babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » labour and consumption   » race to the top

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: race to the top
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 12 October 2005 09:51 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
i'm getting sick of labour disputes....nurses in NB were set to go on strike a few months ago...teachers in BC are on strike....cops in TO are threatening strike...

it seems that organized labour is factioned and looking out for their own greed....people getting paid with public money have no qualms interupting services ...doesn't big labour know that their "race to the top" is everyone elses "race to the bottom"?....perhaps big labour are hypocrites...they say they want to help the poor...but do they really want to help poor people in Canada, India, China or elsewhere in the world?....big labour wants protectionist barriers to keep THEIR standard of living high...dammed with the rest of us...we can pay higher taxes or pay higher prices on goods so they benefit...it doesn't matter to them that non unionized workforces are barely getting by...i mean....what do non unionized, working parents in BC think about the teachers union?....does the BC teachers union even care?....have they talked to parents or polled them to find out if they think a strike if warrented?

if i was the BC gov i'd immediately tell the teachers union that the BC gov will bring in 1000's of teachers from India and China to teach children if they aren't interested

nurse and doctors unions should be told that there's many qualified people in Cuba willing and able to do their job if they're not interested

cops in TO should be told that they can easily be replaced by a few thousand digicams (heck, the 60 thousand plus Canadian Forces has 55 000 soilders not doing much...they could quickly and easily be tasked with policing if need be...i mean really...all our CF guys with guns should be doing something other then endless training, marching, shining of boots and pushing of papers)

public unionized garbage collectors should be told there's thousands of Iraqis and Afghanis who would jump at the chance of picking up roadside garbage in Canada rather then worrying about roadside bombs in their homelands

telus employees should be told there's tens of thousands of intelligent, english speaking Filipinos who could easy be tasked with doing their job if they feel their not getting paid enough

cbc employees should be told there's many South Koreans working for Ohmynews that could reform that institution if they're not up to the task

perhaps big labor should consolidate or evaporate


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 12 October 2005 10:03 AM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wow.

1. Think about what you just said. Ask yourself, "Are all of these workers interchangeable?" "Are costs of living the same everywhere in the world?" Think about the implications of the answers of these questions.

2. I'm not certain virulently anti-union discourse is within the mandate of the Labour and Consumption forum, but that's just my opinion as an ordinary babbler.

3. Throwing around labels like, "big labor" [sic] doesn't help your argument. You're talking about several different unions, with different leaderships, covering totally different professions. Conflating them all just brings down your discourse to the level of stereotype. It adds nothing.

edited for a silly mistake

[ 12 October 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Transplant
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9960

posted 12 October 2005 10:33 AM      Profile for Transplant     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CourtneyGQuinn:

if i was the BC gov i'd immediately tell the teachers union that the BC gov will bring in 1000's of teachers from India and China to teach children if they aren't interested

And you should be told that you can easily be replaced on babble.


From: Free North America | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
RP.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7424

posted 12 October 2005 10:36 AM      Profile for RP.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And you should bee told that you can easily bee replaced on babble.

There, fixed that for you.

/obligatory


From: I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 12 October 2005 10:51 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
i guess the point i'm trying to make is this...did the BC teachers union consult with parents regarding their decision to strike?....or is the conversation merely between labor and management?...and does "big labour" consider consumers/taxpayers when deciding to lobby for protectionism...or is dispute resolution a one-sided consideration?
From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
rinne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9117

posted 12 October 2005 11:00 AM      Profile for rinne     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Welcome to the Winnipeg that elected Sam Katz mayor. When Sam got rid of the union garbage collectors he held up a pair of "made in another country where people work for 30 cents an hour flip flops" as some kind of justification.

Thanks for showing us the whip Courtney Quinn, no doubt workers in this country who benefit from union labor agreements should be very, very grateful and never threaten to strike because they could so easily be replaced.


From: prairies | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Anarchonostic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4133

posted 12 October 2005 11:01 AM      Profile for Anarchonostic     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Courtney, I don't know about other disputes, but in the TELUS/TWU one, the main issues aren't wages, but job security.

We're really not asking for extreme wage increases. Both the union and the company agree we should see increases in flow with the North American average.

