The day is coming when workers across the globe will

[malaise]

ask one simple question. How come contracts we sign are enforced by corporations and governments, but not one contract they sign with us is worth the paper on which it was signed.

When that question is answered, men and women will demand a new paradigm - this shite cannot continue.

[midnight]

1. Yes, inquiring minds want to know.

[formercia]

2. Laws are for 'little people.'

The powers that be just have them enforced. I have seen the'Boys'literally get away with Murder.

All men may be born equal, but....

[Echo In Light]

11. Hence the need for a phony 'war on TERRORISTS!'

[truedelphi]

28. Except it is a needed war. The average person has some amount of money

And multiply that by 6.4 trillion little people, and it is a massive amount of wealth.

And rich people cannot stand to see anyone but them have any money.

So the notion of terrorism has to exist. Thus the Activists in India that are trying so desperately to stop Monsanto and to stop other immoral, environmentally unsound Corporate practices are now being deemed as Maoists.


Our banking practices are actually terroristic in principle. When checks bounce and cause an insufficient fund amount to appear, even if it amounts to say, $ 1.12 - the bank will go forward and charge $ 33 per check on all the other checks that bounce out.

In one case alone, the sum of $ 99 might be spent to offset this NSF situation. It requires an offset equal to over 50,000% interest. The bank justifies this by saying, "But you had use of OUR MONEY!" in reference to the $ 1.12 that was used of the bank's money for 48 hours.

Never mind that the bank might have deliberately stalled on depositing the checks they were supposed to credit to your account. But they don't care. They have the power, and all they care about is their profits. So what if they hurt you financially, destroy the planet's drinking water, the air, the land around us? While unless you own one of the Forbes 500, you are considered the AWFUL HUMAN BEING.

[formercia]

33. Blame the victim.

That's one of their favorite memes.

[kenfrequed]

3. Totally agreed

I have pondered that before as well.

[RandomThoughts]

4. Ask a Native American, they can explain it.

[malaise]

5. Pity so many people didn't listen to them

and still don't listen to them.

Excellent point

[proteus_lives]

26. The Noble Savage myth lives on.

:eyes:

[dana_b]

12. you read my mind

but they can't always explain it. Sometimes it's just bad, greedy people making the contracts.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. Um, the contracts you sign with corporations are just as binding as any other.

If they violate the contract, take them to court, prove your case, you'll win.

Assuming, of course, you read the fine print.

[malaise]

8. There are times I believe

you've had an overdose of an unhealthy sweetener.

[havocmom]

9. Haven't been following labor news much?

Have Omaha Steve fill you in on just how binding contracts aren't when they are with workers.

Take a look at the piles of medical cases where insurers welched on their obligations, digging up excueses of 'pre-existing conditions' like acne.

Sue them? That would be funny if it weren't for all the people they have destroyed with their armies of lawyers and all the time in the world to drag fights out until the pesky consumers die.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lib_wit_it]

23. And assuming, of course, you can afford the time, money, and other sacrifices it takes to prosecute

a law suit. Justice costs, and many of us can't afford it.

[anonymous171]

49. lol Do you know how much a lawyer costs these days?

Our legal system is so incredibly classist it is not even funny.

[havocmom]

7. We are all Indians and our fate is life the corporations let us live

with ever diminishing resources on what ever reservations they aren't exploiting for other purposes.

[tom_paine]

39. Well said and true, havocmom!

:hi:

[havocmom]

40. My dear friend...

you have mail.

[Hannah Bell]

13. great question.

[stray cat]

14. be unemployed?

[Goldstein1984]

15. Good post. Corporate commitments mean nothing

Take them to court? Good luck outspending them on lawyers.

Expecting a pension? Good luck with that, too. Ask a United Airlines employee, or any employee expecting covered by one of the over 800 pension plans that have been underfunded by employers.

Corporations exist to do one thing--make money for those who own them. They are amoral, and will evade any rule they can in pursuit of profit. Employees are expendable, throw-away items. Corporations are not patriotic, ethical, or socially responsible, unless that image fits into their marketing plan. Corporations seldom look more than one or two years into the future, so don't expect anything meaningful from them where human health or the environment is concerned, unless it's required by rules they can't evade, or, again, part of their marketing plan.

