How do you feel about next November?

[Minor Axis]

I say if your middle class, or working class U.S. citizen, you need to get out and vote for either Obama or Hillary. Why do I say that?

First if you can stand a little historical perspective read this paragraph, otherwise skip... Capitalism is a pretty good system, but raw capitalism, capitalism with out any laws that protect workers is pretty darn ugly. If you look back at the 1800's in the U.S., there were titans of industry standing on the shoulders of the workers. Labor laws were either non-existant or minimal. Giant trusts were anti-competitive. Child labor, minimum wages, etc, etc. But the big boys, those in charge got rich. They were also called Robber Barons because while they got filthy rich, the worker bees worked their asses off and got pennies for payment. As you may know out of the 1880's we moved to the roaring twenties and because it was like the wild west of finance, the great depression pulled the plug on the good times.

Out of this mess came the best time for workers, trusts were broken up, labor laws were enacted, pensions were created, banks were given more responsible rules to follow and the middle class rose up. Out of high school people used to be able to get good jobs, jobs at the local factories, buy a house, raise a family. The 40's-50's were prime time for the middle class. I admit it is not quite that simple as the country was experiencing tremendous growth, but it did happen.

Flat out I'll say that, you'll never ever see conservative forces pass labor laws that helps labor. As far as they are concerned, anything that interferes with profits is bad whether it be wages, health benefits, or environmental laws. And ever since the 50's, conservative forces have been trying to take away the good times for the working class and hand in hand with globalization, they are succeeding. The Middle Class is evaporating. All those good paying jobs, most of them are now minimal wage jobs.

Corporations especially those today are only as good as the leaders. There might have been a time (even today) when entrepreneurs create a great company. That company was their baby and they wanted it to succeed, along with all of their employees. But today more times than not, greed and personal gain controls the board room. The company is no longer their baby, it's a cash cow waiting to be shipped to the slaughterhouse. I can say from my own experience that the owners of my company arrived several years ago and since then they have been sucking every dime out of the company and sticking it in their pockets. They do things not for the long term good of the company but for their short term advantage. And when they sail off to the sunset on their golden parachute, the career employees are stuck with the mess if there is still a company left. And it's legal.

So today, instead of acting like a all-for-one, one-for-all country there is a lot of back stabbing going on. I'm talking about these corporations who with glee will ship your job overseas as soon as they can. You, working-class worker bee are just an expense, an expense, the owners would rather do without if they can get away with it.

What is your defense? Unions are looking rather shabby these days. Most workers are not unionized. But in certain industries if you don't have a union, you have nothing. You serve at the pleasure of the owners without a contract, without any ground rules. Unions always rise for a reason- lousy work conditions and lousy pay. Many states are "at will" states. Which means you serve at the will of the employer. It means you can be let go for any reason with no explanation. In an industry like mine (aviation) contracts are a must because besides pay, there is are just too many quality of life issues that can be trampled on.

Besides unions, the only real effective option is to have a government in place who is sympathetic to the workers of their country, the 99% of us, and not in the pocket of corporations and special business interests. Only when laws are in place that protect jobs, when companies are penalized for destroying U.S. based jobs and for shipping manufacturing capability out of the country is there a chance.

Your never going to get that chance with the Republican Party as it exists today. Yes they are all for God and guns, (while they have one of the highest scandal rates), and they too are all about corporate profits. That's why they are currently trying to get a trade agreement passed with Columbia, a country where labor organizers are murdered.

I am not a Democrat btw, I'm Independent and when I listened to the debates, I heard the Republicans talking about how good we had it and I heard the Democrats talking about the current tough times. The Democratic Party is far from perfect, but they are sympathetic to the working class. How effective they will be remains to be seen but they represent the only real chance the working class have to recover.

Feel free to disagree.

 

[All Else Failed]

*waits for this to turn into Carthage arguing for 30 pages*


I agree by the way

 

[Godsloveapples]

I would agree, but I didn't read it, so I can't agree with something without reading it. I'll agree/disagree when I get a chance to read it.

