We are the 53%

[War Wagon]

The 53% who pay income taxes to support the lazy fucks who want handouts.

[smackaholic]

rack it.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

He seems like a very simple and frustrated man.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

...the lazy fucks who want handouts.

[Screw_Michigan]

Yes, of course, because this is what it's all about: government handouts.

Obviously Devry University didn't teach this guy jack shit.

[Screw_Michigan]

HA! I know this dude.

Kevin Eder was among the first to galvanize those who wanted to differentiate themselves from the thousands of people rallying across the nation to raise awareness of the growing economic gap between the rich and everyone else.

In early October, Eder created the Twitter hashtag #iamthe53, which has since been posted in hundreds of tweets as the backlash to Occupy Wall Street mounts.

"I would never identify myself with those occupying Wall Street," said Eder, 26, a business analyst in Washington D.C. "The frustration was born out of people claiming to speak for me who don't."

[mvscal]

Yes, of course, because this is what it's all about: government handouts.

Yeah, pretty much. Have you actually listened to any of these shitsmeared fucktards?

[poptart]

He seems like a very simple and frustrated man.

Yes.

Holding up hand-written notes during YouTube rants... all the while CONTINUING to pay your taxes and take it up the @ss isn't exactly ---> GENIUS.

The fed gov is clearly in violation of the Constitution in SO many areas - and yet dipshits like Kevin Eder continue to fund it.

I think that's > BODE < for somebody.

Sack up.
Get your 53% (or at least 5.3%) coaliton together, and ALL refuse to pay your income taxes until the gov gets back in it's Constitutional boundary.


Or... just keep making us laff.

Whatever.

[jiminphilly]

From:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/10/1 ... hat-53-Guy

Hello,
I briefly visited the “We are the 53%” website, but I first saw your face on a liberal blog. Your picture is quite popular on liberal blogs. I think it’s because of the expression on your face. I don’t know if you meant to look pugnacious or if we’re just projecting that on you, but I think that’s what gets our attention.

In the picture, you’re holding up a sheet of paper that says:

I am a former Marine.
I work two jobs.
I don’t have health insurance.
I worked 60-70 hours a week for 8 years to pay my way through college.
I haven’t had 4 consecutive days off in over 4 years.
But I don’t blame Wall Street.
Suck it up you whiners.
I am the 53%.
God bless the USA!

I wanted to respond to you as a liberal. Because, although I think you’ve made yourself clear and I think I understand you, you don’t seem to understand me at all. I hope you will read this and understand me better, and maybe understand the Occupy Wall Street movement better.

First, let me say that I think it’s great that you have such a strong work ethic and I agree with you that you have much to be proud of. You seem like a good, hard-working, strong kid. I admire your dedication and determination. I worked my way through college too, mostly working graveyard shifts at hotels as a “night auditor.” For a time I worked at two hotels at once, but I don’t think I ever worked 60 hours in a week, and certainly not 70. I think I maxed out at 56. And that wasn’t something I could sustain for long, not while going to school. The problem was that I never got much sleep, and sleep deprivation would take its toll. I can’t imagine putting in 70 hours in a week while going to college at the same time. That’s impressive.

I have a nephew in the Marine Corps, so I have some idea of how tough that can be. He almost didn’t make it through basic training, but he stuck it out and insisted on staying even when questions were raised about his medical fitness. He eventually served in Iraq and Afghanistan and has decided to pursue a career in the Marines. We’re all very proud of him. Your picture reminds me of him.

So, if you think being a liberal means that I don’t value hard work or a strong work ethic, you’re wrong. I think everyone appreciates the industry and dedication a person like you displays. I’m sure you’re a great employee, and if you have entrepreneurial ambitions, I’m sure these qualities will serve you there too. I’ll wish you the best of luck, even though a guy like you will probably need luck less than most.

I understand your pride in what you’ve accomplished, but I want to ask you something.

Do you really want the bar set this high? Do you really want to live in a society where just getting by requires a person to hold down two jobs and work 60 to 70 hours a week? Is that your idea of the American Dream?

Do you really want to spend the rest of your life working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week? Do you think you can? Because, let me tell you, kid, that’s not going to be as easy when you’re 50 as it was when you were 20.

