Wage Strikes Planned at Fast Food Outlets in 100 US Cities on Thursday (12/5/13)

reply to post by macman


Right on!! finally something we agree on!

reply to post by FlyersFan



This is aimed right at the american hamburger and pizza customer hidden behind the face of corporate hate.

Its basically asking Jane and Joe Doe to pay 10$ for a big mac.

reply to post by LDragonFire

blogs.automotive.com...

You sure about that.

reply to post by macman


Yep. I've worked for a union once and boy did they screw me over. I vowed at the time that I would never work with a union required job ever since.

A good employer will take care of their employees without unions. They're not needed anymore.

Their day in the sun has past.

I would like to post an apology for some badly chosen words in a post a couple pages back.

*ahem*

Wealth redistribution is what I consider theft-justification.

Charity is something that is from the individual, not something that is supposed to be mandated.


Many more people are finding times difficult because of poor economic management and an intrusive government. People will always look to their immediate needs or the needs of their family before helping others.

Raising minimum wages in an economic down-turn will only spur higher unemployment, more people on welfare, more people on government assistance and further depress the economy.

Lowering taxes, on the other hand, increases the amount of capital that a business owner has. So the owner can raise wages, hire more, and stimulate the economy.

Obamacare is the antithesis of stimulating the economy, and the rise in general taxes has stagnated the already weak economy further.

It's only going to get worse.

I will try to refrain from my more colourful posts and simply attempt to speak simply and plainly as to not offend.

Cheers,

beez

reply to post by beezzer

Lowering taxes, on the other hand, increases the amount of capital that a business owner has. So the owner can raise wages, hire more, and stimulate the economy.

How long will it take until people will finally figure out that the crap you are spouting doesn't work. Trickle-down economics doesn't work and never has worked. Funny how companies are paying some of the lowest taxes ever but unemployment is still high and people just keep crying give them tax breaks.

reply to post by buster2010


Please point out where raising taxes, growing government, increasing entitlements, has grown an economy.

TDawgRex
reply to post by macman

 

Yep. I've worked for a union once and boy did they screw me over. I vowed at the time that I would never work with a union required job ever since.

A good employer will take care of their employees without unions. They're not needed anymore.

Their day in the sun has past.

Not in my business! Without my union [SAG/AFTRA and IATSE] I would have no retirement, health insurance, or recourse if hurt on the job. I consider my union dues well spent for what they provide for my family and myself.

btw Reagan was a union man as is your messiah Rush Limbaugh, Palin, and all the rest of the conservative talking heads including one of the biggest union bashing crybabies, Glenn Beck!
All the while they rag on unions while being members themselves, enjoying the benifits most working men don't have! What little hypocritical ***ches.
www.alternet.org... _members

www.naplesnews.com...

I say pay the workers more, pay the CEO's and Directors less.

Simple really.

Nobody needs £/$1m bonuses.

But at the other end, people cannot get by on minimum wage.

Trickle down does not work.... it just makes the rich, richer.

reply to post by buster2010


Oh, so you think what we have is the trickle down in action.

Yeah, the thing is, we aren't. We are within the cusp of Govt backing certain companies **Cough GE, GM Cough** that get the tax exemptions while making large contributions to Govt, or Dem Party.


SO... trying to use a bastardized version of it as your arguing point is pretty funny. Sad, but funny.

reply to post by olaru12


Funny, as I don't NEED a Union to provide me a Retirement. Guess you must not be educated enough to do this for yourself.

Oh, and please don't omit the fact that in order for those people you listed to do the business they are in, they MUST be part of the union.

Gotta love using forced actions as your example.

blupblup
I say pay the workers more, pay the CEO's and Directors less.

Simple really.

Nobody needs £/$1m bonuses.

Gotta love it when someone thinks they are holier than though, screaming something isn't fair, but wants to control others creating an unfair situation in reverse.

Poop called, says vomit stinks.

TDawgRex
reply to post by macman

 

Yep. I've worked for a union once and boy did they screw me over. I vowed at the time that I would never work with a union required job ever since.

A good employer will take care of their employees without unions. They're not needed anymore.

Their day in the sun has past.

You are wrong.......I also work for a union AFL-CIO, I am a CNC machinist. My company has multiple plants and we are the only union shop. The union employes make 25-50% more then the other shops.



And my union is very weak but it still pays for itself with higher wages. Even the unskilled jobs pay over 15 dollars and hour.

reply to post by SubTruth


I'll just say this.

It's different everywhere. But my experiance with the unions totally sucked. They didn't do a damn thing for me or my co-workers, It was the mob (La Costra Nostra) all over again.

reply to post by olaru12


Thanks for telling me all those people who have been talking on my radio. I would say that they are parrots (SQUAWK!). I can think for myself thank you.

macman

Gotta love it when someone thinks they are holier than though, screaming something isn't fair, but wants to control others creating an unfair situation in reverse.

Poop called, says vomit stinks.

What?

Can you say that in English now please?

reply to post by blupblup


You are screaming about how it is unfair that CEOs make a certain amount of money.
Yet, you then scream that the low rung person should make a certain amount.

You wish to limit someone, so someone else can have.
This scenario already exists, as you state. Just not to whom you think is most deserving.

reply to post by SubTruth

Yep, I had a union job once, and was too dumb to realize how good I had it and moved on.

Labor Unions are a socialist thingamabob, corporations are the same but in a way opposite, as in not taking into consideration people. And don't EVEN come back with any Corporate personhood BS.

The only reason corporations have become so powerful is that the monetary (credit) is controlled by them and their banks.

A lot of you need to learn to think for yourselves, jump off your pedestal, fall through space.

If it's lonely way up there, come back down, I won't say your name.

Everything is about names, words, twisted to make what was illegal yesterday, legal today.

Who has the resources to do this?....

I am looking into becoming a corporate sole, just so I don't have to worry about starving to death on the streets in the future.

macman
reply to post by blupblup

 

You are screaming about how it is unfair that CEOs make a certain amount of money.
Yet, you then scream that the low rung person should make a certain amount.

You wish to limit someone, so someone else can have.
This scenario already exists, as you state. Just not to whom you think is most deserving.

I'm not sure you're aware of how balancing works.

The one he is talking about limitting often makes more than 100 times what the other makes and typically doesn't even work a full work week.

You really think that's just peachy and has had no effect on the economy?

reply to post by TheRegal


So, again, just a little bit of rights removal, to take from some, to give to others.

Just a weee little bit.........


Sounds fantastic. *Shakes head*