NationStates Jolt Archive

***Thread edited to be Mod-Friendly****
The last thread I started was apparently against the rules for several reasons, but it had some pretty decent discussion going, so I have revised my original post... Can I plese make it clear that this is not something that I do, or encourage anyone else to do? If nothing else, Wal-Mart employees might just kill you if you try.
Here goes nothing:

This thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=437845) got me to thinking of a series of workshops at this annual political/environmental/social issues conference thing in my town that I attend. Well, it got me to thinking about one particular workshop I went to two years ago, rather.

This really nice, wholesome looking university aged guy was talking about homelessness in Toronto, I think, and about one building in particular that was not being used by the city but that the homeless kept getting kicked out of...
We got to talking about property rights and all that, and that's when he went off on a tangent about how he steals from Wal-Mart. Like, all the time.
He said that it was quite easy.
He encouraged us to steal from large corporations to make a statement, and to avoid supporting these large corporations with our patronage. It's called political shoplifting, and he is apparently not the only one doing it.

http://www.why-war.com/guides/2003/...hoplifting.html


Private Property: A Lesson in Brainwashing
One must realize that the concept of private property --that a person or corporation has an inalienable right to some object of material value --is one that we are indoctrinated with as children and that is pounded into our skulls (usually with police batons) throughout our lives
[...]
Everything is yours if you take it. That doesn't mean that we advocate you just steal whatever you want from whomever you want, but the fact remains true; private property is simply a mindset, protected by a violent and coercive state and exploited by the wealthiest members of our society. Even Disney Corporation could not deny the honour of Sir Robin Hood, who 'stole from the rich to give to the poor.' The key to political shoplifting, then, is to make sure that you are always stealing from those who can afford to be stolen from.Not Looking Sketchy
The most important subject to remember from school when liberating stuff you need is psychology. You can get away with amazing things simply by being psychologically aware of your surroundings. If you look like you are supposed to be doing whatever you are doing, the majority of people will assume the same. It is entirely possible to walk into a store with a clipboard in hand, and walk out with a crate of food for your friends, with a courteous nod to the cashier on the way out. Clipboards, like cell phones, for whatever reason are extremely disarming. Wear a collared shirt, a My Name Is____ badge and carry a clip board and you'd be amazed at what you can get away with. When you liberate items from large corporations, or when you make things for yourself instead of buying them, you are simultaneously becoming more self-sufficient, and taking economic direct action against your oppressors.What do you all think?

*****I IN NO WAY SUPPORT THE THEFT OF SALE GOODS FROM MAJOR CORPORATIONS*****

There's a difference between civil disobendience, and breaking the law. When you cross that line, I think your "statement" is lost. "Political" shoplifting is still shoplifting.

Yes. Interesting.

I too, do not support the theft of goods from major corporations.

There's a difference between civil disobendience, and breaking the law. When you cross that line, I think your "statement" is lost. "Political" shoplifting is still shoplifting.
I thought the use of disclaimers was quite thoughtful.

Edit* But with a little monkeying, it could read 'I IN NO WAY SUPPORT THE sale OF goods thieved by MAJOR CORPORATIONS' and be just as valid.

I'm reporting this thread too because that link promotes shoplifting.

Sorry for being such a hard-ass. That's just the way I am.

There's a difference between civil disobendience, and breaking the law. When you cross that line, I think your "statement" is lost. "Political" shoplifting is still shoplifting.Someone mentioned Rosa Parks in the last thread...
It could be argued (though never by me) that breaking a law is a valid form of protest.

Stop apologizing.

Stop apologizing.

If you think that was an apology... it was more a half hearted one.

I'm reporting this thread too because that link promotes shoplifting.

Sorry for being such a hard-ass. That's just the way I am.The link does not encourage other people to shoplift. It describes the motives and methods of political shoplifters.

If you think that was an apology... it was more a half hearted one.
Subtlety is obviously a dying art. In some quarters.

The link does not encourage other people to shoplift. It describes the motives and methods of political shoplifters.

I feel as it violates rules and has been reported again. I'll wait for a ruling.

Distortion at its most distorted! I do not have an 'inalienable right' to having private property.I agree with you, as did the paragraph that you were quoting.

I'll leave it at I worked for my private propertyThe thinking is that huge corporations did not work for their "property"; they instead exploited the people who did work to make the material goods they sell.

If you did not work for it them society has deemed that you do not deserve to have it. This is because someone else labored to create material things (the same for services, but this is beyond the scope of the quote). The way to compensate that person, or those people, that put work in to a given thing is to give them something of equal worth.And the workers who make many of the goods sold in our society today were not properly compensated for their hard work. They were taken advantage of by a system that suffers when we steal from Wal-Mart.

I don't want to get screwed over when I produce something, so I won't screw over anyone else that produces something.Good for you. Large corporations do screw people over, unfortunatly.

The theory behind Robin Hood stealing from the rich and giving to the poor was that the rich stole the money from the poor to begin with through unjustifiable taxes. Remember that it was a fairy tale from a time when feudalism was at its worst. The difference between Robin Hood stealing tax money and you stealing a candy bar from Wal-Mart is that Wal-Mart has never stolen anything from you.But Wal-Mart has stolen from the poor. Robin Hood did not steal from the rich because they had stolen from him. Whether Wal-Mart has stolen from me is debatable, but I won't go into that here. Wal-Mart steals. Unfair wages (both for the factory workers who make its products and for its staff) are a form of theft, to my mind. In the words of the great Evil Arch Conservative: "This is because someone else labored to create material things (the same for services, but this is beyond the scope of the quote). The way to compensate that person, or those people, that put work in to a given thing is to give them something of equal worth". I get paid minimum wage. It is not of equal worth to my time. Theft, right?

Remember, those products Wal-Mart steals come from somewhere. Usually from eastern Asia. When you steal, you're taking advantage of every person that worked on that product in a factory and every person that helped ship it to your local Wal-Mart.No, Wal-Mart takes advantage of them.

I feel as it violates rules and has been reported again. I'll wait for a ruling.Were you the little boy who told your mommy on everyone? :p

There's a difference between civil disobendience, and breaking the law. When you cross that line, I think your "statement" is lost. "Political" shoplifting is still shoplifting.
Well, in fact, civil disobedience involves breaking a law, or it wouldn't be civil disobedience. But I get the point I think you're trying to make.

Civil disobedience involves breaking an unjust law in order to force political change or awareness. It's usually done in the form of sit-ins, or involves trespassing, chaining one's self to trees, etc. But for it to really be civil disobedience, it must be in protest to something.

Theft is not civil disobedience, no matter how much you try to argue that property is theft. It's not protest against a law, even if you're trying to protest the business practices of a particular company. If you want to protest Wal-Mart's business practices, and you want to get arrested to make some noise about it, go picket the headquarters in Bentonville, AR. The cops there will oblige you.

Everyone who knows me here knows my stand on Wal-Mart. I think they and the companies who follow their business model are plagues on the global economy, especially on the people who tend to shop there the most. But you can't justify shoplifting and hide behind the rubric of civil disobedience.

Were you the little boy who told your mommy on everyone? :p

No, I'm just a law and order man.

Were you the little boy who told your mommy on everyone? :p
Careful, or he'll report you for (saying)that, too :rolleyes:

Someone mentioned Rosa Parks in the last thread...
It could be argued (though never by me) that breaking a law is a valid form of protest.

