A question for the Republican Conservatives

[shintao]

The National Average wage in America in 2009 was $40,711.61. How close were you to that "average" figure? (1)

The average Union Wage in 2009 was $47,216.00 (908. x 52 weeks). How close were you that figure? (2)

The Top 500 CEOs averaged a $11.4 million wage in 2009. How close were you to that figure? (3)


Knowing these figures for 2009, I must ask the right why they are attacking Union members who only make $6,505. a year ($3.13 hr. more) more than unskilled workers, and $10.992,784. less than CEOs?

Maybe they can explain this flaw in logic that even a common sense con might understand, in capitalist terms that we would all enjoy to hear. Cons claim capitalism is about making profits whenever they defend a CEO, but not when they attack a Union member. Why is that? And I would expect most of those posting here make over the average of a common worker and union member, but I am fairly sure none are making more than a CEO. Yet they attack the Union member when they make more average wages a year than they do.

So tell us all about it cons. How do you explain this illogical position you hold? Or support your imbeciles in congress who want to tear down the capitalist system, for the average American worker. The only object being is to pay American workers less, yet shield the CEOs who make more.


(1) National Average Wage Index
(2) The Union Advantage: Facts and Figures
(3) CEO Compensation - Forbes.com

 

[MarcATL]

Excellent thread.

From my observation, they have arrived to their logic from the constant demonization of The Union Worker simultaneously tempored with the constant glorification of the Rich, aka the job givers...aka The CEO.

 

[Publius1787]

The National Average wage in America in 2009 was $40,711.61. How close were you to that "average" figure? (1)

The average Union Wage in 2009 was $47,216.00 (908. x 52 weeks). How close were you that figure? (2)

The Top 500 CEOs averaged a $11.4 million wage in 2009. How close were you to that figure? (3)


Knowing these figures for 2009, I must ask the right why they are attacking Union members who only make $6,505. a year more than unskilled workers, and $10.992,784. less than CEOs?

Maybe they can explain this flaw in logic that even a common sense con might understand, in capitalist terms that we would all enjoy to hear. Cons claim capitalism is about making profits whenever they defend a CEO, but not when they attack a Union member. Why is that? And I would expect most of those posting here make over the average of a common worker and union member, but I am fairly sure none are making more than a CEO. Yet they attack the Union member when they make more average wages a year than they do.

So tell us all about it cons. How do you explain this illogical position you hold? Or support your imbeciles in congress who want to tear down the capitalist system, for the average American worker. The only object being is to pay American workers less, yet shield the CEOs who make more.


(1) National Average Wage Index
(2) The Union Advantage: Facts and Figures
(3) CEO Compensation - Forbes.com

Are you devinding people in to class and thus, deviding people in to special interest groups? As if we should pay attention to any group over another? And what about Unions? Their pay DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS. And who pays for thoes lavish pensions, the excellent health coverage, and all the other perks in public sector unions? WE DO! Who bailed out the failed Unions of Detroit as their business was destroied because their non union competetors are destroying them? WE DID! Thus your damn right we get to critisize them! Chris Christie is Awesome!

 

[California Girl]

A question is the title.

It appears the OP can't count. I blame the public schools system.

 

[shintao]

Excellent thread.

From my observation, they have arrived to their logic from the constant demonization of The Union Worker simultaneously tempored with the constant glorification of the Rich, aka the job givers...aka The CEO.

Something is certainly flawed in their thinking Marc, and maybe if they can talk in their common sense manner we can figure it out. An average of $3.13 an hour is what they are resisting. LOL!

 

[shintao]

The National Average wage in America in 2009 was $40,711.61. How close were you to that "average" figure? (1)

The average Union Wage in 2009 was $47,216.00 (908. x 52 weeks). How close were you that figure? (2)

The Top 500 CEOs averaged a $11.4 million wage in 2009. How close were you to that figure? (3)


Knowing these figures for 2009, I must ask the right why they are attacking Union members who only make $6,505. a year more than unskilled workers, and $10.992,784. less than CEOs?