 

[Minor Axis]

Man, you are woefully misled and misinformed. Democrats will raise your taxes--guaranteed. When Clinton was President, you paid about 5% more than you do now (assuming you are working middle class). Let me correct your misconceptions one at a time:

I am working Middle Class and I was making about 40% more during the Clinton Administration. And btw glad to meet you. I've already read the "why are you liberals thread". I started out voting for Reagan and the first Bush when I was in the military. After getting into my "labor" job it took me about 4 years to realize that the Republican party was not good for my professional health. Guys like Lorenzo hammering a healthy company called Eastern and the President saying "oh, that's just business."

The only good paying jobs the US are losing are those that unions have forced overseas. Point out one piece of legislation passed by Republicans that cause good paying jobs to be lost?

Free trade agreements for one. One thing I can't really forgive the Democratic Party for is pushing through NAFTA. There are thousands of examples of what were good paying jobs gone South of the border. There is no such thing as free trade when your dealing with a country that has no environmental laws and pays the workers peanuts. If your in the developed country primarily it takes away good jobs from workers (yes they were good jobs at one point) and increases polution. The company in question saves substantially and passes some of it on to consumers, but mostly the difference goes into their pockets.

My understanding is that our big corporations would like nothing more than to ship their products from China to Mexico and then have Mexican trucking companies fan out across the U.S. delivering those goods. Just another example of trying to disenfranchising another group of workers.

If you understood economics, you'd realize you can't legislate good paying jobs. The fallacy that unions can raise salaries is just that--a fallacy--overall unions hurt the wages of the many in the same industries while benefitting a few (the union members). Good jobs can be lost however by over-regulating and over-legislating businesses--come to California where the liberals have been running companies out for years--we are losing jobs to Arizona, Texas, and Nevada by truckloads--all do to prohibitive cost of doing business--and because of it we have the highest taxes in the country.

I have to disagree with you although I can't speak to how California does it. In a large company, there is no circumstance where the individual worker (not management) is better off by themselves versus collective bargaining. These companies make billions of dollars and the problem is that they don't want to share. Not only that, these people operate in the "ego and power" zone. They think they are invaluable, the most important thing in the world. Consequently they deserve everything they get. And you little worker bee, you lucky to just have a job. Be happy with whatever we decide to dole out in wages because we can always find someone to replace you.

As I originally mentioned, there can be many life style issues that having a contract controls. Unions just did not appear as a wacky idea. They appear because when companies abuse their workers it is the only means of having a say. As a worker, without a union, you have no say. Businesses don't want any part of unions because it can interfere with their game plans. From a worker standpoint, that's just too bad. Maybe the CEO will have to deal with only getting a $20 million bonus instead of a $40 million bonus. Or better yet how about a $2 million dollar bonus? Today greed abounds. I predict as the standard of living plummets in this country you'll see more unions.

Absolute nonsense--rhetoric--you have no support for any of that--there are bad companies and there are good companies--many more good than bad--always been that way and always will be--85% of the country works for small businesses, not large corporations. That's mom and pop businesses most of which are incorporated in some form. You want to tax them more? They already pay 15% in Social Security--their share for themselves and then for them again as employees--what a joke. Its getting to the point where its not worth it to run a business anymore.

The focus of my comments are directed at medium- large corporations.

And if running a company is so great, why don't you start one yourself!!! I always hear people whining about how their bosses are making all the money while they toil away--well guess what--your boss took a big risk by putting up his/her money to create a business that gave you a job.

Most CEOs/ owners of medium large corporations today risk nothing. It's nothing like starting a small business.

Without those people--you'd wouldn't have a job.

And without skilled labor, they would not have their company.

As an employee and later a small business owner, I can confidently say that if you actually ran a business, you'd have a totally opposite view.

You might be right, however my comments are from what I've experienced and it is not functioning in a small business.

Small business is the backbone of the US, but people like you want to kill the golden goose (including your own) by over taxing and over-regulating it--instead of being jealous of those with more--go out and get more--its easy to do if you have a work ethic. Its easy to whine when you are taking none of the risk.

I think most workers just want a fair piece of the pie.

So why do we need unions? Why don't we just pass laws allowing everyone to get paid $50 an hour so we can all have a good life? Put your thinking cap on and tell me why that would not work. When you figure out why that doesn't work, you'll understand why unions don't work. Or go take Economics 101.