Our concern is prevented the company from doing an end-around by eliminating contacting out clauses from our agreement. We're trying to stop TELUS from saving money by eliminating our positions and filling them in the Phillipines.

Unless of course you're suggesting we compete on wages with Asia. But I don't think that's what your suggesting.


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 12 October 2005 11:27 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
citizen of winnipeg---

i'm still wondering about the potential of Mr.Katz....and i somewhat agree with the "flip flop" idea he raised....don't get me wrong...i'm as poor as they get...but i often wonder about a possible entrenched entitlement philosphy that might be evident with unions...the left/labour generally want to help the poor here in Canada and throughout the world...but it seems "they" don't want to accept competition or new, productive solutions..i absoulutley hate the status quo and want to see real changes from the top and bottom classes

Anarchonostic---

i don't believe in job security...i used to work for ATT Wireless when i lived in Cornwall, Ont...(actually, it was a sub-company of ATT Wireless....Startek...(seems sub companies get bigger slices of corporate welfare and gov subsidies if structured just right..))...anyway....i worked in both pre paid (pay-as-you-go) and post paid (monthly contracts) devisions.....4 years ago CSR agents actually took phone calls to "top-off" peoples prepaid accounts....nowadays its all automated...there's no need for people....why should a company promise job security if it can easily be automated/robotised?....i fear that unions may be halting progression by hindering productivity....i mean...what if telus finds a way to automate alot of what they do?....then what of all the job-secured employees?....should subscribers have to pay a premium to have employees push useless paper around and waste time?...either every job should be secure or no jobs should be secure....for "big labour" to fight for job security for only their workers just seems wrong


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025

posted 12 October 2005 11:51 AM      Profile for chubbybear        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CourtneyGQuinn:
cops in TO should be told that they can easily be replaced by a few thousand digicams
Works for me. Digicams don't have heavy steel-toed boots.

From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 12 October 2005 11:59 AM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Courtney, why are you still here?

[ 12 October 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025

posted 12 October 2005 12:43 PM      Profile for chubbybear        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by robbie_dee:
Courtney, why are you still here?
Gotta bee in your bonnet robbie?

From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 12 October 2005 01:05 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Courtney, you simply don't know what you're talking about here.

The job of labour unions is to stand up for the interests of their workers, not to find a "reasonable" compromise. Workers don't go on strike just to cause disruptions. They go on strike because they feel that the company they work for is not negotiating with them fairly and they see no other alternative. Remember that workers have to vote to approve the strike, and in a labour dispute it's the workers who suffer the most because of lost pay, uncertainty, etc.

It's interesting that you mention labour unions feeling a position of entitlement and not caring about low-income people in Canada or about workers around the world. Labour councils are heavliy involved in lobbying for such things as increases to minimum wage, which benefit lower-pay workers and something which most union members will not benefit from. In addition, labour unions around the world are active in lobbying for high labour standards so that there is no competitive advantage for a company to locate somewhere it doesn't have to pay workers well.

As for saving money by reducing staff and hiring robots? For one thing, robots have energy requirements that must be paid for, as opposed to workers who can get their energy by a little exercise most of us call eating. In addition, any savings that result from such things as automation and workforce reduction end up saving money for the company, not the consumer.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 12 October 2005 01:11 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yeah, didn't you flounce off in your Powered Parachute a while ago?

But I thought this brilliant satire:

quote:
if i was the BC gov i'd immediately tell the teachers union that the BC gov will bring in 1000's of teachers from India and China to teach children if they aren't interested

Can't you just see it? Thirty grade-one kids from Prince George staring puzzled at the Maderin-speaking teacher as she tries to explain the alphabet to them using Chinese characters. Hilarious.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
paxamillion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2836

posted 12 October 2005 01:27 PM      Profile for paxamillion   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's about as funny as using Canadian soldiers to do police work. For starters, they don't know the criminal code well....

Soldier: I'm arresting you for loitering.
Suspect: You can't, I was walking along the property on my way home from work. I wasn't bothering anyone.
Soldier: Okay, I'm arresting you for trespassing then?
Suspect: But I was on a public walkway.
Soldier: Okay, let's try causing a disturbance.....


