Interesting article in the WSJ today talking about lack of physical mobility in the workforce....Over the last 10 years, people are changing jobs less and physically moving (i.e. for a better job) less than ever before, less than half what it was 20 years ago in both cases.

No doubt some of that is undoubtedly owning a home being like an anchor for people, especially now given the housing bubble. But I also think dual-income families have a lot to do with it. Which brings up another interesting point - there are more dual-earners than ever before, much much more, and while real wages have been mostly flat the last 30 years couples would seem to be earning 50% or more than before. Yet, somehow, they are poorer as a result? If you want to find a corollary, look no further than Europe, which would be alarming and/or discouraging if perhaps so many didn't continue to hold up Europe as some sort of socialist utopia.

Our "poor" aren't really poor, and those who truly are can get free or highly subsidized rent/mortgages, food and other freebies. I'll say it again, the govt is not the solution to stagnant wages and wealth inequality, at least not directly (i.e. policy vs. taxation).

America has been almost completely taken with a simultaneous sense of entitlement and enabling. Most college degrees, at least the practical ones, pay pretty well - at or above median family incomes after just a few years and that for just 1 earner. Yet students want more subsidies, more handouts, and more tax breaks for college education - I don't generally classify socialism, many programs with which I agree (in moderation), as robbing from the rich to give to the not-so-poor but that one is a prime example of entitlement run amok.

majorspark;992074 wrote:
Rich/poor its all relevent. Once one can take care of all the basic needs for himself or his family after that it is keeping up the Joneses.

+1000. While the arguments do have merit in terms of the share of productivity gains and stagnant real wages, the ire seems mostly driven not that they don't have enough, but they feel entitled to having more. Everyone in America could be obscenely rich, but then they would see the uber-rich retiring 20 years earlier and there would be cries of unfair and to redistribute the wealth.

It's really a fascinating dynamic. What other areas of life do people feel entitled to a level perhaps above their talent or ability or whatever? Should ugly people get free plastic surgery so they can date a model? Should pro sports be a lottery, rather than ability, because who wouldn't love to earn a decent living playing ball? Think about it - people will rail about ticket prices to a game or movie, but they don't really say too much about what those entertainers make driving those ticket prices. It's not that they want them to make less money, it's that they want some of that money to be redistributed to them. All driven by a very materialistic and entitled society that is incapable of attaching value to most non-monetary trade-offs.

majorspark;992074 wrote:If you listen to liberals anyone who is rich has gotten to that point because they inherited it, were greedy, selfish, corrupt who knew how to manipulate the system.



Rich/poor its all relevent. Once one can take care of all the basic needs for himself or his family after that it is keeping up the Joneses.

In America, those that find themselves in difficult finacial straits get assistance through public and private means far above their basic needs in life. The majority of the world considers them rich. Many risk their lives everyday for a chance to get into the USA. Drowning in the sea, freezing to death in the landing gear of a plane, dying of thirst in the desert, packed body to body in the back of a freight truck in 100 degree heat...I could go on and on. To live on the dolls? No. To do the work many Americans find beneath them? Yes.

And a lot of the world lives in absolute squalor so what they consider to be "rich" isn't really relevant as long as you want to believe in American exceptionalism which is something a lot of conservatives feel strongly about and use as justification for foreign and domestic policies. If we're better than everyone else shouldn't our poor be better than other people's poor?

And if we aren't better than everyone else why do we have foreign policy that acts like we are?

I'll say it again just to make sure no one forgets it. I have no problem with people being rich or even obscenely rich. None at all, but I do think the difference in wealth and the lack of upward mobility in this country is starting to become a problem. Whether we agree as to the remedies or not I think it's hard to disagree there is a problem.

And that quote I posted earlier was Vonnegut in case anyone was wondering. Posted it mostly because I figured you guys would hate it.