There is no case where workers are better off at a company where the union has been broken. They make less with less benefits.

Got news for you, you're as liberal Democrat as one can be no matter what you call yourself. You've bought every class-envy emotionally charged argument the DNC uses to get people like you to vote Democrat--they rely primarily on an ignorant voting base--people with little understanding of economics or the tax system works and the pray on your envy--make you angry that other people have more than you--make you believe people are rich because they are unethical and cheaters while you aren't making it because your an honest working man!

Me liberal? Only if liberal is viewing an economic landscape that benefits everyone, not just the fat cats. I consider myself moderate.

BTW--if you were smart--you'd be VERY CONCERNED WITH CORPORATE PROFITS--even more so than the Republicans. Because if corporations aren't profitable, you won't have a job. The politicans will still have theirs--and their pensions.

Is that a swipe at politicians, Republican and Democratic? Good point. If everyone else is losing their pensions, why should they keep theirs? Anyway these corporations are profitable. It's just that they want to be more profitable at the expense of labor.

Oh--and BTW--the working class never had it as good as we have it right now---regardless of the crap the DNC tells you, people in the 50s and 60s didn't have anywhere close to the standard of living the average American has now

I'll let you prove that while your telling all those people who used to work at the factory how much better it is now. It's established that millions of good paying jobs have gone right out of the country and many more are at risk. And I'm talking skilled jobs, like research, finance, computer programing, any job that can be done in an office is susceptible to exportation. Corporations will never do right by their workers if there is a chance to increase profits, because the workers are just expenses that cut into profits. The Federal government is the only chance at correcting the situation. But I'll admit, I don't have high confidence in the government at this point to succeed.

If you can't find it, I'll find it for you, but I'd like you to actually take a crack at learning some facts for yourself.

Fox Mulder speak: "I'm superior and your ignerent or deluded." This kind of a statement does not help keep a civil tone in a discussion like this. And sarcasm should also be avoided.

 

[Minor Axis]

Good jobs can be lost however by over-regulating and over-legislating businesses--come to California where the liberals have been running companies out for years--we are losing jobs to Arizona, Texas, and Nevada by truckloads--all do to prohibitive cost of doing business--and because of it we have the highest taxes in the country.

I was thinking about your California statement. This does not sound like a black or white issue. Is it as simple as that or is it other states trying to lure business by offering tax breaks? What's the standard of living when comparing the two states? And how much regulation is too much? I guess it depends on who you ask, the owners, the workers, the consumers, the local municipality, or the local residents. You have to admit there must be some regulation, or do you?

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

*waits for this to turn into Carthage arguing for 30 pages*


I agree by the way

Waits for you to join debate. You know you're my numero uno debater.

 

[Peter Parka]

*waits for this to turn into Carthage arguing for 30 pages*

:homo:

Whee! This is going to be fun!:24:

 

[Bandit]

noobamanation.com
read that shit.

 

[Peter Parka]

noobamanation.com
read that shit.

A Republican propaganda site? I hardly think that's going to give the unbiased truth!

 

[skyblue]

capitalism is a good thing in theory......if done right.......but in todays day and age i see no need for companies to put profit in front of livelihoods........that is putting people out of work to increase profits......not only is it short sighted its a kick in the teeeth for those who made the profits in the first place

 

[All Else Failed]

noobamanation.com
read that shit.

don't be stupid

 

[Minor Axis]

No offense, but your views completely slanted towards business and don't seem to be grounded in any other message except leave business to run free at the expense of all other considerations. Yours is a true Republican/conservative viewpoint and you are entitled to it.

Why should sarcasm be avoided? What political debate show have you ever watched with no sarcasm? Sarcasm is entertaining and its a highly useful tool for making points in a debate.

It does not help make any points, but only to raise the temperature level in the discussion, something that should be strived to avoid in a forum like this. The goal is to get your message and points across, not cloud the discussion by evoking anger or personal insults. Deny it all you want, but calling someone "ignorant" is an insult even if they are ignerent (not saying anyone is ignorant). I'd use uninformed, or mistaken as a substitute.

Go Obama!

