Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

99% Spring: An Anatomy of Destruction


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,280 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 04:07 PM

99% Spring: An Anatomy of Destruction


The establishment left’s weeklong protest training, deemed the 99% Spring or Shareholder Spring, is an effort to train 100,000 activists in civil disobedience to achieve “social and economic justice” from the 1%. The goal of these left-wing activists is to attain their idea of justice through destruction of America’s social fabric by perpetuating social and economic class warfare.

The protesters’ target will be “the shareholder meetings of over forty corporations, including but not limited to Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron.” In order to destroy America’s “unjust” economy, they seek to tarnish the reputations of the very corporations that create jobs Americans need and desperately want.

According to the 99% Spring website, its mission is to stop “the deliberate manipulation of our democracy and our economy by a tiny minority in the 1%, by those who amass ever more wealth and power at our expense.” This is an ironic stated aim; Big Labor sponsors of the 99% Spring such as the United Auto Workers (UAW), AFL-CIO, and Service Employee International Union are creating the very same problems they claim to be solving.

Big Labor contributions to President Obama’s 2008 campaign totaled over $400 million. Yet, UAW President Bob King stoked the class warfare rhetoric in The Detroit News, “You only get what you are willing to accept,” in anticipation of the 99% Spring last week. He goes on, “We have a choice to make: a government that can be bought by the highest bidder or a democracy that is truly of the people, by the people and for the people.”



More
http://www.openmarke...of-destruction/

#2 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,274 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 04:12 PM

That's how the left rolls. Do as we say, not as we do. Unions are no exemption from that statement. If anything, they are the worst when it comes to collusion with govt. for favors.

#3 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,280 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 04:45 PM

I was trying to find something to back this up, any ideas where to look?

How are union leaders able to plead for an American government that cannot be bought by the highest bidder when Big Labor outspends corporate America every election cycle? When Big Labor is currently putting on a nationwide political grassroots protest, costing millions, to influence the upcoming election? But if corporations perform these activities, they are manipulating our democracy and economy against our will.

#4 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,274 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 04:51 PM

http://www.huffingto..._n_1293173.html Unions Gearing Up To Spend Big In 2012 Elections WASHINGTON — Unions are gearing up to spend more than $400 million to help re-elect President Barack Obama and lift Democrats this election year in a fight for labor's survival. :lol: (yes, labor is dependent on unions...) Under siege in state legislatures around the country – and fearing the consequences of a Republican in the White House – union leaders say they have little choice as they try to beat back GOP efforts to curb collective bargaining rights or limit their ability to collect dues........... Scanlon's union was the biggest overall spender in the 2010 midterm elections, doling out about $93 million to help state and federal candidates, mostly Democrats. This year, AFSCME is expected to spend at least $100 million or more on political action, including television advertising, phone banks and member canvassing. The effort is to help the president, Democrats running for the House and Senate, gubernatorial candidates and key state lawmakers. With increased spending planned by other labor groups, including the powerful Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO, unions are likely to top the $400 million they spent to help elect Obama four years ago.

#5 Feck

Feck
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,546 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 04:55 PM

not sure of this source http://www.opensecre...g/orgs/list.php


the sidewalk kids have set up shop outside my window. nice peaceful polite bunch, getting lots of foot traffic, maybe evenmore than in the park. people stopping to listen to discuss things with them, no yelling or threats.



i think they could use some baby wipes though.

#6 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,280 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 05:10 PM

Wow, that OpenSecrets link is a real eye opener

#7 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,274 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 05:14 PM

3 American Fedn of State, County & Municipal Employees $47,350,548 92% 1%
Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image




What a shocker. The group livin' off the gubmint teat gave back to the govt. ranking 3rd off the dollars confiscated by the govt. to supply the means to pay state/federal/municipal wages.

The ironing is so delicious, I can not even begin....

#8 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,274 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 05:18 PM

The top 20 donors were mostly large unions and they gave massive amounts to the democrat party members. I guess this whole "corporations are buying our elections" is a bit of a smoke screen and mirrors situation. Probably, as par for the course, to distract from the true culprits. The unions.

#9 Tabbooma

Tabbooma
  • VibeTribe
  • 23,220 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:37 PM

I dont see the point, the unions represent millions of people's interests and well being, the washington group represents 1.4 million people alone so why wouldnt they donate to the democratic party that traditionally backs labor union with pro union legislation, the republican goal has been for decades to drive down wages. Not sure what schools you went to or what your jobs are but I know a lot of people that work as example in construction and are in unions and they barelly get by, why shouldnt they have healh insurance, a pension and decent pay, because they did not go to school or work in an office? 3.3 billion dollars was spent last year by lobbyists, where did that money come from and to whom did it go to? it went to both parties obviously for favor. Not sure why you all have so much animosity against labor unions, are they perfect? no they are not, but they do help a whole lot of people to get a semi decent wage. Tabbooma has spoken. ;)

#10 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,274 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:44 PM

Well, it's a long story, Tabbooma. In the private sector, I am pro-union. In the public sector I am "abolish the unions".

