Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 153 154 [155] 156 157 ... 297

Author Topic: Occupying Wallstreet  (Read 288923 times)

Truean

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ok.... [sigh] It froze over....
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2310 on: December 15, 2011, 11:23:50 pm »

More th'40k limit mention than anything else, heh. Not in ohio, so other than idle curiosity I don't terribly care (about the particulars, in this case, the legalese). Though I do mean 'don't terribly care' in the most, uh. Kind? Of ways. Something like that. Benevolent disinterest? Terrible respect for th'work involved (Law research possibly one of the few things more tedious than philosophy research, from what I understand :P), but other than looking at it, th'stuff doesn't do much for me.

Anyway, [/offtopic] from me~

Thanks, it's nice to be appreciated. I also appreciate the resource. Actually I'd say it's sort of on topic in my opinion. I am of the firm belief that the system can be fixed with proper accounting and accountability. See, my above posts on the sadly valid issues raised by SalmonGod and Aquizzar.

Unfortunately, professionals with ethics are vastly outnumbered by those without them.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 11:25:24 pm by Truean »
Logged
The kinda human wreckage that you love

Current Spare Time Fiction Project: (C) 2010 http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63660.0
Disclaimer: I never take cases online for ethical reasons. If you require an attorney; you need to find one licensed to practice in your jurisdiction. Never take anything online as legal advice, because each case is different and one size does not fit all. Wants nothing at all to do with law.

Please don't quote me.

Kogut

  • Bay Watcher
  • Next account: Bulwersator
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2311 on: December 15, 2011, 11:46:00 pm »

Logged
The worst bug - 34.11 poll
Tired of going decades without goblin sieges? Try The Fortress Defense Mod
Kogut, the Bugfixes apostle of Bay12forum. Every posts he makes he preaches about the evil of Bugs.

Pnx

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2312 on: December 16, 2011, 12:52:13 am »

So... the solution to America's lower classes being unable to pay debts, is to squeeze them harder?

Wouldn't you just wind up spending more money than you gain by squeezing them?
Logged

sluissa

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2313 on: December 16, 2011, 12:55:54 am »

That's... actually... a point... of the... article...

Of course, you could just add that cost on top of their debt. I mean, putting people deeper in debt when they can't pay in the first place is the right course of action.
Logged

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2314 on: December 16, 2011, 12:58:03 am »

It actually makes perfect sense when you're looking for a source of penal slavery (excepting that it'd be cheaper to just hire people to do the work; no paying for room and board. No one said slavery was actually efficient.).

But yeah, it's always been one of those really weird rationals -- "You owe us money, and can't pay. So, uh, we're going to have you owe us more money that you can't pay. Because you need to be punished for not paying! Makes perfect sense."

I could see a freeze on buying power outside food/utilities/medical/maintenance, but increasing the debt? It doesn't logically follow that someone that can't pay will magically be able to pay when you increase the bill :-\

Of course, you could just add that cost on top of their debt. I mean, putting people deeper in debt when they can't pay in the first place is the right course of action.
According to the article, they do add the cost in some cases. Genius, I tells ya'.
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

Bdthemag

  • Bay Watcher
  • Die Wacht am Rhein
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2315 on: December 16, 2011, 12:58:19 am »

Is it just me or are we slowly going back in time to the 1700's?
Logged
Well, you do have a busy life, what with keeping tabs on wild, rough-and-tumble forum members while sorting out the drama between your twenty two inner lesbians.
Your drunk posts continue to baffle me.
Welcome to Reality.

sluissa

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2316 on: December 16, 2011, 01:02:36 am »

Is it just me or are we slowly going back in time to the 1700's?

Hooray for indentured servitude. At least we'll eventually get to wear those neat tri-cornered hats again.
Logged

Nadaka

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nadaka.us
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2317 on: December 16, 2011, 01:03:14 am »

That's... actually... a point... of the... article...

Of course, you could just add that cost on top of their debt. I mean, putting people deeper in debt when they can't pay in the first place is the right course of action.

That is the point for the monthly $9.99 fee for having a low checking balance. And the $35 fee every time you go into negative balance or use an account at negative balance. And the $5 daily fee for having a negative balance.  And the $5 customer service fee for calling to figure out what the hell is going on. etc.

So yes, this seems perfectly normal these days.

Is it just me or are we slowly going back in time to the 1700's?

Yes. The plutocracy really wish they could get their noble titles and church sanctions back. Liberty will have been a brief 300 year experiment at best.
Logged
Take me out to the black, tell them I ain't comin' back...
I don't care cause I'm still free, you can't take the sky from me...

