blueblood

life's tough wear a helmet. If you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen and all that other jazz. People need some I testinal fortitude. They should be permitted to drop the f-bomb more in there, at least it's honest.

What the Marxist analysis fails to take into account is innovation from other business owners who come up with products that take the place of labour. When these products are created, there is less need for the employee than before, yet owner still gets rich. What it also fails to take into account is that thheyre owner at any time can say screw you all, I'll take my ball and go home and do it myself. All aspects of a business expense column are designed to make the owner more wealthy, machinery, fuel, labour, marketing, etc. The owner spends/Invests that money In hope of a return. A tv advertisement, a new machine, an employee at the end of the day all serve the same purpose and are no different from each other. The only outlier is the owner, he coordinates and comes up with a plan to utilize these things to make money. In a nutshell, the ontario power company is just as "entitled" to say GMs profits as the workers on the assembly line. Venezuelans are learning that lesson right now.p, and they as a country are poorer for it.

Everyone on the planet deserves the lifestyle of mark Cuban et. Al. That's not up for debate. However that is not possible. The issue is the fact that there is nothing stopping somebody from going out to get them in this country provided they do what is necessary to achieve it. My employees don't deserve a percentage of what I produce, without people like me they have no job, none. we offer a privilege that allows both parties to be further ahead than they were before. You and I both know that if said rich person stops investing, the rich person is still rich, however the worker has nothing. Employees are just another expense on the balance sheet and as has been the trend over the last 20 yrs, said employees are easily replaceable by those with a better attitude who don't feel they deserve things and feel privileged by having the job and income that goes with it.

Oh boo hoo, that in itself is incentive to stay away from narcotics. If you are that selfish to purposely do somehing like that to yourself, than old crack head from the lower east side can pay his own hospital bill.

And Portugal is in the poor house, Outstanding!! Here's a better idea, you have a narcotic in your blood system, your health card goes in the shredder.

Worked better than when China was a free for all with the british flooding it with opium. Worked better than the late 1800's wild west when everything was legal.

Are you aware that sub saharan africa is why govt shouldn't be providing foreign aid? South east asia got sweet nothing from the western world and its booming, Africa is still waiting for its handouts. Market liberalization made asia the fastest growing economy these days, heck even communist China figured that one out.

It's not brainwashing its reality, he who knows the ways of the invisible hand, benefits from the invisible hand. Liberal arts degree= waste of money. Get a trade, get a business degree, go work in a mine, oil rig, farm to pay for school. There is an education inflation issue. 40 yrs ago a high school degree was good enough, why do we need to spend all this time in school. A lot of university students are getting hosed. People get paid what they're worth, right now menial labour from overseas is dropping the cost of labour here, the party is over. Thats what happens when you go and buy products on credit and debt instead of buying things with saved money from actual work. The 99% do get a share in the profits, they get paid wages and benefits on a competitive basis with other labourers, however the labour pool is large, and the 99% of other people on this planet want the same piece of the action as people in the developed world. Thats the most efficient foreign aid there is, everyone on earth is far richer than 50 yrs ago. Theres no issue with income equality, business owners have a larger market with all the emerging markets and are making a killing at it. I am far better off with richer overseas customers than I was just exporting to developed countries. No risk, no reward. Wage earners didn't want to take the risk, they can settle for their wage. If consumers didn't buy my goods, they would starve. If consumers didn't buy oil their standard of living would go down. Consumers will always have a demand for these things and the prices reflect that demand. If consumers have less money in their pocket, prices drop in order to spur demand. Right now there are a lot of people with money who want my products, hence higher prices. If there werent business, the employees wouldnt have a job and we'd be like subsaharan africa. Its the business owner risking his money to get a return that is improving the lot of people, or would you rather have it like medieval days where aristocrats stuffed all their money in a vault and didn't make a go at making more. How was that like for the 99%? I pay my employees based on what other employers pay, and right now its also a lot. $20/hr for unskilled; 18$/acre if you have your own piece of machinery at seeding time. If I don't pay that level I don't get any workers. The system does work, it rewards people who work and punishes those who take shortcuts. I'm already pulling my weight, how about you start stepping up to the plate, equality works both ways; we rich people risk a lot, and contribute a lot more than the 99%.

Thats what they told my great grand dad as well and we went from having a shack in the woods to two multi building yard sites with a shop big enough to put the original shack in with room for all the machinery to boot. In the words of Eddie Murphy "yes I can!"

Yes it's called public mischief and is clearly stated in the criminal code.

thats making excuses, Its never closed. The disparity is the incentive.

Once again cry me a river. I've had all sorts of neighbors get destroyed in the 1980's when interest rates took off when they went on spending sprees, I paid off my debts and could only buy what I could afford. I survived, they did not. They laughed at my little house, older truck, and older machinery; I laughed at their bank account and debt payments. The fact the gov'ts are writing off mortgage tax deductions and insuring bank accounts is bad enough policy, let alone the suggestions they give to central banks to drop interest rates. You keep believing the fantasy that the banks run everything, Obama got elected by pork barreling and trashing rich people. People wanted housing, they got it.

Cry me a river. It's not hard to make a real estate decision, I make 50K a year and have 5K in the bank and the house is 400K, golly gee darn, looks like I'm renting. Ordinary person needs to read a book, newspapers, and news stories on how the markets are doing and look into trends.

