Class warfare?

[JakeStarkey]

Try to live on $25,000 a year with a family of our, Widdekind, and come back and tell us what is wrong with that.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

According to the OP, Apple's "poorly paid store employees here in the US" earn $12 / hour, or about $25K / year. Those are some of the highest wages on planet earth. What's wrong with $12 / hour ?

Well, $12 sucks. I estimate it would be almost double without liberal interference in the ecoonomy. Capitalist health care would kick it up to $16 alone.

 

[JakeStarkey]

According to the OP, Apple's "poorly paid store employees here in the US" earn $12 / hour, or about $25K / year. Those are some of the highest wages on planet earth. What's wrong with $12 / hour ?

Well, $12 sucks. I estimate it would be almost double without liberal interference in the ecoonomy. Capitalist health care would kick it up to $16 alone.

Your imagination is delusional. Without a regulated economy, the purchasing power of the income would decrease and the wage per hour would be less.

Don't you understand that Microsoft would have us working 60 hours a week for $4.50 an hour without regulation?

Where did you go to school?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You bet!

Corporate Profits at All-Time High; Wages at All-Time Low: Can We Call it Class War Yet? | Economy | AlterNet

It’s less ‘class warfare’ and more class contempt and neglect.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Don't you understand that Microsoft would have us working 60 hours a week for $4.50 an hour without regulation?

That's like saying Microsoft would charge $10,000 for Windows were it not for regulation. A-Rod gets $15 million a season because of competition!! Econ 101 class 1 day one minute!

See why we are positive a liberal will always be stupid?? Sorry but what other explanation is possible?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Don't you understand that Microsoft would have us working 60 hours a week for $4.50 an hour without regulation?

That's like saying Microsoft would charge $10,000 for Windows were it not for regulation. A-Rod gets $15 million a season because of competition!! Econ 101 class 1 day one minute! See why we are positive a liberal will always be stupid?? Sorry but what other explanation is possible?

"We"? You and the hamster up your ass? We are talking about regulation that provokes competition not the monopoly that would result from the lack of it, leading to defective products, stymied invention, and poor wages.

Edward, we live in the 21st century, not the 19th, and you can't survive in the modern age.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We are talking about regulation that provokes competition not the monopoly that would result from the lack of it,

too stupid!!!! there is plenty of international competition today so monopoly is the very least of our economic issues. Is the liberal worried IBM or HP or GM or GE are about to gain a worldwide monopoly. See why we have to assume liberalism is perfectly stupid?? What other explanation is possible??

 

[Rshermr]

You bet!

Corporate Profits at All-Time High; Wages at All-Time Low: Can We Call it Class War Yet? | Economy | AlterNet

A) wages are lower because liberal policies have driven all the jobs away( see below)


B) if one class earns more relative to another it does not mean they took it from the other class or made war against the other class.


1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

jesus, ed. You added a and b to your 15 tea party talking points.
Funny how all of your points are beneficial to the wealthy, including the corporatists.
You are a true tool, ed.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You bet!

Corporate Profits at All-Time High; Wages at All-Time Low: Can We Call it Class War Yet? | Economy | AlterNet

A) wages are lower because liberal policies have driven all the jobs away( see below)


B) if one class earns more relative to another it does not mean they took it from the other class or made war against the other class.


1) Make unions illegal ( 10 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

2) make minimum wage illegal ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

3) end business taxation; especially tax incentives to off-shore jobs ( 5 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

4) make inflation illegal ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose


5) make Federal debt illegal( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

6) send illegal workers home(8 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

7) Pass Balanced Budget Amendment to Constitution( 3 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

8) cut pay of government workers in half( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

9) Make health insurance competition legal( 6 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

10) end needless business regulations ( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

11) restrict Federal spending to 15% of GNP( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

12) support unlimited free trade( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

13) reduced unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, medicaid.( 2 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

14) privatize education, social security ( 4 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

15) end payroll taxes ( 1 million new jobs) Democrats oppose

Since Democrats always oppose wisdom and common sense the only serious option is to make them illegal as the Constitution intended.

jesus, ed. You added a and b to your 15 tea party talking points.
Funny how all of your points are beneficial to the wealthy, including the corporatists.
You are a true tool, ed.

