Can The Occupy Wall Streeters Set Up Camp in Canada - by Brent Bambury
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/10/08/f-vp-bambury-wall-street....
"The three-week protest is to hit the streets in five Canadian cities next week. Do we share the anger..?"
CBC's take -
I agree with you gary, except I don't see it as something that needs to be managed by government. THe problem is that the government is already influenced by those multinational business interests to begin with.
Most of what you're talking about is our job, as I see it.
But more to the point, (as has been mentioned already) I think you'd have a hard time fitting that all on a placard. And once you get beyond the growing gulf between rich and poor I don't think everyone is on the same page here.
M. Spector is right - keep it simple and focused.
Personally, I still believe that shorter placard messages could be based on the idea of "Government support of local industry in bringing their products and services to the local market place at competitive prices, which could also later translate to competitive pricing in the global market place."
This is perhaps a longer-term or more drawn-out solution to the "growing gulf between rich and poor" but to simply carry an ill-conceived placard that reads something similar to "End Capitalism" is likely to accomplish little, if anything at all. What exactly should capitalism be replaced with? While I commend everyone's committing to the idea of change via "Occupying Canada," I am starting to wonder just how many of those protesting actually have a decent or thorough understanding of how the system actually works.
In addition, I would also have to disagree that this is not "something that needs to be managed by government." An unfortunate reality of the separation of classes, as a result of gaps in wealth & income, is that many consumers are forced to consume goods and services at the lowest price point, rather than choosing options that are better for both the individual and the community as a whole. However, with Government support in bringing such options to those of lower income (by subsidizing local businesses along supply chains, and providing tax incentives according to more ethical operations, or through volume share purchases in such ethical businesses, etc.) nearly all problems across the system can be addressed simultaneously.
I would contend that there are problems that will not be avoided, regardless of any simpler approach taken by the "Occupying" crowds. For starters...
- If the wealthy corporations and banks are simply made to pay for their own mistakes, then after this has been done (assuming that most do not sink), everything goes back to business as usual. The same way of doing things that caused the current situation.
- If people simply refuse to work toward this system, I'm sure that such people will constitute a minority. How long will they last before they find themselves in need of returning to the system?
- The end of capitalism and the current economic system. Again, to be replaced with what? This view is often quite narrow and usually incorporates thinking that money is not real or that corporations provide no real value. Both of these assumptions are QUITE FALSE.
- Heavier taxation of the wealthy. This might work, so long as every jurisdiction around the globe follows suit. Truth be told, flat rates of taxation for individuals regardless of wealth/income is the fairest system of tax. For example, if every US citizen paid 20% as a flat rate, for every $0.20 contributed by the least wealthy 20% of Americans, about $168.00 would be paid by the wealthiest 20%. The numbers aren't a whole lot different for Canada. Regardless, perhaps corporate tax rates could be a little bit higher than those for the individual. Remember that if these rates go to high for corporations, they can always move their headquarters to somewhere more agreeable, which impacts the economy negatively.
For all of these reasons, an all-encompassing approach that uses the current open-market systems to our own advantage and sways them toward more ethical business conduct is a better option.
Just saying...
One additional thought…
Perhaps some of the placards should read: “≤20”
The idea being that copyright, patents and other forms of intellectual property protection should not be extended beyond 20 years. This would allow ideas to enter the public domain where anyone could use them as a basis for further creation(s), for which they could reap the financial benefits offered by intellectual property legislation over the next 20 years. This rather than ongoing extension of idea ownership by corporations and the like that restricts both new ideas from being created or rewarded, as well as centralizing wealth to only the few.
I assume you want numbers to show up at these events.
You might get more attention from liberty folk if you focus on:
-Demilitarization
-'Corporate Veil' (assuming that means limited liability)
-Corporate welfare
-Accountability and transparency (police, courts and politicians)
-Anti-corporatism
I didn't read it above, but you could consider 'sound money' policies. Inflation is a tax that hits the middle class the most
You might get less attention from liberty folk if you focus on:
-Entitlements (living wages/guaranteed incomes/pensions/education/healthcare)
-Nationalizing banking or energy
-Anti-capitalism
I am on board with the natives but the rest of the liberty community tends not to talk about it much.
Good luck.
Ah yes, sound money policies not unlike the dregulashun mess of the last 30-35 years. Three decades three recessions.
Partial list:
1) All political and related administrative offices, and also the ability to influence or participate in political decision-making, shall be free of any formal or de facto disqualifications due to non-ownership of non-possessive property or, more generally, of wealth.
