M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Evaluate the Democrats based on their results … NOT based on their promises.
- Status
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Mark, read the line about 23 countries already have figured out how to make it work.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Where, outside of banana republics do you find unbridled capitalism? Even in those, it’s more a Peronist alliance of state and its favored few; a pervasive form of “pay to play”.
I take it you don’t know very many working class people. Maybe it differs from region to region, but I know a lot of them, and the only ones I know who are dysfunctional, despairing, etc are those who put their wages up their noses. Those who don’t take “nose candy” don’t live large, but they live decently, and they stay employed, too.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Davidmlamb,
Apparently the only thing Pople Paul VI missed was an outright condemnation of the Republican Party to Hell, itself!
Could it be that you have taken the Pope’s words not only out of context, but have drawn your own conclusion in the bargain! It certainly sounds that way to me.
Ultimately you can not equate the responsibility to aid the poor as the same as paying government more to provide these services. Governments have historically not done nearly as well in truly aiding the poor as the Chruch. In addition to providing material aids to the poor, the Chruch also provides spritual help. There was no ]Welfare Class’ when the Chruch was distributing goods throughout its history.
Seriously, just before you submit the Democratic Part’s name to the Vatican for consideration as to canonization … please take a look at just where we are right now. Admittedly, Obama did not achieve a $16 trillion debt by himself - but at some point, he will have to claim ownership for at least part of it. If there is an economic sin - then crushing national debt has to be considered as very grave indeed.
God bless
Apparently the only thing Pople Paul VI missed was an outright condemnation of the Republican Party to Hell, itself!
Could it be that you have taken the Pope’s words not only out of context, but have drawn your own conclusion in the bargain! It certainly sounds that way to me.Ultimately you can not equate the responsibility to aid the poor as the same as paying government more to provide these services. Governments have historically not done nearly as well in truly aiding the poor as the Chruch. In addition to providing material aids to the poor, the Chruch also provides spritual help. There was no ]Welfare Class’ when the Chruch was distributing goods throughout its history.
Seriously, just before you submit the Democratic Part’s name to the Vatican for consideration as to canonization … please take a look at just where we are right now. Admittedly, Obama did not achieve a $16 trillion debt by himself - but at some point, he will have to claim ownership for at least part of it. If there is an economic sin - then crushing national debt has to be considered as very grave indeed.
God bless
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Monte RCMS,
What a wonderful rememberance! Thanks for sharing it.
God bless - from another unashamed capitalist.
What a wonderful rememberance! Thanks for sharing it.
God bless - from another unashamed capitalist.
D
davidmlamb
Guest
I simply cited what the Magesterium has been teaching since the 1890’s which is supported by the Gospels. So its not a matter of me citing something out of context but you being offended by Church teachings which is in direct conflict with right wing conservatism. Secondly, the Church is not teaching that redistribution of wealth is to take place by passing out checks to the poor as a permanent source of income. The Church is teaching that redistribution of wealth is to take place by paying a living and just wage.Hi, Davidmlamb,
Apparently the only thing Pople Paul VI missed was an outright condemnation of the Republican Party to Hell, itself!
Ultimately you can not equate the responsibility to aid the poor as the same as paying government more to provide these services. Governments have historically not done nearly as well in truly aiding the poor as the Chruch. In addition to providing material aids to the poor, the Chruch also provides spritual help. There was no ]Welfare Class’ when the Chruch was distributing goods throughout its history.
Seriously, just before you submit the Democratic Part’s name to the Vatican for consideration as to canonization … please take a look at just where we are right now. Admittedly, Obama did not achieve a $16 trillion debt by himself - but at some point, he will have to claim ownership for at least part of it. If there is an economic sin - then crushing national debt has to be considered as very grave indeed.
God bless
Let me put it in a language you can relate to; instead of “trickle down economics” it should be “flow down economics” where wealthy corporations and businesses have the ability to pay just wages and benefits but instead they simply “trickle down” the wealth. Right to Work and Employer at Will laws are unjust because they prevent collective bargaining for just wages. This is evil because it ultimately undermines the economic stability of families and leads to all kinds of problems from divorce, to chronic depression, and even abortion.