I understand during the civil rights movement refusing to give up one's place in a public area, because it was discrimination against one's ethnicity. This isn't comparable. Theft harms others, even if indirectly, and most certaintly it will if done on a large scale as this article would have. That's hardly a way to effectively get a message across. No, I don't see that being effectively argued in this case.

*snip*
Yeah, you got it in one.

No, I'm just a law and order man.
You know, it's too easy. It's just too easy.

I'm walking away from this one. Somebody, anybody - the ball, the court, the racket - the whole shebang - is yours.

*sighs in the atmosphere of total absence of fun Mesatecala graces each and every thread he "participates" in*

Someone mentioned Rosa Parks in the last thread...
It could be argued (though never by me) that breaking a law is a valid form of protest.
There are plenty of times where breaking the law is a valid form of protest--but the law has to be unjust in the first place, and you have to be willing to take the consequences of breaking the law.

For instance, what Rosa Parks did was certainly justified. The laws against labor organization at the end of the 19th century adn the beginning of the 20th were unjust, and the people who broke them were certainly justified. The people who protested the Vietnam War and who refused to be inducted into the armed services were justified in their positions. Protesting outside "free speech zones" at polticial rallies is most definitely justified. And I could list many other examples.

The key is that you have to be willing to face the consequences of your actions when you get busted. MLK and all the civil rights leaders did. Lots of draft protestors went to jail, more than went to Canada. Protestors go to jail all the time. It's called putting your money where your mouth is.

The key is that you have to be willing to face the consequences of your actions when you get busted. MLK and all the civil rights leaders did. Lots of draft protestors went to jail, more than went to Canada. Protestors go to jail all the time. It's called putting your money where your mouth is.In cases where all you want to do is have your voice heard, then getting arrested furthers your cause. This is a different matter altogether, and some people think that a different sort of civil disobedience is in order. This is more along the lines of vandalizing weapons, like those two American Nuns and the missile silo http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/072703J.shtml. Trying to stop injustice by causing financial harm to large corporations could be viewed (but never by me) as a valid form of civil disobedience for the purpose of enacting social change.

Theft is theft. After all, if the property is not intrinsically important, you'd not take it. And shoplifters throw the stuff away, right? (The hypocrisy in covering for the crime is amazing.)

And of course, stealing does two things. It raises prices for people who PAY for the stuff and quite often gets workers fired for failing to prevent the losses. So, by all means, screw the corporations -- it just screws the community you profess to be fighting for.

POWER TO THE STEALERS!

Theft is theft. After all, if the property is not intrinsically important, you'd not take it.Some property is important. Like, say, food.

And shoplifters throw the stuff away, right? (The hypocrisy in covering for the crime is amazing.)I don't understand what you mean.

And of course, stealing does two things. It raises prices for people who PAY for the stuff and quite often gets workers fired for failing to prevent the losses. So, by all means, screw the corporations -- it just screws the community you profess to be fighting for.I did not notice that the author of the article mentioned that he was fight for his own community. I think he was fighting against large corporations in general.

The thing is, also, stealing or law-breaking is a method of last resort. This political stealing seems merely a rationalization for those who have a desire to steal anyway.
There are more effective and less costly ways to fight. Help get the right people elected. Organize boycots. Promote fair competition legislation. Speak out. Contribute time and/or money to organizations who promote small businesses. Start a small business. The list goes on.

Also, this kind of activity tends to turn off many who would otherwise be sympathetic, so it is more harmful to any kind of anti-corporate movement than beneficial.

In cases where all you want to do is have your voice heard, then getting arrested furthers your cause. This is a different matter altogether, and some people think that a different sort of civil disobedience is in order. This is more along the lines of vandalizing weapons, like those two American Nuns and the missile silo http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/072703J.shtml. Trying to stop injustice by causing financial harm to large corporations could be viewed (but never by me) as a valid form of civil disobedience for the purpose of enacting social change.
No, it can't. Civil disobedience is by its very nature public protest. Stealing merchandise from a store, no matter the motive, is not public, not unless you make a big scene about it while you're walking out the door. Taking the merchandise without making a public statement defeats the point of the protest--there is no protest without statement.

If they want to do financial harm to a corporation as a form of civil disobedience, then maybe they could organize a shutdown of Wal-Mart's distribution facilities by cloggin up the roads or by chaining themselves to the gates. But it has to be public--otherwise, it's just petty theft.

So what if I go to MacDonald's and buy only the plain burgers that they lose (23 cents per) money on? What if I encourage everyone I know to do the same? What if it catches on? What if MacDonald's were to go bankrupt because of it?

Is that theft? Shoplifting? Sweet vengeance?

Or would I even notice while I read my newspaper and sip my coffee?

I'm reporting this thread too because that link promotes shoplifting.

Sorry for being such a hard-ass. That's just the way I am.

Lets us not forget that you yourself in the last thread advocated illegal activity.

http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9439527&postcount=23

Theft is not civil disobedience, no matter how much you try to argue that property is theft.

In some cases it is civil disobedience: I forget exactly which environmentallist organisation it was which staged a mass shop-lift of illegally felled and imported South American hardwoods from the DIY superstores in Britain and then handed all of the wood in to police stations whilst confessing both that they had shoplifted it and also that they had reason to believe it had been imported illegally.

So what if I go to MacDonald's and buy only the plain burgers that they lose (23 cents per) money on? What if I encourage everyone I know to do the same? What if it catches on? What if MacDonald's were to go bankrupt because of it?

Is that theft? Shoplifting? Sweet vengeance?

Or would I even notice while I read my newspaper and sip my coffee?
It's a pretty good plan, especially if you give the burgers to homeless people. :D

It's certainly not theft, and if I remember correctly, they lose even more money on the Happy Meals.

So what if I go to MacDonald's and buy only the plain burgers that they lose (23 cents per) money on? What if I encourage everyone I know to do the same? What if it catches on? What if MacDonald's were to go bankrupt because of it?

Is that theft? Shoplifting? Sweet vengeance?

Or would I even notice while I read my newspaper and sip my coffee?
no, they would just raise the price of a hamburger by 30cents and make a profit.

these guys are just justifying their own theft. its not in any way an effective political statement to steal from walmart.

no one HEARS the protest since they dont tell anyone. there is no end benefit to society.

it will change nothing.

all it does is keep money in the pocket of the thief. they are sleazy shoplifters dressing up their crimes in political clothing

Spending a summer filing lots and lots of arrest reports about shoplifting, I can say that going before a judge and saying you're doing this as political protest isn't going to impress him or her.

Besides, companies would fire workers or raise prices to compensate for losses, scews out more people than it helps.

If you REALLY have a problem with a company, don't shop there.