2) All political and related administrative offices shall operate on the basis of occupants' standards of living being at or slightly lower than the median equivalent for professional and other skilled workers.
3) All political and related administrative offices shall be subject to immediate recall from any of multiple avenues, especially in cases of abuse of office.
4) There shall be full, lawsuit-enforced freedom of class-strugglist assembly and association for people of the dispossessed classes, even within the military, free especially from anti-employment reprisals, police interference such as from agents provocateurs, and formal political disenfranchisement.
5) There shall be full independence of the mass media from concentrated private ownership and management by first means of workplace democracy over mandated balance of content in news and media production, heavy appropriation of economic rent in the broadcast spectrum, unconditional economic assistance (both technical and financial) for independent mass media cooperative startups - especially at more local levels, for purposes of media decentralization - and anti-inheritance transformation of all the relevant mass media properties under private ownership into cooperative property.
6) There shall be an ecological reduction of the normal workweek even for working multiple jobs - including time for workplace democracy, workers' self-management, broader industrial democracy, etc. through workplace committees and assemblies - to a participatory-democratic maximum of 32 hours or less without loss of pay or benefits but with further reductions corresponding to increased labour productivity, the minimum provision of double-time pay or salary/contract equivalent for all hours worked over the normal workweek and over 8 hours a day, and the prohibition of compulsory overtime.
7) All predatory financial practices towards the working class, legal or otherwise, shall be precluded by first means of establishing, on a permanent and either national or multinational basis, a financial monopoly without any private ownership or private management whatsoever - at purchase prices based especially on the market capitalization values of insolvent yet publicly underwritten banks - with such a public monopoly on money supply management inclusive of the general provision of commercial and consumer credit, and with the application of "equity not usury" towards such activity.
8) There shall be overt, subtle, and covert enactment of explicitly confiscatory, despotic measures against all capital flight of wealth, investment strikes, and other elitist economic blackmail, whether the related wealth belongs to economic rebels on the domestic front or to foreign profiteers.
Others off the top of my head:
1) The abolition of legal personhood, most notably with respect to corporations, and the prohibition of legally defined political contributions made by non-government entities other than eligible voters.
2) The combating of residential gentrification and speculation by first means of expanding resident association guarantees beyond the privilege of homeowners and towards the formation of separate tenant associations, limiting all residential writs of possession and eviction for the benefit of private parties to cases of tenant neglect, and establishing comprehensive tax and other financial preferences for renting over home ownership.
3) The institution of affirmative action policies based either on income and other socioeconomic factors or preferrably on class, especially in the sphere of education.
I also agree with the main thrust of Spector's point about focusing on fewer issues, particularly a couple of issues that would isolate the 1% and unite the 99%. Shopping lists are great for educating people but how would one ever translate 30 or 40 demands into practical campaigns to reach the objectives? Are they building a "solidarity" movement - e.g. to advance First Nations or student interests or a broad movement with demands that affect the entire (or most of the) 99%?
I doubt things can (or should) be reduced to 1 single issue (but if it was, it would seem to be that taxes are central to isolating the super-rich 1%). Another central issue is the undemocratic way in which legislatures are elected and implement their policies. Electoral reform is long over-due.
The most effective way to mobilize the greatest number of people for a protest is to pick a single issue that they can agree on, like "Make the rich pay for their own financial crisis, not the rest of us."The more you try to turn it into a shopping list of grievances, the more you will restrict the range of people who will actively support it, for two main reasons: First, because not everyone agrees on every issue, and second, because foolish people will find excuses to stand on the sidelines and whine because their particular concern is not being placed front and centre by the organizers.
That's not to say that individuals and groups should be discouraged from bringing their own particular slogans and demands to the Occupy Canada protests - quite the contrary. But the focus and appeal of the Occupy Canada movement organizers (which is what I assume Krystalline is asking about) should be a single issue that has broad appeal among the working class.
The problem with that approach is that it has been tried again and again and has failed to make substantive change outside the single issue.
I also agree with the main thrust of Spector's point about focusing on fewer issues, particularly a couple of issues that would isolate the 1% and unite the 99%. Shopping lists are great for educating people but how would one ever translate 30 or 40 demands into practical campaigns to reach the objectives? Are they building a "solidarity" movement - e.g. to advance First Nations or student interests or a broad movement with demands that affect the entire (or most of the) 99%?
All that does is repeat the There Is No Alternative line.
