Occupy Calgary/Do Not Merge

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If spreading to over 70 American cities and gaining traction in countries worldwide isn't "growing", then I don't know what is. What started out as a few hundred students not just three weeks ago in one location has ballooned to hundreds of thousands (if not more) people protesting worldwide and supporting the cause. What can't you see about the "growing" part? Does there need to be over a million in each location? How much more of a description do you need?


.

Re-read my previous post.

Until you get more than the few hundred of the "usual suspects" out in a typical city, you really don't have a significant movement.

A few days ago, you had about 3,000 for occupy Wall St. in New York City - a city of more than 10 million. Meanwhile 45,000 will run in the New York City Marathon next month.

Another example - Metro Denver has a population of 2.7 million and had some hundreds of people out for their Occupy Wall St. protest. Meanwhile, the Denver Rock n Roll Marathon had 12,000 runners.

The full Calgary Marathon had just under 1000 participants and 7,000 across all events . . . . . if this is so important, then do better than that. I'm going to be surprised if you do.

I think I could go to any city where these protests are and find a marathon with more participants in the last six months.

Just giving the debate context in terms of participation among special interest groups.

By having multiple locations you're building the basis for something that COULD be impressive, but its really not at that point yet.

If this movement were really inspiring, each of these locations has the capacity to generate thousands more people than you've seen.

I'm saying you're clearly not inspiring those who wouldn't normally participate.

When Occupy Wall St. starts expanding participation beyond The Usual Suspects like yourself, then that would start to be impressive.

And I said earlier I encourage the protests but thought they should be doing it where they would actually make a difference.

In fact, I'm very clear on why the few hundred are out and clearer still on why there aren't more to this point.

Keep plugging away!!!

Cowperson

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

What are you going to say if they actually achieve true, political change?

That you are still a pretentious d-bag for comparing yourself to someone fighting their way out from under an oppressive regime.

#FirstWorldProblems, man.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

In fact, I'm very clear on why the few hundred are out and clearer still on why there aren't more to this point.

Keep plugging away!!!

Cowperson

So you're assuming that anyone with a beef is already out protesting? There are no "armchair" protesters who support the cause? And to make a real difference, they have to plant two feet in a protesting hot spot? You can create just as much of a voice online as you can in the streets. I don't think you are appreciating that part of it either.

It's like a Flames game. There's 20,000 people actually at the Dome, but far more than that who support the Flames watching on TV and cheering them on on message boards, the Internet and other channels. Or we can use the Obama or Nenshi examples -there were only so many people in the streets voicing support, but their true support came from those who supported their campaigns online and through the media.

BTW marathoners don't have a political purpose and are serving a completely different purpose than protesters. Your examples are perplexing.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That you are still a pretentious d-bag for comparing yourself to someone fighting their way out from under an oppressive regime.

#FirstWorldProblems, man.

Ah, the predictable smarmy remark.

So seriously, what are you going to say if something changes as a result of the protests?

[burn_this_city]

Other than Daradon, is anyone here going to the Calgary protest?

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Ah, the predictable smarmy remark.

So seriously, what are you going to say if something changes as a result of the protests?

I promise to be duly impressed. Sorry, I can't remember the exact quote from Gene Hackman's character in "A Bridge Too Far".

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

BTW marathoners don't have a political purpose and are serving a completely different purpose than protesters. Your examples are perplexing.

What's so perplexing about pointing out that more people make an effort to run a marathon than 'fight the man'? If the 'movement' was building the way you claim it is, you'd see REAL crowds attend these events.

Despite your thoughts on social media, it's 'boots on the ground' that will make the protests credible.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Other than Daradon, is anyone here going to the Calgary protest?

I am going - the merging from Acadia onto Anderson, and from the Heritage mallage onto Deerfoot are particularly vexing.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

I am going - the merging from Acadia onto Anderson, and from the Heritage mallage onto Deerfoot are particularly vexing.

I figured in a show of solidarity, I'll drive 70 merging on to deerfoot and slam on the brakes at the last second, stopping completely at the end of the lane.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Ah, the predictable smarmy remark.

So seriously, what are you going to say if something changes as a result of the protests?

Depends on the change. Also, you act as if such a change would be unprecedented. Anybody from Alberta should know full well that grassroots movements can radically alter the political landscape.

But we're moving in circles back to the opening questions: What is it that you hope to change, and what are your suggestions to foster said change? When OccupyWallStreet finally figures that it, it could certainly become a vehicle for real change.

