Interesting picture, I can relate somewhat

- In my last job I worked for a union.  Terrible, I would decertify if given a vote to.  All the union did was protect the very lazy people and did nothing for peoples work conditions or get  livable wages. 

- I use to work 50-60 hours, go to night school (taking 3-4 courses / week)  and run a small farm.

- Couldn't afford the 'free' canadian health care (note that some provinces make you pay for the 'free' health care)

- didn't take a holiday for 15 years.  Worked most stat holidays and usually one day on the weekend.  For certain busy times of the year I would do double shifts.

- did some military service in the Canadian Infantry reserves.

So I can relate to this guy.  When things are tough, you need to work hard.  From what I see (and the 87 year old lady shows) is that the 'usual suspects' are just at it again.  They are the professional protesters.  You will see the same crowd at every protest.  These people have no solutions to the problems except more government and slogans such as 'tax the rich'.  Until they come up with viable solutions they are just noise.

I worked for a union for 34 years.  They provided great health care.  I got days off.  They provided a pension for us.  They also created an annuity for us.  If we worked over 8 hours in a day we'd get overtime pay.  If we worked Sundays or holidays we'd get double time.

Sure there were some slugs.  It's no different than what I've seen with nepotism, favoritism or that cake job created by some politician to pay back campaign supporters.  If you want to see the definition of lazy, that's the place to look.

The people who are protesting aren't professional protesters.  They are people who are pissed off Wall Street committed crimes and never got charged.  They are pissed political campaign contributions bought politicians and got them to rescind laws protecting the citizens of this country.  They are pissed the bottom 90% has seen virtually no increase in income for over 10 years while the top 10%, the same people buying politicians, have seen their income triple.  They are pissed their hard earned tax dollars bailed out criminals and people who were reckless with our money and caused our retirement savings to practically vanish.  And they are people who want a decent job with decent pay and are willing to work for it.

I know, I'm one of them. 

Quote from: Julie Marie on November 19, 2011, 04:25:46 PM
I worked for a union for 34 years.  They provided great health care.  I got days off.  They provided a pension for us.  They also created an annuity for us.  If we worked over 8 hours in a day we'd get overtime pay.  If we worked Sundays or holidays we'd get double time.

Not my experience in a union.  Not all unions are the same, some unions are just as greedy as the businesses they are trying to protect the workers from.

Quote from: Julie Marie on November 19, 2011, 04:25:46 PM
Sure there were some slugs.  It's no different than what I've seen with nepotism, favoritism or that cake job created by some politician to pay back campaign supporters.  If you want to see the definition of lazy, that's the place to look.

There were several people in my last union job that I would have fired for laziness in all of my other non union jobs.  Even the management wanted him gone.  But they couldn't... because the union protected them.  It was a joke and it would never be tolerated in a non union job.

as for your example of lazy, that is a strawperson argument.  Look at almost all non union jobs and the workers are far more productive.

Quote from: Julie Marie on November 19, 2011, 04:25:46 PM
The people who are protesting aren't professional protesters.  They are people who are pissed off Wall Street committed crimes and never got charged.  They are pissed political campaign contributions bought politicians and got them to rescind laws protecting the citizens of this country.  They are pissed the bottom 90% has seen virtually no increase in income for over 10 years while the top 10%, the same people buying politicians, have seen their income triple.  They are pissed their hard earned tax dollars bailed out criminals and people who were reckless with our money and caused our retirement savings to practically vanish.  And they are people who want a decent job with decent pay and are willing to work for it.

I know, I'm one of them.

The 87 year old lady is a professional protester.  You can tell by the amount of times she brags about being arrested.   There was a lady like that in the last province I worked in and the authorities finally got annoyed and gave her some jail time.   Many of these same people will be at every protest... Thats why I call them professional protesters.

Retirement funds are disappearing because almost every retirement fund is based off stock dividends.  Look at most pension plans... they are usually conservatively invested in large corporations and bonds.  The smaller the profit of these large companies, the smaller the payout to pension funds.  I believe I read that between 75-85% of stockholders are actually pension and mutual funds.  Pensions are getting hit because a large percentage of the population is retiring and profits are falling.   

