"Worthless"

It's not hard to see why this rage-filled anti-austerity poem has gone viral. Austerity is a failure, it only makes the richest, richer and everyone else poorer, with devastating consequences for the poorest. But go on, "tell us that the only thing, not working about this system, is us."

Nice flow. I take it she is greek?

The new buzz word among the pro-austerity crowd in the UK is "live within your means" & "living within our means"...

And it's a slap in the face gesture used mainly by rich folk who's means mean they can live like kings having done nothing but rob the country.

Like bankers and high paid politicians who are asking for a pay rise.



Here's the kicker...

The living wage minimum wage will be raised to £9 in 2020...
It's currently £7.50...

What they've managed to fool the country into not asking is what is £9 going to be worth in 2020...

I'll tell you...

It'll be worth less than the current £7.50 due to inflation and an annual pound sterling drop...



Who voted for these people, oh that's right, people too focused on the EU.


Look at the right hand thumbs up, while the left hand molests your pockets.

a reply to: Kali74

The Greek bailout can be summed up in four words:

'We own you now.'

I'm not an expert but this is economic racketeering as far as I'm concerned. I can understand why there is rioting in the streets.

originally posted by: Thorneblood
Nice flow. I take it she is greek?

She's awake.

Now lets put the banksters to sleep. People are tired of the legal robbery, euphemistically called "austere measures".

a reply to: Kali74

What all low paid workers need to do is all go on strike, then when the greedy corporate welfare scroungers' profits are affected, they will soon realise just how 'worthless' our labour is.

And before anyone says that striking will put loads on the dole and close businesses, let's not forget that doing so will not make any low paid worker any worse off than they are now, they are already on working benefits and are no better off for working. But it will make those greedy welfare-scrounging business owners VERY MUCH worse off.

So, to those business owners who rely on free taxpayer cash to subsidise their payrolls and threaten to close their doors i say go ahead, and I'll say hello to you and smile as you also join the dole queue alongside the rest of us.

If you won't allow us to benefit from our own sweat, we'll make sure you don't either. You have everything to lose, whilst we have nothing to lose by striking.

Working people are your bread and butter and jam, without our labour you have no business, no production, no profits, nothing.

And people are beginning to wake up to it.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

We should all be in the streets, not rioting but just there, in our squares. Our real economic power would show if we did it, I mean really did it. Everyone making under 22/hr (USD), which is what the minimum wage should be, should be out on the streets en masse for 2 days, all over the world. The entire world economy depends on us and we are pooped on.

a reply to: Kali74

Great vid.

And yes, we should all be rioting and striking and supporting local and not the monoliths and supporting each other and our worth.

But, see, they've instilled a fear in many people and a sense of elitism in others and divided us in oh so many ways that this will now never happen. Not until it's way too late.

a reply to: doobydoll

And while people strike, employers will fire them and have 100's of other applications from people willing to work. Your idea would only work if there was unity. Problem is, there is no unity amongst the serfs. Not when it comes to employment and wages.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

We should all be in the streets, not rioting but just there, in our squares. Our real economic power would show if we did it, I mean really did it. Everyone making under 22/hr (USD), which is what the minimum wage should be, should be out on the streets en masse for 2 days, all over the world. The entire world economy depends on us and we are pooped on.

Well it better happen before automation revs up.

a reply to: Bone75

Indeed. However not all min. wage jobs will be able to be automated.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

We should all be in the streets, not rioting but just there, in our squares. Our real economic power would show if we did it, I mean really did it. Everyone making under 22/hr (USD), which is what the minimum wage should be, should be out on the streets en masse for 2 days, all over the world. The entire world economy depends on us and we are pooped on.

Tell that to the EU.

They want to privatize Greece's infrastructure.

Said infrastructure could lead to outsourcing.

That outsourcing could lead to economic collapse.

Then all of a sudden, Greece needs another bailout.

Like I said, Economic racketeering.

