Scott Walker

[Nightshade]

...just beat the recall in Wisconsin.

Discuss.

[CDN_Merlin]

His body wasn't recalled for defects? Well, hopefully it doesn't break down on him. That would really piss him off I'm sure. I mean a politician with a healthy body? Hmm, who would of thunk it.

[Krom]

As a Wisconsin resident, I'm glad that is over with.

[Tunnelcat]

As a Wisconsin resident, I'm glad that is over with.

Maybe not. Slimy politicians have a way of leaving a stink trail.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/s ... se-9423213

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2 ... upporters/

[CUDA]

all politicians are slimey. or are you just calling him slimey because he's from the GOP? or is it because he went after the unions??

[callmeslick]

As a Wisconsin resident, I'm glad that is over with.

I'll bet....that had to be TV ad torture.

[woodchip]

One good thing, I suspect the public sector thug union leadership won't be living quite as high off the hog as they used to.

[Krom]

I don't watch TV, but the damn robot calls from the republican party just wouldn't stop. Next time a real person from Walkers campaign calls, I'll tell them where to put all that out of state money they got: I'll tell them to pack it in an armored car and then shove the whole thing up Walkers ass sideways.

[Tunnelcat]

all politicians are slimey. or are you just calling him slimey because he's from the GOP? or is it because he went after the unions??

I think he's slimier and more evil than usual, even for a GOP politician. Probably because he's really a tea party flunkie, NOT a Republican.

One good thing, I suspect the public sector thug union leadership won't be living quite as high off the hog as they used to.

Yea, now the corporate thugs get to control things and influence elections, and they have far more money to do so. I hope people like working for less with no benefits, in both the public AND private sector.

I don't watch TV, but the damn robot calls from the republican party just wouldn't stop. Next time a real person from Walkers campaign calls, I'll tell them where to put all that out of state money they got.

I don't know why these guys do robo calls. They piss me off so much that whoever does the most robo calling to MY house, I just vote against out of principle.

[Spidey]

They tried to recall a governor for policy reasons, not some kind of misconduct or some such…I think there is a lesson to be learned in there somewhere.

[woodchip]

I don't watch TV, but the damn robot calls from the republican party just wouldn't stop. Next time a real person from Walkers campaign calls, I'll tell them where to put all that out of state money they got: I'll tell them to pack it in an armored car and then shove the whole thing up Walkers ass sideways.

And the Dems had no out of state money either I suppose...nor any robo calls

[woodchip]

One good thing, I suspect the public sector thug union leadership won't be living quite as high off the hog as they used to.

Yea, now the corporate thugs get to control things and influence elections, and they have far more money to do so. I hope people like working for less with no benefits, in both the public AND private sector.

At least the corporate thugs hire people.

[Tunnelcat]

I don't watch TV, but the damn robot calls from the republican party just wouldn't stop. Next time a real person from Walkers campaign calls, I'll tell them where to put all that out of state money they got: I'll tell them to pack it in an armored car and then shove the whole thing up Walkers ass sideways.

And the Dems had no out of state money either I suppose...nor any robo calls

Thus, more votes for the Dems by the virtue that they pissed off less people.

At least the corporate thugs hire people.

So does the government, when the Republicans aren't out there tearing it apart and underfunding it.

Corporate thugs have no conscience either. They worship only profit and loss, and a worker is just another expendable tool that's used to get those profits.

Here's some statistics for you.

The top 400 people own MORE wealth than the bottom half, 150 million, of Americans.

The top 1% owns 40% of all the wealth in the U.S.

The bottom 60% own less than 2% of all the wealth in the U.S.

And passing RTW laws does not always mean more people will get "good jobs", as Mr. Romney asserts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fac ... _blog.html

[roid]

Here's some statistics for you.

The top 400 people own MORE wealth than the bottom half, 150 million, of Americans.

The top 1% owns 40% of all the wealth in the U.S.

The bottom 60% own less than 2% of all the wealth in the U.S.

i've never really heard anyone speak out about this, so i'm gonna...
It bothers me that people think these statistics are meaningful.
There are often/always extreme outliers in any dataset that leave the others in the dust, it's just the way math is. It doesn't really mean anything.
I mean... think about it. Of course a small top certain percentage of the upper extreme is going to be the equivalent of a certain large percentage of the lowest extreme - that's kindof how math works, no? I'm sure it makes for wonderful headlines full of sensational sensations, but only if you don't get statistics.

I mean take this as an example: How much power does the president of USA wield compared to the rest of the population? Is that ok? yes? no? Is it really that scary? Things seem to work out. It's just a thing.
Another example: What percentage of the world's cocaine do the top 10 producers produce? Is this actually causing a big problem? or is it just a thing.
Another example: How hot is the hottest chilli pepper compared to the weakest?

Big numbers arn't scary just coz they're big numbers. They have to mean something becides "omg this big number is looming over me, what if it falls on me".
The Occupy Movement was about more than just big numbers, it was about golden handshakes, a lack of repurcussions, etc. Big numbers were a part of it - but ★■◆●, i wouldn't have cared if that's all it was.

