Why Are Conservatives So Resentful Of Americans With Good Jobs?

[Gadawg73]

With the economy so bad seems as if the Low Information Voters would see that their system is not working very well for them.
The Hate the Business Man rants of the left are a massive failure.
In 4 years, **** it, I am taking my $$ to Costa Rica or Panama and **** all you moocher parasites.
I can live high on the hog down there for 50K a year.

 

[Avatar4321]

Why Are Conservatives So Resentful Of Americans With Good Jobs?

An example of this is a conservative poster who goes by the name of carol.

get this she starts out with this bit of nasty myth: "union thug crap"

then she puts in the bullcrap: "I have nothing against the average person that is in a union job...everyone needs a job!"

and here is where the meat in her resentment exposes itself "Some (actually a lot) of people have their lives wrapped up so tight into their unions that they can't see beyond their nose. They think that companies are obligated to give them everything they want, not necessarily what they need.

Sounds just like the red meat Mitt Romney threw out to Super Wealthy fools who hate "average" people who need a job. Whether Super Wealthy or more average, conservatives despise the 'average' person who needs a job yet wants more.

If you're talking about unions then you are completely mischaracterizing the issue. The right doesn't have a problem with people having good jobs. That's the left's issue. And don't say you don't have a problem with people having good jobs. You just spent a year and a half telling everyone how evil it was for Mitt Romney to work hard saving failing companies.

No, the problem with Unions is the fact that they usually resort to shady, even criminal tactics, in order to extort money out of people. It's the fact that they act like jerks. That they look down on people who do an honest days work but arent in a union. They have no problem using violence and care little to nothing about disruptting someone else's life so they can get what they want.

It's not that they have jobs. It's the fact that they do everything in their power to keep other people from having jobs and treat people horribly why doing so.

That is why the right doesn't like unions. Robbery, extortion, thuggery aren't tactics most on the right approve of.

And please, dont consider this a blanket condemnation on all unions. I am just talking about the ones people have problems with.

 

[Gadawg73]

Why Are Conservatives So Resentful Of Americans With Good Jobs?

An example of this is a conservative poster who goes by the name of carol.

get this she starts out with this bit of nasty myth: "union thug crap"

then she puts in the bullcrap: "I have nothing against the average person that is in a union job...everyone needs a job!"

and here is where the meat in her resentment exposes itself "Some (actually a lot) of people have their lives wrapped up so tight into their unions that they can't see beyond their nose. They think that companies are obligated to give them everything they want, not necessarily what they need.

Sounds just like the red meat Mitt Romney threw out to Super Wealthy fools who hate "average" people who need a job. Whether Super Wealthy or more average, conservatives despise the 'average' person who needs a job yet wants more.

If you're talking about unions then you are completely mischaracterizing the issue. The right doesn't have a problem with people having good jobs. That's the left's issue. And don't say you don't have a problem with people having good jobs. You just spent a year and a half telling everyone how evil it was for Mitt Romney to work hard saving failing companies.

No, the problem with Unions is the fact that they usually resort to shady, even criminal tactics, in order to extort money out of people. It's the fact that they act like jerks. That they look down on people who do an honest days work but arent in a union. They have no problem using violence and care little to nothing about disruptting someone else's life so they can get what they want.

It's not that they have jobs. It's the fact that they do everything in their power to keep other people from having jobs and treat people horribly why doing so.

That is why the right doesn't like unions. Robbery, extortion, thuggery aren't tactics most on the right approve of.

And please, dont consider this a blanket condemnation on all unions. I am just talking about the ones people have problems with.

To hell you say!
Jobs belong to people, the workers and all companies be damned.
Since the job belongs to the union worker a baseball bat to the head of a pregnant woman crossing a picket line is most appropriate.
How arrogant of you to suggest that my 7th grade education is not good enough for that 45K a year + benefits union job.

 

[JoeB131]

Amazing how ignorant the left is on job creation.
.

Last four recessionswere under Republicans... And most of the ones before that.

You don't get to lecture us on this anymore..

You're like the preacher who's been caught in the Whorehouse.

I get to lecture you all day, everyday and twice on Sundays because the preacher is in the whorehouse.