Corporations are a means for the few to make money off of the many. If you question this, look at the millions who lost money in the stock market, or at the 8.5 million jobs that disappeared over the past few years, or the jobless recovery, or the jobs going overseas where sweatshops are still legal and wages are low, and contrast that with the bonuses being paid to the few who created the financial meltdown.

If you think capitalism, or the unit of capitalism called the "corporation," has any concern about the general welfare of citizens then please send your contact information to [e-mail], because I have some genuine, collectible, gold-filled, investment grade medallions with Ronald Reagan on one side and George W. Bush on the other that I'd like to sell you--heads you lose; tails you lose. Each medallion comes with a certificate guaranteeing every investor a slice of the pie we call the American Dream. (Please read the fine print.)

[malaise]

17. Oh they have several other ways to

fuck up contracts - think devaluation, worker contracts signed and sealed and then workers are told about wage freezes and no new jobs, lay offs, salary cuts, violations re health care, vacation, pension and so on. It's beyond criminal and what's really painful is that these workers can't go to the bank and say I can't pay my mortgage because my employer has broken our contract.
Something has got to give - this rubber band is about to burst.

[Goldstein1984]

22. Somewhere between rabid capitalism and pure socialism

there has to be something like socially responsible capitalism.

I believe no corporation should be able to operate in this country without promoting the general welfare as its primary obligation.

Imagine the message we could send if the parasitized masses organized and stopped all nonessential consumption. Yes, it would be painful to many, but it would bring the system to its knees.

We're valued as production and consumer units, not people. Aside from violence, our power rests in our ability to organize and control these two vital functions. In an economy with a GDP based 70% on consumption, consider the impact of cutting consumption.

Problem is, we're not organized. Which is by design.

[Diclotican]

24. Goldstein1984

Goldstein1984

The system, who work in my neck of the wood is sosial-democraty, a system where the government have a large part of what happend in a country, but where the private also have a large part of the economy.. At present the system is 40/60, where the private is in sharge of 60 percent of economy, but where the government, by laws and by economical ties have a 40 percent shunck of what exist on the marked... It means also that the government have a large role in the economy, becouse the state is the most "powerfull" part of the marked and can in some degree have oversight over the system.. The Government also have a lot of control over the Bank systems, mostly becouse in the early 1990s the State had to help out the banks who in other means would have broken down becouse of economical troubles.. After the economy was fixed, the government ended up with a large responsibility, even after selling out a lot of stocks to the private, the government had a lot of stocks, and desided that they wanted to keep an aye on what the banks did... Today the banks is solid as rocks, or at least solvent. And our economy have survived withouth been hit to hard by the ressesion.. Some hit have the economy had, but compared to most others, we are still in the green economical... Thanks to a government who dosen't spend to mutch - and have a lot of money in the bank:P

But to be fair, in my neck of the wood, the STATE have allways had a large control over the economy, even when the formal rule was not to easy from our capital in Kopenhagen, the government even then had a fair control of what happend in Norway... Specially economical, and the State have allways been there to build up things, like our mines, our roads and so on. No private enterpise have been rich enough to by themself build the infrastructure....

It is not a perfect system, but it works.. And we also have a decent "workers right" in our neck of the wood. Mutch thanks to our different government who since the 1800s have build up the econical and public system we have today.. Its a lot of proes and a lot of nais in the system.. But for Norway it works.. Pretty well to.. our welfare system is something most americans would find amazing if they ever was to wisit Norway.. And maybe unbelivable.. For in most part, it is little unbelivable our welfare, and healtcare system..

