# 8% of all employees are union members.



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

So how the F*** did we get 80% of the lazy people?!?!? :no:

:laughing::laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

miller_elex said:


> So how the F*** did we get 80% of the lazy people?!?!? :no:
> 
> :laughing::laughing:


Because you're there leeder..:laughing::laughing:


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

HARRY304E said:


> Because you're there leeder..:laughing::laughing:


Harry, I don't have time for this bullcrap. I've got to formulate a recovery strategy and get the plan out to my henchmen.


----------



## Ziggy (Feb 2, 2011)

They migrated.:no:


----------



## Dennis Alwon (May 9, 2009)

I really think that 80% of work force everywhere is slack. It is not a union , non union thing-- well maybe a little but I am not going there.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

miller_elex said:


> Harry, I don't have time for this bullcrap. I've got to formulate a recovery strategy and get the plan out to my henchmen.


You're henchmen are working on it.. :laughing:


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

Archaic business strategies is how.

The Union is supposed to set the standard, but they're lagging behind in so many ways. I'm sorry but when the local here is making 43+ an hour and non union is 20-25 an hour...something is really off. Union boys can't claim to be the "little" guy when there's that much of a pay and benefits disparity in the trade.


----------



## Rockyd (Apr 22, 2007)

I think the 80/20 rule applies everywhere.

That's the rule that reminds us that 20% 0f the people, do 80% of the work. It has no boundaries, it's that way in all lines of work, everywhere you go.

Unions need learn to play ball with all the players. The threat that "I'll take my ball and go home" doesn't cut it. Everyone wants the best deal they can get, but it has to be defined by reality.

Perhaps an interesting survey would be - what part of the non - union, has been union, in a local? 

What was positive, what was negative?

If the changes you wanted were made, would you consider the option again?

Union provides a much better retirement plan that a single open shop. If you don't think so, try quitting, and taking your insurance, and retirement program with you, compared to what the union in your area offers. Or maybe there is a terrible accident, and the owner is no longer in business, where would that leave you?

Something happens to you, your family still gets taken care of by your retirement, and the local helping members helping out. We had a kid (37 with four kidsand a wife) killed this summer in a motorcyle accident. Our job alone raised $20,000 for the family. Did I mention the kid was a pipefitter, not an electrician on a multicraft, big job? Puts brotherhood back on the map.

Playing ball with republicans would be a smart play. I didn't say give them the game, I said play. In case no one was watching the 2010 political arena, the country is tired of stupid! Stupid = support for Harry Greed, and Nancy Peelousy, with grandiose ideas...maybe they need a clue where money comes from.

Going to quit burning band space, and see what others have to say...


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Rockyd said:


> .Playing ball with republicans would be a smart play...


They never will because they just don't get it..:no:


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

I'm curious as to what Brian John and other union employers (if there are any) would suggest. The IBEW can't appeal to the individual worker anymore to organize a shop. Companies are a lot smaller and scattered now. How can the IBEW appeal more to contractors and company owners?


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Frasbee said:


> I'm curious as to what Brian John and other union employers (if there are any) would suggest. The IBEW can't appeal to the individual worker anymore to organize a shop. Companies are a lot smaller and scattered now. How can the IBEW appeal more to contractors and company owners?


 All they have to do is open the doors too all sell the product..:thumbsup:


----------



## Rockyd (Apr 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> All they have to do is open the doors too all sell the product..:thumbsup:


And not be afraid to fire deadwood! ya! :thumbup:


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

If I was running the show, in my local I would:

Stop supporting the politicians with donations, period, end-of-story. There would be no politics other than repealing free trade and putting members to work.

Make a pathway for bad members to be voted out of the local.

Mandatory rotation of apprentices, and get rid of apprentices that don't produce, i.e. ones that are frequently shuffled between contractors.

Get rid of the current referral system, and do a 50/50 solicit-own-job / call-from-book. Rewarding lazies who stay on unenmployment the longest with the sweetest jobs is reh-tarded.

Put travelers from outside of neighboring locals onto a third book, with interview required to keep troublemakers out.


