Top 8% Own 85%

[Brain357]

You really need to work on your math.

Still waiting on your proof. A link suggesting sometimes a company should settle isn't proof of anything.

Really so settling a 3 billion dollar law suit for 300 million is not a good deal

You can't figure out that 300 million is cheaper than 3 billion on your own?
and the recipients of the cash got about one one thousandth of the original asking price why did they settle for so little

So they were guilty and could expect to pay 3 billion at trial?

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

 

[Brain357]

You really need to work on your math.

Still waiting on your proof. A link suggesting sometimes a company should settle isn't proof of anything.

Really so settling a 3 billion dollar law suit for 300 million is not a good deal

You can't figure out that 300 million is cheaper than 3 billion on your own?
and the recipients of the cash got about one one thousandth of the original asking price why did they settle for so little

So they were guilty and could expect to pay 3 billion at trial?

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

That's not the point and you know it



.

Yes that is the point. To claim it was cheaper to settle is more than a little stupid. It also makes them look guilty which is bad press.

 

[Brain357]

Another claim you can't back up.

They received over 400 million. Sounds like a lot to me. What proof do you have that is a small settlement for this kind of case?

They settled for one cent on the dollar and the people in the suit got a coupe thousand each

So you're saying that these big bad companies only cost these whiners a couple grand in lost wages over several years

Then these companies really didn't suppress any wages did they?

You really need to work on your math. They settled and the DOJ found them guilty. You have yet to prove this isn't a big settlement for this kind of case. Hundreds of millions is a lot of money.

I never said anything about the type of case and the settlement

I said the settlement was a pittance to these companies who are collectively worth 1.3 trillion dollars

You seem to think it hurt the companies. It didn't

Now why did these people settle for 1 cent on the dollar if they were so grievously injured?

One cent on the dollar? Please show your calculation moron.

original damages sought 3 BILLION

Settlement 320 million

excuse me I missed a decimal

10 cents on the dollar

so why settle for 90% less that what you claim were your damages if you were really injured?

Is that abnormal for this kind of case? Prove you have a point.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Really so settling a 3 billion dollar law suit for 300 million is not a good deal

You can't figure out that 300 million is cheaper than 3 billion on your own?
and the recipients of the cash got about one one thousandth of the original asking price why did they settle for so little

So they were guilty and could expect to pay 3 billion at trial?

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

 

[Skull Pilot]

They settled for one cent on the dollar and the people in the suit got a coupe thousand each

So you're saying that these big bad companies only cost these whiners a couple grand in lost wages over several years

Then these companies really didn't suppress any wages did they?

You really need to work on your math. They settled and the DOJ found them guilty. You have yet to prove this isn't a big settlement for this kind of case. Hundreds of millions is a lot of money.

I never said anything about the type of case and the settlement

I said the settlement was a pittance to these companies who are collectively worth 1.3 trillion dollars

You seem to think it hurt the companies. It didn't

Now why did these people settle for 1 cent on the dollar if they were so grievously injured?

One cent on the dollar? Please show your calculation moron.

original damages sought 3 BILLION

Settlement 320 million

excuse me I missed a decimal

10 cents on the dollar

so why settle for 90% less that what you claim were your damages if you were really injured?

Is that abnormal for this kind of case? Prove you have a point.

I'm asking you why they settled for so little if they were as damaged as you claim they were

That is all

so answer it

 

[Brain357]

Really so settling a 3 billion dollar law suit for 300 million is not a good deal

You can't figure out that 300 million is cheaper than 3 billion on your own?
and the recipients of the cash got about one one thousandth of the original asking price why did they settle for so little

So they were guilty and could expect to pay 3 billion at trial?

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

^^^^^^ what he said

If it was a weak case the judge wouldn't have insisted the amount be increased.

 

[Brain357]

You really need to work on your math. They settled and the DOJ found them guilty. You have yet to prove this isn't a big settlement for this kind of case. Hundreds of millions is a lot of money.

I never said anything about the type of case and the settlement

I said the settlement was a pittance to these companies who are collectively worth 1.3 trillion dollars

You seem to think it hurt the companies. It didn't

Now why did these people settle for 1 cent on the dollar if they were so grievously injured?

One cent on the dollar? Please show your calculation moron.

original damages sought 3 BILLION

Settlement 320 million

excuse me I missed a decimal

10 cents on the dollar

so why settle for 90% less that what you claim were your damages if you were really injured?

Is that abnormal for this kind of case? Prove you have a point.

I'm asking you why they settled for so little if they were as damaged as you claim they were

That is all

so answer it

You need to show that they settled for little. Until then you have no point.

