Julian Castro: Women Can't Afford Tampons So They Can't Go To Work

[playtime]

It's the fact, undisputed, that your redistribution system only creates wealth for the political leadership. Are you a political leader in the Socialist democrat movement?

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[flack]

It's the fact, undisputed, that your redistribution system only creates wealth for the political leadership. Are you a political leader in the Socialist democrat movement?

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[flack]

It's the fact, undisputed, that your redistribution system only creates wealth for the political leadership. Are you a political leader in the Socialist democrat movement?

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1. The 1950s were no Golden Age. The U.S. economy grew by an average of 3.4% a year between 1948 and 2007. How did the 1950s do in comparison? If you measure the 1950s from 1950 to 1959, it did a bit better than average, growing at an annual rate of 4.2%. If you measure the decade from 1951 to 1960, it grew at 3.6% rate, a bit above average. The period also saw three recessions, July 1953-May 1954, August 1957-April 1958, and April 1960-February 1961. Now, overall, it was a strong period for the economy, especially for folks with still-fresh memories of the Great Depression. But recall that John F. Kennedy’s 1960 presidential campaign said he would “get this country moving again.” That’s a slogan a politician uses after a decade of stagnation, not hypergrowth. (Of course, JFK sharply cut taxes and the economy boomed.)

 

[playtime]

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

now try to convince me how we weren't living in the best economical years from eisenhower's days to the late 60's early 70's.................

my father was the sole bread winner w/ a wife, 5 kids, a paid for home, a car AND a union job in factory.

 

[playtime]

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1. The 1950s were no Golden Age. The U.S. economy grew by an average of 3.4% a year between 1948 and 2007. How did the 1950s do in comparison? If you measure the 1950s from 1950 to 1959, it did a bit better than average, growing at an annual rate of 4.2%. If you measure the decade from 1951 to 1960, it grew at 3.6% rate, a bit above average. The period also saw three recessions, July 1953-May 1954, August 1957-April 1958, and April 1960-February 1961. Now, overall, it was a strong period for the economy, especially for folks with still-fresh memories of the Great Depression. But recall that John F. Kennedy’s 1960 presidential campaign said he would “get this country moving again.” That’s a slogan a politician uses after a decade of stagnation, not hypergrowth. (Of course, JFK sharply cut taxes and the economy boomed.)

JFK cut taxes to 70%.... is that what it is now?

 

[flack]

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

now try to convince me how we weren't living in the best economical years from eisenhower's days to the late 60's early 70's.................

my father was the sole bread winner w/ a wife, 5 kids, a paid for home, a car AND a union job in factory.

With all the tax deductions nobody paid anywhere near the 70%. I know I lived through it. I remember the 18% interest rates but they too were tax deductible.

 

[SAYIT]

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

Damn Joe! I agree with much of that. I guess you learned a little from your third grade education.

However the Ds aren’t blameless, as you think. They had much to do with income inequality. Your two Messiahs, Ears and Clintons, were all about enriching the rich and themselves.

It odd but not surprising that those who extol the virtues of the "Union Age" (1945- 1970) invariably fail to note that the only industrial show in town was the US. The rest of the industrialized world lay in post WW2 rubble. Way to go, guys.

Like I said earlier. Those big union days were a bubble, and all bubbles burst. It couldn't' last forever, especially with foreign products entering the market, and a huge change in American consumer spending.

I can't tell you how many customers we lost years ago because companies either moved out of the state or out of the country primarily to get away from the unions. Unions were more than just protecting workers, they virtually took over entire businesses.

They told the company who they could hire and who they could fire. They told the company who they can promote and who they couldn't, even if the employee couldn't actually do the job. They told the company how much they have to pay the worker even if the worker wasn't worth half of his or her salary.

One of our last few union customers got rid of their union a little over a year ago. What pissed the workers off was a worthless employee getting a promotion to the highest paid job in the plant. He had the highest seniority and the union told the company he's the one that gets the job.

Well the owner of the company had to do the job instead, because the guy who got the promotion couldn't do the job. That's when the employees decided to take action.

They voted the union out, and the company decided who got that highest paying job based on ability to do it, and of course, years with the company. They fired about three people who were always worthless and never produced any real work, but they always had a job as long as they showed up and were breathing.