Oh, yeah, you get to lecture.

We just laugh at you when you do.

Kind of like when I was growing up Catholic, and we had the lispy, limp-wristed "flamboyant" priest tell us that being gay was bad. Well, you should know, buddy.

Supply side doesn't work. Deregulation is just letting the Foxes guard the hen house.

People are finally figuring this out. And yeah, this recession has been prolonged by the Plutocrats extending the misery hoping to scare people into voting for more of the same, but it didn't work. The Koch brothers threw two billion dollars at Obama, and he won.

Deal with it.

 

[Gadawg73]

Last four recessionswere under Republicans... And most of the ones before that.

You don't get to lecture us on this anymore..

You're like the preacher who's been caught in the Whorehouse.

I get to lecture you all day, everyday and twice on Sundays because the preacher is in the whorehouse.

Oh, yeah, you get to lecture.

We just laugh at you when you do.

Kind of like when I was growing up Catholic, and we had the lispy, limp-wristed "flamboyant" priest tell us that being gay was bad. Well, you should know, buddy.

Supply side doesn't work. Deregulation is just letting the Foxes guard the hen house.

People are finally figuring this out. And yeah, this recession has been prolonged by the Plutocrats extending the misery hoping to scare people into voting for more of the same, but it didn't work. The Koch brothers threw two billion dollars at Obama, and he won.

Deal with it.

Where are you laughing? That would be good, not a problem with that.
All we see from you are your anti capitalism rants.
Joe, when the union lawyer draws up the union contract is he a "working man" when he does that?

 

[LibertyLemming]

It is funny that you think the two parties are sooooo different.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Oh, yeah, you get to lecture.

We just laugh at you when you do.

Kind of like when I was growing up Catholic, and we had the lispy, limp-wristed "flamboyant" priest tell us that being gay was bad. Well, you should know, buddy.

Supply side doesn't work.

Your 4th grade education is showing again.

30 years of growth proved that supply side economics work spectacularly well. Clinton sure was a fan.

 

[Gadawg73]

Oh, yeah, you get to lecture.

We just laugh at you when you do.

Kind of like when I was growing up Catholic, and we had the lispy, limp-wristed "flamboyant" priest tell us that being gay was bad. Well, you should know, buddy.

Supply side doesn't work.

Your 4th grade education is showing again.

30 years of growth proved that supply side economics work spectacularly well. Clinton sure was a fan.

He is still infatuated with the 4th grade gay priest he had.

 

[JoeB131]

Supply side doesn't work.

Your 4th grade education is showing again.

30 years of growth proved that supply side economics work spectacularly well. Clinton sure was a fan.

Uh, Ronald Reagan raised taxes after cutting them.
Bush-41 raised taxes
Clinton raised taxes.

Supply Side didn't work and they all knew it.

All three of those guys DID increase government spending, though. By a lot.

Keynesian economics DO work. Every time it is tried.

 

[JoeB131]

[

He is still infatuated with the 4th grade gay priest he had.

No, more like glad I got outof their with my bunghole intact, as we all knew they were a little strange.

But, hey, probably perfect Republicans, the Bishops all got behind Romney.

And the rank and file Catholics voted for Obama.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Uh, Ronald Reagan raised taxes after cutting them.

Reagan restructured the tax code. The claim that he "raised taxes" is part of the talking points that you morons get from the leftist hate sites.

Taxes, across the board, were significantly lower after Reagan left office than before.

Bush-41 raised taxes

He paid the price.

Clinton raised taxes.

And the dims got slaughtered in 1994, the Republican Party gained 54 seats in the House and 8 seats in the Senate to win control of both the House and the Senate for the first time since 1952.

Further, In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the (audible liberal gasp) capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%.

The 1997 tax cuts also included a phased in increase in the death tax exemption to $1 million from $600,000, and established Roth IRAs and increased the limits for deductible IRAs.

Supply Side didn't work and they all knew it.

You have the intellect of a Reyes Monkey, which is why you are a communist. It was the market driven efforts by Clinton that lead to prosperity.

