Boges

No Shit. Got anymore insightful commentary on said issue?

I'm sure that'll traumatize them. Counting their money at the end of the day will probably cheer them up though. BTW if Brookfield demanding they be evicted would that be illegal?

So what's the definition of a reasonable rate? And who decides that? Your link doesn't specify. $30 for like 300 gigs/month might not be considered reasonable for Bell or Rogers.

Then I expect a court order preventing their impending eviction at midnight tonight. Why hasn't the London, Ontario eviction been struck down as unconstitutional?

Just heard on the radio they plan to have a party before they are evicted. They basically want the police to forcibly remove them. They likely will. Will their be a court order like in New York? Will there be public outcry? Will the Occupiers riot? I'll probably stay up to watch this on CityPanic24. It'll be very interesting and entertaining.

I'm curious if BubberMiley will comment on this issue since Small ISP providers allow people to download all their content pretty much for free. Bell and Rogers own those lines they should be able to charge what they want for access to those lines.

How does squatting in a public park make the 1% uncomfortable?

Really? Then why have no formal demands been made. There appears to be no end-game involved in these protests.

It does, but they want to find a way to do the same with Hydro. Electricity is cheaper than heating fuel anyway. I guess if this motion passes, people with shitteh baseboard heaters are SOL.

You'd think. But this protest isn't really about highlighting income equity anymore. It's about the protest. No one is really talking about any of the issues highlighted by the protesters anymore. I'd actually argue these Occupy protests are a digression from actually very important issues.

So it's only corrupt when you disagree with the rulings? Gotcha!

Well they've been evicted. Apparently they have a back-up plan that includes using a local church (those nasty Christians) Of course it really isn't a protest if you're on private property that you're welcome on. From the Star

That's not a court ruling saying the Occupation is lawful. It's an injunction allowing the protest to continue until issue is heard by a court of law.

Same Courts that ruled that Abortion and Gay Marriage are constitutional rights. I'm assuming you support court rulings then.

Has a court ruled on your opinion of this? If so please cite.

Interesting Article on this. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/occupy-wall-street-site-no-longer-open-for-tents-bloomberg/article2236466/ Which is kind of the point of this exercise. No one's free speech is being hampered by saying that you can't camp in a park. There's a court hearing that'll be heard today about this. I'm guessing by the end of today we'll have precedent on this issue. Which I welcome.

I'm always annoyed that polls of 1,000 people are an accurate reflection of the opinions of a nation of 31 billion.

Interesting development while I was sleeping. Occupy Wall Street was given the boot. Apparently they were squatting on private property owned by a Canadian company. So now the Occupy Toronto people are going to head offices of that company to protest. BTW in all evictions so far the police didn't stop the people from assembling in the park. They just said they couldn't pitch a tent and live there, which they are laws on the books regarding those issues. If this is a charter issue like people here are saying, they would have to convince a judge that camping out in these parks is protected by their charter rights. I'm not going to convince people here that believe it is, that it's not. But that's the issue at hand. Now a question. If protesters decide to camp at the head office of this private company. Would that be protected by their charter rights?

You can comment on Boardwalk Empires in this thread too if you like. I enjoy both programs.

Something. I think the Provincial government is massively bloated. They have a 19 billion deficit, so things will have to be cut. It'll be interesting to see how this debate shapes. Both the Right and Left of the house agree on this issue.

It means "Fixed that for you" If you noticed I changed your quote. Internet immmaturity.

FTFY.

In this instance yes. If a person's right to protest supersedes other laws then that could open a Pandora's Box of people doing all sorts of illegal activity under the guise of protest.

The threat was rather vague so I'm only speculating on what could actually happen. They said "Toronto will be removed from the internet" That could mean they could attempt to eliminate every IP address in Toronto, If that was even possible.

Well the revenue is only 2 years old max. You'd think all the efficiencies made by merging the taxes would make up the difference. Or at least that's what we were told by Daddy Dalton. It's not a tax cut as much as going back to the way things were, Pre-July 2010. And only regarding one or two things people use.