I guess i'm sayin... don't just machine-gun some abstract points out as if they alone make an argument. There's more to it than that.

[Krom]

And the Dems had no out of state money either I suppose...nor any robo calls

Well, the Democrats did call, ONCE, and only once.

The Republicans called every day, sometimes more than once, and they kept it up for over a month even after we repeatedly told them to remove us from the call list. (Actually as far as I know that kind of behavior is considered harassment and is illegal in this state. But of course we all know the political parties and their cronies are above the law anyway; so I guess filing charges would be pointless even if I had the money to burn.)

[Tunnelcat]

Here's some statistics for you.

The top 400 people own MORE wealth than the bottom half, 150 million, of Americans.

The top 1% owns 40% of all the wealth in the U.S.

The bottom 60% own less than 2% of all the wealth in the U.S.

i've never really heard anyone speak out about this, so i'm gonna...
It bothers me that people think these statistics are meaningful.
There are often/always extreme outliers in any dataset that leave the others in the dust, it's just the way math is. It doesn't really mean anything.
I mean... think about it. Of course a small top certain percentage of the upper extreme is going to be the equivalent of a certain large percentage of the lowest extreme - that's kindof how math works, no? I'm sure it makes for wonderful headlines full of sensational sensations, but only if you don't get statistics.

I mean take this as an example: How much power does the president of USA wield compared to the rest of the population? Is that ok? yes? no? Is it really that scary? Things seem to work out. It's just a thing.
Another example: What percentage of the world's cocaine do the top 10 producers produce? Is this actually causing a big problem? or is it just a thing.
Another example: How hot is the hottest chilli pepper compared to the weakest?

Big numbers arn't scary just coz they're big numbers. They have to mean something becides "omg this big number is looming over me, what if it falls on me".
The Occupy Movement was about more than just big numbers, it was about golden handshakes, a lack of repurcussions, etc. Big numbers were a part of it - but ****, i wouldn't have cared if that's all it was.

I guess i'm sayin... don't just machine-gun some abstract points out as if they alone make an argument. There's more to it than that.

Sorry roid. I don't have any better of way to show that the wealthy are getting wealthier, and the vast majority are getting poorer and poorer, and there are now MORE of them. Wages are down and most jobs don't offer any benefits anymore. It's a stark contrast from several decades ago, when we had a strong middle class in the U.S. and most people had funded retirement pensions, good health coverage (both medical and dental) and decent wages and salaries that allowed most to live a comfortable life and even own a home. Now, it's starting to look like a pipe dream for most. I see what we once had slipping away rapidly because everyone is acting in their own self interests and taking what they can when they can. That includes unions, and corporate CEO's alike. No one want's to work as a community anymore. We're all either on one side or the other of the political divide, and we can't seem to come to terms.

I've got a personal example for woodchip on his anti-government spiel about job creation. My husband's grandmother was in an abusive marriage with a drunk, violent man in the 1930's, during the height of the Depression. She had the courage to get a divorce during a time that NO ONE got a divorce. Back then, women were expected to stay married and tough it out, crappy husband or not. They didn't need to enter the workforce. Women were supposed to be subservient to a husband and fully depend on him for support. The private sector was not hiring, ESPECIALLY WOMEN, either.

Well, she had 2 kids, so she NEEDED the work just to support her kids. So guess who hired her? Not the private sector, who could care less about hiring a women with a puny, worthless English degree, but that big, bad, federal government! She picked up her family, moved to Washington DC and started out in a low wage job writing manuals. She eventually worked her way up to a top manager position, very rare for a women at that time. She and her kids survived because there was a government job that needed filling. The government is NOT the boogeyman that tea partiers and Republicans keep painting it as. If it's broke, which it IS now, FIX IT, so that it works for the people and not the corporations. But don't sit there and blather that our government can't be a job creator because you think it's some anti-capitalist monster that needs to be destroyed!

[flip]

Good post TC!

[woodchip]

Awww TC, Your story is a good one one. So is the story of Khadijah Williams, a girl who underwent more hardships than everyone on this board could ever understand except maybe for Flip. Known as the Homeless Girl :

"As long as she can remember, Khadijah has floated from shelters to motels to armories along the West Coast with her mother. She has attended 12 schools in 12 years; lived out of garbage bags among pimps, prostitutes and drug dealers. Every morning, she upheld her dignity, making sure she didn't smell or look disheveled."

Yet she wound up with a full ride to Harvard and as far as I can tell she didn't get any public funds doing so. Read the full story here:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/20 ... -harvard20

[flip]

Yeah, I lived on the streets for about 9 months, luckily it was in a small town. What I did get was an intense, crash course on human nature. It doesn't take me long to figure someone out Also taught me alot of compassion and empathy for those weaker minded than I.