I'm not suggesting that we should dump single-issue or better single-themed campaigns, but proper agitation stems in the first place from proper theoretical and policy education.
The bottom line for me is economic fairness - those who have, should pay more - be they individuals or corporations. And corporations need to justify the need for tax breaks before getting them!
ETA: no 'Occupy Quebec City'? Lots of room outside the National Assemby!
A maximum wage ;)
I love the idea of a maximum wage, but I don't see it ever happening, sadly. 
How about an economic system that is based on meeting human needs with the minimum amount of resources? Where people are guaranteed a minimum standard of living? Where there is a universal recognition that the economy needs to exist within a sustainable ecological footprint? Where economic overhead activities like investment banking and product advertising fall away because they add no inherent value to our lives? Where the amount of work we need to do during the course of our lives is dramatically decreased as we hack away at the vast wastefulness of capitalism? Where creating new jobs is a cause for concern and embarrassment, not celebration? Where happiness and freedom (real freedom, not economic freedom) are the goals instead of economic growth?
How about that?
It's far too lengthy to get even a glimpse of what the demands will be from one person or even a group of people reading a list of individual demands. And every comment, since it is made by an individual, is at risk of flaws and blemishes. This is why we need to being organizing people by their purposes. This is a starting point for organizing our people and creating working groups to bring stuff to the general assembly. It's only groups of people making related working groups and working together that these categories and refinement inside these categories will progress.
1
Clean and Sustainable Agriculture, and Land access
Clean Energy.
Accessible Shelter.
Urban Sprawl, city organization.
Medics.
2
Reject judgment on Economic output. Focus on well-being and happiness.. et cetera instead of GDP.
Government Watchdog. Government policy protests. Corporate/bank reforms and protests, et cetera. Non participation in corporations/gov
Safe Technology.
3
Inclusiveness, connenting with others, children, global et cetera.
Books/Free Education/Empowerment/Giving people a voice. et cetera.
Electorial reform/Decision solutions/Direct Democracy.. Participatory democracy
4
Occupationtogether liason/collaboration and Accessing allies
5
Economic Concerns Outreach and illumination.
Occupyinyourcuty media production.
Media distribution
Functional Equality
6
Money Allocation reform/Prioritizing where tax dollars go/Putting the choice in the peoples hands.
Fundraising/donations.
7
Arts/Creativity.
Repatriate the 500 GBU-12 Paveway guided munitions Canada bought to drop on the people of Libya - only the bad ones of course.
And carpet-bomb the 905.
I second the motion: Bombs Away!
..but please don't copy the choral-crowd repetitions
Vote Liberal or Tory, or don't vote at all, and you'll get more of the same guaranteed!
on second thought save a few of those GBU-12 Paveways for the H of C!
http://stopspying.ca/
(Un)Lawful access: Experts line up against online spying http://bit.ly/nBQEAO
Vote Liberal or Tory, or don't vote at all, and you'll get more of the same guaranteed!
Tabby cats are far nicer. Even if they are cats.
My answer to the main topic:
Renationalize money and impose to bank to have in liquidity the same amount that the saving they were entrusted.
We need a tool to organize this discussion more effectively. A poll application would be great so we could see which issues people feel are most important. We also need a way to prioritize issues so that we can see that while all issues may be important, some need to take priority. Moderators we need your help here! We need a way to evolve this discussion towards consensus. Individual posts are good for allowing people to express themselves, but I don't think it's useful for building consensus.
I like the wiki model, where anyone can edit, but there is a group of users who have earned credibility that can make more important decisions. Is there a way to bring a wiki type application on to this board?
I love the idea of a maximum wage, but I don't see it ever happening, sadly.
I really believe this is the crux of the matter. And we should not shy away from it because it seems impossible. Bringing down dicatators in the Middle East and North Africa were things many people said would likely never happen.
Nearly all of the issues listed here are the result of the unfair inflluence large corporations exert over democratic processes. The ruling class is able to remain in power, not because of higher intelligence, higher morals or better looks. Their influence comes through access to vast sums of money.
We know the necessity of a minimum wage. We need to see the necessity of a maximum wage. We need to see that once you start earning an income past a certain point, the influence you begin to exert over the democratic process is unhealthy. We need to concentrate our weight on pressure points.
A maximum wage is a simple, powerful and elegant demand. It is also very specific and goes straight to the heart of the matter. It is outrageous yes, but only because we don't see it in the context of 99% vs 1%.
We live in a world of finite resources. For too long we've lived under the illusion of infinite economic growth. Cancer is so vicious because unike a normal cell, a cancerous cell can't stop multiplying. After a certain point an income too becomes cancerous...
