GOP once again shows it true colors

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yahoo!

"Mike Burton of Southern Momentum, an anti-UAW group of plant workers, said Corker's statement makes sense.

"We are in a battle with Mexico on where this new product goes," said Burton, "and it stands to reason that the union will add costs. We need to keep costs down to fight for that new product."

In other words let's keep wages and benefits down so VW's stock holders and executives benefit to a greater degree by exploiting the workers.

"Another labor expert, Harley Shaiken of the University of California-Berkeley, said, "The senator's comments amount to economic intimidation that undermines the whole nature of union representation elections."

You have two choices. One, you have hundreds of people employed at a wage dictated acceptable by the market, or two, you have hundreds of people unemployed.

Grow up and take your pick.

"Wages dictated by the market"? Seems the market is defined by the employer, a situation which long ago existed and resulted in violence, not negotiations. Don't you people read history?

If you don't want to work for the wage they are offering you then don't take the job. See how easy that is?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yahoo!

"Mike Burton of Southern Momentum, an anti-UAW group of plant workers, said Corker's statement makes sense.

"We are in a battle with Mexico on where this new product goes," said Burton, "and it stands to reason that the union will add costs. We need to keep costs down to fight for that new product."

In other words let's keep wages and benefits down so VW's stock holders and executives benefit to a greater degree by exploiting the workers.

"Another labor expert, Harley Shaiken of the University of California-Berkeley, said, "The senator's comments amount to economic intimidation that undermines the whole nature of union representation elections."

You have two choices. One, you have hundreds of people employed at a wage dictated acceptable by the market, or two, you have hundreds of people unemployed.

Grow up and take your pick.

Why?

We don't have prices dictated by the markets. The corporations get Congress to suppress competition with new regs and import restrictions all the time.

And do you feel that is an acceptable practice? I don't.

For example, unlike Microsoft who can go to China and India to get low wage software engineers, you cant go to India and buy say a complete set of teak furniture and take advantage of the difference in living standards the way Microsoft does.

I don't give a fuck what they do in India. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything. All that matters is VW is willing to pay a certain wage to have that plant here and several hundred people could now have a job as a result. If they are unable to pay the wage they are willing because of outside interference then they'll put their plant somewhere else and none of those people will have a job. That's all that matters. You have a job or you don't.

The UAW was a major factor in crippling the Big Three.

 

[Spoonman]

Yahoo!

"Mike Burton of Southern Momentum, an anti-UAW group of plant workers, said Corker's statement makes sense.

"We are in a battle with Mexico on where this new product goes," said Burton, "and it stands to reason that the union will add costs. We need to keep costs down to fight for that new product."

In other words let's keep wages and benefits down so VW's stock holders and executives benefit to a greater degree by exploiting the workers.

"Another labor expert, Harley Shaiken of the University of California-Berkeley, said, "The senator's comments amount to economic intimidation that undermines the whole nature of union representation elections."

heres an idea. lets keep labor costs overpriced so more jobs get outsourced. like the democrats haven't already destroyed the economy enough. the only economy democrats are goo for is China's

 

[JimBowie1958]

I might take offense but for the fact you're brain dead. Sad, you've consumed too much poison Kool-Aid and have no idea you support those who don't give a damn if you live or die.

No facts, no reason just bullshit tossed out of your mouth like vomit.

Fuck off, fascist jack boot.

Sorry tough guy, I'll keep posting as long as morons like you continue to pollute my country [You remind me of all the punks seated in the cage in or on their way to jail]

You are a moron as demonstrated by your dull, witless and boring posts.

Even as a troll, you are totally blah.

Fuck off, twat-face mouth whore.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Wry is so dishonest you can't take any of his threads seriously anymore

He post ONE ARTICLE and then claims this is all the Republican party with more BS added with each post

why can't the left be honest anymore?

Because they have been taken over by leftwing Jacobonism and heathen, Christ-hating fools.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yahoo!

"Mike Burton of Southern Momentum, an anti-UAW group of plant workers, said Corker's statement makes sense.

"We are in a battle with Mexico on where this new product goes," said Burton, "and it stands to reason that the union will add costs. We need to keep costs down to fight for that new product."

In other words let's keep wages and benefits down so VW's stock holders and executives benefit to a greater degree by exploiting the workers.

"Another labor expert, Harley Shaiken of the University of California-Berkeley, said, "The senator's comments amount to economic intimidation that undermines the whole nature of union representation elections."

In other words let's keep wages and benefits down so VW's stock holders and executives benefit to a greater degree by exploiting the workers.

