Occupy Wall Street: The Real American Revolution. (NOT Koch funded) - Page 8

And corporations will offer their employees fair treatment when it makes financial sense to do so. Which pretty much means never, unless we regulate. Or they could grow a conscience. One can dream.

I'm curious. Do you believe government treats people fairly and has a conscience?

Sure, when undue business influence is removed from politics, government certainly has a far better shot of treating people fairly. See, corporations are only motivated by one thing: profit. There's no room for compassion. In fact, compassion directly violates a corporation's fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders. Government, at least in theory, is there to serve the people. The problem is the corporations have coerced government to serve them instead.

Much more than business does, honestly. and government is ultimately accountable to the voter.

No truthfully speaking the Government today with all it's politicians stink to high hell and has no remorse or pity for the people today.They care about power and money they can grab for themselves.Their conscience is just as good as Obama giving a shit less about the people that he should serve.Maybe years ago things were different as the presidents cared about the people and helped them a lot.WPA regarding Roosevelt and introducing SS that was a man of the people and so was JFK.

As an example, how many Federal employees work for minimum wage? How many don't have a decent health care plan? How many don't have a decent retirement fund? How many times more does the Chief Executive (the President) and other executives (EG Congressmen and Supreme Court Justices) earn than the average worker? What kind of a severance package do failed Federal politicians get when they really really suck at their job?

Why only discuss federal employees? I can tell you in education that crossing guards, aides, and even certain teaching jobs are all considered part time, have no benefits and meager contributions towards retirement if any.

On another note, OWS keeps sounding like they don't like following their own worldview and increasingly they are pissed off that the freeloaders, looters and other elements that are part of the 99%" cause them trouble and harm.


How exactly does one masquerade as a protester? Are they in-authentically occupying their spot?


Let's check the reasoning here.... The people working are busting their ass. They feel unappreciated and overworked. They complain that a bunch of derelicts are working the system while doing no actual work. They want a means test to make sure that only people who are really doing work get the benefits of the work.

Holy crap, these guys are the Tea Party!


You give away a benefit without qualifications and suddenly you have a lot more people wanting and demanding the benefit. Who would have thought that!


Judgement, not just pure need is an authentic course of action. Who would have thought that!


This is terrible. Next we are going to hear about how the protesters are having to take a second job to afford to move the protests to a better neighborhood to get away from the effects wrought by the first round of protests. Don't worry, we can give the professional homeless a "Section 8" bus voucher to make sure they can follow. I mean they don't really want to be homeless, they just don't have any choice since all the hard working people, their jobs and their businesses will have moved away from people expecting free handouts while acting like criminals. That isn't fair right?

I movement like this talking about fairness and freeloaders.........it's sort of hypocritically hilarious.

Maybe because we're talking about Federal governments? Duh. And we all know about California's budget problems and the fucked up measures that have been taken to ease them (instead of simply raising taxes and selling off more state lands, which is what they should be doing). So California doesn't count.

So you think if the federal government hired our crossing guards for 2 hours a day, they would have full health benefits and retirement?

It isn't hard to find low paying work at any level of government. I assure you they use the standard practices that government engage in. They don't just jump the gap and offer full health coverage if you are working 20 hours a week. They don't suddenly double down on your retirement funding.

Ask yourself why anyone would spend half a billion dollars to get a job like the presidency. It is because controlling money makes money. Obama has paid off his cronies in full. They don't get paid salary. They get paid in loans and contracts. They get paid when they get to rip up contracts and rip off bondholders.

Imagine if a corporation collected the pension of it's employees, spent it and replaced it with bonds owed to itself. It would be a crime but that is exactly what the government has done with Social Security.

You claim government can reform itself. There is no proof of this. A government that does not engage in waste and graft has never existed. The only way to limit corruption is to limit the power and with government that means a limited government, not an all powerful government.

Another thing to keep in mind is that government pays its employees by forcing other people to give the government their money under threat of violence.

No, but I do think that if the Federal Government needed a crossing guard 8 hours a day, they wouldn't hire four people for two hours a day so they could avoid giving them benefits. Which is exactly the type of thing private enterprise does.

More questions for you, ton:

What incentive does government have to cut costs when it has no competition and can arbitrarily raise taxes when it needs more money?

Why is the word "monopoly" a 4-letter word when it comes to the private sector, but perfectly acceptable when it comes to government?

If an employer and employee enter into a contract and it is mutually agreed that there will be little or no benefits aside from monetary compensation, why is that a bad thing?

I'm telling you point blank that they do in fact do this. I'm also telling you that even when dismissing a very blue state like California and the field of education you have to remember how much money comes from the Federal Department of Education with various requirements. If we are hiring aides as an example with Title One monies, we hire half time (3 hour) people and we do so even if some of the people would prefer to take multiple positions to become full time. If for example we have a morning aide and an afternoon aide, they cannot be the same persion even if that person wants six hours a day.

Also speaking of crossing guards, that is another good example. The start and ending times of schools are staggered so when you have children of different ages, you can get them to different schools. The cross guards could obviously work these staggered times and get more hours. It doesn't happen. It isn't allowed.

State and federal governments are PROFOUNDLY aware of the benefits they have to pay. Anytime you read an article about some state or federal employee making some ridiculous amount of overtime, it is because the state won't hire another full time person because of benefits.

They chose to resort to violence. They got what they deserved. Shit happens.