On a somewhat different but related issue, your claims that taxing the rich puts everyone including the rich in poverty is bogus. Can you cite one example of a wealthy person being taxed into poverty? There was a time in America where the highest tax bracket was 90% and the rich still lived like kings. Canada, the UK, Europe, Japan and every other western free nation taxes their wealthiest citizens at rates of 70% or better yet they remain rich. I big part of the reason why we have a 14 trillion dollar debt is because there is not enough revenue being collected to keep our government solvent. The tax code needs to be reformed so that enough revenue is collected to pay down the deficit and support our infrastructure, institutions, national defense, and public services.
The poor working class don’t want a hand out, they want a living wage and basic health care benefits and maybe some vacation time to spend with their families. I think that if you are Catholic you need to prayerfully and honestly read and take time to reflect on the Churches teachings on social justice and then pray for God to give you a right and truthful understanding on a just social economic system. You can read the numerous encyclicals written by every pope since Leo XIII on the Vatican website and you can read them in the Catechism especially CCC 2402-2434 and CCC 1897-1912. In addition, you can read the gospels and what Jesus said to the man who kept the law yet lacked one thing in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
Peace,
David
V
valentino
Guest
of the $15t debt where has it come from?If its come from investments in the future why haven’t these investments payed off ?It seems like we should be in the black?Have we spent most of that on defense over the years and in helping other countries?Has it gone to building monuments in the US?
C
copperblade
Guest
Because the profits go to industry. Only the losses are socialized. Don’t you know? We get the worst of both worlds. The question is which party is doing it more at the moment.
C
ComputerGeek25
Guest
This is why I was against bail outs in the first place. It sets an awful precedent.
D
davidmlamb
Guest
Unashamed Capitalist but ashamed of the gospel which is the power of God to save us. What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world yet forfeits his soul? Capitalism is good when it serves the whole of society and not just the elite.
*2407 In economic matters, respect for human dignity requires the practice of the virtue of temperance, so as to moderate attachment to this world’s goods; the practice of the virtue of justice, to preserve our neighbor’s rights and render him what is his due; and the practice of solidarity, in accordance with the golden rule and in keeping with the generosity of the Lord, who "though he was rich, yet for your sake . . . became poor so that by his poverty, you might become rich."190
2426 The development of economic activity and growth in production are meant to provide for the needs of human beings. Economic life is not meant solely to multiply goods produced and increase profit or power; it is ordered first of all to the service of persons, of the whole man, and of the entire human community. Economic activity, conducted according to its own proper methods, is to be exercised within the limits of the moral order, in keeping with social justice so as to correspond to God’s plan for man
2432 Those responsible for business enterprises are responsible to society for the economic and ecological effects of their operations.218 They have an obligation to consider the good of persons and not only the increase of profits. Profits are necessary, however. They make possible the investments that ensure the future of a business and they guarantee employment.
2434 A just wage is the legitimate fruit of work. To refuse or withhold it can be a grave injustice.221 In determining fair pay both the needs and the contributions of each person must be taken into account. "Remuneration for work should guarantee man the opportunity to provide a dignified livelihood for himself and his family on the material, social, cultural and spiritual level, taking into account the role and the productivity of each, the state of the business, and the common good."222 Agreement between the parties is not sufficient to justify morally the amount to be received in wages.
Peace,
David*
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Employment at Will and Right to Work are not the same things and do not necessarily go hand in hand. As to the first, what is your proposition; that employers should be obliged to satisfactorily justify all terminations to someone or other…the government perhaps? How many employers do you think fire people out of sheer whimsy? There is always a reason, usually related to performance. And it’s possible that Right to Work states enjoy fuller employment than states that do not have such laws.
Unions are not the answer to all things, and perhaps not to anything in this era. In my state, at least, the heavily-unionized areas are suffering a great deal from unemployment, where the non-unionized portions are not.
Sometimes measures thought to be helpful are actually harmful. It is likely that fewer working class people will have good health coverage under Obamacare than prior to it.
