Occupy "The Hood" Not A Joke

but I'm comfortable

reply to post by Chance321


Hell Im not even that. By the time I pay my employees, fuel, trucks, office space, benefits and every thing else I bring home less than my office lady. Sometimes I wonder why I even do it. But im single and live alone so I dont need much.

reply to post by ga-`tv-gi


I hear you, believe me, I do. But I should clarify, my deffinition of comfortable is having enough money to put some back in my savings just incase life takes another down turn and treat myself to a movie from time to time.

One part of my family businesses ( no I dont work there full time. Its in another state and I do the headhunting, hiring and firing) is a sort of "home improvement" and repair plus installation of security systems. We do background and criminal checks on every single one. When home owners or other business open their doors to a business they have hired to perform a job they expect that we have screened out rapists, thieves, etc that have full access to their homes and families.. or their business/goods. No, I will never be put into the position of being sued into oblivion or having your family harmed by my employee by not checking the history of any potential employee. If youre okay with sex offenders and armed robbers being in your home casing the place while installing something or repairing something, thats completely up to you if you wish to put your family in harms way. As far as the construction side of the business, I dont mind hiring ex cons. Most deserve a second chance, but not at the risk of someone else's safety or property. Having the sense to discern a proper position for a felon and giving him a chance wont be putting anyone in direct danger in certain job situations.

Some of you obviously have no business sense, know nothing of liability and seem more concerned with being PC rather than preventing tragedies concerning the people paying you for your services. What you are suggesting is letting the fox in the henhouse because that poor fox has to eat too.. even knowing the potential of the fox given its past hen eating behavior. Not to mention, when you make bad decisions you alone are responsible and accountable for those bad choices. Perhaps choose not to commit felonies.

reply to post by ANOK


Remember the people your defending had the choice to not be a criminal. So a bad choice on their part means a private employer needs to bend over to accommodate them? We should all be held accountable for our actions, and if that means hard to find employment then perhaps it's a life's lesson learned.

Originally posted by ga-`tv-gi
Paid for what?

Their crime.

They've done their time in a system you pay for, that supposedly rehabilitated the criminal, and was sufficiently satisfied they were safe enough to enter back into society.

If that system is not working correctly then who is to blame? Who should suffer the consequences of incompetent authority? The easy person to blame, and continue punishing, is the offender.

Prison turns people into lifelong criminals because they can't find work.

Most crime is causes by inequality, desperation, poverty etc. All results of a system whereby a minority group gets unhealthily wealthy at the expense of everyone else. That minority of capitalist 'owners' are the real criminals.

reply to post by ANOK


Actually, the idea of rehab has all but been rejected. Almost all justifications for incarceration deal with the fact that it is punishment. Unless a person wants to reform themselves no govt institution will do that.

And you must be kidding when you say most crime is committed out of poverty, desperation, etc. While the poor may commit a disproportionate amount of crime, they are not committing it because they are poor except maybe in some very general sense. Most crime is committed because the person has an intention to commit a crime. Assaults and batteries have nothing to do with poverty, murder has nothing to do with poverty, drug charges dont come about because the person is poor and has decided well im poor I should use drugs, if anything they should say I dont have the money I shouldnt do drugs. The only thing you can even relate to poverty or desperation is theft and you cant tell me that even 30% of theft is to get food to feed your family. It is done to get fancy things that they cant afford but feel they deserve

reply to post by ANOK

Sorry about that A I read it wrong the first time I under stand they've payed their debt to society. I speak from my own prospective Im not speaking for all small business owners. I just can afford the liability of having some one go off half cocked or get pulled over or god forbid they kill someone then the blame will be put on me by letting that person in one of my trucks or in the position. The nature of my job is and can be a little confrontational at times so someone with a AA, DUI or drug charge will just make my employ's lives more stressful or difficult to perform or to stay in business all together.

Originally posted by onfire49
And you must be kidding when you say most crime is committed out of poverty, desperation, etc.

Why do you think the projects have more crime than a fancy neighborhood? Better class of people?
Or do they just have the resources to hide their crimes?