Diclotican

[malaise]

38. Social democracy is the best system around so far

although like Ellen Meiksins Wood's, I am wary about the state in capitalist society since it is merely a prop for the corrupt political and economic system and ultimately destroys any notion of democracy.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1132/is_1_51/ai_54682835/

[Diclotican]

43. malaise

malaise

True.. The social democratic system is far from perfect But at least it is a system where most peopole have what they need, regardness of what "Place" in the comunity you are in.... But it is also a place where everyone have to be educated enough to understand things... And many belive that the government is little to control frik over what they want or dosen't want us to do. As one of your country men once told me, that he was thingking of Norways political system as a form of Communism Light... Wel, it is a system who both the conservatives, and the liberales suport for the most part, it is more in what form they want to make it... From the Right to the Left our system of governance have a great deal of suport.. And I doubt that "fremskrittspartiet" would be in government office anytime soon (a rather right/liberalistic party)

And have I told, we have also a Monarc as our head of state?.. The current King is Harald V of Norway.. Who have been a good king, maybe not that BIG as his father, but after some stumbling in the early days a rather good king after all... But the times have shanges since Olav V was king... And I thing Harald V have been doing it better than most belived him to do in the early days...

Diclotican

[malaise]

47. I'm with you on social democracy in the Scandanavian countries

Perhaps it only works if you have abandoned notions of empire. That way the resources actually exist to repay your taxpayers with 'social good' services.

Your take on the monarchy is interesting because Norway, Denmark and Sweden are more democratic than many so called democracies without monarchs. Of course the English monarch only facilitates and perpetuates the most ridiculous class system on the planet.

[Diclotican]

50. malaise

malaise

It tend to more easy to have ressourses to give peopole a decent service, when you dosen't have an empire to run all the time.. It is expensive to be in sharge of the largerst military power on the planet.. The US, as current have the same military power as the 20 other of "top payer of military hardware" combined... And then even many are talking about expanding the US military even further.. Why should US do that, when US allready have biggest most mean military force on the planet as it is... Who are US so afraid of, that you have to expend it so big?

Wel, im not sure but I think, in Norways case it have been the "glue" who have binded everybody togheter.. In the early 1900s when Norway as a nation was new, it also had alot of political grifiences between the rich and the pooor... And Norway was a really political melting pot where radicals was on the brink of open revolt.. A poor country with a population who was hungry for anything.. Then in 1905 we got our first King in more than 500 year, who was king in Norway!.. And he might not be the "smartes" of the shoices we had when we elected our king, but he was defently the most clever one, and he must have been a first rate politican, becouse he not just managed to be welcomed as a king, but also, for the most part to be loved by most peopole, even when their political ideology was 180 degrees of a kingship.. And he semented that trust from the popole in the world war two, where he first flattely denied to kneel for the germans, then had to flee up to Northen parts of Norway. And then in UK was our maybe best diplomat by all means.. And he was welcomed in June 1945 with the cheer of norwigians, who have never been at the same large crowd ever.. And in 1948, when the cold war was in ful, and he was asked what to do with the comunists, who then was in Parlament with 11 reps.. He just say, why should I do something with them, they are still my peopole.. That was a gigant leap for a man who officially in 1917-1920 had seen hes first cousin Tsar Nicolay 2 of Russia been shot, with most of his family by the red forces.. And who publically had told parlament that NO norwigian king was to wisit Russia before the communist was out of power.. In 1993 the first norwigian King, our Harald vas in Russia for the first time... I doubt that Haakon 7 of Norway belived it should go 70 year before it was over in Soviet then... Olav V, our old king - who I rembember best and who had been king all my life when he died in 1991 also segmented the trust most peopole had to him and the royal familiy by acting both as a King, but also to do what is his duty.. And he was respected by most pepole.. Even my old fosterfather, who was "red" to the bone - was sad when he told me that our king had died.. He died allmoust on the eve of the first golf war - and Harald have later told that his father was REALLY worried about what could came of that, becouse he was old enough to rembember Sept 1939...

For the most part, the power lies not in the hand of the King, but rather in the hand of the Parlament. But the king have a important role, and have some say when new laws passes his desk to be signed into laws.. But many of his duties, specially when it came to the political roles is mostly sermoniel, and he dosen't have to mutch REAL power.. But inderectly all 3 kings we have had to this days, have had great power, even signifant power when new laws are put into effect.. Many have used this "back-channel" to both let the king know when things happend in parlament, but also to know what the king is thinking about cases.. And we have the freday meeting at the Palace where our king, and all the ministers are in plenum to diskuss what is important, and new from the parlament..
In most cases the modern King in Norway as the head of state, and the first between equals.. He dosen't have to mutch directly power, but have signifant indirectly power, by the fact that he should be adviced by the Parlament.. But that power is also mutch up to eath King to use. Olav V of Norway used this mutch more than our current King Harald V of Norway.. But the kingship is far different today, than it was when Olav was around I guess.

