver-fatality/article2234871/?utm_medium=Feeds%3A%20RSS%2FAtom&utm_source=Home&utm_content=2234871&service=mobile Are the wealthy so afraid/anxious/panicked that a barrel fire for warmth causes them to unleash the (police) dogs on the poor? Could we have a little sanity here?

... and Nero keeps fiddling while Rome burns! Hilarious, Shady! Thanks for that laugh ... Democracy is corrupted beyond recognition and 99% of us are held ransom and drowning in debt that benefits the wealthiest and most corrupt/powerful ... but we should stop protesting because ... the rich can't eat their lunch in the park! I guess that about says it all!

Ya, it's all so simple ... wealth begets wealth and gouges the rest of us for more. Income-wise, 11,500 Canadian families doubled their high incomes due to deregulation and tax cuts of the late 20th century, while the rest of us saw virtually no income growth in the same period. In other words ... a rising tide floats only the boats of the wealthiest, because corrupted politicians tied the rest of us to the docks. Some have capsized and we're all sinking as the wealthiest sail away. There's no 'trickle down', but there's a flood of money going up. The wealthiest have had their jollies imposing financial hardship on the rest of us for 3 decades and it's time to stop the bleeding, and stop the corrupt biasing of policy to benefit the wealthiest. It's a unique moment in Canadian history, with a majority PM intent upon expanding and deepening the influence of the wealthy, at a time when 99% of the people are realizing that they've been taken. Sparks will fly, for sure! I think we've heard enough of the 'tightening our belts' rhetoric, bb. It is just a ploy to flow more of our money into the pockets of the wealthiest. And every one of us, poor, middle class, wealthy, are just targets for the greed of the wealthiEST.

Oh ... this is the Toronto thread and the news is ... OccupyTO has moved ... To the lawn of the provincial legislature that doesn't belong to Rob Ford, and is only used during protests. "We decided that we have definitely outgrown St. James Park. We have far too many people there, it's too popular. We have tourists coming in all the time and we need more space," he said." http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2011/11/12/toronto-occupy-queens-park.html Oops ... I guess I spoke too soon ... or not ... it's under discussion ... or something ... and the police seem to be quite courteous and helpful ... When police arrived at the camp earlier Saturday, it appeared as if they would let protesters stay. “We did not just order them to leave,” said Const. Geoff Henderson. The issues here are “very sensitive” and will be discussed with our superiors and Queen’s Park, he said. There was some confusion for the protesters over who owns the area of the park they were occupying — the city o the province. The front lawn south of the legislature is provincial land — but the park north of the building, where they were set up, is city property. ... Saturday, a YouTube video claiming be the work of the hacking group “Anoymous” threatened a cyber attack on the City of Toronto and Mayor Ford if the occupation is“interrupted.” “You have said by next week, the occupiers shall be removed. And we say be next week if you do not change your mind, you shall be removed from the Internet. We have already planned for this,” says a computer-generated voice, addressing the city and the mayor. It’s not clear who posted the video. At St. James Park, the threat of eviction is one of the subjects under discussion in a “working group.” Only two of the 20 participants are in favour of an all out move to another park but the idea of a “strategic spread,” to Queen’s Park was well received. Numerous attributes made Queen’s Park attractive to protesters. It has a potentially sympathetic university population nearby, and plenty of space for a mobile kitchen, port-a-potties and even a Frisbee playing area. There are fewer businesses and residences that would be disturbed — a concern that stems from recent complaints by residents and business owners who say the St. James Park protest is hurting sales and making the area unpleasant. “It’s time to expand,” said Paul, a volunteer at the Info Centre who declined to give his last name. St. James Park — home to about 300 tents — doesn’t have the space to accommodate the growing movement, he said. http://www.thestar.com/iphone/article/1086066--attempt-to-spread-occupy-protest-to-queen-s-park-fails

