Biden is not serious about getting the debt under control

[lurchadams]

Right .There is no such thing as 'paying for a tax cut'. There''s just less revenue coming in. Paying is money going out.Words matter.

Yeah, you don't get it. It's ok.. no republican really does.

 

[bongsaway]

Generally, most people who own a second home don't do an every other week travel rotation.

I don't own it. Next theory. It's funny to me how many people have inserted their own meaning into my signature...and most are incorrect.

 

[bave]

I don't own it. Next theory. It's funny to me how many people have inserted their own meaning into my signature...and most are incorrect.

Then it is all around stupid.

 

[bongsaway]

Then it is all around stupid. I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish by posting your "luxurious" lifestyle of living in central Florida Atlantic coast....

I don't live along the coast and I don't own the condo, any more guesses to 'expose' my luxurious lifestyle?

 

[bave]

I don't live along the coast and I don't own the condo, any more guesses to 'expose' my luxurious lifestyle?

No, I just find the whole idea of an internet signature talking about how great your lifestyle is to be rather hilarious.

There was another clown here claiming to be a self made business owning multi millionaire physician who never seemed to work and didn't know anything about the tax code or healthcare.

Then, we had the guy who was a "top executive" at the "largest brokerage in the US" who later in fact claimed to be a routine analyst working somewhere down south.

It's internet frauds and flexing, I find the whole thing comical.

 

[Razoo]

Reagan, Bush, Bush and Rump were never about debt control because Supply Side Wreckanomics cannot exist without borrowing great big bucks forever .......

 

[bongsaway]

No, I just find the whole idea of an internet signature talking about how great your lifestyle is to be rather hilarious.

There was another clown here claiming to be a self made business owning multi millionaire physician who never seemed to work and didn't know anything about the tax code or healthcare.

Then, we had the guy who was a "top executive" at the "largest brokerage in the US" who later in fact claimed to be a routine analyst working somewhere down south.

It's internet frauds and flexing, I find the whole thing comical.

My signature comes from so many on the right telling me I'm so envious of the rich. I'm retired, own my home mortgage free, basically have no debt and spend every other week in an oceanfront condo because my other half's father who is ninety seven needs assistance 24/7. So his daughters take turns and when it's my halfs' turn, I go with her to help take care of him.

Anything else you wish to know? Who's the clown?

 

[KLATTU]

Reagan, Bush, Bush and Rump were never about debt control because Supply Side Wreckanomics cannot exist without borrowing great big bucks forever .......

Neither can keynesian jokeanomics megaspending.(point of OP)
So where are we?

 

[rickc]

 

[pocket aces]

Neither can keynesian jokeanomics megaspending.(point of OP)
So where are we?

I just did a forum search and I can't seem to find the thread you made about Trump not being serious about getting the debt under control. I mean it must be there someplace. They must have deleted it right?

 

[tshade]

No, I'm not. A full time job has a specific description for a variety of reasons.

Depending on the company/institution, etc.....

The problem is there is no competition in public education. I think we would both agree that more motivated teachers tend to land in private schools more often than not for far less compensation and far more hours.

Public education is a Public Good, and the concepts of 'competition' do not apply. Teachers teach in Private schools to avoid the high stress of public schools = MUCH nicer work environment. That's what they tell me everyday.

 

[tshade]

Yes---those things are vital for life itself, but not always what people live FOR. The purpose of public education is to produce socially, politically, and economically functioning citizens.

I am not sure how you are defining governing in this situation. The teachers unions are far more of an interference to governance of public schools than anything else out there.

Not if they work together

Look, we can disagree about a lot of things, part time isn't one of them. A public school teacher around here is 186 days a year, 10 days of sick/vacation time, with 5 active 45 minute periods per day and 1 prep period. That is 3 hours of actual instruction time per day and you can certainly get your grading/prep done in the remaining prep period. That's less than a four hour work day. I will be generous and round it to 5 hours assuming it is a miraculous teacher who tutors for an hour a day. That is less than 900 hours a year before vacation time etc. By every legal and tax definition that is a part time job. Yes, a contract can deem you full time, by their own definition but that is more about tenure and benefits than the actual definition.

