Jump to content

Occupy Toronto Protestors


Boges

Recommended Posts

Evidence?

Evidence? You're killin' me. I'm playing a numbers game here--a game of probabilities. The far right is rarely if ever responsible for doing good--for anyone but themselves. Responsibility for doing bad? Heaps of examples, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to cite chapter and verse. Instead, I suggest that you turn off your tv set; grab your reading glasses and read; observe what's going on around the world; think; then connect the dots. oil procurement through war, environment devastation, deregulation of necessary resources, torture for flawed info, killing, maiming, stealing, lying--everything that is the antithesis of being a good public representative resides on the right of Atilla the Hun. Mind you, the political boundaries these days have become hazy, indeed, but among the public at large, those on the left and far left are far more benign than those on the right and the far right. It is written, you know. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 391
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Probably, but it's an unneeded drop in the bucket.

If I went to a public park and started pouring bleach on the grass would the City just eat the cost or send me a bill?

Ohmygawd, how could you even provide such a heinous supposition? Are you from the far right? Anyone from the left would never even think of anyone pouring bleach into the soil--they are sensitive to these things. Still, if we must let's go with your scenario...............

If caught, you're going to be arrested and when you come before me (I be the judge), you will be required to research bleach and the harm it does to the environment. You are placed in custody until the assignment is completed. Bye Boges.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only people got this enraged over our tax money being used to bail out and subsidize private companies.

But yes... let's fight over people protesting the billions we give away to private corporations. Yes, let's fight about the grass the protesters stood on instead.

Because that makes absolutely no sense, and that is what the elite would rather us do. Fight ourselves for the scraps...

Edited by MiddleClassCentrist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it's impossible that left wing protesters trashed a park they were camped out in for 40 days. It has to be a right-wing conspiracy.

http://berkeley.intel-research.net/arahimi/helmet/ali2.jpg

Well, yeah, ooookay, let's go with that.......if you're talking about trashing. Guys on the left would never set out to trash anything. It's not in their nature. If you mean, that by pitching tents, the hidden grass was unable to avail itself of the light and thus expired or seemed to have expired, that's not trashing. I'm just happy the protesters had a "roof" over their heads. I'm not at all concerned about the grass. If the grass doesn't grow back, the weeds will take over. In any event, by the time spring rolls around, there'll be something for the groundskeeper to mow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only people got this enraged over our tax money being used to bail out and subsidize private companies.

But yes... let's fight over people protesting the billions we give away to private corporations. Yes, let's fight about the grass the protesters stood on instead.

Because that makes absolutely no sense, and that is what the elite would rather us do. Fight ourselves for the scraps...

EXACTLY AND WELL PUT! Another voice of reason!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only people got this enraged over our tax money being used to bail out and subsidize private companies.

People can't comprehend of billions in any practical way, but $60,000 is more appreciable as a here and now concept. You can look at as many stars as you want, but the sun, well the sun is for worshipin'

But yes... let's fight over people protesting the billions we give away to private corporations. Yes, let's fight about the grass the protesters stood on instead.

Ironically there were likely billions of blades of grass...

Because that makes absolutely no sense, and that is what the elite would rather us do. Fight ourselves for the scraps...

And, so I've been told, 'if you fake it til you make it' then one day any person can grow up and be rich off government-bailout-management-bonus-money too. Thus it helps to start acting like one I suppose. At the very least, one ought to adopt that attitude un-thinkingly. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ohmygawd, how could you even provide such a heinous supposition? Are you from the far right? Anyone from the left would never even think of anyone pouring bleach into the soil--they are sensitive to these things. Still, if we must let's go with your scenario...............

If caught, you're going to be arrested and when you come before me (I be the judge), you will be required to research bleach and the harm it does to the environment. You are placed in custody until the assignment is completed. Bye Boges.

So killing grass would get me arrested in your world? Glad I don't live in it. :rolleyes:

I don't have to pay this money to re-sod the park so I don't give a hoot. Just thought I'd bring that information forward.