The above might be enough to straighten things out after a while, but it will never happen, the membership is dead-set against it. :no:


----------



## erics37 (May 7, 2009)

miller_elex said:


> If I was running the show, in my local I would:
> 
> Stop supporting the politicians with donations, period, end-of-story. There would be no politics other than repealing free trade and putting members to work.
> 
> ...


A killing spree might be easier dude.


----------



## TOOL_5150 (Aug 27, 2007)

Wait... What? Im not in a union... Im outta here


~Matt


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Rockyd said:


> And not be afraid to fire deadwood! ya! :thumbup:


 Agreed..:thumbup:


----------



## edward (Feb 11, 2009)

i am part of a utility worker union, its set up different then the ibew though, in that it is only for workers at this utility but it is partnered with other utility unions... i believe? 

anyways... i have been able to work non-union and now union. one advantage of non-union is it is indeed easier to get rid of dead weight workers. however as someone who has always worked hard my whole life, it is nice to now belong to an organization that believes in workers being well compensated and as long as i keep my nose clean i do not have to worry about being laid off by impartial bosses. 

it would be nice if we could see a balance in this regard.


----------



## racerjim0 (Aug 10, 2008)

I see it changed to 8%. How do you change stuff in a title?


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

miller_elex said:


> If I was running the show, in my local I would:
> 
> Stop supporting the politicians with donations, period, end-of-story. There would be no politics other than repealing free trade and putting members to work.
> 
> ...




Miller, were beating a dead horse now. We've been through it over and over again. I do think that the current work situation is a blessing in disguise. Maybe we'll lose some of this dead weight, not enough but some is better then none.

There's a multitude of problems with unions and specifically with in the IBEW.

I would say first and foremost is the culture it's self. More then a few times I've been at a local bar or diner and over heard one of my dear "brothers" running their mouths. Made me completely embarrassed to even be associated with the local.

So,
#1) Culture change.(ex., work ethics, attitude towards non-union, customer relations, etc.)

Next is the hiring system. Time to stop this nonsense about were all the same. We're not. The time for rewarding slackers needs to come to an end.

#2) The entire IBEW should take a page out of my local's book. 50/50 SOJ. Which means that a) Men can find their own work and b) Contractors can put together their own crew. The 50/50 aspect keeps the system fair. For every soj hire a contractor makes, their next hire has to come off the list. This is as simple and as fair a process as can be.

#3) Apprentice standards. Stop with the rampant nepotism and the favoritism. Let's start taking the kids who actually WANT the career as appose to those who think it's owed to them. I will say it has gotten better in my local over the past few years and my class had some really smart guys in it. BUT there is still to much of the other stuff going on.

#4) Journeyman standards. This more or less falls on the contractors. Way to many so-called j-man who couldn't tie their own shoes. There's an avenue for contractors to take to challenge the status of j-man. Instead of bitching about these slugs when they come out, challenge their abilities and get them knocked down, or even out.

#5) Non union. I hear stories from all over the IBEW about flat tires, broken windows, sabotaged work,threats, etc.
This sh*t DOES NOT WORK!!!. Never has and never will. You want to combat cheating employers and attract professional labor shoot me a PM as that is a separate thread all together.

#6) Politics. We have moved way to far to the left IMO. The average person associates us with socialism. That is not a good image to portray. We should be the champion of the working class, not the enemy. We have been made the scape goat in this country for our economic problems (unjustly so) and we have done nothing but helped this along. I would like to see the IBEW publicly denounce all association with the public sector unions. Please don't compare me to those lazy bastards anymore. 

There's a bunch more and a long time ago I put a really good list out here, but these are the burning issues in my mind.

Oh, and another thing. For those of you who can't stand me and think I'm a "koolaide" drinker take a closer look at some of my past posts. Do you really think I'm THAT popular amongst my own "brothers".

piece out, suckas.........


----------



## BBQ (Nov 16, 2010)

Holy crap Vic, well put. :thumbsup:

I hope you don't have to start keeping an eye on your own tires if the wrong hotheads read that .


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

BBQ said:


> Holy crap Vic, well put. :thumbsup:
> 
> I hope you don't have to start keeping an eye on your own tires if the *wrong hotheads* read that .



Screw em'. Their not the ones I want to be associated with anyway. I believe in the IBEW and I would like to see it prosper.
These retards want to keep driving the car in the wrong direction.