As the tax rate on capital gains came down, real wages made their biggest advance since the implementation of the Reagan tax rate reductions in the mid 1980s. Real average hourly earnings were (in 1982 dollars) $7.43 in 1996, $7.55 in 1997, $7.75 in 1998, $7.86 in 1999, and $7.89 in 2000. Yet you fucktard communists attacked capital gains above all else in the last election, with Dear Leader vowing to savage investors with severe gouging on capital gains.

You communists are incapable of learning.

All three of those guys DID increase government spending, though. By a lot.

Keynesian economics DO work. Every time it is tried.

Entirely false. The "peace dividend" left federal spending declines in defense to cover social spending. Annual growth in federal spending was kept to below 3%, or $57 billion.

So comrade Stalin, you post lies and ignorance then declare that this supports a failed economic system that you have utterly no grasp of.

Bravo, you are the perfect communist.

 

[Gadawg73]

We have the poor receiving:
1. Free food
2. Free healthcare
3. Free college education
4. Free school lunches
5. Free housing
6. Free cell phone
7. Free cash without having to work for it

And Joe claims we are in a "plutocracy"!

 

[flacaltenn]

Supply side doesn't work.

Your 4th grade education is showing again.

30 years of growth proved that supply side economics work spectacularly well. Clinton sure was a fan.

Uh, Ronald Reagan raised taxes after cutting them.
Bush-41 raised taxes
Clinton raised taxes.

Supply Side didn't work and they all knew it.

All three of those guys DID increase government spending, though. By a lot.

Keynesian economics DO work. Every time it is tried.

Leadership that focuses on BIG ISSUES and doesn't write huge checks for "stimulus" works. The economy is NOT improved by just tossing money like an NBA player at a strip club. It's improved by encouraging the proper routing of PRIVATE capital to NEW innovative ventures, NOT betting tax money on specific winners and losers. The labor force is promoted by LEADERSHIP into areas that will promote US dominance in the technical ventures. And CHANGING the fundamental expectations in EDUCATION so that America will have the workforce that it needs to bring manufacturing back to this country. There will less and less in the way of "low-skilled -- coaster" jobs in the future -- and the "leadership" is not getting the message.

By funding R&D on things nobody else is doing --- NOT by increasing subsidies for crap we already build like "energy-saver" dishwashers and windmills.

And BRAINDEAD Keynesian "money showers" to consumers today --- just causes more cargo ships from China to unload at Long Beach.. It might have worked in the 50s and 60s -- but those policies are ancient and irrelevant today.. You're living in a different age.

 

[Liberal]

Oh, yeah, you get to lecture.

We just laugh at you when you do.

Kind of like when I was growing up Catholic, and we had the lispy, limp-wristed "flamboyant" priest tell us that being gay was bad. Well, you should know, buddy.

Supply side doesn't work.

Your 4th grade education is showing again.

30 years of growth proved that supply side economics work spectacularly well. Clinton sure was a fan.

Supply side stabs America in the back when you have a place like China and virtually no reason for companies not to go there and build their products.

Thus supply side FAILS, without the proper regulations.. The true debate is what kind of regulations (trade, etc).

You can lower taxes, get rid of the ACA and it still will be more economical to produce a product with $0.25 a day labor and counterfeit parts vs domestic production.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Supply side stabs America in the back when you have a place like China and virtually no reason for companies not to go there and build their products.

Look, you're a leftist - thus you have zero grasp of economics or finance.

"Supply side" is simply the recitation of Says Law "Supply gives rise to demand." This is an economic law that demonstrates the fact that people cannot demand that which does not exist. I may WANT a star trek teleporter - but there is no DEMAND for them because they don't exist. Before a product can be sold, it must exist.

So "Supply Side" has zilch, zip, nada, to do with outsourcing or offshoring.

Thus supply side FAILS, without the proper regulations.. The true debate is what kind of regulations (trade, etc).

Again, you have no grasp at all of the basic terms, much less the concepts or realities behind them. You are in no position at all to spew about what "FAILS.'

You can lower taxes, get rid of the ACA and it still will be more economical to produce a product with $0.25 a day labor and counterfeit parts vs domestic production.

You have absolutely no idea what you are yapping about.

