Business Insider: rich people can't buy all the products we need to sell to have a healthy economy

[mawilson 2,133]

Ah, but the rules for how our version of capitalism are to work belong not just to you and your wealthy friends but to everybody equally. We get to change those rules if we want and maybe you will not be deemed to have 'earned' your millions

And maybe I'll go and earn them somewhere else.

That's what happened in the UK - after (then-British PM) Gordon Brown raised the top tax rate on those making more than £1 million to 50%, nearly two-thirds of British millionaires fled the country to avoid taxes, fewer entrepreneurs came into the country, and the government took in lower tax revenues than it did before the increase.

Edited December 4, 2012 by mawilson

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And maybe I'll go and earn them somewhere else.

You know what they say about that door on the way out, right?

[mawilson 2,133]

You know what they say about that door on the way out, right?

See ya, have fun with all the poor.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

You know what they say about that door on the way out, right?

It swings both ways?

[mawilson 2,133]

Such foolishness and arrogance.

They think they can just keep hitting up the same group of people for more and more cash without consequences, and leave more than half the people in this country out of it entirely.

Guess what - if you try and fuсk the rich, the rich will always fuсk you first.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Everybody hates the rich, because they are such tightasses.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Don't you ever study history? Unions are a precursor of socialism.

The right to bargain for your wages is an exercise of individual liberty, not a takeover, even if you are part of a union that negotiates your contract. And individual, blue collar worker has no bargaining leverage alone, given that he/she can be easily replaced, but that doesn't diminish the value of their labor. That's something every libertarian leaning individual should be able to wrap their head around.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

That's something every libertarian leaning individual should be able to wrap their head around.

Not without getting dizzy trying to follow that twisted logic. Unions --> Collective Action --> Socialism. Pattern repeats over and over again.

The right to bargain for your [individual] wages is an exercise of individual liberty

You left something out of the equation.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Guess what - if you try and fuсk the rich, the rich will always fuсk you first.

Guess what, the rich don't get - or stay - rich in a vacuum. Good luck in Somalia where you will owe $0.00 in taxes to a government that doesn't exist.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

And individual, blue collar worker has no bargaining leverage alone, given that he/she can be easily replaced

Bull. Competent labor is always in demand. As an employer, I will go out of my way to keep a qualified and dependable employee. Problem with unions is, you have to hire the incompetent as well as the competent, and pay both the same.

Edited December 5, 2012 by The Patriot

[mawilson 2,133]

Guess what, the rich don't get - or stay - rich in a vacuum. Good luck in Somalia where you will owe $0.00 in taxes to a government that doesn't exist.

No need for such extremes - Hong Kong will do nicely. 16.5% corporate rate, 15% personal rate, no capital gains, VAT or sales taxes.

I'm not arguing for a zero rate, just a fair rate that doesn't have me working through the month of August just to pay my tax bill.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwg4DB-EeEA

Edited December 5, 2012 by The Patriot

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Check out 2:50 of the video.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bull. Competent labor is always in demand. As an employer, I will go out of my way to keep a qualified and dependable employee. Problem with unions is, you have to hire the incompetent as well as the competent, and pay both the same.

When I worked under the Teamster's Union, it was the company that interviewed and hired me, not the union. This was in California. I saw some workers get fired for incompetence/disciplinary issues. This was when James Hoffa Jr. was president. When you work union, there's a contract - everything is spelled in terms of hiring and termination practices in order to ensure that everyone gets a fair shake. If you ** up at work, there will be disciplinary action taken, including termination.

A different case - years ago, I worked under the UFCW union in Arizona (a right-to-work state). I was a stocker/cashier. Under our contract, if you were to run a register, you had to be assigned that particular drawer (till) where you count the cash beforehand and you lock up the register so that no one else can open it. We did that because the grocery store would hold you accountable if your drawer was short in excess of a certain amount of money (I think it was more than $5). Working on the register for 8 hours on a busy day, you could easily ring up $10,000. Anyhow, I was stocking the floor one shift and had not been assigned a register. One of the shift managers pulled me from the floor to open up an extra lane using what they call a 'manager's till.' That till ended up being short $10 that night. A couple of days later, two of the managers tried to get me to sign a write-up and I refused. I said, "I'm not going to be held accountable for a till that others were using that night besides me." One of the manager's faces turned beet-red in anger while the other one tore up the write up. They knew they were in the wrong. Now, without a union, do you think I would have any leg to stand on? Nope.

Unions serve a purpose. They aren't perfect and they aren't always needed for every job situation, but without them, most workers would have no recourse if managers decided to make them the fall guy like what happened to me. Contracts work.

Edited December 5, 2012 by Lincolns mullet

[mawilson 2,133]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwg4DB-EeEA

Nice fairy tale.