I love your useless stories. Always propping up conservative dogma even when the facts don’t support your tall tales.

Once the union movement was quashed, wages for working American stagnated. Companies promised wages would go up once the unions were gone. It never happened. Workers are still waiting for those raises.

So what companies made such a promise? I don't recall one.

What happened throughout the years was that when our workers made one dollar more an hour, overseas, they made three cents more an hour. When our wages raised another dollar, they raised their wages two cents an hour.

Eventually, unions priced us out of the world market.

With that competition and along with improving and greatly decreasing costs for automation, companies are looking for every way possible to cut costs to compete worldwide. That means less jobs for Americans.

We had to get rid of the unions. We had no choice, because American consumers refused to support those good jobs. That's why Walmart is number one, and Amazon is quickly taking the lead in selling consumer products.

Years ago, when you purchase gasoline, an attendant came out, filled your car, washed the windows, checked the oil and tire pressure, and you paid without getting out of your car. Then somebody had a thought: what if they allowed people to pump their own gasoline at a discounted rate??? It would keep the mechanics working on cars instead of losing money pumping gasoline.

It started out on one island. But because of demand, owners had to have two self-serve islands. Long story short, all gasoline stations in the US had to go to totally self-serve.

Did we put a lot of people out of work? Yes we did, but we saved money in the process.

Eventually, gas stations also got rid of the mechanics and service bays, and reconstructed their stations into convenience stores.

Typically, D-Lady accuses you of posting "facts don’t support your tall tales" by posting baseless tales. Typical because that is the leftards' M.O., and of course when asked to support her BS she simply skates away.

 

[flack]

You have no idea WTF you're talking about. First off, the Republicans warned of the dangers unions were giving this country. Jobs have been moving out since the 70's, mostly because of taxation and unions. What Republicans wanted to do is see that stopped or slowed down. The Democrats wanted to put the movement on super charge.

The glory days which you describe was nothing but a bubble, no different than the housing or tech bubble. All bubbles burst. They don't last forever because it's impossible.

During the 80's and after the recession, people became more frugal in their purchases. We went from buying quality made American products to cheap foreign products. It had nothing to do with Reagan or the Republicans, it had to do with the American consumer and still does today.

eisenhower was pro union AND the corporate tax rate was 90%... & it was one of the most prosperous times in america.

Almost nobody paid the 90% rate. Another libtard lie.

ya ya, i know about the 'effective' tax rate. there weren't nearly as many loopholes or offshore 'headquaters' back then & because big corp had the choice to pay it or roll it back into overhead, upgrades, & worker salaries. which they did.

you think they are even paying that amt after donny's last cut down to 20%?

lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1. The 1950s were no Golden Age. The U.S. economy grew by an average of 3.4% a year between 1948 and 2007. How did the 1950s do in comparison? If you measure the 1950s from 1950 to 1959, it did a bit better than average, growing at an annual rate of 4.2%. If you measure the decade from 1951 to 1960, it grew at 3.6% rate, a bit above average. The period also saw three recessions, July 1953-May 1954, August 1957-April 1958, and April 1960-February 1961. Now, overall, it was a strong period for the economy, especially for folks with still-fresh memories of the Great Depression. But recall that John F. Kennedy’s 1960 presidential campaign said he would “get this country moving again.” That’s a slogan a politician uses after a decade of stagnation, not hypergrowth. (Of course, JFK sharply cut taxes and the economy boomed.)

JFK cut taxes to 70%.... is that what it is now?

You will notice there are to numbers. The lower end and the higher end. Nobody paid the higher end to to deductions.

The president finally decided that only a bold domestic program, including tax cuts, would restore his political momentum. Declaring that the absence of recession is not tantamount to economic growth, the president proposed in 1963 to cut income taxes from a range of 20-91% to 14-65% He also proposed a cut in the corporate tax rate from 52% to 47%. Ironically, economic growth expanded in 1963, and Republicans and conservative Democrats in Congress insisted that reducing taxes without corresponding spending cuts was unacceptable. Kennedy disagreed, arguing that “a rising tide lifts all boats” and that strong economic growth would not continue without lower taxes.

