Fixing Inequality

[thereisnospoon]

Labor is EVERYTHING. Everything you see around you is created by labor--every road, every pencil, every magazine, every CD, EVERYTHING. All wealth is created by--and ONLY BY--the labor of productive workers. It would seem fundamental, then, that labor should decide how the resultant profit is distributed.

And eventually, that will be how things evolve economically; remember, feudalism used to be the prevailing economic practice.

ALSO, the former USSR was a military dictatorship that talked of socialism but practiced totalitarianism. That is indisputable.

Which in no way makes it not a commodity. It just makes it a very valuable one.

And those who labor decide how THEIR SHARE of the profit is distributed. Please understand that, while YOU are unequipped to perform any labor more intellectual than what could be performed by a well-trained chimp, that does not mean that that is the ONLY thing in the world that qualifies as labor. There is such a thing as a intellectual and emotional labor, consisting of the intelligence, foresight, and training to plan and guide an enterprise to profit, and the willingness to risk one's resources in putting it into action . . . and then hiring menial mouthbreathers like you to stand around the water cooler while on the clock and complain about how you're the ones who REALLY make the company work.

Labor is unique in economics for a lot of reasons. Any analogy tends to have a weakness so why not just call it what it is?

Labor is a commodity..
I own a factory that makes cardboard boxes. Everyone who ships or packages stuff needs them.
My annual gross sales are $1mil per year.
One of my sales people lands a big contract. I have a couple problems. One, with the new deal, I have to increase my production to meet the demand. But my facility does not have the equipment or manpower to accomplish the tasks to fulfill the orders.
So, I must hire more people to get the work done. I also need a new production line.....In my quest to find the machinery, A sales guy from the ABC machinery Corp shoots me an email. Tells me he wants to set up a meeting to discuss this new equipment that will cut the time of production in half. The machinery is expensive, but with the favorable terms offered by the company, I run the numbers and I can afford it. In fact, with the new contract, it's paid for in 6 months. I meet withe ABC Machinery Corp guy and sign up....The following week the people come in and install the equipment. They demonstrate how it works. I am impressed. Now I can produce twice as many cardboard boxes in half the time.
Guess what? I no longer need to hire new people. In fact this new equipment requires fewer workers on the floor. Oh but wait....Instead of laying off people, I can send to them to school and they can learn to operate the new machinery. However, I am not going to need the 6 people it takes to run my older machines. I only need 3. One for each shift.
I decide to keep 4. One is a spare for vacations, sick days etc....This person can also work varied shifts. I have to let two people go because their job no longer exists. There is nothing in the plant for them to do. Now are they qualified to go to the tech school because they simply lack the skills and education to learn the new equipment. Sorry, they have to go. They get severance pay and references. I write each person a letter of recommendation to carry with them to interviews.
See how this works? This is business. I spent money to make money. In the process I dramatically increased my production, I reduced labor costs. I also discovered not only did I not have to hire 12 more people, I needed two fewer workers.

 

[thereisnospoon]

What is the difference between a decision and a system?
I swear you're making this up as you go along.

A decision is being made by one employer. A system involves ALL employers and ALL employees and ALL Consumers and ALL government and ALL trade and ALL capital flows etc.

The material point is that from a micro economic standpoint an employer has an economic incentive to lower labor costs which would lower demand, while also wanting to see an increase in demand for their product. This contradiction doesn't impact the micro economic transaction but it does impact the macro economic one. Often times people can only think of economics in terms of the micro economic transactions.

Another example of conflict is trade. It is good for the consumer to be able to buy cheap goods made in China. That trade with China can also hurt the labor market, especially in the short term or if they are cheating. That consumer may also be able to get a lower interest rate on a house because China is investing in USD. (The consumer and the laborer are the same person/group)

In both cases making the discussion only about one side creates an incomplete picture. Economics is about the entire system. If one part of it is unhealthy then the whole thing will start showing symptoms.

Ultimately unemployment numbers don't reflect everything that is going on in an economy. In the end you have to look closer.

I appears as though you are regurgitating stuff you learned from some left leaning college professor.
Lots of vague platitudes and theories. Little of any substance.
What we learn in the classroom just allows us a better chance at passing exams to get a degree. None of that stuff applies to the real world though.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ah yes the lovely technology of phone systems, such a joy. And then you lucky you get someone who speaks English. Maybe you haven't noticed but a lot of call centers are overseas.