As a follow-up to the Richmond, VA Tea Party requesting payment for their rallies since the Occupy Richmond didn't have to pay for anything - http://biggovernment.com/author/cowens/

Apparently, the mayor has decided that since the Tea Party requests equal treatment under the law, they must be audited:

In the audit letter signed by Cynthia Carr, Field Auditor for the City of Richmond, it states that our Tea Party is delinquent in filing of Admissions, Lodging, and Meals Taxes with the city and as such our group has been targeted for a comprehensive audit. Well, aren’t we special? In fact, as part of the Business License we have with the City, a form is filled out by our treasurer every month (as required). We have never charged admission or had lodging or meals associated with our rallies. Every month the forms are appropriately filled with zeros. Ms. Carr goes on to say that if we don’t respond within 15 days, the City will make a statutory assessment–meaning they’ll pick an amount to charge us.So the City and Mayor apparently feel that the Richmond Tea Party has not paid its fair share for use of Kanawha Plaza. We challenged the Mayor’s unequal treatment between groups and he responded with even more unequal treatment.

Looks like the "Chicago Way" has found its way into Richmond, VA. What a legacy, eh Barry?

I just watched the LAPD force all the media to leave the area of the protesters. This is disgusting.

Dayton is now denying camping to Occupiers.

I Wear Pants;994377 wrote:I just watched the LAPD force all the media to leave the area of the protesters. This is disgusting.

Wah, wah, wah. OWS is more about protesting police brutality than enacting any real change. These people must want the Obama kind of change where nothing changes except for who's paying their bills.

WebFire;994453 wrote:Dayton is now denying camping to Occupiers.

IOW, recognizing the rights of everyone else. Good.

Protest all you want. Then go home.

queencitybuckeye;994541 wrote:IOW, recognizing the rights of everyone else. Good.

Protest all you want. Then go home.

Agree. And that's what the city manager told them. The park is open until dusk, and they are free to use it while it's open, like everyone else.

WebFire;994782 wrote:Agree. And that's what the city manager told them. The park is open until dusk, and they are free to use it while it's open, like everyone else.

A substantial number of them won't like this much. They are great defenders of their rights. Rights of others? Fuck 'em, basically.

sleeper;994465 wrote:Wah, wah, wah. OWS is more about protesting police brutality than enacting any real change. These people must want the Obama kind of change where nothing changes except for who's paying their bills.

You are wrong.

I Wear Pants;994985 wrote:You are wrong.

Then please tell me what getting into fights with cops and standing around in public spaces is actually accomplishing? I get the whole 'raising awareness" thing, but honestly these people need to grow up and realize things will never be equal.

sleeper;995034 wrote:Then please tell me what getting into fights with cops and standing around in public spaces is actually accomplishing? I get the whole 'raising awareness" thing, but honestly these people need to grow up and realize things will never be equal.

It isn't about things being equal. OWS isn't a communism awareness group.

It's about corporations being allowed to have private profits (as they should because that's well, how it is supposed to/should work) and socialized losses (not good). It's about corporate lobbying and how our congress has basically turned into a store in which people can purchase legislation best suited to their needs depending upon the budget that they have.

Mind you when I describe corporate lobbying I'm including lobbying by some of the more massive unions as that can be just as damaging and unjust.

It's called protesting sleeper, that involves a lot of standing around in public places and is protected by our constitutions. The militarized police we have today apparently are allergic to people standing around in public places and as such are very aggressive towards those who do.

I Wear Pants;995049 wrote:It isn't about things being equal. OWS isn't a communism awareness group.

It's about corporations being allowed to have private profits (as they should because that's well, how it is supposed to/should work) and socialized losses (not good). It's about corporate lobbying and how our congress has basically turned into a store in which people can purchase legislation best suited to their needs depending upon the budget that they have.

Mind you when I describe corporate lobbying I'm including lobbying by some of the more massive unions as that can be just as damaging and unjust.

It's called protesting sleeper, that involves a lot of standing around in public places and is protected by our constitutions. The militarized police we have today apparently are allergic to people standing around in public places and as such are very aggressive towards those who do.

I agree with them that corporate welfare is a bad thing. Unfortunately, there is no clear goal so they look like a bunch of smelly idiots standing around getting in fights with cops.