My challenge still stands, when this protest comes up with actual workable solutions instead of the same tired chants and slogans... then and only then will people see them as more than just noise.

Quote from: Julie Marie on November 18, 2011, 04:53:37 PM
Personally I don't believe he worked 60-70 hours for 8 straight years while attending college.  If you put yourself on a 4-year-to-graduate program, there isn't a lot of time left after eating and sleeping.  And even less if you allow yourself some time to decompress.  Even cutting his school load in half, he'd have little time to do anything else with that work schedule.  I've worked that kind of schedule, 10 hours a day, 7 days a week.  After a couple of months, I was a zombie.  And I wasn't even going to school.  And yeah, my spouse & kids complained they never saw me.

I was thinking about that, too.  Even with taking minimum hours in college, or close to minimum hours, university is a lot of work.  I had at least two classes a day (usually more) plus labs, which usually are longer than normal classes.  If you were to do a 4-year program, you would be adding a class or two to what I was already doing.

Once I got a job (which could in no way even be considered close to being full-time) I found that it was very difficult to maintain what little social life I had.  Job started really early in the night.  I get off job, barely have time to even eat a banana, and go to early class which I usually can't stay awake in.  Get out of early class (if I even was awake enough to go to class at all), sleep for an hour or two in library until next class.  After that class, I do homework in the library, eat a sandwich, then go to the last class.  After last class, it is already late in the afternoon.  I go home, eat supper.  The rest of the day is either for homework, sleeping, or playing games with friends.  Then, I get up really early that night and do it all again.  Every day was like this except weekends (no class) and days where I didn't have the early class.

Basically, my only real free time was between 4:00 in the afternoon and 1:00 in the morning.  Some of that "free time" was taken up by supper, breakfast (usually bananas), sleep, and supposedly homework.  And, I wasn't going to be completing any degrees in 4 years based on the number of class hours I was taking.  A lot of people had a heavier school load than I did.  Keep in mind that the hours I was working for my job almost never met the requirements for being full-time.

Assuming that Mr. 53% was working on a "real" degree and not some watered down free piece of nothing that some colleges offer, I find it highly unlikely that his claims are true.  Going to university is like a full-time job in itself.  You're basically doing 40 hours a week (more, if you want to finish your degree early) between getting to and from class, attending class, and doing all of the workload.

If he was really working 60-70 hours a week, that means that he was actually "working" 100-110 hours a week assuming he was working on a "real" degree where he actually had to study and learn something in order to pass his exams.  There are only 168 hours in a week.  This means that he should have had approximately 70 hours at most between eating, sleeping, and doing anything other than work or school.  Assuming he ate really quick foods or saved time by always eating while reading his textbooks simultaneously, this leaves 70 hours for sleeping and doing everything else other than work or school.  Assuming that he slept eight hours on average each day, this leaves fourteen hours a week for him to do anything that was not directly related to helping him complete work or school.  This means that he only had two hours a day, at most, to do something that was not directly related to work or school.  Keep in mind that I only considered sleeping, and I didn't include "relaxation" as a necessary activity to maintain his energy or motivation for work and school.

Basically, he would have had two hours a day at most to socialize, relax, or engage in leisure activities.  Keep in mind that "two hours" is a very conservative estimate based on the number of hours he claimed to work.

My conclusion is that this guy is either greatly exaggerating, or he had a small degree program which he managed to stretch out to 8 years so he had enough time to work overtime while still being able to stay awake during class.  At the university I went to, there's no way anyone would be able to work 60 hours a week while attending college full-time unless they were getting less than 4 hours of sleep a day, or they had absolutely NO social lives and did nothing but work and school all day long.

It has been said that while in college you can sleep, you can party, or you can study:  but you can't do all three.  I found this to be very true even while working part-time and taking minimum course hours at my university.  I often gave up sleep to have time to socialize with friends.

Quote from: Zaria on November 20, 2011, 12:15:54 AM
The 87 year old lady is a professional protester.  You can tell by the amount of times she brags about being arrested.   There was a lady like that in the last province I worked in and the authorities finally got annoyed and gave her some jail time.   Many of these same people will be at every protest... Thats why I call them professional protesters.

