patrick.net

But Wait, I thought we make too much and women don't make enough, or was it Ernesto?

From the story:
The message is that banks with all the absurd bonuses need to be bailed out no matter the cost to keep the economy going. Yet for most workers, a fierce predatory system of capitalism is their reality.

Me:
Fierce predatory system is a good way to describe the form of capitalism being practiced these days. I wonder if the rich guys have a plan for what they'll do with the rest of us once they've shaken us down for every cent. The Soylent Green plan? Reopen the Roman coliseum and throw us in the pit to watch us all murder each other?

The entry of women into the workforce double the number of people competing for the same jobs and thus allowed management to half the salaries of the middle class. As a result, families today depend on two salaries instead of one, making them far more financially unstable.

If the so-called job creators were doing their jobs correctly, the number of jobs would not be an inelastic quantity, but rather would have grown to accommodate the number of workers. But that would require the controllers of distribution and capital to care about productivity instead of profits. This is the fundamental weakness of capitalism.

Illegals and off shoring take away way more jobs

Two-income trap?

It's all part of the Democrat party war on men!

Ahem,
I think you mean, straight white christian men, - right?

FortWayne says

Illegals and off shoring take away way more jobs

Freedom 1789-2012

Illegal immigration takes away low-paying farm jobs. Off shoring takes away high paying jobs, but is a recent phenomenon.

Neither can explain the decline of the middle class since 1969.

It depends on what you consider high paying jobs. IT, back office, radiologists, tech support, call centers , finanacial analysts, manufacturing plants, legal aid have all been offshored. I am sure I forgot a few-in today's economy with the price of housing and other essentials-I wouldn't consider any of these to be high paying .

Now the unfair divorce laws-that leaves men paying 90% of alimony or more and with 80% or more women ending up with child custody-that is just unfair. I don't see women rushing to congress and passing any laws to right these imbalances. Each of Charlie Sheen's exes get 50k a month each in tax free income -er child support and the father has no right to even say how that money is spent. I just find that bizarre-basic essentials-half of food and rent yes, but beyond that should be a choice. How do you discipline your child or give him/her values if the governemnt under threat of jail guarentees him/her -or the baby mama a set amount each month.

The same for alimony . Why should someone get 75 million for being a housewife-just because they were married to Kobe Bryant or Tiger Woods?? That is just bizarre. If they are getting money, then they should continue to cook, clean and wash dishes-why should the man be expected to support the woman and recieve nothing in return??? Of course nowadays the reverse is also true -like Britanny Spears and KFed-he didn't care about his first two kids -because she didn't have money. Same with Halle Berry

This is why I don't like both parties. The dems use big govt to do all sort of nasty things like this. The repubs use big govt for all sort of nasty things like gays, abortion, birth control, war on drugs and other such rubbish. Leave us alone and let us be free.

Dan8267 says

FortWayne says

Illegals and off shoring take away way more jobs

Freedom 1789-2012

Illegal immigration takes away low-paying farm jobs. Off shoring takes away high paying jobs, but is a recent phenomenon.

Neither can explain the decline of the middle class since 1969.

Now that AL and GA have made life impossible for non documented workers, they have left the state. The result: Crops are rotting in the fields as the jobs went unfilled as the locals are too damn lazy to do the work. Go figure. Have no idea what is happening in AZ.......

The decline of the middle class is a complicated one but generally speaking imho much of the money that used to go to the workers is skimmed off the top for shareholder distribution and CEO, top management compensation. Also, not to put all the blame on companies, the work force has generally dumbed down. Sure there are tons of people with degrees but many have a lack of highly developed marketable skill sets.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/14/alabama-immigration-law-workers

apparently the same thing is happening in right wing AZ too...

http://azstarnet.com/news/opinion/article_e2a5713c-a065-523d-9e0e-065da4f9593c.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/03/arizona-struggles-to-fill-construction-labor-demands_n_1646109.html

lostand confused says

Now the unfair divorce laws-that leaves men paying 90% of alimony or more and with 80% or more women ending up with alimony-that is just unfair.

I have heard this before. Having said that I think that kids should not be punished due to their parents separation. In Canada where I was living for awhile it is even worse. A divorce results in a 50/50 asset split, almost regardless of circumstances.

Buster says

lostand confused says

Now the unfair divorce laws-that leaves men paying 90% of alimony or more and with 80% or more women ending up with alimony-that is just unfair.

I have heard this before. Having said that I think that kids should not be punished due to their parents separation. In Canada where I was living for awhile it is even worse. A divorce results in a 50/50 asset split, almost regardless of circumstances.