#11 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 21,278 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 09:46 PM

Corruption within Unions has tarnished their rep.

#12 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,280 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 11:47 PM

I've said this before, I come from a union family, my dad was president of the local IBEW here for years, I helped start a union and was on the Exec Board of it. I've also belonged to a couple of other unions including this one http://www.huffingto..._n_1374941.html Public sector unions, especially in Boston are great if you're in them but honestly they're brutal for everyone else who end up paying for their wages and benefits. And yes, the corruption is real and even inside the union itself, it's all about knowing the right people or you can get hung out to dry.

In one union I was getting 6 weeks vacation a year, another 15 paid sick days along with 3-5 personal days a year, time and a half for holidays and there'd be days where I wouldn't even show up to work and got paid, never mind all the partying we did on the clock. All on the taxpayers dime.

It's great if you're in with the in crowd but the vast majority aren't.

I'm really looking forward to seeing how that Wahlberg project plays out

#13 Tabbooma

Tabbooma
  • VibeTribe
  • 23,220 posts

Posted 14 April 2012 - 12:24 AM

My Family were and are union Iron Workers for the last 60 plus years, I was a union Iron Worker for 10 years. 20 years ago I would agree with the corruption in the larger cities and yes there was a lot of nepotism, unfortunatley there is coruption in all walks of life.. Corporations in this country are clean? To climb the corporate ladder is not being in the "in crowd", it sure the hell is, Tabbooma see's it everyday. The guys I worked with while Iron Working were professionals trying to make a living, not sitting around partying on the tax payers dime.. Not sure what union you were in but that would not fly today nor with me or my old associates

#14 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 21,278 posts

Posted 14 April 2012 - 01:08 AM

Still lots of slackers in many Unions that get afforded protections based on the "bargaining unit," reaping benefits and continued employment they do not merit based on work habits.
Perhaps in some cases this is indicative of poor union stewardship and company management. Too bad that large groups all too often seem to end up with an element of corruption in their midst.

#15 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 14 April 2012 - 05:59 PM

I was in the union, and I was part of the asshole crowd. I even started my own union of assholes and they kicked me out for being too much of one! That's why unions are unfair. wah.

I don't need the union to be an asshole.

#16 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,280 posts

Posted 14 April 2012 - 06:58 PM

My Family were and are union Iron Workers for the last 60 plus years, I was a union Iron Worker for 10 years. 20 years ago I would agree with the corruption in the larger cities and yes there was a lot of nepotism, unfortunatley there is coruption in all walks of life.. Corporations in this country are clean? To climb the corporate ladder is not being in the "in crowd", it sure the hell is, Tabbooma see's it everyday. The guys I worked with while Iron Working were professionals trying to make a living, not sitting around partying on the tax payers dime.. Not sure what union you were in but that would not fly today nor with me or my old associates

I'm not saying all unions are bad/corrupt but public unions which contain, I believe, only about 7% of the working population, take from everyone that pays taxes. The money they collect in dues from those taxes, is then used to back the Democratic party which in turn raises all our taxes to pay for more union perks and the cycle continues. It's good for the 7% in the union and for the Democratic party but for everyone else it's a drain on funds that could be put to better use on projects that benefit more taxpayers.

#17 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 14 April 2012 - 08:10 PM

You're lying again.

Unions are funded by dues collected from its members. They do not receive a dime from the US Treasury (and therefore, are not using taxpayers dollars the way you claim).

#18 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 14 April 2012 - 08:16 PM

I'm not saying all unions are bad/corrupt but public unions which contain, I believe, only about 7% of the working population, take from everyone that pays taxes. The money they collect in dues from those taxes, is then used to back the Democratic party which in turn raises all our taxes to pay for more union perks and the cycle continues. It's good for the 7% in the union and for the Democratic party but for everyone else it's a drain on funds that could be put to better use on projects that benefit more taxpayers.


Either you're lying, or just really confused. What you said above doesn't even make sense in its present form.

Unions collecting dues from taxes?? Wait --- What??

#19 Tabbooma

Tabbooma
  • VibeTribe
  • 23,220 posts

Posted 14 April 2012 - 11:55 PM

Okay, Tabbooma see's your point, they are public employees paid by tax payers, is the 7% all municipal workers or only federal workers, municipal would be paid by local tax payers and federal by us all, but this is their pay and how can you tell people what to do with their pay? (Softball tossed to Joker). I do have a problem with my local Fire Fighter Union complaining that they should still recieve 28 paid sick days a year and not the 12 days being proposed in the new contract, not sure who would use 28 days, but on the other hand what if you were really sick, for example Tabbooma's kidney problems, there is no way Tabbooma could be a fireman right now and handle the physical stuff, I have been in pain for 4 months now and Tabbooma is no pussy, he can deal with pain to a point\. So in Tabbooma's case he would not get paid, or have to go out on comp... Tabbbooma needs to look into it furthur.

