Private Sector Workers Need To Sacrifice

[code1211]

many people left with jobs in the workforce, are doing double duty as a minimum already...they are doing the jobs they used to do, plus they are picking up the slack and are doing the jobs of those who got laid off....a pay cut in addition to this, may not be reasonable.

Considering the the cut will go to stimulate the economy and give Corporations incentives to hire more workers, this will lower the burden on those working now. You would be surprised how one person can lessen the burden on ten, but also add to production, and lower your taxes headed towards unemployment nonproductive people. And the pay cut wouldn't have to be permanent. Once work starts picking up again, corporations can afford to be more generous.

The alternative seems to be taking the nation down and everybody losing their jobs and homes.

You have a basic misconception. Sending money to the government does one thing: Reduce its impact.

If you want an employer to hire people in your country or state or county or city or neighborhood, you need to entice that employer to do so.

Your plan is to set up a web of rules and restrictions that can be withdrawn at any moment, increased, amended or otherwise constrict to "entice" people who relish the idea of guiding their own actions. This is lunacy. It's like feeding lettuce to lions.

The lions will walk away and you are left with the sheep.

Your plan will create AmTrak. Again. Oh, wait... Is that you, Barrack?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

union public sector workers pay nothing toward pensions and little if any towards health care. when they retire they will receive full benefits until they die and no longer leach off the non union tax payer. I am self employed and pay full whack for my health care. the kids are on the wife's insurance and she pays $700 a month towards that as well as taxes so the pensions of folks who provide an inferior product or service can ride the gravy train with biscuit wheels. So they have sacrificed what now ?

They are taking cuts in pay & benefits. I call that a sacrifice. And the public sector needs to do the same. Everybody doesn't share your whine that you chose to drink. The average family health care cost is $527. a month, and the teachers educate your children I pay taxes for as well. An average CEO or laborer can afford to take a 20% cut to help stimulate the economy. Some will suffer more than others, but it is for the benefit of the country you chose to live in and use. Without the sacrifice, the country will fall by the wayside, and that will be the end of your business. I also feel the cuts should reach down to lower income people as well, everyone will need to tighten their belts.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but 2007 was the last year of the "good times". Since that point, literally millions of Private sector folks have lost their jobs completely. Literally millions of Private sector folks have found work at vastly reduced levels of pay and literally millions of Private sector folks have not gotten a pay raise if they were lucky enough to not lose their job or have to take a reduced pay rate job.

In the mean time, the Domocrat Congress passed the Failed Stimulus which only served to keep Public Sector workers working at the annually increased wages that they have enjoyed while EVERYONE ELSE in the economy was downsized, out sourced or cut back.

whew....at least you're not relying on generalizations, huh?

*



​

 

[code1211]

They are taking cuts in pay & benefits. I call that a sacrifice. And the public sector needs to do the same. Everybody doesn't share your whine that you chose to drink. The average family health care cost is $527. a month, and the teachers educate your children I pay taxes for as well. An average CEO or laborer can afford to take a 20% cut to help stimulate the economy. Some will suffer more than others, but it is for the benefit of the country you chose to live in and use. Without the sacrifice, the country will fall by the wayside, and that will be the end of your business. I also feel the cuts should reach down to lower income people as well, everyone will need to tighten their belts.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but 2007 was the last year of the "good times". Since that point, literally millions of Private sector folks have lost their jobs completely. Literally millions of Private sector folks have found work at vastly reduced levels of pay and literally millions of Private sector folks have not gotten a pay raise if they were lucky enough to not lose their job or have to take a reduced pay rate job.

In the mean time, the Domocrat Congress passed the Failed Stimulus which only served to keep Public Sector workers working at the annually increased wages that they have enjoyed while EVERYONE ELSE in the economy was downsized, out sourced or cut back.

whew....at least you're not relying on generalizations, huh?
*



​

Sorry. When the economy is bleeding to death, it hardly seems like proof is required, but here it is:

In the years since 2005, the year over year change in the average income is shown below:
2006= +6%
2007= +4%
2008= +3%
2009= -2.6%

This table does not include the levels of 2010. They probably had to lay off the guy that compiled the data. 2009 was the first year in the last 10 during which Per Cap income dropped.

BBER-UNM: United States: Per Capita Personal Income

 

[Care4all]

many people left with jobs in the workforce, are doing double duty as a minimum already...they are doing the jobs they used to do, plus they are picking up the slack and are doing the jobs of those who got laid off....a pay cut in addition to this, may not be reasonable.

Considering the the cut will go to stimulate the economy and give Corporations incentives to hire more workers, this will lower the burden on those working now. You would be surprised how one person can lessen the burden on ten, but also add to production, and lower your taxes headed towards unemployment nonproductive people. And the pay cut wouldn't have to be permanent. Once work starts picking up again, corporations can afford to be more generous.

The alternative seems to be taking the nation down and everybody losing their jobs and homes.

Corporations have once again, increased their productivity of their employees....employees are producing MORE per person...they already have the money to hire more people....they just do not want to.

