Union Boss salaries- They have a lot in common with the people they represent

[JoeB131]

If you are in manufacturing, and your world is manufacturing, you're probably going to think that the world around you is bad because manufacturing employment has been in decline for the past 10, 20, 30 years. The days of the high school dropout who can spend a lifetime in a factory and make a good living are over. But even though manufacturing output continues to rise, manufacturing employment only accounts for ~10% of all the jobs in this country.

Now if you are educated and you work in information technology or healthcare, you are probably making a much better living. Yes, Cleveland sucks, so go to San Mateo and see the future. Knowledge industries are where the growth will be. Manufacturing not so much.

Actually, I'm not even sure if that's the case. You might see a renaissance in manufacturing. Cost pressures are rising in China, and with fracking unlocking an ocean of gas, we may see manufacturing jobs start growing again. But nonetheless, more jobs will be created in knowledge industries than in manufacturing. A quarter of all jobs created in the economy since 1970 are in industries that did not even exist 40 years ago. That will continue.

I heard that swan song crap in the 1990's. But its easier to offshore information technology than it is manufacturing. Manufacturing goods are physical andyou have to move them.

So while we did have a huge boom in IT technologies in the 1990's, the same bloodsuckers that moved the manufacturing jobs to China are now moving the IT jobs to India, and when my computer breaks down, I get some guy named Pradip who claims his name is Bobby to help me.

"Hello, my name is Bobby, how may I provide excellent Customer Service today!"

 

[Toro]

If you are in manufacturing, and your world is manufacturing, you're probably going to think that the world around you is bad because manufacturing employment has been in decline for the past 10, 20, 30 years. The days of the high school dropout who can spend a lifetime in a factory and make a good living are over. But even though manufacturing output continues to rise, manufacturing employment only accounts for ~10% of all the jobs in this country.

Now if you are educated and you work in information technology or healthcare, you are probably making a much better living. Yes, Cleveland sucks, so go to San Mateo and see the future. Knowledge industries are where the growth will be. Manufacturing not so much.

Actually, I'm not even sure if that's the case. You might see a renaissance in manufacturing. Cost pressures are rising in China, and with fracking unlocking an ocean of gas, we may see manufacturing jobs start growing again. But nonetheless, more jobs will be created in knowledge industries than in manufacturing. A quarter of all jobs created in the economy since 1970 are in industries that did not even exist 40 years ago. That will continue.

I heard that swan song crap in the 1990's. But its easier to offshore information technology than it is manufacturing. Manufacturing goods are physical andyou have to move them.

So while we did have a huge boom in IT technologies in the 1990's, the same bloodsuckers that moved the manufacturing jobs to China are now moving the IT jobs to India, and when my computer breaks down, I get some guy named Pradip who claims his name is Bobby to help me.

"Hello, my name is Bobby, how may I provide excellent Customer Service today!"

Again, go to Silicon Valley. It's booming.

Anything that is low value added is going offshore. Legal work is being done offshore. Financial modeling is being done offshore. That will continue.

All economic growth is a function of technological change. All of it.

For rich countries, the way economies and thus incomes grow is by continuously innovating, making new products and making old products cheaper. The way America will maintain its preeminence is by remaining on the cutting edge of innovation. Countries and economies stagnate by turning inward and shielding themselves from competition. That is a recipe for decline. The only way we will continue to lead the world is through innovation and new technologies.

 

[The Rabbi]

If you are in manufacturing, and your world is manufacturing, you're probably going to think that the world around you is bad because manufacturing employment has been in decline for the past 10, 20, 30 years. The days of the high school dropout who can spend a lifetime in a factory and make a good living are over. But even though manufacturing output continues to rise, manufacturing employment only accounts for ~10% of all the jobs in this country.

Now if you are educated and you work in information technology or healthcare, you are probably making a much better living. Yes, Cleveland sucks, so go to San Mateo and see the future. Knowledge industries are where the growth will be. Manufacturing not so much.