My challenge still stands, when this protest comes up with actual workable solutions instead of the same tired chants and slogans... then and only then will people see them as more than just noise.

I think its wonderful she has been protesting ever since she RETIRED  from work

and if you got involved you would know that there are others doing things to make changes www.the99declaration.org

www.the99declaration.org

Quote from: VeryGnawty on November 20, 2011, 01:56:18 AM
If he was really working 60-70 hours a week, that means that he was actually "working" 100-110 hours a week assuming he was working on a "real" degree where he actually had to study and learn something in order to pass his exams.

Don't forget traveling time.  You have to allow time to get to work and school.  For me, an eight hour day at work adds up to about 10 hours, when you consider the time I leave the house until the time I arrive back home.  There's also unpaid breaks.  In Illinois, state law requires an employer to give you 20 minutes unpaid break if you work more than five straight hours (bastards!  )  So that 60-70 hour work week really consumes about 70-90 hours, depending on how many days he's actually working.

For school, you have to add in the traveling time too.  And college is not like grade school, where you arrive in the morning then have a full day of continuous classes.  You might have a class at 8AM, one at 11AM and one at 1PM. 

But let's say the guy went to school at night (less flexibility in class selection then but we'll give a best case scenario.) 

If he left the house for work day 5AM and worked 10 hours, he could be at school by around 5PM.  Not a lot of classes available during dinner time, but let's say he managed to get two classes a night, one at 6PM and one at 8PM.  He'd be leaving campus between 9 and 10PM, unless it was a lab or something like that.  If he lived close by he'd be home between 9:30 and 10:30. 

Then he needs to grab a bite to eat.  That takes up 30 minutes, because he cleaned up his mess too.  So he's sitting down to study around 10 or 11 at night.  He studies only one hour because he's just trying to get by, not get decent grades.  Then he washed up (hopefully takes a shower), brushes his teeth, gets ready for bed and his head hits the pillow around midnight, or later. 

Since he has to leave the house by 5AM to get to work on time, he wakes up at 4:30AM, enough time to get dressed, eat a quick breakfast and brush his teeth (we hope).  So he gets about 4 hours of sleep a night.  And he has zero social time.  If he has a girlfriend, too bad.

And that's if he was working six days a week and only 10 hours a day.  As for those 70 hour work weeks...

Yeah, he's full of it.  I can't wait until he has a family and little kids running around the house.  Maybe his wife will have to work 60-70 hours a week too, just to get buy.  Ahhhh, the New American Dream!  Where do I sign up?   

Quote from: Zaria on November 20, 2011, 12:15:54 AM
There were several people in my last union job that I would have fired for laziness in all of my other non union jobs.  Even the management wanted him gone.  But they couldn't... because the union protected them.  It was a joke and it would never be tolerated in a non union job.

I worked non-union jobs and saw lazy, worthless people keep their jobs while hard working people got laid off.  It's called favoritism and it happens on every job, union or not.  Some people are masters at sucking up to the boss, and keeping their jobs.

Quoteas for your example of lazy, that is a strawperson argument.  Look at almost all non union jobs and the workers are far more productive.

Not from what I've seen.  But I gauge productivity by looking not only at the amount of work completed but also at the quality of the work.  And quality is important to the consumer.

I've seen the work of non-union electricians.  Some is good but some could start a house fire.  They have no schooling and learn everything on the job from people who learned the same way.  The business owner may be happy but he/she will be selling the customer an inferior product.  And, from what I've seen, non-union built houses sell for just as much as union built houses.  So who pockets the money?  Certainly not the non-union employees.  That's why greedy business owners hate unions.  Their existence makes them share the wealth.

But don't forget the 40 hour work week.  If not for unions, we'd all be working 60-70 hours a week while putting ourselves through college or raising a family.  And the only people who would benefit from that is the business owners.

No thanks, even considering the negative aspects of unions, overall I still think they are good for the helping achieve the American Dream, the real version, not the one Mr. 53% is trying to create.

>> Not from what I've seen.  But I gauge productivity by looking not only at the amount of work completed but also at the quality of the work.  And quality is important to the consumer. <<

A prime example of this in Canada is automakers... GM is union... Toyota isn't... guess which car is better built?  certainly not the bailout buggy.

