Job applications dropped on occupy Chicago protestors

Post Reply New Topic

Of course the system won't collapse. Worst case scenario is a double dip recession which we'll eventually recover from.

Hopefully it will, if it does not improve any.

Hi Asp-Z,

The concept of "disparate impact" (as in the enforcement provisions/regulations of the Civil Rights Act, the ADAAA, etc.), has the same foundation for various classes of individuals. One of the more recent federal cases decided included a conflict of establishing the existence of a "disparate impact" versus making the claim of an adverse employment effect from a "disparate impact". In Plain English, this is the Supreme Court demanding verification of a forest with a large number of trees, while the Court refuses to look at more than one tree at a time before the tree can be considered a tree in the yet to be substantiated forest. Therefore, it is impossible for any tree to prove it is one of the many trees in a forest. This makes a valid and objective count or sampling of the trees in the forest impossible, and hence, no valid statistics of any characteristic of any trees in any sub-group of trees in the forest. With people, this reasoning is again repeated in: WAL-MART STORES, INC. v. DUKES ET AL., usually available at: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-277.pdf

The last paragraph in the dissent, with the pdf file, states part of the conflict rather succintly:
"The Court errs in importing a “dissimilarities” notion suited to Rule 23(b)(3) into the Rule 23(a) commonality inquiry. I therefore cannot join Part II of the Court’s opinion."

The official counts of the unemployed always involve deciding "whom to include in which count", and "whom not to include in which count", bases on seemingly arbitrary "dissimilarities" on the individuals being counted. Changing the rules of "dissimilarities" can easily manipulate the count into nonsensical propaganda, such as counting the candidate Mitt Romney as being unemployed, while not counting anyone not having a valid street address. (Legal techs over "who versus whom" in "Leaders and intelligence" by Michael I. Handel (1989), page 137, and in U.S. v. Russo and Ellsberg). "HOW MANY PEOPLE" page 6: http://2010.census.gov/partners/pdf/lan ... nglish.pdf

If I like 22.4% unemployment, go by the number given, if I want less, just say don't count those not working as unemployed, and if I want more, call under-employed as not "fully" employed for 55% unemployment, then increase more by "in major":

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/19/busin ... grads.html

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/ ... ef=economy

I also appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). The MSPB enforces the rules so that "luck" has no effect on employment decisions, with all decisions based only on "merit". That's when I was told "pass" means "fail" and that I'm "too smart to be a cop":
Jordan v. City of New London, 1999 U.S.Dist. Lexis 14289, 15 IER Cases (BNA) 919 (D. Conn.). [1999 FP 163]

http://www.aele.org/apa/jordan-newlondon.html

http://www.allbusiness.com/human-resour ... 635-1.html

My state rehabilitation told me that he never heard of such things happening, then he told me that it happens to everyone.

Tadzio

"Yossarian, they can prepare as many official reports as they want and choose whichever ones they need on any occasion. Didn't you know that?" "Catch-22" by Joseph Heller (S&S Classic Ed edition (October 5, 1999)), page 406.

I don't know who they think is listening to them. All the politicians that I know of supporting the OWS protestors are immediately turning around and taking money from wall street as fast as the checks can be written and cashed.

Well maybe the government should listen when the people complain.

Ye$, they $hould. Perhap$ they would be better off forming political action committee$.

$oon enough you will catch on the real world political $cience they don't teach in high$chool.

The "banks" are not individuals. They do not pack up their customers' assets and move the assets, as that is another form of robbery. Then, even international customers of banks can not move their assets in violation of the law. Just ask Sadamm Hussein and Muammar Qaddafi.

Banking Regulations are still not restrictive enough. The lessons available from the scandles of the savings & loans associations in the 1980's should have been firmly taken as signs of needed stronger regulation for all financial investment institutions. Regulations would have prevented the parasitic domino effect of the Savings and Loan crisis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis ) being repeated in a wider field of institutions through the Baby-Bush/Greenspan Self-Regulation disaster.