If you and argus are stupid enough to put money into investments without actively managing them, you deserve the bath that you take. If you are stupid enough to buy a house thats 400k and you only make 50k per year, you deserve the bath that you take. Had there not been the huge demand for housing, these loans wouldn't be created in the first place, along with the government policy to bail out said banks. It's been well documented that bad gov't policy is part of the problem. The banks are going to create a way to make money no matter what rules are laid in place. The rules in the USA led the banks to do what they did, in Canada we have different rules that are basically an insurance on banks and up until now more responsible bank clients. Oh and if a hobo asks me for $20 I'm going to tell him to fuck off, unless hobo gives me 10$ down and his pants as collateral. Once again I blame EVERYBODY, banks, government, and mortgage clients. They were all pigs and got slaughtered. Keep playing the blame game.

Cheers to getting a better education than a liberal arts degree and cheers to going to the resource sector/trades where the real money is. Typical leftist attitude, blame a scapegoat for many people's laziness. Over the past decade I've been able to replace/add on machinery, hire part time employees, buy "toys", vacations withoud going into debt. We aren't stuffing money into a mattress, it gets spent, saved in a bank, and invested.

Agreed in today's society we have people owning things that only the super rich could afford, namely computers. Remember the days when it was only one tv in the house and it cost a fortune. What's a good flatscreen worth these days? The "99%" should take a little adventure to Africa to see what real poverty is.

And neither did china's economy by having scores of people running around high. What about the ban on schedule I and III substances, shall we reverse that ban as well?

Oh I don't know, historical precedent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_Wars Nobody wants a country full of Intoxicated people

I'm saying EVERYBODY is at fault, and a big part of that is the idiots with <50K salaries wanting 300-400K house. If they get their heads out of their ass and make smarter decisions then we don't see this ridiculous madness. Blaming scapegoats for their blatant lack of responsibility isn't going to solve anything. Not only that, they elect govts who implement policy to facilitate their entitlement attitude.

http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=uncle%20si%2050%20shades%20of%20grey%20quote&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CEkQtwIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D3ljrc4XjYJM&ei=X9AGUaveMca0ygG9noHgBw&usg=AFQjCNFPo7KNEvvoBAdaDB7JqohqqX-bHg&bvm=bv.41524429,d.aWc

To put the blame solely on the banks is laughable, there was also bad govt policy, and not to mention idiots who think they are entitled to a 300-400k house on less than 50k per year salary. Banks will make their money in any environment you put them in, Canada is a prime example of that. Canada is approaching a similar type of debt situation as the USA and at least this time you have the government pretty much screaming at people to get their debt under control, yet the banks still make money. The environment in the USA in the early 2000s with extremely low interest rates, poor govt policy, and entitled idiots basically gave direction to the banks to operate the way they did to maximize profits, and it all came apart when everyone got buried in debt and couldn't pay the bills. Had people down there been smarter and not so entitled, there wouldn't be the market demand for these ridiculous mortgages and the banks would have to act accordingly. In my opinion it's like drug use, we have a bunch of stupid entitled people who want to get high as it makes them feel good. As we all know getting high has it's share of risks, rewards, problems, and benefits. let's take crack for example; there are people who want to get high and want to use crack to do it, people process the cocaine into crack, grow the cocoa plant, and people sell it, and others protect the sellers. And we all know the problems that arise out of crack use, now there's two main approaches to going after this problem, he great game of going after the dealers, processors, and growers (like you guys wishing to go after the banks), or if people got their heads out of their ass and decided that drug use is stupid and ceased wishing to get high, thus killing the demand and forcing the dealers et. Al to find anoer means of obtaining finances (forcing the banks to offer smarter mortgages, demand keeping a cap on home prices, smarter depositors/clients picking smarter banks) People always get what they ask for.

Oh Moses smell the roses...

You also forgot to mention that Scandinavian countries also are enjoying the free ride provided by uncle Sam In regards to security, finance, and most importantly innovation. They get to enjoy their "paradise" while others do all the work. That's one for bushcheney.

This is why when a person accuses someone of rape we have KGB statements to try and convince someone not to falsely accuse someone. And ther is a record of people who get convicted of making false KGB statements, it's called a criminal record.

And intimidation, the criminal code clearly states that blocking a highway is a no-no 423. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction who, wrongfully and without lawful authority, for the purpose of compelling another person to abstain from doing anything that he or she has a lawful right to do, or to do anything that he or she has a lawful right to abstain from doing, (a) uses violence or threats of violence to that person or his or her spouse or common-law partner or children, or injures his or her property; ( intimidates or attempts to intimidate that person or a relative of that person by threats that, in Canada or elsewhere, violence or other injury will be done to or punishment inflicted on him or her or a relative of his or hers, or that the property of any of them will be damaged; © persistently follows that person; (d) hides any tools, clothes or other property owned or used by that person, or deprives him or her of them or hinders him or her in the use of them; (e) with one or more other persons, follows that person, in a disorderly manner, on a highway; (f) besets or watches the place where that person resides, works, carries on business or happens to be; or (g) blocks or obstructs a highway. Exception (2) A person who attends at or near or approaches a dwelling-house or place, for the purpose only of obtaining or communicating information, does not watch or beset within the meaning of this section. And where does some precedent from laying this charge in similar circumstances lie, well with the blood tribe out of Alberta http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/brenda-norrell/2011/09/blood-nation-women-arrested-during-blockade-fracking http://aptn.ca/pages/news/2011/12/23/peaceful-protestors-charged-with-intimidation/ Ouch!