No, it can't. Civil disobedience is by its very nature public protest. Stealing merchandise from a store, no matter the motive, is not public, not unless you make a big scene about it while you're walking out the door. Taking the merchandise without making a public statement defeats the point of the protest--there is no protest without statement.I think that that is the form it most usually takes, but this could also be seen as a valid form of civil disobedience.


civil disobedience, refusal to obey a law or follow a policy believed to be unjust. Practitioners of civil disobediance basing their actions on moral right and usually employ the nonviolent technique of passive resistance in order to bring wider attention to the injustice. Risking punishment, such as violent retaliatory acts or imprisonment, they attempt to bring about changes in the law. In the modern era, civil disobedience has been used in such events as street demonstrations, marches, the occupying of buildings, and strikes and other forms of economic resistance.source (http://www.answers.com/civil+disobedience&r=67)
These people people refuse to support huge corporations with their business, but in some cases, they need things that can only be found in big box stores (after competition has been squashed). They see refusing to support these stores and at the same time attempting to cause economic losses for the stores as a form of economic resistance.

There's a difference between civil disobendience, and breaking the law.

yes, and it lies entirely with intentions and lack of violence against people.

civil disobedience involves disobeying the law. by definition.

I support this totally. If you need food but can't afford then just fucking take it. It's like those anarchists who went into supermarkets, took shitloads and then gave the food to the poor. W0000t. *stealing stuff skank*

In some cases it is civil disobedience: I forget exactly which environmentallist organisation it was which staged a mass shop-lift of illegally felled and imported South American hardwoods from the DIY superstores in Britain and then handed all of the wood in to police stations whilst confessing both that they had shoplifted it and also that they had reason to believe it had been imported illegally.There have been similar cases where the stealing was still illegal, but the political shoplifters were motivated to steal for the greater good. "In Boston, activists launched a covert campaign where they stole hundreds of books from Barnes and Noble and donated them to local schools." - http://www.why-war.com/guides/2003/11/politicalshoplifting.html

Civil disobedience involves breaking an unjust law in order to force political change or awareness.

so is it your opinion that mlk jr. thought that laws against blocking traffic were unjust laws? or was sitting in the streets just law-breaking on his part?

There have been similar cases where the stealing was still illegal, but the political shoplifters were motivated to steal for the greater good.

The Provos in Holland in the early 60s did much the same thing... wandering around department store dressed as Santa Claus and handing out the toys from the shelves as presents to small children.


I'm also reminded of the SLA kidnapping Patty Hearst and demanding that her ransom be paid in food parcels distributed to the needy of the United States.

Spending a summer filing lots and lots of arrest reports about shoplifting, I can say that going before a judge and saying you're doing this as political protest isn't going to impress him or her.

no loss there, as judges don't seem to find political protests blocking the enterances of military bases training death squads to be very impressive either. or, for that matter, any other form of civil disobedience i've ever heard of. in other words, fuck the judges. we don't do these things to impress them.

Oh yeah, this is really up there with Martin Luther King's conscientous objections. Pure political genius. :rolleyes:

The question to ask is, if everyone did this, would the world be a better place?

Someone in Canada go steal Ms. Lib's computer and monitor. Compared to the homeless, Rich Bitch has no rights to that fucking property, anyway.

if everyone did this, would the world be a better place?

yes

yes
Well, we always knew that you were a whackjob. Have you given away all of your material posessions yet? Uinsg the public library's internet connection now, are we? :p

I used to shoplift for fun. It's kind of a mild thrill, getting away with shit like that. I might have occasionally claimed some kind of political reason for it, but even then I knew it was bullshit. Hopefully these dreadlocked gimps know that deep inside as well.

And the workers who make many of the goods sold in our society today were not properly compensated for their hard work. They were taken advantage of by a system that suffers when we steal from Wal-Mart.

I guess taking advantage of people to prevent them getting taken advantage of is OK with you, but two wrongs do not make a right in my book. How the hell does shoplifting do a DAMN THING about the "system?" Let me think. Oh yeah, it doesn't do jack shit. People have always shoplifted. It's never brought about your communist revolution


Wal-Mart steals. Unfair wages (both for the factory workers who make its products and for its staff) are a form of theft, to my mind.

Hrmm. Taxes are a form of theft, to my mind. Does that mean it's theft? Well - no. Similarly, whatever creative ways you choose to define theft, it doesn't mean "Wal-Mart steals."

How are they unfair wages, by the way? Because someone like you looks on and decides that it's so? If I decide the President's salary is unfair, does that mean I get to say the government is stealing from him? No. They're not unfair because people accept them, it's as simple as that. And unfair or not, it's NOT theft.

I get paid minimum wage. It is not of equal worth to my time. Theft, right?

No. How is getting paid, being stolen from? I think you need to get mugged a few times in the park and then come back and tell me what you think. A raw deal is not theft, it's just a raw deal, and you're not a victim for accepting it, you're an accomplice.

Spending a summer filing lots and lots of arrest reports about shoplifting, I can say that going before a judge and saying you're doing this as political protest isn't going to impress him or her.Did you not read the article (http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/072703J.shtml) about the nuns who vandalized a missile silo? Judges aren't "impressed" enough when 80 year old nuns are vandalizing a missile silo (causing $1000 damage)because they are protesting a war to not put them away for a few years. Civil disobedience is doing something even when you know you'll get shit for it later... Otherwise you're doing what is called being a law-abiding citizen.

If you REALLY have a problem with a company, don't shop there.Some people have no choice.

Originally Posted by Oxwana:
I get paid minimum wage. It is not of equal worth to my time. Theft, right?
If your skills are so poor that you work at a Wal Mart (dear Christ), what makes you think you're so fucking valuable you deserve anything more?

Sounds like you get paid exactly what you should. Maybe less.

Did you not read the article (http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/072703J.shtml) about the nuns who vandalized a missile silo? Judges aren't "impressed" enough when 80 year old nuns are vandalizing a missile silo (causing $1000 damage) to not put them away for a few years. Civil disobedience is doing something even when you know you'll get shit for it later... Otherwise you're doing what is called being a law-abiding citizen.

I think to draw a proper parallel here you should be comparing the acts of the ploughshare activists with actions such as firebombing Wal-Mart property, rather than one where there is a direct financial/physical benefit to those taking part.

If your skills are so poor that you work at a Wal Mart (dear Christ), what makes you think you're so fucking valuable you deserve anything more?So someone who works in retail is of lesser value than you? If you honestly believe that, it's scary.

Sounds like you get paid exactly what you should. Maybe less.I agree. I do get paid less than I should. I deserve a living wage in exchange for my hard work.

I think to draw a proper parallel here you should be comparing the acts of the ploughshare activists with actions such as firebombing Wal-Mart property, rather than one where there is a direct financial/physical benefit to those taking part.So if political shoplifters steal for the express purpose of donating the stolen merchandise to charity, it's ok? Awsome. We are in agreement on that, at least.

So someone who works in retail is of lesser value than you? If you honestly believe that, it's scary.

I agree. I do get paid less than I should. I deserve a living wage in exchange for my hard work.
You're talking about the value of a human life. I'm talking about the value of an individual in the market, and yeah, my skills are obviously worth more because I get paid a lot more. I'm worth a lot to my clients because I perform a service for them that enables them to make a lot of money.
Be afradi, be very afraid. I'm worth a whole lot more in the free market than a retail store employee.

Reality check. You do not do hard work. Retail is pussy work.

What were you doing when you were supposed to be getting an education, and building a solid resume?

Personally, I see nothing wrong with the lower wages of asian laborers as long as they aren't low to them. If they feel they are justly compensated, then they are. That they don't have our standard of living is no excuse.

