jacee

I agree, of course, that the children were innocents, though what they are, have become, monsters or not, must be assessed for danger to public safety.But WE put our soldiers in a war against children. Did we ask first whether that was the case? There are no winners here.

But Canada’s tax and transfer system is not reducing income inequality as much as it did prior to 1994. ... Between 1976 and 1994, the effect of the tax and transfer system was to increasingly reduce income inequality. Since 1994, however, the trend has reversed. In effect, while the tax and transfer system still plays an important role in reducing income inequality, the redistributive effect of the tax and transfer system has grown weaker since 1994. http://www.conferenceboard.ca/hcp/hot-topics/caninequality.aspx#ftn3-ref And it's no secret why ... "cutbacks" ... now "austerity" ... but only for the poor and middle class as the rich get increasingly richer.

http://www.salon.com/2011/10/28/fighting_greedy_bankers_an_american_tradition/singleton/?mobile.html Fighting greedy bankers, an American tradition Long before OWS, celebrated patriots from Jefferson to Lincoln battled powerful corrupting financiers.

Nothing "meek" about Ghandi ... nor the OCCUPY protesters. It's their lack of 'meekness' that has the 1% kerfuffled. They're used to mouthless. peons sucking up to them. A bunch of students and single Moms speaking truth to corrupted power is quite a shock to their systems.

Sure and Blair NEVER lies to the public ... oh wait! G20 ... special powers ... officers removing badges ... never happened ... People aren't really serious about defending his excellency "RFF" are they? The guy's an idiot ... a bumbling court jester ... a fool ... a joke. And the joke's on his voters.

I'm increasingly underwhelmed by your comprehension of simple facts, blueblood.Who's 'forcing' anybody? They are free to work in a nonunion shop. If you don't want a group insurance policy, or pension plan, you are free to work in a shop that has none. If you choose to work in a union shop, and reap the benefits of collective bargaining, you share the cost. The predators who fill your brain with such crap aren't helping you. You're on their menu.

What?!?!BUT!BUT!BUT! ... He's ROBFUCKINGFORD!!!! :lol: Comic relief only.

WE are "the government" and "the government" gave unions NOTHING! WE have the constitutional right to freedom of association and assembly and collective negotiation with employers, and to collectively withdraw labour. Government intervention in free markets, free association seems fine with the predators like yourself. But listen to the whining when the government intervenes in your profits with taxation. You get to use the labour, resources, infrastructure and government for personal private profit, paying peanuts to nothing, for the public means afforded to you to make those profits? Are you nuts? Is it any wonder people are protesting private megaprofits of the spoiled rotten, violent, pathological predators. Stick a fork in 'em. They're DONE! THIS does NOT reflect the operation of a "free market": http://i.huffpost.com/gen/387253/INCOME-INEQUALITY.jpg It reveals the corruption of the "free market". And if you are just a middle class earner as you claim ... You lose. To make it easier ... percentage increases in income (US) since 1979 look like this for each 20% of the population, with the top group representing ONLY the richest 1%. Each $ represents a 10% increase in average after tax income. 20% $ 40% $$ 60% $$$ 80% $$$$ 99% $$$$$$ 100% $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you are one of the 99% and you think this is the "free market" operating as it should, then I suggest you are either too stupid or too lazy or too chicken to do anything about your own victimization. Fortunately many young people are neither stupid nor lazy nor frightened of wealth/power and they speak out for 99% of us against the 1% who control our governments, resources and livelihoods ... for their own predatory gain. There is no "free" market. There is no democracy. There is only control of everything for the benefit of the 1%.