Labor cost is rarely the driver to offshore, as shipping virtually always consumes more revenue than is realized in labor savings.

So there must be some other factor that you can't quite grasp.....

Standard Disclaimer: Regulation

 

[JoeB131]

Your 4th grade education is showing again.

30 years of growth proved that supply side economics work spectacularly well. Clinton sure was a fan.

Uh, Ronald Reagan raised taxes after cutting them.
Bush-41 raised taxes
Clinton raised taxes.

Supply Side didn't work and they all knew it.

All three of those guys DID increase government spending, though. By a lot.

Keynesian economics DO work. Every time it is tried.

Leadership that focuses on BIG ISSUES and doesn't write huge checks for "stimulus" works. The economy is NOT improved by just tossing money like an NBA player at a strip club. It's improved by encouraging the proper routing of PRIVATE capital to NEW innovative ventures, NOT betting tax money on specific winners and losers. The labor force is promoted by LEADERSHIP into areas that will promote US dominance in the technical ventures. And CHANGING the fundamental expectations in EDUCATION so that America will have the workforce that it needs to bring manufacturing back to this country. There will less and less in the way of "low-skilled -- coaster" jobs in the future -- and the "leadership" is not getting the message.

By funding R&D on things nobody else is doing --- NOT by increasing subsidies for crap we already build like "energy-saver" dishwashers and windmills.

And BRAINDEAD Keynesian "money showers" to consumers today --- just causes more cargo ships from China to unload at Long Beach.. It might have worked in the 50s and 60s -- but those policies are ancient and irrelevant today.. You're living in a different age.

I'll agree, the trade policies are fucked up, but that's because we make it too easy for those companies to move a factory to China.

And consumers don't make them pay a price for doing so.

Going back to Reagan, there was a point when Japan was engaging in "dumping". they were selling product in the US at a loss in order to drive American industries out of business. In electronics, they largely succeeded. Then Reagan put into place anti-dumping regulations.

Now, back to why Keynesian economics work well, because they put people to work in the shortterm, keeping commerce going, and in the long term, they improve infrastructure, making the country more competitive. That's why it worked so well in the 50 and 60's.

 

[JoeB131]

We have the poor receiving:
1. Free food
2. Free healthcare
3. Free college education
4. Free school lunches
5. Free housing
6. Free cell phone
7. Free cash without having to work for it

And Joe claims we are in a "plutocracy"!

So we throw the poor a pittance to keep them from rioting, and you consider yourself good?

Geeezus, every time I think the GOP might be able to be saved from itself, you prove me wrong.

 

[flacaltenn]

Uh, Ronald Reagan raised taxes after cutting them.
Bush-41 raised taxes
Clinton raised taxes.

Supply Side didn't work and they all knew it.

All three of those guys DID increase government spending, though. By a lot.

Keynesian economics DO work. Every time it is tried.

Leadership that focuses on BIG ISSUES and doesn't write huge checks for "stimulus" works. The economy is NOT improved by just tossing money like an NBA player at a strip club. It's improved by encouraging the proper routing of PRIVATE capital to NEW innovative ventures, NOT betting tax money on specific winners and losers. The labor force is promoted by LEADERSHIP into areas that will promote US dominance in the technical ventures. And CHANGING the fundamental expectations in EDUCATION so that America will have the workforce that it needs to bring manufacturing back to this country. There will less and less in the way of "low-skilled -- coaster" jobs in the future -- and the "leadership" is not getting the message.

By funding R&D on things nobody else is doing --- NOT by increasing subsidies for crap we already build like "energy-saver" dishwashers and windmills.

And BRAINDEAD Keynesian "money showers" to consumers today --- just causes more cargo ships from China to unload at Long Beach.. It might have worked in the 50s and 60s -- but those policies are ancient and irrelevant today.. You're living in a different age.

I'll agree, the trade policies are fucked up, but that's because we make it too easy for those companies to move a factory to China.

And consumers don't make them pay a price for doing so.

Going back to Reagan, there was a point when Japan was engaging in "dumping". they were selling product in the US at a loss in order to drive American industries out of business. In electronics, they largely succeeded. Then Reagan put into place anti-dumping regulations.

