Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
Occupy Calgary will not achieve anything. I'm completely cognizant of that. In fact, I'm not sure why it's even happening here. Protests get little attention here and no one cares. But then again, that's Canadian apathy for you.
If anything, the open-endedness of the protests are the lone similarity to that of Occupy Wall Street, in which that's completely understandable. There are people with beefs about various different things. They have every right to protest whatever they want.
What you see as apathy I see as contentment.
I'm not protesting not because I don't care, but becasue I'm happy with the way the system works.
It certainly isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn good.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Bring_Back_Shantz For This Useful Post:
It doesn't. That list was of donations made by people/PACs associated with a given organization. For example, the IBM number isn't money donated directly by IBM, it's money donated by IBM employees and IBM associated PACs.
The US Gov't number is gov't employees donating. Obama is a strong union type, so he appeals to the public sector unions/employees.
So the 2 million employees of the US government passed the hat and collected $0.25 a person. I am not sure how this kind of money can be seen as corrupting.
I'm not protesting not because I don't care, but becasue I'm happy with the way the system works.
It certainly isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn good.
A lot of people in Canada don't quite understand what they have here. It may not be perfect but considering a lot of other countries people in Canada have it really good. You can't please everyone.
My parents came from old Europe and from some of the stories I hear I am very happy to live in a place like Canada and don't take it for granted.
I'm not protesting not because I don't care, but becasue I'm happy with the way the system works.
It certainly isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn good.
That's the nice thing about these protests - if you have a grievance, you can protest it.
And keep in mind, there are plenty of people in this country who don't have it as rosy. You make it sound like everyone is Canada should be thanking their lucky stars to be here and that being Canadian is "good enough." That's nice on paper and all, but it's simply not the case for every Canadian. Canadians can suffer too.
As stated before, they're drawing relative flies and counting new flies - the usual suspects one would normally find in new locations as evidence of expansion.
The first march in Denver drew anywhere from a few hundred to 700, depending whom you talked to among organizors. If the days go by and the next one draws 2,000 and the next 5,000 and so on . . . . . then you've got the definition of an inspiring movement.
But that's not happening as near as I can see.
Each city of a million or more attracts the few hundred and then it seems to level.
I said earlier that any attempt to focus goals into something definable would likely see the group break apart into its disparate special interests.
They have to keep it ill-defined to stay together . . . . . but that makes it hard to inspire and grow.
The key moment for Occupy Wall St will not be about popping up in various chapters in a wide range of cities. It will be about inspiring and expanding beyond those initial disaffected hundreds in each location so the numbers grow into thousands and tens of thousands.
To get around that unlikely scenario, I would fairly predict they'll take an example from other groups and call for a gathering at the Mall in Washington . . . . . and then we'll argue about how many tens of thousands were there.
I'm supportive of protesting the current political stalemate and lobbying for enhanced regulatory oversight of leverage-creating aspects of the financial system . . . . . but I'm pretty skeptical of this whole Occupy Wall St. thing.
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
Location: In my office, at the Ministry of Awesome!
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
That's the nice thing about these protests - if you have a grievance, you can protest it.
And keep in mind, there are plenty of people in this country who don't have it as rosy. You make it sound like everyone is Canada should be thanking their lucky stars to be here and that being Canadian is "good enough." That's nice on paper and all, but it's simply not the case for every Canadian. Canadians can suffer too.
Clearly not everyone is 100% content in Canada or Calgary, but this goes back to what Cow was saying. If this movement really is gaining traction and so many people have so many grievences they why aren't we actually seeing those people get out with the usualy group of smelly hippies?
This isn't a groundswell of people who feel opressed and what to see significant change, this appears to be a loose group of people who either just hate the system but can't articulate it better than saying "Corporations are bad", nor offer any sort of suggestions for improvements, or middle class kids who feel the need to fight for the downtrodden folks who apparently don't know they are downtrodden.
Protesting a system that works better than 90% of them out there is a waste of effort. You simply won't be able to get the support needed for significant change, becasue the vast majority of the people recoginze that collectively we've got it pretty good.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN. <-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
I'm supportive of protesting the current political stalemate and lobbying for enhanced regulatory oversight of leverage-creating aspects of the financial system . . . . . but I'm pretty skeptical of this whole Occupy Wall St. thing.
