# "occupy" movement



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

anyone following this or involved?

I had a thread on my forum dedicated to something similar but I never thought that something like this would happen as soon as this.

http://www.invertplanet.com/forum/f29/venus_project-58.html


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

Not sure what you mean.
The first sets of video (Aweakening) is good. But has nothing to do with occupy. While I do agree with the problem, I don't think a solution was given. They just point you the the venus project. (Haven't looked at the venus project yet, but will check it out when I have time and a clear state of mind. (Too many hyponthesis/assumption being made but not sure if they are valid.)
The second set of video is just concept (save the first one - circular solar cell (and even then, it's limited - circular solars cells have their own drawback and the technology has yet to be mature. But is very promising.) Anyway, concepts are easy to dream up, but bringing that to reality is not so easy.
For example, when I graduated, I major in Artificial inteligence. My vision of the world is the expectation that AI plays a major role in today's world. But where are they? All turned to dust when the .com busted. Also, with the recent changes of copyright and the DCMA, we pretty much stopped.
Ever wonder why China is moving at such a rappied pace. They don't suffer copyright problems like we do. They are free to invent, free to make things. We're not even allow to take things apart without getting arrest.
Anyway ... too much to rant, not going to waste my time ... but my dreams and visions (human-computer sign languages algorithms, artificial computer speech/singing algorithms, universal-language translator programs and logic programing.) ... oh they are so wonderful.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## PACMAN (Mar 4, 2010)

Zebrapl3co said:


> Not sure what you mean.
> The first sets of video (Aweakening) is good. But has nothing to do with occupy. While I do agree with the problem, I don't think a solution was given. They just point you the the venus project. (Haven't looked at the venus project yet, but will check it out when I have time and a clear state of mind. (Too many hyponthesis/assumption being made but not sure if they are valid.)
> The second set of video is just concept (save the first one - circular solar cell (and even then, it's limited - circular solars cells have their own drawback and the technology has yet to be mature. But is very promising.) Anyway, concepts are easy to dream up, but bringing that to reality is not so easy.
> For example, when I graduated, I major in Artificial inteligence. My vision of the world is the expectation that AI plays a major role in today's world. But where are they? All turned to dust when the .com busted. Also, with the recent changes of copyright and the DCMA, we pretty much stopped.
> ...


You mean they are free to steal products and ideas and then make them and market them at 1/2 the cost?

Chevrolet Spark and Chery QQ









Non-Car example: Here's a cheap Chinese knock-off that's a dead ringer for Apple's chunky little 3rd-generation media player.









CMEC City Smart and DaimlerChrysler Smart Car









Geely Merie and Mercedes-Benz C-Class


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

PACMAN said:


> You mean they are free to steal products and ideas and then make them and market them at 1/2 the cost?


If doing so allows for more competition on the market, greater innovation, and a narrowing of the rich/poor divide, then what's wrong with it?

The catechism here in the West is that without Intellectual Property protection, other people can just copy a good product and sell it at lower cost, thus making it financially unwise to innovate. However, the reality is, companies these days are using IP laws to stifle each other.

On the other hand, despite the abundance of apple knock-off products in China, iPhones and iPad 2s are in extremely high demand.

The average Chinese household income is only a fraction of that of a Canadian household, and they don't have the benefit of free medicare. Do you think the average Chinese can afford a USD 700$ iPhone? That's where the knock-off products come in. What you fail to realize is that those products cater to a completely different market.

This is the same kind of lame argument made by the Recording and Movie industry. They argue that each pirated download equals one lost sales, which is absolutely ridiculous. I don't mind watching Michael Bay's Transformer movies for free, but there's no way I'd pay anything to watch them. Same thing with knock-off products: people who can only afford to buy a 100$ iPhone knock-off still won't buy a 700$ iPhone even if all knock-off products vanished overnight!


----------



## BillD (Jun 5, 2006)

Zebrapl3co said:


> Ever wonder why China is moving at such a rappied pace. They don't suffer copyright problems like we do. They are free to invent, free to make things. We're not even allow to take things apart without getting arrest.
> .


What wonderful inventions and innovations have come out of China? They seem to take others' ideas and capitalize on them without making the capital investment to make them happen. Still, they have conquered the world without firing a shot. When other companies move into China, for the cheap labour, they are only allowed to own 29 or 39% of the company. The lion's share is owned by the Chinese government. So, General Motors in China is only 40% owned by GM. Same applies to Volkswagen, Honda, Toyota, or whoever else wants to build cars cheaply.
The powers that be have done well pitting one worker against the other, for the benefit of the rich.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

BillD said:


> What wonderful inventions and innovations have come out of China? They seem to take others' ideas and capitalize on them without making the capital investment to make them happen. Still, they have conquered the world without firing a shot. When other companies move into China, for the cheap labour, they are only allowed to own 29 or 39% of the company. The lion's share is owned by the Chinese government. So, General Motors in China is only 40% owned by GM. Same applies to Volkswagen, Honda, Toyota, or whoever else wants to build cars cheaply.
> The powers that be have done well pitting one worker against the other, for the benefit of the rich.


Where do you get your info? Is 60% of Apple owned by the Chinese government? How about Sony? Nike? Where foreign companies have a Chinese state ownership, it's because they asked the Chinese government for a ton of money to start their manufacturing facilities in China.

As for Chinese innovations, of course you're not going to hear about it in the Western Media. One of the most important modern inventions out of China is the development of the anti-malarial drug Artemisinin, currently the most effective anti-malarial drug in existence. This is an invention that has literally saved millions of lives in the developing world. Compare that with the iPad, or HIV treatment drugs that are too expensive for 3rd-world nations to afford.

Here's a list of modern Chinese innovations from Wikipedia.


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

You know, copyright used to work for us for the last 60 years of so. But this is the 21st century now.
Big company - oh wait, correction, "all of the big companies" group together to form consortiums. These consortiums would buy out polititians of all levels, make them draft new laws that are not out of the need of the people but out of the need of these companies. See definition of "lobbying". Once passed into laws, they will make use of our tax money to enforce these laws. In the mean time, they get to share each other's ideas in these consortium free of charge.
Every day, they would copyright anything they can think off. Now they aren't really doing this because there is a need to use them. It's to prevent people from using them. It's only purpose is to hinder your competitors. Any startup companies that managed to grow to a sufficient size are prime candidate for the milking.
And if their copyright item should expired, that's OK. They'll make up new laws (after all they have to make use of those polititians they bought ... er ... own ... er I am at a lost of words here ... ... oh, got it, "associate with"). Which makes me wonder, is Mickey Mouse still copyrighted? Hmmm ... how come everything else that is over 50 years expired. I am so confused. What is a Bono what-cha-call-it? Oh Mickey Mouse protection act.



BillD said:


> What wonderful inventions and innovations have come out of China? ....


Not sure what you're implying but take the sentence for what it means. I am simply saying that China is moving at a rapid pace. They are in an envyable possition in terms of innovation while we are tied down by copyright.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## PACMAN (Mar 4, 2010)

-They are moving at a rapid pace, but only at a pace spurred by demand from the rest of the world.

They have the ability to produce, but their innovation is muted in comparison.

-Copyrighting blocks another person from creating a similar product. Wouldn't this spur innovation??


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

PACMAN said:


> -They are moving at a rapid pace, but only at a pace spurred by demand from the rest of the world.
> 
> They have the ability to produce, but their innovation is muted in comparison.
> 
> -Copyrighting blocks another person from creating a similar product. Wouldn't this spur innovation??


1- Really? Has consumption demand grown in the US and EU in the middle of an economic crisis?

