Illinois governor strikes blow for taxapyers...q

[thereisnospoon]

Ok...I have a business. I sell lumber. I have accounts with two large regional builders.
I have 50 people working for me.
One of the contracts ends. My competitor gives the builder a better deal. My volume is now cut in half. I am forced to lay off 25 people.
According to you, I should keep all 50 workers and lay off MYSELF....
.

Works for me. Your employees would be celebrating for days... Maybe if the managers started getting the brunt of the bad decisions they make, instead of the working folks,

But it was WHO this guy laid off he lost have the business that was the real issue. He didn't lay off the people he just hired, he laid off the people who had been with for years because they made more money or were older. And when people pointed that out to him, he replied, 'Well, that's why I'm glad I don't have a union."

Of course, most of the people who kept working there are miserable. A few of them have even come to me to have resumes written.

Now, imagine if there were a union. The people with seniority would have stayed, as it should be. When business came back, instead of hiring new waifs willing to work for a pittance, he would have had to have called back the people he let go. WHich is what a "layoff" is actually supposed to mean.

Again, I see no good reason why the economy should dance to the tune of the managers who make the bad decisions.

I actually support a seniority system. With conditions. The union way is no good. It ignores the performance of the individual.
So, yes, senior people will be retained, but ONLY if they out perform those with less time with the company.
As a business owner, my goal is to what? Maximize profit. And why do I wish to have this as my priority? So I can make a profit to keep the doors open and thus offer employment opportunities to those who I deem a value to my company.
Oh, when people are laid off it has nothing to do with "first called" back. At least not in the real world. Laid off is a term used like a military honorable discharge as opposed to "fired" which is a dishonorable discharge.
Anyway, most people who are displaced go on to other jobs. So trying to bring them back is academic.
From now on, if your reply or explanation is going to include "supposed to", I'd rather you not reply at all. "Supposed to" is an opinion or even an assumption. Not interested.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah, paying a guy with a 10th grade education 65K a year to do a job a Chink with a 5th grade education does better and at 30K a year is real smart.
Give a guy a "living wage" for doing what a 5th grader could do.
And folks wonder why businesses have gone under.
Neighbor of mine was a damn janitor at GM and made 50K a year.

And that's why GM spends $2,500 per unit just to cover the costs of labor. Absurd.

 

[Gadawg73]

Ok...I have a business. I sell lumber. I have accounts with two large regional builders.
I have 50 people working for me.
One of the contracts ends. My competitor gives the builder a better deal. My volume is now cut in half. I am forced to lay off 25 people.
According to you, I should keep all 50 workers and lay off MYSELF....
.

Works for me. Your employees would be celebrating for days... Maybe if the managers started getting the brunt of the bad decisions they make, instead of the working folks,

But it was WHO this guy laid off he lost have the business that was the real issue. He didn't lay off the people he just hired, he laid off the people who had been with for years because they made more money or were older. And when people pointed that out to him, he replied, 'Well, that's why I'm glad I don't have a union."

Of course, most of the people who kept working there are miserable. A few of them have even come to me to have resumes written.

Now, imagine if there were a union. The people with seniority would have stayed, as it should be. When business came back, instead of hiring new waifs willing to work for a pittance, he would have had to have called back the people he let go. WHich is what a "layoff" is actually supposed to mean.

Again, I see no good reason why the economy should dance to the tune of the managers who make the bad decisions.

I actually support a seniority system. With conditions. The union way is no good. It ignores the performance of the individual.
So, yes, senior people will be retained, but ONLY if they out perform those with less time with the company.
As a business owner, my goal is to what? Maximize profit. And why do I wish to have this as my priority? So I can make a profit to keep the doors open and thus offer employment opportunities to those who I deem a value to my company.
Oh, when people are laid off it has nothing to do with "first called" back. At least not in the real world. Laid off is a term used like a military honorable discharge as opposed to "fired" which is a dishonorable discharge.
Anyway, most people who are displaced go on to other jobs. So trying to bring them back is academic.
From now on, if your reply or explanation is going to include "supposed to", I'd rather you not reply at all. "Supposed to" is an opinion or even an assumption. Not interested.

