Why Apple says it can't build an iPhone in the US.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

So you'd like to see SS and Medicare funding halved? OK, add another $410 billion to our deficit each year. You get this idea from Ron Paul?

Is the question posed to conceal deception or did you really not know that exicse taxes and half os medicare and SS are paid by employers

No. I would keep it the same. NONE of it would come from employers or businesses. Are you having difficulty following the conversation? Read the FAIR TAX book.

[웃 910]

I would keep it the same. NONE of it would come from employers or businesses.

Would you keep it the same or would NONE of it come from employers or businesses?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Please list some CEOs that got huge bonuses before the bailouts. (And try to keep them out of govt-funded markets like transportation, telecomm and/or energy. Thanks.)

So, basically, they should just split it up amongst ALL the employees?

I'm really not understanding this belief some Americans hold that "it's not fair" someone else makes so much money. Don't you personally try to make as much as possible when you negotiate your pay? I would think most people don't go into a job interview and say, "$12 an hour? Why that's just too much. Why not spread that love around a little. I'll take $10 and you can re-invest $2/hr. back into the company so we can all make more money down the road."

Do you do that?

Does anyone?

You think a company that's going t*ts up should give themselves (white collar) raises when that company is losing money? Are you for fckng real? I'm being serious here.

There's companies out there that are going t*ts up because of ####### business decisions made and they give themselves (white collars) millions of dollars in bonuses before the company goes completely t*ts up and your b*tching about peeps making $12 an hour? Give me some of whatever your taking...I'm low on booze here atm. So your ok with a bunch of lying white collar thieves lying to their shareholder when they know the ship is sinking yet it's cool when they give themselves big fat ####### raises and bonuses.

Down below is just a few examples...google will find you thousands more in a heart beat. Someone is feeding you a line of bs and whoever it is seems to be doing a bang up job.

Now if you want to talk about companies that were driven into the ground by the white collars making the decisions only to have it bailed out by the actual workers then we can do that to. My grandpa worked for one for close to twenty years aka Tacoma Boat. Google will show that one also.

http://www.theoaklandpress.com/articles/2010/02/25/news/doc4b87179136d0a794710904.txt

Kmart CEO ordered to pay more than $10M

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/21/ceo-compensation-10-ceos-golden-parachutes-100-million_n_1217176.html

10 CEOs With Golden Parachutes Of Over $100 Million: GMI

Edited January 24, 2012 by Why_Me

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Therein lies the hypocrisy. "They shouldn't make that much but I can make as much as I want." Or my personal favorite, "If I made that much I'd WANT them to tax me at a higher rate."

HA!

You missed it entirely.

The white collars up top know when a company is going to sink for good and so what do they do? Do they try to save the ship or do they loot the ship for all it's worth?

Answer that one please. Do you steal your shareholders blind and screw your employees at the same time, or do you do the right thing?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Of course not. Simply ask them at what level they want THEIR pay to be capped. Their children's pay t be capped? And not just pay but total income from all sources. What should be the maximum amount THEY be allowed to earn?

Exactly, so nobody should b*tch when the unions ask for more $$$. I mean what's good for the goose is good for the gander...right?

[MyLittlePony 340]

Over priced Apple product sand under paid employees not able to make products in USA but in sweat shops across the globe go figure.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Would you keep it the same or would NONE of it come from employers or businesses?

Let me see if I can answer your question again, in a way you may be able to comprehend. I am trying.

The amount of funding for SS and medicare would be the same. NONE of the funding would come from businesses and/or employers.

Democrats recently demanded that the funding of SS be decreased by 30%, I am not in favor of defunding SS. I am in favor of funding it another way. We need to implement a tax system that eliminates the politics from our basic needs to support SS, medicare and government functions.

Did you really not know that employers pay half? Or were you just being deceptive?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Exactly, so nobody should b*tch when the unions ask for more $$$. I mean what's good for the goose is good for the gander...right?

Of course. As long as we keep union membership voluntary AND the choice to use union labor or not voluntary, then unions should be able to set whatever labor rate they want. Absolutely.

I have -0- problems with unions. I do have a problem with people being told they MUST join a union in order to have a job and I have a problem with people being told they MUST use union labor. I choose to use union labor when they offer the best value with full and complete satisfaction.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Of course. As long as we keep union membership voluntary AND the choice to use union labor or not voluntary, then unions should be able to set whatever labor rate they want. Absolutely.