Yes, they are. Do you know why? Because Americans think they should be paid $20 an hour to answer a fucking phone, something any high school kid can do.

Yes high school graduates used to be able to make decent money. Now you need a degree to make what high school graduates used to. Now we have low paying jobs with no benefits or retirement. And I guess our current situation is what you think is good? I don't.

That's a load of horseshit. I have a HS education and some college courses specific to what I do and I am up over $20 per hour. No union either. And why am I paid this way? Because I took the time to learn the skills necessary to attain this level of earnings.
The problem with the labor market looking toward degreed people is not that the HS grad cannot do the work. The problem is there are over one million people each year getting either 2 or 4 year degrees. Supply and demand. What's an employer going to look at when the HR manager sees a 4 yr degree on one resume and a HS diploma on another? Of course the 4 yr degree is going to get the nod. The other fact is that the average HS grad simply does not have the education to learn the skills that have replaced the hands on type of work with technical ability. In other words where as a machine in a factory once required two people to operate with many parts of the operation being manual, now that machine is run by computer and produces three times as much product in half the time. The operator must be able to program the computer that runs the machine. Unless the HS grad has gone to a tech school, he or she doesn't stand a chance of getting the job over the guy with the college degree.
I don't agree with this entirely, but I understand.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Tax incentives to have your call center here would be nice.

Make up your mind. You either want corporations to have money, or you don't. You seem to have a different opinion in every post.

No actually I don't. I want corporations to create jobs here in the USA, and start taking care of their employees again instead of having the government do it. Corporations used to provide good paying jobs with good healthcare and retirement benefits. Now they provide poor paying jobs with bad or no healthcare and little or no retirement. So the government gets larger taking on these things for corporations. Now we have obamacare, now more people are on welfare, now more people are on foodstamps, more people need social security and medicare.... And the rich get richer and government grows....

"Taking care of their employees" I love this one..
Define for me what "taking care of their employees" means.

 

[Brain357]

Make up your mind. You either want corporations to have money, or you don't. You seem to have a different opinion in every post.

No actually I don't. I want corporations to create jobs here in the USA, and start taking care of their employees again instead of having the government do it. Corporations used to provide good paying jobs with good healthcare and retirement benefits. Now they provide poor paying jobs with bad or no healthcare and little or no retirement. So the government gets larger taking on these things for corporations. Now we have obamacare, now more people are on welfare, now more people are on foodstamps, more people need social security and medicare.... And the rich get richer and government grows....

"Taking care of their employees" I love this one..
Define for me what "taking care of their employees" means.

How about you just read the post, it's all pretty clearly in there. I love how you righties are so dense.

 

[Brain357]

Yes, they are. Do you know why? Because Americans think they should be paid $20 an hour to answer a fucking phone, something any high school kid can do.

Yes high school graduates used to be able to make decent money. Now you need a degree to make what high school graduates used to. Now we have low paying jobs with no benefits or retirement. And I guess our current situation is what you think is good? I don't.

That's a load of horseshit. I have a HS education and some college courses specific to what I do and I am up over $20 per hour. No union either. And why am I paid this way? Because I took the time to learn the skills necessary to attain this level of earnings.
The problem with the labor market looking toward degreed people is not that the HS grad cannot do the work. The problem is there are over one million people each year getting either 2 or 4 year degrees. Supply and demand. What's an employer going to look at when the HR manager sees a 4 yr degree on one resume and a HS diploma on another? Of course the 4 yr degree is going to get the nod. The other fact is that the average HS grad simply does not have the education to learn the skills that have replaced the hands on type of work with technical ability. In other words where as a machine in a factory once required two people to operate with many parts of the operation being manual, now that machine is run by computer and produces three times as much product in half the time. The operator must be able to program the computer that runs the machine. Unless the HS grad has gone to a tech school, he or she doesn't stand a chance of getting the job over the guy with the college degree.
I don't agree with this entirely, but I understand.

Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? Or do you think people making that much is much more rare than it used to be? I think jobs making that much are much harder to find now.

