Job applications dropped on occupy Chicago protestors

Post Reply New Topic

That is just brilliant

Could be they chose McDonalds because they can't stand Walmart's leeching off of taxpayers.

Leeching off taxpayers? Explain.

I worked at McDonalds for a time. It wasn't a particularly great job, though I've had worse. Certainly not the kind of wage that can provide a person with a decent living... or very much at all, for that matter. "Let them eat cake", indeed. It is also evident that the goals of the protests are either misunderstood or ignored by these people.

It was a gesture intended purely to insult and it did it's job. It certainly had nothing to do with job availability at McDonalds.
Typical frat boy antics, IMO.

Couldn't have put it better myself. Men belittling people with real concerns by acting like snobby idiots.

Which wouldn't surprise me. They call it a class act but it's simply a case of eople being to full of themselves to even dare be concerned with people whose interests they don't personally have. Stuck up rubbish plain and simple.

There is no shame in working at McDonald's, it's certainly a lot better than standing on a street because you'd rather have free stuff than earn money.

Going to be honest here, I find the McDonalds applications pretty funny. But aside from that, I'll say this:

I can understand WHY they are upset, but to me, that is not the most effective way of getting change. Why don't they use the "system" to their advantage, make a lot of money, and THEN try to change things. If you actually go there, most of them don't even have a clear plan, or they just sound very illogical.

I was at a property auction in Dallas, and Occupy Dallas came along telling us that we are stealing, and to buy the house and give it back to the family. We had a good laugh at how illogical that was. We even joked about "So if we buy an office building, are we still stealing someone's home?" To me they are letting their emotions override sound judgement, but that seems to be the weakness of a lot of people. But hey to each his own.

Exactly. They seem to live in some fantasy land where, if you slay all the corporations, everyone will magically live happily ever after

It'd be far more productive for these people to serve up burgers at MuckyD's.

I see the spin that all of the Occupy Wall Street participants are lazy, unwashed hippies is working.

Hi ruveyn,

Sometimes, it is better to stand around doing nothing and consuming minimal resources, as many paltry jobs require expenses over weeks that add up to more than are covered by the paltry wages, and leaving even less resources for barely subsistence survival on the streets.

Volunteer activities can have unexpected consequences also. Volunteering at one of The Peoples Temple locations, I was "lucky" at not becoming "one of the chosen ones", and while the "volunteer" work was required for points against living on the street violations, the consequences for inadvertently supporting the means for future tragedies are still haunting.

The relative recent theft of the sign "Works Sets You Free", here, reminds me of the defense of the Polish Post Office in Danzig with "The Tin Drum", "Europa Europa", and "Schindler's List", as, in ignorance, helping the darkness masquerading as the "True Light", leads to a larger curse than simply doing nothing in ignorance. Wasn't it Dr. Mengele who noted that Jehovah's Witnesses were the most easily, and productively, if useful, worked toward their own demise?

Tadzio

Did Elizabeth Taylor give her properly purchased "Nazi Looted" work of Art back to the heirs of the family???

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/34705/th ... survivors/

I don't believe most people here are assuming that OWS participants are lazy unwashed hippies. Rather many of us believe that their protest is not the most effective way of accomplishing their very vague goals. I try to visit Occupy Dallas once a week to see whats going on with them. I'll even give them a couple of cases of water, simply because they are the very least attempting to try and change things, which I can respect.

I don't think she should have given it back. Even if she did, they should have at the very least paid her what her father paid for it, inflation adjusted, because it is not her problem, and they were awfully late in filling their lawsuit. It is very unfortunate for those who sold it under distress, but thats life.

If you are using this as a comparison to what we do at property auctions, its not even close. Whoever owned it previously didn't pay their bills, simple as that. There was no theft involved, just failure to plan, poor choices, and maybe some bad luck. When you sign those mortgage papers, you agree that if you default, the bank can take your house. Besides, we provide price support for properties since often times we may be the only availible buyers for those properties. We also help foreclosures go through the market more quickly.

When "you sign those papers", those papers have terms that change by future interpretations and changes in the "law". While "Binding Arbitration" nullifies all little peoples' rights. A recent major dispute involved a very large number of families involved with reverse mortgages, when a federal agency decided to change the interpretation of a protected "surviving spouse", it resulted in many surviving spouses being kicked out of their homes that they were previously assured of remaining in with lifetime occupancy. Then, all the recent bizarre foreture laws are expanding too, as in the recent "use birth-control" lose your house, car, belongings, job, freedom, etc... Of course, that's just the way it goes, whether the person is Gaddafi, Ceausescu, Marie Antoinette, or just a random bum in Orange County.

http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/ ... reclosure/

Tadzio