Occupy Wall Street Sept 17 2011

Moonlight Graham · October 9, 2011

Note the photos of the trash, also.

I'm actually impressed they have the trash in bags in a pile and seemingly not thrown about everywhere. All they need is someone to take it away.

I would think just about any prolonged protest in a downtown metropolis would have sanitation issues. Somebody should have organized to dispose of the trash, but probably not the 1st things on their minds at the time.

jacee · October 9, 2011

They need to take their protest to Washington where actual laws can be changed. If that's their ultimate goal. Protesting in New York does nothing.

Scaring the bankers and corporations will give politicians traction.

They can't confront Wall Street by themselves. The power of politicians is an illusion. They only have the power that the corps allow them. It is for the people to confront the corporations that truly have the power.

Edited October 9, 2011 by jacee

Shady · October 9, 2011

Scaring the bankers and corporations will give politicians traction.

How are they scaring bankers and corporations? They don't come in contact with them at all at their protest.

It is for the people to confront the corporations that truly have the power.

Corporations come in all shapes and sizes. So to lump all corporations into one category isn't very logical. Not to mention that many of the larger corporations aren't headquartered in New York, or on Wall Street. So once again, I'm not sure what the point of the protest is, and who they're trying to confront. For example, Wal-mart's headquarters is in Bentonville, Arkansas. How does this protest effect them in any way? :rolleyes:

Edited October 9, 2011 by Shady

jacee · October 9, 2011

Businesses shrug off fears of violent Cdn. Occupy protests

Despite the vandalism and violence of the G20 and Stanley Cup riots, Toronto and Vancouver businesses are optimistic about the crowds expected in their downtown cores when the Occupy Wal Street movement hits Canada. Some businesses destroyed and looted during previous riots say they will keep their doors open when the protests begin on Oct. 15.

"I don't think it's the same kind of crowd. And not anywhere near as great numbers, so I don't think anyone's expecting anything like the G20," Sleep Country Canada sales associate His downtown Toronto store will remain open throughout the protests. Still, he joked that he'll be wearing his bullet-proof vest to work.

In Vancouver, swimwear boutique manager Linda Planidin said it will be"business as usual". She said the movement will bring excitement to the downtown core. "I think this is sounding more like a positive movement, toward making people more aware of corporations and their profits and that type of thing.

It doesn't really worry me, we've all learned a lot (from the hockey riots)," she told CTV News on Saturday."There will be a police presence," she said. "And I think these people are definitely here to bring better consciousness, to making a better world – not breaking windows."

WOW !!!

It looks like small business is on board with the protests.

That will be important to success. Splitting the small business/large corporation communities is absolutely necessary.

Some small businesses do operate unethically but that tends to be a self-limiting strategy for them. For large publicly traded corporations, however, seem to thrive on human rights violations, silencing community concerns, destruction of physical environments that sustain human existence, lying/cheating/stealing from the public for private gain, bullying, bribery/graft/extortion in controlling lawmakers, laws, courts, police, and bureaucrats.

One outcome to be hoped for from the attention would be withdrawal of investments from such corporations. No doubt predatory investors will stay in to suck out the last possible penny, but the large pension fund investors have more ordinary shareholders who, especially with the looming baby boom retirees, are much more likely to influence their pension funds to invest in more ethical products.

I see big changes coming. :D yahoo!

Of course, the other end of the equation is consumption, and that can be influenced too.

Canada will be strongly affected since our economy is entirely reliant on filthy bully extraction industries. So be it. There's a simpler life ahead, supportive of and reliant on local products and resources under local control.

Think about it: ALL of the conflict in the world is conflict between predatory corporations in partnership with predatory regimes - eg Ghadaffi - designed to destroy human environments and peoples (usually Indigenous Peoples) for the profit of the predatory few.

A change is a comin' (Tracy Chapman)

The times they are (finally) a-changing (Bob Dylan)

Yahoo!!!! You GO! Young ones!!