 

[thereisnospoon]

No actually I don't. I want corporations to create jobs here in the USA, and start taking care of their employees again instead of having the government do it. Corporations used to provide good paying jobs with good healthcare and retirement benefits. Now they provide poor paying jobs with bad or no healthcare and little or no retirement. So the government gets larger taking on these things for corporations. Now we have obamacare, now more people are on welfare, now more people are on foodstamps, more people need social security and medicare.... And the rich get richer and government grows....

"Taking care of their employees" I love this one..
Define for me what "taking care of their employees" means.

How about you just read the post, it's all pretty clearly in there. I love how you righties are so dense.

No sir..You made a claim. Support it..
What is the meaning of "taking care of their employees"?
In my book, the employee relationship is first of all "at will".
Second, it is a simple agreement between the hired and the business.
The employee agrees to perform assigned tasks, exercise perfect attendance and punctuality and obey to the letter, all company rules and regulations. The employer in turn agrees to compensate the employee so as long as all conditions set forth in the agreement are met and adhered.
Simply put....The employer agrees "I ask you to come to work every day and on time. You will perform your tasks as per the agreement. If in the event I no longer require your service or violate the agreement, our relationship is unconditionally severed."
Pretty simple stuff. No where do I see the employer agreeing to "take care of the employee".....
Now, if you cannot explain or refuse to explain the meaning of "taking care of their employees" , you then have no argument.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yes high school graduates used to be able to make decent money. Now you need a degree to make what high school graduates used to. Now we have low paying jobs with no benefits or retirement. And I guess our current situation is what you think is good? I don't.

That's a load of horseshit. I have a HS education and some college courses specific to what I do and I am up over $20 per hour. No union either. And why am I paid this way? Because I took the time to learn the skills necessary to attain this level of earnings.
The problem with the labor market looking toward degreed people is not that the HS grad cannot do the work. The problem is there are over one million people each year getting either 2 or 4 year degrees. Supply and demand. What's an employer going to look at when the HR manager sees a 4 yr degree on one resume and a HS diploma on another? Of course the 4 yr degree is going to get the nod. The other fact is that the average HS grad simply does not have the education to learn the skills that have replaced the hands on type of work with technical ability. In other words where as a machine in a factory once required two people to operate with many parts of the operation being manual, now that machine is run by computer and produces three times as much product in half the time. The operator must be able to program the computer that runs the machine. Unless the HS grad has gone to a tech school, he or she doesn't stand a chance of getting the job over the guy with the college degree.
I don't agree with this entirely, but I understand.

Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? Or do you think people making that much is much more rare than it used to be? I think jobs making that much are much harder to find now.

"Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? "
I neither stated nor implied that.
The message I attempt to convey is that unlike you lefties with your ever present 'woe is us' whine, what I have accomplished IS possible for a person such as myself who has just a HS education.

 

[Brain357]

"Taking care of their employees" I love this one..
Define for me what "taking care of their employees" means.

How about you just read the post, it's all pretty clearly in there. I love how you righties are so dense.

No sir..You made a claim. Support it..
What is the meaning of "taking care of their employees"?
In my book, the employee relationship is first of all "at will".
Second, it is a simple agreement between the hired and the business.
The employee agrees to perform assigned tasks, exercise perfect attendance and punctuality and obey to the letter, all company rules and regulations. The employer in turn agrees to compensate the employee so as long as all conditions set forth in the agreement are met and adhered.
Simply put....The employer agrees "I ask you to come to work every day and on time. You will perform your tasks as per the agreement. If in the event I no longer require your service or violate the agreement, our relationship is unconditionally severed."
Pretty simple stuff. No where do I see the employer agreeing to "take care of the employee".....
Now, if you cannot explain or refuse to explain the meaning of "taking care of their employees" , you then have no argument.

Well I think I was pretty clear on what taking care of employees means. But since your bulb is pretty dim I guess I have to repeat myself. If a company is taking care of their employees they are giving good wages, health benefits, and retirement benefits. If a company is not doing this then the government does it. This is why we now have Obamacare, too many companies have failed to give good healthcare. This is why many full time employees still need food stamps to feed their families. People now are very dependent on social security and medicare when in the past people had pensions and healthcare into retirement from companies. So the government grows because companies aren't taking care of employees. Company profits and executive pay is soaring and so is inequality. So inequality leads to more and more big government. And that will be the case as long as we are a democracy. I realize that republicans are doing what they can to keep poor people from voting, but as long as they can this is the case. You may not like it, but that's how it is. So support inequality if you will, but your also supporting big government. Heck of a platform for the right.

