Jobless Occutards Going On Strike In Oakland

[Gazpacho]

Ah, of course, there are no jobs (Pssst: Except there are. Don't tell anyone). It was only a few years ago that we had full employment. Perhaps these people should have saved more. At some point, we are responsible for ourselves.

Congrats on your easy choices.

 

[daredelvis]

With all of the vitriol and robo-posting of links originally sourced from right wing blog sites from the likes of VIrus, Brainster and Grizzly Bear, I am reminded of the response to the pre-Iraq invasion protests. They were all sponsored by ANSWER is case you forgot. Well, we all know how that worked out.

I was on the fence about the OWS protesters, but now...

Daredelvis

 

[stokes234]

For some reason I have come to the conclusion that even if these figures were readily available this would still be a waste of my increasingly valuable time.

Anecdote or not, we're a stones' throw from Milwaukee, Wisconsin's biggest unemployment sink, and people can't be arsed to fill the vacancies we currently have. What we need is a movement called "Occupy the Workplace".

Actually, i'm one of those guys who will admit to being wrong (or will at least shut up and go away) if you can show me convincing data from a non-partisan source that proves me to be wrong. I tend to be wary of anecdotes, though.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

Actually, i'm one of those guys who will admit to being wrong (or will at least shut up and go away) if you can show me convincing data from a non-partisan source that proves me to be wrong. I tend to be wary of anecdotes, though.

Cool. Sorry about the snark.

I have no such numbers, just my own observations. While they might not count as data, they seem relevant. If this area is slobbering for jobs, why are we having such a hard time filling the ones we have open? The jobs aren't fantastic, granted, but they'll fill your belly and keep you off of government assistance.

I'm confused by this. You'd think we'd be chasing applicants away with a stick.

 

[TK0001]

Cool. Sorry about the snark.

I have no such numbers, just my own observations. While they might not count as data, they seem relevant. If this area is slobbering for jobs, why are we having such a hard time filling the ones we have open? The jobs aren't fantastic, granted, but they'll fill your belly and keep you off of government assistance.

I'm confused by this. You'd think we'd be chasing applicants away with a stick.

If you could provide better for your family with unemployment checks, would you be so quick to run out and get a job?

 

[daenku32]

A lot of the occupiers are not jobless. They are just tired of seeing their bosses get large bonuses while their pay if frozen and their comrades are getting let go left and right.

They are also tired that the benefits of 'free trade' has had the greatest impact in the profits of corporations and their executive salaries, while the worker wages have stagnated, as they are forced to directly compete with developing nations and their sub-par wages.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

If you could provide better for your family with unemployment checks, would you be so quick to run out and get a job?

Yes.

In Wisconsin, unemployment will make up the difference between what you make at a job and the full amount of unemployment you are entitled to (they call it "partial unemployment"). For example, if you're entitled to $400/week and you get a job for $250/week unemployment will kick in the extra $150 as long as the job is less than forty hours per week. All the jobs open at my current workplace are either part-time or they are full-time, paying more than the maximum unemployment compensation for Wisconsin.

 

[daenku32]

If you could provide better for your family with unemployment checks, would you be so quick to run out and get a job?

Who exactly wins from working, or after reading Howie's example, simply bringing home, less than an unemployment check?

There are no winners, except the rich.

 

[stokes234]

Yes.

In Wisconsin, unemployment will make up the difference between what you make at a job and the full amount of unemployment you are entitled to (they call it "partial unemployment"). For example, if you're entitled to $400/week and you get a job for $250/week unemployment will kick in the extra $150 as long as the job is less than forty hours per week.

It would be nice if people went out and did a 30 hour week for literally no extra money over what they get on benefits, but it strikes me as a bit of a pipe dream. If you took the above calculations and paid them, say, $250 unemployment alongside the $250 they were earning, some people might be motivated.

 

[TK0001]

At the end of the day, I don't feel the OWS movement isn't about people asking for free handouts or menial jobs (begging for tablescraps). It's about people being fed up with a system that is set up for the advancement of the ultrarich.

Maybe someday we'll give actual capitalism a whirl.

 

[timhau]

It would be nice if people went out and did a 30 hour week for literally no extra money over what they get on benefits, but it strikes me as a bit of a pipe dream.

Yeah, if you're going for the immediate benefit. But the 30 hours/week is going to look a lot better on your résumé than a 0-hour week.

 

[stokes234]

Yeah, if you're going for the immediate benefit. But the 30 hours/week is going to look a lot better on your résumé than a 0-hour week.

Good point. But are you saying that you think this will motivate people, or that you think it should motivate people? Because while i'd like to agree on the latter, i'm a bit dubious on the former.

 

[timhau]

It should, but I'm well aware of the fact that it will fail to motivate some -- probably those who most need motivating.