----------



## 10492 (Jan 4, 2010)

BBQ said:


> Holy crap Vic, well put. :thumbsup:


+1 :thumbsup:




BBQ said:


> I hope you don't have to start keeping an eye on your own tires if the wrong hotheads read that .


I'd have his back if he needed it.


----------



## Sparky3 (Nov 21, 2010)

Frasbee said:


> Archaic business strategies is how.
> 
> The Union is supposed to set the standard, but they're lagging behind in so many ways. I'm sorry but when the local here is making 43+ an hour and non union is 20-25 an hour...something is really off. Union boys can't claim to be the "little" guy when there's that much of a pay and benefits disparity in the trade.


20-25 an hour are these guys electricians or day laborers?


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

You just don't get it. It's class warfare and even the mighty union can't compete with big business in the long run.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

Sparky3 said:


> 20-25 an hour are these guys electricians or day laborers?


No. They're mostly good honest hard workers stuck in a market dominated by poor or no licensing requirements, little to no union influence (out side the city), and colluding employer organizations like ABC, IECA, and the various tech school boards.


----------



## undeadwiring (Feb 9, 2010)

This is an interesting story i found on my FB page

http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm

It talks about how the gap between rich and poor has widened and even mentions the union in there as well as a possibility for a future class war.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Rockyd said:


> I
> 
> p.
> 
> ...



I have said for years when you put all your eggs in one basket and the party you support realizes that, why should they offer you anything, they know you will support them no matter what.

Spread it around, in DC with lobbyist (and the IBEW is a lobby), cash for reelection gets a lot done.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

undeadwiring said:


> This is an interesting story i found on my FB page
> 
> http://money.cnn.com/2011/02/16/news/economy/middle_class/index.htm
> 
> It talks about how the gap between rich and poor has widened and even mentions the union in there as well as a possibility for a future class war.


From your link


> The 1980s was a period of anti-regulation, presided over by President Reagan, who loosened rules governing banks and thrifts.
> 
> A major game changer came during the Clinton era, when barriers between commercial and investment banks, enacted during the post-Depression era, were removed.
> 
> ...


More information pointing to both parties are the parties for the rich. I have nothing against the rich, except the raping of the not so rich.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> From your link
> 
> More information pointing to both parties are the parties for the rich. I have nothing against the rich, except the raping of the not so rich.


Yup! and before the 1980's we had the 1970's You know when the economy was just like it is now...:001_unsure:

I will take an economy from 1980 to 2008 any time:thumbup: verses what we have right now
Edit. 
The last thing our Economy needs is more regulations


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

hardworkingstiff said:


> From your link
> 
> More information pointing to both parties are the parties for the rich. I have nothing against the rich, except the raping of the not so rich.



This is why "donating" money to a party should be illegal.
Let the politicians use the newspapers and public broadcasting to campaign. If large organizations really want to help out, let them donate man power.

Essentially we have a system of buying policies. The smart ones are those who purchase both parties.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

slickvic277 said:


> This is why "donating" money to a party should be illegal.
> Let the politicians use the newspapers and public broadcasting to campaign. If large organizations really want to help out, let them donate man power.
> 
> Essentially we have a system of buying policies. The smart ones are those who purchase both parties.


I agree Exchept for using public broadcasting .

Public broadcasting should be defunded because it is controlled by one party.. :001_unsure:


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Yup! and before the 1980's we had the 1970's You know when the economy was just like it is now...:001_unsure:
> 
> I will take an economy from 1980 to 2008 any time:thumbup: verses what we have right now


 Yea Harry, I bet everyone would like that (including me).

But....., the other questions that need to be answered is what drove that boom? Could it have been the massive deficit spending by our government?


> The thing our Economy needs is more regulations


Yea, they got rid of a bunch of financial regulations and look at what happened.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> I agree Exchept for using public broadcasting .
> 
> Public broadcasting should be defunded because it is controlled by one party.. :001_unsure:


Whatever. If it was YOUR party you'd be find with it.
It shouldn't be controlled by any party. Perhaps only use it during elections, emergencies, and for information.