If anything else, Occupy Wall Steet is drawing attention to a failed banking system in the US which conducted wonton recklessness knowing full well they were preying upon the weaknesses of everyday people.
The protests may lack complete clarity, but even a toddler could figure out what Occupy Wall Street protestors are generally peeved about. I understood their general message the first time I heard heard about the whole thing.
I don't know. It wouldn't change the trend, but it might make it look far less drastic - or more drastic, I dont know.
I don't have time to search through all the data and create a chart, and the creator of the chart decided to make it with *at least* 25% of it comprised of completely fabricated data. There is no reason to think the rest of the information displayed on the graph is fully accurate either.
Trust me, as a student working full time for a non-profit organization while attending classes with a wife and 2 kids at home, I feel the pain of housing prices.
I just don't think that graph is an accurate.
well, even if the data is less drastic, the trend is troubling...really, the concentration of wealth is shrinking the middle class...
The notion of the GOP "not raising taxes for anyone" is a strawman argument. taxation when you are a millionaire vs the average person is relative, as everyday items cost the same too.
Again, the move is to repeal the Bush tax cuts...bring taxation levels back to the Clinton years - people seem to think this is some kind of uncharted territory - it's not.
If the austerity program is to work, cutting government spending is simply not enough. Taxes have to be raised, that's for everyone. The GOP dogma of cutting taxes flies in the face of Republican administrations. Including that of their most celebrated president, Reagan.
If anything else, Occupy Wall Steet is drawing attention to a failed banking system in the US which conducted wonton recklessness knowing full well they were preying upon the weaknesses of everyday people.
That's good to know. The global economic meltdown certainly hadn't already made that clear...
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
well, even if the data is less drastic, the trend is troubling...really, the concentration of wealth is shrinking the middle class...
The notion of the GOP "not raising taxes for anyone" is a strawman argument. taxation when you are a millionaire vs the average person is relative, as everyday items cost the same too.
Again, the move is to repeal the Bush tax cuts...bring taxation levels back to the Clinton years - people seem to think this is some kind of uncharted territory - it's not.
If the austerity program is to work, cutting government spending is simply not enough. Taxes have to be raised, that's for everyone. The GOP dogma of cutting taxes flies in the face of Republican administrations. Including that of their most celebrated president, Reagan.
I think that the whole taxation thing has to be looked at, there is no doubt that taxes has to be raised across most of the classes, with the exception of the working poor.
But I am against Wealth redistribution for redistribution sake. Is there a gap between the rich and the poor, absolutely, is there a gap between the middle class and both sides absolutely. But there has to be that gap and there's going to be that gap because to be honest some peoples skills, or physical skills or intelligence levels or whatever are just more valuable to society, and by punishing people because they're being compensated highly for their skills is just going to sap productivity at those levels.
The U.S. does have to create austerity spending plans, and that includes deep cuts to social programs that have become ineffective and wastful.
The U.S. has to avoid trying to spend their way out of this mess, another trillion for a jobs bill that creates temporary jobs just before an election is short sighted at best. Creating government jobs to boost the employment rate is stupid at best.
America is now at the point where free rides can't be offered everywhere, and you almost have to make people pay for everything, and whether thats through increased taxes for everyone or charging service fees where you can its going to have to happen.
The American's are also going to have to increase their unemployment rate by cutting down on thier civil service instead of increasing it.
While the popular notion is to cut defense spending, and I agree that it has to happen, I don't think that you can cut it that much deeper to the point that it effects readiness. Maybe America needs to start billing countries for its deployment of troops.
I disagree with the notion that in Canada because these things are not well atteneded that its mainly because of apathy. Its mainly because a lot of people in Canada are not in the so called 99% as defined in the states, so why would they protest, and its also because they have thrown these protests wide open so that they sound more like b%tchfests then actual protests.
I'm not going to throw my lot in with a antiwar, Stephen Harper is Hitler reborn, Alberta is evil because we have Oil sands protest where I might agree with one pillar of the protest, I'll wait for the protest thats focused around something that I care about.
