It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ClintK
reply to post by beezzer
When conservatives can't argue with FACTS, they call the person disseminating them a "nutjob."
Pathetic.
Originally posted by Hemisphere
Originally posted by XEyeHandX
Great post my friend.The masses comlpetely forgot who fought and died for the simple work standards we have now.The unions are not the enemy here.They are fighting for all working class people to keep wages up for everyone.Union wages fall that means all wages fall and holiday pay,40hr work weeks,ot pay will follow.All union haters wake up and realize what your screaming for becoause your just steping on your own toes.Man its amazing how powerfull propaganda is.Read between the lines people.Our working rights are at stake.
Not at all. Just imagine how much money is at stake. Not only do the union employees get their "Cadillac" (that's an Obamanism, not my wording) wages and benefits but the union officials and the politicos are skimming unthinkable amounts off the top. How about that, unions support pro-union candidates. What does the "Cadillac" plan buy the thugs at the top? Blind allegiance by their well payed Roman guard er....... I meant public school teachers when the status quo is questioned. This isn't about losing wages and benefits, this is about losing union dues. And thus the demonstrations in Wisconsin at the slightest suggestion of public employees paying their share. Bringing the vaunted public educational system to a halt. The world didn't end, damn! Let it go on for a couple of months and the unemployed parents in Wisconsin might start home-schooling and further prove what a sham the public educational system is...... You progressive McMansioners should show your dedication to the principals. Do what the Obama's do, don't leave your children in the hands of these union pleebs. Send them to private schools. Get real value for your educational dollars. "The children are our future" don't cha know? I know, then you would be footing the bill. Giving up one of your two "beemers". Only one trip to the islands a year. Wadda piddy! But that's the payoff for the non-union elites that back the public school teachers. You've made public schools into private schools at the expense of everyone. Glorified babysitting.
This is nothing folks. Watch how the cops and firemen react when their time comes. That's already hitting the fan in New Jersey. In recent weeks the newspapers have reported of gang presence and activities in towns where it was "previously unknown". In actuality not unknown just unreported, unadvertised. And it's been there for years, imagine that? We wouldn't want to lay off public servants with that gang threat now would we? Police state coming.
The Star-Ledger is a northern New Jersey newspaper. This from January 28th, 2011:
Gangs have presence in 254 towns, in every county in N.J., survey shows
The gangs have been there for decades. The violence has been there. The newspapers and other media always downplayed that. Why now? Layoffs are imminent and those layoffs will threaten public safety or so we are told. The same progressive pleebs that screamed for the rights of incarcerated gang members now threaten us with "increased" gang violence should there be lay offs of union police. Imagine that!
Originally posted by romanmel
Also, isn't it interesting that all we heard after the November elections was the media saying if they don't extend the tax breaks for the millionares there will be no job creation? Well, they extended them, so where are all those jobs?
Originally posted by ClintK
reply to post by beezzer
Totally idiotic. It stops and puts partisan text commentary after what he's saying. You think this actually means something with reference to the OP?? How??
Originally posted by ClintK
BTW:
"(that's an Obamanism, not my wording)"
I think it IS your wording.
Originally posted by ACTS 2:38
reply to post by NoHierarchy
So democrats do not own companies or stocks, or great expanse of land.
They do not create special interest groups that protect their ideals of life.
I find that hard to believe.
Just look at the power in play now in DC they are doing just as you say in both parties.
Instead of ranting on one side lets get back to basics.
Forced charity though taxation is not charity.
No ONE is guaranteed Health Care through taxation. We have the right to health care but we all do not need to pay for others.
So when you wine about tax cuts they fall on deaf ears here.
In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 38.3% of all privately held stock, 60.6% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top 10% have 80% to 90% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate.
The Wealth Distribution
In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%
... the wealth distribution became even more concentrated between 1983 and 2004, in good part due to the tax cuts for the wealthy and the defeat of labor unions: Of all the new financial wealth created by the American economy in that 21-year-period, fully 42% of it went to the top 1%. A whopping 94% went to the top 20%, which of course means that the bottom 80% received only 6% of all the new financial wealth generated in the United States during the '80s, '90s, and early 2000
Originally posted by ClintK
Back up what you say. I know it feels good to say it, but back it up with FACTS.
According to the report, gangs operate in cities, suburbs and rural areas in 45 percent of the state’s municipalities — up from 43 percent in 2007.
Gang presence and activity has remained relatively static since 2007, according to the report, but officials warned that police resources have dwindled because of the economic recession.
Dave Jones, president of the State Troopers Fraternal Association, said cuts to police departments have made it more difficult to combat gangs and their influence. Gangs have only gotten worse, he said.
"It’s become more visible and more palpable," he said. "This a clear and present danger."
Jersey City has 9 gangs but they haven't been staffed yet. There are no members, just gangs. And yet we get the following quote from David Kennedy, director of the Center for Crime Prevention and Control at John Jay College, and a nationally recognized gang expert:
"It’s one of the best pieces of work like this I’ve ever read. Not only for the depth of the data, but the intelligence with which they thought it through."
Zero gang members spread out among 9 gangs in Jersey City. Great Report! Now they'll just have to wait and see who joins these gangs. Is the Spanish Honors Club at Jersey City High School considered a gang? Just wondering.
"The union didn’t even let us vote on it. We were stuck between a rock and hard place. Now we’re just unemployed," said Zack Vonlagen, 25, who surrendered his gun and shield when he reported for duty. "They shouldn’t have even hired us … You don’t buy a house that you can only afford for eight months."
Alonso Vinueza, 33, another officer who was laid off, believes veteran officers refused pay cuts that would have saved his job. He said he hoped "the senior officers, with their untouched contracts, can live a fruitful life."
Newark hasn’t faced layoffs this large since 1978, when then-Mayor Kenneth Gibson eliminated 200 police jobs and the city suffered a spike in violent crime.
Current Police Director Garry McCarthy reorganized the department’s command structure on Nov. 11 to cope with potential layoffs, and said the reduction in force will not prompt a surge in crime.