2- Chinese innovation is muted in the Western Media due to political agenda. If you dug a little deeper, you will realize just how much Reuters is hiding or distorting about China.

3- Patents were created to spur innovation, but they are now being abused to stifle innovation. There are companies that do nothing but register patents, waiting for innovative companies to come up with a product and then profit by suing them. The fact that society currently thinks Steve Jobs is a visionary and master of innovation shows just how _un_innovative we've become. (Not to mention enslaved by advertising.)


----------



## ameekplec. (May 1, 2008)

BillD said:


> What wonderful inventions and innovations have come out of China?










?








?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_inventions


----------



## ameekplec. (May 1, 2008)

Also, Patents force people to be more creative and innovate further. Want to make money? Come up with a better solution or product. Patent litigation just lets people profit off the innovation of others (or their own) when the right people haven't done their homework.


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

PACMAN said:


> -...-Copyrighting blocks another person from creating a similar product. Wouldn't this spur innovation??


Not really, by allow people to create similar product brings competition which spurs furthur inovation. It's the act of stopping others from creating similar product that stops inovation.
And as far as I know, there is nothing to stop you from creating similar product. It's the act of making exact copies that violate copyright.
But big companies and consortium don't need play by these rules, not when they are in the position to make their own rules or change the law in their favour. Or if it comes down to dirty tricks, they can opt to sue you even though they are wrong. The lawsuit itself can bankrupt you. So in cases like this, whoever has more money is right; even though they are in the wrong.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Well to get off the china topic... we do have the technology to create a more comfortable and sustainable future for ourselves. 

I am not sure about the banking portion, but on the tech side.. it is here just just needs to be implemented.

This runs parallel to the "occupy" movement.


----------



## Chris S (Dec 19, 2007)

ameekplec. said:


> ?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And gunpowder =D


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

What I like most about China is a justice - Shoot the criminal and charge the relatives price of the ammo.

*This is a real innovation* that should be introduced in several country. Visited China in 83 and can't express how safe I was feeling there. I would not go in Toronto to the places that I visited there

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Chris S said:


> And gunpowder =D


and noodles (pasta)


----------



## ameekplec. (May 1, 2008)

J-P said:


> and noodles (pasta)


Aw, I can't believe I forgot that one. Students everywhere would be starving would it not have been for the Chinese (because they also manufacture the instant ramen too).

Also, Italians would have no national food. Italians should be thankful for Chinese Innovation.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

ameekplec. said:


> Aw, I can't believe I forgot that one. Students everywhere would be starving would it not have been for the Chinese (because they also manufacture the instant ramen too).
> 
> Also, Italians would have no national food. Italians should be thankful for Chinese Innovation.


LOL!! Off topic, but the Italians were trumped by the French for "Best Pizza" (France) and "most pizza consumed" (USA).

Anyway watch the vids on the original link... They are eye opening. Both on the banking portion and the technology.

If you have time:






it is a full length 1.5 hour movie... excellent watch.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

sig said:


> What I like most about China is a justice - Shoot the criminal and charge the relatives price of the ammo.
> 
> *This is a real innovation* that should be introduced in several country. Visited China in 83 and can't express how safe I was feeling there. I would not go in Toronto to the places that I visited there


Big difference between 1983 and 2011. I absolutely agree that from the 50's to the 80's, China was very safe. I remember that my first and second grade class mates (6-8 year old kids) who lived nearby would walk home for lunch by themselves without a worry.

However, that wasn't due to the death penalty, it was due to the extensive social controls. Every neighborhood had a committee that watched over almost all aspects of life, from work to family relationships. People also stayed in the same place all their life: work posts were for a life time, and neighborhoods were often planned around a work place (factory, university, etc.), so everyone knew everyone else.

With the economic reforms of the 90's, these things began to change. Neighborhood committees did not take as active a part in personal matters, and most importantly, population migration began to take place. Lots of people from rural areas would go to the cities to work for a few years before going home, and people don't have lifetime jobs anymore, forcing them to commute and move, so nobody knows anybody anymore.


----------



## BillD (Jun 5, 2006)

Zebrapl3co said:


> Not really, by allow people to create similar product brings competition which spurs furthur inovation. It's the act of stopping others from creating similar product that stops inovation.
> And as far as I know, there is nothing to stop you from creating similar product. It's the act of making exact copies that violate copyright.
> But big companies and consortium don't need play by these rules, not when they are in the position to make their own rules or change the law in their favour. Or if it comes down to dirty tricks, they can opt to sue you even though they are wrong. The lawsuit itself can bankrupt you. So in cases like this, whoever has more money is right; even though they are in the wrong.


Making similar products doesn't stimulate innovation, but rather copying. The Drug Industry is a great example of this.The impetus is on making money, not drugs. When one company comes out with a new drug (which was generally discovered by a publicly funded institution, they get a 20 year patent. Other companies, will make a similar product, and get a 20 year patent, to grab a slice of the pie, rather than come up with something new. "Me too drugs" they are called. Drug companies spend far more on advertising and marketing than they do on R&D. Drug companies fund doctor's upgrading; can you say incestuous relationship? It is a very dirty business, and they have the US government in their pocket, so the US pays the highest prices in the world for drugs.
Reality is that if you can't protect your idea and profit from it, why would you bring it forward? Knowing that a great idea can make someone else rich off of your idea stifles innovation, not copyright/patent law.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

That is the same as the fashion industry , the computer industry and most others...


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

BillD said:


> ... Reality is that if you can't protect your idea and profit from it, why would you bring it forward? Knowing that a great idea can make someone else rich off of your idea stifles innovation, not copyright/patent law.


What's wrong with that? If the idea suck or overly simplistic, then you get it for what it's worth. If you want to win, you will have to compete with them. Who ever makes the better product should win. This would have been much better than some guy making a cheap idea, then squat on it for years over years with no improvement or incentive to make it better. In a world like that, everybody drives 1 type of car, 1 type of brand. Everybody wears the same type of clothes, same shoes, same glass ...

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## BillD (Jun 5, 2006)

Zebrapl3co said:


> What's wrong with that? If the idea suck or overly simplistic, then you get it for what it's worth. If you want to win, you will have to compete with them. Who ever makes the better product should win. This would have been much better than some guy making a cheap idea, then squat on it for years over years with no improvement or incentive to make it better. In a world like that, everybody drives 1 type of car, 1 type of brand. Everybody wears the same type of clothes, same shoes, same glass ...


This argument is ridiculous. Your examples of cars and clothes are all not patentable or original. If your product is patented, the competition has to come up with a new idea; that spurs innovation. There is nothing innovative about stealing an idea and using cheap labor to undermine the originator. The part everyone seems to be missing, is that once you drive your competition out of business, perhaps through the sacrifices your labor force has made, you can charge what you want. We see this happening already with the demise of the dollar stores, and the rising in prices of those that remain open.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

BillD said:


> This argument is ridiculous. Your examples of cars and clothes are all not patentable or original. If your product is patented, the competition has to come up with a new idea; that spurs innovation. There is nothing innovative about stealing an idea and using cheap labor to undermine the originator. *The part everyone seems to be missing, is that once you drive your competition out of business, perhaps through the sacrifices your labor force has made, you can charge what you want.* We see this happening already with the demise of the dollar stores, and the rising in prices of those that remain open.


And that's exactly what Patent law is allowing the large corporations to do. These guys are sitting on tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of patents, with the sole purpose of preventing competitors from developing a product that can compete with their own products.


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

BillD said:


> ... If your product is patented, the competition has to come up with a new idea; that spurs innovation. ...