 

[Minor Axis]

That's because you still aren't grasping what I'm saying to you. My views are grounded in economic theory.

As you are focused on small business, we should not be arguing apples and oranges. I agree that running a small business is a challenge as I watch them go out of business every day. How do you feel about those large corporations who come into small towns and put most of the local mom and pop stores out of business? Yes it is a fact of life, yes, the small stores can't compete with the large corporation, the smalls stores charge more, and I imagine it drives owners of small stores crazy.

But when it comes to major corporations the issues are- how much profit is enough, why greed is bad, how many U.S. jobs will they be allowed to destroy, and how well do they treat their employees? Of course all of these issues boil down individual perspective. My perspective is that working class Americans can't rely on the Republican party (as it exists today) to look out for their best interests.

 

[Maulds]

As you are focused on small business, we should not be arguing apples and oranges. I agree that running a small business is a challenge as I watch them go out of business every day. How do you feel about those large corporations who come into small towns and put most of the local mom and pop stores out of business? Yes it is a fact of life, yes, the small stores can't compete with the large corporation, the smalls stores charge more, and I imagine it drives owners of small stores crazy.

I'd rather pay more somewhere else than by it at Wal-Mart. My 2 cents.

 

[Minor Axis]

You still don't get it

If getting it means agreeing with you then no. I understand where your coming from but I disagree with your conclusions.

You don't let the Moore-On liberal politicians start try some social engineering and start trying to legislate economic equality.

But the government can put into place protections that prevent corporations from walking all over their employees. Corporations can only be relied upon to make money (or try to), not treat their employees well.

I'm a pilot (in a union) so you can guess how I ended up with a 40% pay cut. In our case the money grubbing bastard owners pushed the company into bankruptcy to 1) eliminate a certain class of jobs 2) avoid paying benefits to a certain class of job 3) knock down the remaining union workers several pegs while awarding themselves huge bonuses for doing a great job of kicking their non-management employees in the teeth. I can accept it when I'm told "times are tough" we must all tighten out belts", but I can't accept it when management awards themselves huge windfalls at our expense.

You have two choices basically--you create a system where people have the ability to achieve if they work hard or you have a Marxist system

Your choices are overly simplistic. History has all ready demonstrated that unregulated capitalism is unfair to workers.

The biggest complaint I've heard from former union employees that decided to get out and do something else is that there's no way to differentiate yourself--no sense of achievement, no comraderie with management and a constant sense of "us vs. them."

Your view of union jobs is colored by the concept of unions having no merit what so ever. And I have to wonder how many former union employees you've really talked to and what kind of jobs they were doing. I'd say most of the aviation jobs I'm familiar with are rewarding for the same reason any job is rewarding- you enjoy it and your good at it. And for pilots there is very much a sense of accomplishment on all most every flight.

All jobs based on seniority systems function on the premise that all those who keep their jobs are qualified to do them. So for pilots, we live by our seniority numbers. If you like avoiding the standard office environment of brown-nosing, back stabbing, and politics, the seniority system works well. And with most aviation jobs as well as factory jobs, there is little/no opportunity to move out of the job you were hired into.

Standard assembly line jobs, most aviation related jobs have a set pay based on a functional job standard (can you do the job?), that takes into account years of service. You don't get paid more because you're buds with your supervisor, you can put together a widget in 20 sec versus 40 sec, or are willing to work 7 days a week (unless it's overtime ). Employers dictate this standard, not employees. Pilots are pilots, assembly factory workers are assembly factory workers (that is if there are any factories left in this country). Yes there are a few opportunities to become supervisors but it's not something the rank and file can depend on for career advancement. Bottom line- working hard in these jobs does not advance you into a better paying job.

"Us vs them" depends totally on management and the employees perception of how they are being treated. If having a union makes management dislike us, well that's the breaks. Historically if companies had given employees a fair shake from the start, unions would have never developed.

I think ultimately, good employees get compensated well without unions and that with unions, bad employees and good employees get compensated the same--and that's just not right.

You're misinformed. Protecting bad employees is not why unions were created and it is not their focus.

Bad pilots?- they don't keep their jobs. We are tested regularly and must demonstrate good judgement.