[Tunnelcat]

Awww TC, Your story is a good one one. So is the story of Khadijah Williams, a girl who underwent more hardships than everyone on this board could ever understand except maybe for Flip. Known as the Homeless Girl :

"As long as she can remember, Khadijah has floated from shelters to motels to armories along the West Coast with her mother. She has attended 12 schools in 12 years; lived out of garbage bags among pimps, prostitutes and drug dealers. Every morning, she upheld her dignity, making sure she didn't smell or look disheveled."

Yet she wound up with a full ride to Harvard and as far as I can tell she didn't get any public funds doing so. Read the full story here:

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/jun/20 ... -harvard20

I heard the story. I wish all kids in her situation could do what she did. She's definitely the exception to the rule however. If all kids had her drive and passion to succeed, we wouldn't have ANY homeless kids, would we? Our country would be a Republican utopia were everyone worked hard at pulling themselves up by their bootstraps when they fell and always succeeded through any adversity. But reality in this world bites, and a society can't function just as bunch of separate individuals. And not everyone has a "family" to fall back on.

The truth is, most people don't care about someone else's abandoned child unless he or she happens to get into the headlines as a sob story. Out of sight, out of mind, or until they commit crimes or get murdered. For every one child who is homeless and makes it out of poverty, crime, homelessness or death, like her, there are hundreds more that fall through the cracks, mostly in large urban areas. We've got homeless kids even in little ol' Corvallis, and most of them are eking out an existence by being panhandlers, thieves, drug dealers and unfortunately, prostitutes. What do we do with these "lazy" ones? We're already abandoning them in the world now, so should we go further to solve the problem and euthanize the lazy ones because they don't have the drive to succeed?

flip, good for you. I'm glad you made it.

[flip]

I am just about ready to hit the streets again . I saw alot of grace in those time TC. There were about 60-70 of us who saw each other at least 3 times a week. Big bon fires in the woods, drunken riots and I saw some unimaginable things happen =/. I was a participant in the narcotics but otherwise an observer. Those buck-teethed inbreds will give you the shirt off your back and some of them deserved their prison sentences I would stay at one place after another until they couldnt feed me anymore, but it was one hell of a learning experience.

[Tunnelcat]

Are you still homeless? How do you access the net all the time?

[flip]

LOL, No, my homelessness started when I was 15, ended right before my 16th. I've been pretty much self-sufficient since then. It was actually a great time in my life I had a lot of fun.

[Tunnelcat]

What happened on your 16th that made you self sufficient?

[flip]

By then I had started working regularly. I always had favor I guess. There has never been one time in my life that if I needed or wanted something, that I didn't get it. I'm like Forest Gump, I want something then simple-mindedly head in that direction and then watch everything unfold just a it needs to By the time I was 16, I had my own house with lights AND water LOL.

[Tunnelcat]

By then I had started working regularly. I always had favor I guess. There has never been one time in my life that if I needed or wanted something, that I didn't get it. I'm like Forest Gump, I want something then simple-mindedly head in that direction and then watch everything unfold just a it needs to By the time I was 16, I had my own house with lights AND water LOL.

But did it have heat?

What kind of job did you stumble into that allowed you to own a house at the age of 16? Hell, I'd just got my driver's license by then and was working at a burger joint in the summer to pay for car expenses. I don't think anyone else would have hired me at better pay doing anything when I was that age!

Here's a little something along the original thread.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ti ... 38674.html

[flip]

No, I didn't buy my first home, I rented and who needs heat during the GA winters . I started framing houses when I was 15. Good pay back then, I'd make $500.00 bucks a house and we could turn one in 3 days. All of them for years were split-levels or ranches that ran about 1500-1800 sq.ft. We could throw a ranch house together with just 4 of us in one day, if we wanted to work 12 hours that day . I had the best job around for years, blew so much money it makes me want to cry now.

[Top Gun]

Hell, I'd be shocked if any owner today would rent to a 16-year-old.

[Tunnelcat]

Yeah, they want all sorts of references and first and last deposits. Rent's almost as high as a mortgage payment in this college town.

[flip]

That's true TG, I've looked back and thought that many times, I imagine I taught the first few a lesson before I learned a few myself . Let's just say the first few times, I didn't get my deposit's back, so I felt like we were even . One time, I actually gave over all my possessions and started over again. There was a family with 2 kids and no place to live. I gave them my washer, dryer, fridge.... just like a dumbass AND didn't advise the landlord he had new tenants LOL.

[Tunnelcat]

Along the lines of Scott Walker and the new Republican Capitalism.

A FEW JOKES

Courtesy of - http://classweb.gmu.edu/sgillesp/Fun/Lightbulb.htm



Q: How many Chicago School economists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: None. If the light bulb needed changing the market would have already done it.

===

Q: How many central bank economists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: Just one -- he holds the lightbulb and the whole earth revolves around him.

===

Q: How many neo-classical economists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: It depends on the wage rate.

===

Q: How many Marxist economists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

A: None. The bulb contains within it the seeds of its own revolution.

===

Q: How many Trotskyites does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: None. Smash it!

And my favorite:

Q: How many Keynesian economists does it take to change a lightbulb?

A: All of them: because then you will generate employment, leading to more consumption, increasing aggregate demand and ending the recession.