Reality check. You do not do hard work. Retail is pussy work.I don't work retail. Did I say I worked retail? I have worked in retail, fast food, as a telemarketer, and in construction. Retail was hard. I actually like construction.

What were you doing when you were supposed to be getting an education, and building a solid resume?I'm seventeen. I've been trying to help support my family for a year now, and I'm still in school.
Hoser.

if your time is worth so much more, why don't you save it instead of giving it away?

If you are working for this wage, that money is obviously worth more to you than your time.

if your time is worth so much more, why don't you save it instead of giving it away?

If you are working for this wage, that money is obviously worth more to you than your time.Nope. I would not sell thirty hours a week during the school year if I didn't need to eat.

Nope. I would not sell thirty hours a week during the school year if I didn't need to eat.

Cop-out. Everyone needs to eat, last I checked. Not everyone thinks their time is worth minimum wage, and not everyone agrees to work at that rate.

You agree that it's worth your time, else you would not do it. Period.

Nope. I would not sell thirty hours a week during the school year if I didn't need to eat.
But you do, so your time is obviously worth no more than you are selling it for. You seem to think that your time has an objective level of value, but it doesn't. Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it and another person is willing to sell it for. And as long as you are giving up your time willingly, they are not stealing from you.

I don't work retail. Did I say I worked retail? I have worked in retail, fast food, as a telemarketer, and in construction. Retail was hard. I actually like construction.
Wow, I've done each of these jobs as well, minus fast food, plus gas station work. At 17 that sounds like you haven't stayed at a single position long enough to work yourself beyond minimum wage. But hell, at least you're working. I'll give you that.

I'm seventeen. I've been trying to help support my family for a year now, and I'm still in school.
Hoser.
Hosette, I feel for you, I really do. I was your age once, and it was aggravating making minimum wage. But, over a decade later, do you think it's fair that you should be making as much as I do? I've put 10 years of hard work into my own business, sacrificed pleasure in order to save for that goal, and started getting paid less than minimum wage.

At 17, you shouldn't expect to be a raging success. Instead of bitching about it, I'd suggest that you start laying the foundation for a better future.
It would be really pathetic if, at 25, you were still bitching about your minimum wages. You're only 17, and you haven't worked long enough to provide any real skills that command a higher salary yet.
Also, I'd suggest you stop working for these major multinational corporations that will never pay you what you're worth. Find another employment strategy. Look into business and finances, instead of spending all your time researching on how to throw the capitalist system (you'll wind up as a pathetic loser).

Cop-out. Everyone needs to eat, last I checked. Not everyone thinks their time is worth minimum wage, and not everyone agrees to work at that rate.

You agree that it's worth your time, else you would not do it. Period.It's the best I can do right now. You think anybody works minimum wage by choice?
If I didn't work, I wouldn't eat, and I'd starve (I'd go on welfare first, but that's not exactly a better alternative to working). If I were to die of starvation, I would be losing the rest of my life (how many hours???). I consider losing 30 hours a week to be the best I can do, and certainly better than the 168 hours a week that I'd be losing (unpaid) if I were dead.

It's the best I can do right now. You think anybody works minimum wage by choice?

I find it strange that you think anyone does ANY job except by choice. If I had the choice between doing what I do or making 30 million dollars photographing nude supermodels, I would choose the latter. But my lack of better options doesn't mean I am not doing this by choice.

It's the best I can do right now. You think anybody works minimum wage by choice?
If I didn't work, I wouldn't eat, and I'd starve (I'd go on welfare first, but that's not exactly a better alternative to working). If I were to die of starvation, I would be losing the rest of my life (how many hours???). I consider losing 30 hours a week to be the best I can do, and certainly better than the 168 hours a week that I'd be losing (unpaid) if I were dead.

I know plenty of homeless people with no real income who do not starve. The starving to death thing is, in America, largely a myth. We're so well fed people can and do survive on charity and garbage. It's not good, but it's not as bad as you are saying. And your job does not force this situation on you, nor does your employer, nor does Wal-Mart.

And you're right, its the best you can do right now, but yes it is your choice. There's always a choice. That's the point, slavery and theft involve no choice.

Wow, I've done each of these jobs as well, minus fast food, plus gas station work. At 17 that sounds like you haven't stayed at a single position long enough to work yourself beyond minimum wage. But hell, at least you're working. I'll give you that.Construction was better than minimum wage (twice minimum wage, if you want to get technical), but the work is hard to get. I quit my first job because I had a fez coming, and I got a job closer to home (but paying less). That job was too much, too, so I quit entirely. Then I went on my exchange, and had to quit my next job. Etc, etc.
Telemarketing pays more than minimum wage, but you sell little chunks of your soul along with your time.

Hosette, I feel for you, I really do.Hoserette, I think, but don't quote me on that. And no, you don't.
Capitalist.

I was your age once, and it was aggravating making minimum wage. But, over a decade later, do you think it's fair that you should be making as much as I do?I should be making as much as you. In exchange for the years that you have worked, you have years of paychecks under your belt. Asking to get paid more per hour, too? If you'd been getting a decent living wage to start, why would you ever need more?
I'm a commie. If you want someone who will agree with you on this, look elsewhere. My time is just as valuable as yours.

I've put 10 years of hard work into my own business, sacrificed pleasure in order to save for that goal, and started getting paid less than minimum wage.I'd be fine getting paid minimum wage, or even less, if the minimum wage were set at a decent level. My goal is not to get paid more than everone else.

It would be really pathetic if, at 25, you were still bitching about your minimum wages. You're only 17, and you haven't worked long enough to provide any real skills that command a higher salary yet.
Also, I'd suggest you stop working for these major multinational corporations that will never pay you what you're worth. Find another employment strategy. Look into business and finances, instead of spending all your time researching on how to throw the capitalist system (you'll wind up as a pathetic loser).I'd rather be a pathetic loser in your eyes than turn into a person I can't respect. This is not about how much I get paid. People all over the world need to start getting paid what their time is really worth. Everyone who works hard deserves an equal share of the wealth.

I know plenty of homeless people with no real income who do not starve. The starving to death thing is, in America, largely a myth. We're so well fed people can and do survive on charity and garbage. It's not good, but it's not as bad as you are saying. And your job does not force this situation on you, nor does your employer, nor does Wal-Mart.

And you're right, its the best you can do right now, but yes it is your choice. There's always a choice. That's the point, slavery and theft involve no choice.Technically, there's always a choice. Live or die, that sort of thing.
My biggest issue is not that I'm being stolen from directly, but that large mulitnationals are stealing; taking what doesn't rightfully belong to them.

I'd rather be a pathetic loser in your eyes than turn into a person I can't respect.
You tell 'im Oxwana!

And I'd sooner get banned for being Dobbsworld, warts and all, than turn into some humourless, non-creative, authoritarian-worshipping, proto-fascist poster's idea of what a good NSer is supposed to be.

Up with Losers!

"Shoplifting is a refusal of the exchange economy. It is a denial that people deserve to eat, live, and die based on how effectively they are able to exchange their labour and capital with others.. It is a denial that a monetary value can be ascribed to everything, that having a piece of delicious chocolate in your mouth is worth exactly fifty cents or that an hour of one person's life can really be worth ten dollars more than that of another person." (crimethinc.)

My biggest issue is not that I'm being stolen from directly, but that large mulitnationals are stealing; taking what doesn't rightfully belong to them.