Maybe they can explain this flaw in logic that even a common sense con might understand, in capitalist terms that we would all enjoy to hear. Cons claim capitalism is about making profits whenever they defend a CEO, but not when they attack a Union member. Why is that? And I would expect most of those posting here make over the average of a common worker and union member, but I am fairly sure none are making more than a CEO. Yet they attack the Union member when they make more average wages a year than they do.

So tell us all about it cons. How do you explain this illogical position you hold? Or support your imbeciles in congress who want to tear down the capitalist system, for the average American worker. The only object being is to pay American workers less, yet shield the CEOs who make more.


(1) National Average Wage Index
(2) The Union Advantage: Facts and Figures
(3) CEO Compensation - Forbes.com

Are you devinding people in to class and thus, deviding people in to special interest groups? As if we should pay attention to any group over another? And what about Unions? Their pay DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS. And who pays for thoes lavish pensions, the excellent health coverage, and all the other perks in public sector unions? WE DO! Thus your damn right we get to critisize them!

Dividing into groups is what the name of the "Union" game is to cons, and the point of this thread. Too complicated for you? The common Average worker or CEO DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS either, so what is your point? We are talking wages here, not what time the sun came up this morning. Get on task dude, stop trying to make this thread a complex case. It is simple arithmetic of ABOUT AMERICAN WAGES>GOT IT???

I try to dumb it down to the common sense level so cons won't get lost, and they still need a road map.

 

[shintao]

A question is the title.

It appears the OP can't count. I blame the public schools system.

I am fairly certain tunafish never made it to college. If she did she spent all day long in a smelly locker.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Don't expect an answer; you may get attacked personally and called all sorts of names, in particual pejoratives (Socialist! Communist?), by those who actually read your post and considered it. Most however will suffer congnitive dissonance and simply hate you for making them uncomfortable.

 

[California Girl]

A question is the title.

It appears the OP can't count. I blame the public schools system.

I am fairly certain tunafish never made it to college. If she did she spent all day long in a smelly locker.

Like most of your 'certainties', you would be wrong. Again. I guess you're used to that.

 

[shintao]

A question is the title.

It appears the OP can't count. I blame the public schools system.

I am fairly certain tunafish never made it to college. If she did she spent all day long in a smelly locker.

Like most of your 'certainties', you would be wrong. Again. I guess you're used to that.

SNIFF Obviously then, you made it through without any math classes. The OP is accurate, and you are playing yourself here as a fool, imbecile.

 

[Mr.Fitnah]

“If you can’t open their minds, open their heads.”

 

[Publius1787]

The National Average wage in America in 2009 was $40,711.61. How close were you to that "average" figure? (1)

The average Union Wage in 2009 was $47,216.00 (908. x 52 weeks). How close were you that figure? (2)

The Top 500 CEOs averaged a $11.4 million wage in 2009. How close were you to that figure? (3)


Knowing these figures for 2009, I must ask the right why they are attacking Union members who only make $6,505. a year more than unskilled workers, and $10.992,784. less than CEOs?

Maybe they can explain this flaw in logic that even a common sense con might understand, in capitalist terms that we would all enjoy to hear. Cons claim capitalism is about making profits whenever they defend a CEO, but not when they attack a Union member. Why is that? And I would expect most of those posting here make over the average of a common worker and union member, but I am fairly sure none are making more than a CEO. Yet they attack the Union member when they make more average wages a year than they do.

So tell us all about it cons. How do you explain this illogical position you hold? Or support your imbeciles in congress who want to tear down the capitalist system, for the average American worker. The only object being is to pay American workers less, yet shield the CEOs who make more.


(1) National Average Wage Index
(2) The Union Advantage: Facts and Figures
(3) CEO Compensation - Forbes.com

Are you devinding people in to class and thus, deviding people in to special interest groups? As if we should pay attention to any group over another? And what about Unions? Their pay DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS. And who pays for thoes lavish pensions, the excellent health coverage, and all the other perks in public sector unions? WE DO! Thus your damn right we get to critisize them!

