Thread: Labor Unions Join Wall Street Occupiers for "Mass Rally'

Originally Posted by cpwill

well there are a number of ways, the uncertainty is a major killer. the main thing I was thinking of here however is the regulatory burden.

The regulatory burden.... which regulations in particular. Post tomorrow if you need to research a bit. The ones I hear your side of the aisle complaining about are EPA regulations, once again I must ask for specifics. I realize it's quite annoying that I keep on asking for such specific answers however you propose that these regulations are killing jobs so I unfortunately am forced to rely on you for the burden of proof. Once again I also have to question the totality of your argument, I have the same problem with liberals and democrats too I assure you. However, the Clayton and Sherman Acts are definitely regulation, the FDA is a regulatory agency, I'll have more examples when I'm not so tired but point being not all regulation is destructive to the economy. I'm not against profit, I'm not against success, but I most certainly am for a better, happier, more secure and stable society and I feel as if we all looked at everything a little more objectively instead of picking sides and writing down a couple of talking points that we could accomplish so much more and grow as a nation.

Originally Posted by cpwill

yes. we call those "issues of the commons", typically limited to non-consumable goods.



and we can all hold hands and sing about how we'd like to buy the world a coke. speaking in fluffy generalities is well and good, but you need clear borders.



no. nor has anyone argued this. it is a host of factors, however, most of them can be drawn back directly or indirectly to their choice of governance.



that's always the claim made, but somehow they are never able to point to a comparable reach into our lives on the part of social conservatives. there is no Individual Mandate saying that everyone must go to an officially approved church, for example.



i don't want them having sex. but i'm hardly about to use the government to force them to stop.

I mean Coke sold Fanta to the Nazi's during WWII so screw them, but I don't see any other reason than your cynicism for why we can't reach a middle ground, otherwise we're just yelling back and forth at each other like a bunch of idiots. As far as the contraception thing goes I guess I'm still a little miffed at Jon Kyl deliberately misquoting the percentage of Planned Parenthood funds that go to abortion. He said 90 percent the actual total is 3 percent and it's three percent which due to the Hyde amendment all comes from private donors. The rest is spent on sex education, providing contraception to young adults, and other services. So no your party hasn't been that direct, instead the whip of your party lied about the numbers to further his agenda and limit the access the most vulnerable and unfortunate of all had to understanding the dangers involved with having sex and what you need to do to protect yourself in case you should.

Originally Posted by alexxouellette

The regulatory burden.... which regulations in particular.

I could not even begin to give you a full list. the Federal Register is over 80,000 pages long.

In general, though? The annual cost of federal regulations in the United States increased to more than $1.75 trillion in 2008. That is, it was just a hair shy of [i]twelve percent of GDP[/url]. and that was before the explosion we have seen over the past three years.

The ones I hear your side of the aisle complaining about are EPA regulations, once again I must ask for specifics.

my uncle is a real American Story. living in a trailor, no college education, hard work up by his bootstraps built a multi-million dollar contracting company, etc. He has about 60ish employees (figures as of last Christmas when last we spoke of this), but has already run the math. The day after the EPA passes Cap and Trade by fiat, he has to walk into work and let 20 of his workers go, just to keep the business in the black and keep the other 40(ish) employed. The regulatory costs of Obamacare are similar (for some reason he didn't have those numbers on hand); but they can be avoided simply by firing 11 workers, and getting his business below the count of 50. Why in the world would he hire someone else, when he's not even sure he will be able to keep the workers already has?

according to the Business Roundtable and the National Association and Manufacturers, the five worst for job-killing are insanely tightened ozone standards, industrial and commercial boiler emissions, export controls, and the Dodd-Frank bill, and livestock marketing. Making pig farmers keep track of every time their pigs poop and every time they shovel said poop out of the barn is idiotic; and it wastes hours.

House Republicans have decided to focus in on the ones that they consider to be the top ten:

1. NLRB’s Boeing Ruling (Week of September 12)
2. Utility MACT and CSAPR (Week of September 19)
3. Boiler MACT (Week of October 3)
4. Cement MACT (Week of October 3)
5. Coal Ash (October/November)
6. Grandfathered Health Plans (November/December)
7. Ozone Rule (Winter)
8. Farm Dust (Winter)
9. Greenhouse Gas (Winter)
10. NLRB’s Ambush Elections (Winter)

but the worst by far is the 6,000 pages (thus far) that have been added to the Federal Registry from Obamacare alone. remember the boondoggle about the paperwork that had to get filed every time a business had a purchase of over a few hundred dollars? there are oodles of that kind of crap spread-load throughout that thing. some studies actually indicate that we were headed towards a fully normal recovery that stalled and stopped coincidentally the instant Obamacare passed Congress.

and so on and so forth. You want more?

