OCCUPY WALL STREET

[ruffryder]

Easier said than done, shop local. Do not shop Wal-Mart or go to McDonald's. You can only shop local if there is local farmers. There are not a lot! I went to a local grocery store, but guess what, it gets it's food from the same place Wal-Mart does and it was more expensive. Farmers sell their product to Wal-Mart and other major grocery stores because there is money in it for them. Why sit outside at a farmer's market all day and hope for someone to buy their stuff when a grocery chain will buy in bulk and take all the crop. I worked wholesale meat and produce for 8 years. We bought bulk from farmers and sold to grocery stores, restaurants, and schools. So farmers stuff does actually make it into stores and around town and stays in the U.S. McDonalds buys their beef from local farmers. . . I also worked 6 years in beef production. We got our cattle from local feed lots, slaughtered them, cleaned them up and distributed the meat to McDonalds and other major restaurants and grocery chains. We even shipped to Japan and handled organic meat for the customers that wanted it. I worked Quality Assurance so I know what is in the meat and how safe it is when it comes out of a meat plant. I have taken many tours from where the cattle comes from to how it is slaughtered, packaged, and shipped. You may not want to shop Wal-Mart or McDonalds, however you should research where they actually get their product from because some of it is from local farmers and from the U.S. We may not like McDonalds and Wal-Mart but they do provide many jobs for people in the U.S. Just a thought..

[Dominique]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Easier said than done, shop local. Do not shop Wal-Mart or go to McDonald's. You can only shop local if there is local farmers. There are not a lot! I went to a local grocery store, but guess what, it gets it's food from the same place Wal-Mart does and it was more expensive...

Sigh. You must force change. There have been extensive and in in depth studies about how the Walmarts of the world, have ruined the small businesses. We [the collective we] in this thread, didn't make this stuff up. One of Walmarts biggest down falls is it's unwillingness to pay it's employees a decent wage. They encourage them to apply
for public assistance. Are you following what the Occupy Wall Street is about Ruffryder? Walmart would be part of the 1%.

Personally, I come here to see what is going on with the movement, what NEW idea's people have to contribute and to see what others are doing to affect change. Based on your post below....you are totally ok with the direction our country is going ? Including what the Walmarts of the world are doing. Let us have our space to discuss how we want to affect change, and you just keep doing the same old, same old. OK?

[persiphone]

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Easier said than done, shop local. Do not shop Wal-Mart or go to McDonald's. You can only shop local if there is local farmers. There are not a lot! I went to a local grocery store, but guess what, it gets it's food from the same place Wal-Mart does and it was more expensive. Farmers sell their product to Wal-Mart and other major grocery stores because there is money in it for them. Why sit outside at a farmer's market all day and hope for someone to buy their stuff when a grocery chain will buy in bulk and take all the crop. I worked wholesale meat and produce for 8 years. We bought bulk from farmers and sold to grocery stores, restaurants, and schools. So farmers stuff does actually make it into stores and around town and stays in the U.S. McDonalds buys their beef from local farmers. . . I also worked 6 years in beef production. We got our cattle from local feed lots, slaughtered them, cleaned them up and distributed the meat to McDonalds and other major restaurants and grocery chains. We even shipped to Japan and handled organic meat for the customers that wanted it. I worked Quality Assurance so I know what is in the meat and how safe it is when it comes out of a meat plant. I have taken many tours from where the cattle comes from to how it is slaughtered, packaged, and shipped. You may not want to shop Wal-Mart or McDonalds, however you should research where they actually get their product from because some of it is from local farmers and from the U.S. We may not like McDonalds and Wal-Mart but they do provide many jobs for people in the U.S. Just a thought..

i see what you're saying. it's gonna take me a minute to deconstruct all your points carefully, but i'll try to break it down. first lemme say that i agree....not all places in America have the basic option of buying from someplace OTHER than Walmart and to be honest, i think that is exactly the point of Walmart. they certainly didn't want to make buying from anyone else easier on the consumer and Walmart has basically monopolized many food markets, and that, in itself, goes against what we, as consumers, deserve as a liberty in America. corporate monopolies used to be regulated and now they are wildly out of control and taking over, which leaves us with....no choices as consumers.