And there is no particular reason, nor have you given one, to assume that the problem with deficits is due to under-taxation rather than overspending.
C
copperblade
Guest
It’s understandable. But at the point where you need the bailouts, you really have no choice. You have to prevent the whole situation whereby an industry can effectively takeover the whole economy. So really the answer is having the right kinds of regulation on the banks. If you let things get too out of hand, it’s really too late. It’s the same problem with Greece. Sure, some people would like to let Greece just fail, but it’s not really good for anyone. So we socialize the losses to protect our interests (in some cases). We have to either 1) prevent a situation from happening ahead of time where the amount it affects us is less acceptable than a bailout, or 2) socialize the profits and socialize the losses.
I think no. 1 is better. I believe in proper regulation in lieu of government spending programs.
S
silentstar
Guest
Whatever happened to “the love of money is the root of all evil”? And I cite myself as someone who does not find the financial teachings of Christianity to be easy.
T
tqualey
Guest
You know, Copperblade, this is nothing but ‘class warfare’ rhetoric.
When it comes to “…which party…” type questions, you really need to consider just what kind of package you are pulling for. The idea that taking money away from people so government can become more of a ‘nanny state’ or totalarian state is simply not Catholic, not Christian - but is certainly Marxist.
And, if you can get your eyes off of your wallet for a moment, just take a look at which party is categorically promoting abrotions.
None of these parties is even decent - much less perfect. I am still working out answers for myself - but, when it comes to parties, life has to come first. That said, then just take a look at the amount of this debt we are all facing. There simply are not enough ‘rich people’ to pay this off. Really. There are going to be serious cuts in social programs - and when it comes to social JUSTICE it is to give everyone what is owed to them. Mercy and charity are different virtues. There is NO MORE MONEY to give away. Are you going out taking out loan after loan to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and shelter the homeless. Get serious. People do what they can - and they have real limits. Goverments have real limits, too - and we are just coming around to seeing this.
God bless
Tom
When it comes to “…which party…” type questions, you really need to consider just what kind of package you are pulling for. The idea that taking money away from people so government can become more of a ‘nanny state’ or totalarian state is simply not Catholic, not Christian - but is certainly Marxist.
And, if you can get your eyes off of your wallet for a moment, just take a look at which party is categorically promoting abrotions.
None of these parties is even decent - much less perfect. I am still working out answers for myself - but, when it comes to parties, life has to come first. That said, then just take a look at the amount of this debt we are all facing. There simply are not enough ‘rich people’ to pay this off. Really. There are going to be serious cuts in social programs - and when it comes to social JUSTICE it is to give everyone what is owed to them. Mercy and charity are different virtues. There is NO MORE MONEY to give away. Are you going out taking out loan after loan to feed the hungry, clothe the naked and shelter the homeless. Get serious. People do what they can - and they have real limits. Goverments have real limits, too - and we are just coming around to seeing this.
God bless
Tom
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Davidmlamb,
This is very complex - and I will have to devote more time and attention to an appropriate answer.
A few things, however, I can tell you without fear of contradiction:
Unrestraind capitalism is evil - just like the excess of any act. Socialism is evil by itself because government winds up taking the means of production, the goods and services are all directed by a central authority. Karl Marx had it right! Government must take all and make it look benevolent “To each according to his need, from each according to his ability.”
Unlike your presentation, the Magisterium is not endorsing socialism or the Democratic Party - this is what I was trying to say.
Actually, I am quit sure that the Magisterium does not endorse any economic system and has condemned the evils it has identified in each. - this must be carefully evaluated because all peoples must operate under an economic system.
I will return on this post of yours.
God bless
This is very complex - and I will have to devote more time and attention to an appropriate answer.
A few things, however, I can tell you without fear of contradiction:
Unrestraind capitalism is evil - just like the excess of any act. Socialism is evil by itself because government winds up taking the means of production, the goods and services are all directed by a central authority. Karl Marx had it right! Government must take all and make it look benevolent “To each according to his need, from each according to his ability.”
Unlike your presentation, the Magisterium is not endorsing socialism or the Democratic Party - this is what I was trying to say.