Stealing what? From whom? Which multinationals?

If stealing is the problem, why do you advocate* it yourself? You lose any moral high ground when you justify theft by pointing to another theft, much like when people justify civilian casualties in Iraq by pointing out 9/11.


*Oh ok, I mean why do you almost seem like you want to advocate it, but you don't really, because that's against site rules? ;)

Stealing what? From whom? Which multinationals?

If stealing is the problem, why do you advocate* it yourself? You lose any moral high ground when you justify theft by pointing to another theft, much like when people justify civilian casualties in Iraq by pointing out 9/11.


*Oh ok, I mean why do you almost seem like you want to advocate it, but you don't really, because that's against site rules? ;)I actually don't advocate it. I kind of agree with people who do it. They have a point.
In this case, if I may point out, no one is advocating murder, which is always wrong. Theft is only wrong if you look at it a certain way.
It's nap time now. Debate later.

Construction was better than minimum wage (twice minimum wage, if you want to get technical), but the work is hard to get. I quit my first job because I had a fez coming, and I got a job closer to home (but paying less). That job was too much, too, so I quit entirely. Then I went on my exchange, and had to quit my next job. Etc, etc.
Telemarketing pays more than minimum wage, but you sell little chunks of your soul along with your time.
Well, glad to hear you're acknowledging the fact that you have made choices that have led to your unenviable current predicament. What are you bitching about, then? I've turned down jobs before that I felt were less than admirable. I wasn't fooling myself into thinking I was being forced to make those decisions. I knew I had a choice, and that's why making the right one was admirable to begin with.

Hoserette, I think, but don't quote me on that. And no, you don't.
Capitalist.
Yes, I'm a capitalist. I'd be a great commie too if it had turned out to be a better, more successful system in the real world. But it hasn't.

I should be making as much as you. In exchange for the years that you have worked, you have years of paychecks under your belt. Asking to get paid more per hour, too? If you'd been getting a decent living wage to start, why would you ever need more?
I'm a commie. If you want someone who will agree with you on this, look elsewhere. My time is just as valuable as yours.

First, I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut whether a little girl in Canada (with a computer and internet connection) agrees with me.
By the way, I don't need to ask to get paid higher by the hour. I don't get paid by the hour! I own a business, sweetie. All of the profits are mine. I'm not a trained monkey doing tricks for an hourly wage. :rolleyes:

If I were in your shoes, I would've saved up for a year and came up with a nice little business model to start from that didn't require the "selling of my soul". I probably would've started a small online magazine (like Ad Busters or something) and built it up with lots of hard work and ambition. I could think of a thousand ways to start a business I loved, that I thought was ethically sound (with little capital for start up).
That would be a lot smarter than, say, selling out to Wal-Mart just to buy a little time, and doing nothing else to help the situation.
I did something damn similar, and you could too. It would be a lot more productive to your cause than spending your free time bitching on an internet forum.

I'd rather be a pathetic loser in your eyes than turn into a person I can't respect. This is not about how much I get paid. People all over the world need to start getting paid what their time is really worth. Everyone who works hard deserves an equal share of the wealth.
Hon, at 17 you're a bit too young to qualify as a pathetic loser. You're also a bit too young to qualify as much more than an idealist without a plan in my eyes, though.
I definitely live out my ideology everyday by taking part in a system I believe in, and work politically to improve it. That's the reason I'm worthy of the self-respect I allow myself.
And guess what? I'm rewarded for my efforts with every dollar I acquire for providing the best services possible to my clients!

How is your ideology working for you? Oh, that's right.

Much of this makes, sense and I agree with it, but one must be very careful, as the site says, to avoid stealing from workers. Stealing from universities is also just plain wrong.

"Shoplifting is a refusal of the exchange economy. It is a denial that people deserve to eat, live, and die based on how effectively they are able to exchange their labour and capital with others.. It is a denial that a monetary value can be ascribed to everything, that having a piece of delicious chocolate in your mouth is worth exactly fifty cents or that an hour of one person's life can really be worth ten dollars more than that of another person." (crimethinc.)
shoplifing is declaring that while the rest of the world must work for what they get, from mr wall right down to poor little oxwana, YOU are too good for such things and deserve to be given whatever you want.

why should someone get delicious chocolate for free when so many people worked hard to get it from the farm to the store he stole if from?

would you, oxwana, really be content to steal what you need rather than work for it even when you are paid less than you feel you are worth? i think not, since you already exhibit the self respect and determination of working for what you get at 17 years old.

I posted this in the old thread but that was locked... so I'll repost it again methinks -

Hmmmm... I mean I'm anti-Walmart and anti-Capitalism, but if I or anyone steals from walmart, who hurts? Surely not the fatcat millionares who we really want to damage. It's the people at the store, the "expendables," who are struggling to scrape enough together to survive. Even if prolific enough, the Wal-Mart stealing scheme still won't defeat the fatcats. They will just lower the bottom line - Fire more people, employ more sweatshop workers, cut more corners, as they struggle to stay afloat. Even drawn to it's finality where nearly everyone takes from Wal-Mart, the corporation will cannabalize itself before the target heads fall.

This scheme can only cause suffering to the poorer members of our society affiliated with Wal-Mart. This scheme will never ever suceed in affecting it's targets in any significant way.

But assuming that *somehow* we make it work. Is it even acceptable? I mean, IMHO, indirectly or directly Wal-Mart and other immoral corporations have taken from society through outsourcing, union-breaking, keeping wages low, using overseas child labour, using sweatshops, caring more about earning millions for a select few than anything else, yet what are we if we steal from Wal-Mart? A keystone of the liberal side of things is a glorious rejection of the Hammurabi's code idea of an eye for an eye. We would be no better than a criminal corporation by commiting crimes on that corporation. In any struggle we must hold the high ground. I mean if it comes to a choice between those who steal from the top-down(Wal-Mart) and those who steal from the bottom-up(political shoplifters), in the finality of things it's just a choice between two theives.

In this Socialist's opinion, this scheme is a bad idea, and not something I could support.

So As a Gay man you've never broken California penel code 286?


No, I'm just a law and order man.

to agree further with Kroisistan..

how does it help the poor to drive walmart out of business? then everything they buy costs significantly more than it does now so they can buy less of the necessities of life.

What are you going to do with the burgers?

So what if I go to MacDonald's and buy only the plain burgers that they lose (23 cents per) money on? What if I encourage everyone I know to do the same? What if it catches on? What if MacDonald's were to go bankrupt because of it?

Is that theft? Shoplifting? Sweet vengeance?

Or would I even notice while I read my newspaper and sip my coffee?

What are you going to do with the burgers?
I'd recommend shellacking them and using them as hockey pucks, or perhaps as targets at a skeet-shoot tournament.

So As a Gay man you've never broken California penel code 286?

You should wake up.

All sodomy laws were overturned by a supreme court decision.

Construction was better than minimum wage (twice minimum wage, if you want to get technical), but the work is hard to get.

I have no idea what kind of construction work a 17 year old girl can get. Unless your boss is doing something insanely illegal like working the heavy gear, you can't be doing more than clean up and paper work. Are you even allowed to drive the truck to get materials?