The workers who voted not to let the UAW take money out of every paycheck? LOL!

 

[JimBowie1958]

You have two choices. One, you have hundreds of people employed at a wage dictated acceptable by the market, or two, you have hundreds of people unemployed.

Grow up and take your pick.

Why?

We don't have prices dictated by the markets. The corporations get Congress to suppress competition with new regs and import restrictions all the time.

And do you feel that is an acceptable practice? I don't.

For example, unlike Microsoft who can go to China and India to get low wage software engineers, you cant go to India and buy say a complete set of teak furniture and take advantage of the difference in living standards the way Microsoft does.

I don't give a fuck what they do in India. It has absolutely nothing to do with anything. All that matters is VW is willing to pay a certain wage to have that plant here and several hundred people could now have a job as a result. If they are unable to pay the wage they are willing because of outside interference then they'll put their plant somewhere else and none of those people will have a job. That's all that matters. You have a job or you don't.

The UAW was a major factor in crippling the Big Three.

No, I don't find it acceptable, and I am talking about what YOU cannot do in India, lol.

The corporate cronies can buy cheap labor from India and undercut your wages, but YOU cannot go to India and undercut the retail market here by buying directly from Indian furniture manufacturing companies.

The system is therefore not just or even handed at all.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, and bmw in greer are taking advantage of it's workers? How about boing in charleston? Niether have unions, time to get rid of them.

Business & Technology | BMW finds skilled workers for less at S.C. plant | Seattle Times Newspaper

Who supports "Class Warfare"?

"But they're all in the factory now making $15 an hour — about half of what the typical German autoworker makes."

"But the price of having a more globally competitive work force means more in America could fall well short of the middle-class living standards that manufacturing workers once could expect. Wages adjusted for inflation have declined for these workers since 2003."

Seems to be a great practice if we want our nation to continue on the road to a caste society ["CASTE SOCIETY: Caste is a form of social stratification characterized by endogamy, hereditary transmission of a style of life which often includes an occupation, ritual status in a hierarchy, and customary social interaction and exclusion based on cultural notions of purity and pollution]

"But they're all in the factory now making $15 an hour

That's awful! They should burn the factory down!!!

Unemployment is better. More dignified.

 

[HenryBHough]

Coming soon:

An executive order that no motor vehicle made in a factory where workers have rejected a union may be sold in Amerika.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So, UAW labor prices itself out of the market and it's the GOP's fault.

You progressives make me.

No, it's more like the corporate business owners, who have generally been very profitable these past few years, are working to undercut American wages again.

When are conservatives going to figure out that since taxes are mostly paid by the middle class, it will take a GROWTH in middle class workers wages in aggregate to bring down the deficits?

Unless you are a Dick Cheney conservative for whom deficits don't matter, this should concern you.

When are conservatives going to figure out that since taxes are mostly paid by the middle class,

What is your definition of mostly and middle class?

I'd like to check your claim.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Coming soon:

An executive order that no motor vehicle made in a factory where workers have rejected a union may be sold in Amerika.

Seriously, Our Dictator in Chief could do exactly that, the same way he had his bureaucrats 'reinterpret' government regs to include CO2 as a pollutant based on the unproven Global Warming theories.

Totally bypassed Congress, and done by his magical Pen of Decree.

Why couldn't he do just about any damned thing he wants?

We need a new party to oppose the Obama regime, the GOP is worthless.

 

[skookerasbil]

Fuck the unions.

Laughed my balls off when I saw yesterday that the plant workers in Tenessee punted on the UAW. Im still laughing.

 

[Wildman]

Yeah, and bmw in greer are taking advantage of it's workers? How about boing in charleston? Niether have unions, time to get rid of them.

Business & Technology | BMW finds skilled workers for less at S.C. plant | Seattle Times Newspaper

Who supports "Class Warfare"?

"But they're all in the factory now making $15 an hour — about half of what the typical German autoworker makes."

"But the price of having a more globally competitive work force means more in America could fall well short of the middle-class living standards that manufacturing workers once could expect. Wages adjusted for inflation have declined for these workers since 2003."

Seems to be a great practice if we want our nation to continue on the road to a caste society ["CASTE SOCIETY: Caste is a form of social stratification characterized by endogamy, hereditary transmission of a style of life which often includes an occupation, ritual status in a hierarchy, and customary social interaction and exclusion based on cultural notions of purity and pollution]

$15 is starting pay, plus they have great benefits. I have a friend that worms there and he makes good money.

when i got to the "worms" part i just about fell out of my chair laughing my ass off ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ...

