F*ck!!!!!! Enough Already!

Quote from Maverick74:

But look at it this way. If I was a pro union liberal and I saw this kind of shit going on, I would be outraged. Because it's giving unions a bad name and it's going to allow the other side to attack a position I believe in. I would want the unions to cut that shit out so as not to give easy bait to the other side to attack. It's in fact in your best interest Ricter to call out this behavior, yet you don't. That's what I don't understand. If I actually was "pro-union", this article would infuriate me.

It's a let down when you see your own side's failings, and it's when you see the most convoluted counter-arguments of them all on this board, when someone is trying to excuse their side. That's the defense part. For offense we find and post the other guy's failings. People can and sometimes do argue each side, playing "the Devil's advocate". It's twice the work. I do it on the religious threads, you may have noticed.
 
Quote from Ricter:

Fair enough. So to answer your first question to me (today), it's because we tend to pick a side and do our offense/defense from there.

Why would you want to do that? I tend to be conservative, but at the same time I think many Christian fundamentalists are dangerous, I think drugs should be legalized, and I have many other views that conflict with traditional conservative thinking. I don't understand why any thinking person wouldn't criticize his own side as much as the opposition. I also know several liberals (including one of my closest friends) whom I respect because they're not afraid to speak up and criticize their own.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...rs-pension-fund-teachers-union-public-pension

These god damn unions are giving me a migraine. I'm about ready to start my own protest. This is such bullshit.

Of course the sick twisted irony of it all is that the unions are f*cking bankrolling the OWS. Am I living in some kind of bizzaro world here?

If it were just a matter of a few people gaming the system there would be an easy fix. The problem is much bigger than that.

Though San Jose is used as the primary example in this article, the math is pretty much the same for all the major cities in California.

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/features/2011/11/michael-lewis-201111

"It shows that the city’s [San Jose’s] pension costs when he first became interested in the subject were projected to run $73 million a year. This year they would be $245 million: pension and health-care costs of retired workers now are more than half the budget. In three years’ time pension costs alone would come to $400 million, though “if you were to adjust for real life expectancy it is more like $650 million.” Legally obliged to meet these costs, the city can respond only by cutting elsewhere. As a result, San Jose, once run by 7,450 city workers, was now being run by 5,400 city workers. The city was back to staffing levels of 1988, when it had a quarter of a million fewer residents… By 2014, Reed had calculated, a city of a million people, the 10th-largest city in the United States, would be serviced by 1,600 public workers."

In 2015, over 30% of the Los Angeles city revenues will be required just to pay pension/retirement benefits. In 2020, retirement benefits will consume over 50% of the city's total budget. San Francisco is almost as bad. There will either have to be massive layoffs, or bankruptcy to renogotiate pension payouts. The cities will have no other choice.


.
 
Quote from tomdavis:

Is he getting paid with taxpayer money? If he is, I agree with you.

See, that's the rub, isn't it :)

If a company pays it's failed CEO to go away, the stock holders can vote against it by selling the stock and not owning it again. Taxpayers have no such option when the government does something stupid like that.
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Not me. If something is wrong on either side, I call it. I don't support bailouts or corporate welfare. I don't think CEO's should be making billions when their stocks tank and their companies go bankrupt.

This union deal is bullshit. The idea that someone could tap into a million dollar pension when the state of IL is broke and facing billions in pension shortfalls and all because they were a substitute teacher for one day? Come on Ricter, have some morals, when you see you something wrong on the left...call it!!!!!

The reason nothing improves is because people like you have no interest in calling stuff out in your own party. There are plenty of people here calling stuff out on the right who ARE on the right. Most of that through the support of people like Ron Paul. But where are your guys at Ricter? Why don't you want to fix your party? You're going to let this union shit slide? Come on...

Major props for making this post. I feel the same way, but the problem is just about everyone else on this board is stuck in this worthless two party paradigm. It's why, even after the lost decade of Bush's Presidency, we have the Obama fanboys scraping the bottom of the barrel with their "he's not as bad as Bush".
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

The problem is you take the FOX News approach to "fair and balanced". In an hour of conversation you/they spend 5 minutes hand slapping the right, and then spend the next 55 minutes bitch slapping the left. MSNBC is the other side of the coin and just as biased. It's a disingenuous position at best.
If it weren't for a few guys here like Ricter and myself there wouldn't be any balance at all.

You are delusional if you honestly believe that you and Ricter are some moral compass. The two of you simply play contrarian to all things perceived to be to the "right" of your political ideology. Once in awhile I've seen you call out both sides of the aisle, but that's a rarity.

Ricter, on the other hand, just enjoys being a pain in the ass.
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

Yeah it's outrageous. Not quite as outrageous as this, but outrageous none the less.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/dail...-golden-parachutes-failed-ceos-153646807.html

The Golden Parachute folks are my personal heroes!! They get to go to all the best luncheons and dinners, get tickets to the Opera, have slush funds.. They have introvert counterparts in all the fund managers that don't beat the indexes but those @ssholes pass out after thirty minutes of socializing...

Union Goons, BFD, anybody can learn to bully!! I practice it all the time just to keep in shape for it... once you start bullying you realize that you better keep in shape for the counterattacks and it drives one to keep one's chops up better than watching Karate Movies ever could!!

I guess they both have their pluses and minuses maybe...
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Not at all. I'm pretty consistent on here and fair. I never see you or Ricter call out the left. I agree, many of the resident ET liberals have long left ET, but I can't help the fact they can't trade their way out of a paper bag.

Never? Com'on, you know that's not true. I'm critical of the left about as much as you're critical of the right...not very, but critical none the less, and prior to 2008 I was relentless against the left. The hi-jacking of capitalism has turned me though, no doubt about that. It's not so much that I now support the left, I just despise the hypocrisy of the right when it comes to who is REALLY responsible for this mess we're in.
I never supported the bailouts or the free pass given out to one and all. All I've ever tried to point out is what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can't/won't hold anyone accountable at the top, then no one is accountable at the bottom either. Bail out the banks, we must bailout the auto industry. Free pass for the fraudsters on Wall Street, then the sub-prime home owner get's a free pass too. Obviously none of this is sustainable, but if one is going to pay the penalty, then all must pay the penalty. If one skates, then all skate.
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

Never? Com'on, you know that's not true. I'm critical of the left about as much as you're critical of the right...not very, but critical none the less, and prior to 2008 I was relentless against the left. The hi-jacking of capitalism has turned me though, no doubt about that. It's not so much that I now support the left, I just despise the hypocrisy of the right when it comes to who is REALLY responsible for this mess we're in.
I never supported the bailouts or the free pass given out to one and all. All I've ever tried to point out is what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If we can't/won't hold anyone accountable at the top, then no one is accountable at the bottom either. Bail out the banks, we must bailout the auto industry. Free pass for the fraudsters on Wall Street, then the sub-prime home owner get's a free pass too. Obviously none of this is sustainable, but if one is going to pay the penalty, then all must pay the penalty. If one skates, then all skate.

So this is part of your "two wrongs make a right" political ideology?

How about two wrongs equals two wrongs?
 
Back
Top