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.
Thats an American-centric viewpoint though and is based in the 1950's-1960's being some sort of NORMAL baseline for future workers instead of pre-WW2.
US labor had it's best era ever because we had little competition and everyone else was rebuilding from the war. Not to mention, as the victor we got to dole out all the contracts etc.
The days of the C-student stumbling through highschool to land a decent paying job in a factory are gone. They aren't coming back. What's sad is that when I was growing up in the 80's the mantra as the economy downturned was to get skills, get an education and so forth to get ahead.
It's a global economy and we have people essentially complaining that Americans that coast on by in school etc. are still entitled to a wage that falls in the top 10% of the world. No politician is going to tell you the truth but they know that's a dying dodo of a reality.
Competing auto companies in other developed nations have a heavily unionized labor force. They do focus on a stronger skill set but then again they offer free education in those nations too.
Wages are higher in those nations too and even Walmart allows for unions too.
This is all besides the point. I'm trying to tell you all that it doesn't matter if the economy is regional, local, national or even global. What matters is what's being produced and what's being gained. So far the gains have been going to the top. When asked about this you can get a whole slew of excuses about the going rate for such labor and the lack of credentials. Yet these excuses cooked up in the corporate boardrooms of America seems just to convenient that it favors capital over labor. You guys can wax on about how this person deserves X amount of money for the mental effort he or she put in but there no real tangible reason that you guys can explain that that labor deserves 100000 more than the work done on the ground.
That's what I'm trying to explain. That this whole argument is not even an economic one. Its a political one but many of you are under this delusion that EVERYTHING a business does is in its rational self interest while anything workers do in theirs is akin to throwing a monkey wrench into the market.
Companies can do what they please to try to maximize profits but do not expect there to be no backlash too. There are alternatives to a lot of initiatives conservative businessmen propose they just don't want to hear it because it wouldn't mean them taking a loss. Them they equate taking a loss with their liberty being infringed and the market being manipulated.
Are you suggesting, for example, the secretary of treasury should have not worked in any financial firm? If they don't work for any financial firm, where do they get the financial management experience?
We want the best and the brightest people to be in the government, no? Good people come from the real world. Would you want a community organizer who has no experience whatsoever taking the role as the head of finance?
Tim "taxcheat" Geithner is the best and brightest ?
That Cash-N-Carry guy they appointed to dole out the TARP money had better credentials and paid his taxes then little Timmy Geithner.
Wages have not increased above the rate of inflation, that is how your wage has stagnated. All this while worker productivity goes up every year.
Also look at the tax brackets:
Everyone pays 7%ish in sales tax, which is = to 7%income tax when all said and done.
Income taxes are higher than capital gains and dividend taxes, while income tax taxes middle class and dividend tax taxes upper class.
Property taxes are much lower than they should be, giving the wealthy a break.
Most government expenditures (farm bill, defense, infrastructure) benefit the rich much more than the poverty class people. So the rich should pay higher taxes for their larger portion of benefits.
Wages have not increased above the rate of inflation, that is how your wage has stagnated. All this while worker productivity goes up every year.
Also look at the tax brackets:
Everyone pays 7%ish in sales tax, which is = to 7%income tax when all said and done.
Income taxes are higher than capital gains and dividend taxes, while income tax taxes middle class and dividend tax taxes upper class.
Property taxes are much lower than they should be, giving the wealthy a break.
Most government expenditures (farm bill, defense, infrastructure) benefit the rich much more than the poverty class people. So the rich should pay higher taxes for their larger portion of benefits.
The government is spending it quicker than it comes into them.
If you give them more money they will just spend more money and you will be no better off but lighter in your wallet.
You seem to think if government takes more money from rich people that somehow it will end up in your bank account ?
AMT, that "tax on the rich" hits people making $45K a year and that is solely Congress' doing.
The government is spending it quicker than it comes into them.
If you give them more money they will just spend more money and you will be no better off but lighter in your wallet.
You seem to think if government takes more money from rich people that somehow it will end up in your bank account ?
AMT, that "tax on the rich" hits people making $45K a year and that is solely Congress' doing.
While I don't agree with conservatives, I think that liberals are too stuck on this idea that if you just raise taxes on the rich that this whole problem will be fixed.
did you lose your copy of the Communist Manifesto that your left-tard professor gave you in college?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer
I am trying to understand how the rich exploit us as a lot of people keep saying they exploit us. As far as I can see it works like this:
I bought a $600 iPhone on my own. The rich and the big corporation just stole that $600 right out of my pocket otherwise how can anybody explain why I am now short of $600?
Now I can't pay my medical bill and my kids are starving. It's the fault of the rich and the big corporation who stole my money.
I am trying to understand how the rich exploit us as a lot of people keep saying they exploit us. As far as I can see it works like this:
I bought a $600 iPhone on my own. The rich and the big corporation just stole that $600 right out of my pocket otherwise how can anybody explain why I am now short of $600?
Now I can't pay my medical bill and my kids are starving. It's the fault of the rich and the big corporation who stole my money.
How do they exploit us? It works several ways. One way they start a company, or "create jobs" as the cons like to call it. But then they discover they're too dumb to run a company and said company starts to go under. They say that the workers should take paycuts and cuts in benefits while they take no cuts at all. Workers accept the cuts and the company survives. But only for a little bit because the people running it are still too dumb to run a company. So the company starts to go under again and they again say the workers are going to have to take more cuts, but this time the workers say no The ones who are supposed to be running the company give themselves hundreds of millions in bonuses and pay raises. They also steal the workers pensions. They company goes over and they claim it's all the workers fault
"Right to work" laws
Laws restricting what unions can do with their own money
Laws that make sure those most likely to support the union will find it very hard to vote
Interesting. How did corporations lower our pay arbitrarily? A wage is an agreement between the employee and the employer, and neither party can unilaterally lower or increase the wage.
Oh yes they can. The company can lower your wages anytime they damn well please and unless you're in a union what the hell you gonna do about it?
You are providing no specifics whatsoever. Would you mind giving one specific example?
Are you saying business should not look for ways to reduce their labor cost, and as consumers, you would like to see huge price increase?
It was a deliberate choice to increase automation, crush unions, gain political capital to shift policy, outsourcing because as the goal for the business is to maximize profit. Even a non-profit business is doing all those.
On the other hand, as individuals, we do not have to work for those businesses. There's no such legal obligation.
Why is it ok for the business to want as much money as it can get but when unions want as much as they can get then they're greedy?
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.
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.
No politician is going to tell you the truth but they know that's a dying dodo of a reality.
