Occupy Edmonton, at 12:15 pm.
Asking the tough questions.
Brought to you by the Alberta Teachers’ Union.
Photos courtesy AZiggen, who notes “I suspect most were there for the farmer’s market at city hall.”
Occupy Edmonton, at 12:15 pm.
Asking the tough questions.
Brought to you by the Alberta Teachers’ Union.
Photos courtesy AZiggen, who notes “I suspect most were there for the farmer’s market at city hall.”
They even occupied Regina, of all places. I laughed my butt off when I read that.
Regina. The financial epicenter of Canada!! That should do the trick.
Protestors in Regina told Global News they had full intentions on continuing their demonstrations as long as they could.
With several degrees of frost last night, I’ll betcha they went home instead.
Why not have each and every person’s photo be posted on facebook with a bio?
It would be fascinating reading!
No Guff:
s/
Of course, you should have paid her tuition. In fact, you should have offered, instead of making her feel, like, you know, all flustered and embarrassed, kind of, because she had to, like, ask.
Don’t you realize how you’ve fractured her Disney dreams of little mermaids, talking tea cups, and beasts that turn into princes? Her unicorn turned out to be a six-year old rusting Kia with one dented fender and three bald tires, and someone’s going to pay!
And, since you’re an older, white male, it’s going to be you. So there. /s
∞² >
“If I had a sign that said “free fusion pineapple deep-fried chicken balls”,”
You would be standing in front of the CHRC, for inciting racism!
The left claims Obamba was born in Hawaii, regardless of the fact that he has not provided a legal birth certificate (forget the online photo shopped forgery that came out two years after the fact). China has opened Obamba fried Chicken outlets across many parts of the nation; they are non-white so that is ok on the politically correct front.
Therefore YOU with sign = Pineapple (Obamba) + Fried Chicken (black racism) + Free (racist welfare mocking) = CHRC & life over as you once knew it.
Whatever you guys do… don’t use that sh!t between your ears. You might actually come to the dangerous realization that you’re part of the 99% whether you like it or not:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2010/09/theoretical_egalitarians.html
Read this. It’s not a matter of opinion that the very wealthy have been concentrating wealth, it’s a matter of record. The ranks of the poor are growing, the middle class stagnating, and the trend is increasing.
That’s what these protests are about, and that’s why you should be adding your voices to the demand for change.
John >
“The ranks of the poor are growing, the middle class stagnating, and the trend is increasing. “
What do you say about closing the borders to stop the influx of Illegal Third World Immigration and all the associated costs that are aiding the state bankruptcies as with California? That would be a practical start wouldn’t it?
John – “…that’s why you should be adding your voices to the demand for change. “
But that’s exactly what the Tea Party has been doing long before these street urchins parked their behinds on Wall Street’s sidewalks. The Tea Party is demanding change, and they are taking it directly to the source that can affect change. Why don’t these people join the Tea Party and do something relevant and effective?
It would appear as though John is as thick as two short planks. For your information John wealth is what YOU create. If there are more poor now than there was a few years ago its because we have more people with out a clue as to how to create wealth. They are bereft of ideas, drive and expertise largely because our socialist ideals have inculcated a ‘gimme’ approach to live that keeps them permanently poor. In other words the government playing Robin Hood increases poverty not eliminates poverty.
Knight,
Stop the ranks of immigration? But how would the Conservatives come to power without these people? They both need them in the country to fire up people like yourself, BUT also to for their votes, because after all, what you have in common with so many of these immigrants you hate, is their backwards, conservative beliefs, which make both you and them vote conservative.
But seriously though, the problem is not the immigrants. It’s a number of things, such as taxation, the attacks on unions (the nations with the strongest unions have the strongest economies and best balance of wealth), and the shipping of jobs overseas to factories where labour laws are virtually non-existant.
As for the tea-party… they stood by and said NOTHING while George Bush turned a surplus into a massive debt, and sat on his ass while the economy went to hell. They only lost their little minds when suddenly there was a democrat in the White House.