 

[JimBowie1958]

So, UAW labor prices itself out of the market and it's the GOP's fault.

You progressives make me.

No, it's more like the corporate business owners, who have generally been very profitable these past few years, are working to undercut American wages again.

When are conservatives going to figure out that since taxes are mostly paid by the middle class, it will take a GROWTH in middle class workers wages in aggregate to bring down the deficits?

Unless you are a Dick Cheney conservative for whom deficits don't matter, this should concern you.

When are conservatives going to figure out that since taxes are mostly paid by the middle class,

What is your definition of mostly and middle class?

I'd like to check your claim.

Well, OK, but first let's define what the 'middle class' is. In the Old World, 'middle class' meant anyone who was not a noble and yet owned significant capital in the form of businesses, etc. This is what the Marxists refer to as the bourgeois and not what Americans think of as middle class, which makes a lot of young radicals look stupid when they use bourgeois to apply to doctors, lawyers and cooks, lol.

I think this Wiki article on the topic is fairly helpful.
American middle class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My own concept I go by is more based on function rather than income, that meaning the middle class is between the upper class who do not have to work to make a living and can live very comfortably off investments, trusts and that sort of thing, and the working poor and poverty stricken on the opposite end of the scale.

This is basically all the degreed white collar workers at the top end, doctors, lawyers, scholars, etc to the lower end of skilled tradesmen and managerial professions.

Statistically I don't think it is valid to simply assign a specific level of income to define the bounds between the upper, middle and lower classes. I look at it this way; those who do not have to work to live very comfortably in homes worth seven digits, full time servants, etc, we are talking about the top 1% of income earners, and the working poor are those below average income levels, i.e. the bottom 50%.

For our purposes the following tax revenue data from income brackets is very useful. It shows the total taxes paid after credits, not what they are supposed to pay in theory, which is most often used by those who defend the rich, but is the total of what they ACTUALLY pay.

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

If you look at the data for 2009, the top 1% paid $318 billion in federal taxes, while the middle class (> 1%, < 50% income bracket) paid $528 billion ($846 billion- $318 billion), almost twice what the upper class or rich people paid.

I hope that is helpful. We middle class Americans have long been the strength of our nation. From native born tradesmen to hard working upwardly mobile immigrants, we have long paid the most in taxes and held the reigns of government by dominance of the political system. In part this necessitated laws that kept the wealthy and corporations from buying elections, but those laws have been gutted and now the corporate money and the extremely wealthy like Soros and the Koch brothers own our political system since the Citizens United ruling in 2010.

Campaign finance in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Campaign finance law in the United States changed drastically in the wake of two 2010 judicial opinions: the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in SpeechNow.org v. FEC.[42] According to a 2011 Congressional Research Service report, these two decisions constitute “the most fundamental changes to campaign finance law in decades.” [43]

Citizens United struck down, on free speech grounds, the limits on the ability of organizations that accepted corporate or union money from running electioneering communications. The Court reasoned that the restrictions permitted by Buckley were justified based on avoiding corruption or the appearance of corruption, and that this rationale did not apply to corporate donations to independent organizations. Citizens United overruled the 1990 case Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, in which the Supreme Court upheld the Michigan Campaign Finance Act, which prohibited corporations from using treasury money to support or oppose candidates in elections.

Two months later, a unanimous nine-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decided SpeechNow, which relied on Citizens United to hold that Congress could not limit donations to organizations that only made independent expenditures, that is, expenditures that were “uncoordinated” with a candidate’s campaign. These decisions led to the rise of “independent-expenditure only” PACs, commonly known as “Super PACs.” Super PACs, under Citizens United and SpeechNow, can raise unlimited funds from individual and corporate donors and use those funds for electioneering advertisements, provided that the Super PAC does not coordinate with a candidate.

It is quite simple to avoid 'coordination' and it is also ambiguous enough to allow the continued use of laws against such coordination to ensnare individuals the oligarchy does not like.

This is how the GOP ended up with a loser like Mitt Romney as its presidential candidate in 2012. The Wall Street bankers gave funds to a so-called independent finance group that exclusively attacked Romney's opponents and dragged them down in the polls one at a time till only Romney was left and pretty much became the default candidate.