Why we can’t go back to sky-high, 1950s tax rates
AEIdeas
EconomicsPublic

 

[jknowgood]

This is Peak 2019 Feminism....I hope. Used to be that we could have female biological processes and still work, see. Then we became snowflakes and women call off work for cramps and yadda yadda.

But now we can't budget for $5.00 of feminine products a month or whatever it might be generic. Heaven forfend that women figure this out, be accountable, etc.

Sweet Sue has no idea what it's like to be really poor.

or held in cages at the border without 'supplies'. but hey - if it ain't her, then why should she care?

You cared less when it happened under Obama. So cruise on hypocrite.

not true. howeverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, you little poorly educated basket dweller, that only happened when an unaccompanied minor crossed the border.

NOT as a matter of policy, no matter the age, or that intact families that are being detained *now*

& that basic humane essentials like clean running water, or hygiene products, or clean diapers & clothing are being denied under TRUMP'S watch makes your silly point almost moot.

No they aren't still doesn't do away with the fact that those pictures you loons got outraged over. Was from the Obama administration.

 

[jc456]

Trumpanzees: The only thing more fun than making fun of minorities is making fun of poor women.

how so? see condescension, as Julian here is demonstrating is the lowest form of insult one person can project on another. How is a male the best rep to speak for a woman? I have never understood that. Like a white guy or woman for a black. you all truly are evil fks.

 

[SAYIT]

He "worked and paid taxes"

Isn't that a fascinating answer from a Leftist, and most instructive?

That I support the solution that ACTUALLY SOLVES THE PROBLEM? Um. Yes. Yes, very instructive.

So what has provided the most poverty relief.

Some Racist Twat picking up a ladle once a year?

Or People working very hard supporting humane entitlements that keep people from starving.

This isn't complicated.

What a shameless fucking hypocrite.

‘Allowing’ the government to confiscate your income through taxes is an act of ‘charity’ and selfless humanism, but someone actually getting off their ass and helping real people in the real world with real sweat and effort doesn’t count? Even you don’t believe that bullshit

In fact he does … right down to his toes. He considers his "working very hard supporting humane entitlements that keep people from starving" by paying taxes to be an extraordinarily noble gesture but those who do so more successfully and pay far more in taxes to be greedy bastards who must be punished.

That is a microcosm for how the leftarded mind works … or rather doesn't work.
Self-righteous, self-important, self-aggrandizing twits and twats. Pathetic little children really.

 

[Dragonlady]

Where was this fact proven?

Here's the thing. We had it right for a while.

After the New Deal, but before Reagan, we had it right. The rich paid confiscatory taxes, when they died, their heirs did not inherit all of their wealth, just some of it. 33% of workers belong to unions and fair wages were the norm. During this time, we built fantastic infrastructure projects, we had an economy that was the envy of the world, we had a real, honest to God functioning middle class.

And then the Republicans fucked it all up.

Damn Joe! I agree with much of that. I guess you learned a little from your third grade education.

However the Ds aren’t blameless, as you think. They had much to do with income inequality. Your two Messiahs, Ears and Clintons, were all about enriching the rich and themselves.

It odd but not surprising that those who extol the virtues of the "Union Age" (1945- 1970) invariably fail to note that the only industrial show in town was the US. The rest of the industrialized world lay in post WW2 rubble. Way to go, guys.

Like I said earlier. Those big union days were a bubble, and all bubbles burst. It couldn't' last forever, especially with foreign products entering the market, and a huge change in American consumer spending.

I can't tell you how many customers we lost years ago because companies either moved out of the state or out of the country primarily to get away from the unions. Unions were more than just protecting workers, they virtually took over entire businesses.

They told the company who they could hire and who they could fire. They told the company who they can promote and who they couldn't, even if the employee couldn't actually do the job. They told the company how much they have to pay the worker even if the worker wasn't worth half of his or her salary.

One of our last few union customers got rid of their union a little over a year ago. What pissed the workers off was a worthless employee getting a promotion to the highest paid job in the plant. He had the highest seniority and the union told the company he's the one that gets the job.

Well the owner of the company had to do the job instead, because the guy who got the promotion couldn't do the job. That's when the employees decided to take action.

