It's been 2 yrs since Dumb Donald claimed he had a secret "foolproof" plan to defeat ISIS
- Thread starter American Fabius
- Start date
A true free market capitalism would favor the right to union representation. Free enterprise doesn't just favor a business owner and it's management. Free enterprise is an economic system in which private business operates in competition and largely free of state control. That competition includes a workers right to compete for a better wage. Unionization is a tool used by workers in a competitive market. Conservatives are against unions, and by default, against free enterprise. Conservative politicians aren't limiting the government. They only limit government that help poor and middle class citizens. Conservatives aren't limiting taxes either. They limit taxes for extremely wealthy citizens while throwing scraps to the middle class. You're being fooled with this nonsense. You believe it because you want to believe it. Americans right now aren't any better off than they were under the Democrats. The rich will keep sponging off the backs of the middle class until American capitalism implodes and another great recession reverses it.
That's a great speech Fabius, but you still didn't tell me what YOU believe in?
What Conservative policy restricts a person's right to join a Labor union? If you believe in the right for workers to organize, should they then be forced to join as they are in public employee unions? Can workers vote NOT to organize without threats from fellow union organizers? Are you for freedom of assembly?
You say Conservatives want to "limit" government that helps the poor and middle class? So do you favor allowing them to keep more of what they earn? Is the Government that works best in your opinion that which does the most for them or the least? Who is better off...those not in need of Government assistance and therefore not dependent on it, or those who are prospering earning a living independent of Government and building wealth for themselves and their Families?
Do you know anyone who is totally dependent on Government and is not consequently living on a subsistence budget either at or below the poverty level? Is that model preferable to people who are gainfully employed,earning higher and higher wages and accumulating wealth through their individual efforts?
What am I being fooled about? I am for an expanding economy, where those seeking good paying jobs can easily find them and then they are allowed to keep more of what they earn through lower taxes to grow their personal fortunes even more and expand the economy further by creating more opportunities for others. Government's role in such a dynamic economy is by definition "limited" because it is neither punishing achievement nor destroying the means that produce it....namely through confiscatory taxation.
If rich people already are wealthy, how do they "sponge" off the backs of the middle class? How does money flow from the poor or middle class up to the rich? Who has ever hired you that's poor? If poor people have no money, how is it that the rich are "sponging" off of them?
Again I ask you, are you a Socialist? Do you favor Government equally distributing incomes so the rich can't "exploit" the poor? Do you believe individuals acting in their own best interests are capable of maintaining themselves and deciding for themselves how much of what they earn and are able to keep is enough?
Or do you favor the State making those decisions, including how much one is entitled to earn and how much they should be forced to return to Government in the form of taxes so that it can make sure no one person has too much more than the next person?
Is that what you believe? If not, then what do you think works better than that philosophy of Socialist income redistribution?
Last edited:
oooooohhhhhh are we a little upset?.....must have struck a nerve
Obama's not my hero and I've never taken a hand out in my life, unlike the majority of "low output" Dumb Donald fans.. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-...de-high-output-america-vs-low-output-america/. I've also been a true patriot who's offered and completed his duty to country, unlike the majority of Dumb Donald fans who revere draft dodgers and think posting a "remembrance" on Facebook proves their patriotism. So, how about shutting the Fk up with your puking mouth and do something real for your country before you croak alone and worthless you 4-F lover.
So much economic misunderstanding (typical of the Left) so little space to correct it all but I'll try to help you
Free markets operate by individuals making economic decisions in their own best interests. If Unions or collective bargaining help individuals achieve their desired wages then they are free to use that tool, however the best arrangements directly compensate the individual skills, talents, and abilities workers offer and it is more efficient because not all workers should be paid exactly the same wages because talents and skills in any labor pool will vary. Not all Doctors and Lawyers or even internet message board posters are the same. Some are simply worth more time than others.
No it doesn't. Free enterprise favors the free market, which determines which products goods and services are created, built or designed to meet the constantly changing demands of consumers who either need, want, or desire those services. Effective response to that dynamic is smart management operating in the free market. Government mandates can NEVER respond to that dynamic.
This is true and the exact opposite of what most Leftist Socialist types advocate. Their model is central planning, income redistribution, equal ownership of both the means of production, and allocation of resources to the masses to make sure no one person or business can control outcomes to their own advantages. The exact antithesis of Free enterprise.