Errr ... OK. Wouldn't coming up with a new idea; (to serve the same purpose or make it better, create competition which in turns) spurs innovations?
That's also called making a similar product too.
I think what you're trying to say is making cheap imitation of a product. Well, that is on shaky ground too if you should choose to use Ipad as an example. The touchpad concept may have come from the west in movies, but it was manufactured and sold in Asia long before Apple made their first Ipad.
Apple simply stole the idea and make it better ...
Ipod? Stole it from MP3 player another gadget that was widely used in Asian before it's available in North America.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Tablet PCs were originally invented by Wacom some 20+ years ago AFAIK. They didn't do that well and other companies moved in later (obviously much later).

Same with the MP3 player. I forgot the company that invented it but again it was a VERY long time ago, and it was a north american company that later went bankrupt (This is the diskless MP3 player as we know it using solid state disks). Asia was still in mini-disk mode than which never caught on here.

When Asia started with the mini-disks, we were just breaking out of the cassettes and looking at portable CD players (if memory serves correct).

Anyway.. patent law is just plain silly. The intentions are good, but it actually stifles competition and creates a backlog in our courts for suing someone for actually doing something with the idea. 

When overseas I had to translate a document for for the U.S. patent Office. It read along the lines "This device does something to something via a specialized program that does something to produce the results shown on the graph." They had to be as ambiguous as possible so that others would not steal their idea or make something similar. Needless to say it was rejected because it wasn't specific enough. It was revised to provide a little more detail but to remain as vague as possible. 

So lets ask why is this the case? It is simply because of our flawed monetary system. Instead of sharing information and competing to make the best product, we sue each other. It just isn't working.


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

Trust me, I know this for a fact. I live through that period. The first MP3 player is call MPMan. Back then, I really really want to get one and it's only available in Asia and I was trying to get some one to buy this for me in Hong Kong. This gadget was not available anywhere in Canada or US yet.
Did a search for MPMan and found this:
http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6450_7-5622055-1.html
Big surprise, it's from Korea! Not Japan or Taiwan as I though.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Zebrapl3co said:


> Trust me, I know this for a fact. I live through that period. The first MP3 player is call MPMan. Back then, I really really want to get one and it's only available in Asia and I was trying to get some one to buy this for me in Hong Kong. This gadget was not available anywhere in Canada or US yet.
> Did a search for MPMan and found this:
> http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-6450_7-5622055-1.html
> Big surprise, it's from Korea! Not Japan or Taiwan as I though.


Yep, I thought it was the RIO also apparently the RIO came out a couple months later...


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Just had to vent on this one... had the union meeting the other day..

http://www.invertplanet.com/forum/entry.php?b=47&bt=59

you have to scroll down to the comment after the entry.

Explicit language..


----------



## BettaBeats (Jan 14, 2010)

im a part of the occupy movement. and it will only get stronger. the economic models and government models we are currently dealing with do not work.


----------



## mrobson (Mar 5, 2011)

BettaBeats said:


> im a part of the occupy movement. and it will only get stronger. the economic models and government models we are currently dealing with do not work.


that maybe true but how does camping and fucking up public parks help change anything, its been going on for how long now with no results.


----------



## BettaBeats (Jan 14, 2010)

mrobson said:


> that maybe true but how does camping and fucking up public parks help change anything, its been going on for how long now with no results.


its participatory democracy. it's not buy-and-sell politics.


----------



## mrobson (Mar 5, 2011)

how so? what have any of the occupy movements achieved other than costing tax payers money, also nice touch attacking 1st responders thats a real good way of getting public support.


----------



## Chris S (Dec 19, 2007)

How do all these people "occupy" without having to work? I work for a living - if I had to go and sit in a tent all day, I couldn't afford to be alive!

Every time I see a news clip, it looks like people who don't have jobs anyway =D


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

Chris S said:


> How do all these people "occupy" without having to work? =D


It is easy:

'Liberal dogma spawned generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalized youngsters'...

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## Redddogg69 (Oct 1, 2011)

Chris S said:


> How do all these people "occupy" without having to work? I work for a living - if I had to go and sit in a tent all day, I couldn't afford to be alive!
> 
> Every time I see a news clip, it looks like people who don't have jobs anyway =D


They attend the gov. Run service Canada office to pick up their social assistance cheques, then head on over the the big bank to cash that check, then grab food at the big chain fast food outlet, buy a phish cd at the big box music store, play that phish cd on an iPod, buy some made in china incense, then head on over to the local occupy protest and chant society sucks. The rest go home when there cold and feel all freedom fighterish


----------



## Chris S (Dec 19, 2007)

sig said:


> It is easy:
> 
> 'Liberal dogma spawned generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalized youngsters'...


I'm as Liberal as they get, but this just isn't true.

In any case, as we all know, politics is a slippery slope, especially on forums. I would ask we try to keep politics to the minimum here, less we have to close the thread


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

I for one am glad these people are doing this. The current Euro Crisis and the 2008 financial crisis has shown just how rotten the economic system is.

Yes, I realize that Canada is in a better shape than the US, but the fate of the Canadian economy is intimately linked with that of the US, so it's important to support those Occupy Wall Street activists. Left to their own devices, the financiers will create bubble after bubble with their reckless speculation and schemes, confident that the US government will bail them out when their house of cards come tumbling down.


----------



## mrobson (Mar 5, 2011)

camping isnt going to change anything if they really wanted to make a difference they would get educated and take up a job were they could actively lobby change in a manner where the would be taken serious. One lady from the occupy movement wanted everyone to live in a tree house community called "new eden" these guys are crazy.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

mrobson said:


> camping isnt going to change anything if they really wanted to make a difference they would get educated and take up a job were they could actively lobby change in a manner where the would be taken serious. One lady from the occupy movement wanted everyone to live in a tree house community called "new eden" these guys are crazy.


You're missing the point. They're not camping, they're protesting. It's not the duty of protesters to offer concrete solutions. Their only goal is to spread the message (of the need for change) and increase public support, so that the PUBLIC can come up with a realistic and concrete plan for change.

The reason you think they're not making any difference is because the media is telling you so. The Occupy Wall Street movement would have made headlines 24/7 and received unanimous support from the media, if it had happened in China or Iran.

Instead, the western media has been condescending and dismissing the movement from the beginning. Occupy Wall Street articles are relegated to the back pages, such that for a whole month, nobody even knew about it, even though it was the biggest protest in the US since the Vietnam War!

This alone should be ringing alarm bells.


----------



## Riceburner (Mar 14, 2008)

and guess who owns the media....????


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

The fact is that the common people need to be aware of the issues at stake.


My circumstance is NOT unique... Public awareness is #1 then comes change. If you have read my post, then you would know that in 2004 the president axed jobs while making over 2.4 million. That is not uncommon, but what is uncommon is the fact that there were alternatives. Same with our situation now.

I am a minimum wage earner. Canada law says you can't get any lower than that. Loblaws now want to gouge into out benefits and make wage increases a thing of the past.

That is just wrong. There are ways around that, but they don't want to explore those avenues because it would make the franchises "poorer". That is a 100:19000 ratio. So to protect the 100 they gouge the 19000.... that is horse sh!t IMO.


----------



## AquaNekoMobile (Feb 26, 2010)

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Chris S View Post
> How do all these people "occupy" without having to work? =D
> It is easy:
> ...


Have not read through the whole thread other then skimming the first 3 pages. Never been to the occupy sites but know they are there. Also don't know anyone directly affiliated to the occupy movement as well tho I'd like to say that some people do enjoy free living be it camping or 'occupying' and still have a job as well. I know of few people that freelance online and do thier work online which allow them to roam around and do what they want as long as they have a laptop/computer and an internet connection and they're good to go getting thier work done and getting paid online. Some work they pick allows a flexible work schedule to work anytime they want as long as the work is done by X date.