And the key difference here… the Tea Party was against the bailout, which was insane, because the bailout was needed to save the economy. The problem was that bankers got a free pass for their failures, and managed to prevent new regulations from coming into play that would stop them from making similar mistakes in the future, and also for giving themselves massive bonuses and pay raises for their efforts.
That said, yes… there are similarities, and the Tea Party types should be on deck with this too. They, after all, are part of the 99%.
John >
Wow, where to start with your delusional view of the world.
To begin with, the Third World Immigration vote goes to the Liberal Democratic Party, your claim that it’s the other way around proves that your disingenuous and marks everything else you say as probable BS.
John – “they stood by and said NOTHING while George Bush…”
The Tea Party didn’t form until mid 2008 in support of Ron Paul’s presidential campaign. The first organized event couldn’t and didn’t occur until 2009 after the failed Ron Paul elections. Your George Bush claim is another misleading false statement.
John – “the Tea Party was against the bailout, which was insane, because the bailout was needed to save the economy”
Insane? The bailouts didn’t work by every expert opinion today. The real shadowed fallacy you bring is that it was necessary to support the banks and Wall Street with bailouts, and then in the same breath you support these lunatics that want to destroy the banks & Wall Street.
The only sensible thing you stated was the corruption that occurred with bonuses and payouts with the bailout money. Yes, it’s called corruption, where is Obamba to hunt down this corruption and recover the money that he gave them against the protests of the Tea Party????
Once again, reality does not fit a conservative thinker’s wold view. What a shock.
I’m afraid to break it to you, but immigrants voted Conservative in the last election, because Cons appealed to their most backward ways. So eager in fact for immigrant votes were some Cons, that they happily rubbed elbows with people connected to the worst terrorist bombing pre-911:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-attended-two-meetings-with-man-acquitted-of-air-india-bombing-campaign-worker-says/article2001661/
But really, the proof is in the stats:
http://www.punditsguide.ca/2011/09/who-really-won-the-%e2%80%9cethnic%e2%80%9d-vote-in-the-may-election/
Even Frum weighes in:
http://www.frumforum.com/how-canadas-conservatives-won-the-immigrant-vote
And no… we heard nary a word about the US debt/deficit from Cons until Obama won, so really, they can cram their opinion up their bums. They kept their mouths firmly shut while government grew and surplus turned into debt, EVEN when the economy was doing well.
And no… the bailouts did actually work according to every measure, if “work” means keeping the economy from collapsing into depression. The problem now is that conservatives fought against reforming a corrupt system that has now come around to bite us once again. The bailouts were not intended to save executives from losing billions, but to save millions from losing their jobs.
In fact there were calls to tax the bonuses, but guess who fought against it? That’s right… Republicans!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/17/AR2009031703780.html
And Joe… is it realistic to expect everyone to create wealth? Is it wrong for the billions of working people on Earth to expect to be paid descent wages by the so-called wealth creators? Do people really need to make billions at the expense of paying people nigh slave wages? Because right now, North Americans are competing against the poor buggers in parts of the world that have never heard of labour laws, and these are the places corporations are rushing to move our jobs to.
“And Joe… is it realistic to expect everyone to create wealth?”
YES! YES! YES! A THOUSAND TIMES YES!!!!!
As an old rifleman once said if you aim for failure you are going to hit it every time.
A little too cold for the socks and birkenstocks crowd perhaps?
So Joe… who’s going to actually do the work? And are you suggesting that the labour of billions of people has nothing to do with the wealth created?
John @2:37 – “And Joe… is it realistic to expect everyone to create wealth?”
Joe @2:43 – “YES! YES! YES! A THOUSAND TIMES YES!!!!!”
John @2:58 – “And are you suggesting that the labour of billions of people has nothing to do with the wealth created?”
John seems confused.
Enlighten me.
I’ll try. Does it occur to you that your two statements, quoted above, seem to imply two mutually incompatible assumptions about a single subject?
