I would like to see a protest against .....

[bush_cheney2004]

....People in North America (including you, me, BC and people on welfare) are the "rich ones". If you want to defend the impoverished of this world, you would want to extend our welfare policies around the world.

<applause>....we are indeed very rich, and it would be silly to complain about the 1% or 10% or 50% who have even more riches. Take that sob story to SubSaharan Africa or parts of Asia and watch them laugh in our rich faces.

[August1991]

First of all, I'm against breaking any law but in today's global downturn, I heard there's 2 million Canadians and 14 million Americans OUT of work.

Wrong. There are 1.3 million unemployed in Canada. Statcan Your number for the US seems about right.

Topaz, what you fail to note is the size of the labour force. About 200 million people in North America go to work every day and produce stuff for others. (We can debate elsewhere whether what they produce is worth anything.) Another 15 million or so are looking for a good employer, good business partner or trying to figure out how to create their own business - while no doubt still producing stuff (privately) for themselves/others. The labour force is 215 million people, and 200 million are "productively" employed. Not bad, given the collapse in housing prices in many US states.

Canada's unemployment rate is "a bit" higher than a few years ago. The US rate has grown appreciably - but it's nothing like what it could have been if Bush/Bernanke/Obama had not done what they did in 2008.

Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991

[charter.rights]

How many people are committing welfare fraud? Do we even know what that percentage is? Do people care? It's part of the 99%. I think that's a given. blah blah blah

Why not protest against those committing "employment fraud"?

There is no doubt there are people posting here during working hours whom are defrauding their employers of time?

Get that and make it into something....if you are honourable enough....

[Guest American Woman]

What does this have to do with Canada/US relations? In Canada, social assistance is a provincial matter and the benefits have some variation by province. And as far as it pertains to foreign relations, I have no idea.

From what I've been reading on this forum, the state of the U.S. economy affects Canada too - very much so, so if occupying Wall Street pertains to foreign relations, so does this topic - because social services/welfare programs take a good size chunk out of our budget, affecting the state of the economy too.

Furthermore, since the occupy movement has moved to Canada and Canadians are speaking out regarding the 99%, why shouldn't Canadians show the same concern for those on the other end - those who are abusing the welfare system?

As I pointed out, those people are within the 99% who are complaining about the rich. It's not as if 99% of our populations are victims by any means. The rest of us foot the bill for those abusing the system, and why that doesn't rile people up as much as tax loopholes/the rich do is beyond me. At least the rich are contributing to the system, where those abusing the system are doing nothing but taking.

[Guest American Woman]

Why not protest against those committing "employment fraud"?

There is no doubt there are people posting here during working hours whom are defrauding their employers of time?

Get that and make it into something....if you are honourable enough....

If I'm honorable enough?? What is that supposed to even mean? Isn't that up to their employers to monitor - not me or the government?? How in Gods's name would I know if people are posting on their employers' dime? But if they are, at least they aren't taking from the system - which is what protests are generally about. again.

[Guest American Woman]

August1991, on 21 October 2011 - 11:06 AM, said: ....People in North America (including you, me, BC and people on welfare) are the "rich ones". If you want to defend the impoverished of this world, you would want to extend our welfare policies around the world.

<applause>....we are indeed very rich, and it would be silly to complain about the 1% or 10% or 50% who have even more riches. Take that sob story to SubSaharan Africa or parts of Asia and watch them laugh in our rich faces.

*more applause*

This has been my point. I honestly don't think there's every been a time when people wanted so much for so little. I doubt there's every been a time in our histories where people expected to be taken care of the way so many do now; where people expect so much from those who have more than they do simply because they have more; where people have so little appreciation for what they do have; when people have spent so much time whining.

We don't see people protesting those abusing the system because it's all about anger at the rich, from what I can see.

[August1991]

How many people who could be working aren't? How many people are getting paid in cash and paying no taxes? How many people are on disability, yet manage to live a very active personal life style?

AW, I agree with others that this thread should not be in the Canada/US Relations category. If you have a specific rant about US policies, make it and put it in the US category.

-----

IMV, avoiding taxes and disability/pension fraud will become common in the future. In the US, a citizen's big relation to government is in taxes, defence, social security and education. (Obama has added health.) Moreover, the US federal government writes cheques in all these areas. In education and defence, it's hard to claim a benefit. But in taxes and social security, it's possible.