Anyways, just wanted to mention that.


----------



## Greg_o (Mar 4, 2010)

I have many mixed feelings about this protest (here in Canada at least, the Wall St protesters certainly have made valid arguments) but my main point for those watching and forming their opinions:

If you're getting your info from the main stream media you need to be objective - of course they're going to over report the dorks and 'morans' who can't form a coherent message. They are very selective with who they quote and give camera time to, to form the consensus that these are basically a bunch of bums.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Greg_o said:


> If you're getting your info from the main stream media you need to be objective - of course they're going to over report the dorks and 'morans' who can't form a coherent message. They are very selective with who they quote and give camera time to, to form the consensus that these are basically a bunch of bums.


And the frightening part is how effectively that tactic is working.


----------



## mrobson (Mar 5, 2011)

sitting in parks pissing and moaning wont fix anything, i think its fairly obvious to those of us that work our regular jobs that things arent exactly kosher if they really wanted to fix things then they should be getting jobs as lobbyist, politicians or law makers so they can actually try and bring about change. If they really wanted to be taken serious then the should come together to form a solid plan for reform and ask the less serious "protesters" to step aside because they are hurting the cause.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

mrobson said:


> sitting in parks pissing and moaning wont fix anything, i think its fairly obvious to those of us that work our regular jobs that things arent exactly kosher* if they really wanted to fix things then they should be getting jobs as lobbyist, politicians or law makers* so they can actually try and bring about change. If they really wanted to be taken serious then the should come together to form a solid plan for reform and ask the less serious "protesters" to step aside because they are hurting the cause.


Yeah, because those positions are so attainable by everyone, right?

Come on, are you serious?


----------



## mrobson (Mar 5, 2011)

solarz said:


> Yeah, because those positions are so attainable by everyone, right?
> 
> Come on, are you serious?


i didnt say they were easy to get but thats what its going to take, do you really think big business is going to say "hey you know what you guys are right we are assholes here have some of my money." Its not going to happen, their companies are driven by one goal make as much money as possible. Also they should be trying to work with people like Warren Buffet and the "Gates Foundation" who are actively trying to rectify the situation.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

mrobson said:


> i didnt say they were easy to get but thats what its going to take, do you really think big business is going to say "hey you know what you guys are right we are assholes here have some of my money." Its not going to happen, their companies are driven by one goal make as much money as possible. Also they should be trying to work with people like Warren Buffet and the "Gates Foundation" who are actively trying to rectify the situation.


Yes, we're all well aware that corporations are only concerned with their bottom line.

That's why we have governments and legislations.

And protests are one of the ways to get the government to enact legislations that force corporations to make decisions that benefit society on a whole instead of just increasing their profits.


----------



## mrobson (Mar 5, 2011)

solarz said:


> Yes, we're all well aware that corporations are only concerned with their bottom line.
> 
> That's why we have governments and legislations.
> 
> And protests are one of the ways to get the government to enact legislations that force corporations to make decisions that benefit society on a whole instead of just increasing their profits.


when i said they should be out getting jobs that put them in positions to enact legislation, you basically said thats to hard. The occupy movement has turned the governments against them thats why they are trying to shut down the camps. Not to mention the majority of existing governments are in bed with big business, the only way forward is to change things from the inside but apparently thats too much work.

At this point in their life they should realize life isnt fair and if you want to achieve anything you need to get off your ass and work for it.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

mrobson said:


> when i said they should be out getting jobs that put them in positions to enact legislation, you basically said thats to hard. *The occupy movement has turned the governments against them* thats why they are trying to shut down the camps. Not to mention the majority of existing governments are in bed with big business, *the only way forward is to change things from the inside but apparently thats too much work.*
> 
> At this point in their life they should realize life isnt fair and if you want to achieve anything you need to get off your ass and work for it.


Last time I checked, we're still living in a democracy.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

mrobson said:


> At this point in their life they should realize life isnt fair and if you want to achieve anything you need to get off your ass and work for it.


My back is saying I am working enough for 3, so does the schedule. I would love an "out" but that just isn't realistic in my situation. I HAVE to do what I do to provide. There is no "choice" in the matter.

"Fair Treatment" is what we ask for. I could go on and on... but what we are doing to ourselves *and our planet* in the name of "profit" is just wrong.

The word of the day is "sustainable". That is just not possible in the current environment. I would like to believe that we are responsible and can become sustainable, but I don't think that will happen in my lifetime. It CAN but greed prevails and it won't.

Eliminate greed and the equation changes drastically.


----------



## Redddogg69 (Oct 1, 2011)

J-P said:


> My back is saying I am working enough for 3, so does the schedule. I would love an "out" but that just isn't realistic in my situation. I HAVE to do what I do to provide. There is no "choice" in the matter.
> 
> "Fair Treatment" is what we ask for. I could go on and on... but what we are doing to ourselves *and our planet* in the name of "profit" is just wrong.
> 
> ...


Greed will disappear with the last human on earth. Do you work enough for three for the bare necessities of life? Or to have enough to enjoy luxuries like aquariums? That in itself is a form of greed, none of us need half the things we have to survive.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Redddogg69 said:


> Greed will disappear with the last human on earth. Do you work enough for three for the bare necessities of life? Or to have enough to enjoy luxuries like aquariums? That in itself is a form of greed, none of us need half the things we have to survive.


I work for 3 because I have been cross trained and the boss has reduced and or eliminated those jobs. We are talking pure survival here.

On greed, if you give the person the fundamentals of life; food, shelter, transportation, health and a meaningful occupation, greed is somewhat stemmed.

Aquariums? Well I have had to scale down BIG time... and I mean BIG. Reef aquarium are sustainable via coral propagation. The species kept in those aquariums CAN be sustainable. Don't forget that we who keep aquariums are a select few. There are millions of aquariums out there, but today we can benefit from captive breeding and propagation. We really don't need to harvest from the ocean.

One factor that is killing the ocean is the fishing industry and going deeper and deeper with drag nets that decimates an entire ecosystem in one sweep. There is no discrimination. There is no remorse. These are people like me doing what they have to do to survive. They get paid very little and the companies profit from it.

We HAVE a minimum wage. Why not a maximum wage?


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Redddogg69 said:


> Greed will disappear with the last human on earth. Do you work enough for three for the bare necessities of life? Or to have enough to enjoy luxuries like aquariums? That in itself is a form of greed, none of us need half the things we have to survive.


That's true. Greed is a part of human nature, just like compassion is. Human society is a constant struggle between individual egotism and altruism. The best societies are those that are able to balance the two.

Without greed, there can be no progress. However, greed unchecked leads to tyrannical societies where power is concentrated in the hands of an elite few.

So it's not really about greed as such, but rather a balance of priorities.

Frankly, I think the 10$ minimum wage law is misguided. Raising the minimum wage doesn't increase a person's purchasing power.

No offense intended, but I think it's ironic that J-P doesn't seem to realize this, since he works at Loblaws/No Frills. If a grocery store has to pay its employees higher wages (not to mention the suppliers of that those groceries have to pay *their* employees higher wages, and the suppliers' suppliers, etc.), then of course they would need to raise the price of groceries. That just translates into inflation.

There's no point wailing about CEO's salaries, either. There's only 1 CEO to several thousand workers, so even if he were to donate his entire salary, the workers would only get maybe 5$ more on each paycheck. Furthermore, CEOs command that much salary because there's only a dozen people with his qualifications on the market. Basic supply and demand: anybody can work for minimum wages, very few people can run a multinational business.

