Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-14-2015, 07:29 AM
 
3,341 posts, read 4,126,193 times
Reputation: 1929

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by henry10 View Post
first off, this left-wing group "jobs with justice" produced a report that advocates -- tax more to spend that money in govt, i.e. Hire more govt workers. Duh! Why they have to make a study -- this beats me.

Secondly, about redistribution of profits. Profits themselves are result of redistribution. From you and me to the capitalist. What's missing from your sentence is -- who should do the redistribution?

Thirdly, there are thousands of books written by many left-wing closeted-marxist professors that justify redistribution by a small group of individuals, via an iron-fisted, centralized agent, that we call the government. This is forced, dictatorial redistribution -- you do this or else.

There is nothing innovative and ground-breaking about this. This is what ct has been doing for the last decades, and you can see how significant this evidence is.
+1

 
Old 05-14-2015, 08:15 AM
 
Location: New London County, CT
8,949 posts, read 12,072,327 times
Reputation: 5145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
First off, this left-wing group "Jobs with Justice" produced a report that advocates -- tax more to spend that money in Govt, i.e. hire more Govt workers. Duh! Why they have to make a study -- this beats me.

Secondly, about redistribution of profits. Profits themselves are result of redistribution. From you and me to the capitalist. What's missing from your sentence is -- who should do the redistribution?

Thirdly, there are thousands of books written by many left-wing closeted-Marxist professors that justify redistribution by a small group of individuals, via an iron-fisted, centralized agent, that we call the Government. This is forced, dictatorial redistribution -- you do this or else.

There is nothing innovative and ground-breaking about this. This is what CT has been doing for the last decades, and you can see how significant this evidence is.
I was with you until you got in the "secret left-wing marxist professor" trope...

The number of people that are in favor of "forced, dictatorial distribution" is so minute to be laughable and not worthy of discussion. If this keeps you up at night, you might need to take a Xanex.

What were talking about is essential fairness-- the workers who actually make the produce (metaphorically) are seeing less and less of the splendors. A more equitable distribution resulted from a reasonable minimum wage and (much more importantly) a balance of power between labor and management. Since the right wing has (sadly) successfully demonized and legislated unions to the point of them being basically powerless, that balance has shifted.

In many places workers get their fair share (and in previous decades we had a concept of this) due to the ethics of management. That's great. In many other places, that doesn't happen-- fewer and fewer in fact. In public companies a misplaced concept of fiduciary responsibility only to shareholders and the need to show constant growth also minimize worker's share.

A strong middle class is the heart of a strong economic system for the long term. We can't have 25,000 rich people and everyone else if we expect the economy to be healthy.

No secret Marxist professors needed.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 09:02 AM
 
3,430 posts, read 3,903,899 times
Reputation: 1731
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
I was with you until you got in the "secret left-wing marxist professor" trope...

The number of people that are in favor of "forced, dictatorial distribution" is so minute to be laughable and not worthy of discussion. If this keeps you up at night, you might need to take a Xanex.

What were talking about is essential fairness-- the workers who actually make the produce (metaphorically) are seeing less and less of the splendors. A more equitable distribution resulted from a reasonable minimum wage and (much more importantly) a balance of power between labor and management. Since the right wing has (sadly) successfully demonized and legislated unions to the point of them being basically powerless, that balance has shifted.

In many places workers get their fair share (and in previous decades we had a concept of this) due to the ethics of management. That's great. In many other places, that doesn't happen-- fewer and fewer in fact. In public companies a misplaced concept of fiduciary responsibility only to shareholders and the need to show constant growth also minimize worker's share.

A strong middle class is the heart of a strong economic system for the long term. We can't have 25,000 rich people and everyone else if we expect the economy to be healthy.

No secret Marxist professors needed.
You're right. There's no need to be a secret Marxist professor on a college campus as it is probably one of the few places where Marxists are quite open and vocal about their views.

What we are really talking about here are low skill workers and low skill jobs. Technology and automation have eliminated many of these jobs, resulting in a decrease in demand and increase in supply, which pushes wages down. Its also why union membership is down. Raising the minimum wage merely deals with the effect and not the cause, which is why it is an ineffective solution. What needs to be done is to decrease the supply of low skill labor, through a combination of skill training/education and immigration reform.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 09:55 AM
 
Location: New London County, CT
8,949 posts, read 12,072,327 times
Reputation: 5145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike 75 View Post
You're right. There's no need to be a secret Marxist professor on a college campus as it is probably one of the few places where Marxists are quite open and vocal about their views.

What we are really talking about here are low skill workers and low skill jobs. Technology and automation have eliminated many of these jobs, resulting in a decrease in demand and increase in supply, which pushes wages down. Its also why union membership is down. Raising the minimum wage merely deals with the effect and not the cause, which is why it is an ineffective solution. What needs to be done is to decrease the supply of low skill labor, through a combination of skill training/education and immigration reform.
Funny.

I agree, this is an important part of the solution. It's not the entire solution. Fact is, even for skilled, non-professional jobs wages are depressed. Along with the training and education you reference above, there has to be more economic justice for those in low skill jobs. These will always exist and we'll always need people to fill them. While I don't think low skill jobs should mean a life on easy street, I don't think families with two full-time wage earners should live at near poverty levels.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 10:22 AM
 
2,313 posts, read 2,141,496 times
Reputation: 1313
Henry10,

Which is easier, getting 250k people to buy something you sell at a 4dollar markup or getting 2 people to buy something at a half million dollar mark up? Wealth doesn't just appear out of nowhere for capitalists, and when the unwashed masses don't have disposable income it shrinks the economy.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilton2ParkAve View Post
+1
Thank you. What's not surprising on that report is that Jobs With Justice, a group funded partially by public unions is advocating more public unions.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beeker2211 View Post
Henry10,

Which is easier, getting 250k people to buy something you sell at a 4dollar markup or getting 2 people to buy something at a half million dollar mark up? Wealth doesn't just appear out of nowhere for capitalists, and when the unwashed masses don't have disposable income it shrinks the economy.
That's the same old and tired argument of building economy from the middle out, or bottom up, or economy that works for everyone -- or other esoteric concepts that mean nothing really.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
@ Mlassoff: you are on my ignore list, which you've earned completely. You will stay there maybe forever, so pound away...
 
Old 05-14-2015, 11:15 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,316 posts, read 4,168,786 times
Reputation: 2822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
That's the same old and tired argument of building economy from the middle out, or bottom up, or economy that works for everyone -- or other esoteric concepts that mean nothing really.
They right way to grow the economy is to trust the consumer. Let him decide, with his free will where to spend his hard-earned money. Let the consumer decide how to re-distribute his wealth, rather than the Govt deciding for him.

This condescending attitude that as consumer I am stupid and the Govt will decide how to spend my money-- this has gotten pretty far, and in a whole lot of trouble in CT.
 
Old 05-14-2015, 12:04 PM
 
Location: New London County, CT
8,949 posts, read 12,072,327 times
Reputation: 5145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
@ Mlassoff: you are on my ignore list, which you've earned completely. You will stay there maybe forever, so pound away...
Great.

I like to read dissenting opinions and consider them. I believe that my own convictions are strong enough to withstand alternate viewpoints.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top