Harry, you can't can everything just because Rush says so.:laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Yea Harry, I bet everyone would like that (including me).
> 
> But....., the other questions that need to be answered is what drove that boom? Could it have been the massive deficit spending by our government?
> Yea, they got rid of a bunch of financial regulations and look at what happened.


 I fixed the last sentence on my last post..


----------



## erics37 (May 7, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> I will take an economy from 1980 to 2008 any time:thumbup: verses what we have right now
> Edit.
> The last thing our Economy needs is more regulations


Yeah you realize that the 1980 - 2008 economy was based off deregulation, right? The 2011 economy is the net result of that.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

slickvic277 said:


> Whatever. If it was YOUR party you'd be find with it.
> It shouldn't be controlled by any party. Perhaps only use it during elections, emergencies, and for information.
> 
> Harry, you can't can everything just because Rush says so.:laughing:





> Harry, you can't can everything just because Rush says so.:laughing:


Thats right i can think for my self..



> It shouldn't be controlled by any party. Perhaps only use it during elections, emergencies, and for information


We do not need to waste millions of dollars on NPR..:no:

The money would be better spent elswhere..


----------



## erics37 (May 7, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> The money would be better spent elswhere..


For instance..... ?


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

Bottom line, we need less spending and more revenue if we want to get out of this. That means:

Cuts in SS, medicare/medicade, defense spending, (the big 3).

Increase in taxes for all.

The problem is that as soon as you do this, the economy probably will start contracting or will stagnate. We (the people of the US) will not like that very much and will vote in whoever will deficit spend to kick start the economy. Damn the future.

With our infrastructure in need of repair, the population aging (more workers needing SS (and medical care) than paying in) and the world becoming a more scary place (need to keep the military ready), states going bankrupt, etc etc, let's just say I'm glad I'm not the President of the United States.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> Thats right i can think for my self..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So in other words you're fine with big business lobbying our politicians. Remember those elected officials are suppose to represent us. Not jet setters who have addresses in 3 different countries.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

erics37 said:


> Yeah you realize that the 1980 - 2008 economy was based off deregulation, right? The 2011 economy is the net result of that.


Ahhh no it is a direct result of too much regulation in other parts of the Economy and all the slezy stuff going on in DC...

And thanks to political correctness we are still in IRAQ and Afganistan..
We should have vaporized Afganistan and taken a pass on IRAQ.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> We should have vaporized Afganistan and taken a pass on IRAQ.



:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Hell yeah. We should have bombed them back to the stone age.(extra credit if you know who said that) we should have turned the whole region into a smoking hole. Just like Japan. Then we could build them back up into a democracy and let them steal our jobs as pay back for our sins.:001_huh:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

slickvic277 said:


> So in other words you're fine with big business lobbying our politicians. Remember those elected officials are suppose to represent us. Not jet setters who have addresses in 3 different countries.


No i am not I Agree with you:thumbsup:


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

I love NPR, I donated 50 bucks just the other week since they were crying about cuts or reductions from state and federal funding.

I'm really curious as to how some of Slick's ideas could be implemented. I'm sure there's plenty guys up top within 98 that have their own agendas.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Ahhh no it is a direct result of too much regulation in other parts of the Economy ..


Help me out Harry, what are you referring to?


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

Frasbee said:


> I love NPR, I donated 50 bucks just the other week since they were crying about cuts or reductions from state and federal funding.
> 
> I'm really curious as to how some of Slick's ideas could be implemented. *I'm sure there's plenty guys up top within 98 that have their own agendas.*


Yeah, their worried about winning elections.(not that anyone EVER runs) This administration is not without fault (I have plenty of bitches) but it is probably the best ran in the IBEW.

Remember, this is an administration that does not have to implement the ce/cw when almost all other locals have too and we have the highest rate of market share in the entire international.

I think for starters is the culture change, which starts in the field with the men. Everything else will branch from there.


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

Sparky3 said:


> 20-25 an hour are these guys electricians or day laborers?


The question is, are these guys working in a blue state and _not_ union?

Assuming you are Union, you too come from a very pro union state. If you're in NYC, then most definitely. Believe it or not, that is not "the going rate" outside of these areas, and outside of the Union. 20-25 is on the higher end. More than that is like hitting gold if you are non-union.

