I ask that those right of center not reply to this thread

[Disir]

The people didn't want unions , look at the recent volkswagon vote look at the Scott.walker recall

That highlights the way companies and right wing politicians use threats and thuggery to dissuade people from joining a union. Which is why the process needs to be fixed, to hold union votes sooner, before the companies can use scare tactics. In the VW case, it wasn't the company using the scare tactics, as it was only the politicians. But early on, most workers seemed to be receptive to a union before Governors, Senators and congressmen started weighing in with threats to workers' livelihoods.

As for Scott Walker, the people in Wisconsin are definitely having buyer's remorse for voting for a slimey dope like him.

In my town it is the thuggery of trade unions which distorts and destroys the business climate. The price paid here, as in Detroit, is development.

Oh, it's thuggery but it isn't the unions.

“I made a prediction a long time ago and it’s come to pass. I said what we’re gonna do is turn Detroit into an Indian reservation, where we herd all the Indians into the city, build a fence around it and then throw in the blankets and the corn.” — Oakland County (MI) Executive Director L. Brooks Patterson.

This quote came from L. Brooks Patterson, a Republican official in Oakland County, MI. Patterson has been the county’s Executive Director for 21 years. He might have said these lines back in the days when he was fighting against desegration of schools. He also said them more recently, during an interview with the New Yorker. The article came out on Martin Luther King Day, 2014.

? Republican Politician Suggests Detroit Become An Indian Reservation For Black People

How much will Patterson make with the destruction of Detroit? How does he benefit?

 

[PratchettFan]

Actually R2W is Big Gov't removing its nose from private contracts. It is "union states" in which Big G requires union obedience in work relations.

I know that you guys like to pretend that's true, but it's not.

Right-to-work law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is only one of me here and your source agrees with my assessment. R2W states protect workers from union enslavement.
R2W states limit "the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring."

An interesting perspective and one I tend to agree with. However, it does bring up another issue. Large businesses are groups, not individuals. They have boards and stock holders. Likewise, a union is a group. When the state steps in and regulates a union, that is no less an interference of the free market than when it regulates a business. It is the state telling both a business and the union how they may or may not do business. It is, in fact, an example of what some people call "The Nanny State".

 

[SAYIT]

I know that you guys like to pretend that's true, but it's not.

Right-to-work law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is only one of me here and your source agrees with my assessment. R2W states protect workers from union enslavement.
R2W states limit "the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring."

The fact that Right to Work laws "limit" private contracts between non-governmental entities does not agree with your "assessment".

Why are you so in favor of Big Government telling you what can or cannot be included in private contracts? How is that "removing it's nose"?

It limits the right of unions to require workers to join and pay dues. How is that limiting workers rights? They can still join and pay dues voluntarily.

 

[SAYIT]

So you don't think that being PART OF US society helped create WEALTH of those 'job creators' huh?


Keynes wrote "The End of Laissez Faire" in 1926. He was correct then, and his insight remains more valid than any economics that conservative Libertarians propound ad infinitum and ad nauseum. Laissez Faire is nothing more than a childish Christmas wish of no substance; just hope and myth, and smoke and mirrors. Fails every time we try even the tiniest bit.

America's capitalist economy sets the table. It has enabled millions to become "the owners." I would remind you that the bottom 50% of earners carry VIRTUALLY NONE of the federal income tax load. The infrastructure and security we ALL enjoy is paid for by the top 50% of earners. America allows all to join the party but guarantees none.

I am so sick of that weakass argument. The rich pay more dollars overall because they make more dollars. It is not rocket science.

I suppose the nature of our progressive tax system is beyond your comprehension. It means the more you make, the higher your tax bracket. As already established, the bottom 50% pay virtually no fed income taxes ... they get a free ride on the backs of those who do pay those taxes.

 

[kiwiman127]

I personally like the idea of no CEO or business owner make say 20 times the amount of his lowest worker. It is not a salary cap you can pay them much as the shareholders want.

I have a friend of mine who's bother lives in Germany and who's job is to check out possible investments for investors.
He says that several manufacturing plants he has visited have technology/equipment in the US, that is behind their counterparts in Europe, The difference is that European manufacturing companies invest more into their plant's technology and employees than most American companies, So in other words, capital investment made to ensure staying ahead of the competition to generate long-term profits.
I guess that explains why the European middle class is seeing growth in the incomes and have seen much larger growth in their incomes than the working middle class in the US.
The fellow looking to invest in the US says that in America it's all about the CEO's and their pay and the shareholders making a quick buck on the short investment. The result will be a continuation of America losing out to the foreign companies who plan for the future versus the short-term thinking in America.
So while the US working middle class flounders with flat wages, their counterparts in Europe are seeing growth in the income. Recently Canada passed the US as having the best paid middle class in the world and other countries will also pass the US in that specific category in the near future..
Sad.