Dividing into groups is what the name of the "Union" game is to cons, and the point of this thread. Too complicated for you? The common Average worker or CEO DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS either, so what is your point? We are talking wages here, not what time the sun came up this morning. Get on task dude, stop trying to make this thread a complex case. It is simple arithmetic of ABOUT AMERICAN WAGES>GOT IT???

I try to dumb it down to the common sense level so cons won't get lost, and they still need a road map.

So you intend to exclude the benefits of the union workers from their pay to make them look poorer than they actually are and to justify this you will do the same for the rich? VERY Misleading! It is dishonesty in its truest form! Especially since the average worker doesent have even half of the benefits of a union worker and all their insurance must come out of pocket along with their savings for retirement. There is no "work for 20-30 years and get a life long pension that you did not contribute to" for the average worker. Furthermore, I have every right to complain about public sector unions when I am taxed for their lavish benefits.

 

[WillowTree]

If you wish to make a CEO's pay get a MBA. If you wish to dig ditches don't.

 

[uscitizen]

Excellent thread.

From my observation, they have arrived to their logic from the constant demonization of The Union Worker simultaneously tempored with the constant glorification of the Rich, aka the job givers...aka The CEO.

it is a matter of rallying around things to be against instead of things to be for with right wingers.

Such as being against funding PBS/NPR when the funding is so small in relation to most other govt spending.
Having rallys to protest abortions but noe to promote adoption or lobbying to make adoption simpler and cheaper.

Whining about the problems instead of working on soloutions.

 

[WillowTree]

Excellent thread.

From my observation, they have arrived to their logic from the constant demonization of The Union Worker simultaneously tempored with the constant glorification of the Rich, aka the job givers...aka The CEO.

it is a matter of rallying around things to be against instead of things to be for with right wingers.

Such as being against funding PBS/NPR when the funding is so small in relation to most other govt spending.

If the funding is small, they won't miss it.

 

[uscitizen]

Excellent thread.

From my observation, they have arrived to their logic from the constant demonization of The Union Worker simultaneously tempored with the constant glorification of the Rich, aka the job givers...aka The CEO.

it is a matter of rallying around things to be against instead of things to be for with right wingers.

Such as being against funding PBS/NPR when the funding is so small in relation to most other govt spending.

If the funding is small, they won't miss it.

thanks for endorsing my post.

 

[shintao]

Are you devinding people in to class and thus, deviding people in to special interest groups? As if we should pay attention to any group over another? And what about Unions? Their pay DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS. And who pays for thoes lavish pensions, the excellent health coverage, and all the other perks in public sector unions? WE DO! Thus your damn right we get to critisize them!

Dividing into groups is what the name of the "Union" game is to cons, and the point of this thread. Too complicated for you? The common Average worker or CEO DOES NOT INCLUDE THEIR BENEFITS either, so what is your point? We are talking wages here, not what time the sun came up this morning. Get on task dude, stop trying to make this thread a complex case. It is simple arithmetic of ABOUT AMERICAN WAGES>GOT IT???

I try to dumb it down to the common sense level so cons won't get lost, and they still need a road map.

So you intend to exclude the benefits of the union workers from their pay to make them look poorer than they actually are and to justify this you will do the same for the rich? VERY Misleading! It is dishonesty in its truest form! Especially since the average worker doesent have even half of the benefits of a union worker and all their insurance must come out of pocket along with their savings for retirement. There is no "work for 20-30 years and get a life long pension that you did not contribute to" for the average worker. Furthermore, I have every right to complain about public sector unions when I am taxed for their lavish benefits.

Yes, no ones benefits, other than wages are included. That tells you how much wages are, and that is what this thread is about. Nothing dishonest about it. It is dumbed down to it's lowest denominator, nothing to confuse the mind with, just honest average wages for 2009.