Look we all know what is really going on here--there's some unfairness, sure, but bottom line is unions and labor laws by and large protect employees that can't achieve success on their own merit

Whose we? By and large yours is a pro-management, anti-labor view of the business world. Labor laws are designed to ensure employees get fair treatment NOT protect bad employees. Saying it multiple times will not make it true.

Survery after survery after survey comes out the same--to most employees, money is NOT the most important factor in job satisfaction--its a sense of worth and importance to an organization even on a small scale that is most important to people. And again I think most good employees get compensated fairly because if they don't, there are plenty of organizations out there large and small looking to hire good employees.

For pilots and flight crew it's a combination of pay and quality of life issues that we've had to fight for ever since the first pilot union was created in the early 1900s. You're expecting all good employees to drop on a knee and expect the company to be generous or even fair? It's never happened and it never will happen. These are large corporations making billions of dollars and it's always been a power struggle between skilled employees who know what they are worth against companies who don't want to pay them. Sure if your owner/management oriented, you think the unions are greedy, but evidence shows that the employees rarely win.

Unions and management are only as good as the people who staff them. If I used the same generalizations you do about unions and applied them to management, it would be easy to say all management sucks, get rid of them. And I'm sure there are good and bad examples of both. However, the deck is stacked in favor of the corporation and unions are the only mechanism that offer labor employees a "say" in their work environment.

 

[Minor Axis]

They have protections--we have labor laws.

In previous statements you have disapproved of labor laws.

Sorry, but I've got no sympathy for you--what did you get your salary knocked down from $300,000 to $250,000? The reason they did that was because you were over-paid in the first place. Your value is based on the skills you can bring or what the market can bare--not what a union can extort out of management. Pilots make good money for working very short work weeks--as my father always said you are crying with a loaf of bread under your arm.

You need to get educated about pilot salaries. Yes there were some pilots who *made* 300k, but most pilots working today are severely underpaid for the job they perform and the responsibility they shoulder.

Who decides what's fair pay- management? There was a pay standard in this country until technology reached a point where owners figured out they could send jobs overseas and pay a $1 a day for someone's labor. Sure as far as they are concerned, now that is all the job is worth. And as I've said previously they pocket most of the savings and pass a small portion of the savings onto the consumer. But workers don't have to accept peanuts for wages for skilled jobs. If they don't want to pay a fair wage it is us vs them.

Unions are NOT enforcing regulations

Actually they do enforce work environment regulations by bringing problems and deviations to the attention of management and oversight agencies.

And who do you think pays for your union extorted salaries and benefits? Not the management--those costs are passed on to the consumers and its why we all have to pay more for our flights. You getting paid more doesn't mean management gets paid less--that's what you aren't comprehending--you getting paid more than your worth (as determined by the market) means someone else has to pay for that imbalance. Instead of complaining about making less now you should be happy that you were overpaid for so long.

Just as exorbitant bonuses and stock options are passed to the consumers. I comprehend, but I disagree with you. Yes you think the worker should have absolutely zero control, zero power over their lives. Until the last 5 years, pilot unions have done an excellent job of forcing employers to share a fair piece of the pie. It's your right to call it extortion. There has always been a power struggle going on. Traditionally owners have all the power. Unions give some power to the workers for a change.

I never said unions didn't have any merit. The problem with unions is the government gives you an unfair advantage--the laws in place allow you to do things you wouldn't otherwise have the power to do.

Really what merits do unions have? Thats your definition of unfair. Giving workers some control is completely fair if your a worker.

Unions would have power simply by banding employees together, but federal law is so skewed pro-union that it requires companies to take drastic measure or go out of business when the unions has them by the balls.

We disagree on this point. As a rule employers have their employees by the balls. Unions help balance the power.

Sure it works well for you--because you're on top of the heap. What you complain of is exactly what you're doing--you have an unfair advantage given to you that gives you an edge over other pilots that are willing to work harder and longer hours than you are for less pay--they can't do it because you've been given an unfair advantage--

Unfair is in the eye of the beholder. Ever since the owners of our company showed up they have sucked every bit of equity they can out of the company taking paid equipment and turning it into leased equipment and pocketing the profits, creating subsidiaries they use to pay themselves, among other tactics. This has been a tradition in airlines for many years. Their greedy short term focus has harmed the company for long term profitability. Their actions are partially responsible for sad state of airlines today. It's their right to be immoral because they are the owners? They'll be long gone and the career employee will be left with the heap of rubble that used to be their company.