 

[Pheonixops]

For those of you on the left.

The question is very simple, but with a very complex answer.

Detail what it is that you think will benefit the Middle Class.

Now, by benefit, I mean provide a means for them to retain their middle class status and to begin advancing themselves upward.

Take your time. Be specific and as detailed as you can.

First and foremost, personal responsibility and personal development (education, vocation, etc.). If one has a hobby and or skill, try to start your own small business, but resist getting ones self into debt doing it. Utilize the programs that are already available to help people who want to succeed (SBA, etc.). Act like a legal immigrant and copy what makes some of them successful (hard work, dedication, and diligence).

Some people may state that it takes a lot of money to start your own business and depending on the business, that may be true. But one can start on a small scale; a mechanic, plumber, electrician, HVAC, accountant, bookkeeper, graphic artist, title examiner, welder, janitor etc. can start with doing "side jobs" and let it grow from there. My stepson delivers oil during the day and then takes his girlfriend with him to go deliver Chinese food and they have a blast.

Some people have hobbies, mine are Tennis and Dog training; so I use those skills to earn extra income. What's great about a hobby, is that I would do it for free, so getting paid for doing what I would do for free is an added bonus. I have a friend who loves to go to "garage sales" and then flip them on Ebay, she's always going to the post office and mailing those items she sells on Ebay.

With all of this Ebay and Craigslist, plus FB, the sky is the limit!

It all starts with us primarily.

Myths right wingers push. US ranks 14th in the developed world in social mobility

Are you calling me a "right winger"? If so, too funny!

 

[Pheonixops]

For those of you on the left.

The question is very simple, but with a very complex answer.

Detail what it is that you think will benefit the Middle Class.

Now, by benefit, I mean provide a means for them to retain their middle class status and to begin advancing themselves upward.

Take your time. Be specific and as detailed as you can.

First and foremost, personal responsibility and personal development (education, vocation, etc.). If one has a hobby and or skill, try to start your own small business, but resist getting ones self into debt doing it. Utilize the programs that are already available to help people who want to succeed (SBA, etc.). Act like a legal immigrant and copy what makes some of them successful (hard work, dedication, and diligence).

Some people may state that it takes a lot of money to start your own business and depending on the business, that may be true. But one can start on a small scale; a mechanic, plumber, electrician, HVAC, accountant, bookkeeper, graphic artist, title examiner, welder, janitor etc. can start with doing "side jobs" and let it grow from there. My stepson delivers oil during the day and then takes his girlfriend with him to go deliver Chinese food and they have a blast.

Some people have hobbies, mine are Tennis and Dog training; so I use those skills to earn extra income. What's great about a hobby, is that I would do it for free, so getting paid for doing what I would do for free is an added bonus. I have a friend who loves to go to "garage sales" and then flip them on Ebay, she's always going to the post office and mailing those items she sells on Ebay.

With all of this Ebay and Craigslist, plus FB, the sky is the limit!

It all starts with us primarily.

Myths right wingers push. US ranks 14th in the developed world in social mobility

What is a "myth" regarding what I wrote?

Is personal responsibility and personal development a "right wing" phenomenon? You don't think that Liberals believe in and practice the above?

Please feel free to back up your assertion that what I wrote is a "right wing myth". I gave REAL LIFE EXAMPLES and I am definitely NOT a "right winger", ask any so-called "right winger" on this forum if I am one of them.

It almost seems like you have given up if you think that what I wrote is not possible or is a "myth".

 

[SAYIT]

I know that you guys like to pretend that's true, but it's not.

Right-to-work law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is only one of me here and your source agrees with my assessment. R2W states protect workers from union enslavement.
R2W states limit "the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring."

An interesting perspective and one I tend to agree with. However, it does bring up another issue. Large businesses are groups, not individuals. They have boards and stock holders. Likewise, a union is a group. When the state steps in and regulates a union, that is no less an interference of the free market than when it regulates a business. It is the state telling both a business and the union how they may or may not do business. It is, in fact, an example of what some people call "The Nanny State".

In fact, R2W states protect the right of workers to choose not to have union membership imposed on them by the unions. They are still free to join or unionize if they so choose. Anti-R2Wers are legitimately concerned that given the choice, workers will choose not to join.

 

[Disir]

You aren't interested in the rights of workers. You aren't interested in protecting the middle class.

 

[Politico]

America's capitalist economy sets the table. It has enabled millions to become "the owners." I would remind you that the bottom 50% of earners carry VIRTUALLY NONE of the federal income tax load. The infrastructure and security we ALL enjoy is paid for by the top 50% of earners. America allows all to join the party but guarantees none.