I quit my first job because I had a fez coming, and I got a job closer to home (but paying less). That job was too much, too, so I quit entirely. Then I went on my exchange, and had to quit my next job. Etc, etc.
Telemarketing pays more than minimum wage, but you sell little chunks of your soul along with your time.

So, you chose to leave your jobs. And, I'll bet you agreed to the wage you'd be paid.

Hoserette, I think, but don't quote me on that.

you get the 'er when you become an adult.

And no, you don't.

Really, because he seemed to be able to equate all of your experiences.

Capitalist.

Its not a dirty word. In fact, its a synonim for realist.

I should be making as much as you.

Bullshit, There are those of us on this board with more education, experience, skills and real life accomplishments than you. Decades more. Our time is worth more because we will accomplish more with it.

You can't do my job. I've already done your jobs. Infact, I can walk into a random crowd of people and pick a total stranger. Odds are, that person will be able to do those jobs as well.

Someday, you will probably make what I do and then you'll realize how much more hard work and knowledge is worth per hour. Although, you'll know its a good job and career when you count your money per year.

In exchange for the years that you have worked, you have years of paychecks under your belt.

And? Thats the idea.

Asking to get paid more per hour, too? If you'd been getting a decent living wage to start, why would you ever need more?

Because, we want better than minimum. A decent living wage should provide a shirt on your back, a roof over your head and food on your table. Everything after that is a bonus.

You get all that materialistic crap when you prove yourself a more useful member of the economy.
I'm a commie. If you want someone who will agree with you on this, look elsewhere. My time is just as valuable as yours.

I'd be fine getting paid minimum wage, or even less,

Not in a few years with more experience and knowledge you won't.

if the minimum wage were set at a decent level.

If you have a roof over your head, food on the table, and a shirt on your back, it is sufficient. A trip to Tahiti is not a human right.

My goal is not to get paid more than everone else.

Neither is mine. I want a job I am good at and enjoy that pays me a reasonable wage that lets me provide a comfortable lifestyle for myself and the family that may someday be in my future.

To get these things, I can't settle for minimum wage. Not because I can't live on it, but because I do want some nice material possesions. I do want to take a nice vacation. I do want my kids to go to the better schools.

I'd rather be a pathetic loser in your eyes than turn into a person I can't respect.

How's that telemarketing job going?

This is not about how much I get paid.

Then stop bringing it up.

People all over the world need to start getting paid what their time is really worth.

Who says that isn't the case now? Market determines value. Its subjective.

Everyone who works hard deserves an equal share of the wealth.

Not true.

My mom went to college, got her degree and has decades of experience as an engineer.

My dad has worked his ass off his entire life in construction. I have all the respect in the world for him, but thats all he brings to the economy. He is tremendously skilled, but in just that one area.

My mom is an engineer, and accomplished sales person and a bussiness woman(she runs the family bussiness).

She makes a lot more than him. He understands it is because her knowledge and experieence are in greater demand.

Thats why they sent me, my brothers and my sister to college and kicked our asses to work hard there. They want to make sure our time is worth more than the majority of people out there.

Yes, I'm a capitalist. I'd be a great commie too if it had turned out to be a better, more successful system in the real world. But it hasn't.You would be a horrible communist, because you think that you are better than other people.

First, I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut whether a little girl in Canada (with a computer and internet connection) agrees with me.That curse rocks my socks.

By the way, I don't need to ask to get paid higher by the hour. I don't get paid by the hour! I own a business, sweetie. All of the profits are mine. I'm not a trained monkey doing tricks for an hourly wage. :rolleyes: You are getting paid more per hour, you are just not getting an hourly wage.

If I were in your shoes, I would've saved up for a year and came up with a nice little business model to start from that didn't require the "selling of my soul". I probably would've started a small online magazine (like Ad Busters or something) and built it up with lots of hard work and ambition. I could think of a thousand ways to start a business I loved, that I thought was ethically sound (with little capital for start up).I saved up and sent myself to Spain to learn my third language. My mother can't pay for my education, and my father won't. So which is more important, oh Great Capitalist Oracle? Education or starting up my own buisness that is magically sure to suceed?

That would be a lot smarter than, say, selling out to Wal-Mart just to buy a little time, and doing nothing else to help the situation.
I did something damn similar, and you could too. It would be a lot more productive to your cause than spending your free time bitching on an internet forum.During the year, I go to school full time, volunteer in my community, and work my ass off. This is my summer. Sod off.

Hon, at 17 you're a bit too young to qualify as a pathetic loser. You're also a bit too young to qualify as much more than an idealist without a plan in my eyes, though.I have no plan? Thanks for reading my mind and informing me of that fact.
Here I was thinking that I did have one.

I definitely live out my ideology everyday by taking part in a system I believe in, and work politically to improve it. That's the reason I'm worthy of the self-respect I allow myself.
And guess what? I'm rewarded for my efforts with every dollar I acquire for providing the best services possible to my clients!Congratulations.

How is your ideology working for you? Oh, that's right.Dude, I'm 17. How sucessful am I supposed to be?

Much of this makes, sense and I agree with it, but one must be very careful, as the site says, to avoid stealing from workers. Stealing from universities is also just plain wrong.Agreed. And Universities have to pass extra expense directly on to poor students. So, especially if you happen to be a poor student, bad idea.

"I have no idea what kind of construction work a 17 year old girl can get. Unless your boss is doing something insanely illegal like working the heavy gear, you can't be doing more than clean up and paper work. Are you even allowed to drive the truck to get materials?"
I was making roofing trusses in a manufacturing plant.

"So, you chose to leave your jobs. And, I'll bet you agreed to the wage you'd be paid."
Each time I got a job, I sent out resumes, called back a thousand times... And each time I got a grand total of one interview. There was no choice involved.

"you get the 'er when you become an adult."
I wasn't referring to myself, which you'd know if you had any reading comprehension skills to speak of.
Hoser.

"Really, because he seemed to be able to equate all of your experiences."
She. Did you not read her post either?

"Its not a dirty word. In fact, its a synonim for realist."
It's not a dirty word to capitalists. It's a dirty word to me. Whether it is or is not a "dirty word" is completely subjective. Any statements that you make as to the positive or negative connotations of the word are completely meaningless.

"Bullshit, There are those of us on this board with more education, experience, skills and real life accomplishments than you. Decades more. Our time is worth more because we will accomplish more with it."
Um, no.
Hard work=hard work.

"You can't do my job. I've already done your jobs. Infact, I can walk into a random crowd of people and pick a total stranger. Odds are, that person will be able to do those jobs as well."
The only question is, are you willing to do it?

"Someday, you will probably make what I do and then you'll realize how much more hard work and knowledge is worth per hour. Although, you'll know its a good job and career when you count your money per year."
If I make more than a decent living wage, I will donate the rest to charity. Hopefull by the time it is even an issue, we will all be paid exually for our hard work.

"And? Thats the idea."
So we agree on something, finally? You reward for years of hard work? Having been paid for all your hard work. If you are getting a living wage, you should own property by the time you're old. Then you have more to spend on other things. Awsome concept, eh?

"Because, we want better than minimum. A decent living wage should provide a shirt on your back, a roof over your head and food on your table. Everything after that is a bonus."
I want what everyone else has. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
We should all be equally well off. Is that really so hard to understand?
A decent living wage should afford you a decent life. Life is not good when you can't afford a little extra.