 

[Brain357]

That's a load of horseshit. I have a HS education and some college courses specific to what I do and I am up over $20 per hour. No union either. And why am I paid this way? Because I took the time to learn the skills necessary to attain this level of earnings.
The problem with the labor market looking toward degreed people is not that the HS grad cannot do the work. The problem is there are over one million people each year getting either 2 or 4 year degrees. Supply and demand. What's an employer going to look at when the HR manager sees a 4 yr degree on one resume and a HS diploma on another? Of course the 4 yr degree is going to get the nod. The other fact is that the average HS grad simply does not have the education to learn the skills that have replaced the hands on type of work with technical ability. In other words where as a machine in a factory once required two people to operate with many parts of the operation being manual, now that machine is run by computer and produces three times as much product in half the time. The operator must be able to program the computer that runs the machine. Unless the HS grad has gone to a tech school, he or she doesn't stand a chance of getting the job over the guy with the college degree.
I don't agree with this entirely, but I understand.

Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? Or do you think people making that much is much more rare than it used to be? I think jobs making that much are much harder to find now.

"Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? "
I neither stated nor implied that.
The message I attempt to convey is that unlike you lefties with your ever present 'woe is us' whine, what I have accomplished IS possible for a person such as myself who has just a HS education.

Actually you called horseshit. So your trying to say that my statement wasn't true. But statistics show I'm right. The fact is that the majority of people with HS diplomas make less than $20. I didn't say it wasn't possible, but it's getting more and more unlikely.

 

[DiamondDave]

Yes high school graduates used to be able to make decent money. Now you need a degree to make what high school graduates used to. Now we have low paying jobs with no benefits or retirement. And I guess our current situation is what you think is good? I don't.

That's a load of horseshit. I have a HS education and some college courses specific to what I do and I am up over $20 per hour. No union either. And why am I paid this way? Because I took the time to learn the skills necessary to attain this level of earnings.
The problem with the labor market looking toward degreed people is not that the HS grad cannot do the work. The problem is there are over one million people each year getting either 2 or 4 year degrees. Supply and demand. What's an employer going to look at when the HR manager sees a 4 yr degree on one resume and a HS diploma on another? Of course the 4 yr degree is going to get the nod. The other fact is that the average HS grad simply does not have the education to learn the skills that have replaced the hands on type of work with technical ability. In other words where as a machine in a factory once required two people to operate with many parts of the operation being manual, now that machine is run by computer and produces three times as much product in half the time. The operator must be able to program the computer that runs the machine. Unless the HS grad has gone to a tech school, he or she doesn't stand a chance of getting the job over the guy with the college degree.
I don't agree with this entirely, but I understand.

Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? Or do you think people making that much is much more rare than it used to be? I think jobs making that much are much harder to find now.

Not if you have a marketable skill you trained for.... MANY in the IT business are NOT college trained.. obtaining OJT, working themselves up, getting professional certs etc.. and that is not the only field where this happens (plumbing, construction, electrician, mechanic, etc etc etc etc)

HS diploma is not a limiter, just as bullshit college degree is not a guarantee

 

[Vox]

why do we need fixing inequality?

Inequality is natural, NORMAL.

there is nothing to be fixed, unless you want simple expropriation.

 

[DiamondDave]

How about you just read the post, it's all pretty clearly in there. I love how you righties are so dense.

No sir..You made a claim. Support it..
What is the meaning of "taking care of their employees"?
In my book, the employee relationship is first of all "at will".
Second, it is a simple agreement between the hired and the business.
The employee agrees to perform assigned tasks, exercise perfect attendance and punctuality and obey to the letter, all company rules and regulations. The employer in turn agrees to compensate the employee so as long as all conditions set forth in the agreement are met and adhered.
Simply put....The employer agrees "I ask you to come to work every day and on time. You will perform your tasks as per the agreement. If in the event I no longer require your service or violate the agreement, our relationship is unconditionally severed."
Pretty simple stuff. No where do I see the employer agreeing to "take care of the employee".....
Now, if you cannot explain or refuse to explain the meaning of "taking care of their employees" , you then have no argument.