Nonprofit organizations in Canada http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Non-profit_organizations_based_in_Canada http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Charities_based_in_Canada One thing that strikes me, looking at this list, is that this "social investing" policy will be a death knell for any orgs not aligned with the avarice of the wealthy. Example:Citizens for public justice To ensure that all Canadians are able to participate in the economy on an equal footing, CPJ has offered three policy recommendations for Budget 2012 that will support low income Canadians while boosting economic growth and reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions 1. Budget 2012 should cancel the corporate income tax cut scheduled to take place January 1, 2012 and instead invest the $3 billion in new and repaired affordable housing agenda 2. Budget 2012 should repeal the "Tough on crime" agenda and invest the $1.5 billion in savings in Aboriginal programs and an increase to the National Child Benefit Supplement. 3. Budget 2012 should cancel the oil and gas subsidies and invest the $1.4 billion in savings in green technologies and an eco-retrofit program for low income households. http://www.cpj.ca/en/content/building-sustainable-recovery If I was a suspicious person, I might think that "social investing" is just a new vehicle for wealthy predators to destroy any oppositional voices, and get mega tax breaks for doing so, INCREASING the income gap and wealth inequality. Surely not!

Thanks Army Guy. Your perspectives are important for us to hear.I think we can all agree with your statement I bolded above.

When I made the 9-1-1 call, I was concerned a told police were arriving soon. In another call, with the delay and said that I had to leave to g the "f-word" at some point as I expressed my f situation. After being attacked in my driveway, for saying the f-word. I never called anyone an expressing my frustration inappropriately. http://www.blogto.com/city/2011/10/rob_ford_issues_statement_about_controversial_911_call/ Ya we believe you ... afterall, you're robfuckingford!

Ottawa looks at rewriting rules on charitable giving BILL CURRY OTTAWA From Friday's Globe and Mail http://m.theglobeandmail.com/life/giving/giving-news/ottawa-looks-at-rewriting-rules-on-charitable-giving/article2216738/?service=mobile In addition to meeting with think tanks foundations and government officials, Ms. Finley spoke with Sir Ronald Cohen, chair of the bank-like social investment fund called Big Society Capital and David Hutchison, CEO of Social Finance UK which focuses on research and advice in the burgeoning field. The concept of social investing, as it is called, has a growing number of advocates worldwide. But its mplementation in the UK at a time of drastic cuts n government spending is also the subject of considerable controversy and confusion. considerable controversy and confusion At its core, Britain’s Big Society asks local volunteers and the private sector to provide some of the services that government used to finance, in areas including schools, libraries and hospitals. Mr Cameron says it will empower communities, but critics call it a public-relations effort to put a positive spin on deep cuts. The G20 ordered deep cuts, and here they come, to be replaced by the largesse of the private sector, currently declining as needs rise. Basically they're downloading much of current government funding of charities and nonprofits to private donations. Full employment and guaranteed annual income would be far cheaper and simpler for the private sector, I'm thinking.

"911 What's your emergency?" "You … bitches! Don't you f--king know? I'm Rob f--king Ford, the mayor of this city!" :lol: There's one for the history books! His excellency the Lord Mayor RobFuckingFord Rotflmao For a man with no sense of humour, he sure is funny! http://m.ctv.ca/topstories/20111027/toronto-mayor-rob-ford-911-accusations-111027.html#menu

Occupy isn't about ideology.That's an oversimplification and a distraction.It's about corporatism, pathological greed and power and its corruption of democracy AND corruption of the free market. Entitlement? How are 1% of Canadians 'entitled' to 40% of the wealth?

Cite link to Afghanistan.