Actually, I am quit sure that the Magisterium does not endorse any economic system and has condemned the evils it has identified in each. - this must be carefully evaluated because all peoples must operate under an economic system.
I will return on this post of yours.
God bless
V
valentino
Guest
So in other words there is just as much wealth in this country as there ever has been its just distributed differently.Even if that is correct we as a nation should always get wealthier because science is progressing .We come up with new inventions everyday (although not world shaking)just like the improvements in the telecommunications area.It makes no sense that the middlle and lower classes aren’t seeing benefits(improved wages)also.My take on this is that this socialists system we have been developing since Wilson are helping the rich and keeping everyone else down.the poor class is growing who are supposed to be helped the most.America is lied to.we are given short fixes so we all say good but in reality over time these fixes hurt us and we can’t seem to see that.It like Obama robbing the Fed.oil reserve.We say good now are gas is cheaper.But we will have to restore that reserve with more expensive oil in the future.We just can’t get it.And to believe Obama made points with that.
M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
What you are doing here is using words interchangeably without any regard for their meaning.
What you are doing, hopefully not deliberately, which is fraud, is to taking complicated expressions and deliberately mixing them. Read the book “1984” and the adventures of Winston Smith … and how they deliberately changed the meaning of words to mislead people. It was done quite deliberately in the novel. I hope you are not doing it deliberately.
There are different kinds of losses.
If an enterprise makes a profit, it does something with those profits. A profit is merely a positive difference between revenues and expenses. Usually what it does with the profits is 1) pay taxes; 2) reinvest what is left after taxes to improve the business; 3) pay a dividend to the owners … the people who put up the money to start the business in the first place. That dividend is income that those investors may use for living expenses [e.g., retirees, trust fund holders, pension funds, mutual funds which are managed by people insultingly described as “wall street fat cats”.]
There are very strict accounting rules of how you compute all the ways that money must be counted. Take a look at the rules describing depreciation, for example. Boring, I know, but better than mixing meanings to mislead people. Precision in definitions and word meanings is essential. So please be precise.
Some politico once told me that it’s “just a bunch of numbers” … but numbers are very precise.
If an enterprise has a loss, which is a negative difference between revenues and expenses, it must do one of two things: correct the problem or go out of business.
Some people describe outer kinds of things as “losses”, such as air pollution. But are they really losses? Or are they the byproducts of the provision of goods and services. You may want an electric car, but air pollution rules require that the batteries be made somewhere else … the rules are too stringent to allow the batteries to be made in the United States. So the jobs are transferred from the United States to someplace else … South Korea or India, which is happy for the jobs.
Do you want manhole covers? India. Some from the United States, but more and more from India. Do you have an old ship that has exceeded its service time; you put out bids to recycle the ship and the best bid is from somebody in Pakistan, which is happy for the jobs. Without those recycling jobs, there is no money for food.
Or you may want electricity, but the emissions from a power plant exceed the environmental rules … so what do you do?
And you want electricity NOW.
What do you do?
Electricity does not come from a wall outlet.
Electricity comes from transforming some natural resource via some process into energy.
Please describe very precisely by what means YOU will manufacture electricity.
T
tqualey
Guest
Employment at Will is a state law where an employer has the right to hire and fire anyone he so chooses as long as it is not for an illegal reason (e.g., “You’re fired because you’re 65!” there can be no discrimination based on age.) Now, if this 65-year old was habitually tardy for work, did not meet the stardards of the job, was dishonest and threatened his co-workers … he could be terminated from his position for any of those reasons. His being 65 had nothing to do with his termination. Here is an interesting link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment
Right to work is a state law where an employee is not forced to join a union once he is hired for a particular job in an area where there is a union. Tly here is no requirement to join a union once you are hired. In a right to work state, these independent actions are correctly separated. Here is a link that is not so nearly as flattering of union muscle in the work place: nrtw.org/rtws.htm
Unless other-wise required by law (e.g., a factory will be closed and virtually all will be terminated, or an employee claims he was discriminated against [firing someone for being a certain age] there is no requirement that anyone look over the employer’s shoulder when terminating an individual. Now, that employee may be entitled to un employment compensation - but, that is really another issue. Why would anyone think that the government had any such right? The assumption is that the employer wants to run his e\business in a profitable and legal manner. The government really has no compulsory right to inervene unless laws are being broken. Just how much of a totalarian state do we want in the US?