Actually, I'm not even sure if that's the case. You might see a renaissance in manufacturing. Cost pressures are rising in China, and with fracking unlocking an ocean of gas, we may see manufacturing jobs start growing again. But nonetheless, more jobs will be created in knowledge industries than in manufacturing. A quarter of all jobs created in the economy since 1970 are in industries that did not even exist 40 years ago. That will continue.

I heard that swan song crap in the 1990's. But its easier to offshore information technology than it is manufacturing. Manufacturing goods are physical andyou have to move them.

So while we did have a huge boom in IT technologies in the 1990's, the same bloodsuckers that moved the manufacturing jobs to China are now moving the IT jobs to India, and when my computer breaks down, I get some guy named Pradip who claims his name is Bobby to help me.

"Hello, my name is Bobby, how may I provide excellent Customer Service today!"

If that's the case why do you constantly gripe about companies sending manufacturing overseas? Can't keep your stories straight?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Anything that is low value added is going offshore. Legal work is being done offshore. Financial modeling is being done offshore. That will continue.

All economic growth is a function of technological change. All of it.

For rich countries, the way economies and thus incomes grow is by continuously innovating, making new products and making old products cheaper. The way America will maintain its preeminence is by remaining on the cutting edge of innovation. Countries and economies stagnate by turning inward and shielding themselves from competition. That is a recipe for decline. The only way we will continue to lead the world is through innovation and new technologies.

Heavens almighty, screw the middling and lower classes, eh, Toro the Tiger? "IT'S GREAT!"

 

[Ava]

Yup. Takes real smarts to run the unions.

Wonder if the dues paying members have any idea what the heads of those unions are pulling in every year??

Or how they are even voting and to whose campaign they are donating their dues....

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far righties are worried about the unions and their elected leaders supporting candidates?

Really? With all the money the CEOs and the corporations (who are people, remember) are donating?

Really? Wow.

here, Neo, heel

 

[Neotrotsky]

Yup. Takes real smarts to run the unions.

Wonder if the dues paying members have any idea what the heads of those unions are pulling in every year??

The Left/concerned trolls depend on the masses
being ignorant and dependent on big gov't - it helps them to get votes

Which is why they have to use things like class and race envy and straight up lies
They have to use emotion not intellect, facts or history, to push their radical ideas.



Truth is hard for the Left

---------------------------



Here boy

 

[Old Rocks]

I have, dipshit. Most of the violence perpetrated by unions 80-90 years ago was because company owners used violence against them for wanting to organize. If companies were doing that today, I'd have more sympathy. But that's not happening today.

Of course, you take it to another level when you start targeting wives and kids, psycho.

So when a big corporation cuts off Sally's dad's health insurance, they arent' threatening Little Sally.

Or is that all okay because it was done with lawyers and shit.

Like I said, when the shit hits the fan, you will have no one to blame but yourself.

Where is it written that anybody is responsible for your health care other than you? If the corporation has to go out of business because it is bankrupt, who pays your wages and provides your healthcare then? If the corporation has to cut back half its work force and scale back expansion, are you more worthy to keep your job trhan the next guy? If you go to work for somebody, that somebody is then on the hook to provide for your every need forever? How many people do you think would go into business if that was the case? And if nobody is willing to take the considerable risks and suffer the considerable grief to be in business, who is going to hire you and provide a healthcare plan for you then?

Interestingly enough, I agree with you. And if the majority of voters vote in people that will develop a Universal Health Care System, and the taxation structure to pay for it, then we will have done the responsible thing for all of us. For, as we can see from the other industrial nations experiance, when that path is taken, the cost per citizen is far less, and the results are much better.

 

[JoeB131]

Again, go to Silicon Valley. It's booming.

Anything that is low value added is going offshore. Legal work is being done offshore. Financial modeling is being done offshore. That will continue.

All economic growth is a function of technological change. All of it.

For rich countries, the way economies and thus incomes grow is by continuously innovating, making new products and making old products cheaper. The way America will maintain its preeminence is by remaining on the cutting edge of innovation. Countries and economies stagnate by turning inward and shielding themselves from competition. That is a recipe for decline. The only way we will continue to lead the world is through innovation and new technologies.