Keep on rockin' ... the free world!! (Apologies to Neil Young ... speaking of whom ... and Bruce Coburn ... and Sarah Harmer ... lots of possibilities!)

jacee · October 9, 2011

How are they scaring bankers and corporations? They don't come in contact with them at all at their protest.

Corporations come in all shapes and sizes. So to lump all corporations into one category isn't very logical. Not to mention that many of the larger corporations aren't headquartered in New York, or on Wall Street. So once again, I'm not sure what the point of the protest is, and who they're trying to confront. For example, Wal-mart's headquarters is in Bentonville, Arkansas. How does this protest effect them in any way?

Unhh ... because they are publicly traded on Wall Street. Get it now?

And if all corporations don't want to be lumped with the real problem predators ... well I guess they'll just have to provide evidence to support their innocence AND evidence to identify the problem predators.

Don't worry your head about it Shady. It will all become clear.

Edited October 9, 2011 by jacee

jacee · October 9, 2011

Here's a good candidate for protests:

... the federal government is allowing mining corporations to use Canadian lakes as dump sites.

http://towardbalancecanada.com/CouncilCanadiansPetition.html

:angry:

It is illegal under the Fisheries Act to dump toxic material into fish- bearing waters. However, in 2002 the government amended the Act’s Metal Mining Effluent Regulation(MMER) to allow lakes and other freshwater bodies to be re-classified as “tailings impoundment areas,” thereby allowing mining companies to get around the general prohibition.

...

“It is inexcusable that they should be allowed to destroy lakes in Canada when they know that they would not be allowed to do so in the United States or other developed countries.”

” Allowing mining companies to use lakes as waste dump sites amounts to a massive subsidy to the mining industry at the expense of publicly owned fresh water resources; this to an industry that made a net profit of over $80 billion in North America in 2007.“

http://www.miningwatch.ca/canada-s-valuable-fresh-water-not-dumping-toxic-wastes-with-background

And that's one reason why predatory mining companies from around the world register as 'Canadian' corporations: Because they can destroy our environment and those of developing countries with the full support and assistance and subsidy by the Canadian government.

Canada is not 'nice'.

The good thing about a free market, of course, is that when (not if) the big ugly filthy sociopathic predator corporations go down due to public protest and disgust, other more ethical and more competent companies will step up. Supply-demand.

A StatsCan study on ETHICAL CONSUMPTION:

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-008-x/2011001/article/11399-eng.htm

Edited October 9, 2011 by jacee

Jack Weber · October 9, 2011

We don't live in a capitalistic society...if we did then GM, Chrysler, Goldman Sachs and a bunch of other companies would be nothing but a distant memory, this isn't capitalism.

I have no idea why you guys refuse to look at the monetary system, it has such a huge impact on our society.

And the US would be looking at 25% real unemployment if those companies (auto companies) were'nt bailed out...

Shady · October 9, 2011

Unhh ... because they are publicly traded on Wall Street. Get it now?

Nope. You still don't make any sense. So what if they're publicly traded? I don't have to be on Wall Street to trade. I can be on my computer from my home, anywhere in the world. But once again, if you want to change the laws regarding Wall Street. It has to be done from Washington. There is no legislative power in New York. Do you still not get that? You're gonna have to pressure politicians to make changes. They're the only ones that can change laws. It's not rocket science.

And if all corporations don't want to be lumped with the real problem predators ... well I guess they'll just have to provide evidence to support their innocence

I see. So guilty before proven innocent. I guess it's a new kind of McCarthyism huh? In Ontario, it takes a whole $360 dollars to incorporate a business. Do you think that the thousands of small businesses that are incorporated should be lumped in with all corporations? Is that your strategy Ms. McCarthy?

Don't worry your head about it Shady. It will all become clear.