The entire concept of unions is very complex - and no single answer is going to address every concern. During the industiral revolution, we see that greed and indifference by owners (capitalists) put the worker at a serious disadvantage - many suffered injury and illness as a result of their work. But, guess what, corrections were introduced into the market place, like protecting people who want to organize, allowing workers to vote on certain matters and laws focused on job safety and health in the work place. Ah, if it had only ended there…
It was not long before organized crime and organized labor became common associates. Not having to compete for the hearts and minds of workers - and engaging in financial abuse and political corruption made the union ripe for their own set of sins. People will only be abused for so long - either by an employer or by a union.
Now, the idea of economically struggling men and women fighting agaist the greed of their capitalist masters may still sound like a romantic ideal - but, it is far from the truth of what we see in this country. As a practical and contemporary example - look at the teacher’s union in Wisconsin two months ago. The state is broke, the elected officials decided that changes in the way state government pays for things had to be made - and the two parties fought it out in the legislature. Knowing the Republicans had the votes to make these changes happen, the Democrates walked out to kill the idea for lack of a quorum. Now, it is at this time that teachers, left their classrooms, and took their students to the capital to protest that teacher benefits would be cut. Students were deprived of the education that were required to get because of the actions of this union. There was violence. “Union power” was all over the street, threating their elected leaders who were trying to come up with ways to cut state spending so Wisconsin could live within its means. This is union power out of control and the issue is now one of endangering the pubic good.
Not all unions are like the Wisconsin teachers union - but, to ignore these actions is to view the current economic situation with a jaundiced eye.
God bless
Right to work is a state law where an employee is not forced to join a union once he is hired for a particular job in an area where there is a union. Tly here is no requirement to join a union once you are hired. In a right to work state, these independent actions are correctly separated. Here is a link that is not so nearly as flattering of union muscle in the work place: nrtw.org/rtws.htm
Unless other-wise required by law (e.g., a factory will be closed and virtually all will be terminated, or an employee claims he was discriminated against [firing someone for being a certain age] there is no requirement that anyone look over the employer’s shoulder when terminating an individual. Now, that employee may be entitled to un employment compensation - but, that is really another issue. Why would anyone think that the government had any such right? The assumption is that the employer wants to run his e\business in a profitable and legal manner. The government really has no compulsory right to inervene unless laws are being broken. Just how much of a totalarian state do we want in the US?
The entire concept of unions is very complex - and no single answer is going to address every concern. During the industiral revolution, we see that greed and indifference by owners (capitalists) put the worker at a serious disadvantage - many suffered injury and illness as a result of their work. But, guess what, corrections were introduced into the market place, like protecting people who want to organize, allowing workers to vote on certain matters and laws focused on job safety and health in the work place. Ah, if it had only ended there…
It was not long before organized crime and organized labor became common associates. Not having to compete for the hearts and minds of workers - and engaging in financial abuse and political corruption made the union ripe for their own set of sins. People will only be abused for so long - either by an employer or by a union.Now, the idea of economically struggling men and women fighting agaist the greed of their capitalist masters may still sound like a romantic ideal - but, it is far from the truth of what we see in this country. As a practical and contemporary example - look at the teacher’s union in Wisconsin two months ago. The state is broke, the elected officials decided that changes in the way state government pays for things had to be made - and the two parties fought it out in the legislature. Knowing the Republicans had the votes to make these changes happen, the Democrates walked out to kill the idea for lack of a quorum. Now, it is at this time that teachers, left their classrooms, and took their students to the capital to protest that teacher benefits would be cut. Students were deprived of the education that were required to get because of the actions of this union. There was violence. “Union power” was all over the street, threating their elected leaders who were trying to come up with ways to cut state spending so Wisconsin could live within its means. This is union power out of control and the issue is now one of endangering the pubic good.
