The movement is about allocating wealth around.

Nope, that isn't even close to anything it's about at all.

Nice straw man you've got there...

There has been a lot of talk about the 99% movement in the States and here in Canada. As a traveler, it has been my observation that on the global economy, we in North America (especialy Canadians due to our economic stability) are the 1% ers we are trying to fight. Just take a minute to think about it.

The movement is about allocating wealth around. So does that mean we should ration all food, water and resourses, including medical supplies equally to every person in the world, regardless of nationality, political connection, religion views, or those that would wish harm to our nation.

Even those recieving social assistance in Canada are 1%ers. Think, free medical, free schooling, accesses to clean water and shelter. Yes there are homeless here which have it rough, but there are other social, psychological and environmental issues that need to address these other then just money allocation.

Now I am not saying a person making 100 million a year or even a million for that matter, is a little over kill, but the same can be said about a people that flushes more clean water every time we take a crap, then most African families will see in a month (if luck).

Just a random thought on th issue...a just saying thought with no clear piont of view, solution or reason to post other then to have us think on being thankful for what we have, even if fighting for a better tommorow

You appear to have a severe misunderstanding of what the "Occupy" movement is about. It isn't about "fighting" the 1%, or about claiming that the 1% are somehow wrong.

Governments are manmade constructs. Individuals come together and agree to create a government because they feel it will result in a society that serves their self-interests better than anarchy. That government can have whatever purposes the people forming it want it to have.

Roughly speaking, the purpose of the US government is "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".

The root message of the Occupy movement is simply that our government should pursue policies that will promote the general welfare for the vast majority of its citizens (the 99%) rather than the tiny minority (the 1%).

None of that suggests that the purpose of the US government should be to provide for people who aren't US citizens. Indeed, that would be completely contrary to the purpose of a government, which is to serve the interests of the people forming it.

If the US formed a new nation combined with all the African nations, it would indeed make sense to pursue policies that helped African citizens more.

Wow thats what I got Steven.... and in fact if you read what I post it was a commentary on being greatful for what we have. But since we are taking, the 99% movement is named that due to the addage the 1% of the population controls 99% of the wealth. No where in there are governments mentioned. I realize in the States there is some issues regarding laws being passed by your elected officals to protect these people...but hey, you have the power tp vote them out...and might I add without the risk of being shot, family being threatened or having your vote made for you...again in this we are the 1%

So the occupy movement is only about protecting US interests?

The occupy movement in the US is about improving things for people in the US. The occupy movement in other places is about improving things for people in other places. This should not be earth-shattering news, people tend to care the most about things that affect themselves. Most people involved in the occupy movement are probably interested in doing more to help people in other countries, but it is unrelated to their protests.

Now, there are as many occupy agendas as there are occupiers, but some actions demanded by some people on the left (and I would be quite left in an American setting myself) are directly detrimental to people in other countries who, everything factored in, are a lot poorer. Namely, many unionists are against free trade - they demand that you buy stuff made by them and not by workers in India. Workers in India are possibly not in a great situation by your standards, but better than if they weren't allowed to work for you. I also hear quite often from people on the left that it's ok for them to have an environmentally unsound lifestyle because they are "poor" and "can't afford" cleaner transportation, food, electricity etc. If isn't just an excuse for not caring (which is unsuitable on the left, as solidarity is ingrained in the ideology); then it could be good to tell them that they are in fact filthy rich; they might just look poor compared to someone on the other side of town, just like a white cat looks gray when walking in a snow-covered garden.

"Free" trade isn't about freedom at all. It's about allowing corporations to circumvent the environmental and human rights laws we have enacted by moving the means of production to areas that do not have those laws. It is the idiotic notion that those goods should compete against goods made with humanitarian standards in a market without compensation for the difference.

Being against "free" trade isn't about control, it's about insisting that the standards we recognize as basic minimums are allowed to continue to exist without being outsourced through exploitation of brown people.

Now, there are as many occupy agendas as there are occupiers, but some actions demanded by some people on the left (and I would be quite left in an American setting myself) are directly detrimental to people in other countries who, everything factored in, are a lot poorer.

There is genuine worry about environmental standards and human rights, and there is selfishness. If you hear protesters protest goods from China and some select dictatorships, then you have reason to believe it's sincere and benevolent concern. If you hear protesters protest goods from "overseas" then you have reason to believe it's concern over "brown people" "stealing the jobs".

It is not the US government's job to enact policies that help people in other countries. It is the US government's job to enact policies that help people in the US. As things are often zero sum, it should not be a shock that people wanting the US government to do its job would want policies that are directly detrimental to people in other countries.

That's rife with ad hominem fallacies. Care to make a cohesive argument for free trade, or are you just trolling?

US government's job is to do what it's 300 million people want it to. If you value someone you never met in Kansas higher than someone you never met in Iceland, then it's 1/300000000 part of the US government's job to care for people in Kansas and not in Iceland.

I want my government to care as much for you as for a random Internet person in Gothenburg. It's of course impractical if you went here each time you needed a dentist (although I wouldn't mind), but when it comes to policies with global consequences, migration, trade, environment etc, I would not instruct my government to care more for me than for you.

So you want your government to eliminate all its restrictions on immigration? It shouldn't treat its citizens any differently from people in other countries. I hope you're ready for your country to be overwhelmed with people from poorer countries immigrating to your country in droves. All the sick people here in the US will come over there to use your health care. Can you afford it?

We would probably not afford the same level of health care that we have today, at least not for a not insignificant # of years. So what? I can't see no reason whatsoever for why I should be more happy to pay for Swedes' healthcare than Congolese's healthcare.

Because Swedes are the ones paying for it. It's the same reason why when you go to a restaurant, you pay for your own meal, but you don't pay for the meals of everyone else there. Because it's your money, and you want to spend it on yourself.

To get back on topic with the occupy protests, our government is no different from any other voluntary association of people trying to decide what to do. If 100 people went on a trip, and pooled their money for the trip, they could choose to rent an entire hotel for 1 person and have the other 99 sleep on the street. But it's more likely they would choose some other more equitable use of their funds.

This is what the Occupy protests want- to have our government make choices that are beneficial to all of its citizens rather than disproportionately beneficial to the top 1%. And the fact that there are other people in the world who are in worse shape is completely irrelevant- those people are not citizens of the US, so they don't have a say in what the US does.

To get back on topic with the occupy protests, our government is no different from any other voluntary association of people trying to decide what to do. If 100 people went on a trip, and pooled their money for the trip, they could choose to rent an entire hotel for 1 person and have the other 99 sleep on the street. But it's more likely they would choose some other more equitable use of their funds.

I won't claim to know the history of Sweden, but American citizens did in fact voluntarily join the nation. Parents make decisions for their children all the time- what nation to be a citizen of is just one of many.

I am absolutely for free migration- but there's freedom on both sides of the table. People are free to migrate to anywhere that is willing to take them. But people are free to not take them. Citizenship is a relationship that requires consent on both sides.

[q]Newsflash - all people in this world are very much affected by what other nations do, and US might affect people in this world more than any other country, through it's power in negotiations and supranational treaties, through military and economy, and also through its exorbitant pollution. You are the 10%, and the 90% have a say in what you do.