What does Memphis do about this?

vantexan

Well-Known Member
We wouldn't be "robbing Peter to pay Paul". We'd be using our IRA to pay for our irresponsible lifestyle.
But who is being irresponsible? And are those not living irresponsibly required to shoulder the same burden because they're in the same generation? Why do they have less standing than future generations? Or is the problem that as a businessman you're required to pay matching funds and you'd rather keep that money now that FedEx is squeezing you too? As I've said if you are benefiting from the exploitation of others you should pay more to the system that benefits you more. Slavery was wrong, horribly wrong. Wage slavery not as bad, obviously, but again we have a large swath of our society benefiting from low wages of an even larger group. Exacerbated by exporting jobs to those working for extremely low wages. We work to exist so others can live well. So who's being irresponsible in this generation? If they can't pay better they can at least assist our retirement. Otherwise we are used then cast off to an eventual miserable death. Is that the "Great Society" we want?
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
But who is being irresponsible? And are those not living irresponsibly required to shoulder the same burden because they're in the same generation? Why do they have less standing than future generations? Or is the problem that as a businessman you're required to pay matching funds and you'd rather keep that money now that FedEx is squeezing you too? As I've said if you are benefiting from the exploitation of others you should pay more to the system that benefits you more. Slavery was wrong, horribly wrong. Wage slavery not as bad, obviously, but again we have a large swath of our society benefiting from low wages of an even larger group. Exacerbated by exporting jobs to those working for extremely low wages. We work to exist so others can live well. So who's being irresponsible in this generation? If they can't pay better they can at least assist our retirement. Otherwise we are used then cast off to an eventual miserable death. Is that the "Great Society" we want?
While it may or may not be what "The Great Society" had in mind what is for certain is that you my good man are the "Great Apologist" . One minute you're Waaaaing about the rotten deal X did to you and your pension. The next minute you are apologizing in behalf of X and countless other companies who did the same thing to thousands of others what they did to you. So chill out man. If you are disease afflicted as you say you are, you're not going to be around to see the bad things you say are going to happen. Oh by the way, Medicare is a key component of LBJ's " Great Society" program. In the end, you'll be signing up for that too. Come to think of it when you hit 65 you are automatically enrolled.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
But who is being irresponsible? And are those not living irresponsibly required to shoulder the same burden because they're in the same generation? Why do they have less standing than future generations? Or is the problem that as a businessman you're required to pay matching funds and you'd rather keep that money now that FedEx is squeezing you too? As I've said if you are benefiting from the exploitation of others you should pay more to the system that benefits you more. Slavery was wrong, horribly wrong. Wage slavery not as bad, obviously, but again we have a large swath of our society benefiting from low wages of an even larger group. Exacerbated by exporting jobs to those working for extremely low wages. We work to exist so others can live well. So who's being irresponsible in this generation? If they can't pay better they can at least assist our retirement. Otherwise we are used then cast off to an eventual miserable death. Is that the "Great Society" we want?
We are irresponsible van. We elected the officials who feed us the make believe economic theory that low taxes brings about so much growth that it not only increases the IRS' take but also decreases the debt. Yes, in the past there was some success with that. But when Reagan's own budget director comes out and says that the calculus is far more complex and we are no longer in a situation where that makes sense, then I think Republicans should start listening.

And no, van, I am not trying to keep the employer's matching funds. Besides if I could, what do you think FedEx would do in the next negotiated agreement? They would take that percentage themselves. Do you see a patern developing here? Why tax the rich? Because they have the money.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
While it may or may not be what "The Great Society" had in mind what is for certain is that you my good man are the "Great Apologist" . One minute you're Waaaaing about the rotten deal X did to you and your pension. The next minute you are apologizing in behalf of X and countless other companies who did the same thing to thousands of others what they did to you. So chill out man. If you are disease afflicted as you say you are, you're not going to be around to see the bad things you say are going to happen. Oh by the way, Medicare is a key component of LBJ's " Great Society" program. In the end, you'll be signing up for that too. Come to think of it when you hit 65 you are automatically enrolled.
Your problem is you refuse to look at both sides. One must always attack the other side and never acknowledge the issues the other side has to contend with. It's a lopsided perspective. What everyone should be trying to achieve is balance. They want it all their way, and are only willing to give enough to keep people willing to stay. You want it all labor's way, and take the lion's share for yourselves when you didn't risk capital, put in the effort to create and grow a business, and provide jobs. Both sides need to understand the rights, responsibilities, and the risks involved. Are you willing to do that? Or will you continue to demonize everyone who doesn't see it your way?
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
We are irresponsible van. We elected the officials who feed us the make believe economic theory that low taxes brings about so much growth that it not only increases the IRS' take but also decreases the debt. Yes, in the past there was some success with that. But when Reagan's own budget director comes out and says that the calculus is far more complex and we are no longer in a situation where that makes sense, then I think Republicans should start listening.

