Question for you:

 

I am a multi-millionaire. I made my money by working for it. Made some good investments and they have paid off. I pay my taxes and give to charity.

 

Are you entitled to any of my money?

 

Mr. Monopoly, you are now going to have some new taxes on your gains for the good of our nation. The belt may have to get a little tighter, but sir as FDR said you can handle it.

Jeez. Did you take any classes other than cyphering numbers?

 

Nice stereotype. No mostly I focus on facts and logic and not idealistic fantasies.

 

First, fixing prices is not the same as joining a union.

 

You can't be serious, what do you think a mandatory union wage is? It is a fixed price (wage) that must be paid to an employee regardless to what the market rate is.

 

Second, I have never in my life heard a single attorney talk about "boy we should have a union".

 

They may not say it but numerous people in professions not allowed to organise have been rightly prosecuted for trying to fix prices among themselves.

 

Third, "when everyone competes with each other and those that offer the best service make the most" is just flat out nonsensical to apply to a factory situation. I mean, you are delusional if you think companies are going to walk around and figure out which worker is out-competing the person next to him. In fact, without some sort of regulations, or the ability to collectively bargain, companies will just pay the least amount possible, to every one. Always. Every time. The least amount possible.

Why are the jobs going to China? Because they want to pay the least amount possible. Why are children around the world working for pennies a day? Because companies want to pay the least amount possible.

If you think some factory owner is gonna walk around his non-union factory and give raises to people who appear to be working hard, you have lost your mind.

 

You have lost your mind if you think most good business owners don't perodically assess which employees are more valuable than others and pay accordingly so as not to have to replace good, valuable employees. If the organization has so many employees the owner(s) cannot assess employees, they have given that authority to managers. Case in point, the past two places I have worked my feedback prompted raises much larger than usual (one double the norm, the other almost triple) for two employees who reported to me because I was able to demonstrate how valuable and how difficult to replace those two ladies would be. On the flip side, another employee my feedback was that if he left it really wouldn't bother me going through the interview process because replacing him with some av better work ethic would not be that difficult

 

If you studied macroeconomics at some point, did they ever talk about the necessity for being able to distinguish reality from fantasy?

 

I think you and Bernie are the one having difficulty with reality.

Mr. Monopoly, you are now going to have some new taxes on your gains for the good of our nation. The belt may have to get a little tighter, but sir as FDR said you can handle it.

 

I'll take that as a yes.

There are numerous smart educated people who only know of economics what they see/hear in the media. Unfortunately most journalists know virtually nothing about economics either. The problem is economics is not a subject taught in schools which it should be, just like math, science, history, grammar, etc.. So many times, when someone asks why did the election to the way it did, people reply, the economy stupid but most Americans have no understanding of why the economy acts as it does.

 

I HIGHLY encourage Anyone who wants to get a better understanding of economics to go on YouTube and watch Milton Friedman on the Donahue show. What he says in 1979 is just as applicable today as it was then. You can't miss it, it is in 5 10 minute sections and he is wearing an ugly 1970's yellow blazer. Maybe tan and the film is bad. He masterfully discusses economics in a very easy to understand method. His commentary on greed in American business really eye opening. When asked to speak at Columbia University, he goes into even further. I could watch his videos repeatedly because I always learn something new.

 

Friedman is a man who I believe never lost a debate on economics. I've seen every video on YouTube he is in multiple times. I've read everybook , even the mind numbing ones , I enjoy it.

 

It didn't matter what question you asked him he had a response and answer.

Mr. Monopoly, you are now going to have some new taxes on your gains for the good of our nation. The belt may have to get a little tighter, but sir as FDR said you can handle it.

 

So your plan to help the economy is to discourage investment in it. Keep digging deeper.

Nice stereotype. No mostly I focus on facts and logic and not idealistic fantasies.

 

 

 

You can't be serious, what do you think a mandatory union wage is? It is a fixed price (wage) that must be paid to an employee regardless to what the market rate is.

 

 

 

They may not say it but numerous people in professions not allowed to organise have been rightly prosecuted for trying to fix prices among themselves.

 

 

 

You have lost your mind if you think most good business owners don't perodically assess which employees are more valuable than others and pay accordingly so as not to have to replace good, valuable employees. If the organization has so many employees the owner(s) cannot assess employees, they have given that authority to managers. Case in point, the past two places I have worked my feedback prompted raises much larger than usual (one double the norm, the other almost triple) for two employees who reported to me because I was able to demonstrate how valuable and how difficult to replace those two ladies would be. On the flip side, another employee my feedback was that if he left it really wouldn't bother me going through the interview process because replacing him with some av better work ethic would not be that difficult

 

 

 

I think you and Bernie are the one having difficulty with reality.

 

I laughed so hard at Mayfields post. Every good company in America today has annual or semi annual performance reviews. That is how they base your raise. All raises aren't equal , it is determined by how you perform compared to your peers.