I've met "journeymen", more like kids with their own vans making 16-18 an hour and no benefits, while putting in a half hour every morning unpaid just to prep for the day. Even worse, they are not on the clock past 3:30, but they also are expected to be on the job site until 3:30, so that 30-45 minute commute back to the shop is also unpaid.

The funniest thing is that these young kids are brainwashed by their slavedriver that they are lucky to be working at all, unlike all the union guys on the bench. And even though they are getting royally f*cked they would turn their nose up to the idea of organizing. And I can't entirely blame them, you can feel their resentment.

The union in these blue states is more like an exclusive labor club where you get more pay, more benefits, more "perks", for probably the same amount of work. Red states are a different story.

I've been around, and I'll tell ya, it can get pretty ugly on this side of the fence.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Bottom line, we need less spending and more revenue if we want to get out of this.
> .
> Increase in taxes for all..





> Increase in taxes for all


NO we already have 22% of the available work force on the bench:no:




> Bottom line, we need less spending and more revenue if we want to get out of this.
> .


 Less spending = more revenue.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Less spending = more revenue.


Sorry Harry, but that is just flat out incorrect.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Help me out Harry, what are you referring to?


Harry, you going to respond to this?


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Sorry Harry, but that is just flat out incorrect.


2+2=4 if you take in 4 dollars and spend 3 dollars you have one dollar left.

If you take in 4 dollars and spend 2 dollars you have 2 dollars left..That is a 50% increase in revenue :001_huh:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Harry, you going to respond to this?


 You allready know the answer ..


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> You allready know the answer ..


No, I don't.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> 2+2=4 if you take in 4 dollars and spend 3 dollars you have one dollar left.
> 
> If you take in 4 dollars and spend 2 dollars you have 2 dollars left..That is a 50% increase in revenue :001_huh:


Fuzzy math Harry!



It's nothing like that.


----------



## Loose Neutral (Jun 3, 2009)

slickvic277 said:


> Miller, were beating a dead horse now. We've been through it over and over again. I do think that the current work situation is a blessing in disguise. Maybe we'll lose some of this dead weight, not enough but some is better then none.
> 
> There's a multitude of problems with unions and specifically with in the IBEW.
> 
> ...



Excellent point in post #6 about denouncing public sector unions. I point out this fact a lot that the IBEW is a for profit union and that we fund our own pensions and medical care. Our benefits do not come at the expense of the taxpayers. New York is about bankrupt with their obligations to the public sector unions.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Fuzzy math Harry!
> 
> 
> 
> It's nothing like that.


Ok so if we raise taxes ,Which increses the cost of goods and services for everybody including the government..

That will help the people at the bottom how??


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Ok so if we raise taxes ,Which increses the cost of goods and services for everybody including the government..


 HUH? The cost of goods and services goes up in price with inflation. Inflation is mostly caused by too much money chasing too few goods. Bernanke is trying to cause inflation because he so afraid of deflation. 

The more you post Harry, the more I wonder what you are talking about.



> That will help the people at the bottom how??


OK, if we want to talk about helping people at the bottom, that's easy. Tax the rich, :laughing:

Edit: I've been mostly not working for the last few years reading and listening a lot trying to better understand this stuff. We of course will not solve anything here. The general conclusion I've come to is the powers that be will continue to deficit spend in an attempt to kickstart the economy. The dollar will continue to weaken. The cost of commodities will continue to rise in dollar terms because of this and the added pressures of expanding emerging markets.

A transfer of wealth (between countries) is occurring, and the US is on the wrong side of this equation right now. A hoarding of wealth is also occurring between the rich and the rest of us. Did you know that 2% of the world population controls 50% of the world's assets? I'm not positive, but I think this number is even higher in the US.

Think about this, the very rich keep taking money out of the system to buy stuff (gold, silver, oil futures, commodity futures, etc.). For the economic system to work, that money needs to be replaced. Where do you think it comes from? Yup, borrowing by the government which spends it back into the system. You see, all the deficit spending going on since the bad 70's (your earlier statement) has been to support the rich taking money out of the system. What happened when the financial system locked up because they found all those fancy money schemes the rich wall street guys used to pull money out of the system? The rich wall street guys scared the government into replacing it. Guess who get's to pay it back? 

