Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
So why is there an effort to go after the ones who are not breaking the law nor are they doing anything inappropriate? They are donating money...the reasons they are donating the money is irrelevant.
Why not go after the ones who we are supposed to trust becuase they are our employees yet they are allowing their own greed to dictate their decisioon making?
I know it's difficult to get your mind around this, but this IS aimed at the government. The action that would meet the requirements is for the government to act to get corporate money out of the electoral process. Everything else follows from there.
However, I disagree that corporations are "not doing anything inappropriate." They are not doing anything that shouldn't be expected, but that's not the same thing. The reality is that business sinks to whatever level of depravity the law allows, because that's a competitive necessity. If you're more scrupulous than your competition, your competition will bury you -- unless the law makes breaking that particular scruple illegal and thus unprofitable.
If businesses were allowed by law to hire assassins and try to murder their competitors, they would do it. Not because all businesspeople are murderers at heart, but because those who are would have a significant advantage over their (late) competitors. We see exactly that happening in the illegal drug industry, which operates outside the law because the entire enterprise is illegal.
So yes, corporations are definitely doing something inappropriate. But the solution is to make this inappropriate behavior illegal, and that requires government action.
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
It is?
How Did Occupy D.C. Protesters Respond to a Table Full of Job Applications?
The news media watchdog Accuracy in Media (AIM) released a video Wednesday that may denounce the notions from some that the Occupy protesters are primarily concerned with jobs.
In it, head hunters set up a table full of job applications near the protest and start offering them to protesters. But the reception they get, according to the video, is less than warm. To many, that might seem odd considering the protesters have camped out in our nations capital for over a month following the Occupy Wall Street protest that began on September 17, partly because of no jobs. Accuracy in Media put it this way in a written statement:
After more than a month of protest demands for better employment opportunities and benefits, Accuracy in Media saw fit to test their desires with employment applications. Our headhunters were treated to every excuse as to why these jobs arent good enough for them. We guess middle management opportunities with healthcare and 401k benefits arent desirable anymore.
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
so to rectify the problem, you prefer government controlling corporations...even though half of the problem is that government cant control itself and how it reacts to corporate donations.
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
BoA customers got that fee to go away, not OWeS.
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
Um no the customers of the banks did that not the people with no jobs who are loitering and whining.
"Government" can and does control itself;
so to rectify the problem, you prefer government controlling corporations...even though half of the problem is that government cant control itself and how it reacts to corporate donations.
"Government" doesn't exist. It's just an abstraction we use to lump together the president, members of Congress, judges, and appointed or hired employees of the state.
"Government" can and does control itself; that is, one subset of these people can and does control actions of other subsets. For example, there are laws against Congressmen taking bribes, meaning gifts of money or kind that the Congressman pockets and uses to enhance his own lifestyle. A Congressman who breaks these laws will be subject to arrest by federal agents (a different branch of the government) and trial in federal court (a third branch) and being sent to prison. He will also be subject to impeachment and removal from office by others in Congress -- the same branch but different individuals. As a result, it is rare for Congressmen to take this kind of illegal bribe. On the other hand, payments to a Congressman's campaign fund, as opposed to his personal bank account, are NOT illegal, and this kind of bribery is rampant. If we had laws against campaign-fund bribery the way we do against personal-bank-account bribery, there is no reason those could not be enforced with the same effectiveness.
However, in order for the government to do this, the law must be changed; and in order for the law to be changed (thanks to the Citizens United decision), either the Supreme Court must reverse itself or the Constitution must be amended.
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
wow...you truly are clueless about business.
Had nothing to do with OWS...had to do with threats of closing accounts...as I threatened.
I had my "fee" waved on all 4 of my accounts a day after it was announced....called my personal banker and said waive em or Im outa here.
Amazing...the power of the consumer.....no?
Would you say anyone with a 14 trillion dollar debt and over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities was controlling himself?
You know it's working, the banks fled from their dirty trick of bilking their clients out of their money by charging 5 bucks to access their own money via ATMs.
The bastards are against the ropes!!
wow...you truly are clueless about business.
Had nothing to do with OWS...had to do with threats of closing accounts...as I threatened.
I had my "fee" waved on all 4 of my accounts a day after it was announced....called my personal banker and said waive em or Im outa here.
Amazing...the power of the consumer.....no?
That's what OWS is all about. If you thought the TP had a powerful voting bloc, wait 'til you get a load of OWS.
Would you say anyone with a 14 trillion dollar debt and over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities was controlling himself?
I explained what I meant already.
By the way: most people involved in Occupy have jobs, and a significant number of them had BofA accounts. Just so you know.
Would you say anyone with a 14 trillion dollar debt and over 100 trillion in unfunded liabilities was controlling himself?
I explained what I meant already.
By the way: most people involved in Occupy have jobs, and a significant number of them had BofA accounts. Just so you know.
Don't mind my SP error in that rep I gave you LOL.
I was going to say it wasn't just the BoA customers....it was also their competition advertising that they wouldn't charge fees....you know capitalism and the competition that it breeds and all that stuff
hey...go for it.
In the meantime, thasnks to OWS, people are losing their jobs...and small businesses are struggling....
And I wonder how many of those people still gleefully and FRAUDULENTLY collect their unemployment benefits....
But I guess somehow that is a good thing to you.