The british Royal House is a far different thing.. That behavour Would never have been acepted in any of the scandicanvian country's.. Not even a fraction of what have happend in the British Royal family would have been accepted... But then again, the british royal familiy have a whole different tradition in the british comunity than in scandinavia I guess

And all tree kings, have had as their "Nametag" the word Alt for Norge. Everything for Norway. It is on all coins and was the tittle Haakon 7 used when he was elected as King of Norway in 1905.
Diclotican

[malaise]

53. Thanks for a fascinating post

:hi:

[malaise]

36. I agree but that requires non-stop

vigilance and activism from most of us and the entire process is rigged to prevent that.

[Hubert Flottz]

16. K&R

I hope I live to see that day...

[scarletwoman]

18. K&r -- it's a great question, but I don't think I'll live long enough to see the workers of world

insisting on having it answered, and backing up that insistence with mass action. :(

sw

[malaise]

19. I'm not sure I will either

but who knows - anger is growing by the day across the globe.

[bvar22]

20. My wife & I went ON STRIKE in 2006.

Cashed out, quit our jobs, moved to The Woods, planted a BIG Veggie Garden, keep chickens and honey bees too.
We grow or produce a good percentage of our food, and are getting better.
We buy almost nothing NEW.
What we can't build or make ourselves, we buy or barter 2nd hand or salvage, and make it work...
or do without.
Wall Street can live or die without our money or concern.
If the Democratic Party and their allies in the Republican Party insist on spending Public Money on MORE WAR
and Bailouts for Billionaires, we QUIT.
They will have to get it from someone else.
We live well on a very low "taxable" income.

Our focus has become local Humanitarian Issues, and finding new ways of denying funding to Corporate America and their bought politicians. We are still on the corporate hook for some things, but are finding ways of reducing that dependence,
and perhaps eliminating it in the future.
It IS a process.
We are no longer Good American Consumers,
and next year, we will consume even less.

We realize we are very lucky to be in a position to do this.
We are both strong and healthy, have no dependents, and have a complimentary set of skills that make this enjoyable.

Less is More!
:hippie:

[pundaint]

21. As soon as We the People understand that we are being cynically pitted against one anther

by our common oppressor, change will rapidly follow. Our culture features trivial competition, we are taught to compete before we are taught to cooperate. The us vs them meme is everywhere, so that it seems natural. Entertainment isn't about art anymore it's about awards, Sports are the passion for many. This keeps us conditioned to oppose each other. You see it with the tea baggers. Corporations cut a group of us out, and filled their heads with the belief that other people are vying for control of their money. They are so competitive about that they don't realize they are being used as the tools of corporations, whose only interest in them, and us, is to suck us dry.

[anonymous171]

25. Justice is a new paradigm? nt

[malaise]

35. No but we have to keep fighting against

those who would redefine its very meaning. Read Hayek and see if the neo-liberals haven't redefined the essence of the word. Life is a constant struggle about decision-making re the allocation of resources, the worldview underlying this and the means by which some people or groups are able to influence said decision-making.

We either fight back collectively or lie back and allow the rich to destroy all ours gains to date.

[bridgit]

27. You're up against they such as the Rothschild', they & they as do others believe...

most firmly, "Give me control over a nations currency, and I care not who makes its laws" and until that changes which will take a mountain of resolve to do (heads banged bloody sutures mug shots the whole nine even Will Pitt) - there will be no change that's just the way it is at present. For proof: witness the oppressive restrictions placed upon not just Gaza, Palestine, and the occupied *god gave this sand to us* territories and 'ground zero' but the thumbing of all Israeli noses (an amalgam of the ultimate state sanctioned foreign subsidized apartheid) to the rest of the world not so inclined to be considered as 'chosen'

When dealing with people with clean fingernails one must understand why they think they deserve them above all others

And for they that suggest, "What the fuck is that bridgit bitch fucking talking about!?" I say stand back - cause you just don't fucking get it the world is bleeding out and someone has to close this wound

[Hannah Bell]

30. take your ethnic obsessions elsewhere.

capital has no such obsessions. the finance cabal is multiethnic, multiracial, & global.