"You get all that materialistic crap when you prove yourself a more useful member of the economy."
So those of us who are disabled, or ill, or somehow unable to work, they should do without? Or should we just burn them and get them out of the way? :eek:

"If you have a roof over your head, food on the table, and a shirt on your back, it is sufficient. A trip to Tahiti is not a human right."
It's called relative poverty. Not being abole to afford things that are the norm in your society is painful. I'm not talking about trips to Tahiti. I'm talking about not being able to afford birthday presents or your child's school trips.

"Neither is mine."
Yes, it is. You want to make more than minimum wage when there are millions of people in your country working their asses off for just that.

"To get these things, I can't settle for minimum wage. Not because I can't live on it, but because I do want some nice material possesions. I do want to take a nice vacation. I do want my kids to go to the better schools."
Do you not see how wrong it is that the wealthy kids get educations that will let them be wealthy later in life, and the poor kids have to work twice as hard (and be ten times as lucky) just to accomplish the same?

"How's that telemarketing job going?"
I never lost respect for myself when I was a telemarketer. If you wish to imply that telemarketing is not a respectable job, then you are wrong. It's not a bad job, but it's hard as hell, and people like you treated me like shit all day while I was at work, getting paid $8 an hour. No, I did not lose respect for myself. I lost respect for people like you who looked down on me for what I was doing to make a living.

"Then stop bringing it up."
I'm trying, believe me, I'm trying. I mentioned my own work once, as a minor point in a post, and you all singled that out as one weak point in my arguement. I have been trying to rebut your outrageous statements since.

"Thats why they sent me, my brothers and my sister to college and kicked our asses to work hard there. They want to make sure our time is worth more than the majority of people out there."
Just remember that any "sucess" that you have later in life will be due in large part to luck that you were born into a wealthy family, and not your own merit.

"
I was making roofing trusses in a manufacturing plant.

You call that construction? Are you serious? My dad worked construction for 50 years and raised the rest of us on it. Sweetheart, what you did does not come within a country mile of construction work.

Each time I got a job, I sent out resumes, called back a thousand times... And each time I got a grand total of one interview. There was no choice involved.

You could have stayed at the old job or waited longer.


I wasn't referring to myself, which you'd know if you had any reading comprehension skills to speak of.

Or if you knew how to type.

Hoser.

I'm an American. Hoser, to my knowledge, is a deragotry term for Candians. Of course, I could be wrong.


She. Did you not read her post either?

Ya, including the part where she did everything but fast food.


It's not a dirty word to capitalists. It's a dirty word to me. Whether it is or is not a "dirty word" is completely subjective. Any statements that you make as to the positive or negative connotations of the word are completely meaningless.

Not true.

The n-word may be totally meaningless to a person. Say it in the South Bronx or Harlem, you can damn well be sure another person's connotation of it will mean something.

Um, no.
Hard work=hard work.

No it doesn't. Some work is just more valuable. Society deems that my physician does more important work than I do. I agre.

Without me (LAN admin), your email doesn't get through. Without him, YOU DIE!


The only question is, are you willing to do it?

Do your job? I grew up doing actual construction. I worked through highschool and college doing retail.

Find someone who can do your job? No problem.

If I make more than a decent living wage, I will donate the rest to charity.

Uh-huh. You say that now.

Hopefull by the time it is even an issue, we will all be paid exually for our hard work.

exually, foodly, whatever, I'm still getting better stuff than you.


So we agree on something, finally? You reward for years of hard work? Having been paid for all your hard work.

But, with the experience and knowledge, my pay goes up.

If you are getting a living wage, you should own property by the time you're old. Then you have more to spend on other things. Awsome concept, eh?

Yes, thats the theory. If you are performing work that is in demand and are good at it, you will make more money and buy nice things.

I want what everyone else has. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

"Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand"- Homer Simpson.

We should all be equally well off.

No. Simply no. I went to college and worked my ass off. I have more knowledge, wisdom and experience than you. As long as there is a roof over your head, clothes on your back and food on your table, you are not in dire straights. I have no obligation to make sure you have an iPod or a new DVD player.

Is that really so hard to understand?

You simply cannot proviude what I can. Why is that so hard to understand?

A decent living wage should afford you a decent life. Life is not good when you can't afford a little extra.

Are you that materialistic? Thats a pretty shitty communist.

So those of us who are disabled, or ill, or somehow unable to work, they should do without? Or should we just burn them and get them out of the way? :eek:

They have bigger problems than what kind of car they drive, now don't they?

And when did I advocate such barbarism? I merely stated society puts a dollar value on experience and knowledge and usefulness.

I have no problem those that can't help themselves. That doesn't mean I think everyone is economic equals.

It's called relative poverty.

Thats not actual poverty. Let me know when you hit that.

Not being abole to afford things that are the norm in your society is painful. I'm not talking about trips to Tahiti. I'm talking about not being able to afford birthday presents or your child's school trips.

That stuff is nice, but its not vital.

Its painful for ugly people in society. Should we make all the beautiful people walk around in masks to even things out?

How about the great speakers or funny people? Are they to be muzzled?

How about the physically gifted? Lets make them walk around with weights so they can't make the rest of us feel bad by running fast or jumping high.


Yes, it is. You want to make more than minimum wage when there are millions of people in your country working their asses off for just that.

And? Its not my fault. I am doing them no harm by making more than minimum wage.


Do you not see how wrong it is that the wealthy kids get educations that will let them be wealthy later in life, and the poor kids have to work twice as hard (and be ten times as lucky) just to accomplish the same?

And? Life is full of challenges. I grew up in a blue collar family and we all did fine. In fact, its made me and my siblings more determined and harder workers than some trust fund kids (not that all trust fund kids don't work hard).


I never lost respect for myself when I was a telemarketer. If you wish to imply that telemarketing is not a respectable job, then you are wrong. It's not a bad job, but it's hard as hell, and people like you treated me like shit all day while I was at work, getting paid $8 an hour. No, I did not lose respect for myself. I lost respect for people like you who looked down on me for what I was doing to make a living.

You said it costs you a piece of your soul. I'm not looking down on you.


I'm trying, believe me, I'm trying. I mentioned my own work once, as a minor point in a post, and you all singled that out as one weak point in my arguement. I have been trying to rebut your outrageous statements since.

By outrageous, do you mean logical?


Just remember that any "sucess" that you have later in life will be due in large part to luck that you were born into a wealthy family, and not your own merit.

I wasn't born into a wealthy family. Fiancially comfortable....most of the time, but not wealthy.

My parents immigrated here without two dimes between them. They worked their asses off to climb the ladder. By the time my sister and two older brothers had gotten into college, my folks just barely scraped together enough money to start the bussiness.

Then, when my dad's partner booked and left him hanging, we all had to chip in to not go bankrupt.

My dad had his full time construction job. My mom had her engineering job plus night school. The five kids were all in school full time, plus my older brothers and sister were all working and trying to maintain their scholarships.

Then, we get the added fun of trying to keep a contractor bussiness afloat.


I was lucky to be born into a loving and supportive family that taught me the value of hard work. I won't even try to deny that. But to imply I'm getting where I am because I was born into money is pretty damn insulting to a man who has busted his ass his whole life.