And what happens if you get sick? You say you don’t have health insurance, but since you’re a veteran I assume you have some government-provided health care through the VA system. I know my father, a Vietnam-era veteran of the Air Force, still gets most of his medical needs met through the VA, but I don’t know what your situation is. But even if you have access to health care, it doesn’t mean disease or injury might not interfere with your ability to put in those 60- to 70-hour work weeks.

Do you plan to get married, have kids? Do you think your wife is going to be happy with you working those long hours year after year without a vacation? Is it going to be fair to her? Is it going to be fair to your kids? Is it going to be fair to you?

Look, you’re a tough kid. And you have a right to be proud of that. But not everybody is as tough as you, or as strong, or as young. Does pride in what you’ve accomplish mean that you have contempt for anybody who can’t keep up with you? Does it mean that the single mother who can’t work on her feet longer than 50 hours a week doesn’t deserve a good life? Does it mean the older man who struggles with modern technology and can’t seem to keep up with the pace set by younger workers should just go throw himself off a cliff?

And, believe it or not, there are people out there even tougher than you. Why don’t we let them set the bar, instead of you? Are you ready to work 80 hours a week? 100 hours? Can you hold down four jobs? Can you do it when you’re 40? When you’re 50? When you’re 60? Can you do it with arthritis? Can you do it with one arm? Can you do it when you’re being treated for prostate cancer?

And is this really your idea of what life should be like in the greatest country on Earth?

Here’s how a liberal looks at it: a long time ago workers in this country realized that industrialization wasn’t making their lives better, but worse. The captains of industry were making a ton of money and living a merry life far away from the dirty, dangerous factories they owned, and far away from the even dirtier and more dangerous mines that fed raw materials to those factories.

The workers quickly decided that this arrangement didn’t work for them. If they were going to work as cogs in machines designed to build wealth for the Rockefellers, Vanderbilts and Carnegies, they wanted a cut. They wanted a share of the wealth that they were helping create. And that didn’t mean just more money; it meant a better quality of life. It meant reasonable hours and better working conditions.

Eventually, somebody came up with the slogan, “8 hours of work, 8 hours of leisure, 8 hours of sleep” to divide the 24-hour day into what was considered a fair allocation of a human’s time. It wasn’t a slogan that was immediately accepted. People had to fight to put this standard in place. People demonstrated, and fought with police, and were killed. They were called communists (in fairness, some of them were), and traitors, and many of them got a lot worse than pepper spray at the hands of police and private security.

But by the time we got through the Great Depression and WWII, we’d all learned some valuable lessons about working together and sharing the prosperity, and the 8-hour workday became the norm.

The 8-hour workday and the 40-hour workweek became a standard by which we judged our economic success, and a reality check against which we could verify the American Dream.

If a family could live a good life with one wage-earner working a 40-hour job, then the American Dream was realized. If the income from that job could pay the bills, buy a car, pay for the kids’ braces, allow the family to save enough money for a down payment on a house and still leave some money for retirement and maybe for a college fund for the kids, then we were living the American Dream. The workers were sharing in the prosperity they helped create, and they still had time to take their kids to a ball game, take their spouses to a movie, and play a little golf on the weekends.

Ah, the halcyon days of the 1950s! Yeah, ok, it wasn’t quite that perfect. The prosperity wasn’t spread as evenly and ubiquitously as we might want to pretend, but if you were a middle-class white man, things were probably pretty good from an economic perspective. The American middle class was reaching its zenith.

And the top marginal federal income tax rate was more than 90%. Throughout the whole of the 1950s and into the early 60s.

Just thought I’d throw that in there.

Anyway, do you understand what I’m trying to say? We can have a reasonable standard for what level of work qualifies you for the American Dream, and work to build a society that realizes that dream, or we can chew each other to the bone in a nightmare of merciless competition and mutual contempt.

I’m a liberal, so I probably dream bigger than you. For instance, I want everybody to have healthcare. I want lazy people to have healthcare. I want stupid people to have healthcare. I want drug addicts to have healthcare. I want bums who refuse to work even when given the opportunity to have healthcare. I’m willing to pay for that with my taxes, because I want to live in a society where it doesn’t matter how much of a loser you are, if you need medical care you can get it. And not just by crowding up an emergency room that should be dedicated exclusively to helping people in emergencies.