 

[Brain357]

So they were guilty and could expect to pay 3 billion at trial?

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

 

[Andylusion]

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

 

[kaz]

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

The problem is that the legislators who pass laws, judges who run courts and the attorneys on both sides are all lawyers. Getting rid of baseless, frivolous lawsuits isn't in their interest. When a woman takes the top off coffee and dumps it in her lap, she gets six figures. It's preposterous.

Then again, it really is McDonald's fault if you think about it for not putting a warning label like, "Drink with your hands and the lid on you stupid bitch." How was she to know that lidless styrofoam cups of boiling liquid don't belong between her knees? I mean geez, do you need to be in Mensa to go to a McDonald's?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Jesus Brian you don't know how that works? It is sometimes cheaper just to pay. Then have shit dragged out in the media and accrue more lwayer fees then just settling out of court.

They don' admit guilt.


.

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

Hey you're the one who said 325 million not me

 

[Andylusion]

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

The problem is that the legislators who pass laws, judges who run courts and the attorneys on both sides are all lawyers. Getting rid of baseless, frivolous lawsuits isn't in their interest. When a woman takes the top off coffee and dumps it in her lap, she gets six figures. It's preposterous

Absolutely insane. And nothing is an "accident", it's magically some evil greedy person somewhere is to blame, and so we have to legislate everything.

I hate to say it, but I think having a "loser pays all" rule would clean out these lawsuits. But it could hamper justice too. Yet the trade off is tilting too far right now.

 

[kaz]

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

The problem is that the legislators who pass laws, judges who run courts and the attorneys on both sides are all lawyers. Getting rid of baseless, frivolous lawsuits isn't in their interest. When a woman takes the top off coffee and dumps it in her lap, she gets six figures. It's preposterous

Absolutely insane. And nothing is an "accident", it's magically some evil greedy person somewhere is to blame, and so we have to legislate everything.

I hate to say it, but I think having a "loser pays all" rule would clean out these lawsuits. But it could hamper justice too. Yet the trade off is tilting too far right now.

Loser pays all is tricky. If I ware a corporation, I'd spend $1M on a small case to destroy the accuser regardless how guilty I was. Win a few and scare the rest. Then when you get into caps, how do you set that fairly? It just becomes another government boondoggle and trial lawyers would fill the coffers of Democrats to set them.

The #1 way to get rid of them would be for judges to toss them. Plaintiffs are supposed to have legal standards of harm and evidence to go to court, and judges just don't enforce that. Like I took the lid off my coffee and it turned out to be hot! No shit. Taking the lid off was clear assumption of risk. And seriously, who doesn't know coffee is made from boiling water? The judge had every power to toss it and didn't

 

[Brain357]

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

You are a fool then. You support illegal collusion. You support bad capitalism which only benefits the rich. Sad. This is why the Republican Party is imploding. You support bad economic policies.

 

[Brain357]

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

The problem is that the legislators who pass laws, judges who run courts and the attorneys on both sides are all lawyers. Getting rid of baseless, frivolous lawsuits isn't in their interest. When a woman takes the top off coffee and dumps it in her lap, she gets six figures. It's preposterous

Absolutely insane. And nothing is an "accident", it's magically some evil greedy person somewhere is to blame, and so we have to legislate everything.

I hate to say it, but I think having a "loser pays all" rule would clean out these lawsuits. But it could hamper justice too. Yet the trade off is tilting too far right now.

There were evil people colluding to hold down wages. That is anti capitalism and so are you.

 

[Brain357]

Lawyers fees wouldn't be over 400 million. Funny.

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

Hey you're the one who said 325 million not me

Really? Quote that loser.

 

[kaz]

And you know this how?

How much does a high powered lawyer and his staff of people get paid for trial?

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

You are a fool then. You support illegal collusion. You support bad capitalism which only benefits the rich. Sad. This is why the Republican Party is imploding. You support bad economic policies.

"Capitalism" benefits everyone, not "only" any one group. You are referring to "crony capitalism," which is a form of socialism. Capitalism is just economic freedom. Socialism is your bag, Holmes

 

[kaz]

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

The problem is that the legislators who pass laws, judges who run courts and the attorneys on both sides are all lawyers. Getting rid of baseless, frivolous lawsuits isn't in their interest. When a woman takes the top off coffee and dumps it in her lap, she gets six figures. It's preposterous

Absolutely insane. And nothing is an "accident", it's magically some evil greedy person somewhere is to blame, and so we have to legislate everything.

I hate to say it, but I think having a "loser pays all" rule would clean out these lawsuits. But it could hamper justice too. Yet the trade off is tilting too far right now.

There were evil people colluding to hold down wages. That is anti capitalism and so are you.

Who did that? Are you talking about Democrats importing unskilled illegal immigrants to fill low end jobs and keep them from legal Americans?

 

[Brain357]

Not 400 million. You claim it would, you show me how that is possible.

you've been using 320 this whole time

and so what if it was for it's still cents on the dollar of the original

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

You are a fool then. You support illegal collusion. You support bad capitalism which only benefits the rich. Sad. This is why the Republican Party is imploding. You support bad economic policies.

"Capitalism" benefits everyone, not "only" any one group. You are referring to "crony capitalism," which is a form of socialism. Capitalism is just economic freedom. Socialism is your bag, Holmes

Our economy doesn't benefit everyone because of shit like collusion. Call it what you want, our capitalism is broken and you fools support it. This is how countries get stuck with communism.

 

[Brain357]

You have been using wrong numbers actually.

Judge approves $415M settlement in Apple, Google wage case

I already gave you the exact reason companies agree to settle.

Companies are boxed in by government, and are guilty no matter what they do. If you under price, you are guilty. Overprice and you are guilty, price the same and you are guilty.

I was reading a report by a former government official who worked in banking regulation, that there are now so many regulations, from multiple federal agencies, and from state and local, and federal regulations, that if they enforced every single regulations, from every single agency, from every single government level, there wouldn't be a single bank left operating in the entire country.

If I have time, I'll look that up again.

It's the same as driving laws. In reality, nearly every person in the country, violates a driving law, every day of their life.

When you ask "Why do companies settle out of court? It makes them look bad". The answer is, because if they go to court, they will likely lose, no matter what the truth is. Even if they did absolutely nothing wrong whatsoever, they will still likely lose.

Moreover, for no logical reason whatsoever, if you fine a company with damages, you can have the fine tripled under the anti-trust laws. Meaning a fine of $3 Billion, would end up $9 Billion under the idiotic law. And they settled instead for $20 Million?

The bottom line is, no matter what the company did, it would have looked bad. So might as well go for the looking bad that costs less money.

As for my take on the whole thing.... few things...

Once again, this is yet another example of the left pretending that it's in favor of the little guy, when in fact they are for the rich getting richer.

The people who would have been poached from Apple and Google, and Intel, Pixar, and so one.... these are all highly paid rich wealthy people who have stock options. So a bunch of rich people are b!tching that they are not richer.... and you people on the left are supporting them? Hypocrites! All the left... all hypocrites.

And by the way, the vast vast majority of workers in this country, if they want to get a higher paying job, they have to apply for the job, like any other worker.

This entire debate is surrounding one single action. Cold-Calling. The agreement that resulted in this entire deal, is these companies agreed to not cold-call other companies top employees. That's it. If *YOU* were a high-paid top Engineer at Apple, and you called up Intel and applied for a job, and they offered you double your already filthy rich salary... there was nothing in the agreement that stopped this. There was absolutely nothing that prevented you from getting your salary doubled in this agreement. They only thing it prevented was you being served a better paying job in a cold-call.

These spoiled brat employees, sued because people were not handing them higher paying jobs on a silver platter, calling them up randomly at work to ask them to take a bigger salary. They could easily apply for a higher paying job, like the rest of the workers on the planet have to do.... but no no, they wanted to sit on their butts and be spoon fed a higher salary.

This is what you are defending? This is what Apple and Google are so "guilty" of? I side with the companies 100%. None of them did anything wrong at all. The entire thing, is just an example of spoiled brat American rich people, complaining they are not richer. Just another example that the left is not for the average people, but for the super wealthy.

The problem is that the legislators who pass laws, judges who run courts and the attorneys on both sides are all lawyers. Getting rid of baseless, frivolous lawsuits isn't in their interest. When a woman takes the top off coffee and dumps it in her lap, she gets six figures. It's preposterous

Absolutely insane. And nothing is an "accident", it's magically some evil greedy person somewhere is to blame, and so we have to legislate everything.

I hate to say it, but I think having a "loser pays all" rule would clean out these lawsuits. But it could hamper justice too. Yet the trade off is tilting too far right now.

There were evil people colluding to hold down wages. That is anti capitalism and so are you.

Who did that? Are you talking about Democrats importing unskilled illegal immigrants to fill low end jobs and keep them from legal Americans?

How about the rich corporations getting politicians to allow more guest workers? You really believe repubs would stop immigration? You are a fool.

We are talking about the collusion case I have posted. If you can't keep up, go away.