They voted the union out, and the company decided who got that highest paying job based on ability to do it, and of course, years with the company. They fired about three people who were always worthless and never produced any real work, but they always had a job as long as they showed up and were breathing.

I love your useless stories. Always propping up conservative dogma even when the facts don’t support your tall tales.

Once the union movement was quashed, wages for working American stagnated. Companies promised wages would go up once the unions were gone. It never happened. Workers are still waiting for those raises.

So what companies made such a promise? I don't recall one.

What happened throughout the years was that when our workers made one dollar more an hour, overseas, they made three cents more an hour. When our wages raised another dollar, they raised their wages two cents an hour.

Eventually, unions priced us out of the world market.

With that competition and along with improving and greatly decreasing costs for automation, companies are looking for every way possible to cut costs to compete worldwide. That means less jobs for Americans.

We had to get rid of the unions. We had no choice, because American consumers refused to support those good jobs. That's why Walmart is number one, and Amazon is quickly taking the lead in selling consumer products.

Years ago, when you purchase gasoline, an attendant came out, filled your car, washed the windows, checked the oil and tire pressure, and you paid without getting out of your car. Then somebody had a thought: what if they allowed people to pump their own gasoline at a discounted rate??? It would keep the mechanics working on cars instead of losing money pumping gasoline.

It started out on one island. But because of demand, owners had to have two self-serve islands. Long story short, all gasoline stations in the US had to go to totally self-serve.

Did we put a lot of people out of work? Yes we did, but we saved money in the process.

Eventually, gas stations also got rid of the mechanics and service bays, and reconstructed their stations into convenience stores.

Once again, you tout the Republican Party's favourite talking points which utterly ignores the role that Republican economic policies have in impacting wealth distribution in the USA. Prior to 1980, income and wealth was distributed across all levels of society. Workers owned about 5% of the wealth of the nation, poverty had been reduced to around 10%, and the economy was strong. Reagan declared an end to the "War on Poverty" and started demonizing "welfare queens" and reducing aid to poor families. He also attacked and broke the air traffic controllers union.

Reagan promised all workers a raise once the unions were gone. It didn't happen. But what did happen was that large companies stopped giving raises to workers, even as GDP soared. Companies claimed that advances in technology increased production, not the workers, ergo the workers weren't entitled to raises. For the next 40 years, corporations absorbed increases in rent/land purchase costs, equipment, insurance, transportation, raw materials, and massive increases (1000% on average), in executive salaries, without raising the wages of their front-line employees.

During this same time frame, corporations have grown increasingly wealthy. All of these mergers and acquisitions are taking place because corporate America is awash in cash and doesn't know what to do with it. Even as their frontline workers have been losing ground economically for 40 years.

In search for ever greater profits and reduced public accountability, companies started off-shoring production. It started first for companies like Monsanto and Dow Chemicals, companies whose production is so toxic, no first world country will allow it, so they moved to countries like jurisdictions, where there was no effective environmental laws and governments were desperate for jobs for their millions of poor. Jobs started to trickle away to Third World jurisdiction, where labour was cheap and pollution was seen as sign of properity.

Companies always portrayed their abandonment of their American workers as the result of "union greed", but it wasn't the unions who were greedy. Currently, wages as a percentage of costs, is at the same level it was during the Guilded Age. Workers, who owned 5% of the nation's wealth when Reagan was elected, are now just holding on - barely, and are dependent on earned income credits, and other government handouts to get by. Every year, corporations are announcing record profits and dividends. Corporations are no longer good citizens.

I believe you posted that New York won't let Walmart in, but gave Amazon huge tax breaks. You said the City of New York shouldn't be deciding who gets to locate in the city and New Yorkers would love to shop at Walmart. My neighbourhood also blocked a Walmart Store on a property which had been home to some of the highest paying jobs in the city, and for the same reasons: jobs at Walmart pay minimum wage. Anyone who works for Walmart as their one and only job, will require social assistance to live in an expensive city like New York. Amazon jobs pay $50,000 per year. Good, solid, middle class jobs. My neighbourhood didn't want our high paying movie studio jobs replaced with "McJobs".

All of this bullshit about the selfishness of unions driving companies overseas, is just cover for the greed of American corporations in selling out American workers to the highest profits in history. Statistics from 2018, show that Trump's tax cuts have made income and wealth equality worse, not better.