It is interesting that people call into question the actual cost of re-sodding the park. I would probably call it into question to, just about anything a public servants do is overpriced an not very efficient. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even last spring:

Auto Bailouts won't be repaid in full

Every billion is just under $30 that every Canadian owes.

$60,000 for sod? $0.022/Torontonian.

$30/Canadian is a great investment if it kept the many people who's employment is linked to the auto sector still employed.

But it does boggle my mind what governments, even conservative ones spend money on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So killing grass would get me arrested in your world? Glad I don't live in it. :rolleyes:

I don't have to pay this money to re-sod the park so I don't give a hoot. Just thought I'd bring that information forward.

It is interesting that people call into question the actual cost of re-sodding the park. I would probably call it into question to, just about anything a public servants do is overpriced an not very efficient. :P

Especially you, Boges. All those right of Centre require exposure to science and to the humanities. Knowing how bleach adversely affects the soil is important for you to know. And in my world, we pay to educate you. We would not take the easy way out and have you pay for damages. It is more important to us that you know why what you did was wrong--you were being injurious to the environment and by extension, injurious to yourself, me and everyone else.

But then, too, under my type of administration, you would have learned all this by now so you wouldn't have poured bleach onto the grass in any event. You see we're very much into putting our monies into preventing problems; into researching where potential problems might lie; into helping people be the best that they can be--not the worst.

You could do far worse than living in my world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially you, Boges. All those right of Centre require exposure to science and to the humanities. Knowing how bleach adversely affects the soil is important for you to know. And in my world, we pay to educate you. We would not take the easy way out and have you pay for damages. It is more important to us that you know why what you did was wrong--you were being injurious to the environment and by extension, injurious to yourself, me and everyone else.

But then, too, under my type of administration, you would have learned all this by now so you wouldn't have poured bleach onto the grass in any event. You see we're very much into putting our monies into preventing problems; into researching where potential problems might lie; into helping people be the best that they can be--not the worst.

You could do far worse than living in my world.

You know it was just an example of a way I could kill grass like the Occupiers did.

I would never pour bleach on grass just cuz. You really didn't need to go into that detail in how you would punish me if you ruled the world.

But if you enjoyed thinking that up then all the power to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$30/Canadian is a great investment if it kept the many people who's employment is linked to the auto sector still employed.

But it does boggle my mind what governments, even conservative ones spend money on.

What shocked me is that they did it despite all of the preachings of the 'free market' that I hear of.

It should have been all paid back or we should have received ownership of much more thant 1.5% as multibillion dollar stake holders with our multibillion dollar investment. Chrysler was bought for $7.4 billion in 2007, tax payers(US and CAN) could have bought the damned company provided funding and sold it again for better investment.

Edited by MiddleClassCentrist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doubt all you want. I'm glad you like weeds. I'm learning to like them myself--a whole lot actually. It costs money to maintain grass, so dang, if the protesters didn't do us another favour if you're right that weeds will take over. But Jacee is also correct. If they're gung ho on keeping their grass, get the grass seed out and scatter. Either way, I don't care. Just keep this movement growing--t' hell with the grass.

What movement? The protests never made clear what is it they are protesting against. I wouldn't call it a movement, more like a bunch of people ranting about nothing. I don't think the government should bail out private companies, nor do I think it should bail out private weed smoking individuals. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

What shocked me is that they did it despite all of the preachings of the 'free market' that I hear of.

It should have been all paid back or we should have received ownership of much more thant 1.5% as multibillion dollar stake holders with our multibillion dollar investment. Chrysler was bought for $7.4 billion in 2007, tax payers(US and CAN) could have bought the damned company provided funding and sold it again for better investment.

Do you hold the same view about welfare recipients? How much do we spend each year bailing out private individuals? And how many of them require bailout again the next year? And the year after? And the year after?

Edited by Archanfel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They never did say what their "protest" was about. I guess that they have all read about the hippies and wanted to copy.Even tho they were at The financial district in Toronto complaining, they used laptops, blackberries, were going to expensive university (some of them) One lived in Rosedale that we know of, etc. Then they squatted in a store that was for rent in Toronto and decided that they were going to set up meals for the homeless. They got kicked out the first day this time. what a bunch of losers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rResults suggest Canada needs to update its tax policies as taxes and tax benefits in particular have become ineffective in wage redistribution, the OECD said.