John >
Of course non western ethnic peoples are conservative by nature; they live in the real world outside of Liberal fantasy. That wasn’t the argument, the argument was which way they vote – and that of course is for the entitlement parties in the west, because they are the overwhelming recipients of Liberal entitlements.
You are either delusional or disingenuous if you believe otherwise. This has been the Liberal voting stronghold from Scandinavia, though the UK, Europe, the US, Australia and Canada. The Third World ethnic minority vote in the west is overwhelming for entitlements not based on actual beliefs. That would require a western sense of moral righteousness which does not occur for the same ideological sense of justice in non western cultures.
The remainder of your arguments are baseless and moot, first and foremost because you cannot get by the simple fact that ethnic minorities generally vote Liberal. This is a conveniently overlooked financial sinkhole of undeserving entitlements derived from racial pandering, a dirty style of politics for the benefit of a few to maintain their liberal left political jobs.
When you can be honest about this point, your other arguments may have a leg to stand on; at the moment they look like pure rubbish, a childish wish list for mom and dad.
John – “is it realistic to expect everyone to create wealth?”
Is it realistic to demand those that do to support those that don’t?
Why are Mao and Stalin the enlightened poster pin-ups for the average Socialist advocate? Did they create wealth for the mass’s or just for themselves? How did their labour laws work out?
Wha? Knight, are you still suggesting that the “ethnic vote” went to the Liberals and the NDP? Dude… check the stats. They voted conservative, and they did so for a number of reason. One was that the conservatives went for them hard with all sorts of goodies you guys would hate, and the other was that they don’t realize that their own conservative beliefs are in part, the reason the country they left is such a lousy place to live.
Joe, my point re wealth creation is that the large bulk of the population does participate in wealth creation by doing the actual work. And that they deserve to enjoy fair compensation for their efforts. They may not be making the big decisions, but they’re still part of the machine. The trouble is, they’ve been tricked into agreeing to all sorts of conservative bull that has seen jobs go overseas, services cut, and taxes for the wealthy reduced to that they’re no longer paying their fair share.
CEO’s have seen their wages soar from 20 times that of a guy on the floor to more than 400 times that amount. Are you guys honestly arguing that they deserve it? That it’s workers who are expecting too much for their labour? Perhaps we should be more like the average Chinese worker?
Don’t answer that. I know what you probably think, and you’re welcome to live your life as a serf if you want, but it seems like finally the middle class is waking up to the fact that they’ve been in a class war for the past 30 years whether they like it or not.
You guys continue circlejerkin’ each other and the wealthy who would as soon kick you in the teeth. I’m goin’ outside.
Oh look, we have our very own Retard Fall troll. How nice.
Say John, how much are they paying you to troll SDA? By the word or by the hour?
John > 4:43 PM
“…and the other was that they don’t realize that their own conservative beliefs are in part, the reason the country they left is such a lousy place to live.”
Did you just say that?
Bwwwwahahahahaha.
Now how many levels of absurd thinking did it take to come up with that racially belittling remark 🙂
We’re done here; no one can dialog much less argue with illogical babbling nonsense.
John, why do you think that the rich don’t pay a lot of taxes? Who told you that they don’t? (“Their fair share”; What would be “fair”, 70, 80%? And who’s “wealthy”?)
Well John,
The bailout was insane, as was the stimulus spending. No matter how many times they try and fail the obtuse fall to their knees grab, Keynes thigh and yell fiscal policy, fiscal policy, government spend!!
The corporate tax rate for a company with over 500K of income is 25% in Alberta, 15% Federal and 10% Provincial (most Provinces, save Quebec are about the same). The Federal rate in the US for a similar company is 35% plus up to an 8% State tax. Care to guess why Canada is doing well?
Yes you are the 99%, of folks who are dumber than average.
John-What is a fair wage for a ‘working class’ person? What are fair government benefits-ie how much health care/education/old age pension? Particularly as it applies to Canada? And to qualify, how long do you have to live in Canada? Please give this readership your specific recommendations.