also, farmers are not making money selling to Walmart. they are just as trapped in that system as the consumer is. when a business like Walmart drives the prices down on everything, it's the farmer that eats that cut, not Walmart. so they end up getting caught in the grow more treadmill rather than the grow better sustainable life cycle because they have to grow more to make ends meet, if they can even do that. and they end up cutting corners, like migrant labor (which is a whole other discussion) that will work those thousands of acres of fields for well below minimum wage illegally. adding onto this...it's corporations like Walmart that have pushed, and got approved, the kinds of visas that allow people from other countries to come and work in agriculture that leads to illegals staying here after those visas have expired. it's actually NOT coming from hordes of people running across the border in the middle of the night. so there are huge impacts that institutions like Walmart represent that are grossly negative on the well being of the country as a whole, from immigration, to agriculture, to food laws, to economic depression and the list goes on and on.

now farming organically is about 3 times as expensive (and that's a conservative number) as farming commercially. AND....out of season produce, i garauntee you, comes from other countries. the in season products that come from other countries are there because it's literally impossible for American farmers to produce those products for cheaper. their hands are tied. you can only drop the prices so much before you're out of business. which leads me to farm subsidies. what alot of people don't understand is that farming has become ONLY profitable IF it is subsidized. it's a hidden cost that most people aren't aware of. so when you get you paycheck, taxes taken out of your check go to subsidizing agriculture. the consumer is paying for that. THEN.....when you go to the store and you get an orange from Florida.... you're paying for that orange. again! but you're not complaining because that orange was only 50 cents. but how much have you already paid for that orange in the form of tax dollars? so what we have is this illusion of "cheap food" that really, isn't cheap at all. and we have no say in the matter....that's the real kick. AND....it's corps like Walmart that push for those ag subsidies, btw. they practically wrote them. so basically, corps like Walmart are deciding how our tax dollars are being spent for us. i dunno about you, but i kinda have a problem with that.

oohhhh where do i start about the beef? *deep sigh* sooooooo.....once upon a time, in a land far, far away, there were some cows that became steak. i'm just kidding. this stuff depresses me. i need some humor. so what if it wasn't funny. so a couple decades ago there were roughly 5 meat corporations that owned somewhere around 20% of the beef supply...the remaining percentage was privately owned, ie cattle ranchers. today there are 4 that own 80 or 85% of that supply and there are less than six slaughter houses in the country that handles all of the nations commercial beef supply. during this time, monopolies (it's a theme here) emerged in the meat industry and in the name of driving prices down, we now have feedlots, injections, subsidized commercial corn (means it's not fit for human consumption) being fed to cows, and all kinds of shady dealings like cutting labor corners (insert illegal immigrant here) so that Walmart can sell beef at a certain price. see where i'm going with this? production in slaughterhouses have tripled because the beef industry, like the farmers, have to now produce in bulk to turn a profit. they're not making a whole lot of money either, or else they wouldn't need to produce in bulk. feedlots are a nightmare to the environment, as well. it creates a host of disease problems, a host of environmental problems, and it's a system entirely dependent on oil to work. all of which are bad and not sustainable forever.

can i talk about McDonalds for a sec? the "beef" that makes up a McDs patty is actually the bits that are sent to a factory that (is also entirely dependent on oil) specializes in grinding them all up and then spraying it all with ammonia, wrapping it in plastic and shipping it out to your neighborhood drive thru. mmmm delish. a McD's burger bun has a grotesque amount of ingredients in it (like 80 i'm not kidding). i'm using the bun as an example, but that's basically the theme for the entire menu. it's not actually food. it's ....something ...else.....that is designed to taste and look like food. colleges offer degrees in this stuff. you can get a bachelor's in "food sciences" and then go to work for Kraft for 100 grand a year trying to make cheese that will never mold. or a bun that looks like bread but actually isn't. but no one offers a bachelors in sustainable agriculture. coincidence? i think not.

