Occupy Wall Street Sept 17 2011

[jacee]

What are we changing? And what are we changing to?

DEMOCRACY NOT CORPORATOCRACY!

[jbg]

When you deal with your own stuff south of the 49th, then we can work together.

Pound sand troll.

Why are you personally attacking me?

[Shady]

DEMOCRACY NOT CORPORATOCRACY!

Any specifics? That's a great slogan though.

[GostHacked]

What are we changing? And what are we changing to?

This is why direction is needed. No direction the movement will fail.

[GostHacked]

Why are you personally attacking me?

I did not attack you. Go back two pages. Unless Buch_Cheney2004 is an alias you use?

[Shady]

This is why direction is needed. No direction the movement will fail.

I agree. I can be on board for change, as long as I know what the change is, and what the change is from.

[GostHacked]

I agree. I can be on board for change, as long as I know what the change is, and what the change is from.

Well, one of those rare moments, you and I agree on something. So anything is possible, there is hope yet.

[cybercoma]

I just don't understand what the protesters want

[Guest Derek L]

I suppose the homeless are part of the 1%?…..Oh the irony……..

The Occupy Wall Street volunteer kitchen staff launched a “counter” revolution yesterday -- because they’re angry about working 18-hour days to provide food for “professional homeless” people and ex-cons masquerading as protesters.

I always thought socialists felt everyone equal…….

Some protesters threatened that the high-end meals could be cut off completely if the vagrants and criminals don’t disperse.

So some vagrants and criminals are organising a class system against other vagrants and criminals? They want the homeless to “clear out”?

“We need to limit the amount of food we’re putting out” to curb the influx of derelicts, said Rafael Moreno, a kitchen volunteer.

What? Are they suggesting that they can’t be all things to all people?

Organizers took other steps to police the squatters, who they said were lured in from other parks with the promise of free meals.

A team of 10 security volunteers moved in to the trouble-prone southwest section of Zuccotti Park in a show of force to confront them.

Overall security at the park had deteriorated to the point where many frightened female protesters had abandoned the increasingly out-of-control occupation, security- team members said.

Are the occupiers becoming what they are protesting?

[jacee]

I agree. I can be on board for change, as long as I know what the change is, and what the change is from.

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.

Edited November 3, 2011 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

...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.

Oh sure...that'll work! It's going to be a long cold winter for these die hards, unless they take a tip from some Tibetan protesters who don't mess around with just grab assing on iPads/iPhones in a park.

[Guest Derek L]

Oh sure...that'll work! It's going to be a long cold winter for these die hards, unless they take a tip from some Tibetan protesters who don't mess around with just grab assing on iPads/iPhones in a park.

They could burn one of their fellow protestors, for warmth indeed, but they only have a limited supply of fuel…….I think here in Vancouver they’ve got about 60 die hards left……

[Michael Hardner]

Question - where is the 1% making their money ?

[jacee]

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%.

Edited November 3, 2011 by jacee

[jacee]

Question - where is the 1% making their money ?

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

Edited November 3, 2011 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

There's some information online in this report, but it's a pdf with no link:

TOP INCOMES IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA OVER THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

Then how did you read it? No link...no dice.

[jacee]

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.

Edited November 5, 2011 by jacee

[bush_cheney2004]

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.

LOL! Yet even more "US data" because it's so hard to find any on Canada. What the hell is the problem "up/down" there? Does data and access to data cost too much?

[eyeball]

This is why direction is needed. No direction the movement will fail.

There are only two directions the gap between the wealthiest and most powerful and everyone else can go. Is it really that much of a mystery which way the OWS movement wants it to go? I guess I expect Shady to remain mystified forever even if he gets it but that kinda goes without saying too.

[capricorn]

Check out this awesome picture of the encampment in Vancouver. The occupiers used skids to set up a 1900's style sidewalk system between the tents.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Fire+chief+orders+Occupy+Vancouver+tarps+removed/5653896/story.html

The discovery of two propane tanks inside the Occupy Vancouver encampment after a heroin overdose Thursday has authorities announcing plans to move in on the tent city to clear out fire hazards.

According to Vancouver fire chief John McKearney, the propane tanks were discovered after a tent city occupant overdosed.

McKearney said the tarps, tents and obstacles in the encampment made it difficult to remove the man and get him to hospital.

With recent changes in the weather, occupants have erected large tarps that enclose multiple tents. McKearney said the enclosures are creating safety concerns for occupants and first responders, partly because they are hiding flammable heat sources and open flames.