That said, it's not what Occupy Toronto/Wall Street is about. The "Occupy" movement was started as a response to the corruption of Wall Street, where financiers can play with numbers and create bubbles to enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of the country. The only reason these people aren't in jail is because we don't have laws in place to forbid such practices. That's what the Occupy movement aims to change.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

solarz said:


> No offense intended, but I think it's ironic that J-P doesn't seem to realize this, since he works at Loblaws/No Frills. If a grocery store has to pay its employees higher wages (not to mention the suppliers of that those groceries have to pay *their* employees higher wages, and the suppliers' suppliers, etc.), then of course they would need to raise the price of groceries. That just translates into inflation.


Actually I know too well. As a pricing analyst, that is a truism. But having a few cents increased across millions of customers in insignificant compared to the benefits the employees would gain.

When Minimum wage went up so did the prices... thus the "minimum wage myth".

So lets look as a concrete example:
A family familiar pizza brand pay $350,000 a year just to get shelf space in our stores. That is HUGE! Multiply that by the number of brands (aka Kraft, Coke, etc..) and you are talking HUGE numbers. That alone pays pays for our warehouse. Then the mark up on the products that pays for the staff and % paid to head office that pays for their staff.

The money only flows up. Now Most No Frills are Franchised, and the argument is they will not remain competitive if the price goes up a couple cents, but that is not the case either.

Head office constantly adjusts the price based on transportation costs, gas prices, wages, and sales.

Their margin NEVER changes. Ours does.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

J-P said:


> Actually I know too well. As a pricing analyst, that is a truism. *But having a few cents increased across millions of customers in insignificant compared to the benefits the employees would gain. *
> 
> When Minimum wage went up so did the prices... thus the "minimum wage myth".
> 
> ...


But it's not just No Frills that need to increase their employees' wages. It's all of No Frills' Ontario suppliers (up to and including the farmers!), Shoppers, Sears, Walmart, all restaurants, movie theatres, office building support staff (cleaning, security, cafeteria, etc.), etc. etc.

An increase of a few cents (on how many dollars?) *EVERYWHERE* is the definition of inflation.


----------



## Redddogg69 (Oct 1, 2011)

J-P said:


> I work for 3 because I have been cross trained and the boss has reduced and or eliminated those jobs. We are talking pure survival here.
> 
> On greed, if you give the person the fundamentals of life; food, shelter, transportation, health and a meaningful occupation, greed is somewhat stemmed.
> 
> ...


This is one of the fundamentals of communism. Just a bit different, one wage for all, see the slippery slope?


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

solarz said:


> But it's not just No Frills that need to increase their employees' wages. It's all of No Frills' Ontario suppliers (up to and including the farmers!), Shoppers, Sears, Walmart, all restaurants, movie theatres, office building support staff (cleaning, security, cafeteria, etc.), etc. etc.
> 
> An increase of a few cents (on how many dollars?) *EVERYWHERE* is the definition of inflation.


that is the devaluation of the dollar. Not really inflation. I use No Frills as a comparison, a snap shot of what is actually happening. There is not barter and trade ans we were taught in schools. There is no "you work hard and you'll be rewarded". The system exists to protect those that benefit form it the most; those at the top.

The banking system and trade system as we know it don't benefit the 99%. We are drones working to keep the satus quo of those with the controlling power.

In the past x amount of goods was traded for x amount of goods or credit. We bought on that credit. Now we have to buy on what "might" be the future price. Which is, in so shape or form, indicative of what the actual value is. That is what options and "futures" trading is all about.

What the farmer gets paid today and what you are actually charged as the end consumer are 2 different things. A+B+C no longer equals D. The entire banking system, the infrastructure is not sustainable.

People, we are producing more food than we can consume. That is a fact. So why are prices going UP instead of down?

Renewable efficient energy resources are HERE today, why are we not implementing them?


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Redddogg69 said:


> This is one of the fundamentals of communism. Just a bit different, one wage for all, see the slippery slope?


Nope... if it is different, than it is not the same. A goose is not a duck.

maybe we need more social programs, but that is not communism.


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

Its tough to make more money, but you have to look at it from a different prespective. let's say you're a succesfull entreprenuer, you worked hard you caught a few breaks you got lucky and now you can hire a few more people to help you. Then these people want a raise because other people in a diff company make more. Well, you like to make more too but as the owner who can you ask? 

your clients? they may pay you more or go somewhere else.

yourself? that's what you've been doing as an entreprenuer. you get more clients, change your course of business or develop more products and services that your clients will pay more.

So basically everyone has to ask themself too. Invent something, go back to school, change direction or help the company make more money. Sometimes you can't just expect someone to pay you more because others get paid more by doing the same thing you've been doing. You may get a bit more that's about it as other people may get a bit of raise every year too.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

J-P said:


> that is the devaluation of the dollar. Not really inflation. I use No Frills as a comparison, a snap shot of what is actually happening. There is not barter and trade ans we were taught in schools. There is no "you work hard and you'll be rewarded". The system exists to protect those that benefit form it the most; those at the top.
> 
> The banking system and trade system as we know it don't benefit the 99%. We are drones working to keep the satus quo of those with the controlling power.
> 
> ...


Raising the minimum wage means basic services cost more to provide, and that translates to inflation. The devaluation of the dollar (CAD? USD?) comes later when the global economy is taken into account, and it's not directly correlated to the minimum wage.

As for why prices are going up, well, there's been a couple of wars in the Middle East (higher fuel cost), a severe drought in China (higher food cost), and the Ontario minimum wage was raised by 7.9% about 18 months ago, and now you're seeing the trickling-down effect of that raise.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

So an an entrepreneur where do you get your start up funds from?

Stock brokers. Those brokers earn a commission. Usually at min $40 per trade across 1000's per day and the company takes their cut and the brokers are bagging $500+ per day.

Now, on the flip side, if you were to invest in a company, which ones would you choose?

Chances are they are not start ups. People buy and trade stock simply because they want to make $$ on the market. They buy into the belief that buying company A over company B will be better. There is nothing wrong with that.

When that money is used for personal jets and excessive salaries, then there is an issue. When brokers who really don't provide a fundamental service to society as a whole are making $1000 a day on predetermined choices, then I and (we) should take issue with that. There are fundamental services that are lacking and those funds could be put to better use if there was a salary cap.

In Singapore the median salary is $100,000. The cost of living is high. The difference between the rich and the poor is not like it is here. In Japan the average salary is about $60,000. The same situation applies. The CEOs are not earning multi-millions... they are earning hundreds of thousands. Even he very well off movie stars and pop stars there are working DAILY tirelessly to earn their elite salary. Completely different than here.

Here the spread is too one sided. Geeze it take a PhD in economics to vaguely understand what is going on. Then top that off with your PhD in social science and political science... 

...............................................................................................


At one time not too long ago in our history we had tribe leaders. These were the experienced and or elected. A tribe leader enjoyed the stature of his position as long as he held it, which was not that long; either by death or by re-election.

Compare that to now. Everyone in power has made it a mandate to control that power through law, contractual agreement, media manipulation or or down right confusion.

We chose our leaders through familiarity. Now we choose them based on popularity. 

Lets cut through the confusion and BS, get back to the basics and provide the masses with their fundamental needs. It is well within the realm of being doable. The companies won't do it... so the government has to step up to the plate.

p.s. 
Go to Frills and check out the No Name pickles. Why are they made in India? We have subsidies on milk, eggs, bread / wheat... I believe, that anything that can NOT be produced domestically should be imported. Anything that can be produced domestically and IS imported should have a tariff. Then there is Bell Canada... ohhh those guys just suck.. LOL!! IT tech in India and customer service in the Bahamas... Why not Canadians working for a Canadian company? "Profit" at the expense of the workers.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

J-P said:


> People buy and trade stock simply because they want to make $$ on the market. They buy into the belief that buying company A over company B will be better. There is nothing wrong with that.