Ah hell, let's just make the minimum wage $100/hour. Why not? It's a living wage ... No wait, I don't think that's enough. Why should my kids have to live a life less extravagant than Beyoncé's kid? I think minimum wage should be more like $500 or maybe $1,000/hour ...

I mean those corporations are just rich right? Thay can pay me whatever I think I need.

a reply to: Thecakeisalie

Oh it absolutely is a racket. What's happening to Greece is jaw dropping. On a small scale it would look like a Mob shake down of the local mom and pop store... but that's illegal in all Western nations.

a reply to: ketsuko

Hurr durr! Asking for fair is like asking for the moon!

How about a trickle up system? We all know the trickle down system doesn't work, it just causes more greed.

“The benefits do not trickle down,” the authors of the study write, directly contradicting the theory that US president Ronald Reagan popularized in the 1980s. Reagan argued that decreasing the tax burden for the rich–investors, executives, corporations and the like–would not only increase their own income but stimulate broad economic growth as they create opportunities for others’ increased prosperity. This belief has been at the center of conservative economic thought in the United States and abroad since Reagan’s presidency, during which he cut tax rates for the rich.
But the IMF study’s five authors say we should instead focus on raising the income of the poor and the middle class. “Widening income inequality is the defining challenge of our time,” they write. “In advanced economies, the gap between the rich and poor is at its highest level in decades.”
Raising up the poor appears to have a dramatic effect: A 1% increase in the income share of the bottom quintile results in a 0.38% increase in GDP. Meanwhile, a 1% increase in the income share of the top 20% results in a 0.08% decrease in GDP growth.
The IMF study comes with caveats. The dataset is from a wide range of countries, some with better available data than others. Also, inequality is far more skewed in developing countries than in countries with advanced economies, producing possible outliers. Lastly, the findings about the top quintile’s adverse effect on GDP growth was significant at the 90% confidence interval (a measure the certainty of the statistic), but fell short of the 95% gold standard within social science research.

Link

originally posted by: EternalSolace
a reply to: doobydoll

And while people strike, employers will fire them and have 100's of other applications from people willing to work. Your idea would only work if there was unity. Problem is, there is no unity amongst the serfs. Not when it comes to employment and wages.

So, the entire low paid workforce will be replaced with new workers who will instantly and miraculously hit the ground running from day one will they? It's as simple as that is it? Get a grip. That's what you'd like us all to believe, and we are going to call your bluff. We will crush you and close you down if that's what it takes.

Work is no longer a means to a decent standard of living for many, and I can assure you that all those workers are up to here with being forced to EARN their POVERTY.

Get ready.

a reply to: doobydoll

When you can get every low paid, working class, citizen in a country to strike, you'll have gotten my attention. When an entire workforce at a Mcdonalds, Walmart, or wherever there is not a union protecting them strikes, you'll have my support. There are not enough people willing to risk what little they do have to make a difference. And there will always be another potential worker willing to work for peanuts to replace them.

Why do I believe that? Because there is no solidarity. It's all about what can be done to get ahead regardless of everyone else.

Just out of curiosity, if I were an employer and offered you a 1/3 or 1/2 over what you make now, would you abandon your cause?

The whole system is a mess.

You only have so much time.. That is what being paid is for, compensation for your time. I've come to learn and understand that ti e is precious, and it isn't unlimited.

Industrialization, and money have ruined things.. we love things, rather than people, and use people instead of things..

Yet, we all must have things, and people found ways to make even the necessities to live be some of the most expensive. We have destroyed self-reliance, and now rely on our jobs.

We forsake love, family, and morals even, for a paycheck.. just to survive.

Now tell me, if you honestly get this, is your time worth it?

a reply to: EternalSolace

Your argument might work if we were robots, but in reality people have kids and schedules. Some positions require travel or a drivers license etc. I could go on for a while with the different circumstances that would cause the answer to be "No". I recently turned down a job that would've given me a 1/3 pay increase. But, I couldn't take the job since I'm a full-time dad and can't travel 50% of the time. Well at least not without taking my kids into consideration. Plus, you need time to train people on the position your hiring for and in that time of finding new employees, how much money would the company lose?