From: the process of recovery | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025

posted 12 October 2005 01:47 PM      Profile for chubbybear        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by paxamillion:
It's about as funny as using Canadian soldiers to do police work. For starters, they don't know the criminal code well....

Soldier: I'm arresting you for loitering.
Suspect: You can't, I was walking along the property on my way home from work. I wasn't bothering anyone.
Soldier: Okay, I'm arresting you for trespassing then?
Suspect: But I was on a public walkway.
Soldier: Okay, let's try causing a disturbance.....


This sounds par for the course. How many of those 'assault while resisting arrest' charges do you think are justified?

From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
mersh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10238

posted 12 October 2005 02:25 PM      Profile for mersh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Courtney, it's pretty much all been said, but come on. You came out swinging on the pro-labour section of a progressive board, after you've flounced off. Don't try to backpedal or dig yourself in any further. Just buzz off.
From: toronto | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 12 October 2005 02:41 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CourtneyGQuinn:
?....big labour wants protectionist barriers to keep THEIR standard of living high...dammed with the rest of us...we can pay higher taxes or pay higher prices on goods so they benefit...it doesn't matter to them that non unionized workforces are barely getting by...i mean....what do non unionized, working parents in BC think about the teachers union?....does the BC teachers union even care?....have they talked to parents or polled them to find out if they think a strike if warrented? ...(and wrapping up this beef against unions)
perhaps big labor should consolidate or evaporate

Fact#1. The USA and Canada have the lowest rate of unionized workforce among richest nations

#2. The USA and Canada have the largest percentage of its workers in low paid employment compared to other rich nations

#3 The USA and Canada own the highest child poverty rates among rich nations

There was a story a few years ago about a new community that popped-up in the Brazilian Amazon region. They were mining gold and knocking down trees for big business interests. And, overnight, prices for just about everything local workers could ever want and need, skyrocketed upward. The interesting part was that there wasn't a union in sight and working conditions were deplorable.

The problem with "big business" interests and workers interests around Latin America, and around the world in general, is that each of them promises to improve the lives of millions of people by providing work. And they propose to do it without being pushed and prodded by unions fighting for worker's rights and living wages. They point out that as time goes by, big business provides jobs and prosperity is spread around by some magic of free market capitalism. But none of them wants to step up to the plate and offer living wages or decent working conditions for the very workers they depend on to make corporate fortunes even possible.

When North American workers have solidarity, wages will begin to reflect the cost of living. Until then, bend over and take the frozen boot of big business like a man, and leave "big unions" out of it. Place the blame where squarely on the shoulders of where it belongs - on 75 years of liberal and 25 of conservative party autocracy in Canada. That's not democracy.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 12 October 2005 03:05 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Gotta bee in your bonnet robbie?

Only that the flounce and surreptitious return is typical troll behavior. Something to keep in mind before you buy into Quinn's bullshit.


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025

posted 12 October 2005 03:06 PM      Profile for chubbybear        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mersh:
Just buzz off.
Now, now, don't worry, bee happy!

From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025

posted 12 October 2005 03:11 PM      Profile for chubbybear        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by robbie_dee:
Only that the flounce and surreptitious return is typical troll behavior. Something to keep in mind before you buy into Quinn's bullshit.
Oh gosh. Court'n'spark explained here that she was denouncin' flouncin'. C'mon, lets all have fun.

[ 12 October 2005: Message edited by: chubbybear ]


From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 12 October 2005 03:17 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by chubbybear:
Oh gosh. Court'n'spark explained here that she was denouncin' flouncin'.

CB that links to a page saying "FYI
Only administrators or moderators may perform this action "


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 12 October 2005 03:20 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think this is the thread chubby was trying to link.