Doesn't sound like you know what you're talking about, regarding pretty much anything. It's been highly entertaining thus far! :lol:

Shady · October 9, 2011

is that when (not if) the big ugly filthy sociopathic predator corporations go down due to public protest and disgust

Protest and disgust doesn't bring down corporations. It barely brings down tyrannical governments, let alone businesses operating within the law. If you want to change laws fine. But that's done legislatively. It's not rocket science.

jacee · October 9, 2011

Nope. You still don't make any sense. So what if they're publicly traded? I don't have to be on Wall Street to trade. I can be on my computer from my home, anywhere in the world. But once again, if you want to change the laws regarding Wall Street. It has to be done from Washington. There is no legislative power in New York. Do you still not get that? You're gonna have to pressure politicians to make changes. They're the only ones that can change laws. It's not rocket science.

I see. So guilty before proven innocent. I guess it's a new kind of McCarthyism huh? In Ontario, it takes a whole $360 dollars to incorporate a business. Do you think that the thousands of small businesses that are incorporated should be lumped in with all corporations? Is that your strategy

Nobody's lumped. They'll decide whether they're with the people or by themselves.

There's no point depending on the politicians. The predators control them, so we wait it out.

bush_cheney2004 · October 9, 2011

Nobody's lumped. They'll decide whether they're with the people or by themselves.

They are "lumped" for you...clear across the Canadian border.

There's no point depending on the politicians. The predators control them, so we wait it out.

You have things backwards....political viability is reliant on economic sustainability.

Moonlight Graham · October 9, 2011

Protest and disgust doesn't bring down corporations. It barely brings down tyrannical governments, let alone businesses operating within the law. If you want to change laws fine. But that's done legislatively. It's not rocket science.

I agree with this. Private citizens protesting Wall Street, ultimately, will not lead to any real change by those on Wall Street. To them, money talks. If protests don't affect their bottom line, it's irrelevant.

Banks, corporations, investors etc. will do just about anything and exploit any legal loopholes in order to maximize profit. Therefore, what must be done is proper and careful regulation of "Wall Street" and corporations/businesses to prevent the type of bullcrap that as happened recently from happening again (at least the part of which is the fault of Wall Street/business/investors).

So yes, protests in Washington might be more effective. But at least this protest gives out the signal that people are PO'd and are watching "Wall Street" closely. The President has even taken notice, so that's something.

bush_cheney2004 · October 9, 2011

...So yes, protests in Washington might be more effective. But at least this protest gives out the signal that people are PO'd and are watching "Wall Street" closely. The President has even taken notice, so that's something.

Let them be "PO'd"...it still amounts to nothing as long as the "president" and a lot of others need to finance campaigns with Wall Street, union, and trial lawyer contributions.

Bob · October 10, 2011

It never gets old how leftists ramble on and on about the evil corporations, never realizing that corporations are collections of real flesh and blood human beings.

Shady · October 10, 2011

It never gets old how leftists ramble on and on about the evil corporations, never realizing that corporations are collections of real flesh and blood human beings.

Exactly. People working together to provide or produce a good or service that nobody is forced to buy.

CPCFTW · October 10, 2011

Exactly. People working together to provide or produce a good or service that nobody is forced to buy.

I think something like 20% of the canadian labour force is employed in financial services.

The big bad banking industry pays billions in taxes, employs millions of taxpayers, and pays 4-5% dividends to shareholders (ie. Pension plans of teachers and government employees). Millions of Canadians realized their dream to own their own cars, furniture, and homes because the big bad banking industry provided them with financing. Damn those bankers!!

capricorn · October 10, 2011

So yes, protests in Washington might be more effective. But at least this protest gives out the signal that people are PO'd and are watching "Wall Street" closely.

Protests without criminality offer people an opportunity to vent their frustrations, whatever those frustrations may be. Some protests can attract people who really don't share the frustration of others protesting. It's just something to do and to be part of the action. As an example, there will be a protest here in Ottawa shortly. Where, I don't know yet. If I'm bored I might just go down there and shout along with the others.

capricorn · October 10, 2011

It never gets old how leftists ramble on and on about the evil corporations, never realizing that corporations are collections of real flesh and blood human beings.