How dare you make profit your #1 goal you greedy bastard.
You have invested all the capital, work longer hours than any employee, took 100% of the financial risk and assume all of the liabilities and problems of owning the business.
So what? It is not fair you make a profit and pocket 3 times more than your workers. You never get a paid vacation but you are the greedy owner, you do not deserve one.
You are the epitome of a "plutocrat" or you support them and you are not supposed to do any of the above.

 

[Gadawg73]

Yeah, paying a guy with a 10th grade education 65K a year to do a job a Chink with a 5th grade education does better and at 30K a year is real smart.
Give a guy a "living wage" for doing what a 5th grader could do.
And folks wonder why businesses have gone under.
Neighbor of mine was a damn janitor at GM and made 50K a year.

And that's why GM spends $2,500 per unit just to cover the costs of labor. Absurd.

And another 2 grand to cover current and future costs of their health care benefits.
They pay MORE by far for their retirees health care than their current workers.
That is the mentality of the union retiree. Fuck the current worker, GIVE ME MINE.
Of course that is the cry of the nation now running 1.6 trillion dollar deficits.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Just answer me one question: why shouldn't any employee have to choice to pay dues or not?

Because letting someone get all the benefits of collective bargaining without paying any of the price for it pretty much defeats the purpose.

But union dues don't only go to bargaining costs. Most of them go to political bullshit.

100% true. In fact unions have lobbied against bills in state legislatures to ban the practice of taking a portion of union dues, without the permission or authorization of members or a member, for the purpose of donating the money to particular political candidates or a party committee.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah, paying a guy with a 10th grade education 65K a year to do a job a Chink with a 5th grade education does better and at 30K a year is real smart.
Give a guy a "living wage" for doing what a 5th grader could do.
And folks wonder why businesses have gone under.
Neighbor of mine was a damn janitor at GM and made 50K a year.

And that's why GM spends $2,500 per unit just to cover the costs of labor. Absurd.

And another 2 grand to cover current and future costs of their health care benefits.
They pay MORE by far for their retirees health care than their current workers.
That is the mentality of the union retiree. Fuck the current worker, GIVE ME MINE.
Of course that is the cry of the nation now running 1.6 trillion dollar deficits.

GM has over one million pensioners. No wonder why the company went broke.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, paying a guy with a 10th grade education 65K a year to do a job a Chink with a 5th grade education does better and at 30K a year is real smart.
Give a guy a "living wage" for doing what a 5th grader could do.
And folks wonder why businesses have gone under.
Neighbor of mine was a damn janitor at GM and made 50K a year.

"Chink"?

And why is it you begrudge a Janitor 50K, but you think it's just fine and dandy that the CEO of GM who ran the company into the ground got $12,000,000.00. You could have hired 240 Janitors for that, and it would have helped the economy a lot more.

 

[JoeB131]

[

I actually support a seniority system. With conditions. The union way is no good. It ignores the performance of the individual.
So, yes, senior people will be retained, but ONLY if they out perform those with less time with the company.SNIP!.

Yeah. That's right. because the bosses are just wonderful at recognizing "performance".

Man when the company was making money hand over fist with this big account they were gouging at 30% markup, they just couldn't say enough nice things about my "performance".

Until I got sick, and ran up some medical bills. Oh, they still couldn't say anything bad about my performance, but when their attempts to get me to quit on my own failed, they just let me go.

Sorry, that's the last time I really start caring about what the douchebags have to say about my peformance.

 

[JoeB131]

Unions were a great force to make companies protect workers with safety initiatives.
Then they started extorting pay and benefits that eventually companies could never pay for.
That is what sunk them and many a business also.

Right. It wasn't the greed or the bad decisions or the lack of long term planning.

It was those damned union guys insisting they should get paid a living wage, those fucks!

Right, those fucks.
Unions destroyed themselves with their unreasonable demands and utter greed.
You people are like children who got caught breaking the living room lamp. You refuse to accept responsibility for your actions.

No, I just don't think we broke the lamp.

America had GREATER prosperity when it was more heavily unionized, and we had GREATER prosperity when the wealthy paid a higher tax rate and we had GREATER prosperity when government regulation had teeth.

Republicans used to get this. We will have to teach it to them again.

 

[Meathead]

Here we go again. This'll probably make Whinin' Joe's heart bleed to death.