American workers need meaningful raises - not 3% per year, but some form of profit sharing so that all of the benefits of GDP growth aren't going only to the top. There needs to be a huge adjustment at the bottom to end government handouts which function as wage subsidies for billionaire corporations who pay their executive millions while their employees receive food stamps.

The American Middle class was built with a union label. American workers need a voice at the table when wage decisions are made and unions gave them that voice. Without a voice, they've been left behind and ignored for so long they actually voted for Donald Trump.

 

[SAYIT]

This is Peak 2019 Feminism....I hope. Used to be that we could have female biological processes and still work, see. Then we became snowflakes and women call off work for cramps and yadda yadda.

But now we can't budget for $5.00 of feminine products a month or whatever it might be generic. Heaven forfend that women figure this out, be accountable, etc.

Sweet Sue has no idea what it's like to be really poor.

or held in cages at the border without 'supplies'. but hey - if it ain't her, then why should she care?

You cared less when it happened under Obama. So cruise on hypocrite.

not true. howeverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, you little poorly educated basket dweller, that only happened when an unaccompanied minor crossed the border.

NOT as a matter of policy, no matter the age, or that intact families that are being detained *now*

& that basic humane essentials like clean running water, or hygiene products, or clean diapers & clothing are being denied under TRUMP'S watch makes your silly point almost moot.

Yeah, yeah … everyone who disagrees with your loony-left POV is a "poorly educated basket dweller."

If I could ask just one thing of you it would be that you insist the Democrat Socialist Party run on your arrogant "basket of deplorables" slogan again because it worked out so well in 2016. The fact is despite all your strutting and preening, I'm convinced you're neither bright enough nor educated well enough to avoid that pompous pitfall in 2020.

Haters gotta hate. Hate on, Bro.

 

[jc456]

He "worked and paid taxes"

Isn't that a fascinating answer from a Leftist, and most instructive?

That I support the solution that ACTUALLY SOLVES THE PROBLEM? Um. Yes. Yes, very instructive.

So what has provided the most poverty relief.

Some Racist Twat picking up a ladle once a year?

Or People working very hard supporting humane entitlements that keep people from starving.

This isn't complicated.

What a shameless fucking hypocrite.

‘Allowing’ the government to confiscate your income through taxes is an act of ‘charity’ and selfless humanism, but someone actually getting off their ass and helping real people in the real world with real sweat and effort doesn’t count? Even you don’t believe that bullshit

In fact he does … right down to his toes. He considers his "working very hard supporting humane entitlements that keep people from starving" by paying taxes to be an extraordinarily noble gesture but those who do so more successfully and pay far more in taxes to be greedy bastards who must be punished.

That is a microcosm for how the leftarded mind works … or rather doesn't work.
Self-righteous, self-important, self-aggrandizing twits and twats. Pathetic little children really.

correct, they must punish success.

 

[Blues Man]

This is Peak 2019 Feminism....I hope. Used to be that we could have female biological processes and still work, see. Then we became snowflakes and women call off work for cramps and yadda yadda.

But now we can't budget for $5.00 of feminine products a month or whatever it might be generic. Heaven forfend that women figure this out, be accountable, etc.

Sweet Sue has no idea what it's like to be really poor.

Neither do you

 

[flack]

Damn Joe! I agree with much of that. I guess you learned a little from your third grade education.

However the Ds aren’t blameless, as you think. They had much to do with income inequality. Your two Messiahs, Ears and Clintons, were all about enriching the rich and themselves.

It odd but not surprising that those who extol the virtues of the "Union Age" (1945- 1970) invariably fail to note that the only industrial show in town was the US. The rest of the industrialized world lay in post WW2 rubble. Way to go, guys.

Like I said earlier. Those big union days were a bubble, and all bubbles burst. It couldn't' last forever, especially with foreign products entering the market, and a huge change in American consumer spending.

I can't tell you how many customers we lost years ago because companies either moved out of the state or out of the country primarily to get away from the unions. Unions were more than just protecting workers, they virtually took over entire businesses.

They told the company who they could hire and who they could fire. They told the company who they can promote and who they couldn't, even if the employee couldn't actually do the job. They told the company how much they have to pay the worker even if the worker wasn't worth half of his or her salary.