My husband went 2 years without a pay increase....the entire workforce of the corporation that he works for were told that no matter how they performed, no one would be getting a raise or bonus.

the worker bees in the private sector have already sacrificed....producing more, with no pay increases....only those at the top of the corporations got more money and bonuses.

 

[boedicca]

The median American family pays nearly 40% of its income in taxes. That's enough of a sacrifice already.

 

[Mr Natural]

So in other words, we'd all be better off if we made less money?

 

[boedicca]

No, we're supposed to SACRIFICE so that Obama can turn the country SEIU Purple.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQj-xBH30-I]SEIU[/ame]

 

[bucs90]

Sum it up:

When the PRIVATE business decides to make its employees to take that cut, then they will.

"PRIVATE" definition: Not my business.

Private business can't force me to give them money. Government cant force me to give $ to a private business (Well, except in Obama and Pelosi's mind).

But government has men with guns who can take money from me. So, I don't give a shit what a private employee makes. I don't pay them. I pay public employees.

 

[kaz]

It is no secret we are falling behind, and everybody ought to be able to give a little to help America

This is the liberal collectivist delusion. Workers shouldn't give ANYTHING to help America. They should get as much as the market allows them to. All we need is government to stop manipulating markets by giving unions artificial power.

 

[boedicca]

many people left with jobs in the workforce, are doing double duty as a minimum already...they are doing the jobs they used to do, plus they are picking up the slack and are doing the jobs of those who got laid off....a pay cut in addition to this, may not be reasonable.

Considering the the cut will go to stimulate the economy and give Corporations incentives to hire more workers, this will lower the burden on those working now. You would be surprised how one person can lessen the burden on ten, but also add to production, and lower your taxes headed towards unemployment nonproductive people. And the pay cut wouldn't have to be permanent. Once work starts picking up again, corporations can afford to be more generous.

The alternative seems to be taking the nation down and everybody losing their jobs and homes.

Corporations have once again, increased their productivity of their employees....employees are producing MORE per person...they already have the money to hire more people....they just do not want to.

My husband went 2 years without a pay increase....the entire workforce of the corporation that he works for were told that no matter how they performed, no one would be getting a raise or bonus.

the worker bees in the private sector have already sacrificed....producing more, with no pay increases....only those at the top of the corporations got more money and bonuses.

That's what happens when the government threatens to raise taxes and increase business expenses via a broad new entitlement. Companies are hoarding cash because they still don't know how much they are going to have to turn over to the government.

And it's not true that management across the economy is receiving raises and bonuses. Maybe in the companies bailed out by Obama, but not in the real private sector. Belt tightening affects everyone.

 

[Care4all]

oh, this union crap is BS....sheesh.

Unions do not work in a vacuum, with no input from the ceo's or owners of the corp....If the companies agreed with the union on a pay raise or on benefits, then it is the owner's/ceo's fault for not calculating the expense of such, on the company long term....it is NOT the Union's fault for asking....it is the Company's fault for agreeing to it.....these are NEGOTIATIONS between the two....one does not have more power than the other....

 

[bucs90]

Considering the the cut will go to stimulate the economy and give Corporations incentives to hire more workers, this will lower the burden on those working now. You would be surprised how one person can lessen the burden on ten, but also add to production, and lower your taxes headed towards unemployment nonproductive people. And the pay cut wouldn't have to be permanent. Once work starts picking up again, corporations can afford to be more generous.

The alternative seems to be taking the nation down and everybody losing their jobs and homes.

Corporations have once again, increased their productivity of their employees....employees are producing MORE per person...they already have the money to hire more people....they just do not want to.

My husband went 2 years without a pay increase....the entire workforce of the corporation that he works for were told that no matter how they performed, no one would be getting a raise or bonus.

the worker bees in the private sector have already sacrificed....producing more, with no pay increases....only those at the top of the corporations got more money and bonuses.

That's what happens when the government threatens to raise taxes and increase business expenses via a broad new entitlement. Companies are hoarding cash because they still don't know how much they are going to have to turn over to the government.

And it's not true that management across the economy is receiving raises and bonuses. Maybe in the companies bailed out by Obama, but not in real private sector. Belt tightening affects everyone.

It also doesn't help when companies think their health insurance costs are gonna soar. Or when they think they'll have to do a 1099 for every single thing they purchase over $600 at WalMart or OfficeMax.

Thanks Obamacare for causing businesses to go into a protective paralysis out of fear of the unknown.

 

[boedicca]

No, it's not crap.

Taxpayers have been forced to bail out failing companies that are insolvent due to excessive compensation and pension liabilities.

And now we face this phenom at the local, state, and federal level. Enough.

 

[Meister]

many people left with jobs in the workforce, are doing double duty as a minimum already...they are doing the jobs they used to do, plus they are picking up the slack and are doing the jobs of those who got laid off....a pay cut in addition to this, may not be reasonable.

Considering the the cut will go to stimulate the economy and give Corporations incentives to hire more workers, this will lower the burden on those working now. You would be surprised how one person can lessen the burden on ten, but also add to production, and lower your taxes headed towards unemployment nonproductive people. And the pay cut wouldn't have to be permanent. Once work starts picking up again, corporations can afford to be more generous.