I am so sick of that weakass argument. The rich pay more dollars overall because they make more dollars. It is not rocket science.

I suppose the nature of our progressive tax system is beyond your comprehension. It means the more you make, the higher your tax bracket. As already established, the bottom 50% pay virtually no fed income taxes ... they get a free ride on the backs of those who do pay those taxes.

No the definition of effective tax rate is beyond yours. Actually that's not true. You know what it means. You just ignore anything that does not support your argument. The more you make the more deductions you can afford. In the end rich people pay a lower effective rate than others. So it all comes down to dollars not rates. When you make more money you pay more dollars overall. Again not rocket science.

 

[PratchettFan]

There is only one of me here and your source agrees with my assessment. R2W states protect workers from union enslavement.
R2W states limit "the extent to which an established union can require employees' membership, payment of union dues, or fees as a condition of employment, either before or after hiring."

An interesting perspective and one I tend to agree with. However, it does bring up another issue. Large businesses are groups, not individuals. They have boards and stock holders. Likewise, a union is a group. When the state steps in and regulates a union, that is no less an interference of the free market than when it regulates a business. It is the state telling both a business and the union how they may or may not do business. It is, in fact, an example of what some people call "The Nanny State".

In fact, R2W states protect the right of workers to choose not to have union membership imposed on them by the unions. They are still free to join or unionize if they so choose. Anti-R2Wers are legitimately concerned that given the choice, workers will choose not to join.

Which does not change the fact that it is government interference of the free market.

 

[SAYIT]

You aren't interested in the rights of workers. You aren't interested in protecting the middle class.

Clearly it is you who fears workers rights in R2W states and we both know why.

 

[SAYIT]

I am so sick of that weakass argument. The rich pay more dollars overall because they make more dollars. It is not rocket science.

I suppose the nature of our progressive tax system is beyond your comprehension. It means the more you make, the higher your tax bracket. As already established, the bottom 50% pay virtually no fed income taxes ... they get a free ride on the backs of those who do pay those taxes.

No the definition of effective tax rate is beyond yours. Actually that's not true. You know what it means. You just ignore anything that does not support your argument. The more you make the more deductions you can afford. In the end rich people pay a lower effective rate than others. So it all comes down to dollars not rates. When you make more money you pay more dollars overall. Again not rocket science.

To the bottom 50% of earners - those who pay virtually no fed income tax - the marginal rate is still nearly ZERO. Nada. Nuttin'. Zippo. Whatever the upper 50% pays - and it's a lot - it's way more than ZERO.
This thread offered you the opportunity to express how the middle class can be helped. Some posted positive ideas about education (although not necessarily how to pay for them) and some posted the same old "he has more, that's not fair" argument. In the end it boils down to using the power of gov't to confiscate more from the haves to benefit the have-nots.
You think it's a good idea and eagerly promote it.
I think it's wrong and counterproductive in many ways.

 

[Silhouette]

For those of you on the left.

The question is very simple, but with a very complex answer.

Detail what it is that you think will benefit the Middle Class.

Now, by benefit, I mean provide a means for them to retain their middle class status and to begin advancing themselves upward.

Take your time. Be specific and as detailed as you can.

1. Universal healthcare. The burden of providing a monthly outlay the equivalent of a 2nd mortgage is immediately relieved from both individuals and businesses. Funded by sales taxes nationwide on the three main killers: tobacco, booze and heavily sugared products. Small co-pays at the time of service make up the slack, if any. Article I, Section 8 provides the power to do this.

2. So relieved, businesses have more money to hire more people, more money for R&D. Individuals have more disposable income and the middle class historically dumps that right into the economy.

3. So doing, the economy is spurred further creating more jobs still.

4. More people with more jobs means more home sales. The real estate market begins to recover.

5. Create severe disincentives for employers to farm out work overseas. Make nice tax breaks for businesses who employ "x-percentage" of actual legal US citizens. Punish those outside agriculture most severely for hiring illegal aliens. Agriculture should have a special pass to hire migrant workers from out of the country. Unless you want to pay $20 for a loaf of bread and cut into that disposable income [see #2]

6. Remove all blocks from expanding green energy. Create programs where polluters can bridge over to green with nice tax incentives and rates that they can charge that are consistent with past profits from dirty energy. Then their only argument against removing our dependence from oil and carbon is "I just like polluting the place where we all live".
Lack of carbon dependence = a boost to the economy. We will always need some carbon fuels but not at the rate we currently consume them.

7. #6 removes 99% of the incentives for our needing to go to unnecessary wars and trillions in expenses in the military in the ME. Leave them to their camels, sand and goats and warring with each other over which God said what, to who and when. A cheaper military means more money for investing in infrastructure. More jobs, and more internal American stability over time.