@Bert

 

Unions and price fixing are different. Unions bargain for a contract covering many aspects of employment. It's a bargaining process, back and forth between two parties. Neither party can unilaterally set any term of the contract.

 

If a bunch of CPA's were to get together and fix prices, that is not the same as two parties bargaining. There is no bargaining. It's not called "price bargaining" it's called "price fixing."

 

I am sorry you can't talk about unions without confusing these very different concepts.

 

The benefit of unions, well one among many, is that they allow the labor force to be on an equal footing for the bargaining process.

 

Unions have been good for families in this country, and I will keep advocating for them and candidates that support them. You can keep a lookout for those evil CPA price fixing unions lol.

@Bert

 

Unions and price fixing are different. Unions bargain for a contract covering many aspects of employment. It's a bargaining process, back and forth between two parties. Neither party can unilaterally set any term of the contract.

 

If a bunch of CPA's were to get together and fix prices, that is not the same as two parties bargaining. There is no bargaining. It's not called "price bargaining" it's called "price fixing."

 

I am sorry you can't talk about unions without confusing these very different concepts.

 

The benefit of unions, well one among many, is that they allow the labor force to be on an equal footing for the bargaining process.

 

Unions have been good for families in this country, and I will keep advocating for them and candidates that support them. You can keep a lookout for those evil CPA price fixing unions lol.

 

As I've stated in here I'm all For unions, as long as employment doesn't mandate Union membership. Good unions that have value will have nothing to worry about. We all know there are some corrupt locals and allowing freedom to choose weeds them out or at least the leadership.

@Bert

 

Unions and price fixing are different. Unions bargain for a contract covering many aspects of employment. It's a bargaining process, back and forth between two parties. Neither party can unilaterally set any term of the contract.

 

If a bunch of CPA's were to get together and fix prices, that is not the same as two parties bargaining. There is no bargaining. It's not called "price bargaining" it's called "price fixing."

 

I am sorry you can't talk about unions without confusing these very different concepts.

 

The benefit of unions, well one among many, is that they allow the labor force to be on an equal footing for the bargaining process.

 

Unions have been good for families in this country, and I will keep advocating for them and candidates that support them. You can keep a lookout for those evil CPA price fixing unions lol.

 

True, they are different but There are similarities. Because members can strike and often use interesting tactics to discourage scab workers, that gives the union a very strong hand at the bargaining table and explains why historically union members in the past have earned wages equal to or in excess of higher skilled labor. I will go back to my original post in this thread. Union activity does not promote free trade, that cannot be argued. If it did, than all professions would be allowed to.

 

I will piggy back off Lipton Bash.

 

I am fine with unions with three qualifiers:

 

1. It should be my choice alone whether or not to join a union. If I do not feel the protection offered by the union is worth the dues or if I do not like how the union spends my union dues on lobbying, I should be able to withdraw my membership. On the flip side, there should be some protections for the union such as I should have to commit for a long time period and not join and drop whenever it is remotely convenient for me. Also, when I drop, the union is absolved of all responsibilities to protect me and that includes the union wage. Should the company drop my pay, that is my problem, not theirs.

 

2. Unions should have to collect their own dues. The company should not have to hear the administrative burden to collect dues and remit to the union.

 

3. Governments should not be allowed to bid work out mandating x percent must be union. On the flip side, unions should not he able to be pushed out of bidding. The work go to the lowest bidder, regardless of union or not, ie free trade

So your plan to help the economy is to discourage investment in it. Keep digging deeper.

 

Better not elect me then. I might tax their offspring when they kick the bucket.

Someone remind me. What was the highest U.S. federal income tax rate in history?

Better not elect me then. I might tax their offspring when they kick the bucket.

 

Do you claim any deductions on your taxes?

Nation is already poor. 20% are rich. 1% is REALLY rich.

And how dare they have the audacity to be successful.

Do you claim any deductions on your taxes?

 

Yes.

 

And how dare they have the audacity to be successful.

 

No one would stop the American Dream. You can certainly be fabulously wealthy if we returned to higher taxes.

Don't you think that it's a bit hypocritical that you reduce the amount you pay in taxes while wanting someone else to pay more?

 

Wait let me guess, you're not wealthy so it's OK. Only the evil rich should pay more.

 

FWIW in my opinion anyone who wants anyone else to pay more in taxes while doing ANYTHING to reduce the amount they pay, legal or not, is a hypocrite.

 

What's your definition of wealthy? Who exactly should pay more? What is their fair share? I hear those terms thrown around by the left but no one ever defines them.

 

What about people that have no skin in the game, so to speak? Shouldn't everyone that has an income pay income taxes? After all they get the benefits of any tax payer, shouldn't they have to help pay for it. That's the argument the left uses for compulsory union membership.