Political action committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2012 Election[edit]

Super PACs may support particular candidacies. In the 2012 presidential election, Super PACs played a major role, spending more than the candidates' election campaigns in the Republican primaries.[25] As of early April 2012, Restore Our Future—a Super PAC usually described as having been created to help Mitt Romney's presidential campaign—had spent $40 million. Winning Our Future (a pro–Newt Gingrich group) spent $16 million.[not in citation given][19] Some Super PACs are run or advised by a candidate's former staff or associates.[26]

In the 2012 election campaign, most of the money given to super PACs came from wealthy individuals, not corporations.[25] According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, the top 100 individual super PAC donors in 2011–2012 made up just 3.7% of contributors, but accounted for more than 80% of the total money raised,[27] while less than 0.5% of the money given to “the most active Super PACs” was donated by publicly traded corporations.[28] Super PACs have been criticized for relying heavily on negative ads.[29]

As of February 2012, according to Center for Responsive Politics, 313 groups organized as Super PACs had received $98,650,993 and spent $46,191,479. This means early in the 2012 election cycle, PACs had already greatly exceeded total receipts of 2008. The leading Super PAC on its own raised more money than the combined total spent by the top 9 PACS in the 2008 cycle.[30]

We have let the Republic's political system be bought, literally bought, by the top 1% and corporations they control. These people largely do not have the same values as middle class Americans, generally hate and despise us and will abuse the hell out of our government on a level exponentially worse than anything the old Democratic patronage system ever did.

 

[Wildman]

i have read for a few years now about the democRATS accusing the GOP of "the WAR on Women"........., once more i have to laff in their faces

what did the commie liberal press and all their goons do to Sarah Palin ?????

if that was not and still is a war on this woman then what the fuck do you liberal sons-of-bitches call it ???

 

[JimBowie1958]

i have read for a few years now about the democRATS accusing the GOP of "the WAR on Women"........., once more i have to laff in their faces

what did the commie liberal press and all their goons do to Sarah Palin ?????

if that was not and still is a war on this woman then what the fuck do you liberal sons-of-bitches call it ???

Just like Clarence Thomas is not a 'genuine' black person because of his 'race traitor' ideology and politics, so too Palin is considered not a genuine liberated woman because of her ideology and politics.

When libtards talk about diversity it does not include ideological and rational diversity.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No, it's more like the corporate business owners, who have generally been very profitable these past few years, are working to undercut American wages again.

When are conservatives going to figure out that since taxes are mostly paid by the middle class, it will take a GROWTH in middle class workers wages in aggregate to bring down the deficits?

Unless you are a Dick Cheney conservative for whom deficits don't matter, this should concern you.

When are conservatives going to figure out that since taxes are mostly paid by the middle class,

What is your definition of mostly and middle class?

I'd like to check your claim.

Well, OK, but first let's define what the 'middle class' is. In the Old World, 'middle class' meant anyone who was not a noble and yet owned significant capital in the form of businesses, etc. This is what the Marxists refer to as the bourgeois and not what Americans think of as middle class, which makes a lot of young radicals look stupid when they use bourgeois to apply to doctors, lawyers and cooks, lol.

I think this Wiki article on the topic is fairly helpful.
American middle class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

My own concept I go by is more based on function rather than income, that meaning the middle class is between the upper class who do not have to work to make a living and can live very comfortably off investments, trusts and that sort of thing, and the working poor and poverty stricken on the opposite end of the scale.

This is basically all the degreed white collar workers at the top end, doctors, lawyers, scholars, etc to the lower end of skilled tradesmen and managerial professions.

Statistically I don't think it is valid to simply assign a specific level of income to define the bounds between the upper, middle and lower classes. I look at it this way; those who do not have to work to live very comfortably in homes worth seven digits, full time servants, etc, we are talking about the top 1% of income earners, and the working poor are those below average income levels, i.e. the bottom 50%.

For our purposes the following tax revenue data from income brackets is very useful. It shows the total taxes paid after credits, not what they are supposed to pay in theory, which is most often used by those who defend the rich, but is the total of what they ACTUALLY pay.

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

If you look at the data for 2009, the top 1% paid $318 billion in federal taxes, while the middle class (> 1%, < 50% income bracket) paid $528 billion ($846 billion- $318 billion), almost twice what the upper class or rich people paid.

I hope that is helpful. We middle class Americans have long been the strength of our nation. From native born tradesmen to hard working upwardly mobile immigrants, we have long paid the most in taxes and held the reigns of government by dominance of the political system. In part this necessitated laws that kept the wealthy and corporations from buying elections, but those laws have been gutted and now the corporate money and the extremely wealthy like Soros and the Koch brothers own our political system since the Citizens United ruling in 2010.