I think Krugman characterized the US federal government as a tank with a pension plan.

Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991

[August1991]

Furthermore, since the occupy movement has moved to Canada and Canadians are speaking out regarding the 99%, why shouldn't Canadians show the same concern for those on the other end - those who are abusing the welfare system?

AW, you have the direction wrong. I think the "occupy movement" started in Canada (Vancouver to be precise - Lotusland, no wonder) and then moved to the US.

So maybe your choice of thread category makes sense after all.

At last, the occupation comes to the west coast. It’s about time; the idea behind the Occupy Wall Street protest was hatched inside the offices of Vancouver-based Adbusters, a slick anti-consumerist magazine that is, ironically, always on display at Whole Foods supermarkets and on the shelves of other corporate retail giants.

National Post Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991

[Guest American Woman]

IMV, avoiding taxes and disability/pension fraud will become common in the future. In the US, a citizen's big relation to government is in taxes, defence, social security and education. (Obama has added health.) Moreover, the federal government writes cheques in all these areas. In education and defence, it's hard to claim a benefit. But in taxes and social security, it's possible.

I think Krugman characterized the US federal government as a tank with a pension plan.

As I said, it's not so much about policies as it is about people protesting against the rich while not giving any notice to those abusing the systems - and that pertains to both of our nations. If we should be calling attention to the loopholes for the rich, we should be protesting the other end of things too.

Your country has policies that are being abused too, so why so little protest to that - as Wall Street gets all kinds of attention?

Canadian-American relations very much play into my puzzlement over this.

Edited October 21, 2011 by American Woman

[cybercoma]

AMWO, if you had actually read the study I posted, you would know the policies aren't being abused. Rather, it's ignorant buffoons that wrongfully think it's being abused.

[msj]

As I said, it's not so much about policies as it is about people protesting against the rich while not giving any notice to those abusing the systems - and that pertains to both of our nations. If we should be calling attention to the loopholes for the rich, we should be protesting the other end of things too.

Your country has policies that are being abused too, so why so little protest to that - as Wall Street gets all kinds of attention?

Canadian-American relations very much play into my puzzlement over this.

I am wondering how you know that these "99%" protesters (or whatever they are called) do not give "any notice to those abusing the systems?"

Have you spoken to these people?

Have you asked them about their views on these type of abuses?

I would bet that many of these people would have the same view as me:

If you are abusing welfare, or you are a waiter/waitress who is not reporting tip income on your tax return, or you are in the construction industry earning "cash," or you are a big bank bundling up loans and knowingly selling the loser loans to losers, or you are a bank who bought a bunch of bundled up loser loans asking for a multi-billion bailout, etc...

All of these people deserve whatever is coming to them:

Wlefare fraudster should go to jail, the underreporting of income should be audited and pay taxes/interest/penalties, the big banks can take the loss and go bankrupt (you know, how capitalism is supposed to work) etc...

As for protesting - well, the bigger problem to protest (at least in the US) is a system that has allowed as much fraudulent activity as has occurred down there with respect to CDO's, MBS', robo-signing/defective foreclosure title etc...

As has already been identified - welfare fraud is criminal. Why protest something everyone knows is wrong and for which laws are already in place to try to deal with it?

As for under-reporting of income - once again, laws are in place so why go to the trouble of protesting that? What are people going to do? Go to the nearest IRS/CRA office with signs that read "Tax the waitress on her 10 to 20%?"

But rules that legally allow banks to pull the crap that they have pulled in the US, in particular, and that allow them to get away with it - well, the laws need to be toughened up to not allow this kind of crap to happen.

Of course, it is not possible to go into just how much crap I'm talking about so I will refer you to Michael Lewis' book "The Big Short," to Barry Rhitholtz' book "Bailout Nation" and to his blog, and also Calculated Risk's blog.

Now, I'm not saying that the protesters are protesting these things in particular (with the one exception of the MBS link above) but that's because they are feeling the effects while not knowing the many details related to some of the causes of those effects.

Which is the same kind of ignorance betrayed by your OP but at least yours is funny and non-disruptive although more pointless and poorly aimed.

[bush_cheney2004]

....But rules that legally allow banks to pull the crap that they have pulled in the US, in particular, and that allow them to get away with it - well, the laws need to be toughened up to not allow this kind of crap to happen.

