It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is using government force to take from one to give to another the moral high ground?

page: 8
10
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Jusvistn

originally posted by: Daughter2

originally posted by: Jusvistn


And the company I used to work for had their union negotiate the company right out of business. Fought for all these special benefits, more paid time off, higher wages, better retirement, etc..... With zero regard for what the "corporate muscle" could actually afford.

So they closed the doors and all the union workers went home with nothing.


Actually when unions were most powerful, the economy was great.

What happened is the unequal trade policies. Of course you can not compete if a company can go to another country and not be subject to things like child labor and overtime laws.


I didn't say my old company went to another country. They closed their doors. Not sure if that is what you were implying or not......

Unions, back in the day, were great for fighting for the rights and wages of the workers. Today's unions seem to be as greedy and unbalanced as those they claim to be fighting against.

Personally speaking, in my own experience, the best wages and fairest treatment I have had in the work force has always been in with non-union companies. But that is MY experience. I'm sure it's not true for everyone.

Bingo! Give the man a ceegar! The reason that said companies did not have a union is that they had happy workers who did not feel the need to organise. And, in turn, I'm betting that the companies had great productivity levels. Make no mistake, a lot of companies today are just as eager to exploit their labour force as they were back in the day when they'd call out Pinkerton's to shoot the strikers. Cept these days, it's a little harder to get away with it.


Hmmm. I'm honestly not sure if you are being mean to me or not.

And your pic about Unions & Weekends makes me smile, since i know of a whole crap load of Union Workers who are working today, and will be working New Years Eve, as well as New Years Day.....




posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: toysforadults

What about using unions and collectively bargaining? Is this moral?

What about corporations comparing their pay with each other with in a specific area/region and all of them setting the pay rate accordingly? Is that moral?


.


Do you know when it stops being moral? When the union blocks people from working unless they belong to it, it becomes immoral. If a union really is a good thing, then it shouldn't have to force workers to belong. Right?


Unions only make 15% of the workforce so there are tons of other places people can go to get around unions.
Is it not the case, that if people do not like the terms at a company, they are free to go somewhere else?
That is the free market at work.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: toysforadults
Pretty simple question...

Is it moral to use government force to take from one to give to another with an unwilling party on the taking side?

Seems like a pretty simple question right? The obvious answer to me is no, forcefully stealing from someone against their will is not moral or ok.




We spend trillions of dollars a year on the Military Industrial Complex and it is not for defense but to further globalist ambitions.
That is taken by force as well.
You may cite the defense aspect of the constitution, but then you would be admitting it is OK to take things by force if it is written down.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jusvistn
Hmmm. I'm honestly not sure if you are being mean to me or not.
And your pic about Unions & Weekends makes me smile, since i know of a whole crap load of Union Workers who are working today, and will be working New Years Eve, as well as New Years Day.....

Not being mean at all...sorry to confuse. And as to those union workers working today and on New Year's Eve, they will be doing so under the terms mutually negotiated by both parties.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kettu
If you think taxes are "taking from me and giving to others" then you are ideologically at odds with this country, and should find a new country to move to.


Isn't the income tax something that was introduced quite sometime before the ideology of the country was ingrained?
Income tax was generally a source for war funds too.



posted on Dec, 30 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Jusvistn
Hmmm. I'm honestly not sure if you are being mean to me or not.
And your pic about Unions & Weekends makes me smile, since i know of a whole crap load of Union Workers who are working today, and will be working New Years Eve, as well as New Years Day.....

Not being mean at all...sorry to confuse. And as to those union workers working today and on New Year's Eve, they will be doing so under the terms mutually negotiated by both parties.


Mutually agreed. I'm honestly not for or against unions in any way, and do appreciate your side of things and your input!

And i'm really glad you weren't being mean.



posted on Dec, 31 2017 @ 06:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xenogears


Minimum wage was supposed to be living wage.


Well no it is not...I think that is were you are confused. It is a baseline that many other hourly wages are set against. It is basically zero skill/low education type work. The kind of work it takes a day or so to learn the job. Out of the 80 million hourly workers in America less than 2 million are actually minimum wage jobs.


It is suppose to be a starting wage for the zero skill worker. We need to put some responsibility on the person too to actually progress in life with better skills etc and that leads to better paying jobs.

Also what do you mean by living wage? The vast majority of the world that means a group of people living together sharing expenses. In America it means a single living earnings and I hate to tell you but single living is a luxury not a right. Even when I was young back in the 80s I had roommates until my 30s and then I could afford to live on my own because I had better skills that paid better. Today I'm doing well and can afford a family on a single wage, but it took me a long time to get there. Your 21 per hour is 43k per year...nice...




Want the quote about its creation where it is stated to be meant as a living wage?

There used to be a time where the low skill working man could have a stay at home wife 3 to 4 kids, vacations, retirement, a large house.

Youve been scammed.
edit on 31-12-2017 by Xenogears because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2017 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jusvistn

originally posted by: Daughter2

originally posted by: Jusvistn


And the company I used to work for had their union negotiate the company right out of business. Fought for all these special benefits, more paid time off, higher wages, better retirement, etc..... With zero regard for what the "corporate muscle" could actually afford.

So they closed the doors and all the union workers went home with nothing.


Actually when unions were most powerful, the economy was great.

What happened is the unequal trade policies. Of course you can not compete if a company can go to another country and not be subject to things like child labor and overtime laws.


I didn't say my old company went to another country. They closed their doors. Not sure if that is what you were implying or not......

Unions, back in the day, were great for fighting for the rights and wages of the workers. Today's unions seem to be as greedy and unbalanced as those they claim to be fighting against.

Personally speaking, in my own experience, the best wages and fairest treatment I have had in the work force has always been in with non-union companies. But that is MY experience. I'm sure it's not true for everyone.


Well if your company competes against others with slave labor overseas of course they cant compete and would be made bankrupt by fair wages.

Not to say that excesses cant be requested.



posted on Dec, 31 2017 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears

There used to be a time where the low skill working man could have a stay at home wife 3 to 4 kids, vacations, retirement, a large house.

Youve been scammed.


Can you give an example of that time?



posted on Dec, 31 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xenogears
Want the quote about its creation where it is stated to be meant as a living wage?

There used to be a time where the low skill working man could have a stay at home wife 3 to 4 kids, vacations, retirement, a large house.

Youve been scammed.


We do know FDR's quotes, he was also a politician, so should we quote Trump on everything he says as written in stone too? If we go back to the 60s/70s minimum wage was what we teens made, no one was raising a family on it. If we go back to FDR it was .25c $520 a year, so good luck even in 1935 to raise a family with that, and that is about 4 bucks at today's inflation, so not so good. Here is an interesting chart about living wage that is reasonable, big cities would be a little more. I don't know where you get your 21 bucks an hour from, and if you decide to have a family I'm not sure how a company is responsible to pay you more for the same job just because you decided to have kids. In yellow is what 2 people working in synergy can make and live on. Those amounts are not what every job should pay as a minimum it is what a person needs to get up to as a minimum. So if you are flipping burgers with three kids you are doing it wrong...become a plummer, as example, instead...





edit on 31-12-2017 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

Not being mean at all...sorry to confuse. And as to those union workers working today and on New Year's Eve, they will be doing so under the terms mutually negotiated by both parties.


And making like 2.5 times their pay...hehe



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join