Actually, there is a problem with that. The market works on the assumption that people are rational. They are not. 95% of investors buy when stock prices rise, and sell when stock prices fall.

What's wrong with that, you ask? Consider how stock prices rise and fall in the first place. Suppose I'm shorting company X. I "borrow" 1 million of their stocks valued at 10$ a piece. I then dump them at 9$ a piece, making myself 9 million$ in the process. If company X only issued, say, 2 million stocks in total, I have now just caused their stock prices to drop by 10%. That's a big drop in one day, and other investors, having no idea what had happened, goes into panic mode and starts selling their own stocks. After a couple of days, maybe weeks, the stock price of company X fell down to 5$ a piece (through no fault of their own, might I add). Now I buy 1 million of those back at the cost of 5 million$ and return them to whoever I "borrowed" it from. I've just made 4 million $ from this, and caused a whole lot of other people to lose a lot of money. And this is one of the simplest "tricks" you can play on the market. Of course, this only works if you've got the clout to borrow all those stocks in the first place. And guess what kind of people have that kind of clout?

That's the problem with Wall Street.



J-P said:


> Go to Frills and check out the No Name pickles. Why are they made in India? We have subsidies on milk, eggs, bread / wheat... I believe, that anything that can NOT be produced domestically should be imported. Anything that can be produced domestically and IS imported should have a tariff. Then there is Bell Canada... ohhh those guys just suck.. LOL!! IT tech in India and customer service in the Bahamas... Why not Canadians working for a Canadian company? "Profit" at the expense of the workers.


There are plenty of pickles made in Ontario. Do I buy them? No, because they're more expensive.

You want to slap a tariff on Indian pickles? Okay, India will now slap a tariff on Canadian wheat. Now watch the prairie farmers get up in arms.

That's the problem with protectionism.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

solarz said:


> Raising the minimum wage means basic services cost more to provide, and that translates to inflation. The devaluation of the dollar (CAD? USD?) comes later when the global economy is taken into account, and it's not directly correlated to the minimum wage.
> 
> As for why prices are going up, well, there's been a couple of wars in the Middle East (higher fuel cost), a severe drought in China (higher food cost), and the Ontario minimum wage was raised by 7.9% about 18 months ago, and now you're seeing the trickling-down effect of that raise.


To a certain extent you are correct.

Lets look at a can of pop: 350 ml. A decade ago that can cost $0.50, today it costs $1.00. What has changed? Prices went up. Is that inflation? Or that what the dollar can buy is less? Inflation IS devaluation of the dollar. The dollar buys less, thus it is worth less; in our domestic currency.


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

I am not the boss, but I do work for a smaller company which I realize that everyone is accountable and our salary depends on the company revenue. I would like to get more but I have to find ways to drive more revenue and not take others. Its hard I know, especially if you have family to support. I used to know a friend back in university where he was working full time and going to school full time, its hard but he made it. he doesn't sleep until the weekend lol. Come to think of it he worked on the weekend too.

Everyone feels some entitlement but I can tell you the boss feels alot more than you do. I am not saying there aren't greed, corruptions, bad bosses or employees but you gotta try another way. You won't hear me say that I am working too hard or my back or 3 jobs or anything. I understand there is only so much you can do but there is also so much others can do for you.

Maybe you can't find the opportunity and its not enough to just wiki something in the internet. Maybe more schooling? I don't know your background so I cannot say but good luck.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Holidays said:


> I am not the boss, but I do work for a smaller company which I realize that everyone is accountable and our salary depends on the company revenue. I would like to get more but I have to find ways to drive more revenue and not take others. Its hard I know, especially if you have family to support. I used to know a friend back in university where he was working full time and going to school full time, its hard but he made it. he doesn't sleep until the weekend lol. Come to think of it he worked on the weekend too.
> 
> Everyone feels some entitlement but I can tell you the boss feels alot more than you do. I am not saying there aren't greed, corruptions, bad bosses or employees but you gotta try another way. You won't hear me say that I am working too hard or my back or 3 jobs or anything. I understand there is only so much you can do but there is also so much others can do for you.
> 
> Maybe you can't find the opportunity and its not enough to just wiki something in the internet. Maybe more schooling? I don't know your background so I cannot say but good luck.


Thank you for the kind words. Schooling isn't the issue, it is JOBS. Adequate viable jobs. In our company I am one of the lucky few to work full time (today was my last day on the 90 day probation). The company does not hire full timers because they don't want to pay the benefits and wage increases. Thus we are flooded with part timers that a) don't want to be there or b) are waiting for a full time shot (and that is YEARS waiting). 1 full time employee takes the position of 1.5 part time employees at the same rate of pay based on the same hours. In this situation (and it is not unique) it is closer to 1 : 3. There is no "dogging" it here. Thus comes into play; equal pay for equal work. That is not applied in this company.

In theory it is work to your ability and receive equal pay. Is a 70 year old working to his / her ability to be paid the same as a 19 year old working to his / her ability? What if the employer exploits the 19 year old to eliminate a couple jobs or reduce those hours of the elderly that are not as productive and can't afford to live on their CPP? Was that a "bad decision" on the part of the elderly person as to say "well you should have invested?" Maybe that 70 year old needs more schooling.

I don't mean to be harsh, but the situation we have put ourselves in is not sustainable. There are no "peaches and cream" at retirement for us. Just more cut backs. There is no "equal pay for equal work".

The fact that this topic even exists is a symptom of something wrong and people are becoming vocal about it.

In medicine, you read the signs and symptoms and come up with a diagnosis. The signs and symptoms have been there for a LONG time. Unfortunately the treatment has not been. Collectively, I believe the treatment IS here. I don't know it it works, but it is worth a try.


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

Jobs and standard of living is still alot worse in other countries.

It's the nature of capitalism, basically if you work hard, you can get rich, move up and do whatever you want. 

Capitalism allows you to starve but also allows you to better yourself and situation.

If you don't like the outcome / fruit of your labour change direction, I would.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Back on topic, did you guys read all the editorials on the Occupy movement when the police started evicting the camps? These "journalists" were all so certain that the movement had achieved nothing and was going to die off.

But the movement is not going to go away, just because mainstream media tells us that it's not "news" anymore.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Yes, Personal quibbles aside, I would like to see a strong positive change for the better within out lifetime. 


There is a revolution on the horizon. Will it be loud? or Quiet? Change MUST occur.


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

Comment from the tsun
Best I've read in a long time!

"1. You cannot legislate
the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for
without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not
first take from somebody else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!

5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because
the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the
idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what
they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation. "

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

sig said:


> Comment from the tsun
> Best I've read in a long time!
> 
> "1. You cannot legislate
> ...


Sorry, but that has nothing to do with the Occupy Movement. No one is asking for free hand-outs. The protesters are asking for better legislation so that financial big-wigs cannot fraudulently make money off of taxpayers' backs!

The Toronto Sun, as usual, is at its best when tearing down a straw man.


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

Even warren buffet said his federal tax bill last year was $6,938,744.
"That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income - and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

There is no way to tell wheter its not a real tax deduction. Their accountants have all the paperworks to legitimize it. He suggested to change the tax law, that'll never pass.


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 13, 2006)

Here's the Occupy Movement's 24/7 livestream:

http://www.livestream.com/occupytoronto


----------



## sig (Dec 13, 2010)

Holidays said:


> Even warren buffet said his federal tax bill last year was $6,938,744.
> "That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income - and that's actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
> ...


