What the Occupy Movement Means for Canada

There is a surprisingly good article (but only online, I think) in the Globe and Mail by an economist with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Armine Yalnizyan, who offers an interesting assessment of the Occupation Movement.

These are a few of the facts the article brings forth:

Raise the top tax rate by 3 per cent on those making over $250,000 -- a round number which marks the entry gate for the fabled 1 per cent - - and, at 32 per cent, you’d still pay less than the 33 per cent rate in the U.S. at that income level. It would raise about $2-billion, the federal share of, say, a national child-care program.

A 35 per cent tax bracket for Canadians whose income is higher than $750,000 -- the U.S. top rate, except there it’s applied on incomes above $373,650 -- would yield $1.2-billion. Over a decade, that could pay for the federal share of fixing drinking-water and waste-water infrastructure across Canada.

Realistically, however, such is not going to happen in the near future. As Yalnizan points out:

But governments are increasingly tangled up in elite interests. The latest example is Finance Minister Jim Flaherty‘s drive to marshall support to scuttle a proposed financial transactions tax, a mechanism that could help slow down the wild gyrations of the stock market we’ve witnessed of late. Flaherty and other G20 finance ministers will be meeting in Paris just as thousands of Canadians gather to Occupy Toronto on Bay Street. He will be protecting certain interests, just not those of the majority of Canadians.

And that will likely remain the status quo, unless and until enough of us join the movement to make both our voices, and our outrage, heard.