The discovery of the tanks contravenes the earlier directive set by the fire chief prohibiting propane and fuels of any type at the encampment at the Vancouver Art Gallery.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Fire+chief+orders+Occupy+Vancouver+tarps+removed/5653896/story.html

[Guest Derek L]

Check out this awesome picture of the encampment in Vancouver. The occupiers used skids to set up a 1900's style sidewalk system between the tents.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Fire+chief+orders+Occupy+Vancouver+tarps+removed/5653896/story.html

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Fire+chief+orders+Occupy+Vancouver+tarps+removed/5653896/story.html

Indeed………It’s quite the (smelly) eyesore…….I wonder how “strong their cause is”, once the fire department removes their tarps and propane stoves……..For those not aware of the area…….Tiffany & Co, Holt Renfrew, Louis Vuitton, Lacoste and the Omega boutique are all within a block or so from the “campground”……..And Christmas is coming, let’s get these ~60ish “99%ers” out of the downtown shopping district……..

[jacee]

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.

Edited November 4, 2011 by jacee

[Guest Derek L]

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.

The requirement to keep police, fire and paramedics around the encampment 24/7 costs the city, and in turn the taxpayer money…….Money that could be spent on further improvements for the homeless on the lower East side……..Mayor Robertson (whom most consider “progressive”) only has a finite amount of resources………Their occupation of the art gallery will hurt the homeless & poor, since there’s a annual food/clothing/toy drive held in the downtown core, strategically located amongst all the major shops and department stores……..Now this annual event will have to be moved to “accommodate” less than 100 spoiled brats living in tents……..Many people are staying away from the city center for fear of another Stanley Cup like riot………My wife and daughter won’t go downtown since they don’t feel safe around these “revolutionaries”……I’m sure they’re not alone…….Instead, they’ll do their Christmas shopping in Burnaby (Metrotown), online and are planning a weekend trip down to Bellingham (Washington State)……It will be telling to see how much this “occupation” will cost local merchants is lost sales…..not to mention the cost to local government.

[jacee]

The requirement to keep police, fire and paramedics around the encampment 24/7 costs the city, and in turn the taxpayer money…….Money that could be spent on further improvements for the homeless on the lower East side……..Mayor Robertson (whom most consider “progressive”) only has a finite amount of resources………Their occupation of the art gallery will hurt the homeless & poor, since there’s a annual food/clothing/toy drive held in the downtown core, strategically located amongst all the major shops and department stores……..Now this annual event will have to be moved to “accommodate” less than 100 spoiled brats living in tents……..Many people are staying away from the city center for fear of another Stanley Cup like riot………My wife and daughter won’t go downtown since they don’t feel safe around these “revolutionaries”……I’m sure they’re not alone…….Instead, they’ll do their Christmas shopping in Burnaby (Metrotown), online and are planning a weekend trip down to Bellingham (Washington State)……It will be telling to see how much this “occupation” will cost local merchants is lost sales…..not to mention the cost to local government.

Hmm ... gee ... I guess they'll want to start looking to some resolutions to the issues raised ... a little pressure here, a little there ...some discussion of issues perhaps?

Ya the scary revolutionaries ... waggling their fingers and all ...

Even Quebec is moving very carefully.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-prepares-to-dismantle-occupy-camp/article2225078/?service=mobile

But the city was concerned that if it acted too swiftly, it could trigger the opposite effect and give the Occupy movement even more exposure and public support.

Edited November 4, 2011 by jacee

[Guest Derek L]

Hmm ... gee ... I guess they'll want to start looking to some resolutions to the issues raised ... a little pressure here, a little there ...some discussion of issues perhaps?

Ya the scary revolutionaries ... waggling their fingers and all ...

Even Quebec is moving very carefully.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/quebec-city-prepares-to-dismantle-occupy-camp/article2225078/?service=mobile

But the city was concerned that if it acted too swiftly, it could trigger the opposite effect and give the Occupy movement even more exposure and public support.

I think both Quebec city and Vancouver are handling the “99%ers” properly……..Ask them politely to remove all their inherent hazards at their campsites……..If they do remove their “comforts” certainly some protestors resolve will weaken and their numbers will drop further…..If they don’t comply with the cities request to comply with safety and civic by-laws, they further demonize themselves in the court of public opinion………..To be quite honest, I’m surprised Vancouver mayor Robertson is relenting on his position to remove the campers………Now why would that be? He’s in an election cycle and ~75% of the public want the “99%ers” gone.

Both cities “tactics” will prove to be effective, since whatever the response from the campers is, it’s both damaging……….If I was the “99%ers” I’d pack up the tents, and organize “rotating demonstrations” around the city instead of the their ineffective campsite.