“The growing share of income going to top earners means that this group now has a greater capacity to pay taxes,” the report said. “In this context governments may re-examine the redistributive role of taxation to ensure that wealthier individuals contribute their fair share.” The top federal marginal income tax rates declined markedly in the past 30 years, falling to 29% in 2010 compared with 43% in 1981.

“Taxes and benefits reduce inequality less in Canada than in most OECD countries,” the report said.

http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/news/economy/blog.html?b=business.financialpost.com/2011/12/05/canadas-rich-still-getting-richer-oecd

Deregulation, free trade and tax cuts have benefited only the wealthiest, who continue to reap the benefits of doing business in/from Canada without paying their fair share back to the country.

The economy isn't recovering because 99% of us are not able to spend. When consumers don't spend, there's no economic growth. When wealth inequality is this extreme, it comes back to bite all of us.

You see, greed isn't good ... not even for the 1%. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They never did say what their "protest" was about. I guess that they have all read about the hippies and wanted to copy.Even tho they were at The financial district in Toronto complaining, they used laptops, blackberries, were going to expensive university (some of them) One lived in Rosedale that we know of, etc. Then they squatted in a store that was for rent in Toronto and decided that they were going to set up meals for the homeless. They got kicked out the first day this time. what a bunch of losers.

Why shouldn't they be using laptops or blackberries exactly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The revolution is tweeted.

Not only that, but guess which sector keeps bringing it up, 2 weeks after the protesters were removed? :lol:

They don't know what the message was, but they keep on talking about it.

Irony more delicious than home-made Greek baklava.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What movement? The protests never made clear what is it they are protesting against. I wouldn't call it a movement, more like a bunch of people ranting about nothing.

If you don't know what the protest was about, you were ignoring it and never read anything other than what you wanted to hear. I didn't even support them fully in their message but I understand what it was about. Frustration toward the weealthy elite who manipulate our laws and government for their own benefit at the expense of everyone else.

Do you hold the same view about welfare recipients? How much do we spend each year bailing out private individuals? And how many of them require bailout again the next year? And the year after? And the year after?

Welfare is a safety net for everyone if they ever end up in a worst case scenario. As has been pointed out in other threads, welfare abuse is highly vocalized by conservative ideologues but the reality is that investigations into welfare fraud rarely result in fraud being found.

Letting a corporation fail would simply mean that another corporation would grow by buying it up or increasing it's market share. It is a business entity that when ceasing to exist has little real impact on anything except for the people who knowingly made a risk investing in the company. Corporations aren't people, jobs shift but the world goes on. Saving a corporation that has mismanaged billions, has limited liability keeps the bad corporate policies that lead it there alive.

Letting a family fail means that you end up with ghettos, higher crime rates and more homeless people begging you for money. I guess that is part of conservatopia. Keep up the noble fight for more starving children, ghettos and homeless people. ;)

  • Welfare should have a hard cap of time spent on it consecutively
  • Welfare recipients should be required to report for communty service/volunteer services for the community if physically/mentally able.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't know what the protest was about, you were ignoring it and never read anything other than what you wanted to hear. I didn't even support them fully in their message but I understand what it was about. Frustration toward the weealthy elite who manipulate our laws and government for their own benefit at the expense of everyone else.

Except that's not what they are protesting against. They are protesting against the middle class who are already under heavy tax burden. They simply want more bailout for individuals and an even more progressive tax system. That's not going to hurt the wealthy elites much, but would crash the middle class which is already shrinking. Of course, they can't say that, so the message is vague at best with no concrete proposals other than rhetoric. They are not saying "Stop bailing out the corporations so that we can cut taxes for the middle class", they are saying "Stop bailing out the corporations so that we can bail out the people" Who are the "people"? Not the middle class for sure, since we don't need a bail out, we just need less taxes.

Welfare is a safety net for everyone if they ever end up in a worst case scenario. As has been pointed out in other threads, welfare abuse is highly vocalized by conservative ideologues but the reality is that investigations into welfare fraud rarely result in fraud being found.