Guys. Read this. Fact check the info if you must, and keep in mind things have gotten worse since this was published.
http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4#the-gap-between-the-top-1-and-everyone-else-hasnt-been-this-bad-since-the-roaring-twenties-1
It’s quite simple – don’t like the job you’ve got? Go out and get the skills and training you need and get a better one.
Time for these folks to go home and look in the mirror and ask why they are not successful, the easy thing to do is to blame society, as John is doing.
Beer and Popcorn… did you even read the thing I posted? It’s basically just easy to understand infographics, so don’t let it scare you.
But if you do read it, you will see that it’s just not as simple as you think it is. While the values you are suggesting are good ones, you are not taking into account the ability of people to get those skills and training. It could be that they just can’t afford it, have health problems, or kids.
The whole point is that for a while our society had found a respectable balance of wealth distribution, but now it’s out of wack, and it’s mostly because a few people are getting so greedy, that they’re just looking at their own bottom lines vs that of our civilization.
Do yourself a favour and read the graphic. I don’t love all the causes you see at these rallies either, but the issue of wealth distribution concerns everyone in the 99%. This means you.
Beer and Popcorn… did you even read the thing I posted? It’s basically just easy to understand infographics, so don’t let it scare you.
But if you do read it, you will see that it’s just not as simple as you think it is. While the values you are suggesting are good ones, you are not taking into account the ability of people to get those skills and training. It could be that they just can’t afford it, have health problems, or kids.
The whole point is that for a while our society had found a respectable balance of wealth distribution, but now it’s out of wack, and it’s mostly because a few people are getting so greedy, that they’re just looking at their own bottom lines vs that of our civilization.
Do yourself a favour and read the infographics. I don’t love all the causes you see at these rallies either, but the issue of wealth distribution concerns everyone in the 99%. This means you.
http://www.businessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4#the-gap-between-the-top-1-and-everyone-else-hasnt-been-this-bad-since-the-roaring-twenties-1
John, I can see your point about people not being able to change certain circumstances of their lives because of things like health concerns or having children but also keep in mind that greed, not capitalism, is the evil that must be challenged, the standard of poverty in the First World is having all one’s basic needs met and even being obese and that “wealth distribution” is ultimately unfair. Why should I forgo my earnings because some trust-fund baby or union leader says so? Not everyone is some caricature craven capitalist. And people who have excess wealth (relative term for now) can “share” it as they see fit in the form of charities of their choice. They can’t do that when over-taxed or forced to redistribute what they’ve worked hard for.
John @4:43 – “The trouble is, they’ve been tricked into agreeing to all sorts of conservative bull that has seen jobs go overseas, services cut, and taxes for the wealthy reduced to that they’re no longer paying their fair share.”
Via. David Thompson, “The nearby chart shows that the top 1% of taxpayers, those who earn above $388,806, paid 40% of all income taxes in 2006, the highest share in at least 40 years.”
“The trouble is, they’ve been tricked into agreeing to all sorts of conservative bull that has seen jobs go overseas, services cut, and taxes for the wealthy reduced to that they’re no longer paying their fair share.”
What complete and absolute poppycock. Consumers not businesses tell the business where to buy its products. As a consumer I can go to a store and spend $100.00 for a pair of jeans made in Canada or I can go to a store and spend $20.00 for a pair of jeans made off shore. It is my choice as a consumer. If I and every other consumer were to opt for the Canadian jeans no retailer would be bringing in off shore jeans. However the real question I have for you is if you actually care for the impoverished or you are just a unionista spouting the Marxist line. If you really care about alleviating poverty then you would welcome the outsourcing of production. While making the jeans off shore may cut the wages of the jean makers in Canada by 40%, it increases the wages of someone off shore by 200%. Believe it or not those off shore live in real poverty not the materialist luxury we call poverty.
“If you really care about alleviating poverty then you would welcome the outsourcing of production.”