Police gave repeated warnings to protesters to disperse from the entrance to Frank Ogawa Plaza at 14th Street and Broadway before firing several tear gas canisters into the crowd at about 7:45 p.m. Police had announced over a loudspeaker that those who refused to leave could be targeted by "chemical agents."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...#ixzz1c0q9eYpD

I am the 1%. I employ 150 people. How many do you employ?

Peter Schiff spreading the truth again.

And if you split his income into 20 people, they would probably employ 1500.

I'm telling you point blank that you're still talking about California.

Because in a labor shortage, the prospective employee has no bargaining rights. The employer cuts benefits because they can.

Name a state government that you don't think would do that.

The voter.

The voter.

Let me ask you this. What incentive does an employer have to offer benefits when they receive 50 applications for one position?

That is correct.


That is incorrect, because it always makes financial sense to do so. Companies that treat people unfairly and offer terrible wages and working conditions are not going to have a productive workforce. Frankly, you seem to have this quasi-slave labor "Horrible Bosses" view of corporations and their employees. You don't seem to understand that employees and their employers are entering into an At Will social contract. If the corporation doesn't live up to its end, the employee is going to quit...even in today's economy.



I agree with most of that, actually.

Isn't "evidence" of excrement, urine, vomit and tampons just....excrement, urine, vomit and tampons?

Yes, I guess that it is.

Woman charged with pimping teen recruited at Occupy NH rally






Jensen was going to start training her to be a prostitute, with her first customer scheduled to be Mad Mike.



http://www.unionleader.com/article/2...WS03/710289961

Michael Moore, I am the 1%.

When he is the one percent, he is "blessed" and when others are the one percent, they are exploitative greedy assholes.

Talk about your irony.....

Surprise, surprise. It turns out that your so-called "freedom fighter" is a leftist scumbag who actually hates the US military.

He is the founder of a site called I hate the Marine Corps.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011...e-marines-com/

When it's time for his gastric bypass surgery, hopefully he goes down to Cuba and gets it done.

Simply put it the government employees are overpaid today.

If he was a good guy he would only make films under a profit sharing arraignment with his oh pressed workers. That or surrender his income over $50,000 to the government.

Simply put, it's the private sector employees that are being abused, overworked, underpaid, and being told by the puppet masters to be upset at the public sector employees instead of their own shitty situation. The elite have quite adeptly turned the struggling 99% against each other by getting one group of people to say, "NOT FAIR, TAKE AWAY THEIR SHIT!" instead of "NOT FAIR, YOU SHOULD PAY US THAT WAY, TOO!"

I'd settle for him sharing his lunch. He has to eat enough for three people to maintain and grow that size.

Stop there. Examples?


Or maybe they should be upset with certain public sector employees?


If the market demands they are to be paid more, they will be paid more. What do you want to do, have minimum wage be raised to $30 an hour? Do you really think that company employees will get anywhere by having sit-ins in the lobby?

He'll get a good deal, and won't have to deal with the HMO leeches and parasites that infest the US "health care" industry, get between doctor and patient, and provide precisely nothing but hugely inflated bills.

Are you kidding? Compared to the private sector?

Lower level government employees are generally far better paid than lower level private sector employees. Executive Government employees are multiple times LOWER paid than private sector executives.

The government model is way better than the private sector model. They just need to make it easier to skim the fat.

Oh, you stop there. You know very well that there are millions of Americans working for minimum wage with no benefits, and that that is generally not enough income to live on. In a period of high unemployment, employers do this because they CAN -- not because they need to, or because of any consideration of what the right thing to do is, but because they can. This is most certainly exploitation of the masses who are struggling to maintain steady employment.

Why does Walmart pay minimum wage while Apple retail pays quite a bit above minimum? Because Walmart exploits workers and Apple doesn't.

Per this link the Federal minimum wage is $7.25 an hour.

Per this link the average hourly salary of a Walmart associate is $11.75 an hour.

Please try to actually cite something instead of just making shit up that fits the caricatures in your brain.

Apple has $76 billion and pays no dividend. It was swept up in a stock options backdating scandal that almost took down Jobs. Jobs cancelled all corporate philanthropy when he returned and he personally and Apple additionally do next to none even now. Apple makes all it's products in China.

Perhaps there are examples you can cite to demonstrate what you want but Apple isn't one of them.

Now take out the top 10% of Walmart employees and give me the correct figure. "Average" doesn't count for shit and you know it. Go get an entry level job as a new employee at Walmart and tell me you get $11.75 or one penny above whatever the minimum is in the location of your employment.

It's absolutely flabbergasting that after having this explained to you a million times, you still deny this simple concept. It's not stupidity, I know. You don't actually think the typical Walmart floor employee gets $11.75. It is intellectual dishonesty, plain and simple.

Here are some stats...

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Wal-...aries-E715.htm

That stat still shows them above minimum wage. Do you dispute that?


What the hell are you talking about? First of all BR just posted a link and it still shows Sales Associates getting paid above minimum wage. It shows jobs above Sales Associates getting paid far more than that. Why does average suddenly not count for shit? When you declare Walmart pays only minimum wage, that Apple doesn't or that they exploit their workers are you claiming you are talking about outliers or some percentage of their sales associates rather than the average?

You're seriously just ranting and making crap put at this point because there isn't a link shown yet that shows Walmart ONLY pays their sales associates minimum wage which is what you claimed.