Right to be Slave States

[Sunbiz1]

Right to Work for Less

Right to work states do NOT work. I've seen first hand what happens when this bill passes, in Florida. We had Haitians floating in and performing skilled trades for $8/hr. Trades that normally pay around $18/hr in construction were lowered to about 12 b/c of this. Nobody wins b/c in effect your labor is being sold-out to the lowest bidder.

For the record, I don't care for unions either...my neighbor slings meat in a freezer for Dominick's food. he makes over $35/hour for unskilled labor. That's why their prices are so high.

So what's the happy medium, one in which everyone wins?.

Chrysler adding 1,800 jobs at Belvidere factory - CBS News

That is, unions are now making concessions. These employees were hired at a starting rate of $15/hr. Save our state, and our future by not allowing what just happened in Indiana to ever occur in Illinois.

 

[Crystallas]

If we could clap our hands and wish really hard, then maybe jobs will appear.


Unfortunately, we have to compete with the world. And if you consider one job skilled labor, and another not skilled, then you must not understand supply-demand, and why one position makes more than another. Skill raises demand, skill doesn't justify wages.

So what's the happy medium, one in which everyone wins?.

Honesty is the happy medium. If you distort positions, then there is no honesty.

 

[Sunbiz1]

If we could clap our hands and wish really hard, then maybe jobs will appear.


Unfortunately, we have to compete with the world. And if you consider one job skilled labor, and another not skilled, then you must not understand supply-demand, and why one position makes more than another. Skill raises demand, skill doesn't justify wages.



Honesty is the happy medium. If you distort positions, then there is no honesty.

So, you think it's fair when a trim carpenter with 35 years experience is paid 12 bucks an hour b/c he's in a "right to work" state while my next door neighbor makes $35/hour moving meat?. I don't think the world considers loading trucks to be "skilled". If skill raises demand, then how does it NOT justify wages?. Higher demand always results in higher prices, at least it should and does when it comes to professional sports contracts. The principals are no different in any other profession.

 

[brett05]

I'd pay meat packers, garbage men, janitors, etc a heck of a lot more than a carpenter. Those folks do jobs most don't want to do and their value from a health/saftey perspective is way more valuable to society.

I can wake up one day and lay a hard wood floor. I cannot get hamburger from a cow on a farm I do not own.

 

[Sunbiz1]

I'd pay meat packers, garbage men, janitors, etc a heck of a lot more than a carpenter. Those folks do jobs most don't want to do and their value from a health/saftey perspective is way more valuable to society.

I can wake up one day and lay a hard wood floor. I cannot get hamburger from a cow on a farm I do not own.

Then we should pay drive through tellers the same wage rates as loan officers...correct?. Gee, that provides a ton of incentive to better oneself in the workplace. While we are at it, lets close all the universities...no need to be wasting $$ on education...lol

 

[beardown28]

Then we should pay drive through tellers the same wage rates as loan officers...correct?. Gee, that provides a ton of incentive to better oneself in the workplace. While we are at it, lets close all the universities...no need to be wasting $$ on education...lol

You completely missed his point. He was saying jobs with health risks should get paid more not 14 year old kids working at mcdonalds.

 

[cubsneedmiracle]

"Right to work" is crap.

 

[FirstTimer]

LOL at Unions.

 

[Sunbiz1]

You completely missed his point. He was saying jobs with health risks should get paid more not 14 year old kids working at mcdonalds.

That isn't how I interpreted it. A little over a decade ago I watched 2 guys fall off a hotel under construction during an icy morning in Florida. Both were killed. Should we pay roofers more than garbage men?, or vice versa??.

 

[Crystallas]

So, you think it's fair when a trim carpenter with 35 years experience is paid 12 bucks an hour b/c he's in a "right to work" state while my next door neighbor makes $35/hour moving meat?. I don't think the world considers loading trucks to be "skilled". If skill raises demand, then how does it NOT justify wages?. Higher demand always results in higher prices, at least it should and does when it comes to professional sports contracts. The principals are no different in any other profession.

You can pay them whatever you want to pay them. Why are you only paying them $12 an hour?

You have absolutely no concept of how this works. You keep using this fallacy of skilled vs unskilled. Do you know what that even means?

First off, occupation =/= skill. That is a complete fail.

If I work at the biggest hypothetical McDonalds in the world. I am a fry guy. But you know what? I can eliminate 4 other fry guy positions, because I am just that efficient. I get paid $30 an hour, now in your mind, he is unskilled, because you only see the occupation, but that is not skill.

I just have to add. It's because of this failed mentality of grouping occupations into a skill, that have screwed over hard working people in all fields. Because it doesn't make sense on paper for a McDonalds to pay more, than it is politically accepted. So pat yourself on the back, if you still believe in this fallacy.

 

[X]

thought this was gonna be a thread about women's rights.

 

[Sunbiz1]

You can pay them whatever you want to pay them. Why are you only paying them $12 an hour?

You have absolutely no concept of how this works. You keep using this fallacy of skilled vs unskilled. Do you know what that even means?

First off, occupation =/= skill. That is a complete fail.

If I work at the biggest hypothetical McDonalds in the world. I am a fry guy. But you know what? I can eliminate 4 other fry guy positions, because I am just that efficient. I get paid $30 an hour, now in your mind, he is unskilled, because you only see the occupation, but that is not skill.

Are you advocating that people should actually be paid what they are worth?.