IF you want to discuss benefits, start a new thread. I would be interested to see how you figure out who has benefits, and who doesn't, what the benefits are, etc. Oh, and keep it simple, huh?

Is $3.13 an hour lavish to you? And do you also complain about the average CEOs $25,555. a hour wage you are taxed for?

 

[saveliberty]

The National Average wage in America in 2009 was $40,711.61. How close were you to that "average" figure? (1)

The average Union Wage in 2009 was $47,216.00 (908. x 52 weeks). How close were you that figure? (2)

The Top 500 CEOs averaged a $11.4 million wage in 2009. How close were you to that figure? (3)


Knowing these figures for 2009, I must ask the right why they are attacking Union members who only make $6,505. a year ($3.13 hr. more) more than unskilled workers, and $10.992,784. less than CEOs?

Maybe they can explain this flaw in logic that even a common sense con might understand, in capitalist terms that we would all enjoy to hear. Cons claim capitalism is about making profits whenever they defend a CEO, but not when they attack a Union member. Why is that? And I would expect most of those posting here make over the average of a common worker and union member, but I am fairly sure none are making more than a CEO. Yet they attack the Union member when they make more average wages a year than they do.

So tell us all about it cons. How do you explain this illogical position you hold? Or support your imbeciles in congress who want to tear down the capitalist system, for the average American worker. The only object being is to pay American workers less, yet shield the CEOs who make more.


(1) National Average Wage Index
(2) The Union Advantage: Facts and Figures
(3) CEO Compensation - Forbes.com

Since you seem Hellbent on stupid comparisions...

Figure in a pro baseball player in there for me. Explain to me why he makes 10 times what the manager makes.

Union workers make less, because unions bargained away the new hires wage rate. That lowered the average pay rate. Of course, you completely ignored the excellent benefit package which increases the annual pay package dramatically. Convenient oversight on your part.

CEOs are answerable to their boards and to a degree shareholders. You might want to ask them, not the government or me.

 

[shintao]

If you wish to make a CEO's pay get a MBA. If you wish to dig ditches don't.

A wise statement. Those relying on common sense are in for a hickory handled shock.

 

[shintao]

The National Average wage in America in 2009 was $40,711.61. How close were you to that "average" figure? (1)

The average Union Wage in 2009 was $47,216.00 (908. x 52 weeks). How close were you that figure? (2)

The Top 500 CEOs averaged a $11.4 million wage in 2009. How close were you to that figure? (3)


Knowing these figures for 2009, I must ask the right why they are attacking Union members who only make $6,505. a year ($3.13 hr. more) more than unskilled workers, and $10.992,784. less than CEOs?

Maybe they can explain this flaw in logic that even a common sense con might understand, in capitalist terms that we would all enjoy to hear. Cons claim capitalism is about making profits whenever they defend a CEO, but not when they attack a Union member. Why is that? And I would expect most of those posting here make over the average of a common worker and union member, but I am fairly sure none are making more than a CEO. Yet they attack the Union member when they make more average wages a year than they do.

So tell us all about it cons. How do you explain this illogical position you hold? Or support your imbeciles in congress who want to tear down the capitalist system, for the average American worker. The only object being is to pay American workers less, yet shield the CEOs who make more.


(1) National Average Wage Index
(2) The Union Advantage: Facts and Figures
(3) CEO Compensation - Forbes.com

Since you seem Hellbent on stupid comparisions...

Figure in a pro baseball player in there for me. Explain to me why he makes 10 times what the manager makes.

Union workers make less, because unions bargained away the new hires wage rate. That lowered the average pay rate. Of course, you completely ignored the excellent benefit package which increases the annual pay package dramatically. Convenient oversight on your part.

CEOs are answerable to their boards and to a degree shareholders. You might want to ask them, not the government or me.

I have made it so simple even a simpleton can understand it, and then answer the simple questions posed, rather than ramble off as you chose to do adding unneeded variables. Yes, I ignored tons of items that have no relevance to this thread.