I turned myself into a monster, to fight against the monsters of the world.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2318 on: December 16, 2011, 01:06:37 am »

That is the point for the monthly $9.99 fee for having a low checking balance. And the $35 fee every time you go into negative balance or use an account at negative balance. And the $5 daily fee for having a negative balance.  And the $5 customer service fee for calling to figure out what the hell is going on. etc.

Sounds like someone need to move their money to a credit union.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

sluissa

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2319 on: December 16, 2011, 01:10:38 am »

That's... actually... a point... of the... article...

Of course, you could just add that cost on top of their debt. I mean, putting people deeper in debt when they can't pay in the first place is the right course of action.

That is the point for the monthly $9.99 fee for having a low checking balance. And the $35 fee every time you go into negative balance or use an account at negative balance. And the $5 daily fee for having a negative balance.  And the $5 customer service fee for calling to figure out what the hell is going on. etc.

So yes, this seems perfectly normal these days.

Is it just me or are we slowly going back in time to the 1700's?

Yes. The plutocracy really wish they could get their noble titles and church sanctions back. Liberty will have been a brief 300 year experiment at best.

Well, that's... at least in some viewed ways, beneficial to the bank... at some point. Putting someone in jail for having a negative balance... and then adding the cost of the jailing to the negative balance helps nobody at all... with the possible exception of whomever is running the prisons if they're not publicly controlled.
Logged

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2320 on: December 16, 2011, 01:17:59 am »

Prisons are a major industry.

That's... actually... a point... of the... article...

Of course, you could just add that cost on top of their debt. I mean, putting people deeper in debt when they can't pay in the first place is the right course of action.

That is the point for the monthly $9.99 fee for having a low checking balance. And the $35 fee every time you go into negative balance or use an account at negative balance. And the $5 daily fee for having a negative balance.  And the $5 customer service fee for calling to figure out what the hell is going on. etc.

So yes, this seems perfectly normal these days.

I think we could take this much further, too.  I'll throw in that I've seen a major trend in employers having tons of really strict, nonsensical rules that they enforce selectively to keep their employees constantly on the verge of losing their jobs, so they feel more pressure to perform well.  My bosses seriously just make shit up.  Anything they don't like, they'll just hand out a warning for "this thing we don't like".
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

sluissa

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2321 on: December 16, 2011, 01:22:09 am »

Completely agree with that. Especially harsh on people who've got a lot of time invested in a retirement with companies. The closer you get to retirement, the more they push, the more strict they are, and odds are about even they'll find something they can get rid of you for before you reach full retirement age.
Logged

Duuvian

  • Bay Watcher
  • Internet ≠ Real Life
    • View Profile
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2322 on: December 16, 2011, 08:27:25 am »

America: It's OK if corporations do it.

WASHINGTON (AP) — A senior executive at a technology company that makes monitoring software secretly installed on 141 million cellphones said Thursday that the FBI approached the company about using its technology but was rebuffed. The disclosure came one day after FBI Director Robert Mueller assured Congress that agents "neither sought nor obtained any information" from the company, Carrier IQ.

Hero of the average American goes to Trial.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Army intelligence analyst suspected in the biggest leak of classified U.S. documents in history makes his first court appearance on Friday accused of multiple charges including aiding the enemy, which could bring life imprisonment.

Private First Class Bradley Manning, 23, is suspected of being the source of documents that last year eventually made their way to the WikiLeaks website. WikiLeaks divulged hundreds of thousands of sensitive diplomatic cables that exposed the candid views of U.S. officials and their allies.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2011, 08:42:26 am by Duuvian »
Logged
FINISHED original composition:
https://app.box.com/s/jq526ppvri67astrc23bwvgrkxaicedj

Sort of finished and awaiting remix due to loss of most recent song file before addition of drums:
https://www.box.com/s/s3oba05kh8mfi3sorjm0 <-zguit

SalmonGod

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nyarrr
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: December 17, 2011, 12:26:34 am by SalmonGod »
Logged
In the land of twilight, under the moon
We dance for the idiots
As the end will come so soon
In the land of twilight

Maybe people should love for the sake of loving, and not with all of these optimization conditions.

Angle

  • Bay Watcher
  • 39 Indigo Spear Questions the Poor
    • View Profile
    • Agora Forum Demo!
Re: Occupying Wallstreet
« Reply #2324 on: December 17, 2011, 01:02:16 pm »

Soooo....

Down with Capitalism? Cause that's starting to look more and like the only answer.
Logged

Agora: open-source platform to facilitate complicated discussions between large numbers of people. Now with test site!

The Temple of the Elements: Quirky Dungeon Crawler
Pages: 1 ... 153 154 [155] 156 157 ... 297