Yes. I would add, companies, governments and unions invest pension plan funds in successful corporations (a collective of people) to build the pensions their employees and members will collect at retirement. Of course, that includes the pensions leftists will benefit from.

Bob · October 10, 2011

Not sure if you folks have seen how the leftist rats in the media (i.e. CBC) have tried to spin these NYC/Wall Street protesters as the counterweight to the Tea Party, never mind the fact that the Tea Party was, as far as I know, free of arrests and composed of working taxpayers. These losers in NYC/Wall Street, on the other hand, look like they're all unemployed. Bunch of twenty-somethings from the suburbs with blue-hair, facial-piercings, tattoos, tattered hipster clothing, and no education - all the while wondering why nobody is offering them a lucrative career on a silver platter.

Edited October 10, 2011 by Bob

maple_leafs182 · October 10, 2011

And the US would be looking at 25% real unemployment if those companies (auto companies) were'nt bailed out...

The US is already at a 16% unemployment rate.

Bailing out those companies out didn't solve any problems. At least if we let the companies fail we could of got rid of all the bad debt. It would be 3 years later, we may of been back to growth instead of continuing to have a teetering global economy.

An interview with Dr. Robert Shapiro who is an adviser to the IMF says that if Greece isn't bailed out then there could be a crisis worse then 08'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsXg_kn-vYY&feature=feedu

All these bail outs have done to solve our problem is a temporary fix, we kicked the can down the road and made the problems larger.

The people are protesting wall street, wall street is the financial sector, they are protesting the financial sector...the financial sector is the problem, not the corporations.

You guys have to start looking at monetary policy...the reason these corporations are so large and are goblin up all the wealth is because we give them easy access to capitol. We favour them over other the little guys, if they make bad bets we bail them out and take on the debt. This isn't a left vs right issue, this is an up vs down issue.

bush_cheney2004 · October 10, 2011

...You guys have to start looking at monetary policy...the reason these corporations are so large and are goblin up all the wealth is because we give them easy access to capitol. We favour them over other the little guys, if they make bad bets we bail them out and take on the debt. This isn't a left vs right issue, this is an up vs down issue.

Irrelevant....US fiscal policy has far more impact than monetary policy. Bailed out financials have paid back their TARP loans plus interest. GM and Chrysler have not. I am not sure what you mean by "we".

Sir Bandelot · October 10, 2011

If the bailout was so double-plus good, and money was repaid with interest, why is the economy still tanked? Why would anyone pay back money with interest, if they weren't financially recovered. And why are they talking about the need to inject more money again.

bush_cheney2004 · October 10, 2011

If the bailout was so double-plus good, and money was repaid with interest, why is the economy still tanked? Why would anyone pay back money with interest, if they weren't financially recovered. And why are they talking about the need to inject more money again.

The economy is not tanked....US economic growth is positive, unlike Canada's last quarter. Direct TARP cash injection interest returned a net gain to the US Treasury. The objective of keeping the financial system afloat was achieved and had the consensus approval of a majority of economists.

jbg · October 10, 2011

If the bailout was so double-plus good, and money was repaid with interest, why is the economy still tanked? Why would anyone pay back money with interest, if they weren't financially recovered. And why are they talking about the need to inject more money again.

The restrictions that came with that money just about mandate it's repayment if at all possible.

Sir Bandelot · October 10, 2011

Not according to Ben Bernanke:

AFP- Appearing before lawmakers, Bernanke said "the recovery is close to faltering" and recent indicators pointed "to the likelihood of more sluggish job growth in the period ahead."

The Fed chief told members of the Joint Economic Committee that a credible plan to cut long-term deficits was needed urgently, but that they should "avoid fiscal actions that could impede the ongoing economic recovery."

Bernanke warned that overly zealous spending cuts could hit a US recovery that "has been much less robust than we had hoped."

Bernanke warns Congress on hurting recovery