There is a common root to all the claim, they are all consequence of the financial system going beserk.
So reforming the money and financial system is a required for all other claim.
If we don't solve the financial system, it like fixing a crumbling wall with paint.
A so-called "maximum wage" (not a really appropriate term because the rich don't earn "wages" as such) can be implemented quite simply by imposing a 100% marginal income tax rate on incomes above whatever you choose to be the maximum.
There are roughly 17,000 Canadians earning seven figures annually, and according to data collected by McMaster University's Mike Veall, today's millionaires are being taxed at the lowest rates since the 1920s.
Vote Liberal or Tory, or don't vote at all, and you'll get more of the same guaranteed!
Tabby cats are far nicer. Even if they are cats.
Yes, follow the trail of chee$e all the way to the big red and blue cat houses, and a non-elected cat chamber cattery for fat-cat party hacks most of whom were rejected by us lowly mice if only by fraudulent first past the cat elections before sneaking their way into chee$e for life appointments. Too bad they don't choke on their Bay Street fur ball$ those fat cats.
It's been a catastrophe in Ottawa for the last 140 years in a row non-stop without a break for the mice.
A so-called "maximum wage" (not a really appropriate term because the rich don't earn "wages" as such) can be implemented quite simply by imposing a 100% marginal income tax rate on incomes above whatever you choose to be the maximum.
The problem is that the tax deductions and credits are such that even alternative minimum tax can't effect a "maximum wage."
Here is what Occupy Vancouver put on their web site. They got it right IMO.
We, the Ninety-Nine Percent, come together with our diverse experiences to transform the unequal, unfair, and growing disparity in the distribution of power and wealth in our city and around the globe. We challenge corporate greed, corruption, and the collusion between corporate power and government. We oppose systemic inequality, militarization, environmental destruction, and the erosion of civil liberties and human rights. We seek economic security, genuine equality, and the protection of the environment for all.
...
We humbly acknowledge that Occupy Vancouver is taking place on unceded Coast Salish territories
My suggestion is here:
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2011/10/its-time-nationalize-banks
My suggestion is here:
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2011/10/its-time-nationalize-banks
Nice self promotion.
I think it is time for Canadians to discuss the Official Languages Act. What was meant to bring equality among people has turned into language Apartheid in certain areas of the Country. The ways of Quebec are quickly being pushed onto New Brunswick to the point that the province is broke and relies on all the other provinces to support it. Yet we nor our MLA"S are allowed to question it or duality or any cost saving measures that involve cutting anything to do with francophones services.
This act has created what they call stakeholders, which gives anyone of any minority or special interest groups millions in free government money while we continue to pay for it.
New Brunswick is on the brink of destruction and as for the rest of the country
Air Canada's $12,000 episode says it all.
Seems off topic to me, but I think it was your legislature which established NB as the only officially bilingual province in Canada, no? If this were something imposed by the federal government I think the first line of defense would be your legislature.
But I am not that familiar with NB politics.
On the question itself, I have always been suspicious of the notion that government coffers are being broken and society is being divided by expanding language services. Go to other parts of the world and speaking two or three languages is common. And already here many banks and businesses are offering a multitude of language services beyond our two official languages.
Sorry if I don't see this as a bad thing.
I think it will eventually all be distilled down to the separation of corporation and state.
That's what it's got to be.
is that going to be nationalization of the banks without compensation, or do we exchange the bank shares with government bonds? some people have their pensions tied up in bank shares...
Nationalization of the banks in Canada or the USA is a very faint pipe dream, but still a good idea. It'd probably take a civil war, first, to achieve.
This interesting bit of video (making the rounds on facebook) might provide some food for thought, and amusement.
Chris Hedges handing Kevin O'Leary his ass on a plate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAhHPIuTQ5k&feature=player_embedded
To bad, as he said, he won't be back.
I don't have cable, so I never see any of this shit, but I did heard Hedges giving a great and far more sympathetic interview to Michael Enright on the Sunday Edition.
Interesting how he says that the conservatives are the ones calling for the rule of law. The radicals are the 1% who are undermining everything.
if the govt doesnt mind exchanging share paper for sovereign debt the profits from the bank would convert those bonds to cash pretty quickly anyway. maybe you could have a cap of 5,000,000 per portfolio or something, the rest just expropriated.