Actually 30 million new jobs would be beneficial to those who got the 30 million jobs!! Why not read for comprehension next time, liberal iliterate!!

 

[Rshermr]

We are talking about regulation that provokes competition not the monopoly that would result from the lack of it,

too stupid!!!! there is plenty of international competition today so monopoly is the very least of our economic issues. Is the liberal worried IBM or HP or GM or GE are about to gain a worldwide monopoly. See why we have to assume liberalism is perfectly stupid?? What other explanation is possible??

Wow. I am so surprised that you do not think corporate monopoly is a big problem.
You love corporations who have a great deal of monopoly power, but prefer that labor has none. And you are probably not stupid enough to wonder where that ends up.
Just more tea party dogma from you ed. What a surprise.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Wow. I am so surprised that you do not think corporate monopoly is a big problem.

of course if it is a big problem you would not be so afraid to identify the monopoly!! Does your fear tell you that as a liberal you must be very very slow? What other conclusion is possible?

 

[Rshermr]

Wow. I am so surprised that you do not think corporate monopoly is a big problem.

of course if it is a big problem you would not be so afraid to identify the monopoly!! Does your fear tell you that as a liberal you must be very very slow? What other conclusion is possible?

Great, insightful post. You really should not post something like this and then call others slow.
If you can not see monopoly power out there, then you are not only dumb but blind. And please do not ask me for help. I long ago quit trying to provide learning to a closed mind.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If you can not see monopoly power out there, then you are not only dumb but blind.

of course if monopoly power is a big problem you would not be so afraid to identify the monopoly!! Does your fear tell you that as a liberal you must be very very slow? What other conclusion is possible?

 

[JakeStarkey]

We are talking about regulation that provokes competition not the monopoly that would result from the lack of it,

too stupid!!!! there is plenty of international competition today so monopoly is the very least of our economic issues. Is the liberal worried IBM or HP or GM or GE are about to gain a worldwide monopoly. See why we have to assume liberalism is perfectly stupid?? What other explanation is possible??

You are such a tool, aren't you? You can't argue economics, you can't argue voucher, all you do is act like Edward the Mindless Parrot.

What I am confident about is two fold: (1) Romney will win and (2) he will have nothing to do with you 19th century mentoids. Go to, fellow.

 

[Widdekind]

Try to live on $25,000 a year with a family of four, Widdekind, and come back and tell us what is wrong with that.

$25K / year is allot of money. Trim expenses, live within means. You don't need to live in an expensive house, or drive an expensive car.

Microsoft would have us working 60 hours a week for $4.50 an hour without regulation?

$15K / year is more money than most of mankind makes. You're saying, that businesses (Apple, Microsoft) "owe" US workers earth-world-record wages, which they "deserve" ? If every worker on this world demanded comparable wages, the global economy would fail. You sense a downward pressure, on your wages, from "US business". i attribute the same pressure, ultimately, to "foreign workers", who are willing & able, to work harder, for less pay, than US workers (in many cases, much of the time, not always).

If US workers ditched their cars, and their single-family homes; for mass-transit & apartments; then they could save allot of money; and become more economically competitive. According to me, US workers have been "set up", over the past 100 years, into acclimating to an unsustainably-high "standard" of living -- which will only price US workers out of every job, in the long-term. At some point, "reality will have to kick in".

If foreign workers are willing & able, to work more, for less; then they are economically more competitive; they are "pack leader"; they set the pace; they get the jobs. That's (Libertarian) rules. When the rest of earth charges tens of thousands of dollars less per year, for comparable work; then US workers will have to pick up their pace, and "make do". Even if money did grow on trees, then that would only cause price inflation.

 

[Rshermr]

Try to live on $25,000 a year with a family of four, Widdekind, and come back and tell us what is wrong with that.

$25K / year is allot of money. Trim expenses, live within means. You don't need to live in an expensive house, or drive an expensive car.

Microsoft would have us working 60 hours a week for $4.50 an hour without regulation?

$15K / year is more money than most of mankind makes. You're saying, that businesses (Apple, Microsoft) "owe" US workers earth-world-record wages, which they "deserve" ? If every worker on this world demanded comparable wages, the global economy would fail. You sense a downward pressure, on your wages, from "US business". i attribute the same pressure, ultimately, to "foreign workers", who are willing & able, to work harder, for less pay, than US workers (in many cases, much of the time, not always).