[ 12 October 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777

posted 12 October 2005 10:47 PM      Profile for radiorahim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well CGQ it must be really boring on all of those right-wing boards so you came back here to be around folks you can actually learn something from.
From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 13 October 2005 12:34 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
if we had good government leaders...would we really need union labour leaders?....i said this months ago: "instead of paying union dues...why not pay an equivilant amount to the NDP?"

from what i remember about the unions i've belonged to...you pay them dues/fees to help with training and unfair labour practices....isn't that the job of governments?...if Mr.Layton/NDP were put into real positions of power...would auto workers really need Mr.Hargrove/CAW?....are unions simply doing the jobs governments should be doing?....why the overlapping interests?....why pay both taxes AND dues to rely on training, workplace safety, fair labour conditions?

perhaps the NDP gaining power is labour leaders worst fear....serious question....would the number of organized labour leaders increase or decrease with an NDP government?....if workers installed 160 or so NDP members in Ottawa....would the need for thousands of union labour leaders in Hamilton, Windsor, Moncton, Quebec, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Vancouver increase or decrease?....would workers need to pay dues/fees if there was a strong NDP government?


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 13 October 2005 12:46 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
it just seems the strategy of the BC teachers union is wrong...walking around in circles with silly signs all day doesn't help the unions public profile...it achieves nothing


why didn't the BC teachers union do this for a strategy....poll the parents and raise a public awareness campaign before striking...tell the parents that the teachers union would be willing to rent community centers/arenas/big top tents to house and teach the students while the strike was occuring....the union could have talked to the bus drivers and had them drop-off/deliver the kids to alternative sites while the strike happened.....if parents were on the side of unions they might have agreed to paid a small fee to help rent the temporary facilities while the strike occured (heck, the small fee would probably be less then what parents now have to pay for daycare)

how's this for public optics....set up a big top tent on the lawn of the provincial legislature gov grounds during strike....if the union cares about the kids and parents day-care needs....bring as many Vancouver kids to the governments front door step


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 13 October 2005 12:56 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
thinking about it more...perhaps the Toronto police strike is the perfect opportunity for poverty advocates in Canadas biggest city...if the cops are willing to semi/quasi break the law in order to achieve a means to and ends...why don't homeless people follow suit?....why don't all the homeless people and poverty advocates set up bases in empty/vacant municipal, provincial and government buildings?....TO police can view this action in one of 2 ways...they can either break up the poverty/homeless bases in government buildings (and look like mighty big hypocrites)....or they can allow the temporary occupation of empty gov buildings by the poverty/homeless alliance....kill 2 birds with one stone....force the multiple govs to negotiate with both the police union AND poverty/homeless alliance
From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 13 October 2005 02:59 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Chilean's enjoyed freedom from unions and the dead hand of government bureaucracy in the economy from 1973 to 1985 or so. Workers lined up at soup kitchens across the country. Zero tolerance for unions and socialist opposition did nothing for productivity or in attracting foreign investment.

[ 13 October 2005: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068

posted 14 October 2005 02:45 AM      Profile for CourtneyGQuinn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
i really do think the left should utilize the opportunity presented by an upset Toronto police force....if you're poor and/or homeless or a poverty advocate/leader living in TO....to quote Rage Against the Machine..."what better place then here, what better time then now"....

police bending/breaking the rules in Canada's largest city doesn't happen all the time.... poor, homeless people should immediately occupy empty municipal, provincial and federal buildings....i'd love to see government leaders on all levels react and try to do something about such a scenario....govs to cops: "do something...get them out of our buildings"....cops to govs:"first off, do something about police labour concerns...secondly, those buildings aren't yours...they're the publics..the peoples...if you won't build them affordable homes....fuck it...we're letting them stay in the buildings until you give a shit about them and us..."


From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Left Turn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8662

posted 14 October 2005 04:52 AM      Profile for Left Turn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
big labour wants protectionist barriers to keep THEIR standard of living high...dammed with the rest of us...we can pay higher taxes or pay higher prices on goods so they benefit...it doesn't matter to them that non unionized workforces are barely getting by

The problem is not unions per say, but rather ceratin segments of the labour bureaucracy. Here I am referring primarily to private sector business union types, the more conservative public sector union leaders, and labour federation leaders like Jim Sincaliar of the BC Fed of Labour, and Ken Giorgetti of the Canadian Labour Congress. This segment of the labour bureaucracy, is not interested in helping the genuinely disadvantaged in society; nor are they interrested in increasing overall union levels. This segment of the labour bureaucracy is primarily concerned that at the end of the day they still have their cushy jobs. These union leaders may talk the talk when necessary, but when push comes to shove and it's one day away from a general strike, people like Jim Sinclair and Ken Giorgetti do everything in their power to try and kill it.

