Flat Wages for the middle and working class - what to do?

[Critter7r]

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

 

[Conaeolos]

"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?

 

[Critter7r]

I not arguing Donald Trump. I am arguing GOP. Why are you treating them as the same thing?

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.

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.

...

 

[vash1012]

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).

Yes, that's a concern. I suppose there could be a law stating you would have to convert at least X% of the previous healthcare cost sharing directly into salary or other perks. I have to think many employers would be willing to comply with that to get the prospect of covering increasing healthcare costs off their backs.

 

[Conaeolos]

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

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..,

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?

Becuase the GOP doesn't want to end NAFTA, some of its members do...

 

[Critter7r]

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...

Right. The highest ranking member.

Sent from my SM-G360V using Tapatalk

 

[Conaeolos]

Right. The highest ranking member.

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.

In Canada, the PM has the type of power you refer as he is a party leader. The dissent is internal. The whip can remove party status if you dissent in a way the PM dislikes; however, the seat belongs to the members and they are still technically free to defend their differing views it just in pracitce more diffcult.

In the US, the president, gop, house of representatives and the senate are all separate bodies. And operate independently of one another. GOP in congress have no obligation to agree with the president and the president does not control the members party stats. The head of Gop does. Whips still keep order by to a much less strict a degree.

So sorry if I sounds like I am talking down but your statement does not make sense to me.

Based the structures here, the president wants NAFTA open the gop congress is split. So it is not just a case of why isn’t it on the table. There not enough consensus, so its grid locked. It's stoped by checks and balances.

 

[Moderate Right]

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.

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?

 

[Moderate Right]

The middle class in this country was never so strong as when unions were strong. Bring back strikes....and watch wages rise

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.

 

[Moderate Right]

I not arguing Donald Trump. I am arguing GOP. Why are you treating them as the same thing?

Because he is dishonest.

 

[vegas giants]

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

 

[Moderate Right]

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.

 

[vegas giants]

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

 

[Moderate Right]

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.

 

[vegas giants]

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

 

[Moderate Right]

Union leaders are voted in by members....corporate leaders are not

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.

 

[Critter7r]

Oversimplification and generalization.

Ironic that you would admonish VG for this and then go on to make an oversimplified and generalized comment. Not surprising, but still ironic.

... 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.

 

[vegas giants]

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.

 

[Moderate Right]

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.

Unions 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.

 

[vegas giants]

Unions 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.

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

 

[Neomalthusian]

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?

That's a totally legitimate thought. If anything is so important, it can and must be regulated by government itself, not any third party cartel.

 

[Moderate Right]

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.

 

[vegas giants]

And CEO's do not steal money from their employees. Now, we're just mincing words.

I don't recall saying they did

 

[Moderate Right]

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.

 

[vegas giants]

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.

I am not the "left". I am a person. The "left" does not speak with one voice. And labor unions fight for better wages and benefits for the working man....CEO's fight against that