more brutal teabaggers

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
i sometimes wonder why i bother to respond to this annoying little gnat. answering his posts is more trouble than they're worth and i can be sure he will simply ignore any worthwhile points in favor of meaningless party line garbage and underwhelming posturing.

Duke is the master of taking an intelligent, well thought out post and thinking he can garner a few "likes" with a flaccid remark, because he thinks he is surrounded by no one but barking liberal seals. He actually believes he holds the high ground because he parrots the MSM.
 

Prefontaine

Well-Known Member
You dont know what your talking about you dont even come close to having a clue
as a non-union inspector of union work, by union workers who made on average twice, but often as much as 3 or 4 times my hourly wage, and having myself taken a 12 percent paycut for two years before a lay-off aligned with my interest in getting a second degree resulted in me returning to college,

i know what im talking about, and you are the one with no clue
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
cells? i guess you are just giving him the benefit of the doubt.
i give everyone credit for having at least two active braincells, whether they deserve it or not.

the amazing part to me is its so hard for the left to see that they are doing this to themselves.

the same folks that want ridiculous demands from the company, then bitch when the workforce is farmed out to illegals, and eventually over seas.
we've been doing this to ourselves for longer than any of us have been alive. we are the victims of our own success and we always seem surprised when, believing our own hype, those in power take advantage of our naivete. what on earth were we thinking when we took for granted that a single nation should spread across the entire continent? i suppose it was almost excusable in an age of conquest, but the monster it created has come back to haunt us. with abundant resources and no troublesome neighbors to keep us in check, it's no wonder we thought so highly of ourselves. the post ww2 boom was perhaps the most destructive blow to our nation's ethos. newly christened as the leader and protector of the free world, we allowed the power of the sole intact major nation in the world to get away from us. the infrastructure of the welfare state was already in place, thanks to fdr's handiwork, and we simply allowed ourselves to be taken care of and taken over by a federal government which had seen us through two world wars and promised us invincibility. with a new threat, communism, to lend credence to the state's demands for increasing control, we fell into our apathy gradually and its natural outcome is the nation we see today. a nation with its might spread thinly across the globe and its people, feeling they deserve only the best, willing to stand by and allow an increasingly unruly bureaucracy free rein.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
Being that I worked construction for 10 years for both Union and non Union Companys I can tell you its the Free market that dictates wages for Labor. The influx of Illegals into the small construction crews was the result of Cheaper wages

AND

They fucking showed up for work on time and SOBER

Now tell me what kind of Hypocrite you are for supporting Ron Paul who is MR. Freemarket Capitalist and thinks minimum wage laws are Unconstitutional then Juxtapose that Opinion with your Belief that Cheaper Labor and Loans No one forced Banks to make is what caused the downfall of the construction industry trades
 

feff f

Active Member
Being that I worked construction for 10 years for both Union and non Union Companys I can tell you its the Free market that dictates wages for Labor. The influx of Illegals into the small construction crews was the result of Cheaper wages

AND

They fucking showed up for work on time and SOBER

Now tell me what kind of Hypocrite you are for supporting Ron Paul who is MR. Freemarket Capitalist and thinks minimum wage laws are Unconstitutional then Juxtapose that Opinion with your Belief that Cheaper Labor and Loans No one forced Banks to make is what caused the downfall of the construction industry trades

incoherent much?
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Now tell me what kind of Hypocrite you are for supporting Ron Paul who is MR. Freemarket Capitalist and thinks minimum wage laws are Unconstitutional then Juxtapose that Opinion with your Belief that Cheaper Labor and Loans No one forced Banks to make is what caused the downfall of the construction industry trades
take a class on reading comprehension. cheap labor had no part in the housing collapse and no one is saying it did. the accessibility of illegal immigrant labor contributed to both the falling construction wages and the unemployment of millions of american workers, but it was the demand for increased home ownership and the necessary loosened lending requirements that led to the housing market's collapse. that demand was made at the federal level, all for the sake of making us feel better about ourselves and garnering a few extra votes at the polls. you're right, the government couldn't make those lenders approve those loans, but it could make life unbearable for those who refused to go along with the plan. look to the success of ge, a giant in the lending industry, for a sample of the perks of going with the flow. its profits barely felt a bump as the nation reeled and its chairman finds himself at bambam's elbow, a favored position that enables him to secure even greater benefits for g.e. and for himself. blame the banks all you want, they most certainly deserve it, but reserve some of that scorn for the masterminds of our economy's demise.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
take a class on reading comprehension. cheap labor had no part in the housing collapse and no one is saying it did. the accessibility of illegal immigrant labor contributed to both the falling construction wages and the unemployment of millions of american workers, but it was the demand for increased home ownership and the necessary loosened lending requirements that led to the housing market's collapse. that demand was made at the federal level, all for the sake of making us feel better about ourselves and garnering a few extra votes at the polls. you're right, the government couldn't make those lenders approve those loans, but it could make life unbearable for those who refused to go along with the plan. look to the success of ge, a giant in the lending industry, for a sample of the perks of going with the flow. its profits barely felt a bump as the nation reeled and its chairman finds himself at bambam's elbow, a favored position that enables him to secure even greater benefits for g.e. and for himself. blame the banks all you want, they most certainly deserve it, but reserve some of that scorn for the masterminds of our economy's demise.
Loosened Loans are the Direct result of a Free market working Unhindered by regulations to rein them In
I want you to think of that next time you call for Small Goverment ala Ron Paul the Turtle fucking anarchist
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Loosened Loans are the Direct result of a Free market working Unhindered by regulations to rein them In
I want you to think of that next time you call for Small Goverment ala Ron Paul the Turtle fucking anarchist
get a clue, buy a vowel, do whatever it takes to garner some small inkling of what a free marketplace really is. once the state begins making demands of it, expanded home ownership in this case, it ceases to be free. it is under the control of the state and those demands. its reactions are to those mandates and the people themselves have lost control of it. perhaps you should look up the definition of anarchism so you don't seem such a dolt in the future.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
get a clue, buy a vowel, do whatever it takes to garner some small inkling of what a free marketplace really is. once the state begins making demands of it, expanded home ownership in this case, it ceases to be free. it is under the control of the state and those demands. its reactions are to those mandates and the people themselves have lost control of it. perhaps you should look up the definition of anarchism so you don't seem such a dolt in the future.
No one forced banks to Underwrite any loans
Get it?
No of course you dont.
Banks saw an opportunity to make money and they did.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member