Now, back to why Keynesian economics work well, because they put people to work in the shortterm, keeping commerce going, and in the long term, they improve infrastructure, making the country more competitive. That's why it worked so well in the 50 and 60's.

Consumers don't "make them pay a price", because "them" ain't gonna be PAYING the price. It would be CONSUMERS paying the price for tariffs or penalties or other imposed restrictions. You should know that. And anyway, cheap labor is NOT the evil-doer here. It's automation and efficiency that running rampant, depleting jobs like a domino fall. From travel agents to grocery clerks, from car body painters to phone operators --- the ability to employ armies of specialized labor is going away.

The Chinese are building 21st century factories WITHOUT cheap labor. They know that building dormitories and cafeterias for displaced low-skilled labor is NOT gonna be sustainable. Question is are we (YOU?) smart enough to drop the politically convienient bullshit excuses long enough to figure our WHAT POLICIES are really important for redirecting American business and labor. In THIS age. In THIS time. Before it's too late.

 

[JoeB131]

Consumers don't "make them pay a price", because "them" ain't gonna be PAYING the price. It would be CONSUMERS paying the price for tariffs or penalties or other imposed restrictions. You should know that. And anyway, cheap labor is NOT the evil-doer here. It's automation and efficiency that running rampant, depleting jobs like a domino fall. From travel agents to grocery clerks, from car body painters to phone operators --- the ability to employ armies of specialized labor is going away.

The Chinese are building 21st century factories WITHOUT cheap labor. They know that building dormitories and cafeterias for displaced low-skilled labor is NOT gonna be sustainable. Question is are we (YOU?) smart enough to drop the politically convienient bullshit excuses long enough to figure our WHAT POLICIES are really important for redirecting American business and labor. In THIS age. In THIS time. Before it's too late.

If you don't want to pay the tariff, don't buy the foriegn made shit. Simple enough. We used to fund the entire federal governent on tariffs and excises...

Now, you have a point about automation, but again, this is the consumers putting up with it. Frankly, I get annoyed with self-service checkout and robo-calls. For instance, when I got my local Jewel-Osco, they have 8 cash registers, and only 3 have human beings in them at any time. The others are empty, and they route people to the "Self-Checkout".

 

[flacaltenn]

Consumers don't "make them pay a price", because "them" ain't gonna be PAYING the price. It would be CONSUMERS paying the price for tariffs or penalties or other imposed restrictions. You should know that. And anyway, cheap labor is NOT the evil-doer here. It's automation and efficiency that running rampant, depleting jobs like a domino fall. From travel agents to grocery clerks, from car body painters to phone operators --- the ability to employ armies of specialized labor is going away.

The Chinese are building 21st century factories WITHOUT cheap labor. They know that building dormitories and cafeterias for displaced low-skilled labor is NOT gonna be sustainable. Question is are we (YOU?) smart enough to drop the politically convienient bullshit excuses long enough to figure our WHAT POLICIES are really important for redirecting American business and labor. In THIS age. In THIS time. Before it's too late.

If you don't want to pay the tariff, don't buy the foriegn made shit. Simple enough. We used to fund the entire federal governent on tariffs and excises...

Now, you have a point about automation, but again, this is the consumers putting up with it. Frankly, I get annoyed with self-service checkout and robo-calls. For instance, when I got my local Jewel-Osco, they have 8 cash registers, and only 3 have human beings in them at any time. The others are empty, and they route people to the "Self-Checkout".

By looking backwards all the time -- "OLD" labor is gonna become roadkill. I'm sure that many folks thought the same things about debit cards and ATMs at one time. And there might STILL be a few people who use a phone operator or a travel agent.

In a few years -- you will be rolling your cart thru a TSA style arch and paying for the total on the other side. America should be INVENTING and INNOVATING this stuff. Not blaming each other for the inevitable changes in the meaning of "a job". Think AHEAD or end up with the economy of Yemen --- Your choice "commie-light".

We should give up on making toasters and plastic toys, quit whining about "foreign" crap and start making the stuff that the rest of world CAN'T do. THAT'S what supports the American quality of life. NOT making basketballs and consumer electronics.