I won't even get into the whole police thing because clearly you are sensationalist and buy into the whole notion that people aren't intentionally trying to start something with the cops to get on TV.

I Wear Pants;995049 wrote:It isn't about things being equal. OWS isn't a communism awareness group.

It's about corporations being allowed to have private profits (as they should because that's well, how it is supposed to/should work) and socialized losses (not good). It's about corporate lobbying and how our congress has basically turned into a store in which people can purchase legislation best suited to their needs depending upon the budget that they have.

Mind you when I describe corporate lobbying I'm including lobbying by some of the more massive unions as that can be just as damaging and unjust.

It's called protesting sleeper, that involves a lot of standing around in public places and is protected by our constitutions. The militarized police we have today apparently are allergic to people standing around in public places and as such are very aggressive towards those who do.

The OWS group does horrible job communicating what they are protesting. If they are upset with the legislation that has been passed (there are some valid complaints with that), wouldn't the Mall in Washington be the place to protest?

They do have the right to protest, but they also need to follow that rules that are in place. Blocking ports, blocking people from getting to store etc. hurts the people working those jobs earning $10/hr far more than it hurts any billionaire.

You'd think, but how well has that worked (protesting in DC lately)? And it's not like they aren't protesting there, they are.

But they are protesting on Wall Street because that's who is benefiting from the bailouts and who is paying for bad legislation that only benefits themselves.

I Wear Pants;995086 wrote:You'd think, but how well has that worked (protesting in DC lately)? And it's not like they aren't protesting there, they are.

But they are protesting on Wall Street because that's who is benefiting from the bailouts and who is paying for bad legislation that only benefits themselves.

If they want to protest Wall Street for taking handouts why not go into welfare neighborhoods and protest the people taking government handouts there as well? If nothing else it would make for some interesting TV.

I Wear Pants;995049 wrote: It's called protesting sleeper, that involves a lot of standing around in public places and is protected by our constitutions. The militarized police we have today apparently are allergic to people standing around in public places and as such are very aggressive towards those who do.

Alternatively, the authorities realize that just as the OMS gomers have a right to stand in a public place and protest, you and I have the same exact right to that same exact space. They have the right to vent and to move along, so that I can use the space to vent, or to do any legal activity I choose.

Al Bundy;995081 wrote:The OWS group does horrible job communicating what they are protesting. If they are upset with the legislation that has been passed (there are some valid complaints with that), wouldn't the Mall in Washington be the place to protest?

They do have the right to protest, but they also need to follow that rules that are in place. Blocking ports, blocking people from getting to store etc. hurts the people working those jobs earning $10/hr far more than it hurts any billionaire.

It's also where it crosses the line from a protest to illegal activity.

Al Bundy;995114 wrote:If they want to protest Wall Street for taking handouts why not go into welfare neighborhoods and protest the people taking government handouts there as well? If nothing else it would make for some interesting TV.

Because they don't have a problem with poor people? And because once you start making a lot of money you aren't eligable for welfare anymore. The banks were making lots of money and then fucked up then we gave them a fuck load of money.

queencitybuckeye;995116 wrote:Alternatively, the authorities realize that just as the OMS gomers have a right to stand in a public place and protest, you and I have the same exact right to that same exact space. They have the right to vent and to move along, so that I can use the space to vent, or to do any legal activity I choose.

Ah, so now there is a limit on our right to assembly. That limit being "say your shit then move on or else you will be physically assualted and/or have chemical weapons used against you".

I Wear Pants;995121 wrote:Ah, so now there is a limit on our right to assembly. That limit being "say your shit then move on or else you will be physically assualted and/or have chemical weapons used against you".

There has always been a limit, or do you believe the rights of the protesters trump those of everyone else?

I Wear Pants;995121 wrote:Ah, so now there is a limit on our right to assembly. That limit being "say your **** then move on or else you will be physically assualted and/or have chemical weapons used against you".

"Chemical Weapons??" Seriously? You're in danger of a complete meltdown bro....I suggest you step away from the internetz for a few days.