-snip-

I'm sensing a lot of anger from you. Do you need to get laid or something?

I said that this wasn't about me, or where I work. You keep going on (and on) about things that don't matter... You killed my thread, may it rest in piece. You know that, right?
Fun sucker.

But prior to the Supreme Court decision you were a law abiding citizen and therefore celibant ?

You should wake up.

All sodomy laws were overturned by a supreme court decision.

Do you go to Karl Marx Regional High School? Hard work is not all equal one hour of a brain surgeons time is one hell of a lot more valuable that that of Billy the burger flipper. You nor anybody else is entitled to JACK blind criplled crazy you free pass. Steven Hawkins has a job. Louise Braille was Blind ...goddamn Helen Keller even had a job no excuses not for anybody, the miniscule percentage truely can't work only they should be taken care of.
If you want more than minium wage get a better education and earn more money.



"I have no idea what kind of construction work a 17 year old girl can get. Unless your boss is doing something insanely illegal like working the heavy gear, you can't be doing more than clean up and paper work. Are you even allowed to drive the truck to get materials?"
I was making roofing trusses in a manufacturing plant.

"So, you chose to leave your jobs. And, I'll bet you agreed to the wage you'd be paid."
Each time I got a job, I sent out resumes, called back a thousand times... And each time I got a grand total of one interview. There was no choice involved.

"you get the 'er when you become an adult."
I wasn't referring to myself, which you'd know if you had any reading comprehension skills to speak of.
Hoser.

"Really, because he seemed to be able to equate all of your experiences."
She. Did you not read her post either?

"Its not a dirty word. In fact, its a synonim for realist."
It's not a dirty word to capitalists. It's a dirty word to me. Whether it is or is not a "dirty word" is completely subjective. Any statements that you make as to the positive or negative connotations of the word are completely meaningless.

"Bullshit, There are those of us on this board with more education, experience, skills and real life accomplishments than you. Decades more. Our time is worth more because we will accomplish more with it."
Um, no.
Hard work=hard work.

"You can't do my job. I've already done your jobs. Infact, I can walk into a random crowd of people and pick a total stranger. Odds are, that person will be able to do those jobs as well."
The only question is, are you willing to do it?

"Someday, you will probably make what I do and then you'll realize how much more hard work and knowledge is worth per hour. Although, you'll know its a good job and career when you count your money per year."
If I make more than a decent living wage, I will donate the rest to charity. Hopefull by the time it is even an issue, we will all be paid exually for our hard work.

"And? Thats the idea."
So we agree on something, finally? You reward for years of hard work? Having been paid for all your hard work. If you are getting a living wage, you should own property by the time you're old. Then you have more to spend on other things. Awsome concept, eh?

"Because, we want better than minimum. A decent living wage should provide a shirt on your back, a roof over your head and food on your table. Everything after that is a bonus."
I want what everyone else has. Why is that so hard for you to understand?
We should all be equally well off. Is that really so hard to understand?
A decent living wage should afford you a decent life. Life is not good when you can't afford a little extra.

"You get all that materialistic crap when you prove yourself a more useful member of the economy."
So those of us who are disabled, or ill, or somehow unable to work, they should do without? Or should we just burn them and get them out of the way? :eek:

"If you have a roof over your head, food on the table, and a shirt on your back, it is sufficient. A trip to Tahiti is not a human right."
It's called relative poverty. Not being abole to afford things that are the norm in your society is painful. I'm not talking about trips to Tahiti. I'm talking about not being able to afford birthday presents or your child's school trips.

"Neither is mine."
Yes, it is. You want to make more than minimum wage when there are millions of people in your country working their asses off for just that.

"To get these things, I can't settle for minimum wage. Not because I can't live on it, but because I do want some nice material possesions. I do want to take a nice vacation. I do want my kids to go to the better schools."
Do you not see how wrong it is that the wealthy kids get educations that will let them be wealthy later in life, and the poor kids have to work twice as hard (and be ten times as lucky) just to accomplish the same?

"How's that telemarketing job going?"
I never lost respect for myself when I was a telemarketer. If you wish to imply that telemarketing is not a respectable job, then you are wrong. It's not a bad job, but it's hard as hell, and people like you treated me like shit all day while I was at work, getting paid $8 an hour. No, I did not lose respect for myself. I lost respect for people like you who looked down on me for what I was doing to make a living.

"Then stop bringing it up."
I'm trying, believe me, I'm trying. I mentioned my own work once, as a minor point in a post, and you all singled that out as one weak point in my arguement. I have been trying to rebut your outrageous statements since.

"Thats why they sent me, my brothers and my sister to college and kicked our asses to work hard there. They want to make sure our time is worth more than the majority of people out there."
Just remember that any "sucess" that you have later in life will be due in large part to luck that you were born into a wealthy family, and not your own merit.

Oxy, you're a commie, I'm a capitalist. There's no seeing eye to eye.
I stick by my original point though, that shoplifting is hardly gonna bring on the revolution you desire. If anything, it hurts the people you're trying to help.

"Really, because he seemed to be able to equate all of your experiences."
She. Did you not read her post either?
I'm a he.

I stand with G.K. chesterton on this one. Vulgar thiefes (it doesn´t matter if you are stealing a stereo from a car to sell it for dope or stealing from a supermarket to make a political statement) were never a threat to tga capitalist sistem. Thiefes, blue-collar ones or readers of saint-simon and other neo-marxist crap, always respected the capitalist way of life and private property. They believe that private property is a value to cherish; they simply feel that they have a much more righteous claim to some asset that they covet and is in someone else´s hands. So, even if you´re stealing in the name of a higher political purpose, you are still a capitalist at heart, because you respect private property so much that you don´t seek to destroy it, to nullify the concept, but simply to change the proprietor.

Have you given away all of your material posessions yet? Uinsg the public library's internet connection now, are we? :p

irrelevant.

got an argument on why it wouldn't be beneficial for everybody to punish criminal capitalists by taking away their ill-gotten goods? most people are down with governments punishing criminal normal people by taking away their's. consider it a form of diffuse sanctions.

irrelevant.

got an argument on why it wouldn't be beneficial for everybody to punish criminal capitalists by taking away their ill-gotten goods? most people are down with governments punishing criminal normal people by taking away their's. consider it a form of diffuse sanctions.
Steaming crock. Why would I have an argument against punishing criminals, who use force or fraud to obtain capital?

I think you know me better than that by now, FS. Talk about irrelevancy. :rolleyes:

irrelevant.

got an argument on why it wouldn't be beneficial for everybody to punish criminal capitalists by taking away their ill-gotten goods? most people are down with governments punishing criminal normal people by taking away their's. consider it a form of diffuse sanctions.


Thats precisely what happens. Anything you gain as a result of a crime gets taken away from you.

Its happening to the Enron and Tycho execs that are being prosecuting right now.

One guy gets 20 to life plus a $20 million fine and he has to pay bacl all the money as is still open to civil lawsuites. And he cut a deal. I can't imagine whats happening to the guys that go to the juries.

You're right. I'm just some teenager that doesn't know her elbow from her asshole.

Thats all you really need to say. And no, I'm not angry. You're just some kid who doesn't know a damned thing.

You talk about your big ideas and how you will give away your extra money, but look in the mirror and see if that person believes you.