ok what's next. oohhh quality assurance. i love this one. i cannot count how many times there has been a meat (of sort) recall in the past ten years there has been that many. and they've been huge, too...like in the millions of pounds kind of thing....not like oops we dropped a side of beef on the floor and it contaminated 300 pounds of beef, no. millions of pounds. millions! that's an astounding number to me. i think the most recent one was ground turkey. the one that sticks out, though, was the one that woke me up and that was 2 million pounds of ground beef that was recalled and it stopped me cold from buying commercial ground beef and i took my son off the school lunch program. children have died eating commercial beef in america. DIED. so please tell me about quality assurance. i would looooovvveeee to know more and i'm not being sarcastic at all. on side note, the beef industry had legislation passed that actually permits slaughterhouses that keep having "issues" from shutting down while also keeping the public from being able to sue them. i gotta say, i'm not feeling super confident about any quality assurances that might be in place, as you say. cuz....the proof is in the pudding, man. you can't deny that massive and commonly occuring meat recalls in this nation is a good example of quality nor is it very assuring.

[atomiczombie]

For any of you who still shop at Walmart, PLEASE watch this documentary so you can at least be an INFORMED consumer.

[Cin]

Occupy the Food System!
by Eric Holt-Giménez and Tanya Kerssen

In the past few weeks, the U.S. Food Movement has made its presence felt in Occupy Wall Street. Voices from food justice organizations across the country are connecting the dots between hunger, diet-related diseases and the unchecked power of Wall Street investors and corporations (See Tom Philppot's excellent article in Mother Jones).

This is very fertile ground.

On one hand, the Food Movement's practical alternatives to industrial food are rooted at the base of our economic system. Its activities are key to building the alternative, localized economies being called for by Occupy Wall Street. On the other hand, Occupy provides a space for the Food Movement to politicize its collective agenda and scale-up community-based solutions by changing the rules that govern local economies.

Of course, in the U.S., what we refer to as the "food movement" is really more of a loose "food network" of non-profit organizations and community groups (CSAs, food policy councils, community gardens, etc) with a sprinkling of bona-fide family farmer organizations and food worker organizations. There's nothing wrong with this. The network has blossomed over the past decade, creating an amazing social infrastructure that is actively using the food system to make us healthier and happier. In the Food Movement we re-learn and re-invent ways of farming, cooking and eating. In doing so, we put back in the social, economic and cultural values robbed by the industrial food system.

But if the community gardens, CSAs, farm-to-school programs and sustainable family farms in the Food Movement are so great why isn't everyone doing it?

The simple answer is, because the rules and institutions governing our food system -- Wall Street, the U.S. Farm Bill, the World Trade Organization and the USDA -- all favor the global monopolies controlling the world's seeds, food processing, distribution and retail. This should come as no surprise, the "revolving door" between government and corporate food monopolies is alive and well, and goes back decades. But it means it's unlikely that the Food Movement's alternatives will ever become the norm rather than the alternative fringe -- unless the Food Movement can change the rules and institutions controlling our food.

To do that, the Food Movement needs politicizing.

Why? Hasn't it worked to improve school food, legalize urban chickens and reform the farm bill? Indeed, it has made important strides in impacting food policy. But many community food organizations have become dependent on the diminishing funding streams from the very foundations that helped them get off the ground. The nation's economic downturn has further affected community organizations, forcing them to tighten belts, cut staff, eliminate programs and compete for scarce resources at a time when communities need them more than ever. This makes them vulnerable to cooptation.

This is not to say that the organizations in the Food Movement don't deserve financial support. They do, and the existence of so many community food organizations is testament to positive cooperation with funders. But a broad-based movement is a different animal than an isolated community organization. For a movement, following a funding stream is the tail wagging the dog. Movements are about creating political will for the benefit of all. They converge, unifying and amplifying popular voices around a shared vision. Politically, movements cannot afford to be disarmed by money, silenced or divided.

A movement to "occupy the food system" will need to put healthy food in our communities and community voices in places of power.

A new, collective decision-making process is being fleshed out at Occupy sites across the country, and in the vibrant conversations on blogs, list servs and social media. It's about more than formulating "demands." As Naomi Klein commented in a recent visit to Food First, "Demands are about negotiation and compromise; this movement is articulating a broader vision." As the food movement moves into the new political spaces being opened up by Occupy Wall Street, a bold vision of food sovereignty is being crafted -- one in which food decisions, food resources and the food dollar are not controlled by Wall Street or by the food monopolies, but by local communities.

