Thread: "Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost" - Ronald

the sad thing is that people don't see the direct correlation with the decrease in labor unions and corporate pay...when the unions went away in the 80's so did the increase in pay across most markets, which is why non-farm payroll has been stagnant since..

The sad thing is, people don't see the direct correlation between higher prices and higher taxes in direct relation to unions. In regards to public union employees, they are paid from the taxpayers. For them to have benefits and pay that far surpasses another guy doing the same thing not in the union, is rediculous. Many hide behind thier unions when they get in hot water for lackluster performance, where the non-union guy would get canned. Higher pay, better wages, protection to screwoff? Who wouldn't want that, but it's not reality. Oftentimes, non union companies are barred from bidding on jobs when politicians are involved, creating a monopoly and much higher cost for the job - funded ofcoarse through the taxpayer. The politician lines the pockets of the union heads. The union heads rally the troops for the votes. I wish it wern't this way, otherwise I would be completely pro-union.

Originally Posted by phosphor

The sad thing is, people don't see the direct correlation between higher prices and higher taxes in direct relation to unions. In regards to public union employees, they are paid from the taxpayers. For them to have benefits and pay that far surpasses another guy doing the same thing not in the union, is rediculous. Many hide behind thier unions when they get in hot water for lackluster performance, where the non-union guy would get canned. Higher pay, better wages, protection to screwoff? Who wouldn't want that, but it's not reality. Oftentimes, non union companies are barred from bidding on jobs when politicians are involved, creating a monopoly and much higher cost for the job - funded ofcoarse through the taxpayer. The politician lines the pockets of the union heads. The union heads rally the troops for the votes. I wish it wern't this way, otherwise I would be completely pro-union.

so why haven't US company's kept up employee pay with increases in stock profits the past 3-4 decades? please explain...

Originally Posted by LAM

so why haven't US company's kept up employee pay with increases in stock profits the past 3-4 decades? please explain...

You are asking a loaded question. No explanation needed.

that's what I thought....

Originally Posted by LAM

so why haven't US company's kept up employee pay with increases in stock profits the past 3-4 decades? please explain...

Wait a sec. Are you asking why companies haven't increased employee salaries based on its market capitalization?

Originally Posted by DOMS

Wait a sec. Are you asking why companies haven't increased employee salaries based on its market capitalization?

it doesn't matter if you go by market cap, financial ratios, etc. wages have been stagnant in most non-farm payroll markets for decades but the indexes on the NYSE say companies are racking in profits while paying minimal taxes.

Originally Posted by LAM

it doesn't matter if you go by market cap, financial ratios, etc. wages have been stagnant in most non-farm payroll markets for decades but the indexes on the NYSE say companies are racking in profits while paying minimal taxes.

Nice job not answering the simple question.

Originally Posted by DOMS

Wait a sec. Are you asking why companies haven't increased employee salaries based on its market capitalization?

nope..because that depends on who the share holders are

it is a very general question..

A very general question based under false pretenses and requires a very lenghty answer - in which you'll read only an 1/8 of and turn it into class warfare. Thanks, but no thanks.

Originally Posted by phosphor

A very general question based under false pretenses and requires a very lenghty answer - in which you'll read only an 1/8 of and turn it into class warfare. Thanks, but no thanks.

the answer is plain and simple, they don't have to which is why they haven't it has nothing to do with economics.

enjoy making the same wage for the next 20-30 years....

Originally Posted by LAM

the answer is plain and simple, they don't have to which is why they haven't it has nothing to do with economics.

enjoy making the same wage for the next 20-30 years....

out of sheer boredom and curiosity what do you think would be the answer to this? government regulation that stipulates employees be paid more?

Originally Posted by bio-chem

out of sheer boredom and curiosity what do you think would be the answer to this? government regulation that stipulates employees be paid more?

Keep up with the cost of living is all that most people ask.
Taxes keep going up, tolls keep going up and rent is through the roof, all I as is that they try to keep up somewhat with the raises.

Originally Posted by min0 lee

Keep up with the cost of living is all that most people ask.
Taxes keep going up, tolls keep going up and rent is through the roof, all I as is that they try to keep up somewhat with the raises.

so then the government should force companies to pay higher wages?

I know that attacking unions that have fought to get raises and other benefits for their members surely isn't/wasn't the problem. now the pension programs, etc. that's another issue.

for profit company's are basically raping American for short term economic gains and the people are powerless. they only do what is required of them by law. many of these large for profit company's are like no different in mentality than a small child that does not have a fully developed personality, the are controlled by the id, there is no ego or superego.

what to do, I don't really know...continuing to give them welfare in the form of tax breaks, etc. surely hasn't helped spur them to increase wages so maybe start taking some of these things away from them.

I'm almost positive the company's on the list below can do with out welfare from the US government in any and all forms...

Companies With the Highest Revenue - Tracked.com

i would hardly consider tax breaks a form of welfare. letting them keep their money isn't welfare. taxing them higher will for sure drive them out of the US. lets compare corporate tax rates here in the US compared to other countries shall we? our companies are responsible to the share holders and thats how it should be.