Well I think I was pretty clear on what taking care of employees means. But since your bulb is pretty dim I guess I have to repeat myself. If a company is taking care of their employees they are giving good wages, health benefits, and retirement benefits. If a company is not doing this then the government does it. This is why we now have Obamacare, too many companies have failed to give good healthcare. This is why many full time employees still need food stamps to feed their families. People now are very dependent on social security and medicare when in the past people had pensions and healthcare into retirement from companies. So the government grows because companies aren't taking care of employees. Company profits and executive pay is soaring and so is inequality. So inequality leads to more and more big government. And that will be the case as long as we are a democracy. I realize that republicans are doing what they can to keep poor people from voting, but as long as they can this is the case. You may not like it, but that's how it is. So support inequality if you will, but your also supporting big government. Heck of a platform for the right.

1) What you negotiate or can demand in compensation from your marketability and skill is on you
2) Your personal compensation and upkeep is not a responsibility of government
3) Government grows because it wants more power.. nothing less
4) Equality in outcome is also not a governmental concern
5) We are not a democracy.. we are a constitutional representative republic with differing ways that our officials are put into governmental positions
6) Nobody is preventing anyone from voting
7) It is those of you on your side who call for the selective unequal treatment of others when it suits you

 

[thereisnospoon]

How about you just read the post, it's all pretty clearly in there. I love how you righties are so dense.

No sir..You made a claim. Support it..
What is the meaning of "taking care of their employees"?
In my book, the employee relationship is first of all "at will".
Second, it is a simple agreement between the hired and the business.
The employee agrees to perform assigned tasks, exercise perfect attendance and punctuality and obey to the letter, all company rules and regulations. The employer in turn agrees to compensate the employee so as long as all conditions set forth in the agreement are met and adhered.
Simply put....The employer agrees "I ask you to come to work every day and on time. You will perform your tasks as per the agreement. If in the event I no longer require your service or violate the agreement, our relationship is unconditionally severed."
Pretty simple stuff. No where do I see the employer agreeing to "take care of the employee".....
Now, if you cannot explain or refuse to explain the meaning of "taking care of their employees" , you then have no argument.

Well I think I was pretty clear on what taking care of employees means. But since your bulb is pretty dim I guess I have to repeat myself. If a company is taking care of their employees they are giving good wages, health benefits, and retirement benefits. If a company is not doing this then the government does it. This is why we now have Obamacare, too many companies have failed to give good healthcare. This is why many full time employees still need food stamps to feed their families. People now are very dependent on social security and medicare when in the past people had pensions and healthcare into retirement from companies. So the government grows because companies aren't taking care of employees. Company profits and executive pay is soaring and so is inequality. So inequality leads to more and more big government. And that will be the case as long as we are a democracy. I realize that republicans are doing what they can to keep poor people from voting, but as long as they can this is the case. You may not like it, but that's how it is. So support inequality if you will, but your also supporting big government. Heck of a platform for the right.