When there is a major robbery, one of the main pieces of evidence is who is in possession of the "loot". When one person robs 99 other people, the 99 people are the ones without the loot, while the robber has the loot. But by the model you are preaching, the 99 people are the individuals who are "wrong", and not the distinguished & now wealthy crook attracting a few sycophants and paying for protection from justice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis
("creative accounting reduced recognized losses by a factor of ten with the RTC, but retirement savings still lost ten times as much as the official numbers, so Great Grandpa didn't leave it to be inhereted (the Republican's slogan "Death Tax" didn't apply to the most frequent small dollar amounts lost, and like Silverado Savings and Loan, the very rich received nearly complete protection with a token sacrifice or two (PornoBurnBoy Keating the notable)).

The CityScumGroup Plutonomy Plans foresaw parts of their own future:

"This could mean global imbalances get even larger, without the planet
getting knocked of its axis and sucked into the cosmos. But this thesis
is not without its risks. Plutonomies have existed before and they have
come to an end. To this end we see four primary risks. The first, war
and/or inflation. Secondly, financial collapse. Three, the end of the
technological revolution. Finally, political pressure to end the increase
in income and wealth inequality." page 17.
http://madsociologist.net/resources/Plutonomy.pdf

They seem not to fully understand desperate, unchecked, and very un-academic activities of the citizenry when the town bank is discovered to have been "otherwise lawfully" robbed by con artists preaching uncontrolled free market opportunities for talented scam artists. Inflation may return from the shortage of enough rope in the short-term, and a great demand for guillotines in the longer-term. And, in the mid-term, the Capitalist version of the "Nicolae Ceaușescu Shuffle" may be most popular for the financial genius prestidigitators

Tadzio

Yeah well if the real world is about screwing people over, I wan't nothing to do with it. And just so you know I really did not learn anything in school, I learned things from my recreational non-fiction reading.

Oh and I have already caught on I am just not willing to take pharmacutical drugs, or suffer shock therapy in order to be ok with it.

Also, maybe I'm just kinda slow........but why are you using the $ symbol in place of the letter S? I don't get it....

Last edited by Sweetleaf on 12 Nov 2011, 12:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Having thought about it a little bit more, the devil on my shoulder suggests that an even more insulting thing to have dropped would have been money. If I was a wealthy stockbroker type attending an event where OWS was protesting, I'd be awfully tempted to get $10k or so in singles and dump it on the protesters, having tipped off the news first of course. Aside from the evulz to be had from such a prank, it probably would take the OWS people down a peg when the video of them fighting each other over the cash hit the media. I'd make some one liner about wealth redistribution if asked about it too, just to really savor the moment.

What is this? This is an over-simplified diagram.

Let me show you a better one:

Yours is at the top. The proper one including government taxation and spending is below. Study it carefully, because when money is used in social spending it doesn't just die. It reenters the economy.



Well they are, mostly government jobs. Heavens know why they are cutting government jobs. THe US public sector when it comes to employment is peanuts compared to medicare, medicaid and debt interest. It's a case of not working within the bounds of one's pocket, something I like to call Alabama state finance syndrome.


Sweetleaf is a she.
Well? They may not be connected phenomena but the fact is that not opposing the system when it does injustice does tend to make you live in an over-simplified world. However the explicit connection is somewhat tenuous, although providing a single exception is also tenuous. A lot more contributes to the shut-in approach America has to the world.


Good heavens, quoting myself.

He's hinting at how money is used to manipulate people in real world politics for personal profiteering and to do the wrong thing.

So psychopathic humour again?

Yes true, but that wouldn't be bullying or snide mockery, it would be explosing the duplicity of other people, if that is the way they would react. So in fact it wouldn't be bad at all. It would be f***ing funny.

Alright, I thought it was something like that.

Apparently its ok because they are all 'losers' who don't deserve the air they breath...I wish that was not the message I am getting but it sure looks like it.

Sweetleaf, I feel the same. I don't think seeing the system die or a radical solution is in order, but the fact is that we're going to have to beat aside the self-interest of the business community if we don't want to end up like the Byzantines.

Or maybe we should become the germanic tribes across the limes?

I would certainly prefer the germanic tribes....I kind of feel like the system probably won't improve so the only other option seems to be for it to die as it seems to be doing.