This political "convergence in diversity" has the potential to take us from the strategies for survival to strategies for transformation.



Another interesting article-

http://motherjones.com/environment/2...-street?page=1

[Cin]

[Cin]

OWS demand introduction of "Robin Hood" tax
Published: 25 October, 2011, 08:41
Edited: 25 October, 2011, 08:41



Occupy Wall Street activists have called for worldwide protests ahead of Saturday's G20 summit in France, demanding that the G20 leaders introduce a "Robin Hood" tax on high-finance transactions and currency trades by banks and institutions.

Anti-corporate demonstrations are continuing across the US, despite tougher tactics from police, including mass arrests. In Chicago, 130 have been held and charged with camping out in a city park after closing time. Back in New York, where the rallies began over a month ago, dozens have been arrested in a police crackdown on activists in recent days.

Author and activist David Swanson, who has been at the protests in Washington, believes neither the police nor the upcoming cold spell will stop the growing movement.

“We are starting to hear talk from the police again that they are being pushed by someone in the administration higher up to drive us out of there. We’ll see what comes of that. We are not leaving,” he told RT.

“We are protesting not just our government but its funders, its handlers, its think-tanks, and we are building a community and we are making decisions, and we are networking with the other ‘occupy’ movements around the country,” he said. “We’ll see what the police do and what the weather does to these occupations but, you know, the weather won’t shut down half of this country… and there are a lot of people camped out there that have no intention of ever leaving.”

OCTOBER 29 – #ROBINHOOD GLOBAL MARCH

This is a proposal for the general assemblies of the Occupy movement.
Eight years ago, on February 15, 2003, upwards of 15 million people in sixty countries marched together to stop President Bush from invading Iraq … a huge chunk of humanity lived for one day without dead time and glimpsed the power of a united people's movement. Now we have an opportunity to repeat that performance on an even larger scale.

On October 29, on the eve of the G20 Leaders Summit in France, let's the people of the world rise up and demand that our G20 leaders immediately impose a 1% #ROBINHOOD tax on all financial transactions and currency trades. Let's send them a clear message: We want you to slow down some of that $1.3-trillion easy money that's sloshing around the global casino each day – enough cash to fund every social program and environmental initiative in the world.

Take this idea to your local general assembly and join your comrades in the streets on October 29.

for the wild,
Culture Jammers HQ

[Dominique]

JaGG, I hope you are still following us!!

Here is the revised *Obama Home Loan Program* as it was dubbed. I'm glad they did revisit this. (It didn't take long either!)

http://www.governmentrefinanceassistance.com/

[Sachita]

Originally Posted by atomiczombie

For any of you who still shop at Walmart, PLEASE watch this documentary so you can at least be an INFORMED consumer.

this is really great if anyone cares enough to watch it. thanks for posting it

[dreadgeek]

Ruffryder:

You bring up some interesting points that I wish were given more due consideration. One of the books I read in the last six months (I think it was Matt Ridley's The Rational Optimist) had a discussion about local sourcing and while it seems like a great idea, it actually can create quite a bit of price inflation. Someone back east set out to create a men's suit using only materials that could be obtained within 50 miles of her home. To be fair she started absolutely from scratch and, if memory serves (I don't have the book with me at work) a suit that would have cost maybe $150 - $200 at a local clothing store was close to $1000 when all was said and done. Another book I'm currently reading (Steven Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature) brings up a really interesting point about trade and that is that it appears to create a more peaceful world. Why bomb someone at great expense when you can trade with them and get the things they have that you want at a fraction of the cost?

People who have studied how humans have become less violent over time (and despite what you might think humans are *far* less violent now then even a century ago) have noted two things. Trading partners tend not to go to war with one another and democracies tend not to go to war with one another. So while the idea of local sourcing and buying local might seem like an intuitively obvious idea, it may turn out that there are hidden costs. This is NOT a defense of globalization nor is it a defense of unregulated capitalism.