Depends what you're talking about ... The hockey enforcers had booze and sleeping pill parties to pass out, because they couldn't sleep otherwise. Injured players and other injured workers, car accident victims, etc etc, get prescribed and hooked on oxycontins (legal heroin) and some graduate to the street, and some are at the office or at home doing what druggies and drinkers do, maybe your neighbours. I wouldn't know how to define it. For every one that's identified there could be 5 or 105 more, dysfunctional but in nice houses and neighbourhoods so not identified except by their families/colleagues ... But ... "1 in 10 Canadians 15 years of age and over report symptoms consistent with alcohol or illicit drug dependence." http://www.camh.net/news_events/key_camh_facts_for_media/addictionmentalhealthstatistics.html

Maybe I'll put it in my signature. I think people are trying to figure out where they stand, income-wise. It's a natural curiosity. ^kve been looking but statscan just hasn't broken down income finely enough to see what the income cutoff is for the top 1%, only in quintiles (20% groupings), and the top 20% is $153,000 as you said, which isn't very helpful. Ya think someone doesn't want us to know? http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2007109/t/4168848-eng.htm This is the best I can do but it's 2004 data. It says the top 1% started at $181k in 2004, The really striking thing about this data, though, is the modest income gains of all groups, even the low end of the 1%'rs compared to the doubling of incomes of the top .1% (to $650k) and .01% (to $2.8m) between 1982 and 2004. The deregulation and tax cuts of the 80's and 90's resulted in income stagnation for 75% of Canadians, and only modest gains for the next 24.9% of us, while the top .1 and particularly the top .01% made out like bandits. No, the Occupiers are not making it up: We are virtually all getting taken by about 1000 of the very highest income Canadians. And that's before Harper. And wealth and income are not the same, but both of interest. There's a smaller subset that wields the power of wealth and pays the high incomes perhaps?

Statscan does provide household income too.However judging who is the 1% is better defined by WEALTH, not income, because it's the wealthiest people who buy politicians and have the laws, regulations and policies written to suit them, appointments made to suit them, banks and the stock market at their command, etc. It's about (corrupt) power, not just high income, and it's persistent wealth that wields that kind of power. An athlete or actor, no matter what their income, doesn't have that kind of power. Wealth of 'families' http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/11206/4096770-eng.htm

Ah yes ... the dichotomous black and white thinking ... Are you a hockey fan bb? I neglected to include another population vulnerable to addiction ... pro athletes ... especially, according to a cbc show today, those known as "enforcers". According to some of them, they don't like the job of fighting and it often leads to addictions. Do you have any understanding of mental illness bb - like the fact that it isn't something a person can control? That it affects their ability to think clearly and may result in bad 'choices' that they can't control, rather like the voices in their heads that they can't control either? Addictions and the factors that underlie them may not be something many of us have experienced, but it is still possible to understand it. It is still true that only the addict can choose to get clean, and it's a very difficult thing to do, harder work than most of us (including you) have ever done. It isn't as simple as good or bad, choices or otherwise. Life seldom is that simple and certainly people aren't. And it definitely isn't as simple as 'rich people are good and deserve everything they can take, and poor people are bad' and deserve nothing except to die in the streets.

Really?Who do you speak for olp? I understand the disappointment some feel but it seems not constructive to me to throw vengeful statements around. What happened is just democracy in action. I realize democracy is frustrating to business/industry autocrats, but at some point they have to get accustomed to it. If TransCanada had paid attention to people's concerns earlier in the game and presented alternative routes up front, maybe they'd be proceeding now. They can buy the politicians but not the people.

The Conservative Party and its fundraising arm on Thursday pleaded guilty to lesser charges of breaching campaign spending limits and failing to report all expenses. http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/conservative-senators-avoid-charges-in-elections-canada-plea-deal/article2232120/?service=mobile GUILTY of CRIMES Soft on their OWN crimes and those of the 1%'rs, Only TOUGH on the crimes of the poor.

So I guess Harper's only tough on SOME crime ... and it's not the 'white collar' kind!

People who have overcome those things, are entitled to that opinion.People who haven't faced such challenges can count their blessings.