I don't know, I'm into babbling now.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Am I the only one who doesn't believe the graph does shoot up like that? I know we were resilient in Canada, but housing prices didn't continue that upward trajectory through 2008 and beyond. Something seems wrong...
That chart is a little silly in that it seems to operate on 5 year increments but the overall numbers are correct. By the end of the chart's timeline (end of 2009) prices were that much higher in those cities when compared to 1996. If the chart was more precise, it would have shown an even steeper rise between 2005 and early 2008 where Calgary's real estate hit 240% of 1996 levels before dropping down a bit to 190% in 2009. So the end results are correct but the path prices took to get there are a little misleading. There has been a bit of a drop off from the peak, but it's still increased that much more than income in that span.
Hell, I don't even blame these people for protesting. There's a lot ####ed up things going on in this world, but misinformed and misguided protesting is a waste of time and really just makes everyone laugh at you.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to jar_e For This Useful Post:
I think that the whole taxation thing has to be looked at, there is no doubt that taxes has to be raised across most of the classes, with the exception of the working poor.
But I am against Wealth redistribution for redistribution sake. Is there a gap between the rich and the poor, absolutely, is there a gap between the middle class and both sides absolutely. But there has to be that gap and there's going to be that gap because to be honest some peoples skills, or physical skills or intelligence levels or whatever are just more valuable to society, and by punishing people because they're being compensated highly for their skills is just going to sap productivity at those levels.
The U.S. does have to create austerity spending plans, and that includes deep cuts to social programs that have become ineffective and wastful.
The U.S. has to avoid trying to spend their way out of this mess, another trillion for a jobs bill that creates temporary jobs just before an election is short sighted at best. Creating government jobs to boost the employment rate is stupid at best.
America is now at the point where free rides can't be offered everywhere, and you almost have to make people pay for everything, and whether thats through increased taxes for everyone or charging service fees where you can its going to have to happen.
The American's are also going to have to increase their unemployment rate by cutting down on thier civil service instead of increasing it.
While the popular notion is to cut defense spending, and I agree that it has to happen, I don't think that you can cut it that much deeper to the point that it effects readiness. Maybe America needs to start billing countries for its deployment of troops.
I disagree with the notion that in Canada because these things are not well atteneded that its mainly because of apathy. Its mainly because a lot of people in Canada are not in the so called 99% as defined in the states, so why would they protest, and its also because they have thrown these protests wide open so that they sound more like b%tchfests then actual protests.
I'm not going to throw my lot in with a antiwar, Stephen Harper is Hitler reborn, Alberta is evil because we have Oil sands protest where I might agree with one pillar of the protest, I'll wait for the protest thats focused around something that I care about.
I don't know, I'm into babbling now.
well, it was a well considered babble at least.
there has always been some disparity and concentration of wealth - that is the natural outcome of capitalism.
I would argue however, that the vast gulf that has developed isn't because of the inherent talent, ability or skill of the elite; rather its recent magnification is the result of a system being flawed or of corporations taking advantage of the system.
The GOP crying foul over the proposed legislation to close tax loopholes is ridiculous. Loopholes, be definition, were never intended to be part of the legislation. Instead, people fall back on the notion that this is a way of 'raising taxes'....actually, no it is not. It's about creating some fairness in the system.
GE's corporate tax paid last year is symptomatic of the problems with the system. 14.2 billion profit, 5.1 billion from US operations, and they paid...zero taxes? That makes no sense.
That's the nice thing about these protests - if you have a grievance, you can protest it.
And keep in mind, there are plenty of people in this country who don't have it as rosy. You make it sound like everyone is Canada should be thanking their lucky stars to be here and that being Canadian is "good enough." That's nice on paper and all, but it's simply not the case for every Canadian. Canadians can suffer too.
You don't protest a grievance; you protest against the (perceived) cause of the grievance. How do you protest joblessness? How do you protest poverty?
Perhaps America Complains would have been a better name for this "protest" then.
You don't protest a grievance; you protest against the (perceived) cause of the grievance. How do you protest joblessness? How do you protest poverty?
Perhaps America Complains would have been a better name for this "protest" then.
Sigh.
People have lost their savings. Their homes. Their livelihoods. And a good swath of them didn't have a say in the matter.