We live in a finite world with an economic system that needs to have continuous expansion. This is unsustainable.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> HUH? The cost of goods and services goes up in price with inflation. Inflation is mostly caused by too much money chasing too few goods. Bernanke is trying to cause inflation because he so afraid of deflation.
> 
> The more you post Harry, the more I wonder what you are talking about.
> 
> ...


 Tax the rich = less jobs for the poor. The rich supply the jobs



> Bernanke is trying to cause inflation


Thats right and that reduces the spending power of the poor



> Inflation is mostly caused by too much money chasing too few goods


.

We have not had that problem for 4 years.



> The more you post Harry, the more I wonder what you are talking about


Me too.:laughing::laughing:


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Me too.:laughing::laughing:


:laughing: :laughing:


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

HARRY304E said:


> Tax the rich = less jobs for the poor. The rich supply the jobs


We both know that's bull$hit.

You think if they get taxed appropriately that they'll just throw their hands up and lay everyone off?

Too many of them as it is pay people to find the loops holes so they don't even pay what's expected of them. They've all had tax cuts for 10 years now. With your logic there should be a crapload of jobs and they should be rolling in dough.

I honestly don't care if they'll have to save a little more to buy themselves a new island. The rich can protect themselves, they don't need anyone else defending them, especially the poor.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> I've been mostly not working for the last few years reading and listening a lot trying to better understand this stuff. We of course will not solve anything here. The general conclusion I've come to is the powers that be will continue to deficit spend in an attempt to kickstart the economy. The dollar will continue to weaken. The cost of commodities will continue to rise in dollar terms because of this and the added pressures of expanding emerging markets.
> 
> A transfer of wealth (between countries) is occurring, and the US is on the wrong side of this equation right now. A hoarding of wealth is also occurring between the rich and the rest of us. Did you know that 2% of the world population controls 50% of the world's assets? I'm not positive, but I think this number is even higher in the US.
> 
> ...





> The general conclusion I've come to is the powers that be will continue to deficit spend in an attempt to kickstart the economy


Its not working and we are bankrupting the country.

Poor people do not create jobs...Rich people do.



> We live in a finite world with an economic system that needs to have continuous expansion. This is unsustainable


That is an opinion not a fact..



> Think about this, the very rich keep taking money out of the system to buy stuff (gold, silver, oil futures, commodity futures, etc.). For the economic system to work, that money needs to be replaced. Where do you think it comes from? Yup, borrowing by the government which spends it back into the system. You see, all the deficit spending going on since the bad 70's (your earlier statement) has been to support the rich taking money out of the system. What happened when the financial system locked up because they found all those fancy money schemes the rich wall street guys used to pull money out of the system? The rich wall street guys scared the government into replacing it. Guess who get's to pay it back?


Money comes from those who create jobs not the government..


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Frasbee said:


> We both know that's .
> 
> You think if they get taxed appropriately that they'll just throw their hands up and lay everyone off?
> 
> ...


Yes what do you think happend in the last 4 years.


----------



## Frasbee (Apr 7, 2008)

HARRY304E said:


> Yes what do you think happend in the last 4 years.


The rich got tax cuts and then they shipped jobs overseas, then made record profits across the board.

Then we extended their tax cuts while trying to decide whether or not to extend jobless benefits.

We extended their tax cuts and unemployment, but now we have people who are more likely to cut social security before taxing billionaires.

I'm telling you Harry, the rich are not on your side.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

Frasbee said:


> The question is, are these guys working in a blue state and _not_ union?
> 
> Assuming you are Union, you too come from a very pro union state. If you're in NYC, then most definitely. Believe it or not, that is not "the going rate" outside of these areas, and outside of the Union. 20-25 is on the higher end. More than that is like hitting gold if you are non-union.
> 
> ...


Frazzle, I gotta hand it too you this is one of the best posts I've ever read on this site. Just flat out on the money and is exactly how I felt about things after spending the first 5 years or so of my career in the "open shop".




Frasbee said:


> We both know that's bull$hit.
> 
> You think if they get taxed appropriately that they'll just throw their hands up and lay everyone off?
> 
> ...