Ahh. The entitlement mentality.
What you describe are known as "fringe benefits". A concept developed out of the need for employers to attract the best candidates for open positions.
The idea of fringe benefits has been transmogrified into an 'entitlement'...That an employer MUST provide fringe benefits. Not true.
BTW, there is no barrier to healthcare access. So stop using the term "healthcare"....The proper term is "health Insurance"...And you plebes have been brainwashed into the belief that without an insurance company or the federal government( which really pulls the strings of health insurance as an industry) we are all doomed. FALSE..
The fact is, even with Obamacare all those who buy their insurance through the federal or state exchanges will still be paying a majority of their medical expenses out of pocket as these plans all have large deductibles.
The reasons there are problems in the health insurance industry are several. The largest of these issues is government interference. But for the federal mandates and ridiculous rules and regulations, things like Obamacare would not be necessary. Government screwed up health insurance. The fix is worse. That's the pattern. Do gooder politicians with a idea that they need to "fix" something or make something "fair" neglect to examine the laws of unintended consequences.
You'll never be able to prove the notion of "good wages" because the marketplace determines wage levels. Meanwhile there is no such thing as a "living wage"....
And please spare me the class warfare platitudes. They mean nothing.
"This is why many full time employees still need food stamps to feed their families."
Really? Ok what percentage of full time private sector workers are also food stamp recipients?
"So the government grows because companies aren't taking care of employees."
No. Government has always grown. Government grows because politicians have obligations to those who have an interest in expanding government. Ideology of the left requires expansion of government by expanding the availability of entitlements. Vote buying. Obamacare is vote buying. Period. It fixes nothing. We don't get to keep out health insurance plan. We don't get to keep our doctor. We don't save up to $2500 per year. There will still be millions not covered by insurance and no, preexisting conditions will not be universally covered.
No one is trying to keep poor people from voting. The poor do that to themselves. yes, the poorest Americans as a group have the lowest percentage of voter turnout.
Final point. This silly idea of income inequality is a load of crap because the concept presupposes the idea that income should be equal in the first place. It isn't. And never will. I will remind you that there is no need for you to respond to this post. You are being educated with facts. This is not a debate.
And there ya have it....Out. good luck

 

[thereisnospoon]

why do we need fixing inequality?

Inequality is natural, NORMAL.

there is nothing to be fixed, unless you want simple expropriation.

Obama and his minions planted this income/wealth inequality seed in the minds of the entitled, uninformed and the envious.
All of these types are part of the democrat voting base.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? Or do you think people making that much is much more rare than it used to be? I think jobs making that much are much harder to find now.

"Ok, so you actually think making over $20 an hour with just a HS diploma is the norm? "
I neither stated nor implied that.
The message I attempt to convey is that unlike you lefties with your ever present 'woe is us' whine, what I have accomplished IS possible for a person such as myself who has just a HS education.

Actually you called horseshit. So your trying to say that my statement wasn't true. But statistics show I'm right. The fact is that the majority of people with HS diplomas make less than $20. I didn't say it wasn't possible, but it's getting more and more unlikely.

Which statistics are those?
No. It's not getting less likely. You made that up.
Have you been paying attention? There are literally tons of technical and adult based educational opportunities for people to learn a skill or trade. All they have to do is make the effort. No college degree needed. Effort.
But no. You'd rather pine for the "good old days". When a kid could allegedly walk into the factory and take a job for the next 40 years....The labor market no longer supports that. Training and skills are now required. Get them.

 

[Vox]

why do we need fixing inequality?

Inequality is natural, NORMAL.

there is nothing to be fixed, unless you want simple expropriation.

Obama and his minions planted this income/wealth inequality seed in the minds of the entitled, uninformed and the envious.
All of these types are part of the democrat voting base.

well, class warfare is the base for any upheaval the left dreams to provoke, so I am not surprised by the leftard rhetoric.

I am surprised so many sheeple fall in line with it.

Better is the enemy of good - that is exactly about this situation.

You think inequality is bad? start equalizing - and then you will understand the difference.

The sheeple are being slaughtered in the equalization game the first and can never understand why them as they support it

 

[Brain357]

why do we need fixing inequality?

Inequality is natural, NORMAL.

there is nothing to be fixed, unless you want simple expropriation.

Like everything else it's bad in excess. Well it's good if you like big government.

 

[The Rabbi]

why do we need fixing inequality?

Inequality is natural, NORMAL.

there is nothing to be fixed, unless you want simple expropriation.

Like everything else it's bad in excess. Well it's good if you like big government.

What is "excess"? What makes it "bad"? Pages and pages of discussion and the brain dead leftists are stuck with the same old empty phrases: income inequality. Taking care of employees (like a business is some sort of charity). Fair wages. Living wage.
It's all bullshit. Employer-employee is a business relationship. Like all business relationships it exists for the mutual benefit of both parties. Once one party stops getting appropriate benefits, it stops the relationship. Period.
The only "fair" thing employers can do is follow through on their agreements with employees. Paying promptly. Providing contracted benefits. That's fair. And there's a court system to enforce it if they dont.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Inequality of annual income can never be fixed. Don't sacrifice the pursuit of happiness. Unapologetic Americans know that remains in tack.