Unions don't work anymore.
Posted By: Backwards typist on 2008-12-13
In Reply to: If that were true....(sm) - Just the big bad
Some union members are afraid to vote for better benefits or strike because management threatens to move, like the other posters stated.
Case in point: A small manufacturing shop. Union wanted higher wages or strike, and health care benefits to stay the same, both in cost and care. The union wanted a $.25 an hour raise. Owner said No. Union asked for $.15. Owner said no. Union said strike. Workers said no. They were afraid the owner would shut down and they had their jobs for 30 years.
The union steward fought for better benefits but when the workers voted against the better benefits, the company won. Two weeks later, the steward was laid off, along with a member of my family just because he was friends with the union steward. That was 3 years ago. The workers are still working for the same hourly rate this year. How's that for being fair?
I was a member of the Teamster's. When we went on strike for better wages back in the ྂs, he company threatened to move out.. We also wanted (women) equal pay for equal work because we did the same work the men did, but got paid $.25 an hour less. They moved and 100 jobs were lost. So, you see, companies still have the upper hand, not unions. They only want your money anymore. They really don't care about the workers.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
That doesn't work anymore.
my friend. ;-)
Unions
I am in total agreement with your synopsis of unions. Case in point: I work for one of the largest HMO's in the country as a MT, and our jobs are on the line. We belong to a 'union' (won't say which one), and without notice, the facility decided to use VR and guess what? The majority of our MT's are either jobless or working for dang near nothing. The union stood with management and let them take our jobs and then turned around and told us that 'there was nothing they could do about it'. Our country has gone to h#ll in a handbasket since deregulation (Reagan years). They deregulated every single job such as Gourdpainter pointed out, trucking. Look at the airlines and any other large company you can think of. The American worker is an and has been an endangered species and it saddens me that on the Repub and Dem sides that we are stuck in the middle and ultimatrly pay the price for their greed and neglect when it comes to their constituents. WE suffer - not them. They don't have to worry about what to do when they decide to retire, they don't have to worry about how to give their children a good education and certainly don't have to worry about how their families are fed. There was a time when unions did their best to protect the American worker but looking at what I personally deal with at this point in time - they are weak, useless and take your money and you can believe you get little or no representation when or if its needed. JMO.
those bad ol' unions
I love how the unions are always the secret cause of the problems. If demanding good pay and fair treatment can utterly destroy the economy, then maybe our economy is too unbalanced to be worth saving.
You're right, though. It's a lot easier to create a cheap job where workers are unprotected and uninsured, than it is to create a good job. And so the foreign car companies came flocking to the southern US to build their factories, and the US taxpayer, as always, picked up the cost of the uninsured. And now the business is bottoming out, and there's no safety net for the workers, because everybody was too busy trying to cut costs and complaining about those evil union workers up north.
What the unions have done lately
is negotiate bloated hourly pay rates and pension plans. The car manufacturers, of course, agreed. Couple that with executive pay and bonuses, the effect has been to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.
I believe it was a triad, the unions, executives, and government meddling that has killed the auto industry.
Let's not leave out the government's part in this - long before the bailouts, government mandates and standards for manufacturing cars other than what people wish to buy. And since the government could not ban SUVs and trucks (apparently what many consumer wanted and still want) it attacks them in a different way.
We've all read claims that SUVs are 'responsible for highway deaths.' Why? Because the SUV driver walked away and the family of four driving a roller skate did not? Look for gas prices to go back up to four bucks and stay there. That will be to force us to drive tiny death trap cars. People were actually buying them when gas prices were high, but sales dropped when the per-gallon price got back down to two dollars.
Maybe there will also be some kind of tax based on vehicle size or weight, either on purchase, or to scoop more of us into the governmentm maw, a federal surtax when we reregister our current cars.
Unions, etc.
1. I agree that I kind of mixed up two points here. I was sort of confused about you saying I needed to educate myself on percentages, though. And I was being kind enough not to mention that we might not need such a large part of our budget going to the DOD had Mr. Bush not gotten us into at least one, if not two unwinnable wars with the loss of over 4,000 young American lives, on the basis of, shall we say, fibbing, or making up "facts on the ground" that were totally false. But hey, Mission Accomplished!