I have -0- problems with unions. I do have a problem with people being told they MUST join a union in order to have a job and I have a problem with people being told they MUST use union labor. I choose to use union labor when they offer the best value with full and complete satisfaction.

Agreed as long as each non union individual separately negotiates his or hers own wages and benefits. In no way shape or form should they automatically get what the union members negotiated on. Why should the union break ground for scabs? Nothing is for free and there's a reason union members pay those dues...and they aren't to make life easier for someone who wants to ride on the backs of the union for free. It doesn't work that way in the north and in the west,..only in right to work states like New Mexico, Colorado, etc..

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Agreed as long as each non union individual separately negotiates his or hers own wages and benefits. In no way shape or form should they automatically get what the union members negotiated on. Why should the union break ground for scabs? Nothing is for free and there's a reason union members pay those dues...and they aren't to make life easier for someone who wants to ride on the backs of the union for free. It doesn't work that way in the north and in the west,..only in right to work states like New Mexico, Colorado, etc..

I understand your idea, but it is not an area for government to be involved in.

The union negotiates a contract for a certain wage and benefits. The employees can choose to join the union and accept the wages AND benefits that the union offers OR they can choose to accept the wages and benefits that the employer offers. So two electricians working for the same hospital, for example, one could be union, one non-union. The hospital could pay what it wanted, of course. Which may or may not be better than the union offers, and the hospital could offer its own package of benefits which may or may not be better than the union. The employee can then CHOOSE, just as we choose insurance policies offered by employers.

This way the union gains members by offering something they cannot receive otherwise, collective bargaining for example, protection form arbitrary termination, etc. Whatever. The union EARNS it's members, which is better for the members. Competition. Free market pressures.

Unions should be able to set their ewages, employers should be able to set their wages and the government should GTFO!

Once we eliminate the government and determine that membership is voluntary what happens after that is what happens. Unions that offer a good value will thrive. Unions that do not will fail. Why would anyone want it differently?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I understand your idea, but it is not an area for government to be involved in.

The union negotiates a contract for a certain wage and benefits. The employees can choose to join the union and accept the wages AND benefits that the union offers OR they can choose to accept the wages and benefits that the employer offers. So two electricians working for the same hospital, for example, one could be union, one non-union. The hospital could pay what it wanted, of course. Which may or may not be better than the union offers, and the hospital could offer its own package of benefits which may or may not be better than the union. The employee can then CHOOSE, just as we choose insurance policies offered by employers.

This way the union gains members by offering something they cannot receive otherwise, collective bargaining for example, protection form arbitrary termination, etc. Whatever. The union EARNS it's members, which is better for the members. Competition. Free market pressures.

Unions should be able to set their ewages, employers should be able to set their wages and the government should GTFO!

Once we eliminate the government and determine that membership is voluntary what happens after that is what happens. Unions that offer a good value will thrive. Unions that do not will fail. Why would anyone want it differently?

If a non union member wants to take the companies package then fine. But I know from experience that usually it ends up bad. First there are the warnings then there is the sliced tires, and if that doesn't do the trick ...worse ...way worse.

Union shop means just that...union shop. Your either with or against. If a company wants to make their shop non union that's one thing, but to try and mix and match union with non union ...it doesn't work...at least not on our trade. Again make the shop all non union and no problem, or make it a union shop...even better, but if you try to mix and match in places like Oregon, California, Washington state, Michigan, Ohio, NY, etc... chances are someone is going to the hospital. A$$, gas, and grass...nobody rides for free.

[웃 910]

Gary, did you watch the debates? Romney sounded just like you, he said: "use e-verify, the illegals will not have jobs, and they will self-deport!"

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Gary, did you watch the debates? Romney sounded just like you, he said: "use e-verify, the illegals will not have jobs, and they will self-deport!"

No jobs for the illegal blood suckers and where they gonna go? Home would be my guess.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

No jobs for the illegal blood suckers and where they gonna go? Home would be my guess.

Or Alaska and Vermont.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Gary, did you watch the debates? Romney sounded just like you, he said: "use e-verify, the illegals will not have jobs, and they will self-deport!"

He got the idea from me. If he also proposes the taxes he may win.

Still wondering. Did you not know that half of SS amd medicare come from employers? Really.

Did you know that Obama's "payroll tax cut" is a reduction of funding for SS?

Or Alaska and Vermont.

They don;t even come here WITH jobs. There are three people in Vermont that speak Spanish.

Gary, did you watch the debates? Romney sounded just like you, he said: "use e-verify, the illegals will not have jobs, and they will self-deport!"

Romney is your guy right?