Of course we're all to blame. The situation we're in is still the increasingly rapidly growing income gap, the suction of money from all of us to the 1%. And resumption of economic growth can't be assumed. Currently the only certainty is that the richest have a bigger share of the wealth than ever before, and growing more rapidly in Canada. Growing Gap December 1, 2010 TORONTO – Canada’s richest 1% are taking more of the gains from economic growth than ever before in recorded history, says a report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA). The Rise of Canada’s Richest 1% looks at income trends over the past 90 years and reveals the 246,000 privileged few who rank among the country’s richest 1% took almost a third (32%) of all growth in incomes between 1997 and 2007. “That's a bigger piece of the action than any other generation of rich Canadians has taken,” says Armine Yalnizyan, CCPA senior economist and the report’s author. “The last time Canada’s elite held so much of the nation’s income in their hands was in the 1920s. Even then, their incomes didn’t soar as fast as they are today. It’s a first in Canadian history and it underscores a dramatic reversal of long-term trends.” ... The study notes Canada’s tax system is playing a different role, too. In 1948, the top marginal tax rate was 80% but by 2009 it had been cut almost in half, to 42.9% “The last time the richest Canadians were taxed at this level was in the 1920s,” says Yalnizyan. “Combine record- breaking growth in incomes with historically low top tax rates, and the richest 1% is truly breaking new frontiers of income inequality.”

NEWSFLASH !!! The economy isn't getting better unless 'consumer confidence' returns. ONE REASON that won't happen is that the middle class has been decimated by contracting out, attacking unions, using offshore labour, usurious interest rates, joblessness ... ie, the persistent attacks of the wealthy predators. ANOTHER REASON 'consumer confidence' won't return is simple demographics- the population bulge that fuelled the orgy of stealing wealth from the people, the baby boomers, is retiring. They're not buying consumer goods anymore and won't be, and their kids can't because they can't get decent jobs! The 20th century is OVER and with it the era of CONSPICUOUS CONSUMPTION that fuelled the greed and acquisitions of the 1%. ANOTHER REASON 'consumer confidence' won't return is that the 99% movement is both giving voice to and educating people about the theft of wealth by the 1%. You have the order wrong: If people start buying, the economy will recover. If they don't, it won't. Do the Math: Unemployed, underemployed and pensioned people AREN'T BUYING!! Your contempt for the middle class - ie, THE CONSUMERS - is duly noted, and IS THE PROBLEM. Attacking unions is one example of the insanity of the greed of the 1%: Chewing off your own leg, killing the geese that laid the golden eggs, cutting off your nose to spite your face ... INSANE GREED KILLS THE GREEDY. And that's where we are today. The effects of the insane greed of the 1% and their bank and government lackies is exposed.

Knee-jerk 'solutions' are no answer. As anyone who knows anything about group problem-solving knows, defining the problem(s) is 99% of the process.I don't expect conservative minds to comprehend REAL democratic processes, focused as you always are on "somebody tell us what to do" ... and corporations and wealthy profiteers - with banks as their willing slaves - are all too willing to assume authority and tell you what to do, and narrow conservative minds dutifully follow-the-wealth. That's your problem. There will be no quick solutions, there will be no leaders speaking to you for us. We are the 99%, and we are winning the hearts and minds of the people. Get used to the uncertainty. Banks, corporations, politicians and the 1% know their own nefarious deeds. The uncertainty may be productive in refocusing them on their true clients - the 99%, instead of the 1% they usually pay fealty to. They know what they're doing that funnels money to the wealthy. Let THEM propose "solutions" .... for our consideration.

Oh ya ... and we will make our governments BOYCOTT CORPORATE SUBSIDIES AND TAX BREAKS FOR THE WEALTHIEST. Get used to it. The people are taking control, because that's where control belongs, and the wealthy and powerful and their politician lackeys have violated our trust and used their power nefariously to funnel our money into their pockets. NO MORE!

And the people are speaking. Listen! If you try to dismiss them, no changes will occur, nothing will change. Personally, I think a CREDIT BOYCOTT is in order and will make the usury community take notice.