If so, that type of thought process is far too logical to be feasible in our wasteful government. I didn't set the $12/hr for installers, the market did over a decade ago in that area b/c there was too much labor...then the Haitians/Jamaicans arrived and further drove wage rates lower.

 

[Crystallas]

Are you advocating that people should actually be paid what they are worth?.

If so, that type of thought process is far too logical to be feasible in our wasteful government. I didn't set the $12/hr for installers, the market did over a decade ago in that area b/c there was too much labor...then the Haitians/Jamaicans arrived and further drove wage rates lower.

Then don't leave it to the government to determine. That is why we have so much inequality in the first place.

Believe it or not, I used to make $250/hr doing something in the 90s that is now a $15/hr position. I would rather welcome lower prices and savings incentives, than I would welcome higher wages.

 

[Shawon0Meter]

Honesty is the happy medium. If you distort positions, then there is no honesty.

Well said. There's a way that "right to work" can work well and ways unions can work well but both are too often abused by one side or the other. Honesty is what's needed.

 

[Crystallas]

I'm not anti-union. I am anti-corruption. I wish people were consistent. You can't blame big corporations for corruption, but then praise big unions for doing the same thing; lobbying the government to work against the majority, and work for special interest.

I'm not anti-government either, but I think one way to curb the corruption is to reduce the power that special interest has is by limiting the power of legislators and the executive branches against the people they supposedly represent.

 

[dabynsky]

thought this was gonna be a thread about women's rights.

I thought that this was going to be some crazy states rights argument in favor of actual slavery...*

*But I am a history teacher after all...

 

[Scoot26]

I'm not anti-union. I am anti-corruption. I wish people were consistent. You can't blame big corporations for corruption, but then praise big unions for doing the same thing; lobbying the government to work against the majority, and work for special interest.

I'm not anti-government either, but I think one way to curb the corruption is to reduce the power that special interest has is by limiting the power of legislators and the executive branches against the people they supposedly represent.

Its of my opinion you limit corruption in government by getting money out of election campaigns. No "favors" are given that way because of generous campaign contributions. Don't get me wrong, corruption and bribes will still happen, but to me, with limiting the money given by the richer individuals and getting rid of these SuperPACs, you limit the power of money in elections.

Our election seasons are entirely way too long. Representatives seem to spend nearly their entire 2 years campaigning. Presidents start campaigning 2 years before the next election as well. A primary should take a month, the general election season should only start after September 1st and end on election day. Campaigning shouldn't be allowed before that.

I'd actually be in favor of taxpayer funded election campaigns. You get a certain set of money and you live within that budget. The only other thing is individual donations that have a small limit (up to $100 in one election season). That would also limit the power in money in elections.

Also Corporations should not be considered people.

 

[Crystallas]

Its of my opinion you limit corruption in government by getting money out of election campaigns. No "favors" are given that way because of generous campaign contributions. Don't get me wrong, corruption and bribes will still happen, but to me, with limiting the money given by the richer individuals and getting rid of these SuperPACs, you limit the power of money in elections.

Our election seasons are entirely way too long. Representatives seem to spend nearly their entire 2 years campaigning. Presidents start campaigning 2 years before the next election as well. A primary should take a month, the general election season should only start after September 1st and end on election day. Campaigning shouldn't be allowed before that.

I'd actually be in favor of taxpayer funded election campaigns. You get a certain set of money and you live within that budget. The only other thing is individual donations that have a small limit (up to $100 in one election season). That would also limit the power in money in elections.

Also Corporations should not be considered people.

I don't like how the election process works at all. From the top to the bottom, it is bought for nearly every politician between every party. But I fear that if you have a tax payer funded election, you would have a very hard time enforcing outside funding or interest. It wouldn't be prevented, and therefore, we'll get more cooked books, numbers and figures that lie to the people. So we get stuck paying for something that has been paid for, and we still have special interest influencing the elections. Look at how media outlets work for example, they have a great deal of influence, and they don't need to contribute to any campaigns.

And yes, corporations are groups, not people. Anyone who says that corporations are people and openly denies they are groups, is a total shill.

 

[Scoot26]

I don't like how the election process works at all. From the top to the bottom, it is bought for nearly every politician between every party. But I fear that if you have a tax payer funded election, you would have a very hard time enforcing outside funding or interest. It wouldn't be prevented, and therefore, we'll get more cooked books, numbers and figures that lie to the people. So we get stuck paying for something that has been paid for, and we still have special interest influencing the elections. Look at how media outlets work for example, they have a great deal of influence, and they don't need to contribute to any campaigns.

So your solution to the election process?

 

[Crystallas]

Well, if these big corporations want to dump their money onto something, we should consumer educate to make their influence mean less. Of course, that is a short term goal, and not a solution.

I personally think a lot of this gets fixed if we abolish the Commission on Presidential Debates, and all of the legislature they have made to influence elections as a power grab. It's called the Commission on Presidential Debates, but they have over-reached(shocker) and it goes a lot further than just Presidential debates.

But that is just one step. The other steps would be to restructure FCC licensing for the media outlets, so they can actually get their press permits revoked for violations and/or slander.

We also need to visit how educational institutions use influence to dictate political outcomes. Many suggest this to be more of a root cause that spreads it's way up the chain.

No one single solution will work, it will take a lot of time, but most importantly, we need to all agree that having a system of diverse checks and balances is critical to an effective system of representation. Right now, it's all one side with tiny differences among all branches of government, that is a recipe for disaster.