I don’t object to it at all. What I do object to is companies going offshore in order to pay horrifically low wages.
Take Apple. Great products. Love em to death. Would I mind paying a bit more for an Apple so that some poor slob in China doesn’t have to work under horrendous conditions? Not a bit. But how’s about this? I’m willing to pay more, maybe that rich, dead SOB Jobs also pay a bit more, or rather take a bit less?
Again with the black and white thinking.
I still wish I’d gone to the protest with a “DOWN WITH MINIMUM WAGE” sign.
Chang wanted to bring that “I HATE STUFF TOO” sign that a slightly smarter hipster took to Occupy Wall Street.
John @ 8:49 p.m.: “The whole point is that for a while our society had found a respectable balance of wealth distribution, but now it’s out of wack, and it’s mostly because a few people are getting so greedy, that they’re just looking at their own bottom lines vs that of our civilization.”
There is some truth in this, but not much. The reason things may be “out of wack” is that for several decades, politicians have spent more than taxpayers can afford, so they’re in the midst of the process of borrowing nations into oblivion. Apparently it’s cheaper for governments to borrow, even though a lot of government spending is not invested in productive enterprises, unlike most private business spending.
“Greed”, meaning the desire for something a person is not entitled to, is always kept under control by the free market, because capitalism is based on voluntary trade for mutual benefit, based on one’s own individual judgments about the relative value of items on offer. If one asks for too much, no one will deal with you. It’s only when people (which may of course include certain businessmen) press governments to pass laws that interfere with the free market, that greed can become a problem and the favoured few get things they do not deserve. Over the long run, this cannot hold. The solution is to abolish government intervention in the economy.
It’s entirely possible that, in difficult economic times (which are always a creation of government policy), it’s more difficult to run a corporation, so the rewards have to be higher. The rich can generally take care of themselves, while the poor may have a tougher time of it. But that is not the fault of the rich per se.
The economic crisis is one of coercion. The fundamental moral principle of a civilized society is that no person has the right to initiate the use of force on any other person. This rule needs to be acknowledged and all government policies that violate it must be scrapped.
“It’s entirely possible that, in difficult economic times (which are always a creation of government policy), it’s more difficult to run a corporation, so the rewards have to be higher. The rich can generally take care of themselves, while the poor may have a tougher time of it. But that is not the fault of the rich per se.”
It is when the rich are not paying the poor better for the work they do.
I’d written another comment that never made it, and for the life of my I have no idea why. Possibly my logic was too blinding for this blog?
Ah well. You guys believe whatever you want. Once again I sign off with “you’re just shooting yourselves in the foot.”
Thanks Mamba, been looking for some updated stats like this. No comment from John, though….now he’ll start babbling on about “wealth” instead of taxes…..
———————–
John @4:43 – “The trouble is, they’ve been tricked into agreeing to all sorts of conservative bull that has seen jobs go overseas, services cut, and taxes for the wealthy reduced to that they’re no longer paying their fair share.”
Via. David Thompson, “The nearby chart shows that the top 1% of taxpayers, those who earn above $388,806, paid 40% of all income taxes in 2006, the highest share in at least 40 years.”
Except jcl, that the wealthy aren’t actually paying those taxes. Oh sure… on paper it says they’re supposed to pay that much, but the fact of the matter is that 94,000 millionaires were paying less than a middle class family.
But you keep on staring reality boldly in the face and pretending that the wealthy aren’t getting richer while the rest of us stagnant.
You can add that up to other things that aren’t happening according to conservatives like climate change and evolution.
John >
No one has to feed you, wipe your nose or change your diaper. The fact that you desperately want to be cared for and babied by others that have more does not mean it’s going to happen. Never will in fact.
You can’t force anyone to do more for others and sacrifice less for themselves. Well unless you fall in with some Christian organization that gives without expected return, but people like you usually hate those types of organizations. So you just sh*t out of luck, go live in China for awhile you may appreciate what you have here more, I did you can too.