Or we could just protect our markets.

I mean, you can talk the "innovation" shit all day, but usually when you bloodsuckers say that, you usually mean "working people should accept less, and screw those advances you made in safety and environment in the last 100 years, you'd better learn to suck it, peasants, Mitt Needs a New Car Elevator."

Offshoring is more about breaking the middle class than about innovation. Always has been. Even with the crap tariffs (oh, by the way, the Chinese have no problem protecting their markets) the amount saved really isn't all that much.

 

[The Rabbi]

Again, go to Silicon Valley. It's booming.

Anything that is low value added is going offshore. Legal work is being done offshore. Financial modeling is being done offshore. That will continue.

All economic growth is a function of technological change. All of it.

For rich countries, the way economies and thus incomes grow is by continuously innovating, making new products and making old products cheaper. The way America will maintain its preeminence is by remaining on the cutting edge of innovation. Countries and economies stagnate by turning inward and shielding themselves from competition. That is a recipe for decline. The only way we will continue to lead the world is through innovation and new technologies.

Or we could just protect our markets.
.

Yeah that worked really well for E.Germany and North Korea.

 

[The T]

Yup. Takes real smarts to run the unions.

Wonder if the dues paying members have any idea what the heads of those unions are pulling in every year??

Or how they are even voting and to whose campaign they are donating their dues....

Without the input of those paying the dues.

 

[JoeB131]

[

Or we could just protect our markets.
.

Yeah that worked really well for E.Germany and North Korea.[/QUOTE]

Well, no, East Germany was a country that was occuppied by another power and really didn't have a market. It was a colony. So that doesn't really count.

North Korea, pretty much the same deal. They don't actually have anything to trade, not that they are keeping stuff out...

Again, maybe you need to read how the EU protects its markets from non-EU members, or how hard it is to get American products INTO China.

But you see, here's the thing, Clem, you've been brainwashed into thinking that free trade is good because it breaks the unions, and them unions vote for Democrats and Democrats hates them some Jay-a-zus, so you're happy to slit your own throat on command.

 

[Toro]

Again, go to Silicon Valley. It's booming.

Anything that is low value added is going offshore. Legal work is being done offshore. Financial modeling is being done offshore. That will continue.

All economic growth is a function of technological change. All of it.

For rich countries, the way economies and thus incomes grow is by continuously innovating, making new products and making old products cheaper. The way America will maintain its preeminence is by remaining on the cutting edge of innovation. Countries and economies stagnate by turning inward and shielding themselves from competition. That is a recipe for decline. The only way we will continue to lead the world is through innovation and new technologies.

Or we could just protect our markets.

I mean, you can talk the "innovation" shit all day, but usually when you bloodsuckers say that, you usually mean "working people should accept less, and screw those advances you made in safety and environment in the last 100 years, you'd better learn to suck it, peasants, Mitt Needs a New Car Elevator."

Offshoring is more about breaking the middle class than about innovation. Always has been. Even with the crap tariffs (oh, by the way, the Chinese have no problem protecting their markets) the amount saved really isn't all that much.

Joe

Economists disagree about many things. Listen to economists debate about whether or not we should have stimulus, for example. Some economists will argue that it is necessary because it is a substitute for consumer demand, others will argue that it is a waste of money and hindering a recovery. Or listen to economists talk about monetary policy. Some will say that QE is necessary and others will say all it is is printing money and creating inflation. Same with tax policy. Sam with social spending. Lots of debate in those issues. But you hear very few arguments on trade policy. You don't have one ideological group of economists arguing that we should have full blown free trade and another ideological group of economists arguing we should put up high tariff walls. Why? Because few economists believe that high tariffs are beneficial to the American economy. When economists argue about tariffs, it is whether it helps developing economies or industries, or whether they are necessary during an adjustment period from one policy set to another. There are very few economists who are arguing that we need to set high tariffs to protect American manufacturing and jobs. And the reason for that is it imposes a high cost on the American economy by making products more expensive and the economy less efficient.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe

Economists disagree about many things. Listen to economists debate about whether or not we should have stimulus, for example. Some economists will argue that it is necessary because it is a substitute for consumer demand, others will argue that it is a waste of money and hindering a recovery. Or listen to economists talk about monetary policy. Some will say that QE is necessary and others will say all it is is printing money and creating inflation. Same with tax policy. Sam with social spending. Lots of debate in those issues. But you hear very few arguments on trade policy. You don't have one ideological group of economists arguing that we should have full blown free trade and another ideological group of economists arguing we should put up high tariff walls. Why? Because few economists believe that high tariffs are beneficial to the American economy. When economists argue about tariffs, it is whether it helps developing economies or industries, or whether they are necessary during an adjustment period from one policy set to another. There are very few economists who are arguing that we need to set high tariffs to protect American manufacturing and jobs. And the reason for that is it imposes a high cost on the American economy by making products more expensive and the economy less efficient.

Yeah, "Economists". They're like weathermen. They so rarely get it right that its a wonder anyone listens to them at all.

Fact is, everyone BUT us uses tariffs to protect their key national industries. We're the only ones bending over on the big free trade weenie.

Sorry, I've had enough of the Free Trade Bullshit. I've had enough of watching people I know getting laid off while we get boatloads of cheap crap from China that breaks the minute you take it out of the box.

Enough is enough. A free trader only looks good on the end of an American Made Rope.

 

[Toro]

Joe

Economists disagree about many things. Listen to economists debate about whether or not we should have stimulus, for example. Some economists will argue that it is necessary because it is a substitute for consumer demand, others will argue that it is a waste of money and hindering a recovery. Or listen to economists talk about monetary policy. Some will say that QE is necessary and others will say all it is is printing money and creating inflation. Same with tax policy. Sam with social spending. Lots of debate in those issues. But you hear very few arguments on trade policy. You don't have one ideological group of economists arguing that we should have full blown free trade and another ideological group of economists arguing we should put up high tariff walls. Why? Because few economists believe that high tariffs are beneficial to the American economy. When economists argue about tariffs, it is whether it helps developing economies or industries, or whether they are necessary during an adjustment period from one policy set to another. There are very few economists who are arguing that we need to set high tariffs to protect American manufacturing and jobs. And the reason for that is it imposes a high cost on the American economy by making products more expensive and the economy less efficient.

Yeah, "Economists". They're like weathermen. They so rarely get it right that its a wonder anyone listens to them at all.

Fact is, everyone BUT us uses tariffs to protect their key national industries. We're the only ones bending over on the big free trade weenie.

Sorry, I've had enough of the Free Trade Bullshit. I've had enough of watching people I know getting laid off while we get boatloads of cheap crap from China that breaks the minute you take it out of the box.

Enough is enough. A free trader only looks good on the end of an American Made Rope.

That is simply false. The US has used trade protection on a wide range of products, such as steel, softwood lumber, media, defense, etc.

You've had enough of free trade because it hurts you. But to protect you, everybody else would have to pay.

 

[The Rabbi]

Joe is typical of the union mentality: give me mine, everyone else can get screwed.

Protectionism makes for inefficient outmoded industries that cannot compete and demand more and more gov't guarantees to stay in business. This is not theory but fact. It is bad for everyone except the few union employees. And ultimately bad for them too once the gov't decides it's had enough leaching.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Rabbi is typical of the corporatist mentality: I got mine and I am going to take yours.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Rabbi is typical of the corporatist mentality: I got mine and I am going to take yours.

I am constanntly amazed by your stupidity. Just when I think you can't say anything more removed from the truth you surprise me,

 

[JakeStarkey]

As you talk to yourself in the mirror, The Rabbi.

 

[JoeB131]

That is simply false. The US has used trade protection on a wide range of products, such as steel, softwood lumber, media, defense, etc.

You've had enough of free trade because it hurts you. But to protect you, everybody else would have to pay.

No, I'm against free trade because of this...

That's how much wealth we've been bleeding out since the 1970's.

Free trade hurts nearly everyone.