You probably don’t agree with that, and that’s fine. That’s an expansion of the American Dream, and would involve new commitments we haven’t made before. But the commitment we’ve made to the working class since the 1940s is something that we should both support and be willing to fight for, whether we are liberal or conservative. We should both be willing to fight for the American Dream. And we should agree that anybody trying to steal that dream from us is to be resisted, not defended.

And while we’re defending that dream, you know what else we’ll be defending, kid? We’ll be defending you and your awesome work ethic. Because when we defend the American Dream we’re not just defending the idea of modest prosperity for people who put in an honest day’s work, we’re also defending the idea that those who go the extra mile should be rewarded accordingly.

Look kid, I don’t want you to “get by” working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week. If you’re willing to put in that kind of effort, I want you to get rich. I want you to have a comprehensive healthcare plan. I want you vacationing in the Bahamas every couple of years, with your beautiful wife and healthy, happy kids. I want you rewarded for your hard work, and I want your exceptional effort to reap exceptional rewards. I want you to accumulate wealth and invest it in Wall Street. And I want you to make more money from those investments.

I understand that a prosperous America needs people with money to invest, and I’ve got no problem with that. All other things being equal, I want all the rich people to keep being rich. And clever financiers who find ways to get more money into the hands of promising entrepreneurs should be rewarded for their contributions as well.

I think Wall Street has an important job to do, I just don’t think they’ve been doing it. And I resent their sense of entitlement – their sense that they are special and deserve to be rewarded extravagantly even when they screw everything up.

Come on, it was only three years ago, kid. Remember? Those assholes almost destroyed our economy. Do you remember the feeling of panic? John McCain wanted to suspend the presidential campaign so that everybody could focus on the crisis. Hallowed financial institutions like Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch went belly up. The government started intervening with bailouts, not because anybody thought “private profits and socialized losses” was fair, but because we were afraid not to intervene - we were afraid our whole economy might come crashing down around us if we didn’t prop up companies that were “too big to fail.”

So, even though you and I had nothing to do with the bad decisions, blind greed and incompetence of those guys on Wall Street, we were sure as hell along for the ride, weren’t we? And we’ve all paid a price.

All the” 99%” wants is for you to remember the role that Wall Street played in creating this mess, and for you to join us in demanding that Wall Street share the pain. They don’t want to share the pain, and they’re spending a lot of money and twisting a lot of arms to foist their share of the pain on the rest of us instead. And they’ve been given unprecedented powers to spend and twist, and they’re not even trying to hide what they’re doing.

All we want is for everybody to remember what happened, and to see what is happening still. And we want you to see that the only way they can get away without paying their share is to undermine the American Dream for the rest of us.

And I want you and I to understand each other, and to stand together to prevent them from doing that. You seem like the kind of guy who would be a strong ally, and I’d be proud to stand with you.

EDIT: Thanks to everyone for the recommendations and to Kos for the promotion to the front page. I'm really stunned. I hope it isn't weird to add an edit like this after you've been promoted to the front page. But I wanted to say how much I appreciate the opportunity to be heard and I appreciate all the kind comments (which I will probably spend most of the rest of the night reading).

A lot about this article bothered me including how this self-described liberal calls a former marine and college grad a kid. Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

[Felix]

Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

mostly....what specific problems do you have with what he wrote?

[poptart]

Hey kid, go fetch my divot.

Hey kid, I wanna Super-Size that.


Hey kid, that jizz isn't going to mop itself.

[jiminphilly]

Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

mostly....what specific problems do you have with what he wrote?

Well for starters how about this:

Do you really want to spend the rest of your life working two jobs and 60 to 70 hours a week?

Some of us work these kinds of hours with 1 job. What's so wrong with having a little bit of a work ethic? It seems like this guy thinks the bar is being set too high be people (such as this former Marine) who are willing to work more than a 40 hour work week.