Yeahh, That's a big revelation. And given the gravity of it, the New York Post lets Buffett have it:
*Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his "mega-rich friends" should pay higher taxes, why doesn't his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates?*

*Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002 *

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/warren_buffett_hypocrite_E3BsmJmeQVE38q2Woq9yjJ

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/29/warren-buffett-taxes-berkshire-hathaway_n_941099.html

*100% free webcam site! | Awesome chicks and it is absolutely free! | Watch free live sex cam - easy as 1-2-3*


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

sig said:


> Yeahh, That's a big revelation. And given the gravity of it, the New York Post lets Buffett have it:
> *Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his "mega-rich friends" should pay higher taxes, why doesn't his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates?*
> 
> *Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Owes Taxes Going Back To 2002 *
> ...


Under taxation laws, corporations form a distinct entity. Buffett may be the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway, but that doesn't mean he can do anything he wants with the firm.

Furthermore, there can be a variety of reasons why the firm is still dealing with the IRS. Just because someone favors a fairer taxation plan doesn't mean he has to agree with everything the IRS says!

Taxing corporations is also a completely different issue from taxing individuals. Corporations create jobs and runs the economy, all things individuals don't do, even the wealthy ones. Buffett is not proposing hiking taxes on big corporations like the NDP. He is proposing fairer individual income taxes.

*Finally, even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that Buffett is a hypocrite, it takes nothing away from the FACT that the very wealthy are paying less taxes (in % of income) than middle class people!*


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 13, 2006)

I believe the greatest danger in the status quo is the wealth gap between the poor/middle class and the super rich, which continues to grow at an alarming rate.

For an example of the danger, consider what would happen if the European Union were to collapse and Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy were to become insolvent (go bankrupt). In the worst case, the entire world could plunge into the worst depression of all time. With no way for governments to support the poor and middle classes, they would quickly use up their savings and become homeless within a year or two. On the other hand, someone who has over one-billion dollars of net worth could spend a million dollars a year, and be able to last for one-thousand years before going broke.

Is there any reason why someone SHOULD have over one-billion dollars of net worth?


----------



## fesso clown (Nov 15, 2011)

*um*

my 2cents


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

fesso clown said:


> my 2cents


That one's right on the mark!


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

THe second reminds of of the kid selling lemonade and got shut down by the police for not having a vendors permit.


----------



## Redddogg69 (Oct 1, 2011)

Web Wheeler said:


> *Is there any reason why someone SHOULD have over one-billion dollars of net worth?*


Why shouldn't they if the earn it? Are you a communist? Why can't I make as much money as I can through my own efforts?


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Why I Occupy: Letter from a Vancouver protester


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Redddogg69 said:


> Why shouldn't they if the earn it? Are you a communist? Why can't I make as much money as I can through my own efforts?


That is the point.. through your OWN efforts. Money breeds money. It takes away from those that have not. If you are willing to produce than that is not a problem. If you are willing to work that is not a problem. What IS a problem is that those who work 40+ hours a week are still below the poverty line.

We need more support for those that support YOUR community.

Then there are those that work, not full time, but part time because the company refuses to hire full time to avoid the additional costs. Those part timers should be treated equally but are not. Wage increases are not equal, nor are benefits. The waiting list is long to get to that coveted "full time" position.

I don't understand why the people that provide the basic necessities of life are treated the worst.


----------



## Redddogg69 (Oct 1, 2011)

Menial jobs will never be high paying or disappear. Humans are lazy as a species, if you can make more money for doing less physical work you will. By paying more for these menial jobs, you will inadvertently drive up inflation. Many societies have tried to improve on this system and failed. Bottom line is, no system is infallible, there will always be the have's and have nots. The haves's will make money on the labour of the have nots and the have nots will always be resentful of it.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

that is not actually true... that is a concept that we have created and exploit...


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

I don't think anyone exploit anyone, its just simply the job market based on demand and supply. 

I agree with Reddog that people by nature is lazy, they prefer to do an easier job but the harder job will pay more. It is easier to work as general labourer than say a doctor.

the supply for general labour is abundant thus low compensation.

We all can keep "quibble" ing as you said but in reality not much people can become a doctor thus high compensation.

The harder a job is the more compensation you'll get. Why would someone work harder and smarter which not a lot of people can do but not get compensated more? that's not fair. You see someone with good pay, lets say the president of the supermarket, why not try to get the education like a degree and MBA and try to do what they do? why quibble?


----------



## Redddogg69 (Oct 1, 2011)

Holidays said:


> I don't think anyone exploit anyone, its just simply the job market based on demand and supply.
> 
> I agree with Reddog that people by nature is lazy, they prefer to do an easier job but the harder job will pay more. It is easier to work as general labourer than say a doctor.
> 
> ...


It's easier


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

The opportunity of better jobs and pay exist in Canada. In canada if you want to go to school so you can do a more difficult job that needs more education and training but don't have money the govt will lend you. People in a different country can only dream of this kind govt assistance.


----------



## J-P (Feb 27, 2011)

Doctors are necessary and they are well paid yes (to an extent);

We're talking about corporate big wigs that have really contributed nothing VITAL to society.

Think of it this way: The highest paying positions in society are the ones we can do without. 

Tech: Youtube
Entertainment: You name it
Sports: see above
Stock brokers / investors: They are needed BUT the system allows them to manipulate the numbers to make it so complex that a "Doctor" can not figure it out. ** Don't even get me started on that one**

Q: So why should people who provide "fringe" benefits be paid more than those who provide the basic fundamentals of life?

A: Because we are idiots


----------



## Web Wheeler (May 13, 2006)

Redddogg69 said:


> Why shouldn't they if the earn it? Are you a communist? Why can't I make as much money as I can through my own efforts?


*"Are you a communist?"* What kind of question is that??? Are you a McCarthyism bigot trapped in a 1940's / 50's time warp?

As to your question, "Why can't I make as much money as I can through my own efforts?", I'll let Elizabeth Warren explain it to you:

_"There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there -- good for you. But I want to be clear. You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that maurauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory... Now look. You built a factory and it turned into something terrific or a great idea -- God Bless! Keep a Big Hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along." Elizabeth Warren_


----------



## Holidays (Apr 18, 2010)

I hear you elizabeth ...I know I know you're not elizabeth...the thing though is that it is not your company, not your house and not your money. Yes you work in their house but let's reverse the situation, you have a house and you bought a new computer for your family. Someone who is less fortunate tell you why you need a new computer? sell your computer and buy 2 less expensive used computers and give him one, after all he did work in building your house. But you paid fair market value of your house why should someone who you already paid entitled to more? The best thing he can do is ask you if he can build an extension to your house and you both share the profit. Or better yet he build his own house then he can be entitled to it.

We all know everybody want more money and everybody want others to pay more so they don't have to, it doesn't matter what kind of jobs you got.

But at the end its their company, their house, their money, you can't tell if the deduction is not right. The tax deduction can help to grow the economy and create jobs.

Op not everyone is an idiot, some of us just choose profession that are not abundant in the job market and we find opportunities where others don't.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Web Wheeler said:


> *"Are you a communist?"* What kind of question is that??? Are you a McCarthyism bigot trapped in a 1940's / 50's time warp?
> 
> As to your question, "Why can't I make as much money as I can through my own efforts?", I'll let Elizabeth Warren explain it to you:
> 
> "There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own.(...)


All comments about communism aside, I think what Redddogg69 is saying is that just because you can find flaws in a system doesn't mean you can come up with a better system.

Communism was one such attempt. It failed because it idealized human nature, that people would take what they need, and give what they can.

Capitalism has a lot of problems. This was shown abundantly in the slums and rampant sufferings of the 19th century. In fact, the problems of capitalism is what gave rise to Marx's philosophy.