Perhaps kids should be taught the value of money and that it does not grow in trees? That bad behaviour on their part will result in privileges being yanked. Why should the state get into that. if two people divorce I am fine with that-but both brought the child into the world and both of you need to parent-not the state telling you what to do and when and how much.

Of course if you are in the state of FL even if DNA evidence proves that the kid is not yours, you still have to pay child support and won't get any custody- after a while. best interest of the child-yeah I am sure there are plenty of starving kids in third world countries that have no money and it would be in that child's best interest for me to be forced to fork over all my money . Who knows, the way the laws are going in this country-that may become mandatory.

Yeah I read about Canada. I think Quebec it is, where the court ruled that even if you are not married, if you split up , you still have to split assets or some such. Why would a man work hard and have any ambition , when divorce can take away all his assets and leave him stranded? The state has way too much power here.

zzyzzx says

It's all part of the Democrat party war on men!

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

not sure if you're joking but that is the goal.

they attack men's ability to have a family, put women in the workforce and children in under the control of public institutions.

Buster says

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/14/alabama-immigration-law-workers

apparently the same thing is happening in right wing AZ too...

http://azstarnet.com/news/opinion/article_e2a5713c-a065-523d-9e0e-065da4f9593c.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/03/arizona-struggles-to-fill-construction-labor-demands_n_1646109.html

all lies....

The Original Bankster says

zzyzzx says

It's all part of the Democrat party war on men!

If the homeowner isn't insulted by your offer...you didn't bid low enough!!!

not sure if you're joking but that is the goal.

they attack men's ability to have a family, put women in the workforce and children in under the control of public institutions.

The San Francisco Treat

Women in the workforce are fine. I have met plenty of talented, sharp and intelligent women, who would be bored to death being the modern housewife. It is not like they have to gather the firewood, milk the cows and take care of the 13 kids they popped out. What I abhor is the unfair divorce and child custody laws. It is easier to throw a father in jail than it is a murderer. Once equality is there, then the woman is as much responsible to provide for the family as the man-that is what equality is all about. Basic necessities-should be split down the middle and the rest should be a choice. Why should a court have the power to order 55k a month in child support??

Maybe I am rich and want to live frugally and expect the kids to do so to-to give them values and teach them about this unstable world. My parents were extremly frugal and left me a nice inheritance. But the court system will not allow that and instead forces the man or in some cases the woman to cut out a check based on income/assets. That takes away the fundamental choice a person has on how he wants to raise his own kids. How can we call ourselves a free society , when the governemnt will not allow us to raise our kids the way we deem fit? Now extremes I understand-but not every case.

Of course you get tired of this and look to the right and the republicans want to take choice away for a whole lot of things and some think women should not even be allowed to work. The folks who settled this wild land must be turning over in their graves.

THE PRINCIPLES OF TRUE GENDER EQUALITY:

1) Women should not be given any special privileges in the workplace OR school.

2) Gender distributions in salaries, positions, or degrees are not indicators of bias.

3) There is no 'original sin' of gender equality and men are not by default guilty of discrimination.

4) Women DO want to be mothers and housewives as is evidenced in just about anything you can see with your two eyes. They are not due some power fantasy trip by society simply because they feel things are unfair. There are natural functions in society and this should be considered fact.

5) Feminism is not about liberation. It's about an attack on the family unit.

The Original Bankster says

THE PRINCIPLES OF TRUE GENDER EQUALITY:

1) Women should not be given any special privileges in the workplace OR school.

2) Gender distributions in salaries, positions, or degrees are not indicators of bias.

3) There is no 'original sin' of gender equality and men are not by default guilty of discrimination.

4) Women DO want to be mothers and housewives as is evidenced in just about anything you can see with your two eyes. They are not due some power fantasy trip by society simply because they feel things are unfair. There are natural functions in society and this should be considered fact.

5) Feminism is not about liberation. It's about an attack on the family unit.

The San Francisco Treat.

Absolutely 100% agree!!!

How anyone can read the story posted and turn it into a diatribe against women is beyond me.

Have you noticed that we're all in this together? Taking away someone else's rights does nothing to strengthen yours.

Buster@ 11,
The farmer shouldn't worry about his tomato harvest. The members of the Al. legislature that voted for the new law are going to recess & help in the fields. Wonder how the farmer's representative voted?

jhall says

How anyone can read the story posted and turn it into a diatribe against women is beyond me.