-if it weren't for unions you'd have to compete for your job. How is the advantage you're given any different than management having an advantage over employees?

I knew you'd say that. It's different because the worker has *some* say instead of management having *all* of the say.

No offense by I see "working hard" and "union worker" as an oxymoron. Now I am sure there are union people working hard, I don't mean to imply there aren't but the Marxist nature of unions creates a discincentive to work hard.

You delight in belittling all unions which is your right but does not mean you are right. Some unions maybe. Not the aviation related unions I'm familiar with. We are working 12 hour days, with minimum rest (just enough to sleep) and are gone more than 400 hours per month. And although we can be at the airport or in the plane most of the day, we are only paid when we push off the gate. Compare that with any 40 hour a week job. And my impression is that most auto workers are very hard workers. Before unions and labor laws, many employers abused employees. It's a fact.

And if you want to talk corruption, the most corruption and back rubbing and brown-nosing in the world occurs between Democrats and union leaders--millions of dollars are being donated by union to get Democrats elected so they can keep giving unions unfair advantages. As you've seen, though companies are forced then to take jobs overseas.

It's you I hear screaming when the minimum wage is raised (thanks Democrats)! Your perception would be funny if it was not so biased. Big business is the champ at throwing money at politicians, but you see fit to bad mouth unions. Companies have never been forced to take jobs overseas, they relish the opportunity to put extra profits to into their pockets and destroy good paying U.S. based jobs in the process.

The worse are government unions. Here in California, for example, if you work 30 years for the state government, you get 90% of you pay for life in pension

So pensions are a sign of corruption? What about all those federal pensions for politicians? According to you the only ones who are not corrupt are business owners and Republicans- a very biased view.

I think we've both stated out positions very clearly and somehow I don't think I can convince you of just how wrong you are. We used to have it good in this country. Big business is destroying the middle class it-is-a-fact. I'm very hopeful that the people of this country will finally call "bullshit" and give the Republicans a good kick in the backside.

 

[golfbunny]

Electability is an issue with most of the candidates. :smiley24:

 

[Minor Axis]

Fox,
Thanks for the input. I admit I'm on the top end of labor salaries and in today's environment I am lucky to have chosen this field of work. However my particular job (even among pilots) is atypical of most aviation jobs today. Your opinion is that I don't deserve my salary. My opinion that corporate executives don't deserve to make 100+X times what the average worker makes nor should they have the right to screw over their employees. Yes, it's all about perspective. In the end, the peoples perspective will prevail.

Worse case scenario of what's going to happen in this country without intervention, by way of medium to large companies, our manufacturing base will be exported, most of the jobs that can be exported will be exported, as many jobs as possible will be reduced to less than $10 per hour wage, corporation will avoid paying benefits to as many employees as possible and when the system is sufficiently broken, when enough people are pissed off and realize the system is not equitable for society at large, you won't see Republicans in charge any more. That could be sooner than you think.

Go Obama!

 

[Minor Axis]

The scenario you pose won't happen because in order for capitalism and a free market to work, you need a fairly affluent middle class financially--corporations can't make big profits if the populace doesn't have money to spend.?

Something we almost agree upon! :nod: I say it can happen because corporations are not smart enough to act on this principle. Many of them seemed to be focused on destructive short term practices with bad long term consequences for them and the country in the name of self enrichment. Only government has the power to check this trend.

We can argue the effect that unions have had all day long. But for any interested bystanders, just keep in mind unions were not created because employees were making too much, they were created because some large percentage of owners undervalued the work of their employees. And as the work environment deteriorates, unions always become more popular. It's a completely understandable dynamic.

 

[LiberalVichy]

The only response I have to the elections is nausea at all those people cheering at the appointment of the newest top slavemaster, and prattling on about how this choice (to the extent it even exists) somehow makes us 'free'. Democratic propoganda is possibly the most sickening and tragic propaganda I've ever had the misfortune of being bombarded with.