I'm not against profit, I'm not against success, but I most certainly am for a better, happier, more secure and stable society and I feel as if we all looked at everything a little more objectively instead of picking sides and writing down a couple of talking points that we could accomplish so much more and grow as a nation.

everybody feels that way, alex. they simply have completely different "objective" conclusions.

Originally Posted by alexxouellette

I mean Coke sold Fanta to the Nazi's during WWII so screw them, but I don't see any other reason than your cynicism for why we can't reach a middle ground, otherwise we're just yelling back and forth at each other like a bunch of idiots

that's because our current political structure is the result of three "wave" elections - two putting the lefter of the Democrats in power, and one sweeping out the moderate democrats and replacing them with conservative republicans.

think of a venn diagram.... with very little overlap. there simply isn't enough shared assumption for much meaningful compromise. If I think the way to create jobs is to increase government spending, and you think the way to create jobs is to reduce it, we have what is called "mutually contradicting ideals".

As far as the contraception thing goes I guess I'm still a little miffed at Jon Kyl deliberately misquoting the percentage of Planned Parenthood funds that go to abortion. He said 90 percent the actual total is 3 percent and it's three percent which due to the Hyde amendment all comes from private donors.

that is inaccurate, and is the result of PP twisting its' books to provide precisely such a small number. the overwhelming majority of people that go to PP get abortions, but PP counts each procedure separately in order to hide multiple services that are happening simultaneously or one after the other. What Kyle was trying (and failing) to say was that 90% of PP's services to pregnant women consists of abortion. That, too, would be false. the correct number is 98%. According to Planned Parenthood’s 2009 report, it performed 332,278 abortions, saw, 7,021 prenatal care clients, and made 977 adoption referrals.

The rest is spent on sex education, providing contraception to young adults, and other services. So no your party hasn't been that direct, instead the whip of your party lied about the numbers to further his agenda and limit the access the most vulnerable

this belongs in another thread - but the most vulnerable person in this event is the baby. who is being sawed into pieces while still alive.

Originally Posted by nonpareil

First of all, trying to conflate the 700 arrests without understanding the context is dishonest.

The majority of those were given citations (tickets), but 'arrests' make it sound so much sinister...

Originally Posted by justabubba

i guess that is one way to explain why 50% of our nation owns but 2.5% of its wealth
while 1% of the nation owns 33.8% of all assets

what other industrialized nations displays such a wealth disparity?

Who gives a damn? Seriously...if you have the opportunity to become succesful, who CARES if there are literally thousands of the "Hollywood elite", "socialites", or other extemely wealthy? Grow a set and stop being so worried about what everyone else has managed to accumulate and focus instead on what YOU can do to become successful. There have ALWAYS been extraordinarily wea;thy individuals. I dont CARE that they are getting MORE wealthy. The reality is they are in fact only the tiniest fraction of people in this country. Stop bitching about Oprah Winfreys massive wealthy or even Jon Stewarts 15 million a year salary and focus instead on YOUR ability to provide well for your family. This whole latest round of anti-rich whining has NOTHING to do with the 1% or even the vast majority of the 99%. It has EVERYTHING to do with the considerably smaller percentage of miserable failures running around being pissed off that THEIR lives are such dismal failures. Those very wealthy individuals didnt get there at the expense of the dismal failures...the dismal failure so it to themselves every day. Then they whine bitch and moan becauyse the wealthy arent doing more to take care of them. It is pathetic.

Originally Posted by VanceMack

Who gives a damn? Seriously...if you have the opportunity to become succesful, who CARES if there are literally thousands of the "Hollywood elite", "socialites", or other extemely wealthy?

Progressives care... the class warfare assclowns care. Everyone else just wants to be successful and see their family and children be successful. Those who are jealous whine about those who are successful.

Originally Posted by Ockham

Progressives care... the class warfare assclowns care. Everyone else just wants to be successful and see their family and children be successful. Those who are jealous whine about those who are successful.

Everyone does want to be successful and see their family do well. We are in agreement.

Some of us do not stop there however. We want to see everyone do well so that we have a prosperous and sustainable society for all. Why that should make us "assclowns" is a mystery to me. Perhaps I should see if Lew Rockwell has written a column on the topic.

Originally Posted by Ockham

Those who are jealous whine about those who are successful.

You sound like a beleaguered mother trying to coax a young child after a day of getting teased at school.

"Oh no little Timmy, they are only mean to you because they are jealous."

Originally Posted by KevinKohler

Ironic that a LABOR union would decry another about CORRUPTION, lol.

Get a dictionary and look up the word ironic.