Rob Ford is moving and talking very carefully, which is NOT his normal style AT ALL. He knows he's up against something that has more support than he has. I expect Chief Bill Blair will be cautious too, since he and his officers' reputation is in the toilet after their behaviour at the G20 last year. I understand the protesters have been offered a couple of other sites. If they're private property, the city won't have as much say.

ooooo ouchie!

That's because they're natural tobacco, smooth and without the abrupt 'hit' from commercial cigs. My understanding is that one of the MANY additives put in commercial cigs actually increases the uptake of nicotine into your body beyond the nicotine content listed on the package, to increase addiction. Another example of the 'free market' (not) regulating itself. And btw ... smokers do NOT have higher health costs over their lifetimes, because they die younger. And if anyone thinks we should outlaw smoking because of health effects, I would suggest that we should also outlaw juicy marbled steaks, refined starches and sugar, etc etc.

Blueblood, you obviously have no idea about the traumas of people's lives that leave them vulnerable to drug addiction. I will just mention a few:1) Incest and other chronic abuse 2) Combat 3) Chronic pain "It's their fault" is a disgustingly uninformed perspective. While it is true that only the addict can change him/her self, the circumstances that made them vulnerable to addiction are usually not in their control. I'd really like to blow up that pedestal you put yourself on, looking down your nose at the rest of us. You obviously don't know jackshit about humanity as it seems to have bypassed you entirely.

I believe you made the comment earlier that all the regulatory red tape makes it difficult for honest people to do business. I agree, but without screening and regulation, how do we know they're honest? It isn't good enough to say "the market will correct itself" if consumers or workers have to be injured, poisoned and possibly die for that correction to happen. Some people will always cut corners for extra profit leaving workers and consumers vulnerable. We KNOW that. People who have done good and honest work in the past may become lax over time without oversight. Regulatory red tape IS the market correcting itself. If there weren't problems, it wouldn't have evolved that way. However, if regulations are written to favour some companies over others as political payoffs or patronage, I believe you'd have virtually unanimous support in blowing that apart! There is another route that can help, the one taken by most professions, self-regulation: Doctors, lawyers, teachers, psychologists and many other professions set standards for practice, and have regulatory bodies that the public/consumers can access when they have complaints. Practitioners can be and are suspended, sent for retraining, decertified, etc. To my knowledge, business, industry, banking, etc. don't operate this way. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) It seems to me that in the private sector, PROFIT is king and whatever you can do to get there is considered fair game. I recall in an earlier discussion about the subprime mortgages/hedge fund issue I asked a question about "what are the standards?" The person who responded said "There were no standards (for the loans). Everybody got one." My question, however, was actually about 'What are the professional standards for traders?" but it was clear to me that there are none except skirting the line of the law as closely as possible, and going over the line without getting caught. We entrust the financial and business communities with our economy, jobs, our very existence, and yet they have no internal, professional standards? Something wrong there! As examples ... Certified General Accountants have standards ... lots of them ... but I can find no information about a regulatory body or a route for public complaints ... http://www.cga-canada.org/en-ca/Standards/ProfessionalAndPracticeStandards/SMP/Pages/ca_support_SMPs.aspx Also, there are industry designations for Corporate Social Responsibility, but all a company has to do is post it on their website and then use it as PR for getting contracts: There is absolutely no oversight, nothing to prevent them from listing their company on the TSX, nothing to prevent them from violating those 'standards'. Friday, March 25, 2011 Corporate Social Responsibility Suppressed Report Confirms International Violations by Canadian Mining Companies News release: A report obtained by MiningWatch Canada reveals that Canadian mining companies are implicated in four times as many violations of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as mining companies from other countries. The report was commissioned by the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) in 2009 but was never released to the public. ... Canadian companies are more likely to be engaged in community conflict, environmental and unethical behaviour...” Importantly, the report also found that the large majority of the Canadian mining companies involved in such violations have CSR policies in place.“

It's natural that street people are drawn to the protest camp. That doesn't make the protesters "druggies".

That didn't happen Derek.