You need to define "work". A friend works in the IT department at the hospital and says he has about an hour of work most days when someone calls. He is "full-time". What's your point? Teachers do other things besides be in front of a class.

 

[tshade]

My issue with benefits is that it is totally disconnected from reality. Find me a private employer that offers a pension plan. Find me a private employer that offers DROP plans, retiree healthcare programs, mandated raises for irrelevant education which is also paid for by the employer. Those things don't exist in the private sector. Moreover, they lead to major financial problems down the road. Again, I cite PSERs. These heavily unionized public employee states are going to get hit with waves of bankruptcies and failures for these pension and health plans. Even with a *soaring* stock market PSERs funding ratio is dropping like a stone. What do you think happens if the stock market goes flat/negative for three years? You get a handful of states who can't afford to send out pension checks. That's my problem. It is a corruption system. Politicians can't afford to bribe the unions with current budget years, so they give the unions future goodies they don't have to pay for. It happens over and over again.

Many private companies still have pensions, and should. Shame on those that do not. Not all school districts have the benefits you state----certainly not in Western, Pa. The corruption reflects the poor choice of politicians we elect in office.

 

[bave]

Depending on the company/institution, etc.....

No, it is defined by the IRS and every and any economist.

Public education is a Public Good, and the concepts of 'competition' do not apply. Teachers teach in Private schools to avoid the high stress of public schools = MUCH nicer work environment. That's what they tell me everyday.

The competition for labor exists regardless of it being a public good. There is a reason why so many people want to be firefighters and lifeguards in California, because the bar is so low and the compensation is so high. There is a disconnect in supply/demand courtesy of the unions. That is best exemplified in the private/public employment competition in education.

Not if they work together

There is no such thing, their goals have no overlap whatsoever. The goal of the teachers union is to protect jobs, make the jobs less stressful, drive down responsibility and accountability, and drive up total compensation. None of that is in the public interest.

You need to define "work". A friend works in the IT department at the hospital and says he has about an hour of work most days when someone calls. He is "full-time". What's your point? Teachers do other things besides be in front of a class.

You seriously need me to define work for you? Teachers have activities outside of instruction, yes, but in my examples they are given ample time (on the clock) to do them.

Many private companies still have pensions, and should. Shame on those that do not. Not all school districts have the benefits you state----certainly not in Western, Pa. The corruption reflects the poor choice of politicians we elect in office.

Less than 2% of private companies offer a pension, almost none of them to new hires. Why would they? All it does is shift the investment liability to the employer. I don't trust your assessment of the benefits by region, I have seen the PA statewide statistics for years.

 

[tshade]

No, it is defined by the IRS and every and any economist.

It is defined, yes-----but at 30 hours weekly. All teachers I know are covered as being employed at least that many hours. I think you lost that point !

The competition for labor exists regardless of it being a public good. There is a reason why so many people want to be firefighters and lifeguards in California, because the bar is so low and the compensation is so high. There is a disconnect in supply/demand courtesy of the unions. That is best exemplified in the private/public employment competition in education.

?? There is a nationwide shortage of teachers. Anyone can work at Walmart. ???? You also forget that many people want to do meaningful work, regardless of compensation.

There is no such thing, their goals have no overlap whatsoever. The goal of the teachers union is to protect jobs, make the jobs less stressful, drive down responsibility and accountability, and drive up total compensation. None of that is in the public interest.

Then you never have seen how it works----I have. I think you have it wrong on the goal of unions, in that you make it too simple/narrow, especially education unions. Just my experience with them

You seriously need me to define work for you? Teachers have activities outside of instruction, yes, but in my examples they are given ample time (on the clock) to do them.

Well, yes----I think your definition of "work" differs based on your experience. Teachers have many duties beyond classroom or grading papers. What is 'work' for one person may seem like nothing to another, and vice versa

Less than 2% of private companies offer a pension, almost none of them to new hires. Why would they? All it does is shift the investment liability to the employer. I don't trust your assessment of the benefits by region, I have seen the PA statewide statistics for years.