Not all unions are like the Wisconsin teachers union - but, to ignore these actions is to view the current economic situation with a jaundiced eye.
God bless
D
davidmlamb
Guest
Ridgerunner: Employment at Will and Right to Work are not the same things and do not necessarily go hand in hand. As to the first, what is your proposition; that employers should be obliged to satisfactorily justify all terminations to someone or other…the government perhaps? How many employers do you think fire people out of sheer whimsy? There is always a reason, usually related to performance. And it’s possible that Right to Work states enjoy fuller employment than states that do not have such laws…
Dave: Employer at Will and Right to Work Laws have several things in common, it allows the employer to terminate ones employment for any reason or no reason without notice and. with no accountability to the community or the workers. It allows the company to operate for the good of the company but not the common good. They typically pay much lower wages and benefits which results in underemployment.
For your second comment, companies must be accountable to someone other then themselves. Whether that be the courts or arbitration to enforce labor contracts or to governments. For a non union company there should be laws preventing companies from frivoulesly firing their employees. There must be just cause an a firm attempt by the company to assist the employee in his weaknesses by training and council. Firing should be a last resort proportional to the situation.
In a state where Right to Work or Employer at Will Laws exist, “Fuller Employment” often means more people underemployed. Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his/her life and that of his/her family, and of serving the human community. Those responsible for business enterprises are responsible to society for the economic and ecological effects of their operations. They have an obligation to consider the good of persons and not only the increase of profits.
Ridgerunner: Unions are not the answer to all things, and perhaps not to anything in this era. In my state, at least, the heavily-unionized areas are suffering a great deal from unemployment, where the non-unionized portions are not."
Dave: Unions have always done very well to assure a just and living wage through collective bargaining. They assure accountability so that employers cannot defraud workers out of a just and living wage. Unions are the answer for the poor working class to get out of poverty, get off welfare, and live with dignity. Unions assure that wealth flows down instead of trickle down. Unions have been commended by the Popes and the Church since 1890 to assure living conditions for families so that they can grow and become strong stable families. Contract negotiations are to assure a balance and equitable flow of wealth. Unions are the answer to grow the middle class and to have a vibrant economy where capitalism works for the common good.
Ridgerunner: Sometimes measures thought to be helpful are actually harmful. It is likely that fewer working class people will have good health coverage under Obamacare than prior to it.
Dave: Quite the contrary! More people are being covered while the quality of health care benefits has improved. My wife and I both have Blue Cross/Blue Shield through different companies and there is no longer any annual or lifetime limitations, more things are being covered at a lesser co pay and we are able to cover our older children over 18. My 21 year old daughter has epilepsy but works as a waitress so she had no health care coverage to treat her debilitating handicap. Now she does thanks to the new law.
FYI under the new law you may cover your children under your employer paid health care until their 26th birthday. They do not have to live with you or be in school, and they can even be married. In addition, if your family income is up to 29K a year and you have no health care you are now eligible to receive Medicaid benefits. I’ve read the entire law and although not perfect it’s pretty good.
Ridgerunner: And there is no particular reason, nor have you given one, to assume that the problem with deficits is due to under-taxation rather than overspending.
Dave: Let’s say you are the owner of a department store in a place where the consumers get to decide whether or not you raise the prices of your goods. The consumers can even lobby to force you to cut your prices but you must pay the price set by your vendors. You have to spend money in order to have sufficient inventory, pay your utilities and all the overhead cost it takes to run your business. You need to raise your prices in order to break even but instead local legislation forces you to cut your prices again. You now have to borrow money in order to stay in business but this causes you to run a huge deficit. Now, is the deficit caused by you spending money to keep your business solvent, or because you are being forced to lower your prices? That is what is happening with our government. A perfect example is the war in Iraq. Instead of raising taxes to pay for the war, Republicans borrowed hundreds of billions from Communist China and then cut taxes on the rich. Then, they extended those tax cuts claiming it will grow the economy while demanding cuts in Medicare and Social Security for the weak and vulnerable of society. In the world of right wing conservatism, making the economically advantages render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar is evil while stealing from God what belongs to God is good.