Frasbee said:


> The rich got tax cuts and then they shipped jobs overseas, then made record profits across the board.
> 
> Then we extended their tax cuts while trying to decide whether or not to extend jobless benefits.
> 
> ...



Save your breath. Harry, while he seems to be a decent fella, is brainwashed. A wanna be as are most neo-cons. He sides with the uber-powerful & rich because he wants to be one too. He may even actually believe that HE IS ONE.:laughing:

But........he is not. I'm kinda waiting in anticipation for the far right to take back the office. When things continue in the same direction, I wanna know whom they'll blame then.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

Frasbee said:


> The rich got tax cuts and then they shipped jobs overseas, then made record profits across the board.
> 
> Then we extended their tax cuts while trying to decide whether or not to extend jobless benefits.
> 
> ...





> The rich got tax cuts and then they shipped jobs overseas, then made record profits across the board


The best way to fix that problem is to cut the corprate tax rate here.

And raise taxes on all the goods that are produced oversee's.

That will bring the jobs back here..


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

slickvic277 said:


> Save your breath. Harry, while he seems to be a decent fella, is brainwashed. A wanna be as are most neo-cons. He sides with the uber-powerful & rich because he wants to be one too. He may even actually believe that HE IS ONE.:laughing:
> 
> But........he is not. I'm kinda waiting in anticipation for the far right to take back the office. When things continue in the same direction, I wanna know whom they'll blame then.


We will blame you of cource..:laughing:

Thats right i do want to be rich:laughing:

So you are saying that you don't want to be rich.:blink:


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

slickvic277 said:


> Save your breath. Harry, while he seems to be a decent fella, is brainwashed.


I think he may be watching too much Fox news, :laughing:

I too think Harry is a nice guy.


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

HARRY304E said:


> Thats right i do want to be rich:laughing:


Count me in, rich is good.

Harry, should I interpret your posts to mean you think if you cut taxes on the rich that they will go out and hire people (create jobs)?


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Count me in, rich is good.
> 
> Harry, should I interpret your posts to mean you think if you cut taxes on the rich that they will go out and hire people (create jobs)?


 :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

hardworkingstiff said:


> Count me in, rich is good.
> 
> Harry, should I interpret your posts to mean you think if you cut taxes on the rich that they will go out and hire people (create jobs)?


it worked before, one thing is for sure tax the rich and they will move themselves or their money elsewhere.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

hardworkingstiff said:


> I think he may be watching too much Fox news, :laughing:
> 
> I too think Harry is a nice guy.



I am watching survivor right now..:laughing: 

Thank all you guys are cool too..


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

HARRY304E said:


> We will blame you of cource..:laughing:
> 
> Thats right i do want to be rich:laughing:
> 
> So you are saying that you don't want to be rich.:blink:


 I'm not saying that. But the type of rich that you can attain and the type of rich that the people you back, are light years apart. They are the type of rich that are powerful. Harry I hate to break it to ya, but your a nobody.:laughing::thumbsup:


Actually I don't want to be rich. (whatever that means). I'm a scrub from a humble background. I like the career choice that I have made and am over all happy about my position. I like being a small timer, it has it's perks.

The only thing that matters to me is having the respect and admiration of my family, friends, and peers. And I know, with out a doubt, I have all three.


----------



## DoCJohnny (Feb 16, 2011)

I'm I the only person who likes the FairTax idea?

Get rid of the IRS altogether.


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

slickvic277 said:


> I'm not saying that. But the type of rich that you can attain and the type of rich that the people you back, are light years apart. They are the type of rich that are powerful. Harry I hate to break it to ya, but your a nobody.
> 
> 
> Actually I don't want to be rich. (whatever that means). I'm a scrub from a humble background. I like the career choice that I have made and am over all happy about my position. I like being a small timer, it has it's perks.
> ...





> Harry I hate to break it to ya, but your a nobody.:laughing::thumbsup:


Thanks for rubbing it in..:laughing:



> I'm not saying that. But the type of rich that you can attain and the type of rich that the people you back, are light years apart. They are the type of rich that are powerful


As with any group of people there good,,And there are Bad,,

I am on the side of the good rich people.:thumbsup:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

DoCJohnny said:


> I'm I the only person who likes the FairTax idea?
> 
> Get rid of the IRS altogether.