One of our last few union customers got rid of their union a little over a year ago. What pissed the workers off was a worthless employee getting a promotion to the highest paid job in the plant. He had the highest seniority and the union told the company he's the one that gets the job.

Well the owner of the company had to do the job instead, because the guy who got the promotion couldn't do the job. That's when the employees decided to take action.

They voted the union out, and the company decided who got that highest paying job based on ability to do it, and of course, years with the company. They fired about three people who were always worthless and never produced any real work, but they always had a job as long as they showed up and were breathing.

I love your useless stories. Always propping up conservative dogma even when the facts don’t support your tall tales.

Once the union movement was quashed, wages for working American stagnated. Companies promised wages would go up once the unions were gone. It never happened. Workers are still waiting for those raises.

So what companies made such a promise? I don't recall one.

What happened throughout the years was that when our workers made one dollar more an hour, overseas, they made three cents more an hour. When our wages raised another dollar, they raised their wages two cents an hour.

Eventually, unions priced us out of the world market.

With that competition and along with improving and greatly decreasing costs for automation, companies are looking for every way possible to cut costs to compete worldwide. That means less jobs for Americans.

We had to get rid of the unions. We had no choice, because American consumers refused to support those good jobs. That's why Walmart is number one, and Amazon is quickly taking the lead in selling consumer products.

Years ago, when you purchase gasoline, an attendant came out, filled your car, washed the windows, checked the oil and tire pressure, and you paid without getting out of your car. Then somebody had a thought: what if they allowed people to pump their own gasoline at a discounted rate??? It would keep the mechanics working on cars instead of losing money pumping gasoline.

It started out on one island. But because of demand, owners had to have two self-serve islands. Long story short, all gasoline stations in the US had to go to totally self-serve.

Did we put a lot of people out of work? Yes we did, but we saved money in the process.

Eventually, gas stations also got rid of the mechanics and service bays, and reconstructed their stations into convenience stores.

Once again, you tout the Republican Party's favourite talking points which utterly ignores the role that Republican economic policies have in impacting wealth distribution in the USA. Prior to 1980, income and wealth was distributed across all levels of society. Workers owned about 5% of the wealth of the nation, poverty had been reduced to around 10%, and the economy was strong. Reagan declared an end to the "War on Poverty" and started demonizing "welfare queens" and reducing aid to poor families. He also attacked and broke the air traffic controllers union.

Reagan promised all workers a raise once the unions were gone. It didn't happen. But what did happen was that large companies stopped giving raises to workers, even as GDP soared. Companies claimed that advances in technology increased production, not the workers, ergo the workers weren't entitled to raises. For the next 40 years, corporations absorbed increases in rent/land purchase costs, equipment, insurance, transportation, raw materials, and massive increases (1000% on average), in executive salaries, without raising the wages of their front-line employees.

During this same time frame, corporations have grown increasingly wealthy. All of these mergers and acquisitions are taking place because corporate America is awash in cash and doesn't know what to do with it. Even as their frontline workers have been losing ground economically for 40 years.

In search for ever greater profits and reduced public accountability, companies started off-shoring production. It started first for companies like Monsanto and Dow Chemicals, companies whose production is so toxic, no first world country will allow it, so they moved to countries like jurisdictions, where there was no effective environmental laws and governments were desperate for jobs for their millions of poor. Jobs started to trickle away to Third World jurisdiction, where labour was cheap and pollution was seen as sign of properity.

Companies always portrayed their abandonment of their American workers as the result of "union greed", but it wasn't the unions who were greedy. Currently, wages as a percentage of costs, is at the same level it was during the Guilded Age. Workers, who owned 5% of the nation's wealth when Reagan was elected, are now just holding on - barely, and are dependent on earned income credits, and other government handouts to get by. Every year, corporations are announcing record profits and dividends. Corporations are no longer good citizens.