2. I don't think a transcription union would work - especially right now. Too many people are worried about keeping their jobs to complain about how our pay rate has actually decreased over the years rather than increased. 30 years ago I was earning 5 cents per line for a 50-character line, straight typing, correcting mistakes with white-out (so happy when correcting selectrics arrived) and managing 100 dollars a day. That amount actually meant something back then. Nowadays people are under so much stress, not knowing when the "other shoe is going to fall" that they are happy to have scraps, as long as it means they have a job.
3. I'm not exactly sure what happened with the UAW, other than being put under incredible pressure to make concession after concession, all while being made to look like the bad guys who were the cause of all the trouble. For myself, I can't imagine how difficult it would be to work on the line day after day, as was the case for some of my relatives. My husband's union is a very strong union. Every year he has gotten a raise in pay, he has vacation pay, health insurance, and a pension plan. I don't really think I provided you with a "cache of union slogans", but I am very thankful for the Ironworkers Union.
I think probably the end of unions is not far away. Union-busting seems to be a favorite activity of certain people. All I can tell you is that for my family, my husband was able to earn a living wage in his very dangerous occupation.
As I alluded to previously, in our great country we are entitled to our opinions. I thank God for that.
I swear this is all because of the unions. They will
nm
want to talk about unions?
the places i've seen around our area who have unions are pathetic. i've seen unions protect employees who come to work intoxicated, who don't come to work at all, who PLAY CARDS on work time, do what they want because their "union will protect" them. so if you are suggesting the union is American... that's pretty pathetic. if they were actually protect HARD WORKING AMERICANS, then i'd be fine with it.
you wanna talk about "jabs" at obama? i guess "a bunch of losers" would not be a jab?
i believe the unions were meant to
maybe part of the downfall is because of the lazy ones who rode on the backs of the hard workers.
that is the only part of a union that i could say i'm against. if you are not pulling your weight, enough... ya know?
regarding these MTs who cherry pick, i wish these companies would call them on it, give them notice and get rid of them... there are plenty of good MTs who would gladly take their place.
actually i have seen norma rae.. lol... it has been YEARS go though...
I have seen unions do good and bad
Did anyone take note of what happened with the last grocery strikes in California. The employees certainly did not end up better off after months of striking for a corrupt union. I have also seen them do very good things. They do keep wages high--sometimes, perhaps too high. Checkers at your grocery stores used to have to memorize codes and prices and everything else. Now, it is so simple that you and I can do it with no training whatsoever, thus, the self checkout, so maybe, just maybe, $20/hour with really good benefits is more than that job is worth at this point. I think that unions are good and bad, but the sanctity of the secret ballot needs to be preserved. Of course, this is just my opinion and some of you out there might disagree 200%.
Deregulation of unions in US
Gourdie: I definitely agree, and I find it such a shame that the workers and consumers in this country cannot see what has happened. All this talk about OSHA, etc. has no meaning anymore because the backbone of these government offices have no backbone and don't give a gnat's tweeter how the American workers have and continue to suffer.
Profitable? Doing well? No unions?
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/germ-o25.shtml
European Auto Industry in Crisis
http://www.emf-fem.org/Press/Press-release-archive/2007/EU-Automotive-Restructuring-Forum
EU Automotive Restructuring Forum - talks about working with trade unions
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/ashuster/nonviolence/2008/09/romanian_autoworkers_strike_against_rockbottom_wages.html
Romanian Autoworkers Strike Against Rock-Bottom Wages
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/german-autoworkers-threaten-strike/
German Autoworkers Threaten Strike
http://uk.oneworld.net/contact/company/view/18
Canadian Autoworkers Union Directory
http://www.just-auto.com/article.aspx?id=89621
UK: Car workers' Union Frustrated by Low Manufacturers Output
http://www.autonews24h.com/Auto-Industry/Peugeot-Citroen/741.html
UK Peugeot Workers Vote Against Strike to Protest Lay-Offs
http://climateandcapitalism.com/?p=573
Swedish Auto Workers Campaign
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/2002/10/feature/it0210303f.htm
Crisis at Fiat Worsens - name countless unions
Yet another reason we need unions...nm
x
This, along with the millions to the unions
help pay for Mr. O's presidency being bought. These 2 for sure, reckon how much more?
unions redux
The question that always comes to mind, when I hear how lazy and shiftless all those UAW workers are, is--who made all those millions and millions of cars on the road, all these years? It certainly couldn't be the union workers, right? They wouldn't lift a finger to make a car, they were too busy fanning themselves with hundred dollar bills. So who made the cars?