[Felix]

Some of us work these kinds of hours with 1 job. What's so wrong with having a little bit of a work ethic? It seems like this guy thinks the bar is being set too high be people (such as this former Marine) who are willing to work more than a 40 hour work week.

then you weren't reading the same article I was

the author simply asked the question "is working 60-70 hours a week just to get by really what the American dream is"? a great work ethic used to translate into prosperity, but now it seems to translate into "just getting by"....

btw, that whole "53% pay taxes" is incredibly misleading.....people that work and don't make enough to pay federal income tax pay plenty of taxes-sales tax, gasoline tax, etc.

[R-Jack]

[BSmack]

A lot about this article bothered me including how this self-described liberal calls a former marine and college grad a kid. Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

For the most part yes, that fellow summarized 21st Century American liberalism fairly well. So he called someone 20 years younger than him "kid." Who fucking cares? Babe Ruth used to do it to people 20 years OLDER than him.

[jiminphilly]

A lot about this article bothered me including how this self-described liberal calls a former marine and college grad a kid. Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

For the most part yes, that fellow summarized 21st Century American liberalism fairly well. So he called someone 20 years younger than him "kid." Who fucking cares? Babe Ruth used to do it to people 20 years OLDER than him.

They had pussy's and he was slurping the whiskey off their tits.

This guy may be 20 years younger than the writer but he's earned the respect of being called a man, or sir. When I think of a kid I think of my naive 8 year old son not the 20 something year old guy with a strong work ethic or the 20 something year old graduate from college who expects his loans to be repaid because he can't walk into a $100K salary after graduation.

[BSmack]

A lot about this article bothered me including how this self-described liberal calls a former marine and college grad a kid. Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

For the most part yes, that fellow summarized 21st Century American liberalism fairly well. So he called someone 20 years younger than him "kid." Who fucking cares? Babe Ruth used to do it to people 20 years OLDER than him.

They had pussy's and he was slurping the whiskey off their tits.

No, Ruth called everybody "kid," even men 20+ years his senior.

This guy may be 20 years younger than the writer but he's earned the respect of being called a man, or sir. When I think of a kid I think of my naive 8 year old son not the 20 something year old guy with a strong work ethic or the 20 something year old graduate from college who expects his loans to be repaid because he can't walk into a $100K salary after graduation.

Seriously, wash the sand out Jim.

[jiminphilly]

Seriously, wash the sand out Jim.

Putting aside the kid bullshit, you disagree with what I am saying about the 20 something's and their expectations after college?

[BSmack]

Seriously, wash the sand out Jim.

Putting aside the kid bullshit, you disagree with what I am saying about the 20 something's and their expectations after college?

I think 20 somethings understand how fucked they are.

[jiminphilly]

Seriously, wash the sand out Jim.

Putting aside the kid bullshit, you disagree with what I am saying about the 20 something's and their expectations after college?

I think 20 somethings understand how fucked they are.

I don't think they understand shit. This is a generation more interested in when the new Iphone is going to be released as opposed to living within their means and working hard to earn something.

[Felix]

I don't think they understand shit. This is a generation more interested in when the new Iphone is going to be released as opposed to living within their means and working hard to earn something.

you're obviously angry but i think your anger is directed at the wrong people
I think most college graduates would gladly repay their student loans if they could find a decent paying job.....but you seem to think that 70-80 hour work weeks should be the norm rather than the exception....no offense dude but that's pretty fucked up

[Felix]

So what?

scott, I'm pretty sure you make decent money doing what you do so your putting in 70 to 80 hours is not "just to make ends meet-there just aren't a lot of opportunities out there....I think that's what their concerned about, not having to work hard

[jiminphilly]

I don't think they understand shit. This is a generation more interested in when the new Iphone is going to be released as opposed to living within their means and working hard to earn something.

you're obviously angry but i think your anger is directed at the wrong people
I think most college graduates would gladly repay their student loans if they could find a decent paying job.....but you seem to think that 70-80 hour work weeks should be the norm rather than the exception....no offense dude but that's pretty fucked up

I'm not the least bit angry. I'm just reading and listening to the rhetoric surrounding this whole occupy <insert city> and I wonder how many of them have first decided to live within their means by cutting back on unnecessary expenses instead of taking to the streets and protesting because they're not getting it handed to them on a silver platter.

