jacee

44% support the protest. That's more support than most of our governments have. I expect they can reorganize the site to the satisfaction of any concerns, as other camps have to do. Some cities are providing hydro and water and garbage pickup helps too. Nobody's going to tell the police to use force to remove them, (Scott Olsen still can't talk, and US veterans are organizing peacekeeping forces for protesters. The significance of this is not lost on Canadian politicians.) and police have discretion too. And they're perhaps more inclined to exercise that discretion in Canada.

You didn't even read the link you posted ...The city said it was considering how to clear the space, but the use of force did not appear to be among the options being weighed. "We don't want to turn them into martyrs," said city spokesman Jacques Perron. You see? You are totally out to lunch with your yearning for violence against these young people Derek. Obviously they have you very worried ... and that's a good thing !!!

You've been cheering for that from the beginning. Do you care about the issues at all, or just love to see young people attacked? You've failed to grasp that violent police attacks on peaceful protesters causes public outrage and strengthens the movement. There is no logical or legal reason for Vancouver to force an end to the Occupy Vancouver camp, city staff told Vancouver council Tuesday. Instead, evidence has shown that cities that roust Occupy protesters out invariably FAIL because protesters simply return stronger than before, City Manager Penny Ballem said.. (Emphasis added)

Who would choose to live outside in tents with no facilities in Canada with winter approaching? The protesters obviously because they are committed to a purpose. But most of us wouldn't. For the urban homeless, however, the tent city is an improvement in lifestyle from wandering the streets until the shelters open. Makes you think ... Obviously the homeless are being attracted to the camps, and that's an issue the protesters will have to address. However, it also raises an issue that we need to think about if homeless people find a tent more attractive than their other options.

One thing I really like about the Occupy movement is that it reclaiming mental space. I’m thinking of the overt focus on the riches gained by the top 1%, and of naming and shaming capitalism. Two are one and the same, of course. It is in the top 1% that we find the capitalists – those who own large chunks of the economy as we know it – as well as the chief beneficiaries of capitalist enterprise – those who receive high incomes due to the proximity to the system’s core, including executives, bankers, lawyers and other professionals who command high incomes but may not have an ownership stake (though they probably do). capitalist enterprise – those who receive high incomes due to the proximity to the system’s core, including executives, bankers, lawyers and other professionals who command high incomes but may not have an ownership stake (though they probably do). ... A key point is that wealth is much more unequally distributed than income. ... It is striking that what we might think of as capitalism, the ownership of the private economy, is almost entirely locked up by the top 10%, who hold 82% of US financial wealth. ... So changes in the distribution of income are a must, and that includes measures that strengthen the hand of workers, like unionizing the low-wage service sector and living wage policies in the labour market along with progressive income taxes for the top earners and greater redistribution of those revenues into public services and income transfers (like a guaranteed income). But we need to go further and challenge the inequitable distribution of wealth itself by taxing financial wealth, or minimally the transfer of that wealth through inheritances, bequests and gifts. http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2011/10/20/wealth-and-income-in-the-top-1/ So there's a few ideas on how to change things, for Shady and others to chew on.

There's some information online in this report, but it's a pdf with no link so you'll have to google.TOP INCOMES IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA OVER THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2006/12/07/wealth-distribution-in-canada/ In terms of distribution, the report finds a worsening situation with regard to wealth inequality. By quintiles, the largest gains in net worth accrue to the top quintile (up 43% from 1999) and things scale down from there; the bottom quintile had a 70% decline in net worth. In the supplementary tables, it is notable that there are now over one million households with over a million dollars in net worth. These households, 8.2% of families, hold 46.5% of the total net worth. Overall, the top 20% had 69.2% of total net worth, while the bottom 20% had 2.4% and the bottom 60% had 10.8%.