[bridgit]

34. don't kid yourself

[Hannah Bell]

44. unlike yourself, i've done actual research of historical & financial records.

& traced genealogies.

people who babble about "rothschilds" are idiots. their information comes exclusively from a limited number of sources, all of which focus on jewish finance to the exclusion of non-jewish finance -- including, e.g. asian & arab finance -- something never touched on by the "it's the rothschilds" folks.

and also to the exclusion of the intermarriage between banking & finance families regardless of ethnicity.

[bridgit]

45. Read it much more carefully, "they & they as do others believe"...

You don't care to see the big picture? All the moving parts? That's to your detriment. You want to be froggy? Then do that on your own time. It would appear to be a primary function of DU Socialists. But there are reasons socialism generates less product than it is able to yak about so idyally. There are reasons socialism's preference is to annex the product of others. One such reason is in no small measure seen in the brittle intransigence of their spokesperson and their inability to entertain *anything* past the tips of their noses - I do I find that odd, and if that *is* the product then it is a strange one that is on its way straight to DVD and/or a .99Ct store

But you can; you can sing your song on the mountain top you can sing it to the face in the mirror you can sing it the ex-patriot Cherokee princess of south america I don't care but when you cherry pick a component of a matrix out *because* of its interpreted "ethnicity" (as though to divert) you perpetrate the same event you accuse others of doing and that is hypocrisy so that when you're done expressing your admiration for your own skill-sets you can stick head back in the sand

[Hannah Bell]

51. you don't see shit. socialism doesn't "annex the product of others."

if socialism generates "less product," it would be out of preference for free time v. product.

the rest of your post is just more babble. you can't compose a comprehensible sentence, start there.

[bridgit]

52. I feel the pain you should be feeling for yourself but for your over stuffed ego

Criticizing Israel is not an act of bigotry

A grassroots revolt is underway in Jewish communities throughout the world, a revolt that has panicked the élite organizations that have long functioned as official mouthpieces for the community. The latest sign of this panic is the recent publication by the American Jewish Committee of an essay by Alvin H. Rosenfeld, entitled Progressive Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism, which accuses progressive Jews of abetting a resurgent wave of anti-Semitism by publicly criticizing Israel.

This is the latest attempt to conflate anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism in order to silence or marginalize criticism of Israel. This approach is widely used in Canada. Upon becoming CEO of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Bernie Farber declared that one of his goals was to “educate Canadians about the links between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.”

It is misleading for groups like the CJC to pretend that the Jewish community is united in support of Israel. A growing number of Jews around the world are joining the chorus of concern about the deteriorating condition of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories as well as the inferior social and economic status of Israel's own Palestinian population.

In a world where uncritical support for Israel is becoming less and less tenable due to the expanding human rights disaster in the West Bank and Gaza, leaders of Jewish communities outside Israel have circled their wagons, heightened their pro-Israel rhetoric, and demonized Israel's critics. These leaders imply that increased concerns about Israel do not result from that state's actions, but from an increase in anti-Semitism.

http://www.rabble.ca/news/criticizing-israel-not-act-bigotry

Netanyahu: My father foresaw 9/11 attacks in 1990s

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that his father predicted the 9/11 attacks on New York’s twin towers back in the ’90s.

Haaretz reported that the remark was made during the 100th birthday celebration of the premier’s father, Benzion Netanyahu, a historian and Zionist activist.

The Israeli prime minister added that those who do not know their past will not understand their presence and will not be able to predict their future.

The Israeli newspaper Ma’ariv on 17 April 2008 had reported that Benjamin Netanyahu, then Likud leader, told an audience at Bar Ilan University that the September 11, 2001 terror attacks had been beneficial for Israel.