Get away with what? You just said it was legal. No crimes were committed, but we should ignore those who do violate exiting law for reporting income and paying taxes because such laws already exist? That doesn't make any sense.

[msj]

Get away with what? You just said it was legal. No crimes were committed, but we should ignore those who do violate exiting law for reporting income and paying taxes because such laws already exist? That doesn't make any sense.

Some crimes have been committed - the FBI have hired many more people for their fraud investigations in the past few years. And it would be nice if more funding went into that rather than what gets wasted on "homeland security."

The part that I agree with any protest is where the government/Fed sits in the back room with the old boys (and girls) and they all agree to print more money and pass out bailouts rather than do up a prepackaged bankruptcy where bondholders and shareholders actually have to take a loss.

Sure, it may be legal to make the taxpayers take a bath on their losses while maintaining existing bondholders but it shouldn't be.

[bush_cheney2004]

Some crimes have been committed - the FBI have hired many more people for their fraud investigations in the past few years. And it would be nice if more funding went into that rather than what gets wasted on "homeland security."

That's not your call..."homeland security" is also a high priority. If crimes were committed, indict the perps and try them in court, just like welfare cheats and tax dodgers.

The part that I agree with any protest is where the government/Fed sits in the back room with the old boys (and girls) and they all agree to print more money and pass out bailouts rather than do up a prepackaged bankruptcy where bondholders and shareholders actually have to take a loss.

The protesters either voted for, against, or not at all for such representation. Government has a vested interest in maintaining the golden goose, not the other way around. Where do you think tax revenue comes from?

Sure, it may be legal to make the taxpayers take a bath on their losses while maintaining existing bondholders but it shouldn't be.

The US taxpayers made money on a good portion of bank TARP funds since repaid with interest. Hardly a "bath".

[msj]

That's not your call..."homeland security" is also a high priority.

If crimes were committed, indict the perps and try them in court, just like welfare cheats and tax dodgers.

NSS.

If US voters, who also happen to be protesters, want to redirect money from the huge waste called homeland security to something else than that's their business. If not, then not.

The protesters either voted for, against, or not at all for such representation. Government has a vested interest in maintaining the golden goose, not the other way around. Where do you think tax revenue comes from?

Tax revenues come from people who pay taxes.

And those who vote have a say in the expenditure of those taxes and the making of laws.

Nothing new is being learned here....

The US taxpayers made money on a good portion of bank TARP funds since repaid with interest. Hardly a "bath".

This is another load of crap brought to us by liars such as yourself.

[cybercoma]

Get away with what? You just said it was legal. No crimes were committed, but we should ignore those who do violate exiting law for reporting income and paying taxes because such laws already exist? That doesn't make any sense.

People that violate existing laws are not being ignored when it comes to welfare fraud. They're actually highly monitored, even though their fraud amounts to pennies, compared to the unregulated and unmonitored fraudsters on Wall Street.

[bush_cheney2004]

If US voters, who also happen to be protesters, want to redirect money from the huge waste called homeland security to something else than that's their business. If not, then not.

Correct...you have no say in the matter. Worry about hockey instead.

Tax revenues come from people who pay taxes.

And those who vote have a say in the expenditure of those taxes and the making of laws.

Nothing new is being learned here....

You don't understand why government would preserve the financial system? Must be because you think we should all go back to trading goats and pigs instead of using fiat currency.

This is another load of crap brought to us by liars such as yourself.

Some of the banks were forced to participate in the program, and broke TARP rules to pay back loans early so execs could get out from under compensation provisions. As for me being a liar, I'd expect no less from a somebody in Canada watching the machinations of another nation as if his/her life depended on it....pitiful.

[msj]

You don't understand why government would preserve the financial system? Must be because you think we should all go back to trading goats and pigs instead of using fiat currency.

There are better ways to preserve it - such as firing the board of directors and the top employees of the banks and making the bondholders and shareholders take a bath.

IOW - prepackaged bankruptcy.

Instead we get Japan disease.

No wonder 'mericans are fed up.

Some of the banks were forced to participate in the program, and broke TARP rules to pay back loans early so execs could get out from under compensation provisions. As for me being a liar, I'd expect no less from a somebody in Canada watching the machinations of another nation as if his/her life depended on it....pitiful.