The conservative labour bureaucracy sells out not only unionized workers, but it also sells out non-unionized workers when it refuses to launch new unionization drives. In the face of capitalistsd attacks on working and living standards, workers need unions more than ever. Labour leaders who shy away from unionzation drives are part of the problem.

And when public sector unions like HEU and the BCTF go on strike, the support of labour bureaucrats like Jim Sinclair is not really there. Sure, he initially talks a good line, but when the rubber hits the road one day before a general strike, Jim Sinclair is on the other side of the fence.

Strikes are an absolute necessity in our increasingly neo-liberalized world. And with each successive round of attacks on the working class, fewer and fewer options are available to workers besides the General strike if they want to affect real change. Unfortunately, the Labour bureaucracy stand in the way of a general strike.

Replace the labour bureaucracy with leaders who actually care about the coolective fate of the working class; who actively seek to increase unionization rates; who seek to educate the working class not to take no for an answer. Lets build a labour movement that fights neo-liberalism and wins.


From: Burnaby, BC | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Anarchonostic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4133

posted 14 October 2005 06:09 AM      Profile for Anarchonostic     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by CourtneyGQuinn:

police bending/breaking the rules in Canada's largest city doesn't happen all the time.... poor, homeless people should immediately occupy empty municipal, provincial and federal buildings....i'd love to see government leaders on all levels react and try to do something about such a scenario....govs to cops: "do something...get them out of our buildings"....cops to govs:"first off, do something about police labour concerns...secondly, those buildings aren't yours...they're the publics..the peoples...if you won't build them affordable homes....fuck it...we're letting them stay in the buildings until you give a shit about them and us..."

Good idea, Courtney. I'd be all for it (well, from out here on the West Coast, anyways).

You should send a copy of your post to [email protected]

Solidarity works best when it's used as a wide net, is my belief.

But taken with your earlier posts, are you sure you're not trying to bring about some Mad Max/Blade Runner dystopia, with cutthroat wage warfare, entirely robotic corporations, and rampant revolution?

With all seriousness, though: do you foresee a problem with the 'inevitable', looking a generation into the future? Can Canadian workers adapt, or will unemployment skyrocket? Can Canadian workers adapt enough for corporations hungry for constant growth and ever higher share prices?

I know what TELUS can automate now, and what they can't. They have automated, for now, about all they can without impacting customer service.

[ 14 October 2005: Message edited by: Anarchonostic ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 14 October 2005 09:27 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Originally posted by CourtneyGQuinn:
poor, homeless people should immediately occupy empty municipal, provincial and federal buildings....

I think this is an excellent idea - long overdue, in my opinion. Are there *really* empty govt. buildings anywhere? Any empty military bases with housing? I think it's insane to expect the homeless to cope on the streets this winter if there are buildings available. The homeless should occupy any public building they wish and remain until their problems are addressed in a significant way. If it's a vacant govt. building, the govt. should in addition provide full utilities and dupport until the homeless are no longer homeless. Isn't this self-evident?


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
mersh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10238

posted 14 October 2005 09:33 AM      Profile for mersh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There was a series of squatting attempts across Canada over the past few years. It's very difficult to sustain this sort of action (if it's done publicly) without broader political support. The police have a funny way of getting involved.
But again, Courtney prefers to spew first and learn later...

From: toronto | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 14 October 2005 10:50 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes, I remember reading in the news some years ago of poor people squatting in basically empty spaces. But I think the frustration with homelessness is more widespread today, and maybe there'll be more popular support for squatters. What say ye?
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 14 October 2005 10:54 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There are churches that are empty except on Sundays. What a waste of space. They should be occupied by the homeless. I think the realization that the downtown core has many homeless and poor is what led All Saint's on Dundas (Toronto) to open its doors as a mission to the poor thirty years ago or so. Wherever there's homelessness and an empty church, put the two together.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca