A sign of things to come? Sit in at closed plant.

[strmrdr]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081207/ap_on_bi_ge/workers_takeover

 

[starsapphire]

I think that they should do something to get what they are owed. Maybe if more people got pissed off like them, companies would not crap on their workers!

 

[HollyS]

Actually, any occupation, by force, of a building or the premises of a business that is not your own, should be an arrestable offense. Every person should be taken downtown for a ''sit-in'' in their very own jail cell.

If we let civil unrest get out of hand in America, you will see the kind of turmoil they are experiencing in Greece right now. Or France a couple of years ago.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/9/2008 5:55:13 PM
Author: HollyS
Actually, any occupation, by force, of a building or the premises of a business that is not your own, should be an arrestable offense. Every person should be taken downtown for a ''sit-in'' in their very own jail cell.


If we let civil unrest get out of hand in America, you will see the kind of turmoil they are experiencing in Greece right now. Or France a couple of years ago.

I have no words :{

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 12/9/2008 11:04:17 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/9/2008 5:55:13 PM
Author: HollyS
Actually, any occupation, by force, of a building or the premises of a business that is not your own, should be an arrestable offense. Every person should be taken downtown for a ''sit-in'' in their very own jail cell.


If we let civil unrest get out of hand in America, you will see the kind of turmoil they are experiencing in Greece right now. Or France a couple of years ago.

I have no words :{

I have words...

Right on Holly

There are ways to protest without breaking the law.

 

[perry]

Date: 12/9/2008 11:04:17 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/9/2008 5:55:13 PM
Author: HollyS
Actually, any occupation, by force, of a building or the premises of a business that is not your own, should be an arrestable offense. Every person should be taken downtown for a ''sit-in'' in their very own jail cell.


If we let civil unrest get out of hand in America, you will see the kind of turmoil they are experiencing in Greece right now. Or France a couple of years ago.

I have no words :{

Holly: There is a very fine line between tolerance and opression; and dramatically different results.

While you raise a technical point that the building owner - or the perhaps the lesee (if the business was leasing the building) could ask for the eviction and arrest of the protesters... That is most often conterproductive.

Part of what makes America America is the fact that many times tolerence is practiced which most often results in peaceful resolution of situations.

I grew up during the Viet Nam riot years - and very close to one of the active "rioting" univeristies in the nation (UW - Madison). I know of protest that were turned into riots by the way the police acted. I know of ugly protest that petered out by a different police action with a different police chief.

It is a very unfortunate situation when the banks call the loans on a business and forces an instant closure of a business. It has happened many times over many decades (and even centuries in America and the rest of the world).

The employees can feel fortunate that they got their last paycheck. A lot of employees in similar situations do not.

I support the concept of the people protesting for what they should have gotten. As long as they do no damage to the building - let them be. If you try to crack down you will almost certainly create a much worse situation.

The riots in Greece and other parts of Europe are often from the police using excessive force for the situation. Many of the past riots in the US have been from percieved excessive force. Forceably arresting these people when they are really doing no harm would be using excessive force and possibly create the kind of riots you wish to avoid.

I also understand that the business owner(s) probably cannot offer the employees anything. The bank shut the business down. Today their was news that the financial institition is now offering a loan to cover these employee separation expenses; but not the revolving credit needed for the business to continue to operate. From a business perspective - I don''t see why the business owner(s) would sign loan papers for a loan that they cannot possibly pay off. They likely cannot pay off the outstading loans on the business already and all they can do is try to minimize the cost of closing down the business. Most businesses that fail never file for Chapter 7 bankruptcy (liquidation) as that just adds legal bills that get paid first from the disposition of whatever assets exist. Most creditors just cut whatever deal they can get as a business is liquidated.

It''s a sad situation... and likely to repeat itself many times in the next year as the US and world economy reshuffles back to more stable credit policies.

Heck, I''ve worked for businesses that continued to make money and operate and never was paid for my work. Sometimes you just cut your losses and move on. I''ve had to do that more than once in my life.

Perry

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/9/2008 11:44:14 PM
Author: perry


I support the concept of the people protesting for what they should have gotten. As long as they do no damage to the building - let them be. If you try to crack down you will almost certainly create a much worse situation.


Perry

Bravo
Peaceful protest is a long American tradition.
Going JBT on them just leads to worse unrest and violence.

 

[HollyS]

Date: 12/9/2008 11:04:17 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/9/2008 5:55:13 PM
Author: HollyS
Actually, any occupation, by force, of a building or the premises of a business that is not your own, should be an arrestable offense. Every person should be taken downtown for a ''sit-in'' in their very own jail cell.


If we let civil unrest get out of hand in America, you will see the kind of turmoil they are experiencing in Greece right now. Or France a couple of years ago.

I have no words :{

You completely and utterly amaze me. I no longer know what you believe, because from where I sit, you are all over the map. I think you had better explain yourself. Find the words.

What gives anyone the right -- because they want their severance package (which isn''t owed to them, it is merely given if the employer wishes to give it) -- to stage an occupation of a business that they don''t own??????

Don''t confuse this situation with real problems where civil disobedience can be effective. Shame on anyone who allowed this protest to work in the favor of the protesters. This is just the first slide on the slippery slope of anarchy. And your approval of it makes me

.

So there.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/10/2008 12:44:26 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 12/9/2008 11:04:17 PM

Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/9/2008 5:55:13 PM

Author: HollyS

Actually, any occupation, by force, of a building or the premises of a business that is not your own, should be an arrestable offense. Every person should be taken downtown for a 'sit-in' in their very own jail cell.



If we let civil unrest get out of hand in America, you will see the kind of turmoil they are experiencing in Greece right now. Or France a couple of years ago.

I have no words :{

You completely and utterly amaze me. I no longer know what you believe, because from where I sit, you are all over the map. I think you had better explain yourself. Find the words.


What gives anyone the right -- because they want their severance package (which isn't owed to them, it is merely given if the employer wishes to give it) -- to stage an occupation of a business that they don't own??????


Don't confuse this situation with real problems where civil disobedience can be effective. Shame on anyone who allowed this protest to work in the favor of the protesters. This is just the first slide on the slippery slope of anarchy. And your approval of it makes me

.


So there.

First I have no need to explain myself to you nor do you have the right to demand that I do so.
but since you asked:
I believe in truth, justice and the American way :}

As to where I stand on issues:
I am pro-business and pro-worker and believe things are best when there is a balance between the 2.
I am pro-business and pro environment and believe there is a balance that can be achieved.
I am pro-business and pro-consumer and believe there is a balance.
I find a lot of republicans overly pro business and unions overly pro-worker.
I believe in collective bargaining to give power to workers I do not believe in the socialist agenda that a lot of current unions have.
I believe in helping people but believe that the government does a very bad job of doing it.
It should be a hand up not a lifestyle.
I believe in the fundamental right of free expression including the right to protest injustice.
I believe in the right to be left alone by the government.
I believe in the right to carry arms and to be armed.
I believe in the justifiable use of arms both by individuals and government.
I believe in local and state authority and do not believe in federal authority.
I believe in property rights and that people should be free on government involvement in their person papers and processions.
I believe in easy legal emigration with strong secure borders.
I believe in Americans first and all foreign aid should be cut off until the deficit is paid off and there are no hungry people in the US.
I believe in protecting the US manufacturing base.
I believe that the system that has been built around the dollar and wall street is corrupt.
I very strongly believe that the governments in the US on several levels are corrupt and totally out of control and well beyond the powers granted them in the constitution.
Most of all I believe in the power of the people over the power of the government.

This was a peaceful protest of an injustice brought about by the crooks on Wall Street added and abetted by the crooks in government and in the banking system.
A little anarchy is not a bad thing!
The bad thing is the tight control that government tries and yoke us with.


See i'm am easy to understand :} but you will not understand it because it is clear you have no understanding of the concept of freedom.

 

[MoonWater]

Hmm...I agree with Karl on a lot of stuff.

 

[LAJennifer]

Date: 12/10/2008 3:23:42 PM
Author: MoonWater
Hmm...I agree with Karl on a lot of stuff.

Me too - Karl is one of my favorites.

 

[strmrdr]

I got in a hurry that should say...
I believe in property rights and that people should be free OF government involvement in their person papers and processions.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 12/10/2008 3:36:28 PM
Author: strmrdr
I got in a hurry that should say...
I believe in property rights and that people should be free OF government involvement in their person papers and processions.

heh, that's how I read it anyway so you're good.

btw Karl, I don't agree with you on everything, but you are extremely consistent in your beliefs and I have a huge amount of respect for you for that.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/10/2008 3:50:36 PM
Author: MoonWater

Date: 12/10/2008 3:36:28 PM

Author: strmrdr

I got in a hurry that should say...

I believe in property rights and that people should be free OF government involvement in their person papers and processions.

heh, that''s how I read it anyway so you''re good.


btw Karl, I don''t agree with you on everything, but you are extremely consistent in your beliefs and I have a huge amount of respect for you for that.

thanks for the kind words.

 

[Beacon]

It's easy to say "I believe in...." and then have that statement be quite inconsistent in the face of real situations.

Reality is that collectivism is not a good thing in general and private property should be respected and trespass is not ok.

I do not think it is a "workers right" to take over private property. They can conduct their protest on neutral ground.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/10/2008 3:36:28 PM
Author: strmrdr
I got in a hurry that should say...

I believe in property rights and that people should be free OF government involvement in their person papers and processions.

is it wierd to correct a correction lol

possessions not processions

Rofl!!! all I can say is its the sinus meds fault!!!!

 

[Skippy123]

Date: 12/10/2008 4:29:41 PM
Author: Beacon
It''s easy to say ''I believe in....'' and then have that statement be quite inconsistent in the face of real situations.

Reality is that collectivism is not a good thing in general and private property should be respected and trespass is not ok.

I do not think it is a ''workers right'' to take over private property. They can conduct their protest on neutral ground.

I agree; I do feel for them though.

 

[purrfectpear]

Date: 12/10/2008 6:32:01 PM
Author: Skippy123

Date: 12/10/2008 4:29:41 PM
Author: Beacon
It''s easy to say ''I believe in....'' and then have that statement be quite inconsistent in the face of real situations.

Reality is that collectivism is not a good thing in general and private property should be respected and trespass is not ok.

I do not think it is a ''workers right'' to take over private property. They can conduct their protest on neutral ground.

I agree; I do feel for them though.

Exactly. I did my share of protesting in the late 60''s but I managed to protest without breaking any laws.

They could picket on public property, but they''d rather sit in climate controlled comfort with bathrooms

 

[perry]

I agree with the concept that this protest should not have infringed on private property - and that private proterty is just that --- Private; and should not be infringed upon without just reason (which does exist in certain situations).

However, in this situation and in the real world many times you have situations where things are not ideal. In this case the protesters are in fact inside the building.

So, how do you resolve the situation in the best way once it developes?

Forceable eviction and/or arrest is very likely to either create a riot or future vandalism against the property. That can be quite costly for the property owner (and forget about collecting damages - it almost never actually happens no matter what the courts rule).

On the other hand - if the people are peacable and there is no other urgent need for the building... Letting them occupy the building does no harm and may in fact do some good (like preventing other vandalism).

While it is fine for people to state what the rights are (and the wrongs); the fact is that the situation is such that you have to find a reasonable way of dealing with it. A lot of things in life are that way. My experience is that the extreemist responses rarely, if ever, actually achieve a good long term solution.

As far as Karl goes and his beliefs and actions. I tend to agree with more of them than I disagree with. Both of us, and many others, are not entirely consistent in what we post either as we all look at situations and apply different levels of pragmatism and experience.

Something I''ve been meaning to ask Karl though... and now might be a good time. Karl; how''d you like to get together for a lunch or dinner over the holidays. I tend to travel to Madison on a regular basis - and I used to live in Janesville.