As an example, I speak with the hiring managers/owners of civil engineering companies and when they decide to look for a person to fill an entry-level position for their company an it comes to the topic of compensation, inevitably the salary demand from a recent college grad is on par with someone with 5 years experience. They've been saying the same thing to me for the past 3-4 years.

[jiminphilly]

So what?

scott, I'm pretty sure you make decent money doing what you do so your putting in 70 to 80 hours is not "just to make ends meet-there just aren't a lot of opportunities out there....I think that's what their concerned about, not having to work hard

He's willing to sacrifice to have a nice way of living?

[Smackie Chan]

I speak with the hiring managers/owners of civil engineering companies and when they decide to look for a person to fill an entry-level position for their company an it comes to the topic of compensation, inevitably the salary demand from a recent college grad is on par with someone with 5 years experience.

If the prospective hire demands it and gets offered something less, he can either take it or leave it. If he takes less, it's not really a salary demand as much as a salary request or a negotiation starting point. If he leaves it, he can go elsewhere with the same demand until he either gets what he asks for, tires of getting refused and accepts less, or stays unemployed. Nothing wrong with asking for as much as you can get, but at some point dude's gotta start working for as much as he can get offered if it's less than requested.

[Felix]

instead of taking to the streets and protesting because they're not getting it handed to them on a silver platter.

so you think these protests are about recent college graduates not having a good paying job handed to them?

inevitably the salary demand from a recent college grad is on par with someone with 5 years experience. They've been saying the same thing to me for the past 3-4 years.

I've never heard of a candidate DEMANDING a salary...they may want a salary at a certain rate and that rate may not fit into the hiring companies economics....if a job applicant chooses to walk away from a potential job because the hiring company can't pay them what the candidate wants, then that's the applicant's choice....

[jiminphilly]

I speak with the hiring managers/owners of civil engineering companies and when they decide to look for a person to fill an entry-level position for their company an it comes to the topic of compensation, inevitably the salary demand from a recent college grad is on par with someone with 5 years experience.

If the prospective hire demands it and gets offered something less, he can either take it or leave it. If he takes less, it's not really a salary demand as much as a salary request or a negotiation starting point. If he leaves it, he can go elsewhere with the same demand until he either gets what he asks for, tires of getting refused and accepts less, or stays unemployed. Nothing wrong with asking for as much as you can get, but at some point dude's gotta start working for as much as he can get offered if it's less than requested.

Except the overall job pool of engineering graduates is smaller and by extension so is the pool of decent applicants.

[Smackie Chan]

I've never heard of a candidate DEMANDING a salary

I have. Happens all the time, but usually by those who already have a decent job or can afford to hold out for what they demand. Typically, those applying for entry-level work or recent college grads are in no position to make such demands. But some are, can, and do.

[BSmack]

As an example, I speak with the hiring managers/owners of civil engineering companies and when they decide to look for a person to fill an entry-level position for their company an it comes to the topic of compensation, inevitably the salary demand from a recent college grad is on par with someone with 5 years experience. They've been saying the same thing to me for the past 3-4 years.

And wages have been stagnant for the last 30 years. Yet the money one has to pay for a degree has trebled in the same time frame.

[Smackie Chan]

I speak with the hiring managers/owners of civil engineering companies and when they decide to look for a person to fill an entry-level position for their company an it comes to the topic of compensation, inevitably the salary demand from a recent college grad is on par with someone with 5 years experience.

If the prospective hire demands it and gets offered something less, he can either take it or leave it. If he takes less, it's not really a salary demand as much as a salary request or a negotiation starting point. If he leaves it, he can go elsewhere with the same demand until he either gets what he asks for, tires of getting refused and accepts less, or stays unemployed. Nothing wrong with asking for as much as you can get, but at some point dude's gotta start working for as much as he can get offered if it's less than requested.

Except the overall job pool of engineering graduates is smaller and by extension so is the pool of decent applicants.

Which really has nothing or little to do with the discussion. You're talking supply and demand with some quality and potential mixed in. If the supply of anything (in this case, entry-level engineering talent) is low, and the demand for such talent is high, the applicant has the upper hand, especially if he/she graduated with high marks from a prestigious program. If there is a glut of such talent and demand is low, employers are in the catbird seat. They can take their pick of what's available, offer what they think is fair, and eventually find someone willing to take what they offer. But in either case, an applicant can ask for whatever he wants, irrespective of whether he can get it.

[jiminphilly]

So what?

scott, I'm pretty sure you make decent money doing what you do so your putting in 70 to 80 hours is not "just to make ends meet-there just aren't a lot of opportunities out there....I think that's what their concerned about, not having to work hard

I've written this in another thread, but here goes again

There are opportunites out there IF the person wants to make themselves marketable

Easy Examples

Bi lingual - learn a second or third language - I can't begin to tell you how many opps there are for someone who can speak spanish / french / mandarin Chinese / Japanese. And not just sales or management but all the various support functions that go with it. We are in a global market.

Educate / degree youreslf in a high demand field - Health care is the first that jumps out. The boomer population is aging and the demad far outstips supply in multiple facets of this industry.

Relocate - Right now North Dakota can't get enough workers, due to the oil boom up there. They hold monthly job fairs in Minneapolis - and it's not just working the rigs - all infrastructure and support are needed up there.

Good points, especially the bold part. Not only are we in a global market but colleges have seen a steady increase of international students. Guess from where?

[Smackie Chan]

wages have been stagnant for the last 30 years.

Without doing the research, I'd be inclined to call bullshit on that, although I'd agree that wages haven't kept pace with the cost of college. Still, that's not the employers' problem. It's all about supply & demand. Employers are smart to try to attract & retain talented and hard-working employees for as little as they can, while employees are smart to try to get as much as they can from whomever is willing to pay it.

[BSmack]

wages have been stagnant for the last 30 years.

Still, that's not the employers' problem.

Of course not. It never is the employer's problem until the workers or the marketplace or both MAKE it the employer's problem.

[Dr_Phibes]

He's right, wages related to national income have been in decline since the 1970's in all the OECD countries. They've even fallen in China of all places.
And it will become the employer's problem eventually or rather, it's an employer's problem now. In the short term, they have a larger reserve labour pool to draw from so they can drive down wages even further, but then where's your demand going to come from?
The employers are out of business, there's a problem in there somewhere.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

That fat fuck should go "occupy" a treadmill instead of bragging on the internet about how he fucked around for 45 years before getting a real job.

[Diego in Seattle]

That fat fuck

Speaking of which......



Exxon Mobil's profit last quarter was 41% higher.

[bradhusker]

Seriously, is this what some of you believe in?

mostly....what specific problems do you have with what he wrote?

The part where he said he wants lazy bums and filthy criminals to have all their needs met, and not have to work a day in their life if they choose not to work, YOU FUCKIN ASSHOLE.

Listen up felix you idiot liberal you.

If you dont work, you get nothing.
Number one priority in life is to get up and go to work.
After that, then you can talk about other things.
BUT, until a human being gets up and goes to work? He gets zero, NADA, squat.

Its really quite simple, if a human being does NOT work, he is not a human being.
I am talking about able- bodied individuals between the ages of 18 and 67.
End of story you sick twisted liberal faggott.

[poptart]

Sounds like maybe the students should vacate Wall Street and start occupying their campus bursar's office. Educators are clearly screwing America's youth, big time.

Or better yet, stand in front of their pappy and protest HIM for producing a moronic offspring who would WILLINGLY ass-fuck himself by going eyeballs-deep in debt to "study" political science, philosophy, or women's studies.

[mvscal]

Yet the money one has to pay for a degree has trebled in the same time frame.

The costs have more than tripled. That is the inevitiable consequence of getting the Federal government involved, though. When the feds start to guarantee loans for everyone with a pulse, universities no longer have to worry about pricing kids out of the market. They can charge as much as they want and Uncle Sugar will pick up the tab. Of course the Feds borrow at 2.8% and then charge you 6.8% and use the difference to fund more "programs." There is no negative feedback at any point in this system that would act as a brake on increasing costs.

The same thing has/will happen to healthcare.

[Carson]

Education lotteries have helped to increase college appetites for budget money, too.

Another government program of good intentions.