 

[Darkwind]

If Darkwind is really just writing down these insanely simply minded ideas people are giving it will be hilarious when he posts them a a whole.

Basically it will come down to:

Free HC
Free homes
Free education (forever)
Free energy
High wages
Long paid vacations

All paid for by higher taxes on the rich to make them near or middle class... making one wonder, after all the rich are middle class and no one can become rich but can't really be poor as everything they need is free.... who will strive for anything other than meritocracy at best? Then, who will be paying these taxes to keep everything "free."? Same problems from bad "solutions," just a different moment in time that someone is selling the bad ideas.

I guess I can respond because I'm not really left or right...

I am compiling the responses and will be posting the 'lefts' idea of how to help the Middle Class....

As it stands now, it will be next week before I can write a response to all of it, and list what I think should be the best policy for helping the middle class. My week has gone from 60 hours to a possible 96 hours.....so I ask people to indulge My schedule.

 

[initforme]

Make college more affordable so then there are low numbers of low skilled workers and low wage jobs are left unfilled... As they should be. I would love to see minimum wage job openings unfilled and businesses struggling to find workers to fill those jobs... but that will never happen. For some reason people still apply for those jobs. I hope they don't pour their heart and soul into those jobs. Minimum wage = minimum productivity...., one of the components of our system.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I

Make college more affordable so then there are low numbers of low skilled workers and low wage jobs are left unfilled... As they should be. I would love to see minimum wage job openings unfilled and businesses struggling to find workers to fill those jobs... but that will never happen. For some reason people still apply for those jobs. I hope they don't pour their heart and soul into those jobs. Minimum wage = minimum productivity...., one of the components of our system.

College is not the answer to skilled manufacturing jobs. More voctational high schools are the key. We live in a USA now with way to many single mothers and no dads

 

[Silhouette]

I

Make college more affordable so then there are low numbers of low skilled workers and low wage jobs are left unfilled... As they should be. I would love to see minimum wage job openings unfilled and businesses struggling to find workers to fill those jobs... but that will never happen. For some reason people still apply for those jobs. I hope they don't pour their heart and soul into those jobs. Minimum wage = minimum productivity...., one of the components of our system.

College is not the answer to skilled manufacturing jobs. More voctational high schools are the key. We live in a USA now with way to many single mothers and no dads

Agreed bear. I can't tell you how many of my friends have college degrees and are working as sales clerks and odd jobs just to make it by. Engineering and hard sciences seem to be the only exception to this rule. A BA in liberal arts and you might as well head straight to the unemployment line right from the cap and gown ceremony.

What we need is demand first. Then the jobs will come. And when they are finally available, THEN we boost college education.

 

[Politico]

I suppose the nature of our progressive tax system is beyond your comprehension. It means the more you make, the higher your tax bracket. As already established, the bottom 50% pay virtually no fed income taxes ... they get a free ride on the backs of those who do pay those taxes.

No the definition of effective tax rate is beyond yours. Actually that's not true. You know what it means. You just ignore anything that does not support your argument. The more you make the more deductions you can afford. In the end rich people pay a lower effective rate than others. So it all comes down to dollars not rates. When you make more money you pay more dollars overall. Again not rocket science.

To the bottom 50% of earners - those who pay virtually no fed income tax - the marginal rate is still nearly ZERO. Nada. Nuttin'. Zippo. Whatever the upper 50% pays - and it's a lot - it's way more than ZERO.
This thread offered you the opportunity to express how the middle class can be helped. Some posted positive ideas about education (although not necessarily how to pay for them) and some posted the same old "he has more, that's not fair" argument. In the end it boils down to using the power of gov't to confiscate more from the haves to benefit the have-nots.
You think it's a good idea and eagerly promote it.
I think it's wrong and counterproductive in many ways.

You need to get back on your meds. 'I' made no that's not fair comments. Nor did I express this imaginary promotion you speak of. What 'I' did say was:

No one should be 'provided' anything.

Now go troll somewhere else.

 

[JoeB131]

For those of you on the left.

The question is very simple, but with a very complex answer.

Detail what it is that you think will benefit the Middle Class.

Now, by benefit, I mean provide a means for them to retain their middle class status and to begin advancing themselves upward.

Take your time. Be specific and as detailed as you can.

1) Strong Minimum Wage Laws.
2) Universal Health care NOT provided by employers.
3) Worker Representation in the workplace, such as the German Worker's Councils.
4) Sensible Trade treaties that don't let other countries undercut us.
5) A moratorium on Immigrant Work Visas until unemployment dips below 5%. No new ones issued and revoke the old ones.