- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Here is a question I have for all you Union backers....Does a person "own" their job?
j-mac
j-mac
Here is a question I have for all you Union backers....Does a person "own" their job?
j-mac
What do you mean? A right to a job? Control of the workplace? Does a worker have a say at work? Question is poorly asked if you ask me..
Clarify more...
I think it is simple, and clear cut. Does a person "Own" their job. IOW, The unions are griping, and claiming 'union busting' for Boeing moving a segment of their operations to SC. Yet they are not discontinuing their operations in that Union shop in WA state.
So I ask again, does a person "own" their job?
j-mac
Of course not..
Tim-
no, you showed that they had a slight decline in 2009 - a year in which unemployment rose and remained high in general. one year is not the same as "several years".
The point is that is declining currently and will decline even futher if the GOP war against the working class is successful
well if Wisconsin (which was a light blue state to begin with) is any indication, the main "working class" that is upset is the people "working" for governments. only the public unions were effected by the recent legislation.
The polls have all shown that a majority of wisconsin working class stand in solidarity with the teachers who's collective bargaining rights are under attack.
why do left-wingers insist on pretending that somehow the working class - which is a huge segment of the American population - can be defined solely within the context of public employee unions? that's like saying that the American economy can be defined by our top 10% of income earners.
Hate to break this to you but teachers, policemen and firefighers are part of the working class. They are not the top 10% of income earners.
(I think I've had to tell you this before) the 2012 House Budget plan is actually tax neutral. Indeed, it keeps top tax rates higher than the President's own Bi-Partisan Debt Reduction Commission suggested - and they estimated that the effect would actually be a tax increase of $100 Bn. So according to one estimate, it's tax neutral and according to another it's a tax increase.
Ryan's proposal will: "Cut taxes and other revenues by $4.2 trillion"
Summary of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan
the House 2012 Budget asks the President to come together with Congressional leadership to figure out how to fix Social Security. Nowhere does it propose any policy changes whatsoever.
the House 2012 budget does not cut Medicaid. not a single dollar was spent last year that will not be spent next year, and not a single dollar will be spent next year that does not get spent the following year. Indeed, spending on Medicaid keeps going up under the Republican plan. What happens instead is that Medicaid is transformed into a block grant, which allows state governments flexibility in systematic reform, and removes their incentive to cram as many people as possible into the system to get that "free" federal money. If Medicaid expenditures go down it will be because people are moving up. The mindset of someone who would see that as a negative boggles me.
Both Republicans and the Democrats plan to reduce Medicare expenditures. The Presidents' plan is to have the cuts get made through rationing, which would be planned by a bureacracy known as the IPAB, and would be imposed one-size-fits-all style on America's seniors and current retirees starting in 2014. The 2012 House plan is to allow retirees to allocate their own Medicare dollars so that they decide what is important and what isn't (this is the same plan, btw, that members of Congress are on - I don't see many of them screaming about how what they need is an IPAB to make their decisions for them), but to keep the system currently in place for everyone 55 and older. So whereas the President intends to start cutting Medicare expenditures for our current retirees (who may or may not be able to make needed adjustments), the House plan is to start 10 years from now, so that anyone who will be effected will have plenty of time to plan.
"3 Congressional Budget Office. Cost Estimate for H.R. 2, Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act. Available at http://cbo.gov/ftpdocs/120xx/doc12069/hr2.pdf.
4 Congressional Budget Office, Letter to Chairman Ryan, April 5, 2011. Congressional Budget Office - Long-Term Analysis of a Budget Proposal by Chairman Ryan
For Medicare, the chairman would fundamentally transform the program from its fee-for-service model to a “premium support” model beginning in 2022. Under this reform, the government would make a premium-support payment to an approved private insurance plan that was chosen by the Medicare beneficiary. (The proposal also would gradually increase the eligibility age for the Medicare program from age 65 in 2021 to age 67 in 2033). The premium support would partially subsidize the purchase of insurance and would be adjusted so that wealthier beneficiaries received smaller subsidies, sicker patients received larger payments, and lower-income seniors received more help to cover out-of-pocket expenses. Current Medicare beneficiaries would have the option to join the new premium support system or continue with the current program. Because the rate of increase for the government’s premium support would be limited, the reform would slow the growth of Medicare spending over time compared to current law. However, CBO also found that under the proposal, most elderly people would pay more for their health care than they would pay under the current Medicare system."