I agree with that..:thumbsup:


----------



## miller_elex (Jan 25, 2008)

slickvic277 said:


> Harry I hate to break it to ya, but your a nobody.:laughing::thumbsup:


Harry, I actually enjoy telling you that you're nobody.  :laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

miller_elex said:


> Harry, I actually enjoy telling you that you're nobody.  :laughing:


 I love abuse..:laughing::laughing:


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

brian john said:


> it worked before, one thing is for sure tax the rich and they will move themselves or their money elsewhere.


Sounds good on paper. But we had tax breaks and deregulation and look where it got us, wall street bail outs, economic depression, inflated dollar, and a more indebted country.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

slickvic277 said:


> Sounds good on paper. But we had tax breaks and deregulation and look where it got us, wall street bail outs, economic depression, inflated dollar, and a more indebted country.


Now you are mixing issues, tax breaks and the fact the the feds did not do their job with existing laws and forced banks to make risky loans are two different issues.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

brian john said:


> Now you are mixing issues, tax breaks and the fact the the feds did not do their job with existing laws and forced banks to make risky loans are two different issues.



My point is they wanted both. The two go hand in hand. The claim is one will not work without the other.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

slickvic277 said:


> My point is they wanted both. The two go hand in hand. The claim is one will not work without the other.


No, existing laws were not enforced, one has nothing to do with the other.

Unions are losing market share and the price of copper is on the rise. Should I blame the copper increases on the fact unions are losing market share? 

NO! One has nothing to do with the other.

The fact that FDIC, SEC and other regulators did not do their job goes more in line with, more government is not good and about 60-80% of the government work force should be fired.


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

brian john said:


> No, existing laws were not enforced, one has nothing to do with the other.
> 
> Unions are losing market share and the price of copper is on the rise. Should I blame the copper increases on the fact unions are losing market share?
> 
> ...



 Why do I feel like your yelling at me?? Jeeesh. Being stuck up in North Jersey has got you stressed out. Hope that shut down goes well.:laughing::laughing:

And yes, fire all those lazy guberment bastards!:laughing:


----------



## HARRY304E (Sep 15, 2010)

brian john said:


> No, existing laws were not enforced, one has nothing to do with the other.
> 
> Unions are losing market share and the price of copper is on the rise. Should I blame the copper increases on the fact unions are losing market share?
> 
> ...


 Hopefully they start at the IRS first..


----------



## DoCJohnny (Feb 16, 2011)

Where in north Jersey are you brian john?


----------



## hardworkingstiff (Jan 22, 2007)

brian john said:


> it worked before, ....


I assume your talking about Kennedy and Reagan, but leaving out Bush (because it didn't create jobs), right?

Let's not forget that Clinton raised taxes and the economy expanded AND he had some years of a balanced budget.

I think it can be argued that other forces are at work and that it just "appears" to be the tax cuts that did the work.

Now, I'm all for low taxes and balanced budgets. I just really like to cut through as much of the propaganda as possible and really try to understand what is happening.


----------



## Sparky3 (Nov 21, 2010)

brian john said:


> Now you are mixing issues, tax breaks and the fact the the feds did not do their job with existing laws and forced banks to make risky loans are two different issues.


The banks weren't forced they knew exactly what they were doing try reading Michael Lewis -The Big Short


----------



## slickvic277 (Feb 5, 2009)

Sparky3 said:


> The banks weren't forced they knew exactly what they were doing try reading Michael Lewis -The Big Short


Great story. Brilliant guy too.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

DoCJohnny said:


> Where in north Jersey are you brian john?


Hilton Garden Inn Ridgefield Park, NJ


----------



## DoCJohnny (Feb 16, 2011)

brian john said:


> Hilton Garden Inn Ridgefield Park, NJ


Not far at all, can I ask what you're doing in the area?


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

DoCJohnny said:


> Not far at all, can I ask what you're doing in the area?


Some electrical testing in a data center for a firm I work for in DC.


----------



## DoCJohnny (Feb 16, 2011)

brian john said:


> Some electrical testing in a data center for a firm I work for in DC.


I worked in 2 data centers in Carlstadt which is very close to where you are now. One of them we had over 200 electricians working on, it was a great experience.


----------