Originally Posted by LAM

I know that attacking unions that have fought to get raises and other benefits for their members surely isn't/wasn't the problem. now the pension programs, etc. that's another issue.

for profit company's are basically raping American for short term economic gains and the people are powerless. they only do what is required of them by law. many of these large for profit company's are like no different in mentality than a small child that does not have a fully developed personality, the are controlled by the id, there is no ego or superego.

what to do, I don't really know...continuing to give them welfare in the form of tax breaks, etc. surely hasn't helped spur them to increase wages so maybe start taking some of these things away from them.

I'm almost positive the company's on the list below can do with out welfare from the US government in any and all forms...

Companies With the Highest Revenue - Tracked.com

Its very difficult to change the psyche of US business...they are going to continue this practice as long as we operate under a capitalist system, which by definition ranks shareholder wealth as priority number 1.

Originally Posted by bio-chem

i would hardly consider tax breaks a form of welfare. letting them keep their money isn't welfare. taxing them higher will for sure drive them out of the US. lets compare corporate tax rates here in the US compared to other countries shall we? our companies are responsible to the share holders and thats how it should be.

You should really read this then Corporate Welfare: Corporate Welfare - TIME

Originally Posted by LAM

You should really read this then Corporate Welfare: Corporate Welfare - TIME

I read it and find it about as credible as something michael moore would do. meaning it has no credibility at all whatsoever do to the high level of bias. for instance here is on paragraph below. bold is mine

State and local governments now give corporations money to move from one city to anotherI want my state/local governments to give incentives to business to move closer to me--even from one building to another--and tax credits for hiring new employees.why is this bad? tax credits to HIRE employees?!?!!! They supply funds to train workers or pay part of their wages while they are in training, and provide scientific and engineering assistance to solve workplace technical problems. They repave existing roads and build new ones.whats wrong with fixing infrastructure? They lend money at bargain-basement interest rates to erect plants or buy equipment.again, bringing jobs local They excuse corporations from paying sales and property taxes and relieve them from taxes on investment income.I'm a fan of tax cuts in all shapes and forms

Read more: Corporate Welfare: Corporate Welfare - TIME

of course you don't find it credible..enjoy being poor

Originally Posted by LAM

of course you don't find it credible..enjoy being poor

I read it, i took a paragraph as an example and I responded to it. what more do you want?

I'm not rich, but I make a wage that i'm very happy with

Originally Posted by min0 lee

Oh no...in the private sector we screwed.
Collective bargaining takes care of that for me, where does one go to complain about raises in the private sector.

if an employee doesn't like what they are making and can make more somewhere else then they are at liberty to move jobs. If not than that is the wage they are worth

Originally Posted by bio-chem

if an employee doesn't like what they are making and can make more somewhere else then they are at liberty to move jobs. If not than that is the wage they are worth

If there was any work out there then I can see where one can go from job to job seeking better pay.

Originally Posted by min0 lee

If there was any work out there then I can see where one can go from job to job seeking better pay.

its true. high unemployment sucks. i agree, but are we to raise taxes on corporations to spur them to hire? are we to force them to hire/pay more taxes?

Originally Posted by bio-chem

its true. high unemployment sucks. i agree, but are we to raise taxes on corporations to spur them to hire? are we to force them to hire/pay more taxes?

allowing them to pay minimal taxes hasn't worked either...and now since the final stage of "globalization" has kicked in many jobs are lost for ever...

pouring fuel on a fire isn't a good way to put out or prevent future fires...

you do realize that you can't get a 30-year fixed mortgage in any other country. most countries also only lock the rate in for 5-7 years max. in the US there is only the rich and the poor, many "middle class" still haven't come to terms with their distinct lack of wealth.

based on the stagnant wages in most US job markets over the past 30-40 years what type of financial future do you think your children and their children are going to have?

Originally Posted by LAM

allowing them to pay minimal taxes hasn't worked either...and now since the final stage of "globalization" has kicked in many jobs are lost for ever...

pouring fuel on a fire isn't a good way to put out or prevent future fires...

you do realize that you can't get a 30-year fixed mortgage in any other country. most countries also only lock the rate in for 5-7 years max. in the US there is only the rich and the poor, many "middle class" still haven't come to terms with their distinct lack of wealth.

based on the stagnant wages in most US job markets over the past 30-40 years what type of financial future do you think your children and their children are going to have?

you are pointing out the differences with us and other countries without showing how their way is better or more effective. different just means different.
I have a higher earning potential than my father and I expect my children to also have a higher earning potential than myself.

Originally Posted by bio-chem

its true. high unemployment sucks. i agree, but are we to raise taxes on corporations to spur them to hire? are we to force them to hire/pay more taxes?

I no longer have any sympathy for corporations, after 20 years working in one of the bigger corps out there and getting to personally know 3 of the guys who were major players and hearing how they screw the little guy....