>> I've seen the work of non-union electricians.  Some is good but some could start a house fire.  They have no schooling and learn everything on the job from people who learned the same way.  The business owner may be happy but he/she will be selling the customer an inferior product.  And, from what I've seen, non-union built houses sell for just as much as union built houses.  So who pockets the money?  Certainly not the non-union employees.  That's why greedy business owners hate unions.  Their existence makes them share the wealth <<

Here in Canada the government regulates those who can do electrical work.  Unions are unnecessary with proper regulations. 

>> But don't forget the 40 hour work week.  If not for unions, we'd all be working 60-70 hours a week while putting ourselves through college or raising a family.  And the only people who would benefit from that is the business owners. <<

Yes there once was a time and place for unions, but this happened YEARS ago.  What have unions done since other than protect lazy workers?   

>> I think its wonderful she has been protesting ever since she RETIRED  from work <<

she just changed professions. 

I also get annoyed by people who say they are representing me when I think they are spouting nonsense... the 99% movement doesn't even closely hold my views...  or many if not most of the people I know.  Reminds me of our local socialist party who keeps talking about representing 'average working people'  when most average working people I know and work with can't stand them.  What they should really say is that they represent 'union and government workers'... at least that would be honest.

The "99%movement" declaration has some good ideas... but then again they tend to blame corporations for everything.   As I pointed out earlier the vast majority of stocks are held by pension and mutual retirement funds.  If you wish to 'progressively' tax corporations you will only make things much worse for the current retired generation.  If you think pensions are falling now... tax those dividends even more and watch pensions fall to unprecedented lows.

There was once a time when a single wage-earner could support a family of four with a house, at least one car, and a family vacation every year.

That has not been true in my lifetime.

What seems commonplace these days, based on my friends, family, and co-workers, is to have two wage-earners working three jobs between them to support a family of 3.5 with a rented apartment, one car and a bus pass, and about three days off each year after using up vacation time to handle medical emergencies, car repairs, and whatever else.

I have worked for a single employer for over ten years.  I sat down and did some calculating and found that my annual raises have not kept pace with inflation. I always get "exceeds expectations" or better pay raises, yet I lose spending power with every passing year. (This is with a company whose pay scales are very competitive within the industry.)

When inflation numbers are reported, they normally report inflation WITHOUT food and energy factored in, yet those are the items most critical to households and are also the items experiencing the most inflation. When unemployment numbers are reported, there are entire classes on nonworking potential workers who are not included for various reasons, effectively cutting the figures by as much as 50%.

As a society, we bail out the banks, then pass regulations that reward them for not lending money to businesses and individuals.  Then we tell the banks to make more loans to needy borrowers and get upset when the number of bad loans on their books goes up. We tell businesses to hire more people if they can and to pay employees more if they can, then pass regulations that reward them for moving jobs out of the country and keeping their profits overseas. We tell our CEOs to cut costs, then give them huge bonuses for laying off workers. We demand universal healthcare, then structure it in a way that encourages medical professionals to leave the field entirely. We demand competent representatives, then elect the same old people for fear of "the other guy" winning or because "the other guy" doesn't seem to stand a chance... if we even vote at all.  We protest big banks, then deposit our protest funds into accounts in big banks.  We applaud increased productivity in the economy, then complain about working harder for less money - almost the definition of "productivity".

We say we want change, but down in the weeds where it really matters, we don't act like we want change.

Something is very broken.

Something is not getting fixed.

Quote from: Julie Marie on November 20, 2011, 10:49:38 AM
For school, you have to add in the traveling time too.  And college is not like grade school, where you arrive in the morning then have a full day of continuous classes.  You might have a class at 8AM, one at 11AM and one at 1PM.

This is one of the main reasons I doubt this guy is serious.  If his college schedule was anything like mine, it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for him to work 70 hours a week.  Most of my classes were staggered.  I rarely had classes back-to-back.  I had anywhere from 1-3 hours after a class, and then I had another class.  That's the reason I tried to get all of my homework done in the library.  If I would have taken the bus home, I would have had about fifteen minutes before I would have had to take the bus back to campus.  There was no point in leaving campus.  I stayed there all day unless the break between classes was three hours or more.