There is a direct correlation between poverty and criminality (Kelly, 2000; Block and Heineke, 1975). Becker’s economic theory of crime (1968) assumes that people resort to crime only if the costs of committing the crime are
lower than the benefits gained. Those living in poverty, therefore, have a much greater chance of committing property crime (Kelly, 2000, Chiu and Madden, 1998) than the general population. Property crime is defined as
burglary, larceny, or theft (O’Connor, 2005). In his 1968 paper, Becker used statistical and economic analysis to determine the optimal control of crime. Here, we use a system of ODEs to try and get a more realistic, dynamical
solution to that same question.

mtbi.asu.edu...

Property crime is the most common form of crime. History proves there is a connection between poverty and risky behavior. The fewer options a person has the more likely that will commit crime. Lack of education, health care, hope, despair etc., in a community will breed criminals, and anti-social behavior.

www.chicagonow.com...

Originally posted by Fitch303
Hmmm so odd that these people want to bite the hand that feeds them. the bottom 47% pay no income taxes while they take up just about all the resources in terms of gov assistance.

You are a bigot hiding behind clever vernacular. There is no "They", we are ALL part of the 99%!

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
i see a bunch of people ranting...

this has nothing to do with the OWS and the overall goal of the movement.

they talked about:
- racism from police
- a piece of legislature that needs to be killed
- power to the people
- walmart not hiring criminals
- wanting jobs and needing them now
- complaining their jobs went overseas

The economic and political powers which control these factors are still corrupt and responsible for ruining the livelihoods of the 99%; this protest is just set in a different environment. The problem is that people are steadily trying to label a movement too massive for labels. Too diverse for some and too general for others.

Now is not the time to continue dividing amongst ourselves over silly racial prejudices and petty disagreements in perspective. We are all disappointed with the same factions for similar reasons, and we must stand united.

Don't forget, we have power in NUMBERS!

reply to post by Fitch303


Wow. These people? I know folks with substantial educations that are seeking work but must hold out their hand for food stamps. Really

This is exactly what OWS movement is about.

Originally posted by ANOK


Why do you think the projects have more crime than a fancy neighborhood? Better class of people?
Or do they just have the resources to hide their crimes?

There is a direct correlation between poverty and criminality (Kelly, 2000; Block and Heineke, 1975). Becker’s economic theory of crime (1968) assumes that people resort to crime only if the costs of committing the crime are
lower than the benefits gained. Those living in poverty, therefore, have a much greater chance of committing property crime (Kelly, 2000, Chiu and Madden, 1998) than the general population. Property crime is defined as
burglary, larceny, or theft (O’Connor, 2005). In his 1968 paper, Becker used statistical and economic analysis to determine the optimal control of crime. Here, we use a system of ODEs to try and get a more realistic, dynamical
solution to that same question.

mtbi.asu.edu...

Property crime is the most common form of crime. History proves there is a connection between poverty and risky behavior. The fewer options a person has the more likely that will commit crime. Lack of education, health care, hope, despair etc., in a community will breed criminals, and anti-social behavior.

www.chicagonow.com...

edit on 11/5/2011 by ANOK because: typo

Ok this is one study but since I dont want to/dont have the time to look up another study lets work off this. This simply says there is a correlation between poverty and crime. Idk how strong the correlation is but lets assume its a strong value. That way we can limit the factors of correlation v causation. This simply says that the poor have more to gain by committing crime and less to lose.....well no duh. A rich person isnt going to go steal a flatscreen TV because they have one already and thus there is no benefit to the activity when weighted against jail time. But this says nothing about desperation, this doesnt say anything about stealing of food or necessities. I am willing to bet most property crime is the taking of luxuries from stores or houses. And I dont care what anyone says if you dont have the money to bad no ipod for you. The poor in this country know nothing of poverty, even compared to our poor in other times. There certainly are people who commit crime to feed themselves and I understand that but you cant tell me that any large proportion of them are doing it to feed themselves. I also think you have to look at what they are doing to get out of poverty....in some cases its easier to steal then work a job that sucks. I am close with people who would rather sit around an collect welfare than actually work so I am not buying it

And can we drop the fake racial sensitivities....people gasping at the words these people and calling people biggots. Idk what the posters' racial views are but it sickens me that everything is made into a racial argument , especially when their is nothing intelligent to say