Right-to-work debate heats up ahead of Mich vote - Yahoo! News

 

[JoeB131]

Stop trying to impress yourself.
We are taxed enough. IN fact, we are over taxed. When all of the taxes we pay are complied most middle income and higher earners have a minimum 50% total tax burden. All the money that goes to state and the federal governments and they still demand more.
What the fuck are these people doing with our money. Any self respecting American should be aggressively asking this question. Yet, you lefties voted for more of the same old wasteful shit.
Of course, this has nothing to do with revenue. It's about punishment.
It is about growing the size of government.
73% of all new jobs created in the last 4 years have been federal employment. That's right. Obama is busily growing federal employment which adds NOTHING to the economy. It only removes more wealth from the private sector economy. The economy will collapse under the weight of this bulbous federal government.
Oh, I have a question...If the Obama economy is doing so well and Obama himself is creating these millions of new jobs, then why is there a need for an extension of unemployment benefits?

If you want to throw around horseshit statistics... 93% of the wealth created in this recovery went to the top 1%.

That's why they need to pay more.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Stop trying to impress yourself.
We are taxed enough. IN fact, we are over taxed. When all of the taxes we pay are complied most middle income and higher earners have a minimum 50% total tax burden. All the money that goes to state and the federal governments and they still demand more.
What the fuck are these people doing with our money. Any self respecting American should be aggressively asking this question. Yet, you lefties voted for more of the same old wasteful shit.
Of course, this has nothing to do with revenue. It's about punishment.
It is about growing the size of government.
73% of all new jobs created in the last 4 years have been federal employment. That's right. Obama is busily growing federal employment which adds NOTHING to the economy. It only removes more wealth from the private sector economy. The economy will collapse under the weight of this bulbous federal government.
Oh, I have a question...If the Obama economy is doing so well and Obama himself is creating these millions of new jobs, then why is there a need for an extension of unemployment benefits?

If you want to throw around horseshit statistics... 93% of the wealth created in this recovery went to the top 1%.

That's why they need to pay more.

They already do pay more.

How much is enough for you greedy sheep?

 

[JoeB131]

[

They already do pay more.

How much is enough for you greedy sheep?

Tax the rich, feed the poor, until there are no rich no more...

Again, you guys did this to yourselves. When you had unions, you had a vibrant middle class, and the middle class would have gone to the wall for you against expansion of government.

Then you (and not you personally, since I doubt you really are any more successful than I am) decided that, shit. The rich don't have enough dressage ponies. We need to bust those unions. We need to fire people when they get sick. We need to move those factory jobs to China. We need to m ove that CS job to India so you can talk to someone who doesn't speak English when you have a technical problem.

And when that former middle class turns to the government for relief, you guys whine "Waaah, you sheep are trying to mess with my freedom!"

You did this to yourself. I'd have never voted for a character like Obama 10 years ago. Or four years ago, for that matter. I did this time.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[

They already do pay more.

How much is enough for you greedy sheep?

Tax the rich, feed the poor, until there are no rich no more...

So you don't think any married couple should be allowed to earn over 250K a year?

Again, you guys did this to yourselves. When you had unions, you had a vibrant middle class, and the middle class would have gone to the wall for you against expansion of government.

Tell me what unions do not exist now that existed when we "had unions"?

Then you (and not you personally, since I doubt you really are any more successful than I am) decided that, shit. The rich don't have enough dressage ponies. We need to bust those unions. We need to fire people when they get sick. We need to move those factory jobs to China. We need to m ove that CS job to India so you can talk to someone who doesn't speak English when you have a technical problem.

What people do with their own money is none of your business. And sorry but if you miss work enough to be fired that's your problem not mine.

And when that former middle class turns to the government for relief, you guys whine "Waaah, you sheep are trying to mess with my freedom!"

I have a right to keep what I earn. You think some people should be exempt from taxes. I don't.

 

[Gadawg73]

[

They already do pay more.

How much is enough for you greedy sheep?

Tax the rich, feed the poor, until there are no rich no more...

Again, you guys did this to yourselves. When you had unions, you had a vibrant middle class, and the middle class would have gone to the wall for you against expansion of government.