And no, van, I am not trying to keep the employer's matching funds. Besides if I could, what do you think FedEx would do in the next negotiated agreement? They would take that percentage themselves. Do you see a patern developing here? Why tax the rich? Because they have the money.
We also elected officials that believed we can spend our way out of a serious crisis without ever having to face the inevitable collapse continuing to do so brings. $20 trillion and the cliff is ever closer. Why not try reducing the regs that have strangled business and see where that leads? What we were doing was only benefiting the rich. Otherwise we'll still be churning out college graduates who can't find good jobs, and we're already seeing the unrest from that.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
We also elected officials that believed we can spend our way out of a serious crisis without ever having to face the inevitable collapse continuing to do so brings. $20 trillion and the cliff is ever closer. Why not try reducing the regs that have strangled business and see where that leads? What we were doing was only benefiting the rich. Otherwise we'll still be churning out college graduates who can't find good jobs, and we're already seeing the unrest from that.
Yes, van. College graduates who in just a few short years will be running the country and deciding it's finances.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Your problem is you refuse to look at both sides. One must always attack the other side and never acknowledge the issues the other side has to contend with. It's a lopsided perspective. What everyone should be trying to achieve is balance. They want it all their way, and are only willing to give enough to keep people willing to stay. You want it all labor's way, and take the lion's share for yourselves when you didn't risk capital, put in the effort to create and grow a business, and provide jobs. Both sides need to understand the rights, responsibilities, and the risks involved. Are you willing to do that? Or will you continue to demonize everyone who doesn't see it your way?
Can you name one time that business without regulation has acted prudently in the public's best interest at the detriment of it's stockholders?
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Can you name one time that business without regulation has acted prudently in the public's best interest at the detriment of it's stockholders?
No one is saying no regulations. Just not strangulation by regulation. Ones that cost business serious money to comply with and discourage others from even going into business. "60 Minutes" recently had a segment on shady lawyers having disabled people show up at various businesses just so they could sue them for not being in compliance with in many cases absolutely ridiculous regulations that cost them very large sums of money for no good reason. Many of the businesses weren't even aware of these minor details that they needed to have corrected until they ended up losing large sums of money in court by unscrupulous lawyers who were suing thousands of businesses. If you think that's ok then we need to stop this merry-go-round argument now.
 

Maui

Well-Known Member
No one is saying no regulations. Just not strangulation by regulation. Ones that cost business serious money to comply with and discourage others from even going into business. "60 Minutes" recently had a segment on shady lawyers having disabled people show up at various businesses just so they could sue them for not being in compliance with in many cases absolutely ridiculous regulations that cost them very large sums of money for no good reason. Many of the businesses weren't even aware of these minor details that they needed to have corrected until they ended up losing large sums of money in court by unscrupulous lawyers who were suing thousands of businesses. If you think that's ok then we need to stop this merry-go-round argument now.
My family has been sued by that guy. He is very shady. He will find a plaintiff that has not even used or visited a business and still claim standing. He is horrible. The plaintiff had never been anywhere near the property, but in CA they allowed the suit to go forward. Additionally, this lawyer keeps the suit even if you make the necessary addition or minor repair. He just seeks settlements from mid-sized businesses of around $15,000-$30,000, but sometimes much more.

IMO we should have had an opportunity to make the minor repair and to answer the complaint. I hate that guy.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
All the wage slave earners who'll need others to do the same some day.
Wrong. Because sooner or later debt has to be paid.

In this country there used to be pensions. There used to be jobs where one parent went to work and easily provided for the family. Why do you think SS is always going to be there?
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Wrong. Because sooner or later debt has to be paid.

In this country there used to be pensions. There used to be jobs where one parent went to work and easily provided for the family. Why do you think SS is always going to be there?
I'm going on the gov't's SS website. If nothing done about it it'll still be there, only paying less. Those 100,000,000+ still working will still have taxes taken out, still having employers matching their taxes. Those pushing constantly that SS is bankrupt are almost all Republican businessmen who hate paying the tax. They don't care that it helps people, people are there to be used for their benefit, not the other way around. That doesn't mean all Republicans feel this way. These are the same people who year over year strip away benefits and suppress pay while they cash in stock options. And they're always looking for areas where they can increase profits. They and their higher paid employees who benefit from the status quo are the ones pushing for the end of SS.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Wrong. Because sooner or later debt has to be paid.

In this country there used to be pensions. There used to be jobs where one parent went to work and easily provided for the family. Why do you think SS is always going to be there?
And sooner or later debt has to be paid down to a manageable level. Highly doubtful we'll ever see this much paid off.
 

Route 66

Slapped Upside-da-Head Member
My family has been sued by that guy. He is very shady. He will find a plaintiff that has not even used or visited a business and still claim standing. He is horrible. The plaintiff had never been anywhere near the property, but in CA they allowed the suit to go forward. Additionally, this lawyer keeps the suit even if you make the necessary addition or minor repair. He just seeks settlements from mid-sized businesses of around $15,000-$30,000, but sometimes much more.

IMO we should have had an opportunity to make the minor repair and to answer the complaint. I hate that guy.
Better call Saul
 

Schweddy

Balls
You guys seen this yet? It's on facebook, American AF - AAF Nation;

16387868_1247557401979398_5424153780208098475_n.jpg
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Rest assured all this hoopla and " hooray for the red white and blue " will disappear in a flash if X is a named codefendant is a civil rights law suit filed by the protesters and they make it stick. If so rest assure the employee in question will go among the missing and there will be a whole new set of conduct rules which will specifically ban this type of behavior.
 

Schweddy

Balls
Yeah I'm not 100% on it but I keep seeing suggested posts for their t-shirts for sale, etc.

I'm assuming it might be because when Fedex and ups merge it'll be fedup and maybe they threw usps in for kicks?

(Random) It actually reminds me of that old prank call where the guy keeps saying, you kick muh dog?!
 
Top