The austrian-school piece you quote is a good example of the thing that is most wrong with our country: Turning worker against worker, while the CEOs profit. Boiled down to its essentials, the article says: ''Workers shouldn't have any power to organize to defend their rights. Their pay should be determined by the free market--a market that is not so much free, as it is controlled by the corporate interests.''
That is the ideological foundation: Enrich the rich, at the expense of the worker. The pratical method: Keep workers from organizing so that their interests don't have to be considered. And the antiunion rhetoric that we've all heard, all our lives, is the propaganda technique that makes it seem reasonable.
I don't doubt that the foreign car companies who have based operations here in the non-unionized southern US have good production numbers. They have received massive government intervention in their own countries, enabling them to create better production methods (rather than simply enriching the CEOs and stockholders, as our domestic companies seem intent on). The fact that, in their own countries, they don't have to pay for insurance for their workers, because these benefits are provided by the government, helps them stay lean. Our own method, throwing workers to the wolves, also helps socialize costs, but with a more chilling, terrifying effect.
Anyway. My point: If you are against workers organizing to defend their rights, then you are on the side of the wealthy who have organized to defend their wealth. There is not a middle ground.
Well....civil unions would have
to be something we would do on a country wide basis. I mean...what is the point if you can't leave your state because other states don't accept them. I meant this as a country wide thing. If the whole country recognized civil unions with the same benefits as marriage kind of thing. I guess I wasn't specific enough.
As it goes, same sex marriage is only accepted in the states that allow it. I mean...you have to live in those states to have the rights of marriage...right? Please correct me if I'm wrong on that one because I really don't know.
Bringing up from below about taxes/unions
At first we were told the outsourcing was to cut labor costs. Only after this campaign rhetoric took hold did the issue of taxes come up. Now I ask you, if the reason for outsourcing is taxes, what the heck? Didn't Bush CUT taxes.
It seems that American people have lost the reasoning side of their collective brains. When I quit working a few months ago I was making LESS than I made in the 80s. How is that possible? The cost of medical care has not gone down. The cost of medical insurance has not gone down. I posted some time ago about a local hospital that laid off their most experienced nurses, not a few of them, ALL of them, and hired new graduate nurses to replace them at lesser wages. What was that about? They got away with it though. Anything to increase the bottom line profit.
This is true in every industry. They like to blame labor for everything. Well, how the heck can you buy a $2+ loaf of bread and $5 gallon of milk on minimum wage, ya know? Take gasoline for example. Sure it has gone down the last days but is it back where it was when oil was what? $86 a barrel or whatever? No and it never will be.
So that car you drive.........how much do you think of the price tag is labor?
These things are what really aggravates me. People just can't seem to use reasoning power any more. I'll give you an example: After my husband lost his job in the CF fiasco, he drove for awhile for a friend who owns a trucking company. I went with him on a trip. He picked up a load of beef in Boonesville, AR, hauled it to Chicago, no problem. Then they sent him somewhere in Ohio to pick up a load of vinegar to take to Florida. Got to Ohio and I forget the reason but he couldn't pick up the vinegar. Then he was sent (empty) to Logan (?), Kentucky where he picked up 40,000 pounds of chocolate covered doughnuts which he delivered to Phoenix. In Phoenix they told him that most of that load would be routed back to Atlanta. Now what kind of sense does that make? Taxes the problem? I would say poor management is a bigger problem than taxes OR labor.
I'm sorry about your dad's experience. People used to do things like that. I recall my late father-in-law, worked for the fire department in Fort Worth and he said during the depression they did the same thing, worked less so the ones with less seniority could keep a job. They all suffered but they suffered together and somehow they all made it as did your parents.
I am just horrified at the apparent digress of intelligence in this country. It seems people believe anything the news media or anyone else tells them. Seems they have totally lost the ability to reason and God forbid that anyone should think of anyone other than themself.
All that said, feel free to go ahead and believe that companies are outsourcing jobs because of labor costs or taxes. The unionized workers, under Reagan, started taking wage concessions, that is taking a DECREASE in pay to keep jobs. How did that work? Don't believe I've heard of any of the victims of outsourcing even being offered a pay cut to keep the jobs in this country. Certainly not the Rheem plant in Fort Smith that the other day laid off the last 600 workers. They sent most of their production to Mexico a few years ago. Fort Smith they say is dying because of outsourcing. Their reason? They say, it's "labor costs." Well, then, how is it that people can't afford to pay their bills with all the excessive wages they're supposedly receiving. Obviously the next in vogue EXCUSE will be that taxes are lower in other countries. B.S.!!!!!!!