I think it is time for Canadians to discuss the Official Languages Act. What was meant to bring equality among people has turned into language Apartheid in certain areas of the Country. The ways of Quebec are quickly being pushed onto New Brunswick to the point that the province is broke and relies on all the other provinces to support it. Yet we nor our MLA"S are allowed to question it or duality or any cost saving measures that involve cutting anything to do with francophones services.
This act has created what they call stakeholders, which gives anyone of any minority or special interest groups millions in free government money while we continue to pay for it.
New Brunswick is on the brink of destruction and as for the rest of the country
Air Canada's $12,000 episode says it all.
Off topic, bigoted trolling.
Thanks, Rebecca. As an NBer, I would crtainly lament the province returning to the days before Louis Robichaud introduced Equal Opportunity.
This interesting bit of video (making the rounds on facebook) might provide some food for thought, and amusement.
Chris Hedges handing Kevin O'Leary his ass on a plate:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAhHPIuTQ5k&feature=player_embedded
To bad, as he said, he won't be back.
I don't have cable, so I never see any of this shit, but I did heard Hedges giving a great and far more sympathetic interview to Michael Enright on the Sunday Edition.
Interesting how he says that the conservatives are the ones calling for the rule of law. The radicals are the 1% who are undermining everything.
There was a link on the rabble home page this week and I posted a link to it in another thread. Hedges agrees with me that the Lang O'Leary show is no better than Fox. The CBC is a state media completely now and not a public broadcaster.
Occupy Parliament! I'd love to see a half million people camped out on and around the Hill forcing MPs to get to work through a throng of very pissed-off people.
Occupy Parliament! I'd love to see a half million people camped out on and around the Hill forcing MPs to get to work through a throng of very pissed-off people.
I agree that would be awesome. It remains to be seen how long our authoritarian governments across the country will allow a tent city to remain in public places. They have sent in the police and they have disbanded political encampments in Vancouver and Victoria in the past. It all depends on the size of the tent city. The more people the easier it is to resist the inevitable push back from authority figures.
There was a link on the rabble home page this week and I posted a link to it in another thread. Hedges agrees with me that the Lang O'Leary show is no better than Fox. The CBC is a state media completely now and not a public broadcaster.
Ooops. Sorry. I missed it.
And perhaps my perspective is a bit different because I do not get newsworld, and only get to see O'Leary in his daytime gig on the gong show.
You and I will just have to disagree about the value of CBC.
Are you telling me you watch that despicable show, Dragon's Den? Please tell me isn't true.
I spent from the 1970's to about 2001 being a CBC booster. They have changed their views not me. They produce some good programming but mostly they promote an imperialist US centric perspective on all their news shows. Everyone of its news shows pumps out the same MSM bullshit that is bought and paid for on private stations by the 1%. Because I believe in worker rights I don't see how the CBC can be redeemed. The management has been hiring the same type of right wing leaning employees for at least a decade. The problem in the CBC IMO is in the producers and other middle management levels. They are not mindless robots following someones else's agenda. They don't follow orders from Harper. However they were hired because they share the world view of people like Carole Taylor and Harper. Since I can't in good conscience advocate firing a whole generation of CBC employees I would rather we just stopped sending them money to propagate their narrow world view.
Are you telling me you watch that despicable show, Dragon's Den? Please tell me isn't true.
Haha
I thought you might get a rise out of that. No, I don't really have time for TV. But my daughter likes to watch it. THough if you changed your perspective a bit you might realize there is good information there for anyone looking to not work for other people. I did catch the episode when the guy from Saskatchewan (who isn't on this season, apparently) told a contestant that she should walk away because she didn't need their money and she would be better off controlling her own business. So clearly they aren't all singing out of O'Leary's songbook.
And my point was that he's an entertainer, not a journalist.
But to bring it back to the question. I think I just figured out I will be carrying a "support public broadcasting" sign to the Saskatoon event this weekend.
I support public broadcasting to bad the CBC doesn't provide it.
I support public broadcasting to bad the CBC doesn't provide it.
Yeah, I hear you. Like I said I think we'll just have to disagree on the struggle as it relates to the CBC
While some may think that nationalizing banks is utopian, its really not. It should be a demand to get it back into conversation. Nationalized banks have served the Chinese well and helped save Iceland from the abyss. Other European countries have nationalized banks in the most recent recession out of necessity only to reprivatize them later, not using them to their advantage other than to stop a total meltdown. Seriously I'd like to see the Federal Government nationalize CIBC (the smallest of the big 5) just to show the others how successful a nationalized bank could be to benefit consumers and help the economy.