Then you (and not you personally, since I doubt you really are any more successful than I am) decided that, shit. The rich don't have enough dressage ponies. We need to bust those unions. We need to fire people when they get sick. We need to move those factory jobs to China. We need to m ove that CS job to India so you can talk to someone who doesn't speak English when you have a technical problem.

And when that former middle class turns to the government for relief, you guys whine "Waaah, you sheep are trying to mess with my freedom!"

You did this to yourself. I'd have never voted for a character like Obama 10 years ago. Or four years ago, for that matter. I did this time.

When the rich run out of $$$ who feeds the poor? The larger piece of pie that goes to the government makes for smaller slices for everyone else, especially the poor.
The wealthy in this country are largely responsible for securing your and most of the world's liberty and defending it for most all of the rest.
When our free government takes on the objective which you want: the achievement of financial equality for all, rather than equality under and before the law, the government then poses a threat to LIBERTY.
You take your citizenship for granted.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Yeah, paying a guy with a 10th grade education 65K a year to do a job a Chink with a 5th grade education does better and at 30K a year is real smart.
Give a guy a "living wage" for doing what a 5th grader could do.
And folks wonder why businesses have gone under.
Neighbor of mine was a damn janitor at GM and made 50K a year.

"Chink"?

And why is it you begrudge a Janitor 50K, but you think it's just fine and dandy that the CEO of GM who ran the company into the ground got $12,000,000.00. You could have hired 240 Janitors for that, and it would have helped the economy a lot more.

Because $50k per year for a no skill minimum wage job is highly inappropriate.

 

[JoeB131]

[

When the rich run out of $$$ who feeds the poor? The larger piece of pie that goes to the government makes for smaller slices for everyone else, especially the poor.
The wealthy in this country are largely responsible for securing your and most of the world's liberty and defending it for most all of the rest.
When our free government takes on the objective which you want: the achievement of financial equality for all, rather than equality under and before the law, the government then poses a threat to LIBERTY.
You take your citizenship for granted.

Yeah, yeah, yeah... the wealthy are indispensible, and we can't do without them.

Except most of the world doesn't let them get away with the shit we do, and they get along just fine.

The Plutocratic Mantra- ignore the rest of the world. Please don't notice that single payer works better than private insurance.

Sorry, man, when I was in the service, the only "rich" person I saw was the idiot nephew of a prominant family who joined the army, and they had to make him an officer. The men laughed when he waddled out in front of formations.

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, paying a guy with a 10th grade education 65K a year to do a job a Chink with a 5th grade education does better and at 30K a year is real smart.
Give a guy a "living wage" for doing what a 5th grader could do.
And folks wonder why businesses have gone under.
Neighbor of mine was a damn janitor at GM and made 50K a year.

"Chink"?

And why is it you begrudge a Janitor 50K, but you think it's just fine and dandy that the CEO of GM who ran the company into the ground got $12,000,000.00. You could have hired 240 Janitors for that, and it would have helped the economy a lot more.

Because $50k per year for a no skill minimum wage job is highly inappropriate.

According to whom? Frankly, I think 12,000,000 for being a CEO is highly inappropriate, especially when your company loses SO much money, they need to go to the government for a handout.

 

[JoeB131]

[....
I have a right to keep what I earn. You think some people should be exempt from taxes. I don't.

You totally missed my point... but I think you are so fucking retarded, if I explained it to you again, using smaller words you'd still miss it.

Hey, make it simple for you.

Ten years ago, I voted Straight Line Republican. Then my boss fucked me, because, hey, he didn't have a union telling him what to do.

Now I vote Straight Line Democrat.

So do a lot of people.

That's why you lost.

 

[Skull Pilot]

[....
I have a right to keep what I earn. You think some people should be exempt from taxes. I don't.

You totally missed my point... but I think you are so fucking retarded, if I explained it to you again, using smaller words you'd still miss it.

Hey, make it simple for you.

Ten years ago, I voted Straight Line Republican. Then my boss fucked me, because, hey, he didn't have a union telling him what to do.

Now I vote Straight Line Democrat.

So do a lot of people.

That's why you lost.

Wow you are an unthinking ovine.

Anyone that would vote for someone simply because there is a D or an R next to their name on the ballot is a fucking retard.