Have you noticed that we're all in this together? Taking away someone else's rights does nothing to strengthen yours.

This ain't no diatribe against women. Fully accepting they are equal-but need to act that way. You can't say you are equal and then accept massive lifetime alimony. I was laid off from my job where I put in much more than a decade. Does this mean the company has to maintain me to the lifestyle I was used to? I got a nice transitory package, felt bad and betrayed, but then picked up the pieces, went to work. I worked outside the country for a few years, then came back and worked in the mid-west mostly for a few years in consultant job after consultant job. Now finally signed on to another full time job in CA and back. Even recently I was willing to get out of IT altogether and get back into farming-I come from farming roots. But then got the full time offer and am thinking of slowly transitioning to farming in a few years. Looking to buy farm land and lease it out and learn the basics of today's farming and then move on.
For eons men have always picked up the pieces and moved on-not expected somebody to pay to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to. It is time for women to learn to do the same-they are the ones asking for equality and to be treated the same-MAN UP. You get something,you give up somehting-there ain't no free lunch in life. Our court system and govt has been corrupted to give the free lunch to women and now an increasing number of men married to wealthy women that free lunch. That needs to end and time for us to find our own way-that is what equaliuty means.

lostand confused says

For eons men have always picked up the pieces and moved on-not expected somebody to pay to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to. It is time for women to learn to do the same-they are the ones asking for equality and to be treated the same-MAN UP.

Women pick up the pieces and move on, too. Lots of single moms don't get a dime of alimony. Many women suffer at the hands of the person they love through violence. Lots of women get fired, get laid off, are poor. It sounds like you're angry with one particular woman, and it sounds like you have every reason to be. I used the word diatribe because the comment you said you agreed with was a directed against all women. Not all women get alimony.

STEM has been decimated by foreigners, and that tends to be male-dominated. New grads and even experienced folks can send hundreds of resumes out in the Silicon Valley and receive little or no response from the employers, even for jobs they're perfectly qualified for. I know PhD's who are on food stamps and I personally haven't worked in 5 years despite having an EE BS and a CS BS.

jhall says

lostand confused says

For eons men have always picked up the pieces and moved on-not expected somebody to pay to keep them in the lifestyle they are used to. It is time for women to learn to do the same-they are the ones asking for equality and to be treated the same-MAN UP.

Women pick up the pieces and move on, too. Lots of single moms don't get a dime of alimony. Many women suffer at the hands of the person they love through violence. Lots of women get fired, get laid off, are poor. It sounds like you're angry with one particular woman, and it sounds like you have every reason to be. I used the word diatribe because the comment you said you agreed with was a directed against all women. Not all women get alimony.

Nope I am not angry at a single women-though that seems to be a frequent tactic -to try and make it personal-when it is clearly not. The data supports my assertion. Over 90% of alimony is paid by men. Over 80% of child custody is won by women.

I am angry at this stupid system that allows this to happen, where the court/state can come in and determine out of the blue how much of your assets and money you have to fork over. You get to have absolutely no say in how that is spent and no voice. This is just bizarre and is very feudalistic-where landowners demanded a certain payment from the serfs .

It is not a free society and that women benefit disporportiantely from this is fact. That you intend to make this personal and throw in all sorts of other stuff into it-without answering the main point-speaks for itself. The left uses big govt for this nonsense and the right uses big govt for other nonsense. Time for the govt to get out of family and individual lives and live free.

lostand confused says

It is not a free society and that women benefit disporportiantely from this is fact. That you intend to make this personal and throw in all sorts of other stuff into it-without answering the main point-speaks for itself. The left uses big govt for this nonsense and the right uses big govt for other nonsense. Time for the govt to get out of family and individual lives and live free.

I was trying to answer your point, but I think I get it now.

Your point is that women gain benefit from getting divorced and men do not. Women are paid alimony and men aren't. I would imagine the system was created during a time when women didn't typically work outside of the home, and would suffer economic hardship after a divorce.

But today men are awarded alimony, too. Here's a story about it:
http://www.forbes.com/2007/03/13/women-paying-alimony-lead_cx_pink_0313alimony.html

Not all men get alimony, but some do. Is it always fair or right? Probably not. Are their (female) ex-spouses upset that they have to pay? Probably so.

It may be time to rethink the way we award settlements after divorce. But it's not a reason to rail against all women. You have to include men in there, too. And I would argue that there are times that alimony is justified for men and women recipients. And times that it's just for revenge or whatever and not justified.