No, unions DO put them in a financial hole.
nm
The unions are killing companies, though. That is
nm
Have a question for the labor unions....
especially the UAW....how do you like him now that he has thrown you under the "let the automakers go bankrupt" bus. Be careful what you vote for.....
I think they should go bankrupt. Unions didn't cause it -
well, i guess the word has not gotten to the unions then...
at end of article they quoted one union leader as saying his members "would not tolerate" this. It was an article dated yesterday. But, it would not surprise me that he would exempt unions, which makes absolutely NO sense, because they are the best and most costly benefits to be had. So, probably so, it will be on the backs of folks like us. My question is...what are they going to do after they break our backs? Who is going to pay for all their cr*p then?? Why, whatever am I thinking? Soon it will be only the "poor" which will include all of us, and the government and those who kiss*d the government as* who prosper...hmmm. Kinda like Venezuela...kinda like Nazi Germany...hmmm.
Yeah, I'll talk about unions s/m
Two husbands who were union workers. One IBEW, one Teamster. BOTH said there were workers who didn't carry their share of the work load...not much different than MTs who cherry pick for instance.
#1 IBEW husband said at the time or Reganomics, when Ronald Reagan, himself a card-carrying member of the actor's union, said he would break the unions, it would be the downfall of the American workers.. Regan succeeded in breaking the backs of the unions. When union workers lost the ability to bargain, they had to start taking wage concessions......and guess what? Union wages went down, so did non-union wages follow suit. When union workers got better working conditions, better wages and better benefits, so did non-union workers.
#2 Teamster husband is a radical retired Teamster. While he also complained that there were lazy workers who rode on the backs of the hard-workers, he also said that the union does not support such and more times than not the union would uphold the firing of such a person. He has a Teamster retirement that is the envy of most people and he has retiree health care benefits even though we pay about $700 a month for that. While he was working, his union dues were around $35 a month and that covered our insurance. Teamster retirees today will not enjoy those benefits.
Do some research on the history of unions. Might not hurt to watch the movie Norma Rae as well.
You already posted this question. Civil unions are
*
they don't do that anymore...
You get a maxium amount regardless of how many kids you have.
what I would do is make them take a class a month towards a trade, CNA, teaching assist, something in demand, in order to get their welfare for the next month, unless they were getting it b/c they were disabled.
Not anymore they don't!
--
This is not an option anymore
I've been listening to the news people talking and this is not an option anymore. Barack is being polite about this, but I see no way for them to run together. Her time has passed. He is now looking at other very qualified people to be VP. One is a woman and one is even a republican. A lot of people think that it will be so easy to win over republicans this fall, but if McCain is running against Hillary he for sure will win as there is too much negativity about Hillary. I cannot stand McCain, but I for one would vote for him over Hillary. First I would change my party to independent, and then I would vote for McCain. People are saying there are three parties running here. The republicans, the democrats and the Clintons. The Clintons have put themselves into their own party. Although a vote for Clinton and a vote for McCain are virtually the same thing. She used to be a republican before she switched to democrat years ago, and her voting record is quite conservative. I for one am glad that Obama is looking at other people for VP slot and his list is pretty impressive. The candidates all seem to be very good choices and I hear many people really respect these people. There are even a lot of republicans who do not want McCain in there, however, they want Hillary even less. I believe that if Obama is the nominee he will win as a lot of republicans will back him, but if Hillary is in there McCain will win as she and Bill have so much bad history attached to them. The only people who are now pushing for an Obama/Hillary ticket are the Hillary supporters as they are trying anything and everything to get her in there, but none of the talk of them running together is coming from Obama's side. Makes you kind of think about that.
On another note it seems as if every state she wins she tries to convince people that if you don't win that state you will not win in November. Funny how these states never include the ones she lost in. You don't hear her saying that about Iowa or Minnesota. We sit and laugh and say nice try Hillary. Then we listen to the news and they say the same thing.
I really don't care anymore.
They can call me what they want. Only I know if I am or not a racist. I do know I am against the dems so if that makes me a racist, so be it.
Will not be a river anymore is why we
So hot that the rivers and lakes are drying up.
Okay, I can't stand it anymore....
the answer is......Hitler. His directive 51 was pretty much the same thing.
