It does not follow.
True
Well first, when did the GOP run on ending NAFTA?
I actually don’t think there is one republican who did, but I could be wrong. I can tell you with certainty though the majority did not.
Trump said renegotiate but that's not a party wide sentiment or even popular.
"A Trump administration will renegotiate NAFTA and if we don't get the deal we want, we will terminate NAFTA and get a much better deal for our workers and our companies. 100 percent."
-Donald Trump at a campaign rally in Grand Rapids, MI
Trump-O-Meter: Renegotiate NAFTA | PolitiFact
I not arguing Donald Trump. I am arguing GOP. Why are you treating them as the same thing?
Well first, when did the GOP run on ending NAFTA?
I actually don’t think there is one republican who did, but I could be wrong. I can tell you with certainty though the majority did not.
Trump said renegotiate but that's not a party wide sentiment or even popular.
...
A big problem that I see coming for myself in that decoupling scenario is convincing my employer to pay me the $600 per month that they currently pay toward my health insurance. I pay 25% of my health insurance costs, and I could totally see my employer (and many other employers that pay, or pay some portion of, employee's health insurance), pitching the change as, "Hey, look, we aren't taking ANY money out of your check for insurance anymore. You just got a $250/month raise!" and keeping that $7k/year for themselves, while the gov't takes an additional $6k out of my check each year (assuming single-payer).
Well you have some very selective reading there my friend but thanks for leaving in that context. If ever you get interested again, the only relevant point is how does trump view equal the collective opinion of the GOP? It matters not one iota if trumps was to terminate, renogitionate or keep it as is.I wasn't. I was merely pointing out that the Donald DID say those things which you "don't think there was one Republican who did". You conceded he said "renegotiate", I was just pointing out that he also said "terminate".
Nothing more
Becuase the GOP doesn't want to end NAFTA, some of its members do...Well, the voters handed the Reps the WH and both houses of Congress. So, it is very serious to ask if the GOP campaigned on ending NAFTA, why haven't they done it?
Right. The highest ranking member.Well you have some very selective reading there my friend but thanks for leaving in that context. If ever you get interested again, the only relevant point is how does trump view equal the collective opinion of the GOP? It matters not one iota if trumps was to terminate, renogitionate or keep it as is.
But you're more than welcome to just stand by baselessly modifying my arguments into the absurd. Just not sure what your hoping to demonstrate.
On the context of my orginal statement..,
Becuase the GOP doesn't want to end NAFTA, some of its members do...
No actually, but I get your point but you are aware that is separate from the other branches as part of the design of our government? Where in, dissenting options can rise and you have checks and balances.Right. The highest ranking member.
Unions don't provide bargaining power. They simply coerce. In any real bargaining, either side can walk and there is no sale. With unions, they retain exclusive bargaining privileges and monopoly power, thus the buyer is bound to them virtually indefinitely. That's not "bargaining power." It's coercive monopoly power.
Whatever the solution concerning economics and the general welfare, it will have to not involve unions, because unions are on their way out, and that's something that should be celebrated. There are very good chances unions will soon no longer be able to coerce people into their financial core membership, hopefully Congress will finally protect employees' rights to decertify or deauthorize their unions, Trump is likely to get union-busters onto the NLRB, and so forth. It is spring time for union-busting. Let's just eliminate them and be done with it.
Whatever it is you want for people, accomplish it through government policy, not labor cartels.
The middle class in this country was never so strong as when unions were strong. Bring back strikes....and watch wages rise
I not arguing Donald Trump. I am arguing GOP. Why are you treating them as the same thing?
Oversimplification and generalization. Those companies that have or could have unions are actually paying somewhat decent wages and benefits while those on the low end of the totem poll would only sink lower. Increased wages for the middle class would increase inflation and the buying power of those making minimum wage would deteriorate. While the average wage would rise, the poor would get even poorer.
So you don't want higher wages for the middle class and think they are doing just fine. I would say most of America disagrees with you
The middle class would be doing fine if liberal policies would quit tromping all over them. But, the left wants to take from the rich and give to the poor with every policy they have - completely bypassing the middle class.
Or it could be that corporate profits are sought out at the expense of the working man due to a lack of unions
The unions are corrupt organizations that use the little people as a means to make themselves rich, the very same thing you claim of corporations.
Union leaders are voted in by members....corporate leaders are not
Oversimplification and generalization.
... those on the low end of the totem poll would only sink lower. Increased wages for the middle class would increase inflation and the buying power of those making minimum wage would deteriorate. While the average wage would rise, the poor would get even poorer.
So? The unions force people to pay union dues, whether they want to or not (in most cases), and these union dues go toward making the union leaders rich - not any different than the CEO's of corporations. There's a reason why at one time most unions were under the jurisdiction of the mob. Unions were nothing but a criminal enterprise, stealing from the poor and giving to the rich.
Unions leaders are elected. If they do a bad job for workers vote them out. CEO's are essentially elected by stockholders who do not care about workers ....they care about profits. Someone needs to stand up for the working man.
They do not steal money and if they do they are arrested for it. Millions of people got health insurance under Obama....some for the first time in their lives. That is a simple factUnions steal money from the poor and give it to their rich, same as corporations do. We live in a capitalistic society, not a socialist society. There is no such thing as a Democratic Socialist. It's just a cute slogan to get elected and do the same crap politicians have done for hundreds of years. If you don't understand that, then you are naive. What have Democrats done for the poor, ever? Under Obama the poor got poorer and the rich got richer after claiming for eight years that he was for the little guy. Hillary claimed she was for the little guy but she doesn't even know what a little guy is herself.
Led me to an interesting thought. I wonder how the left would feel about eliminating all labor unions entirely in exchange for other things, such as raises to the minimum wage or single payer, or other similar government controls?
They do not steal money and if they do they are arrested for it. Millions of people got health insurance under Obama....some for the first time in their lives. That is a simple fact
And CEO's do not steal money from their employees. Now, we're just mincing words.
I don't recall saying they did
That's what the left always implies. I'm saying that there is absolutely no difference in what CEO's do than in what bigwhigs in labor unions do, whatever term you want to use for it. They are one in the same.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?