Parroting the crap that the bankers put in their annual reports hardly makes it true.

This is not to say that some of the money wasn't paid back but that is hardly the entire story.

And, no, I'm not going to go through the entire story with someone as slippery as you.

[GostHacked]

"Don't commit fraud, the government hates competition."

I can't recall who said that.

[bush_cheney2004]

There are better ways to preserve it - such as firing the board of directors and the top employees of the banks and making the bondholders and shareholders take a bath.

Again, not your call from the peanut gallery. Many Americans voiced their objection to the bailouts and the politicians processed the risks and benefits to make a call. It was hardly unanimous. Lehmen Bros was allowed to fail with a very bad result...remember?

Parroting the crap that the bankers put in their annual reports hardly makes it true.

This is not to say that some of the money wasn't paid back but that is hardly the entire story.

And, no, I'm not going to go through the entire story with someone as slippery as you.

It dosen't make any difference...the US was perfectly willing to take a loss, just as it will from GM or Chrysler. It even bailed out Canadian banks who were exposed, and many others around the world. The objective was achieved.

Edited October 21, 2011 by bush_cheney2004

[Guest American Woman]

Ya, I'd like to see that too!

A bunch of preppy rich people in designer labels parading through the streets protesting 'welfare fraud'.

Let me know where/when and I'll bring my video camera. Suggest you come 'downtown' ... ie, to the belly of the beast.

Thanks AMWO. I needed a good laugh.

So judging by all of your LOL's, I can only surmise that you believe rich people can't protest those who abuse the system. People who wear designer labels should just suck it up and not have their say. Only the rich should be held accountable, while we all give a pass to the people costing us all big bucks by their abuse of the system. Rich people should share, people who don't do the responsible thing should be taken care of by the rich and the rest of the 99% - because? Perhaps you can answer that...........

Edited October 21, 2011 by American Woman

[msj]

Again, not your call from the peanut gallery. Many Americans voiced their objection to the bailouts and the politicians processed the risks and benefits to make a call. It was hardly unanimous.

Sure, and many Americans can protest and vote and ask for changes in laws to prevent TBTF and other policies from continuing to rear their ugly heads.

Who knows, maybe the taxpayers will see if their political masters do it with Bank of America. I won't hold my breath on it though.

It dosen't make any difference...the US was perfectly willing to take a loss, just as it will from GM or Chrysler. It even bailed out Canadian banks who were exposed, and many others around the world. The objective was achieved.

Yes, the objective to use an inefficient crony capitalistic way to keep the banking system has worked.

You are extremely slippery.

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure, and many Americans can protest and vote and ask for changes in laws to prevent TBTF and other policies from continuing to rear their ugly heads.

...but they won't, because total collapse is worse than the disease.

Who knows, maybe the taxpayers will see if their political masters do it with Bank of America. I won't hold my breath on it though.

Why do you care....you live in Canada! American taxpayers don't need your help or pity.

Yes, the objective to use an inefficient crony capitalistic way to keep the banking system has worked.

I'm sorry if facts disturb you...I prefer reality over fantasy.

You are extremely slippery.

..and you are extremely Canadian.

[msj]

blah blah blah...

Let's just agree to disagree and let the thread move back towards the OP....

Edited October 21, 2011 by msj

[August1991]

There are better ways to preserve it - such as firing the board of directors and the top employees of the banks and making the bondholders and shareholders take a bath.

IOW - prepackaged bankruptcy.

Instead we get Japan disease.

No wonder 'mericans are fed up.

Hank Paulsen did as you suggest with Lehman Bros, and then faced the abyss. The US is not Japan, nor Sweden.

Lehmen Bros was allowed to fail with a very bad result...remember?

Precisely.

msj, Calculated Risk is a real estate blog, made famous in a real estate bubble. Barry Ritholtz manages other people's money, and sells books. He understandably tells some people want they want to hear.

-----

Haircut? As Bernanke wisely said, if your neighbour's house is on fire, and even if your neighbour is Al Capone, it makes sense to put out the fire.

Sometimes, the right thing to do (as Anglo-Saxons use the word "right") may not seem "just" or "fair" (as Anglo-Saxons use those words) .

Edited October 21, 2011 by August1991