The problem has been identified as a rapidly increasing accumulation of wealth by the richEST 1% of Canadians while the middle class is decimated by joblessness and debt.Suggestions of changes will come from everyone engaging in the conversations, because everyone has a perspective on the problem and the solutions If the protesters themselves propose solutions only from their own perspective, their ideas will just get shot down and ignored. Clearly the OCCUPY demonstrations will continue until those responsible for the transfer of wealth to the 1% enter the discussion of solutions with realistic ideas.

... these companies generated so many excess tax breaks that they reported negative taxes (often receiving outright tax rebate checks from the U.S. Treasury), totaling $21.8 billion. These companies’“negative tax rates” mean that they made more after taxes than before. $21.8b in tax refunds for already profitable corporations. Something wrong there!

-________

DEMOCRACY NOT CORPORATOCRACY!

It's a valid question, given current events: From previous post here ... some veterans were organizing to be "peacekeepers" and maintain "perimeter security." "As vets, I think it is our job to protect our community through teachings of nonviolence and defensive measures like how to protect yourself from unprovoked police attacks." NEW YORK — About 100 military veterans are joining the Occupy Wall Street protest by marching in uniform through Manhattan. The march began Wednesday at the Vietnam Veterans Plaza near Wall Street. The protesters planned to end at the Zuccotti Park encampment. Police separated them from the entrance of the New York Stock Exchange. The marchers are fired up by what they call brutality against a Marine veteran in Oakland, Calif., whose skull was fractured. In New York, Marine Sgt. Shamar Thomas went toe to toe with officers policing activists in Times Square recently. Veterans March For Occupy Wall Street — And It's Like Nothing You've Ever Seen Before

In-A-Gadda-Gaz-ebos, Baby :Liveblogging Tony Clement et al on G8 ... CBC.ca http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2011/11/in-a-gadda-gaz-ebo-baby-liveblogging-tony-clement-et-al-on-g8-legacy-fund-at-public-accounts.html

I'm very concerned about a comment on this vid that the police crackdown (in the US) last Tuesday was a direct result of adbusters making a 'demand'.The demand ... a 1% sales tax on Wall Street "is a real threat to Wall Street and therefore on Tuesday we get massive police repression coming down...". I ask again of any US posters or observers here ... How is that possible? Who gives orders to police? In Ontario we've been through a public inquiry into the death of Dudley George, an Aboriginal protester killed by an OPP sniper, where the main issue was whether the premier ordered use of violence to remove protesters, because politicians/government cannot interfere with police decision-making. It's an ongoing issue of course, and deserves more attention than just a passing reference that an action of adbusters can IMMEDIATELY translate into nation-wide police crackdown on protesters. Is that true? How does that happen? I would like to know whether politicians/government or the private sector/Wall Street can influence police decision-making in the US. Is that legal? Bush_Cheney? AmWo? Jbg? Any comment? If veterans become peacekeepers for the OCCUPY movement, the question becomes rather critical ... Will police still obey orders from 'Wall Street' if it means facing soldiers? Will the powers-that-be still assume that they can order the army in to clear protesters if necessary? Will the army and police still obey 'orders' from Wall Street? If the movement continues to gather strength and becomes a real threat to the predatory Wall Street 1% ... who will protect 'them' ??

Occupy Veterans Movement Growing Across U.S. Since Occupy Wall Street protests have broken out in cities across the U.S. and abroad, support has come from what might seem like an unlikely corner: war veterans. But two of the highest-profile protesters -- each from opposite ends of the country -- had served in wars. Last week, the world watched as bleeding, dazed 24-year-old Marine Scott Olsen was carried away by fellow protesters after he was struck in the head by an object apparently fired by an Oakland police officer. And before that, Marine Sgt. Shamar Thomas was captured on video confronting a group of New York police officers he said had been too rough with protesters Both Thomas and Olsen have become rallying figures in the Occupy Wall Street movement -- not only among civilian protesters but among veterans whose participation in the protests has been growing, according to such veterans-turned- organizers as Paige Jenkins."For veterans especially, health care is paramount, yet is always on the table to be cut," Jenkins said in an interview with ABC News. "Vets in this movement don't want to fight anymore. We want to make peace and ive peaceably. We shouldn't have to fight for our benefits, and if vets are fighting for their benefits then it can't be any better for nonvets. "What do you think is going to happen in 2012 after everyone gets home from Iraq? No jobs, no benefits. This will not be a good scene," Jenkins continued. " "I imagine the suicide rate will climb, and sadly, I think that some people in this country don't feel any responsibility for that." Jenkins who served first in the U.S. Navy and then in the California National Guard, said that some veterans were organizing to be "peacekeepers" and maintain "perimeter security." "As vets, I think it is our job to protect our community through teachings of nonviolence and defensive measures like how to protect yourself from unprovoked police attacks," said Jenkins, who is currently studying military social work at the University of Southern California's Virtual Academic Center. This is a profound development ... veterans placing themselves in protection of protesting citizens and facing off with police ... !