Well. because some employers, including my father, wanted the best employees and actually cared about them. Imagine that?? I can promise that your school is a tad higher in benefits than the schools many areas

 

[bave]

It is defined, yes-----but at 30 hours weekly. All teachers I know are covered as being employed at least that many hours. I think you lost that point !

According to whom? Them? Shocking. Your hours worked is determined by your contract requirements, I have yet to see a PA teachers contract that required 30-32+ hours a week. I get it, you're a teacher and you think you are incredibly hard working, impossible to replace, and the lynchpin to the future of democracy. Polls consistently show people have entirely inaccurate pictures of their skills, value, and work ethic.

?? There is a nationwide shortage of teachers. Anyone can work at Walmart. ???? You also forget that many people want to do meaningful work, regardless of compensation.

Correct, best exemplified in teachers working at non profits and private schools, for far less total compensation that public educators for some reason.

Then you never have seen how it works----I have. I think you have it wrong on the goal of unions, in that you make it too simple/narrow, especially education unions. Just my experience with them

Phew, I guess that term on the school board doesn't count. I am sure your "on the ground" experience is far less bias and clear. Your experience with them is that they deliver for you, of course you think they are good.

Well, yes----I think your definition of "work" differs based on your experience. Teachers have many duties beyond classroom or grading papers. What is 'work' for one person may seem like nothing to another, and vice versa

How are you an educator? There is one definition of work.

Well. because some employers, including my father, wanted the best employees and actually cared about them. Imagine that?? I can promise that your school is a tad higher in benefits than the schools many areas

Really? What kind of business is your father in? How many employees? All of them are in active DB plans? I sincerely doubt this. Either way, 2% of private employees have pensions, almost all of those are frozen and closed to new employees. Why should public employees get a benefit from the taxpayers that they themselves don't get?

 

[tshade]

According to whom? Them? Shocking. Your hours worked is determined by your contract requirements, I have yet to see a PA teachers contract that required 30-32+ hours a week. I get it, you're a teacher and you think you are incredibly hard working, impossible to replace, and the lynchpin to the future of democracy. Polls consistently show people have entirely inaccurate pictures of their skills, value, and work ethic.

All Jeffereson and Clearfield contracts require, at minimum, 35 hours in the school, etc.......................I am not a teacher, but I think the job is tons of work. Good teachers are always hard to replace.. Public schools are indeed a lynchpin to democracy.......................agree with the polls

Correct, best exemplified in teachers working at non profits and private schools, for far less total compensation that public educators for some reason.

Meaningful jobs, yes..............................but public schools are considerably tougher to work in than private schools....

Phew, I guess that term on the school board doesn't count. I am sure your "on the ground" experience is far less bias and clear. Your experience with them is that they deliver for you, of course you think they are good.

If the system works better by cooperation, then yes. It is rare that it doesn't work better, don't you think?

How are you an educator? There is one definition of work.

Don't understand your question?? No----work can be defined many ways , depending on who you ask.

Really? What kind of business is your father in? How many employees? All of them are in active DB plans? I sincerely doubt this. Either way, 2% of private employees have pensions, almost all of those are frozen and closed to new employees. Why should public employees get a benefit from the taxpayers that they themselves don't get?

Auto dealership with DB. See? There you go. The attitude is "if I don't have it, why should you "?? I believe ALL workers should have great benefits, and I believe they CAN.

 

[bave]

All Jeffereson and Clearfield contracts require, at minimum, 35 hours in the school, etc.......................I am not a teacher, but I think the job is tons of work. Good teachers are always hard to replace.. Public schools are indeed a lynchpin to democracy.......................agree with the polls

Lol, a lynchpin of democracy. Give me a break. You aren't a teacher, but I guarantee someone close to you is feeding you this. Heard it a million times. Everyone who sounds like you is a teacher, is married to a teacher, or came from a teacher, at least in PA.