Socialism is an attempt to harness the strengths of capitalism while reining in, through regulations, the anti-social aspects of capitalism. Today, there is no black/white difference between capitalism and socialism. Every nation is somewhere on a continuum between capitalism and socialism.

Ask the most ardent Tea Party supporter if they would refuse to collect their pension upon retirement. I think you know what answer we'll get.

The point is, no system is perfect. It helps to identify the problems of a system, but sometimes the solutions people propose would just lead to something worse.


----------



## BillD (Jun 5, 2006)

Holidays said:


> I don't think anyone exploit anyone, its just simply the job market based on demand and supply.
> 
> I agree with Reddog that people by nature is lazy, they prefer to do an easier job but the harder job will pay more. It is easier to work as general labourer than say a doctor.
> 
> ...


Most of this is not true. A general laborer (around $26 an hour) works harder than a doctor for less compensation (extra schooling not withstanding). As well, working harder to get a degree or more skills doesn't guarantee a better job. You have to take that job away from someone else to get it; it doesn't should spring up out of the ether. I guess it boils down to whether you believe that everyone deserves an opportunity to make a living wage. If you want the menial jobs filled, the money needs to be there or people will spend all their time trying to get something better, and we import labor from Mexico.
The big problem here and the US is that the wealth creating jobs, in manufacturing have been shipped off to other countries, with the governments blessing and resultant loss in tax revenue and the parasitic jobs (service sector) have replaced them. These jobs don't create wealth but eat away at the wealth that is created. Without wealth creation, the service sector will not have any source of income. Those in power, have done a really good job, partly with the media they control, to pit one wage earner against the other. They have done a great job of brainwashing the masses to believe that the sky is the limit when in reality those at the top (the 1%ers) have no interest in letting you into the party, no matter how hard you work. The one thing they don't teach in schools, is that no matter how smart you are, how hard you work, or how well educated you become, there isn't enough good jobs to go around, and some will be left to survive on scraps.


----------



## BillD (Jun 5, 2006)

Perhaps we need to differentiate between Communism which is a political system and socialism which is an economic system (like capitalism), which in it's essence is democratic, which is another political system.


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

BillD said:


> Perhaps we need to differentiate between Communism which is a political system and socialism which is an economic system (like capitalism), which in it's essence is democratic, which is another political system.


No, communism is an economic system.

The opposing spectrum of democracy is authoritarianism.


----------



## PACMAN (Mar 4, 2010)

Comedic break from this 
intense discussion?

(What can I say, I'm a clownfish!)


----------



## Syed (Oct 20, 2010)

^

That was actually pretty funny lol.


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

LMAO, that's funny.

I was out of the country for 30 days. Had a good peek at China. From what I can pick up, the Chinese don't consider themselves communism anymore. The locals consider communism a huge failure and a lost cause. I am not sure what you would call today's China; it's a mixture of capitalism and communism. It's not socialism either. But the political elite and the corporate at the moment seems to function quite well as a single entity. The people seem relatively happy. There is social imbalance at every turn and the wealth distribution gap can be enormous. But there isn't the kind of resentment we get here.
Anyway, having step out of the influence of the media and then back in. It's really weird how your perspective can change.
I was kind of a camp supporter, but now it's fuzzy. I am not so sure anymore. Questions are popping up in my head. If we have that many people who are unhappy, did these people voted in the last election. Damn it, we have an all time low turn out in the last Ontario election. This is what led to careless government spending and that's what's been gutting us all these years. The last guy how tried to stop the spending spree and gave us some money back was Mike Harris. What did we do with him? We booted him from office.
The top 1% has always existed, yes; they evade taxes in one form or another. But who won't? If I have that kind of income, I would too. I can't think of a reason why I'd hand over money to the government and allow them to squander it. It's not like it will reach the poor anyway. And the sad part is, we have that power to make a difference through election, but we just didn't care. It's too big of an inconvenience to make that trip to the voting booth.
Instead of camping out or breaking store windows. How about encouraging your family, friends and co-worker to vote. Write letters to your constituent letting them know you want to see the corruption stop. If you're going to camp out, how about camping out at the door step of our corrupted government's office?
Anyway, that's just my rant...

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## solarz (Aug 31, 2010)

Zebrapl3co said:


> I was out of the country for 30 days. Had a good peek at China. From what I can pick up, the Chinese don't consider themselves communism anymore. The locals consider communism a huge failure and a lost cause. I am not sure what you would call today's China; it's a mixture of capitalism and communism. It's not socialism either. But the political elite and the corporate at the moment seems to function quite well as a single entity. The people seem relatively happy. There is social imbalance at every turn and the wealth distribution gap can be enormous. But there isn't the kind of resentment we get here.


It's "Socialism with Chinese characteristics". 

I'd say there's plenty of resentment as well, but it's countered by a lot of "fatalism". Ironically, because there is very little welfare system in China, most Chinese do not expect society to give them a minimum living standard.



> Anyway, having step out of the influence of the media and then back in. It's really weird how your perspective can change.
> I was kind of a camp supporter, but now it's fuzzy. I am not so sure anymore. Questions are popping up in my head. If we have that many people who are unhappy, did these people voted in the last election. Damn it, we have an all time low turn out in the last Ontario election. This is what led to careless government spending and that's what's been gutting us all these years. The last guy how tried to stop the spending spree and gave us some money back was Mike Harris. What did we do with him? We booted him from office.
> The top 1% has always existed, yes; they evade taxes in one form or another. But who won't? If I have that kind of income, I would too. I can't think of a reason why I'd hand over money to the government and allow them to squander it. It's not like it will reach the poor anyway. And the sad part is, we have that power to make a difference through election, but we just didn't care. It's too big of an inconvenience to make that trip to the voting booth.
> Instead of camping out or breaking store windows. How about encouraging your family, friends and co-worker to vote. Write letters to your constituent letting them know you want to see the corruption stop. If you're going to camp out, how about camping out at the door step of our corrupted government's office?
> Anyway, that's just my rant...


Tax breaks benefit those with higher income, while those with lower income depend a lot on the social programs funded by those tax revenue.


----------



## Zebrapl3co (Mar 29, 2006)

solarz said:


> It's "Socialism with Chinese characteristics".


LOL, heh.



> I'd say there's plenty of resentment as well, but it's countered by a lot of "fatalism". Ironically, because there is very little welfare system in China, most Chinese do not expect society to give them a minimum living standard.


No, there isn't that much resentment in North, East and Southern China. Maybe on the western part where the social wealth gap is bigger. I haven't visit that part of the country, so can't comment. But overall the majority of the people I meet are relatively content. And to be honest, I even envy some of them. In many provinces, the retirement age for women is 50. The retirement age for men is 60. I even heard that some civilservants posts can retire as yearly as 45 with limited benefits.
But one fact is clear. Urban land owners in big cities will always have more benefits than migrant farmers. That is where the in-equality lies. Anyway off topic.



> Tax breaks benefit those with higher income, while those with lower income depend a lot on the social programs funded by those tax revenue.


Tax breaks mostly benefits corporations. Not necessarily higher income. Most higher income pays the most taxes. Only the highest of those (ahem %1) gets away with it. But even then, it's on a depend basis. Some companies share these kinds of bonus with employees, albei, at a smaller portion of the profit pie.
Canada doesn't have the kind of rediculous tax loop like the US.
If anything, the so-call poor get's off way more than the %1. How many carpenters/Waiter/mechanics/duct cleaners/repair man/*cough*fish breeders*cough*  etc... do we do cash deals with? These people pay $0 income tax. Although I have to excuse the fish breeders because it's never enough to make a difference.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------