Summary of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan
A majority of Americans are opposed to increaseing costs to our seniors.
Whovian said:interesting how none of the 'Boeing is an evil union buster' crowd has addressed this.
The former chairman of the National Labor Relations Board thinks this is nonsense. Thanks to Boeing, union employment in Puget Sound has increased by about 2,000 workers since the expansion.
How, exactly, is this union busting? I've asked repeatedly for certain posters to cite the specific law or statute that Boeing broke, making their actions 'union busting'. All I get is 'but...but... they are union busting!'
Hell, if a company closed a facility specifically because of unionization, I don't believe it should be seen as union busting. Its just a business decision. Also, it maintains a necessary balance between worker concerns and management concerns, both of which are valid.
The polls have all shown that a majority of wisconsin working class stand in solidarity with the teachers who's collective bargaining rights are under attack.
Is it funny, or just ironic that people who say polls which support their position on a given subject are important, also say that polls which do not support their position on a different subject are mangles and unimportant?
Well if your are unconvinced by the great majority of the polling, let's check in to see how the recall elections are going for each side in this war against the working class:
"Republicans are failing to obtain the necessary signatures to do so while Democrats are having success."
And I showed you one reason for this in the other thread, but you simply danced, bobbed, weaved, and denied the video evidence provided, since the reality of the situation did not maych your fantasy.
A federal lawsuit against Boeing for alleged union-busting has become more than a conservative crusade; it’s an uncomfortable question for vulnerable Democrats in right-to-work states.
Vulnerable Democrats face an almost impossible choice: Side with Boeing and buck not only the White House but also ditch the unions that have long contributed to Democratic campaigns.
Moderate Democrats’ response for now: Run.
“I really don’t want to get involved,” said Sen. Mary Landrieu. The moderate Democrat from Louisiana has raked in more than $1 million in union contributions since her first election in 1996.
Sen. Ben Nelson, a Nebraska Democrat who faces a tough reelection bid in 2012, said he’ll start paying attention to the matter only if it comes up in a bill.
When Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, a vulnerable Democrat up for reelection in 2012, stopped for a question from POLITICO on Tuesday, he bolted to the Senate floor when the case came up.
“I have to speak to a senator right now, I’m sorry,” Nelson said.
Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.) said she’s still studying the issue, though she’s a strong backer of the Tar Heel State’s right-to-work laws
If Democrats decide not to explain their stance, Republicans are happy to do it for them.
“It’s a tough position,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a vocal critic of the suit, told POLITICO. “With 9 percent unemployment, I can’t think of a better way to kill job growth than this complaint. And a lot of Democrats believe the unions have gone way too far. This is sort of toxic for them.”
Good for him.In a hearing rife with partisan disagreement, Rep. Darrell Issa, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, threatened to eliminate the National Labor Relations Board at his committee's hearing today in response to a lawsuit the board has filed against Boeing.
"We could eliminate the NLRB or take the premise and statutorily change it," said Issa, R-Calif. "This [lawsuit] could lead to repercussions in America's competitiveness."
So, as was pointed out previously... Boeing added 2,000 NEW jobs at the Washington plant, and that apparently isn't enough for the unions.The company (Boeing) has added 2,000 union jobs at the Washington plant since the decision was made to move to South Carolina, where 1,000 new employees will begin working later this summer.
What is a con-head?There is no indication that auto manufacturing received less than any other similar autos being made. There is however, proof that the auto manufacturing profits have allowed the corporation to go International with auto plants & sales. So I think auto manufacturing excuse is FAIL.
There seems to be some misconceptions in con-heads, part of the reality dump of the left lobe. However there is very little difference between private & public salaries. They are all underpaid.
ISACS - Private
Head: 285,415.
Teacher: 98,273.
About.com: http://www.isacs.org/ftpimages/72/download/download_group374_id3056.pdf
BLS - Public
Administer: highest 10 percent earned more than $124,250.
About.com: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm#earnings
Teacher: the highest 10 percent earned more than $77,950.
About.com: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos069.htm#earnings
If boeings union made less per hour than they would have to pay in South Carolina Boeing would gleefully stay in the union shop
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?