But I guess they're just complainers.
People sure love to focus on the suburban 'iPod aficionados' in the Occupy crowd, but they also love to ignore the thousands upon thousands of people who took a beating economically. People who are in poverty and lost everything because of a broken system.
Is there no sympathy for these people? At all? Or is it all their fault as it appears the right-leaning crowd around here is suggesting? And is this conversation going to go in circles again?
I haven't had my three martini lunch yet so I'm a little shaky.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary
there has always been some disparity and concentration of wealth - that is the natural outcome of capitalism.
I would argue however, that the vast gulf that has developed isn't because of the inherent talent, ability or skill of the elite; rather its recent magnification is the result of a system being flawed or of corporations taking advantage of the system.
While I don't strongly disagree with the above, I do disagree with the above. For the most part and I've said the most part, CEO's and executives get to that level because at some point they've proven that they can do that job. For the most part CEO's and Executives get paid more because they have the skills, knowledge or Corporate Behavior that dictates large dollar pay checks in the market place. But Captain, some will argue, what about the CEO's that are running companies that are losing money, or doing bad business. Well the system while flawed will eventually take out those executives. Also for the most part salaries aren't set based on the success of the organization as much as their based on the fierce competition to find, hire and retain very high level people. I think if you want to blame companies or corporations etc, you have to get beyond the CEO focus and go right to the Board of Directors level because those are the guys that approve the golden parachutes and high salaries.
At the end of the day, in a Capatalist society you will get paid what the market dictates you will get paid, and its great to have the notion that a guy who digs toilets should get paid on a closer level to a guy that runs a multibillion or million dollar company its just not realistic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary
The GOP crying foul over the proposed legislation to close tax loopholes is ridiculous. Loopholes, be definition, were never intended to be part of the legislation. Instead, people fall back on the notion that this is a way of 'raising taxes'....actually, no it is not. It's about creating some fairness in the system.
I've always agreed that the government should be in the business of closing loopholes and making the tax code easier to follow. If you actually cut all the loop holes, you would literally be able to lower tax rates because everyone would pay their proper share.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary
GE's corporate tax paid last year is symptomatic of the problems with the system. 14.2 billion profit, 5.1 billion from US operations, and they paid...zero taxes? That makes no sense.
I absolutely agree that GE has to pay more taxes, but don't you need to balance that against the nearly 300,000 people that they employ in the U.S.? How do you balance that off and encourage companies like GE to continue to grow and employ Americans?
And instead of blaming GE for taking advantage of the tax code, shouldn't we be angry at the American Government and the IRS? And don't you think that we should be wary that Obama received a corporate contribution from GE to the tune of $570,000.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Last edited by CaptainCrunch; 10-12-2011 at 01:40 PM.
People have lost their savings. Their homes. Their livelihoods. And a good swath of them didn't have a say in the matter.
People who are in poverty and lost everything because of a broken system.
Is there no sympathy for these people? At all? Or is it all their fault as it appears the right-leaning crowd around here is suggesting? And is this conversation going to go in circles again?
Did a 'broken system' cause people to run up massive credit card debt?
Did a 'broken system' make people decide it was fine to live above their means?
Did a 'broken system' cause people to buy more house than they could afford? I'm no genius but I didn't rush out to buy the biggest, most expensive house because I thought house prices would go up forever.
I acknowledge that the system is very flawed, but lets not remove personal responsibility out of the equation.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to longsuffering For This Useful Post:
Did a 'broken system' cause people to run up massive credit card debt?
Did a 'broken system' make people decide it was fine to live above their means?
Did a 'broken system' cause people to buy more house than they could afford? I'm no genius but I didn't rush out to buy the biggest, most expensive house because I thought house prices would go up forever.
I acknowledge that the system is very flawed, but lets not remove personal responsibility out of the equation.
I didn't. I said a good swath of them lost their livelihoods due to reasons beyond their control.
Personal responsibility is very much a pertinent thing that caused people to live beyond their means. However, the system allowed for it. There were no restrictions, no warnings, no red flags - as long as the rules were wide open, banks had no problem letting the abuse continue. I believe this has already been beaten to death with the keyboard stick in this thread already.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!