Letting a corporation fail would simply mean that another corporation would grow by buying it up or increasing it's market share. It is a business entity that when ceasing to exist has little real impact on anything except for the people who knowingly made a risk investing in the company. Corporations aren't people, jobs shift but the world goes on. Saving a corporation that has mismanaged billions, has limited liability keeps the bad corporate policies that lead it there alive.

Letting a family fail means that you end up with ghettos, higher crime rates and more homeless people begging you for money. I guess that is part of conservatopia. Keep up the noble fight for more starving children, ghettos and homeless people. ;)

  • Welfare should have a hard cap of time spent on it consecutively
  • Welfare recipients should be required to report for communty service/volunteer services for the community if physically/mentally able.

Unless the corporation doesn't employee anybody in Canada, it will hurt a lot more people than just the shareholders. Not only that, the ripple effect in the local economy would be traumatizing. However, that's necessary for the economy to realign. Remove unneeded capacity and move people to more productive roles. Yes, it's painful, but neither the communists nor Keynes have found a better way.

I am all for social safety net. If somebody really gets into a tough spot through no faults of his/her own, then we as a society should lend a helping hand, if only so that they can pay more taxes later. However, that's simply not the case for a lot of people. I am not talking about frauds. Take the golden girl of TCHC Munira Abukar for example. Is she or her parents still in a worst case scenario? I don't think they are committing welfare or housing fraud, but I'd say they are getting pretty comfy there. How many urban Canadian couples can afford 9 kids or a 5 bedroom apartment in Toronto? That's not a worst case scenario for these people, it's a nightmare for the middle class who are paying their bills. The scary part is these people don't feel apologetic at all, while in the mean time, hundreds of people who are really in their worst case scenario languish on the waiting list.

Moral hazard (which has nothing to do with moral, but everything to do with risk managements) is the key phrase here. I am not against corporation bailout because it is wrong or anything, but because it creates moral hazards. Same goes for the social programs. Social safety net is necessary to help people out, but let's make sure that these people are willing to put in an effort to get out first.

Edited by Archanfel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welfare should have a hard cap of time spent on it consecutively

I disagree. What's more important than the hard cap is finding out why long-term welfare recipients are on it for so long and getting them the training and education they need to be employable; or helping them relocate if that's necessary.
Welfare recipients should be required to report for communty service/volunteer services for the community if physically/mentally able.
I disagree with this as well, since community service and volunteer services are often aimed at aiding welfare recipients themselves. Taking up their time by forcing them to do community service, as if they're criminals, just limits the amount of time that they're out looking for jobs or waiting by the phone for calls from potential employers. Their primary focus should be on finding a job or getting the necessary training/education needed for getting another job, not volunteering their time to other endeavours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't know what the protest was about, you were ignoring it and never read anything other than what you wanted to hear. I didn't even support them fully in their message but I understand what it was about. Frustration toward the weealthy elite who manipulate our laws and government for their own benefit at the expense of everyone else.

Welfare is a safety net for everyone if they ever end up in a worst case scenario. As has been pointed out in other threads, welfare abuse is highly vocalized by conservative ideologues but the reality is that investigations into welfare fraud rarely result in fraud being found.

Letting a corporation fail would simply mean that another corporation would grow by buying it up or increasing it's market share. It is a business entity that when ceasing to exist has little real impact on anything except for the people who knowingly made a risk investing in the company. Corporations aren't people, jobs shift but the world goes on. Saving a corporation that has mismanaged billions, has limited liability keeps the bad corporate policies that lead it there alive.

Letting a family fail means that you end up with ghettos, higher crime rates and more homeless people begging you for money. I guess that is part of conservatopia. Keep up the noble fight for more starving children, ghettos and homeless people. ;)

  • Welfare should have a hard cap of time spent on it consecutively
  • Welfare recipients should be required to report for communty service/volunteer services for the community if physically/mentally able.

Great point, just look at how well detroit has done with the union-induced failure of corporations there. :lol:

How much is it for a house there now? $10k? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...