 

[Checkmite]

So how'd that General Strike turn o.....oh %&$@.

(AP)

OAKLAND, Calif. - Occupy Wall Street supporters who staged rallies that shut down the nation's fifth-busiest port during a day of protests condemned on Thursday the demonstrators who clashed with police in the latest flare-up of violence in Oakland, Calif.

Riot police arrested dozens of protesters in the city's downtown, where bands of demonstrators threw chunks of concrete and metal pipes as well as lit roman candles and firebombs, police said. At least four protesters and several officers were injured.

"I think it will allow detractors to criticize the movement," protester Hale Nicholson said.

The protest outside the Port of Oakland, which reopened Thursday, represented an escalation in tactics as a movement that had largely been about marches, rallies and tent camps targeted a major symbol of the nation's commerce.

The violence that followed, however, raised questions about the direction of the movement and whether the clashes, so far mostly isolated in a city with a history of tensions between residents and police, will galvanize protesters or hurt their cause.

Nicholson blamed the violence on a small group of young people just there for violence — "Some kids looking to blow off some steam."

In Los Angeles, a spokesman for the encampment there, said those demonstrators don't represent the movement.

Of course they don't! The No True Occupier argument, I presume.

 

[TruthersLie]

Yes.

In Wisconsin, unemployment will make up the difference between what you make at a job and the full amount of unemployment you are entitled to (they call it "partial unemployment"). For example, if you're entitled to $400/week and you get a job for $250/week unemployment will kick in the extra $150 as long as the job is less than forty hours per week. All the jobs open at my current workplace are either part-time or they are full-time, paying more than the maximum unemployment compensation for Wisconsin.

But it is much easier just to stay on unemployment, make 4 to 6 phone calls a week asking if there are jobs available (which take about 30 minutes a week), turn in the form online and then collect your unemployment for the week.

Much easier, and doesn't require pesky things like actually working for 25 to 30 hours.

 

[JihadJane]

Arbeit Macht Frei.

 

[TruthersLie]

Arbeit Macht Frei.

Unless you have national unemployment insurance... In Finland (IIRC) it used to be 5 years of unemployment... and it was amazing, that about 3 months before it would run out, people would find jobs. Absolutely amazing. And when they reduced it from 5 years, to 4 year there were people stating that the unemployed would be starving because they couldn't find jobs... but golly gee whiz, about 3 months before that would run out (at 4 years) people started finding jobs. Amazing.

Same principle in the US. About a month before unemployment runs out, there is a spike in people finding jobs... go figure.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Shocking scenes in UKland as well:

 

[Muldur]

How do you expect to generate jobs by having rich kids smoke pot and sleep in parks? Only jobs they're providing is overtime for the police.

There's that meme again: "it's just a bunch of rich kids/homeless/etc...ie 'losers', so we dont have to pay attention to what they have to say...

Funny how those questions weren't being asked of the Tea Partiers. They were advocating for their own (twisted) brand of social change and were herlded as being the "voice of the unheard people" and lauded for their participation in the democratic process.

So we have Right Wing protestors = standing up for their rights and Left Wing protestors = pathetic losers who need to go get a job...

Shameless flip flopping on the part of Tea Partitards and Liberaritards.

 

[Muldur]

Not mine.

You're a part of this society, and you openly support the politcal and socio-economic structure (libertarian capitalism) that has brought us to the brink of ruin.

So yes, in part it IS your fault.

Thanks! Have we met?

Face to face? Not that I know of...and am thankful for it. I would not hold myself responsible for knocking a Corporatist shill on his/her ass.

It isn't? So absolutely none of the unemployed are at fault for not having a job?

All or nothing logic trap...haven't seen one of those in awhile...nice try. You know there's a distinction between the group and the individuals within.

That's life. Should a business losing money keep a person employed just to be nice?

You know as well as I do that those businesses weren't chosing between profit and no-profit. They were choosing between profit and MORE profit. At the expense of millions of hard-working US lower and middle class people.

And paying a large chunk of the taxes. I'm working hard to become part of the 1%. How about you?

The solution to slavery is to become a slave holder yourself, is that it?

Thank you for showing your true colors.

Get a job. Work hard. Save. Stop whining.

Had one, worked very hard and did a good job...got fired after a merger/acquisition by another company. What little I managed to save is long gone, as is my UE benefits...thankfully I have parents willing to help me or I'd be on the street.

"Corporatist"? Is that even a word? I have no idea what it means. Also, what is the "establishment"?

You know perfectly well what both words mean.

I'm pretty sure the "powers that be" aren't terribly frightened by a couple dozen hippies and trust fun kiddies camping out in a park.

Then how about the 1000s and 1000s of union workers, vetrans, and other people who have joined them? Are they afraid of them? They should be. The French Aristocracy wasn't afraid of their exploited masses...look what happened to them eventually.