The alternative seems to be taking the nation down and everybody losing their jobs and homes.

Taking money out of the pockets of private sector workers is going to stimulate the economy? With less in their pockets, the less they can spend right?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Right believes that if something can be produced for 30 cents an hour labor somewhere in the world,

that's where it should be produced, without regard to American labor interests. Unless of course it can be produced for 20 cents an hour somewhere.

Borders, nations, national interests are all irrelevant to the Right. Capitalism and the efficiencies that best express the principles of Capitalism have to be global, unfettered by nationalist limitations. Conservative capitalists are the true globalists. Capitalism is internationalism.

In the perfect Conservative Capitalist world, all else being equal, an American worker would never make any more doing the same or similar job to any worker anywhere else in the world.

 

[Meister]

oh, this union crap is BS....sheesh.

Unions do not work in a vacuum, with no input from the ceo's or owners of the corp....If the companies agreed with the union on a pay raise or on benefits, then it is the owner's/ceo's fault for not calculating the expense of such, on the company long term....it is NOT the Union's fault for asking....it is the Company's fault for agreeing to it.....these are NEGOTIATIONS between the two....one does not have more power than the other....

I don't have issues with private sector unions. I have issues with the public worker's unions. Contracts are negotiated on the backs of tax payers. No money is coming from the pockets of those that are negotiating the contracts. This is where I have my issues.

 

[bucs90]

The Right believes that if something can be produced for 30 cents an hour labor somewhere in the world,

that's where it should be produced, without regard to American labor interests. Unless of course it can be produced for 20 cents an hour somewhere.

Borders, nations, national interests are all irrelevant to the Right. Capitalism and the efficiencies that best express the principles of Capitalism have to be global, unfettered by nationalist limitations. Conservative capitalists are the true globalists. Capitalism is internationalism.

In the perfect Conservative Capitalist world, all else being equal, an American worker would never make any more doing the same or similar job to any worker anywhere else in the world.

Oh. Well, then I suppose you are saying that in contrast, borders are very important to the left? Ok. When is Obama going to secure ours then?

And if we are "unfettered by nationalist limitations" then you are saying on contrast the left is nationalist? Because socialism + nationalism leads to a nasty situation ya know.

 

[boedicca]

oh, this union crap is BS....sheesh.

Unions do not work in a vacuum, with no input from the ceo's or owners of the corp....If the companies agreed with the union on a pay raise or on benefits, then it is the owner's/ceo's fault for not calculating the expense of such, on the company long term....it is NOT the Union's fault for asking....it is the Company's fault for agreeing to it.....these are NEGOTIATIONS between the two....one does not have more power than the other....

I don't have issues with private sector unions. I have issues with the public worker's unions. Contracts are negotiated on the backs of tax payers. No money is coming from the pockets of those that are negotiating the contracts. This is where I have my issues.

I do have issues with private sector unions when taxpayer money is used to bail out the companies they have caused to fail just to prop up their above market compensation packages.

 

[Meister]

oh, this union crap is BS....sheesh.

Unions do not work in a vacuum, with no input from the ceo's or owners of the corp....If the companies agreed with the union on a pay raise or on benefits, then it is the owner's/ceo's fault for not calculating the expense of such, on the company long term....it is NOT the Union's fault for asking....it is the Company's fault for agreeing to it.....these are NEGOTIATIONS between the two....one does not have more power than the other....

I don't have issues with private sector unions. I have issues with the public worker's unions. Contracts are negotiated on the backs of tax payers. No money is coming from the pockets of those that are negotiating the contracts. This is where I have my issues.

I do have issues with private sector unions when taxpayer money is used to bail out the companies they have caused to fail just to prop up their above market compensation packages.

Good point, Boe.

 

[code1211]

The Right believes that if something can be produced for 30 cents an hour labor somewhere in the world,

that's where it should be produced, without regard to American labor interests. Unless of course it can be produced for 20 cents an hour somewhere.
Borders, nations, national interests are all irrelevant to the Right. Capitalism and the efficiencies that best express the principles of Capitalism have to be global, unfettered by nationalist limitations. Conservative capitalists are the true globalists. Capitalism is internationalism.

In the perfect Conservative Capitalist world, all else being equal, an American worker would never make any more doing the same or similar job to any worker anywhere else in the world.

Another Leftist who pronouces what the "Right" believes. Wrong again, but please feel free to stew in your misconceptions.

Rather than living in a world where you oppose the fantasy that you think others hold, why not apply your beliefs to the actual situation around and then explain how that will solve the problem?

What is the solution of the Left? Is there one that works? Please enlighten us with your wisdom. The Leftist Congress had 4 years to make it work and successfully moved us from under 5% to over 10% unemployment. The Prez has had more than two years to solve the problem and has successfully made it worse.

If you have the answer based in the philosophy of the Left, you might want to state it clearly and succinctly so that your bretheran might follow your lead.

Hold forth!