I don't think it matters anymore
We are on the brink of a major depression. I don't know that anything they do will prevent it. The best they can do is maybe lessen the severity and length. The automakers, credit card companies, and banks are going to end up like the airlines (at best) in having to be propped up for an indefinite period of time by the government.
I know. So did I but I don't care anymore.
I was called a racist just because I don't trust O. So be it. It sure was a surprise to my foster son.
We don't buy dog food anymore....
and that saves a lot of money.
That's why we don't watch TV anymore -
TV is just for movies and entertainment. Can't expect to get any "real" news from the tube.
Does it get anymore juvenile than this?
Or is it just party dumb we see here?
Not anymore. We are THEIR servants. They are not ours. (nm)
.
You won't be anymore uninformed than he will....he
NM
No, I refuse to try and debate you anymore
because you can't be anything but condescending and ugly.
MT doesn't hang around here much anymore. sm
So I am going to take up for her. Frankly, I am not sure why you are so upset. So your friend exaggerated. Lots of people do that. MT (and most of us) have certainly taken our licks on these boards a lot of times. I really don't see why you being so mean about it.
Is this the liberal board anymore?
I give you Democrats and/or liberals credit for even being able to respond to the right wing who for some reason, I just cannot understand why, constantly come over to the liberal board and post more than the liberals do and every post is a disagreement or outright attack towards the liberal poster who posted on the liberal board..I frankly have had it with the Republicans. They have messed up America with their backward way of thinking and they still dont get it. Their party is falling apart and they are looking at more Democrats being voted in yet they still spew their hate, bias, closed mindedness..From Limbaugh to Coulter to Falwell to Robertson, Dobson, Hannity, etc., etc., they show the world how uninformed and racist and backward they are..and the Republican masses follow blindly. I just about choked on the latest idiotic comment by Coulter concerning Christians and Jews. Someone needs to set that broad straight real fast. The comments she made that Jews need to be perfected is a mind set right out of Hitlers Germany. Oh and all you Republicans who will wander over to the liberal board and real this, dont waste the energy, I will not respond to your posts nor read them. This is a post to my fellow Democrats/liberals.
I'm not arguing this anymore, it's pointless
but your last argument hit me. If abortion was made illegal and I got pregnant and carrying that baby was going to kill me - then someone would have the power to choose whether I live or die - the people who chose to make abortion illegal.
And before anyone argues that abortion would be allowed in those cases, who would get to decide? The courts? By the time the case went through the sluggish system, it could be too late.
This debate has no winner, everyone has their own views. However, from a legal standpoint it either has to be legal or illegal. A pregnant woman is not given the luxury of time for the court to decide whether it is okay in her particular case to be allowed to have an abortion.
God bless.
Oh my God. You really sound ignorant, but I am not going to say anymore. nm
/....
Well, I don't trust any politician anymore
It seems they're only out to rip us off. As soon as I heard of this "buying" votes, the idea of the O coming so quick from nothing to president elect and was from Illinois gave me the idea that he bought his seat. I've been watching the news and maybe that's what they do in Illinois without realizing it's wrong. After all, there have been so many politicians from there that have been indicted for political crimes, I'm thinking that it's a natural way of doing "business" there. Even the governor doesn't think he did anything wrong. Are they a different country and we don't know it?
No one would listen and he is not an option anymore sm
I started preparing and investing in sound money 2 years ago because of him. My silver may end up being worth $200 an ounce and all the Federal Reserve Notes will be worth the same as Monopoly money. We all knew this was coming and it is going to get worse. Note the date:
Congressman Ron Paul
U.S. House of Representatives
July 16, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I rise to introduce the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act. This legislation restores a free market in housing by repealing special privileges for housing-related government sponsored enterprises (GSEs). These entities are the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie), and the National Home Loan Bank Board (HLBB). According to the Congressional Budget Office, the housing-related GSEs received $13.6 billion worth of indirect federal subsidies in fiscal year 2000 alone.
One of the major government privileges granted these GSEs is a line of credit to the United States Treasury. According to some estimates, the line of credit may be worth over $2 billion. This explicit promise by the Treasury to bail out these GSEs in times of economic difficulty helps them attract investors who are willing to settle for lower yields than they would demand in the absence of the subsidy. Thus, the line of credit distorts the allocation of capital. More importantly, the line of credit is a promise on behalf of the government to engage in a massive unconstitutional and immoral income transfer from working Americans to holders of GSE debt.