Meaningful jobs, yes..............................but public schools are considerably tougher to work in than private schools....

That's comical. It's the same job, but the private job has longer hours, no job protection, and performance metrics.

If the system works better by cooperation, then yes. It is rare that it doesn't work better, don't you think?

No, I don't think. We spend more on education than anywhere else in the world by far for mediocre results. That's the very definition of "not working".

Don't understand your question?? No----work can be defined many ways , depending on who you ask.

Definition of work
intransitive verb

a: to perform work or fulfill duties regularly for wages or salary
works in publishing
b: to perform or carry through a task requiring sustained effort or continuous repeated operations
worked all day over a hot stove
c: to exert oneself physically or mentally especially in sustained effort for a purpose or under compulsion or necessity

It really isn't near as subjective as you think.

Auto dealership with DB. See? There you go. The attitude is "if I don't have it, why should you "?? I believe ALL workers should have great benefits, and I believe they CAN.

I would love to see the ERISA filings, I call bullshit. Auto dealerships are notorious for 1099'n and part timing them. I have never heard of one that is known to be a well benefited institution unless it is tiered out.

Run your own business, offer union level benefits, then get back to me.

If you think everyone should go this route, explain the fact that public employee pension plans, in spite of a soaring market for a decade, are swallowing state budgets whole and enormous unfunded liabilities. Great deal for taxpayers.

 

[weaver2]

*So a CEO's compensation is largely tied to the profitability of a corporation, combined with other strategic goals.
*They get paid to improve the long term performance of a company.
*Piecing out factories and mills are part of the game. If those facilities were still viable, they wouldn't do it.
*Workers get laid off when there isn't enough work, not because they have to pay an executive.
*Employees aren't entitled to a share of the profits. They aren't entitled to to anything outside of their compensation agreement,

Not sure where you think the conspiracy in the above is. I'm not sure where the villainy is.

I was not implying there was any conspiracy. I was simply explaining that American corporations lobbied into existence the laws that make it legal to "piece out" companies without regard to workers lives or towns. These laws have nothing to do with improving the long term performance of the company. Most paper companies owned extremely valuable property: paper machines, hydroelectric plants, waste treatment plants, vast woodlands, private roads and lakes. Starting in the late 70s owners went from leading the world in the quality and quantity of paper produced to the rapid buying and selling of companies; ignoring, competency, experience, maintenance, infrastructure and modernization.

National wealth is created by mining, agriculture, or making a real or intellectual product. Buying, piecing out, selling, trading does not create wealth; it transfers wealth out of the middle class into the wealthy class. Few countries succeed economically by just transferring wealth. Even more disturbing is the belief you have expressed that "employees aren't entitled to a share of the profits. They aren't entitled to to anything outside of their compensation agreement." Employees are entitled to humane treatment and respect for the skills, loyalty and integrity they bring to work every day. I await your scoffing accusations of bleeding heart liberal with bad ideas.

 

[bave]

I was not implying there was any conspiracy. I was simply explaining that American corporations lobbied into existence the laws that make it legal to "piece out" companies without regard to workers lives or towns.

Of course, the same way you can move out and sell your house and property. It is privately owned property, you are allowed to dispose of it as you will.

These laws have nothing to do with improving the long term performance of the company. Most paper companies owned extremely valuable property: paper machines, hydroelectric plants, waste treatment plants, vast woodlands, private roads and lakes. Starting in the late 70s owners went from leading the world in the quality and quantity of paper produced to the rapid buying and selling of companies; ignoring, competency, experience, maintenance, infrastructure and modernization.

The fundamental problem is one of automation and capital investment, first and foremost. Same problem existed with the steel industry. If you want the business owner to invest in the facility, but the unions will fight job cuts, you don't need as many jobs with modern equipment. So the union fights it, drags their feet, and it becomes less competitive. It has happened in tons of industries. Moreover, the geographical location of the industry shifted to the south east where the pine industry exists.