Another problem I see with our quickness to grasp onto local sourcing and buying local as a panacea is that it ignores what happens when trade is diminished. Let's say you live someplace where there's plenty of minerals but not a lot of good farmland. I live someplace where there's not a lot of minerals but lots of farmland. Now, if you trade your surplus minerals with me and I trade my surplus food with you, you have the food you can't grow yourself and I have the minerals I can't dig out of the ground. But what happens if I stop trading with you? Well, I still have all this food but I don't need to grow as much anymore. If I'm no longer selling for a large market, I don't need all the extra hands around. So I lay them off. Likewise, since you don't need nearly as many miners if you aren't trying to get enough minerals out of the ground to trade for other goods you lay them off. Now, we've done the right thing and we've shrunk our footprint. We are now only doing business locally but we're doing *less* business. Every person I lay off is one person who doesn't have money to stop by the bar and buy a couple of beers after a hard day. Every person you lay off is someone who isn't going to eat at the diner during their lunch hour. So the diner lays off someone. That person isn't going to go to the tailor and buy a new dress. So the tailor lays off someone. That person isn't going to be buying a car from the used car dealership, so they lay off someone.

We can't say that the economy doesn't behave that way because, in fact, we are in a recession *precisely* because the economy *does* behave that way. There's a crisis on Wall Street and businesses either fold or contract. The people who lose their jobs aren't spending at the lunch counters, bars and little shops surrounding the business districts so some of those businesses also fold. People who keep their jobs seriously contract their spending in case they are the next one's to get a layoff notice. More jobs are lost. And the cycle feeds on itself.

This is why I am so very, very frustrated that the GOP is pretending that a Keynesian stimulus would be nothing but a waste of money and energy. If people are hired to start repairing schools, bridges and roads those will be construction workers who have money in their pocket. Knowing that it's going to take a while to do the job and there'll be more work because there's a lot of roads to be repaired and schools to be updated, so they spend at the bar or the tailor or what-have-you. That is part of what is wrong is that the government, the spender of last resort, isn't able to do infrastructure projects NOT because there's no money but because our politics is broken.

I understand the arguments in favor of buying local and to some degree I think that's good. My wife and I, for instance, have committed to not eating out of season so there won't be bananas in January for us. On a limited scale this works and as an act of conscience I applaud it. However, I think that we need to be mindful of the ripple effects of economic actions. What might seem to be a self-evidently great idea may, in light of deeper reflection, have hidden costs that may be higher than we should want to pay.

How many here would be willing to have the cost of most everything--certainly their electronics, clothing and food--to double? Triple? Would this really help the poor if suddenly a $700 bare-bones laptop suddenly became a $2100 laptop because every component had to be made within 100 miles? What about those objects that have no physicality? Do we local source that stuff as well? When I upgraded to OS X Lion I didn't touch a DVD, I downloaded it. I don't know nor do I care *where* those bits came from. Should we local source those items like software, books and music that have no physicality to them?

Cheers
Aj

Originally Posted by ruffryder

Easier said than done, shop local. Do not shop Wal-Mart or go to McDonald's. You can only shop local if there is local farmers. There are not a lot! I went to a local grocery store, but guess what, it gets it's food from the same place Wal-Mart does and it was more expensive. Farmers sell their product to Wal-Mart and other major grocery stores because there is money in it for them. Why sit outside at a farmer's market all day and hope for someone to buy their stuff when a grocery chain will buy in bulk and take all the crop. I worked wholesale meat and produce for 8 years. We bought bulk from farmers and sold to grocery stores, restaurants, and schools. So farmers stuff does actually make it into stores and around town and stays in the U.S. McDonalds buys their beef from local farmers. . . I also worked 6 years in beef production. We got our cattle from local feed lots, slaughtered them, cleaned them up and distributed the meat to McDonalds and other major restaurants and grocery chains. We even shipped to Japan and handled organic meat for the customers that wanted it. I worked Quality Assurance so I know what is in the meat and how safe it is when it comes out of a meat plant. I have taken many tours from where the cattle comes from to how it is slaughtered, packaged, and shipped. You may not want to shop Wal-Mart or McDonalds, however you should research where they actually get their product from because some of it is from local farmers and from the U.S. We may not like McDonalds and Wal-Mart but they do provide many jobs for people in the U.S. Just a thought..