I'm not saying all unions are bad/corrupt but public unions which contain, I believe, only about 7% of the working population, take from everyone that pays taxes. The money they collect in dues from those taxes, is then used to back the Democratic party which in turn raises all our taxes to pay for more union perks and the cycle continues. It's good for the 7% in the union and for the Democratic party but for everyone else it's a drain on funds that could be put to better use on projects that benefit more taxpayers.



#20 PeaceFrog

PeaceFrog
  • VibeTribe
  • 8,284 posts
  • LocationWhisky a Go Go

Posted 15 April 2012 - 12:13 AM

oh he's trying to say the unions take taxpayer money because it is taxpayers who pay the public employees?

that's wrong. Once the money is assigned to payroll, it is no longer tax dollars. That money belongs to the employee who worked for it, not the taxpayer.

your argument is like saying the water from your faucet is the same as what you flush down the toilet... not quite.

#21 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 21,278 posts

Posted 15 April 2012 - 12:19 AM

You might want to read again.

#22 Tabbooma

Tabbooma
  • VibeTribe
  • 23,220 posts

Posted 15 April 2012 - 12:28 AM

Tabbooma cannot speak for Joker :)

#23 Joker

Joker
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,280 posts

Posted 15 April 2012 - 01:46 PM

Well you really can't tell people what to do with their pay (unless, of course, you're Obama ;) )

It's a tough call. I believe some services like firefighters do deserve certain benefits that others don't get. But, at least around here, if one union gets something then all unions try to get the same thing in their contracts at the next bargaining session. I know when we were negotiating that was what we did and it was pretty successful because the city could just raise taxes in order to raise the additional revenue to cover it or ask the state for more help and then they could raise taxes on a statewide level, then they could then go to the government for more aid and they could do the same.

Now it might be different in smaller towns but in the big cities it's all about keeping the political machine in place, that's one of the reasons most public employees vote Democrat, they know who butters their bread.


I found this, it doesn't seem to differentiate between municipal and federal workers other than the part I bolded about "local government"



UNION MEMBERS -- 2011



In 2011, the union membership rate--the percent of wage and salary workers who
were members of a union--was 11.8 percent, essentially unchanged from 11.9
percent in 2010, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The number
of wage and salary workers belonging to unions, at 14.8 million, also showed
little movement over the year. In 1983, the first year for which comparable union
data are available, the union membership rate was 20.1 percent and there were
17.7 million union workers.

The data on union membership were collected as part of the Current Population
Survey (CPS), a monthly sample survey of about 60,000 households that obtains
information on employment and unemployment among the nation's civilian
noninstitutional population age 16 and over. For more information, see the
Technical Note.

Highlights from the 2011 data:

--Public-sector workers had a union membership rate (37.0 percent) more
than five times higher than that of private-sector workers (6.9
percent). (See table 3.)

--Workers in education, training, and library occupations had the
highest unionization rate, at 36.8 percent, while the lowest rate
occurred in sales and related occupations (3.0 percent). (See
table 3.)

--Black workers were more likely to be union members than were white,
Asian, or Hispanic workers. (See table 1.)

--Among states, New York continued to have the highest union membership
rate (24.1 percent) and North Carolina again had the lowest rate
(2.9 percent). (See table 5.)

Industry and Occupation of Union Members

In 2011, 7.6 million employees in the public sector belonged to a
union, compared with 7.2 million union workers in the private sector.
The union membership rate for public-sector workers (37.0 percent) was
substantially higher than the rate for private-sector workers (6.9
percent). Within the public sector, local government workers had the
highest union membership rate, 43.2 percent. This group includes
workers in heavily unionized occupations, such as teachers, police
officers, and firefighters.
Private-sector industries with high
unionization rates included transportation and utilities (21.1
percent) and construction (14.0 percent), while low unionization rates
occurred in agriculture and related industries (1.4 percent) and in
financial activities (1.6 percent). (See table 3.)


More
http://www.bls.gov/n.../union2.nr0.htm

#24 syd_25

syd_25
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,016 posts
  • LocationNorthwest Ct

Posted 16 April 2012 - 12:30 PM

I do have a problem with my local Fire Fighter Union complaining that they should still recieve 28 paid sick days a year and not the 12 days being proposed in the new contract, not sure who would use 28 days...


If you're refering to the town I think, they are arguing against it being retro active back to 2010 not the decrease in paid sick days going forward.

#25 Tabbooma

Tabbooma
  • VibeTribe
  • 23,220 posts

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:05 PM

That blows.. Gonna look into it tonight. Thanks

If you're refering to the town I think, they are arguing against it being retro active back to 2010 not the decrease in paid sick days going forward.