Isaiah 10
1 Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
2 to deprive the poor of their rights
and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey
and robbing the fatherless.
3 What will you do on the day of reckoning,
Peace,
Dave
Dave: Employer at Will and Right to Work Laws have several things in common, it allows the employer to terminate ones employment for any reason or no reason without notice and. with no accountability to the community or the workers. It allows the company to operate for the good of the company but not the common good. They typically pay much lower wages and benefits which results in underemployment.
For your second comment, companies must be accountable to someone other then themselves. Whether that be the courts or arbitration to enforce labor contracts or to governments. For a non union company there should be laws preventing companies from frivoulesly firing their employees. There must be just cause an a firm attempt by the company to assist the employee in his weaknesses by training and council. Firing should be a last resort proportional to the situation.
In a state where Right to Work or Employer at Will Laws exist, “Fuller Employment” often means more people underemployed. Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his/her life and that of his/her family, and of serving the human community. Those responsible for business enterprises are responsible to society for the economic and ecological effects of their operations. They have an obligation to consider the good of persons and not only the increase of profits.
Ridgerunner: Unions are not the answer to all things, and perhaps not to anything in this era. In my state, at least, the heavily-unionized areas are suffering a great deal from unemployment, where the non-unionized portions are not."
Dave: Unions have always done very well to assure a just and living wage through collective bargaining. They assure accountability so that employers cannot defraud workers out of a just and living wage. Unions are the answer for the poor working class to get out of poverty, get off welfare, and live with dignity. Unions assure that wealth flows down instead of trickle down. Unions have been commended by the Popes and the Church since 1890 to assure living conditions for families so that they can grow and become strong stable families. Contract negotiations are to assure a balance and equitable flow of wealth. Unions are the answer to grow the middle class and to have a vibrant economy where capitalism works for the common good.
Ridgerunner: Sometimes measures thought to be helpful are actually harmful. It is likely that fewer working class people will have good health coverage under Obamacare than prior to it.
Dave: Quite the contrary! More people are being covered while the quality of health care benefits has improved. My wife and I both have Blue Cross/Blue Shield through different companies and there is no longer any annual or lifetime limitations, more things are being covered at a lesser co pay and we are able to cover our older children over 18. My 21 year old daughter has epilepsy but works as a waitress so she had no health care coverage to treat her debilitating handicap. Now she does thanks to the new law.
FYI under the new law you may cover your children under your employer paid health care until their 26th birthday. They do not have to live with you or be in school, and they can even be married. In addition, if your family income is up to 29K a year and you have no health care you are now eligible to receive Medicaid benefits. I’ve read the entire law and although not perfect it’s pretty good.
Ridgerunner: And there is no particular reason, nor have you given one, to assume that the problem with deficits is due to under-taxation rather than overspending.
Dave: Let’s say you are the owner of a department store in a place where the consumers get to decide whether or not you raise the prices of your goods. The consumers can even lobby to force you to cut your prices but you must pay the price set by your vendors. You have to spend money in order to have sufficient inventory, pay your utilities and all the overhead cost it takes to run your business. You need to raise your prices in order to break even but instead local legislation forces you to cut your prices again. You now have to borrow money in order to stay in business but this causes you to run a huge deficit. Now, is the deficit caused by you spending money to keep your business solvent, or because you are being forced to lower your prices? That is what is happening with our government. A perfect example is the war in Iraq. Instead of raising taxes to pay for the war, Republicans borrowed hundreds of billions from Communist China and then cut taxes on the rich. Then, they extended those tax cuts claiming it will grow the economy while demanding cuts in Medicare and Social Security for the weak and vulnerable of society. In the world of right wing conservatism, making the economically advantages render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar is evil while stealing from God what belongs to God is good.
Isaiah 10
1 Woe to those who make unjust laws,
to those who issue oppressive decrees,
2 to deprive the poor of their rights
and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people,
making widows their prey
and robbing the fatherless.
3 What will you do on the day of reckoning,
Peace,
Dave
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
- Status