If US workers ditched their cars, and their single-family homes; for mass-transit & apartments; then they could save allot of money; and become more economically competitive. According to me, US workers have been "set up", over the past 100 years, into acclimating to an unsustainably-high "standard" of living -- which will only price US workers out of every job, in the long-term. At some point, "reality will have to kick in".

If foreign workers are willing & able, to work more, for less; then they are economically more competitive; they are "pack leader"; they set the pace; they get the jobs. That's (Libertarian) rules. When the rest of earth charges tens of thousands of dollars less per year, for comparable work; then US workers will have to pick up their pace, and "make do". Even if money did grow on trees, then that would only cause price inflation.

Ah, you are a libertarian.
Enlighten me. What country can you name that is libertarian?
Somalia?
What country has ever been libertarian and successfull?

You are a fool, who would like everyone to work at wages of countries where the working person has essentially nothing.
Why not look at a bit different idea. A country that is doing well and does exist. Like Germany. Sweden. Several others.

The fact that you think that the middle class should be willing to sink live like the poorest nations workers shows where your head is. Thank god there are elections.

 

[regent]

Get rid of Bain (20 million new jobs) Republicans oppose

Raise taxes on the wealthy (14 million new jobs) wealthy and Romney oppose

Stop outsourcing of jobs (26 million new jobs) Romney opposes

Keep money in America (6 million new jobs) Foreigners oppose

Make kids eat their oatmeal (4 new jobs) Kids oppose

If we need more jobs let me know.

 

[Widdekind]

You ... would like everyone to work at wages of countries where the working person has essentially nothing...

not what i said

US workers should work for, and earn, fair & competitive wages. If US workers demand exorbitant pay, then that will make their products pricier; and less economically competitive. US consumers themselves hate paying for exorbitant US wages -- Walmart did try, and did fail, to promote "made in America". Now they import cheap products from foreigners; and US consumers buy billions of dollars of those cheap products, each year.

When US voters are confronted with the exorbitant wage-demands, and exorbitant prices, of other US workers; they "vote with their wallets", and vote those wages down. By billions of dollars per year. According to US consumers, US workers are over-paid; and demand too much. Nobody likes paying for US workers' "standard" of living -- not their bosses; not their customers. (US taxpayers are pretty easy going, though, i guess.)

 

[Rshermr]

You ... would like everyone to work at wages of countries where the working person has essentially nothing...

not what i said

US workers should work for, and earn, fair & competitive wages. If US workers demand exorbitant pay, then that will make their products pricier; and less economically competitive. US consumers themselves hate paying for exorbitant US wages -- Walmart did try, and did fail, to promote "made in America". Now they import cheap products from foreigners; and US consumers buy billions of dollars of those cheap products, each year.

When US voters are confronted with the exorbitant wage-demands, and exorbitant prices, of other US workers; they "vote with their wallets", and vote those wages down. By billions of dollars per year. According to US consumers, US workers are over-paid; and demand too much. Nobody likes paying for US workers' "standard" of living -- not their bosses; not their customers. (US taxpayers are pretty easy going, though, i guess.)

Here's the problem. Wages don't directly affect sales of goods and services. They are a factor, but not the complete problem.
So, the fact is that corporations are enjoying record profits in 2011 and 2012. Don't believe me. Not my idea. Just google record profits 2012 and see what is happening.
Then tell me again how workers wages are pricing us out of the market. It is simply not happening.
Look to germany, and again let me know why strong unions are coexisting with a strong economy.
And you did indeed say that us workers are overpaid and need to work at wage rates comparable to those taking their jobs. Not word for word. But it is definitely what you are saying.

So, explain to me why the wealthy are getting more wealthy by huge amounts (275% over the past 30 years, compared to workers increases of around 17%) and yet you believe the problem is with the workers. The wealthiest 400 Americans have the same combined wealth as the poorest half of Americans -- over 150 million people.

You express libertarian views. You did not answer my questions in regard to libertarian successes.

 

[hortysir]

$25,000 is the federal poverty level?