Perry

 

[strmrdr]

It was the perfect pr move.
Very well done.

to the workers er ex-workers.
Its not like anything was going to be done with the building for weeks if not months.

 

[strmrdr]

Perry,
That would be kewl
Things are a little crazy right now so not sure when it would be possible.
Might have to put it off for a while.

 

[movie zombie]

the owner of the building broke their contract. they owe $ to the workers. should they be in jail?

movie zombie

 

[HollyS]

Yahoo buzz has a story about how Greek protests have stirred things up all across Europe. Young people, personally unhappy, taking their anger out into the streets. No real focus for the protests -- just feeling a bit ''anarchy'' today. And there ain''t nothing peaceful about the ensuing rioting.

I think that pretty much proves my point for me, thank you.

 

[HollyS]

Date: 12/10/2008 4:29:41 PM
Author: Beacon
It''s easy to say ''I believe in....'' and then have that statement be quite inconsistent in the face of real situations.

Reality is that collectivism is not a good thing in general and private property should be respected and trespass is not ok.

I do not think it is a ''workers right'' to take over private property. They can conduct their protest on neutral ground.

Which is exactly the problem. And precisely my point. It doesn''t have diddly squat to do with freedom. Yours, mine, or anyone''s.

 

[HollyS]

Date: 12/11/2008 3:33:42 PM
Author: movie zombie
the owner of the building broke their contract. they owe $ to the workers. should they be in jail?

movie zombie

The fact that you can even equate the two is ridiculous. Trespassing is a violation of the law . . . because like it or not, that company still has rights under the law. Whether they are ''nice'' people is immaterial to my comments.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 12/11/2008 5:31:19 PM
Author: HollyS
Yahoo buzz has a story about how Greek protests have stirred things up all across Europe. Young people, personally unhappy, taking their anger out into the streets. No real focus for the protests -- just feeling a bit ''anarchy'' today. And there ain''t nothing peaceful about the ensuing rioting.


I think that pretty much proves my point for me, thank you.

That has absolutely nothing to do with a peaceful sit in at a plant.
It proves absolutely nothing.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 12/11/2008 3:33:42 PM
Author: movie zombie
the owner of the building broke their contract. they owe $ to the workers. should they be in jail?

movie zombie

Yes.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 12/11/2008 5:45:36 PM
Author: strmrdr

Date: 12/11/2008 5:31:19 PM
Author: HollyS
Yahoo buzz has a story about how Greek protests have stirred things up all across Europe. Young people, personally unhappy, taking their anger out into the streets. No real focus for the protests -- just feeling a bit ''anarchy'' today. And there ain''t nothing peaceful about the ensuing rioting.


I think that pretty much proves my point for me, thank you.

That has absolutely nothing to do with a peaceful sit in at a plant.
It proves absolutely nothing.

Talk about a non sequitur.

 

[movie zombie]

Date: 12/11/2008 5:39:02 PM
Author: HollyS

Date: 12/11/2008 3:33:42 PM
Author: movie zombie
the owner of the building broke their contract. they owe $ to the workers. should they be in jail?

movie zombie

The fact that you can even equate the two is ridiculous. Trespassing is a violation of the law . . . because like it or not, that company still has rights under the law. Whether they are ''nice'' people is immaterial to my comments.

ridiculous?! please no name calling or disparaging remarks against my thought process or character. it doesn''t become you.

the employees have rights under the law [like it or not].
not paying $ owed is a violation against the law.
the owners broke the law first by not paying the $ and the employees decided to sit down and stay put until they got what they are owed....not that two wrongs make a right.
they have not carved up the place and removed things to settle the debt owed by the owners. speaks well for them.
also speaks well for the owners that they haven''t attempted to force the issue by having the ex-employees forcibly removed. makes me wonder if they aren''t hopeful there wiil be enough pressure brought to bear that BofA will give them the $ necessary to pay their debts owed to the workers and stay in business.


movie zombie

 

[iheartscience]

Did everyone see that the workers got what they were owed? They got paid for their last week of work, severance pay and 2 month's health insurance.