"We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq," Ma’ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events "swung American public opinion in our favor."

http://www.voltairenet.org/article164394.html

Damage Control: Noam Chomsky and the Israel-Palestine Conflict

While the Bush administration is sinking into the Iraqi mess and supports the Israeli destruction campaign in Palestine and in Lebanon, a controversy is expanding in the United States on the exact links between the US imperialism and the zionist expansionism. Suddenly, the thought of Noam Chomsky, which was imposed, for a long time, as a reference to the US left-wing, does not function any more. It is the moment, for the journalist Jeffrey Blankfort, to question this superstar. We publish here, in three parts, his long study of the limits of Noam Chomsky’s thought.

______*

In the field of US-Israel-Palestine relations he has been a virtual human tsunami, washing like a huge wave over genuine scholarly works in the field that contradict his critical positions on the Middle East, namely that Israel serves a strategic asset for the US and that the Israeli lobby, primarily AIPAC, is little more than a pressure group like any other trying to affect US policy in the Middle East. For both of these positions, as I will show, he offers only the sketchiest of evidence and what undercuts his theory he eliminates altogether.

Nevertheless, he has ignited the thinking and gained himself the passionate, almost cult-like attachment of thousands of followers across the globe. At the same time it has made him the favorite hate object of those who support and justify the US global agenda and the domination of its junior partner, Israel, over the Palestinians. Who else has whole internet blogs dedicated to nothing else but attacking him?

What is less generally known is that he admits to having been a Zionist from childhood, by one of the earlier definitions of the term—in favor of a Jewish homeland in Palestine and a bi-national, not a Jewish state—and, as he wrote 30 years ago, "perhaps this personal history distorts my perspective" <2>... . Measuring the degree to which it has done so is critical to understanding puzzling positions he has taken in response to the Israel-Palestine conflict...

Given the viciousness and the consistency with which Chomsky has been attacked by his critics on the "right," one ventures cautiously when challenging him from the "left." To expose serious errors in Chomsky’s analysis and recording of history is to court almost certain opprobrium from those who might even agree with the nature of the criticism but who have become so protective of his reputation over the years, often through personal friendships, that have they not only failed to publicly challenge substantial errors of both fact and interpretation on his part, they have dismissed attempts by others to do so as "personal" vendettas.

That last little run-through is for you, Hannah, it fits you like a glove. Though your haughty condescension roiling with, certainly in my opinion: *anti*-social violence and indignation for anyone or anything that deigns suggest you otherwise is all the proof I require - you folks are too emotionally fragile to run anything but your mouths which is fine in that you're less able to see up into all four corners anyway

Soon, summer approaches, and it will be cherry picking time. I expect to see you out there picking your own. Have a lovely evening, you deserve it, Hannah

http://www.voltairenet.org/article143519.html

[upi402]

29. Our consent to be governed wont be required

as long as this charade of a democracy is swallowed by the easy to fool.

[maryf]

31. General strike

is my hope, K&R...

[DisgustedInMN]

32. I take your valuble question as rhetorical..

.. because the answer is quite obvious to any of us that look with open eyes, Malaise. We are being played. Of that there can be no doubt. You are also correct in that "this shite cannot continue," although I would add to that, indefinitely. Things WILL reach a boiling point, one we are rapidly approaching, and there WILL be a revolution. The one unresolved question of that is, can it be achieved peacefully or will there be violence?

Like so many greedy bastards before them, the "entitled" fat, lazy, rich of today are making the classic mistake that all fat, lazy, greedy, "entitled" bastards make, they've pushed it so far that it's becoming obvious to the masses that even the hope of things getting better is gone. They always seem to forget that desperate people do desperate things and when you've got nothing, you've got nothing to lose...

... and there's a whole fucking bunch more of US than there is of them.

[malaise]

37. Absolutely correct

Notice that the biggest thieves go nowhere without personal security. They are already terrified.

[glitch]

41. +7,000,000,000 to about 2,000. Say 3,500,000 to 1. :) nt

[readmoreoften]

42. +1000

We are not "equals in the marketplace". Most blind defense of contract law is extraordinarily conservative.

[marmar]

46. Los trabajadores del mundo unitan !!!!

[malaise]

48. The sooner the better

:hi: