Top 8% Own 85%

[there4eyeM]

Saying 'Brain' had one did not mean to exclude that others might, also.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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.

The Republican party is imploding because of the separation between the Establishment and the conservatives. It has nothing to do with the rich.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

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

The solution is to emulate Britain: loser pays all. You'd see how fast these phony lawsuits would stop.

 

[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.

The Republican party is imploding because of the separation between the Establishment and the conservatives. It has nothing to do with the rich.

Which side are these fools that support collusion and bad capitalism?

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Top 8% Own 85%

Suck on that, Bitch

 

[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

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

Really? Quote that loser.

Top 8% Own 85%

Suck on that, Bitch

Ah that was before the judge who knew all the details forced the amount to be higher. Clearly they had a strong case.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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.

Top 8% Own 85%

Suck on that, Bitch

Ah that was before the judge who knew all the details forced the amount to be higher. Clearly they had a strong case.

And yet you denied ever quoting it

Bitch

 

[Brain357]

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.

Top 8% Own 85%

Suck on that, Bitch

Ah that was before the judge who knew all the details forced the amount to be higher. Clearly they had a strong case.

And yet you denied ever quoting it

Bitch

I've also quoted a link where the judge increases that amount. And links to the new total. Try to keep up.

 

[Skull Pilot]

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

Really? Quote that loser.

Top 8% Own 85%

Suck on that, Bitch

Ah that was before the judge who knew all the details forced the amount to be higher. Clearly they had a strong case.

And yet you denied ever quoting it

Bitch

I've also quoted a link where the judge increases that amount. And links to the new total. Try to keep up.

you implied I was a liar for saying you quoted that

Bitch

 

[Skull Pilot]

and FYI that larger settlement which the judge had no right to impose was still lees than a drop of piss in the ocean for those 4 companies who are worth over 1.3 trillion collectively and the people who said they were injured proved that they only thought their "injuries" were only worth a couple grand

This was a bullshit laws suit and you want to claim it as some sort of gigantic victory

But those companies just got some big write offs and we all know how much that frosts your ass

 

[Brain357]

and FYI that larger settlement which the judge had no right to impose was still lees than a drop of piss in the ocean for those 4 companies who are worth over 1.3 trillion collectively and the people who said they were injured proved that they only thought their "injuries" were only worth a couple grand

This was a bullshit laws suit and you want to claim it as some sort of gigantic victory

But those companies just got some big write offs and we all know how much that frosts your ass

Well we have learned you support collusion and bad capitalism.

We have stagnant wages and the rich collude to hold them down. Glad the DOJ caught them in this case. Hope they catch more soon.

 

[Andylusion]

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

But that doesn't solve anything. Judges already toss millions of cases. The problem is, as long as it's free to file suit, people file suit hundreds of times hoping to win one case. That's why it has the nickname "the legal lotto", because you never know if some asinine suit will win. The shocking "coffee is served hot" case is a perfect example.

There was one case, where a guy supposedly lost a pair of pants at a laundry mat, and the guy filed suit for millions of dollars. The case actually went to trial, and was only dismissed when the laundry mat found the pants in the mean time, and brought them to court.

So apparently the "let the judges throw out the cases" plan isn't working. And until people have to cough up money to pay for cases they bring, they have no reason to stop filing suits until one strikes the legal lotto and they win.

Inside the Beltway: Top 10 ‘frivolous lawsuits’ of 2015

PETA, which has filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Naruto, a 6-year-old crested macaque monkey. The animal rights group claims that the primate owns the rights to a series of “monkey selfies.” Indeed, Naruto took pictures of himself with a special camera setup supplied by a photographer who later published the images in a book. PETA claims the publication profits belong to Naruto, not the photographer.
​

Until these idiots start having to pay massive money to file these moronic lawsuits, our courts will be clogged with garbage.

 

[Andylusion]

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.

I don't have a problem with guest workers. Why would that be a problem? Why are only Americans allowed to make money? I just don't understand this mentality.

 

[Andylusion]

and FYI that larger settlement which the judge had no right to impose was still lees than a drop of piss in the ocean for those 4 companies who are worth over 1.3 trillion collectively and the people who said they were injured proved that they only thought their "injuries" were only worth a couple grand

This was a bullshit laws suit and you want to claim it as some sort of gigantic victory

But those companies just got some big write offs and we all know how much that frosts your ass

Well we have learned you support collusion and bad capitalism.

We have stagnant wages and the rich collude to hold them down. Glad the DOJ caught them in this case. Hope they catch more soon.

Because it's not collusion, and not bad capitalism, and there is nothing wrong with it. Yes I support people being about to do stuff that isn't wrong.

Just flat out, it's not wrong. You people declare everything wrong, and then scream when people do anything.

 

[Brain357]

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.

I don't have a problem with guest workers. Why would that be a problem? Why are only Americans allowed to make money? I just don't understand this mentality.

You are ok with replacing US workers with cheap foreign workers? That's great for wages.

 

[Andylusion]

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.

Nah, you are full of crap. You do realize that Capitalism inherently means private ownership and control of productions of goods and distribution. Capitalism means it's not your company. It's their company. Not yours. So you have no right to tell them, dictate to them, how to operate it.

Demanding that you control how Apple and Google, and any other company operates, is essentially socialist. Government or "Social" control over the production and distrobution.

So in reality, your position, is anti-capitalist.

But even more stupid than that..... Do you even realize that what you are complaining about? You are complaining that a company DID NOT attempt to destroy another company. You are complain about something they DID NOT DO.

You didn't offer me $100 to mow your lawn. YOU ARE ANTI CAPITALIST! HOW DARE YOU!

Why didn't you offer me $100 to mow your lawn? You must be anti-capitalist.

That is EXACTLY the argument you are attacking these companies with. That is an IDIOTIC position. Sorry... just being honest.

 

[Andylusion]

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.

I don't have a problem with guest workers. Why would that be a problem? Why are only Americans allowed to make money? I just don't understand this mentality.

You are ok with replacing US workers with cheap foreign workers? That's great for wages.

Are you OK with discriminating against all people of the world, for money? That's a benevolent position. How kind and open minded you are.

 

[Brain357]

and FYI that larger settlement which the judge had no right to impose was still lees than a drop of piss in the ocean for those 4 companies who are worth over 1.3 trillion collectively and the people who said they were injured proved that they only thought their "injuries" were only worth a couple grand

This was a bullshit laws suit and you want to claim it as some sort of gigantic victory

But those companies just got some big write offs and we all know how much that frosts your ass

Well we have learned you support collusion and bad capitalism.

We have stagnant wages and the rich collude to hold them down. Glad the DOJ caught them in this case. Hope they catch more soon.

Because it's not collusion, and not bad capitalism, and there is nothing wrong with it. Yes I support people being about to do stuff that isn't wrong.

Just flat out, it's not wrong. You people declare everything wrong, and then scream when people do anything.

Not wrong? You are not a capitalist. Holding down wages through collusion is against the market.

 

[Andylusion]

and FYI that larger settlement which the judge had no right to impose was still lees than a drop of piss in the ocean for those 4 companies who are worth over 1.3 trillion collectively and the people who said they were injured proved that they only thought their "injuries" were only worth a couple grand

This was a bullshit laws suit and you want to claim it as some sort of gigantic victory

But those companies just got some big write offs and we all know how much that frosts your ass

Well we have learned you support collusion and bad capitalism.

We have stagnant wages and the rich collude to hold them down. Glad the DOJ caught them in this case. Hope they catch more soon.

Because it's not collusion, and not bad capitalism, and there is nothing wrong with it. Yes I support people being about to do stuff that isn't wrong.

Just flat out, it's not wrong. You people declare everything wrong, and then scream when people do anything.

Not wrong? You are not a capitalist. Holding down wages through collusion is against the market.

Not wrong. There is nothing wrong with saying "we're not going to poach each others employees". Nothing wrong with that. Period. End of story.

You are not capitalist. Capitalism means THEY own THEIR company, not you. You don't get to dictate how they run THEIR company, not yours. I am more capitalist than you are on this issue. You are SOCIALIST, trying to demand how they operate is SOCIALIST.

 

[Brain357]

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.

I don't have a problem with guest workers. Why would that be a problem? Why are only Americans allowed to make money? I just don't understand this mentality.

You are ok with replacing US workers with cheap foreign workers? That's great for wages.

Are you OK with discriminating against all people of the world, for money? That's a benevolent position. How kind and open minded you are.

Well it's great for the rich.