Army Guy, you are twisting and contorting facts and law to justify anger at ONE child insurgent. Your feelings are understandable, but Omar cannot be held accountable for the actions of ALL child insurgents you encountered, and he is being held accountable for what he's accused of. END OF STORY!! I agree with you that his family is responsible for his indoctrination, training and presence as a child insurgent against allies of Canada. That's another issue and may be addressed when he returns to Canada. His mother is a poor stand-in for the real culprit, his father. Like Omar, she didn't act independently either, but his father is dead. You have some issues to work through, but focusing all your anger on the Khadrs isn't constructive. We need to focus some attention on why Canada sent soldiers like you into combat at all. Because the answers to that have nothing to do with soldiers or insurgents and everything to do with business and corporate interests. Specifically, a pipeline through Afghanistan/Pakistan to India (for selling Iraqi oil), and Afghanistan's inability to get a corner of the monopolized legitimate medical opiate business, despite price manipulation and shortage of medical supplies worldwide. As a soldier, youu don't ask these questions. You go and do what you're told, and you do not have to justify your actions or feelings beyond that. Making war on child insurgents is nasty business, but that is the situation you were in ... legitimately ... and WE put you there. As Canadians responsible for the decions of our governments, we ALL have to answer these questions before we go accusing anyone of "treason". Treason against whom? ... Corporate interests that aren't even Canadian? We are ALL accountable for your experiences ... and Omar Khadr's.

Agreed ... but even "complacent" people are getting active enough to let their fingers do the walking and order takeout for the protesters.

A lesson in flags ... Mohawk 'Warriors' (ie, all Mohawk men) wear a headdress with 3 feathers, reflected in their flag. The flag used by all Indigenous Peoples has one feather, signifying their Unity worldwide, and it is called the Unity flag. I'm not surprised at this development. Corporate demands have influenced and profited from the theft and desecration of Indigenous land since European occupation of Canada began. So have we all. As for removing protesters ... I think Mayors and politicians all over North America are paying close attention to what happened in Oakland.If you use violence against protesters, their support grows. There is no way to "remove" protesters without increasing their numbers, donation$ and strength. It's NOT going to happen. I guess the trick is for corporations, banks, wealthy profiteers and our governments NOT to piss people off in the first place. Democracy rules, and if governments cater to big business and money instead of the other 99% of the people, then democracy rules from the streets.

Couldn't hear him for his yelling. Want to give us a synopsis?

Oakland Calif, where police used tear gas and rubber bullets, leaving one protester in critical condition the Mayor in trouble with the public and protesters regrouping ... http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_19197518?nclick_check=1 Hundreds of protesters responded Wednesday night by packing the amphitheater at Frank Ogawa Plaza, where they voted to hold a citywide general strike on Nov. 2, when workers and students will be urged to stay home to show support of the Occupy movement. A grassy section of the plaza - the site of an elaborate encampment that police dismantled Tuesday morning - remained fenced off for cleaning, though not for long. By 7 p.m., the fence had been torn down as the lawn filled with protesters chanting, "Whose park? Our park!" Police officers kept their distance. http://www.baycitizen.org/occupy-movement/story/hunt-rubber-bullets-occupy-oakland/ Officer Elon Steers, a spokesman for the California Highway Patrol's Golden Gate Division, which includes the Bay Area called rubber projectiles "a routine, non-life-threatening tool" for dispersing crowds, but said that typically only specially trained officers, such as Special Weapons And Tactics team members, carry such munitions. Oakland requested 500 officers from at least 17 agencies to help with its response to the Occupy Oakland movement, beginning with the early-morning eviction on Tuesday of the group’s two-week-old encampment at Frank H. Ogawa Plaza. Of the agencies that helped with the eviction, at least five including the Solano County Sheriff’s Office and the University of California Police Department, did not go on to participate in the response to the protest later that night. At the press conference Wednesday, Jordan said the department had opened a "level one investigation" into the injury of Scott Olsen, and Iraq war veteran, who was critically wounded during a confrontation with police Tuesday night. In a YouTube video, which shows Olsen bleeding from the head, people carrying Olsen tell the cameraman that he was shot. Jordan said the investigation would involve OPD's internal affairs, major crimes and homicide departments; the Alameda County District Attorney's office; and the federal monitor that oversees the Oakland police department “It’s unfortunate that it happened. I wish it didn’t.