National wealth is created by mining, agriculture, or making a real or intellectual product. Buying, piecing out, selling, trading does not create wealth; it transfers wealth out of the middle class into the wealthy class. Few countries succeed economically by just transferring wealth. Even more disturbing is the belief you have expressed that "employees aren't entitled to a share of the profits. They aren't entitled to to anything outside of their compensation agreement." Employees are entitled to humane treatment and respect for the skills, loyalty and integrity they bring to work every day.

There is an economic principle called creative destruction. Old struggling businesses have to die to make room for new ones that can then thrive. A great example of this is the advent of the mini mill for steel production. The big steel mills fought these tooth and nail because they drastically reduced head count and labor needs, but the old mills died out and slowly the mini mills replaced them. Same thing with paper, at least it looks that way.

Who is talking about treating people inhumanely? Stating that an employee isn't entitled to the profits of an enterprise has nothing to do with humanity. They agreed to work for a wage as their compensation, if you can do better elsewhere, by all means, that's the market. However to expect to earn a wage and then a share of profits on top without taking any risk or investing any capital is silly.

 

[tshade]

Lol, a lynchpin of democracy. Give me a break. You aren't a teacher, but I guarantee someone close to you is feeding you this. Heard it a million times. Everyone who sounds like you is a teacher, is married to a teacher, or came from a teacher, at least in PA.

Of course I know teachers---who wouldn't?? Come on----it goes both ways = everyone that sounds like you has some irrational feeling against teachers. Look: education is a great equalizer of conditions of men—the balance wheel of the social machinery, so, yeah, a lynch pin. In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have.

That's comical. It's the same job, but the private job has longer hours, no job protection, and performance metrics.

well yes------did I say otherwise ?? These things you mention hardly make a job tougher. It is a primary reason private school teachers do not move to public schools = their job is much nicer, less stressful.

No, I don't think. We spend more on education than anywhere else in the world by far for mediocre results. That's the very definition of "not working".

No, given the dynamics that American educators have to deal with, I believe they do superior work, and they do it while being attacked and insulted by those who really do not know better, but think they do......

Definition of work
intransitive verb

a: to perform work or fulfill duties regularly for wages or salary
works in publishing
b: to perform or carry through a task requiring sustained effort or continuous repeated operations
worked all day over a hot stove
c: to exert oneself physically or mentally especially in sustained effort for a purpose or under compulsion or necessity

It really isn't near as subjective as you think.



I would love to see the ERISA filings, I call bullshit. Auto dealerships are notorious for 1099'n and part timing them. I have never heard of one that is known to be a well benefited institution unless it is tiered out.

Run your own business, offer union level benefits, then get back to me.

If you think everyone should go this route, explain the fact that public employee pension plans, in spite of a soaring market for a decade, are swallowing state budgets whole and enormous unfunded liabilities. Great deal for taxpayers.

 

[tshade]

Definition of work
intransitive verb

a: to perform work or fulfill duties regularly for wages or salary
works in publishing
b: to perform or carry through a task requiring sustained effort or continuous repeated operations
worked all day over a hot stove
c: to exert oneself physically or mentally especially in sustained effort for a purpose or under compulsion or necessity

It really isn't near as subjective as you think.

well, okay----teachers follow this definition.

I would love to see the ERISA filings, I call bullshit. Auto dealerships are notorious for 1099'n and part timing them. I have never heard of one that is known to be a well benefited institution unless it is tiered out.

Run your own business, offer union level benefits, then get back to me.

If you think everyone should go this route, explain the fact that public employee pension plans, in spite of a soaring market for a decade, are swallowing state budgets whole and enormous unfunded liabilities. Great deal for taxpayers.

 

[tshade]

I would love to see the ERISA filings, I call bullshit. Auto dealerships are notorious for 1099'n and part timing them. I have never heard of one that is known to be a well benefited institution unless it is tiered out.

Agree------------it is likely why the funeral home was packed at he and his father's death. Many came tell to tell stories of their generosity over the decades, including employees. Again, it all depends on what your experiences have been. Yours sound negative......?

Run your own business, offer union level benefits, then get back to me.