Knockoffs like OccupyCalgary? Not so much. For the most part, those will simply follow the lead of Slutwalk. People show up, people make noise, people go home, people return to their normal lives.

[The Goon]

If the Flames do poorly against Montreal tomorrow night, I can see this protest turning into OccupySaddledome.

[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.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by RedJester

Did I miss the memo that the Occupy Movement was suddenly all about the twenty something crowd not working hard enough?

To properly discard an argument ad hominem, first you must characterize it's proponents as an undifferentiated (and preferably socially scorned) group. It's easier to say, "Oh, those lazy kids should get a job instead of protesting! Life isn't fair, deal with it!" instead of wondering if maybe there's something to the idea that we don't live in the best of all possible worlds.

[Resolute 14]

Pffft. Says the guy whose avatar looks like a serial killer.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Other than Daradon, is anyone here going to the Calgary protest?

I probably will be there, as long as nothing urgent comes up at work.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

So you're assuming that anyone with a beef is already out protesting? There are no "armchair" protesters who support the cause? And to make a real difference, they have to plant two feet in a protesting hot spot? You can create just as much of a voice online as you can in the streets. I don't think you are appreciating that part of it either.

It's like a Flames game. There's 20,000 people actually at the Dome, but far more than that who support the Flames watching on TV and cheering them on on message boards, the Internet and other channels. Or we can use the Obama or Nenshi examples -there were only so many people in the streets voicing support, but their true support came from those who supported their campaigns online and through the media.

BTW marathoners don't have a political purpose and are serving a completely different purpose than protesters. Your examples are perplexing.

You like to make the comparison to the Arab Spring but the on-line communication in those instances served a particular purpose, that being to get people out into the streets in the tens of thousands, and was very successful.

The numbers marching in each location for Occupy Wall St. are hardly mind-blowing suggesting all of that invisible on-line activity isn't motivating people to more activity.

Its easy to find other special interest groups - like marathoners as one example - who can put out more participation in each location by a long shot. Whether or not its political or not is irrelevant. The comparison speaks to the capacity of a city to generate a group of like-minded citizens for a specific purpose . . . . most marathoners search for races and register on-line.

I'm not saying you'll never do it . . . . . I'm just saying you haven't done it to date. The cause has been limited to physical particpation of 'The Usual Suspects" for the most part.

The Arab Spring inspired those who wouldn't normally take to the streets.

As I've said earlier, even titans of industry are sympathetic to Occupy Wall St. as far as complaining about the current political stalemate . . . . . hell, even I'm sympathetic.

But don't kid yourself. While interesting, this is a lot less galvanizing than you're making it out to be.

I think if you refine your message and have clear and identifiable goals - a business plan - you could probably jump active participation a fair bit.

That's probably going to be impossible, however. You don't have clearly defined goals because if it ever got around to that conversation within the group, the arguing would probably send people off on their own special interest/beliefs tangents.

Cowperson

[Muta]

More fuel to the fire! Some of you arguing for a 'purpose' might be surprised.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/10/12/tech...htm?hpt=hp_bn2

[Ozy_Flame]

We'll just have to agree to disagree then. Since the protests are showing no signs of slowing down and cater to those with a grievance, I see it as a galvanizing force that has finally gotten people out into the streets in a collective manner.

Perhaps they should switch their focus to burning the Ayatollah for the Iranian terrorist plot instead?

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Bah, rants of lame old men around here.

I'll talk about one reason specifically why the younger generation is pissed off and should be upset about the way things are going:

Entry level salaries for University grads are not rising proportionately to cost of living, while CEO's salaries are increasing exponentially.

Think about the cost of a house. In the 80's, you old farts probably bought your brand new baby for 2-3x your base salary (my father personally made 35K and paid 67K for his house).

Now, us on the other hand are looking at 4x-5x the amount on a normal entry level salary and that's for a ****ty condo. More people than ever are getting stuck in the renter's rut, unless they are married / have generous parents.

Housing costs rise because there are more people competing for less real estate. Salaries drop because there are more people competing for fewer jobs and there is always someone else who is willing to do the same job for less than you make.

Why should you expect those to be tied together or why would corporations be inclined to tie what they pay to rising housing costs?

I agree with your point as we all would like more pay and cheaper housing, but it just doesn't coincide with reality unless a protest can galvanize government intervention...to start killing off the weak and infirm and deporting the visible minorities.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

How does the US government give a donation to a candidate in an election?

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.