Evidence has shown that cities that roust Occupy protesters out invariably fail because protesters simply return stronger than before, (Vancouver) City Manager Penny Ballem said.. Ballem and Deputy City Manager Sadhu Johnston said Occupy Vancouver has taken on a similar shape of the protests that have emerged in 1,700 cities around the world. Most of the cities are taking a “watch and wait” approach and are respecting peoples’ right to protest, Johnston said. Those cities that have tried to forcibly end the occupations, including Chicago, Melbourne and Oakland have all failed. “It appears that even going in and forcing a shutdown doesn’t end it. It is very grassroots and people come back in their own ways and keep doing it,” he said. _________________________

"widespread customer revolt" rocks!

Ahhhh ... so the riots begin.OCCUPY isn't smashing and grabbing with rapid expansion of the underground economy, but those elements of Vancouver and especially London riots, would be more likely under the scenario you describe.

Why do you say that, AG? Omar is certainly being held accountable.

OTTAWA — Canada will stop making voluntary payments to the United Nations cultural agency now that the Palestinian Authority has been accepted as a full member."We're just deeply concerned with the decision that UNESCO has taken," Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said Tuesday. Baird stops Ca nada's voluntary funding for UNESCO The Canadian Press Just friggin lovely. Clarification http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-wont-pony-up-any-extra-cash-for-unesco-baird-says/article2221537/?from=sec434&service=mobile Canada will continue funding UNESCO even though t doesn’t like the organization’s move to recognize a Palestinian state. But the Harper government is warning it won’t pony up more money to make up for a massive budget shortfall caused by the United States cutting off its funding to the UN Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization.

I agree with cybercoma on this: Making demands will be the end of the movement because those demands will enter the usual political process where they'll get watered down to serve the 1% while some sop will be 'negotiated' to 'satisfy' the protesters and get them to go home. They need to be right where they are, doing what they're doing to be a constant reminder to the 1% and politicians.

Very interesting.The interviewee seems certain that the demand from Adbusters fuelled police crackdowns last Tues. I'd like to know how that works. Who controls the police? He didn't even question it. It suggests to me that if some people can tell the police what to do, we'd all better start lobbying police. As for the 'demand' by Adbusters for a 1% tax on every stock trade ... it may make sense and may be championed by some politicians, but it didn't come from the Occupiers. I think these are examples of people trying to co-opt the movement and control it from within current political structures. The occupiers are avoiding making demands for that reason. They're raising awareness and no doubt hoping for such conversations about strategy to occur within current political structures, but they are intentionally not limiting themselves to specific strategies or demands: That's for politicians to fight about and win or lose.

I support peace between them, and any efforts that help achieve that.

Corporations are HEAVY users of taxpayer funded public infrastructure and should pay taxes accordingly, but they don't pay a fair share - ie, they don't pay all their costs of doing business in Canada.

It's not 'your money' until you pay the cost of doing business in Canada. If you need to buy trucks for your business, that's a cost built into your pricing. Likewise, the (eg) highways you need to drive them on have costs ... taxes. That's a business cost, and it's not 'your money' until you've paid ALL the costs.