The Free Housing Market Enhancement Act also repeals the explicit grant of legal authority given to the Federal Reserve to purchase the debt of housing-related GSEs. GSEs are the only institutions besides the United States Treasury granted explicit statutory authority to monetize their debt through the Federal Reserve. This provision gives the GSEs a source of liquidity unavailable to their competitors.
Ironically, by transferring the risk of a widespread mortgage default, the government increases the likelihood of a painful crash in the housing market. This is because the special privileges of Fannie, Freddie, and HLBB have distorted the housing market by allowing them to attract capital they could not attract under pure market conditions. As a result, capital is diverted from its most productive use into housing. This reduces the efficacy of the entire market and thus reduces the standard of living of all Americans.
However, despite the long-term damage to the economy inflicted by the government’s interference in the housing market, the government’s policies of diverting capital to other uses creates a short-term boom in housing. Like all artificially-created bubbles, the boom in housing prices cannot last forever. When housing prices fall, homeowners will experience difficulty as their equity is wiped out. Furthermore, the holders of the mortgage debt will also have a loss. These losses will be greater than they would have otherwise been had government policy not actively encouraged over-investment in housing.
Perhaps the Federal Reserve can stave off the day of reckoning by purchasing GSE debt and pumping liquidity into the housing market, but this cannot hold off the inevitable drop in the housing market forever. In fact, postponing the necessary but painful market corrections will only deepen the inevitable fall. The more people invested in the market, the greater the effects across the economy when the bubble bursts.
No less an authority than Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has expressed concern that government subsidies provided to the GSEs make investors underestimate the risk of investing in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for Congress to act to remove taxpayer support from the housing GSEs before the bubble bursts and taxpayers are once again forced to bail out investors misled by foolish government interference in the market. I therefore hope my colleagues will stand up for American taxpayers and investors by cosponsoring the Free Housing Market Enhancement Act.
I agree with you. I was on the fence, too, but not anymore
I thought Obama was going to be my choice then I did some research because I wondered how he was going to accomplish all those ideas. It's a dream scheme, nothing but a lot of hot air and higher taxes as usual. There's no way he can do what he wants to do.
McCain is not promising the world on a silver platter. He's not the greatest speaker, but I believe he'll do a better job.
Families abandon their own a lot anymore.
nm
He isn't unskilled anymore then. Why do you want to argue about EVERYTHING? SM
BS
More the reason we don't need anymore taxes
@
Not anymore monotonous than the rote...
ohhhbaaamaaa can do no wrong. What alternate reality do you exist in that you think just because he won the election people who are concerned about what he will do will just fold their tents and go home? That we would all join the Obama lovefest? Seriously???? lol.
I can't write too fast anymore, but here's what I did get
1. Fiscal Stimulus Plan: Before or after inauguration (sp). Wants to get it moving quickly, but if he has to wait until January 20, so be it, but states he will try during these couple months to push one through now.
2. Retooling assistance plan for automakers for fuel-effieicnt cars. He realizes that the auto industry employs thousands and other companies depend on the auto industry for their jobs. Wants this package done quickly.
3. Review implementaion of plans and not rewarding management for housing problems that are caused.
4. Grow middle class in the long term.
Reporters asked questions but couldn't get them all.
1. He wants to help the states financially.
2. As to going to other countries for conferences: He is developing a team and weighing all his options. Iran's nuclear weapons are unacceptable along with the militants. This has to cease. It's not something he can do in a knee-jerk fashion and wants to be careful (not to p--s them off).
3. Tax plan: 95% of WORKING Americans will get it. His first goal is tax relief for struggling families and to build the economy from the bottom up.
That's all I could get.
I'm guessing they're not around anymore.
And yes, they are actually more profitable now because of sending too many jobs overseas and many MTs here working as ICs (i.e. no benefits). But what I'm saying is, and why I used the MTSO as an example, that if they have to start paying more in taxes, things are just going to get worse - for us, not them. They'll figure out a way to stay profitable no matter what. It's the American MTs that are going to lose our jobs or work for worse wages than we are already. I'm not saying that's fair or that's right, but what these days is? That may sound kind of pessimistic, but I think it's looking kind of glass half empty, even with Obama as our future pres. I hope to God I'm wrong, though, and would be very pleased to chow down on some of that crow you mentioned a little while back! =)
I didn't think much could surprise me anymore
but this is some creepy stuff. What's next?
|