WillyBagseed

Active Member
So, a company that takes local taxpayer money to build its terminal and then instead of hiring those same tax paying locals attempts to hire low wage earners and then settles on out of town workers should not get those very same locals pissed off?

Please, take my money to build your shit and I won't mind if you hire people from out of town instead of me............. right....

damn straight a run on sentence.
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
Willyßagseed;6246244 said:
So, a company that takes local taxpayer money to build its terminal and then instead of hiring those same tax paying locals attempts to hire low wage earners and then settles on out of town workers should not get those very same locals pissed off?
making excuses for union thuggery seems to be a full time job. while i'm by no means "in the know" concerning this affair, this isn't a matter of hiring out-of-towners. they contracted with a company that uses the operating engineer's union instead of the longshoremen and the poor idiots are getting pissy about it. of course there is an advantage in it for the port, but i'm sure they aren't making any killing. that the longshoremen have priced themselves out of the job is entirely the fault of the union bosses who demanded a bit too much in hard times. they thought they had a lock on the port and now find they aren't the only game in town.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
YOu mean the Longshoremen that have had a pay freeze for several years and contribute more into their benefits than they did before?
Those guys?
 

dukeanthony

New Member
Labor activists insist that after receiving tax breaks and promising to create well-paying jobs at the new $200 million terminal, EGT initially tried to staff the terminal with nonunion workers. Following a series of protests by the Longshore workers this year, the company announced it would hire a contractor staffed by workers from a different union.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
8 September 2011: The ITF has condemned the detention yesterday of ILWU (International Longshore and Warehouse Union) president Bob McEllrath while attending a protest in Vancouver, Washington, USA. He and other ILWU members were defending the job rights of workers at a new grain export terminal at the port of Longview, whose owners, EGT, appear to be trying to ignore the 80 year history of ILWU membership at the port by recruiting non-ILWU members – in defiance, the ILWU believes, of its contract with the port.
Bob McEllrath was then released in the face of protests from his fellow dockers, among reported threats from the ‘authorities that the army would be brought in next time’.
ITF general secretary David Cockroft commented:“Bob was detained for standing up for the rights of his members. That’s not acceptable in the modern world. We call on the company and all its stakeholders to halt their provocative plans before they take this conflict out of control.”
ITF president Paddy Crumlin said: “EGT are playing with fire, and they know it. They need to take a big step back and think about what they are trying to force through, then see sense and talk to the ILWU about how to resolve this issue before it escalates even further.”
He continued: “The 350,000 plus dockers in the ITF will be watching how the company treats their American colleagues and, if the company makes it necessary, will be ready to take lawful solidarity action in support of the ILWU.”
 

undertheice

Well-Known Member
in the past few years i watched my business cut in half by this economy. many of my long time clients, folks i'd been doing jobs for, both large and small, for years were losing their jobs and, often, their homes. while i could make back some of my momentum by altering my business model a bit, many of these people are still searching for employment in their fields or anything that can pay the bills. these people didn't just have their pay frozen, they had it cut or even eliminated entirely. are we supposed to back the thuggish actions of longshoremen simply because their pay raises were halted at an already inflated rate?

business does not exist to cater to the whims of special interests. it exists to provide goods and services in a manner that is profitable and at least comes close to satisfying the needs of all concerned. considering the history of the longshoremen, one can hardly fault anyone for trying to get out from underneath their thumb. they have abused their nearly unassailable position for years and done so with the full support of the liberal establishment. they have become what they were first conceived to combat and only a fool is blind to that fact. such organizations have ceased to represent the people as a whole, because "the people" are so much more than a union that has essentially monopolized its segment of the marketplace. all of the people have a right to the jobs that such unions consider their private domain. why is it that competition in business is considered such a good thing until we start talking about that part of business that concerns organized labor?
 

Jack Fate

New Member
YOu mean the Longshoremen that have had a pay freeze for several years and contribute more into their benefits than they did before?
Those guys?
Perhaps you can tell us their pay scale and how much they pay for their benefits and what those benefits entail so we can make a judgement to see if their behavior is justified.
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
No one forced banks to Underwrite any loans
Get it?
No of course you dont.
Banks saw an opportunity to make money and they did.

What fucking world are you living in? I guess you don't remember Janet Reno threatening the banks if they didn't do exactly that. Carried on by Eric Holder at this very moment, forcing banks to relax their lending practices and actually collecting settlements and having over 60 banks under investigation for not wanting to lend money to deadbeats.

Sure, the banks ran with it once they knew Fannie and Freddie had their backs, and that is completely their fault. But make no mistake, the boulder was set in motion by Clinton and his good squad. Barney Frank and Dodd are also responsible and should be sitting in a jail cell for their complicity as the evidence was pratically "teabagging" them in the face in 2004. Jesus, you have the memory of a housefly.
 
Top