Being at school for me was an all-day affair, because with an hour or two break inbetween classes it was impossible to make it back to my apartment and have any time to actually do anything before having to go back to campus.  I fail to see how this guy could work sixty hour weeks unless all of his classes were in consecutive blocks, which was almost IMPOSSIBLE to set up at my university because it was so difficult to get classes at the times you preferred.  I hated morning classes with a passion, and I still had to take a couple of them because all of the afternoon classes were full already.

Quote from: Dana_H on November 20, 2011, 05:52:49 PM
Something is very broken.

Something is not getting fixed.

That's why people are protesting.

Quote from: Julie Marie on November 20, 2011, 07:14:11 PM
That's why people are protesting.

So, JM, after all the posts and media report, what is the prognosis ? Will they stick ?

Jen61

I guess the most interesting question would be: would they make a difference ? Congress does not seem to give a rat a.. Super committe is death ! Tomorrow is going to be a day of recon for the marks, a new downgrade, Dow looses 500 points, Fed and contractor jobs will be cut by the ten of thousands thought 2012 ! Really doom and gloom IMO

Perhaps Nostradamus and the Mayans are right,

Hope I am wrong !

I believe it will continue to grow. I attended an Occupy your State Capitol event last month, and from that various regional Occupy movements and actions have grown into existence. For those who think it's just young hippies, go to an Occupy event. You will see and talk to, as I did: young people, students, middle aged people, construction workers, middle class professionals, ministers, unemployed, employed, retired people, including two WWII vets. Some democrats, some republicans, some independents. Some queer, some straight. All united in the knowledge that the system isn't working for most of us. All aware that we have a government by, of and for the corporate interests. The agenda, the mission, is set by everyone. By consensus.

Z

Quote from: Zaria on November 20, 2011, 05:49:57 PM
I also get annoyed by people who say they are representing me when I think they are spouting nonsense... the 99% movement doesn't even closely hold my views...  or many if not most of the people I know.  Reminds me of our local socialist party who keeps talking about representing 'average working people'  when most average working people I know and work with can't stand them. 

Well here at this thread you seem to be in the 1% with your views..

Quote from: Jen61 on November 20, 2011, 07:24:45 PM
So, JM, after all the posts and media report, what is the prognosis ? Will they stick ?

Jen61

Yes.  This isn't going away.  The fact the media has glommed on to it guarantees it will be put to the forefront of the minds of the people.  The media loves it because there's always something to report and there's always people watching their reporting.  If the media dropped it, OWS would struggle to stay alive.  Sadly, we are a TV nation.

But on the plus side, I'm seeing more and more information coming to the surface that is exposing the reality of life in Washington.  Anyone using more than a few brain cells can figure out who is really pulling the strings there and why.

Occupy DC? If you guys promise to stay there, I'll get the "Koch Brothers" to cover your expenses.
I'll also personally go to Rush's studio and ensure air time for "the cause".

I think the hardcore OWS supporters need to realize that your your own 1%. As in 1% of the US population would agree with your solutions to the current economic difficulties the world faces.

Case in point. Spain just threw out their Socialist Party, which was a real Capital S Party, for a conservative government. In a landslide.

What a gigantic can of pepper spray cannot do, old man winter will do. That is unless you occuppy Miami or Tijuana 

Jesus was meeting with other protesters and guess what happened?

Quote from: Jen61 on November 21, 2011, 04:08:22 PM
What a gigantic can of pepper spray cannot do, old man winter will do. That is unless you occuppy Miami or Tijuana 

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Concepcion-Picciotto-24-Hour-Peace-Vigil-Since-1981/269336512824

"The Doctrine of Fascism" by Benito "Il Duce" Mussolini. In his 72 page manifesto, "The Chief" defines pure fascism as a merger of the state with corporate power. Not nationalization or a take over corporations by the state like in communism. Rather he describes what we have today; a merger of power where the corporations are free to earn profits for a small group of people in and out of government. 94% of elections are won by the candidate with the most money. This is how a congress with a 9% approval rating stays in power.