Campaign finance in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Campaign finance law in the United States changed drastically in the wake of two 2010 judicial opinions: the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision in SpeechNow.org v. FEC.[42] According to a 2011 Congressional Research Service report, these two decisions constitute “the most fundamental changes to campaign finance law in decades.” [43]

Citizens United struck down, on free speech grounds, the limits on the ability of organizations that accepted corporate or union money from running electioneering communications. The Court reasoned that the restrictions permitted by Buckley were justified based on avoiding corruption or the appearance of corruption, and that this rationale did not apply to corporate donations to independent organizations. Citizens United overruled the 1990 case Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, in which the Supreme Court upheld the Michigan Campaign Finance Act, which prohibited corporations from using treasury money to support or oppose candidates in elections.

Two months later, a unanimous nine-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit decided SpeechNow, which relied on Citizens United to hold that Congress could not limit donations to organizations that only made independent expenditures, that is, expenditures that were “uncoordinated” with a candidate’s campaign. These decisions led to the rise of “independent-expenditure only” PACs, commonly known as “Super PACs.” Super PACs, under Citizens United and SpeechNow, can raise unlimited funds from individual and corporate donors and use those funds for electioneering advertisements, provided that the Super PAC does not coordinate with a candidate.

It is quite simple to avoid 'coordination' and it is also ambiguous enough to allow the continued use of laws against such coordination to ensnare individuals the oligarchy does not like.

This is how the GOP ended up with a loser like Mitt Romney as its presidential candidate in 2012. The Wall Street bankers gave funds to a so-called independent finance group that exclusively attacked Romney's opponents and dragged them down in the polls one at a time till only Romney was left and pretty much became the default candidate.

Political action committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

2012 Election[edit]

Super PACs may support particular candidacies. In the 2012 presidential election, Super PACs played a major role, spending more than the candidates' election campaigns in the Republican primaries.[25] As of early April 2012, Restore Our Future—a Super PAC usually described as having been created to help Mitt Romney's presidential campaign—had spent $40 million. Winning Our Future (a pro–Newt Gingrich group) spent $16 million.[not in citation given][19] Some Super PACs are run or advised by a candidate's former staff or associates.[26]

In the 2012 election campaign, most of the money given to super PACs came from wealthy individuals, not corporations.[25] According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, the top 100 individual super PAC donors in 2011–2012 made up just 3.7% of contributors, but accounted for more than 80% of the total money raised,[27] while less than 0.5% of the money given to “the most active Super PACs” was donated by publicly traded corporations.[28] Super PACs have been criticized for relying heavily on negative ads.[29]

As of February 2012, according to Center for Responsive Politics, 313 groups organized as Super PACs had received $98,650,993 and spent $46,191,479. This means early in the 2012 election cycle, PACs had already greatly exceeded total receipts of 2008. The leading Super PAC on its own raised more money than the combined total spent by the top 9 PACS in the 2008 cycle.[30]

We have let the Republic's political system be bought, literally bought, by the top 1% and corporations they control. These people largely do not have the same values as middle class Americans, generally hate and despise us and will abuse the hell out of our government on a level exponentially worse than anything the old Democratic patronage system ever did.

the middle class (> 1%, < 50% income bracket)

The middle class is the 50th-99th percentile?
Doesn't sound very "middlely" to me.

almost twice what the upper class or rich people paid.

Your definition of "upper class or rich", top 1% only, is a unique one.

and the working poor are those below average income levels, i.e. the bottom 50%.

Your definition of working poor is also unique.
You should assign an income number to your 50% cutoff.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Look at all the good the UAW has done for GM and Detroit!!

 

[JimBowie1958]

the middle class (> 1%, < 50% income bracket)

The middle class is the 50th-99th percentile?
Doesn't sound very "middlely" to me.

It was never 'middlely' statistically anyway. What exact definition you use is rather arbitrary.

almost twice what the upper class or rich people paid.

Your definition of "upper class or rich", top 1% only, is a unique one.

No, it isn't. Why do you think the charts were set up the way they were? Do you think I did them? lol

and the working poor are those below average income levels, i.e. the bottom 50%.

Your definition of working poor is also unique.
You should assign an income number to your 50% cutoff.

With inflation as it is there is no valid reason to assign a number that might make sense this year but not ten years from now.

By your suggestion we are all rich by 1950 numerical income standards, which is why specific income numbers are deceiving and pointless.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The workers rejected the union.

Volkswagen workers reject union at Chattanooga plant, a blow to UAW - latimes.com