I believe you posted that New York won't let Walmart in, but gave Amazon huge tax breaks. You said the City of New York shouldn't be deciding who gets to locate in the city and New Yorkers would love to shop at Walmart. My neighbourhood also blocked a Walmart Store on a property which had been home to some of the highest paying jobs in the city, and for the same reasons: jobs at Walmart pay minimum wage. Anyone who works for Walmart as their one and only job, will require social assistance to live in an expensive city like New York. Amazon jobs pay $50,000 per year. Good, solid, middle class jobs. My neighbourhood didn't want our high paying movie studio jobs replaced with "McJobs".

All of this bullshit about the selfishness of unions driving companies overseas, is just cover for the greed of American corporations in selling out American workers to the highest profits in history. Statistics from 2018, show that Trump's tax cuts have made income and wealth equality worse, not better.

American workers need meaningful raises - not 3% per year, but some form of profit sharing so that all of the benefits of GDP growth aren't going only to the top. There needs to be a huge adjustment at the bottom to end government handouts which function as wage subsidies for billionaire corporations who pay their executive millions while their employees receive food stamps.

The American Middle class was built with a union label. American workers need a voice at the table when wage decisions are made and unions gave them that voice. Without no voice, they've been left behind and ignored for so long they actually voted for Donald Trump.

You are missing two very important facts. The rise of the global economy and the overreach of the unions. By the way if you are worth $94,000 you are in the top 10% of the wealthiest people on the planet. If you are worth $4300 you are in the top 50% wealthiest people on the planet.

 

[Blues Man]

Save money save the planet

Lunapads Washable Cloth Menstrual Pads & Period Underwear

 

[BrokeLoser]

Meanwhile, in the real world, outside of a LibTardia, kids are graduating daily with degrees and stepping right into $80-$100K jobs. While the lowlife pieces of shits in the ghettos and barrios refuse to make a good decision and refuse to become ambitious...but, but, but....”THE 1%’ers are holding them back.”....hahaha...funny ass shit.
Joe, you are all fucked up in the head bud.

Really? Hey, guy, I'm writing their resumes... they are not stepping into 80K jobs. They are, if they are lucky, getting 40K jobs which don't help much with tens of thousands in college loan debts.

We have a plethora of poor because you Loons have been importing and recruiting Mexico’s poor for decades, they are disgusting, human cockroaches whom are very comfortable being ‘USA Poor’ which is Mexico wealthy....1/3 of this nation is comprised of thirdworlders, here by way of criminality, with illegal roots and on stolen citizenships...What the fuck were you expecting? You can not turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse.

Okay, buddy, I'm sorry you failed so badly at being a white person that you are being beaten by people of color at the Game of America. Even with the game massively rigged in your failure, you STILL managed to lose to people with no money, no connections and a limited grasp of the English Language.

I have twin nieces, both recently graduated from a nursing program, both got hired at the same facility.

What is The Average Salary of a Registered Nurse in California?
RNs in California earn an average of $102,700 each year or $8,560 monthly or $49.37 hourly. This figure can fluctuate based on your city of residence, your employer, and your overall nursing experience.
Type Average Salary
Hourly $49.37
Monthly $8,560
Annual $102,700
(Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 2018)

“Okay, buddy, I'm sorry you failed so badly at being a white person that you are being beaten by people of color at the Game of America. Even with the game massively rigged in your failure, you STILL managed to lose to people with no money, no connections and a limited grasp of the English Language.”

Haha...you can’t refute my claims with intellectual dialogue and or logic so you resort to talking stupid shit. I’m sure you consider yourself quite witty and clever...BUT anyone sane knows you’re an ignorant fool who can’t offer a sensible refutation.

 

[SAYIT]

American workers need a voice at the table when wage decisions are made and unions gave them that voice. Without no voice, they've been left behind and ignored for so long they actually voted for Donald Trump.

"Without no voice..."

Every American worker has a voice - even those who are mute - and those who choose to can still work union however most now would rather not. Much as the unions have made themselves obsolete, so is the Democrat Socialist Party, and 2020 will find many of those who've "been left behind and ignored for so long they actually voted for Donald Trump" - including 4 million Dems - will do so again in 2020.

It just never occurs to some they are always burrowing into rabbit holes and barking up the wrong trees but the fact that you yearn to return to the 1950s or 60s says all one need know about you.

 

[Lesh]

Unions are declining at about the same rate as the middle class... while corporations enjoy record profits year after year

but unions are the problem???

hardly