Buster says

The result: Crops are rotting in the fields as the jobs went unfilled as the locals are too damn lazy to do the work.

All work will get done if you pay prospective workers enough. Offer people $1 million for a year's work picking crops and you'll have millions lining up to do the work.

The reason no one wants to be a farmer is that the small farmer and farm hands got ass fucked during the entire 20th century. Everyone knows there's no future in farming, so why would anyone enter that field? Of course, being the owner of a farming corporation is an entirely different matter. People will still try to get in that business because it pays a lot and you don't have to work hard.

Since no one can make a decent career out of farming and even attempting to do the manual labor will cost you opportunities and do nothing for your resume, the only way to attract people to the field is making the compensation high enough to warrant wasting a few years of your life doing the work instead of your real career. This situation is the direct result of the decades upon decades of treating farm laborers like crap and impoverishing them. America is simply reaping what it sowed. As such, I blame no one for wanting to be used like that.

Buster says

The decline of the middle class is a complicated one but generally speaking imho much of the money that used to go to the workers is skimmed off the top for shareholder distribution and CEO, top management compensation.

Amen brother. I've been saying that on this site for years.

The solution to this problem and outsourcing is to limit the total top management compensation including the CEOs to the median compensation received by the employees. Count outsourced workers as employees for this solution. Then top management won't want to pay some Chinese slave laborer $1 a day because it would lower their own income.

Companies will still have an incentive to maximize efficiency, but efficiency won't mean starving your employees (the producers). Efficiency will mean maximizing every employee's productivity as that is the way management makes the most money under my proposed system.

Additionally, management will not make more money by making the company gigantic. In fact making the company bigger after a certain point would lower top management's income. There will be an incentive to grow a company up to and only up to the point that maximizes production per person.

I call this system Capitalism 3.0. The first release was classical capitalism. The second Keynesian 20th century capitalism/corporatism.

Dan8267, why not fix corporate governance, in particular, strengthen the rights of minority shareholders, so that the Boards and the management can be prevented from oppressing them.

CEO compensation and Board compensation is completely out of control because its basically a club which doesn't have to care about the rights of the smaller shareholders. CEOs are not worth millions more than less senior managers.

Mark77 says

Dan8267, why not fix corporate governance, in particular, strengthen the rights of minority shareholders, so that the Boards and the management can be prevented from oppressing them.

Although that's not mutually exclusive with my solution, it does seem to address a much smaller problem. Capitalism 3.0 is a fundamentally different architecture.

Mark77 says

know PhD's who are on food stamps and I personally haven't worked in 5 years despite having an EE BS and a CS BS.

I believe it.

zzyzzx says

It's all part of the Democrat party war on men!

Yeah that's just it. Where is all the bitching about the "war on men"?

Lol, they got to used to paying the illegals dog crap, and nobody wants to go work in Arizona for beans when rents are up due to the recapitalization of the RE markets.

Actually, many contractors have realized this monster is mobile and they will travel for work, so I'm sure the cavalry will arrive any day to assist with bubble mania.

Freak, plenty of MGTOW websites to be found, feminism has reeled in just about every girl in the states (and fast!), through collectively putting men down through the education process, the marriage process, the television process, (I quit watching TV, to disgusted by it). Basically, since men have built up everything they need, steam age and economic system is near it's peak, government backstop?, they don't think they need us anymore, and, lol, they don't!

I got a couple of neighbors, both men, taking care of like 4 kids from the women in their family who don't even want the kids any more, they just want to run around, having more kids. Those girls are using those family members big time, women have really become good at using men these days, but at least the guys know how important it is to at least keep those kids out of the kind of environment the women would expose them to, and think nothing of it. Parts of the societies in this country have completely lost their way.

I'll ad an edit to this. Feminism really took off as our countries debt problems mounted, girls are expensive. Girls are not all dumb, they are really good at feeling people out, great manipulators, great recruiters, just check out the white feather campaign. Still, even a girl I know really well who is an auditor, the other day I'm like don't you think it's time to refinance, she owes less than 100k has a great job yet could easily move from 4.75/30 year down to a 2.75/15 year, and she's actually pretty good with her money, and she's like, oh yeah.. Very bright girl, but her head is still in the clouds. Same girl who told me rates are going up in 2014/2015.

jhall says

Taking away someone else's rights does nothing to strengthen yours.

Thankfully, no one is trying to take away anyone's rights.

Can you give an example of a serious movement to take away anyone's rights?

this original article is utter garbage.

The Original Bankster says

this original article is utter garbage.

Voters have a short mammary.