People do it all over the nation. Good companies

If you think everyone should go this route, explain the fact that public employee pension plans, in spite of a soaring market for a decade, are swallowing state budgets whole and enormous unfunded liabilities. Great deal for taxpayers.

Poor decisions by politicians. Terrible markets under Bush and (at the end) Trump.

 

[weaver2]

Of course, the same way you can move out and sell your house and property. It is privately owned property, you are allowed to dispose of it as you will.

Piece by piece, doors one day, copper plumbing, next the shrubs, then the whole back yard for a dump site is how corporations would sell your house. No town would let you sell that way.

The fundamental problem is one of automation and capital investment, first and foremost. Same problem existed with the steel industry. If you want the business owner to invest in the facility, but the unions will fight job cuts, you don't need as many jobs with modern equipment. So the union fights it, drags their feet, and it becomes less competitive. It has happened in tons of industries. Moreover, the geographical location of the industry shifted to the south east where the pine industry exists.

I believe unions even the playing field so that workers get treated fairly. Have they gone too far on occasion? Yes. Have the always gone too far? No! Are they actually the reason the auto industry collapsed, Pennsylvania RR died, the paper industry moved to Finland and China? No. Corporate leadership style is way more important than the wages and benefits negotiated by the union.

There is an economic principle called creative destruction. Old struggling businesses have to die to make room for new ones that can then thrive. A great example of this is the advent of the mini mill for steel production. The big steel mills fought these tooth and nail because they drastically reduced head count and labor needs, but the old mills died out and slowly the mini mills replaced them. Same thing with paper, at least it looks that way.

Creative destruction is the creative language that emerged in the 90s to justify what corporations were already doing to much of the manufacturing companies in the US including paper. It was different from the demise of steel in the 1960s. . When the paper mills were shut down and sold off they moved tissue mills to South America, for the fast growing short fiber eucalyptus pulp and the calendared paper mills requiring long fiber fir and spruce to Finland for reasons unclear since Finland industries are all unionized, the government is highly socialized, the environmental laws are tough, taxes are high and the emphasis is on sustained manufacturing. And to China because there are no environment laws.

The people that have designed and gotten enacted our financial and banking laws have no interest in long term investment in the maintenance and modernization needed for slow but steady growth and modest profit. They want a market where fast financial gambling and high short term returns are more fun. And it is fun, but not for workers or sustained and responsible manufacturing.

Who is talking about treating people inhumanely? Stating that an employee isn't entitled to the profits of an enterprise has nothing to do with humanity. They agreed to work for a wage as their compensation, if you can do better elsewhere, by all means, that's the market. However to expect to earn a wage and then a share of profits on top without taking any risk or investing any capital is silly.

A corporation is not treating it's workers with dignity when it makes them fight for 14 years for back pay, vacation, sick leave and retirement money. It is not honest or humane to promise to stay open if a tax break is given then keep threatening closure, lay workers off then back on for 6 years
No employee expects a share of the profits. Upper management has forgotten that the only reason a corporation has profits is because an employee made something or provided a service.

I've never understood why people denigrate blue collar workers and portray them as lazy, beer swilling Neanderthals without skills or ability. Our country was built on the fact that they showed up every day and made high quality products that people wanted to buy. They were not responsible for letting the steel mills fall into disrepair. They didn't refuse to modernize the paper mills, they didn't design the gas guzzling junkers that eventually sent people to Japan. The big risk takers, the tough decision makers, the big guys that knew how to run things ........... they designed the junk cars, they let the mills go to hell and they blamed the unions and their workers.

 

[weaver2]

We spend more on education than anywhere else in the world by far for mediocre results. That's the very definition of "not working".

The right way to compare spending on education is % of GDP and we are 66th in the world with 5% of GDP going for education right down there were Nauru at 4.9% of GDP and Togo at 5% GDP. Norway spends 8% of GDP on education. Canada and the UK each spend 5.5% of GDP. Cuba spends a greater % of it's GDP on education. It has a literacy rate of 99.8% US literacy rate is 99%.