All workers inherently have that right based on the skills and talents they bring into the workforce. Unions try to standardize wages regardless of an individual's talents and the end result is upward pressure on labor making many business unable to compete or adjust to market conditions of varying levels of worker output. Unions in many cases actually kill businesses by making unreasonable demands not relative to costs which drive management to find savings elsewhere...usually in the quality of the products they produce or the prices we pay for them, or the absence of their businesses and the loss of valuable jobs and employment because they can no longer turn a profit (the purpose of ALL private business)
The dirty little secret especially among public sector employee Unions is that they exist to fund political organizations and their leadership. They often work against their own best interests because they do not allow free choice to organize, freedom to vote against the demands of the leadership, or freedom to offer workers room to innovate, become more efficient, or reward individual efforts to achieve savings for taxpayers who pay their salaries. Conservatives are not against these people being represented, but they do resent the politicization of their workplaces primarily by Democrat or Leftist leadership.
Conservative politicians favor the Government operating within its Constitutional limits. To the extent we've gone beyond that, we have 20 trillion dollars in unpaid debt.
Conservatives believe the best Government is that which is needed the least. People can best do for themselves what Government promises to do for them. Creation of a growing self sustaining middle class is much more preferable and conducive to a healthy society than a permanent underclass of Government created dependence that seeks only to keep it's recipients enslaved. Go into any area living only on Government handouts, and poverty & despair is all you see. Go into area where people are NOT dependent on Government handouts, and you see prosperity. Most people prefer prosperity to handouts.
In fact, the wealthy pay the vast majority of taxes collected in this country, and a significantly higher amount of their earned income than the poor. Their taxes are certainly not limited, they are confiscated at exorbitantly high rates and then redistributed to mostly non tax paying citizens or certainly to people who have not paid into the system as much as they are being given by politicians who only promise to take more from those who have produced and give to those who either do not produce or produce very little in relation to what they are collecting.
So explain to me what I've posted here that is wrong. How do you see our wage and tax system operating as it should be?
If rich people earn their money from the poor, why are the poor where they are and the rich where they are? Why do Leftists insist the rich pay their "fair share" if the poor have all of the money? Why aren't they (poor) being asked to pay all of the taxes if they hold all of the money that rich people steal from them? How do poor people start out with all of the money, and then the rich come in and steal it from them leaving them still poor?
Who has the money to start with, and who does it eventually belong to?
Explain how that works?
Free markets operate by individuals making economic decisions in their own best interests. If Unions or collective bargaining help individuals achieve their desired wages then they are free to use that tool, however the best arrangements directly compensate the individual skills, talents, and abilities workers offer and it is more efficient because not all workers should be paid exactly the same wages because talents and skills in any labor pool will vary. Not all Doctors and Lawyers or even internet message board posters are the same. Some are simply worth more time than others.
No it doesn't. Free enterprise favors the free market, which determines which products goods and services are created, built or designed to meet the constantly changing demands of consumers who either need, want, or desire those services. Effective response to that dynamic is smart management operating in the free market. Government mandates can NEVER respond to that dynamic.
This is true and the exact opposite of what most Leftist Socialist types advocate. Their model is central planning, income redistribution, equal ownership of both the means of production, and allocation of resources to the masses to make sure no one person or business can control outcomes to their own advantages. The exact antithesis of Free enterprise.
All workers inherently have that right based on the skills and talents they bring into the workforce. Unions try to standardize wages regardless of an individual's talents and the end result is upward pressure on labor making many business unable to compete or adjust to market conditions of varying levels of worker output. Unions in many cases actually kill businesses by making unreasonable demands not relative to costs which drive management to find savings elsewhere...usually in the quality of the products they produce or the prices we pay for them, or the absence of their businesses and the loss of valuable jobs and employment because they can no longer turn a profit (the purpose of ALL private business)
The dirty little secret especially among public sector employee Unions is that they exist to fund political organizations and their leadership. They often work against their own best interests because they do not allow free choice to organize, freedom to vote against the demands of the leadership, or freedom to offer workers room to innovate, become more efficient, or reward individual efforts to achieve savings for taxpayers who pay their salaries. Conservatives are not against these people being represented, but they do resent the politicization of their workplaces primarily by Democrat or Leftist leadership.
Conservative politicians favor the Government operating within its Constitutional limits. To the extent we've gone beyond that, we have 20 trillion dollars in unpaid debt.
Conservatives believe the best Government is that which is needed the least. People can best do for themselves what Government promises to do for them. Creation of a growing self sustaining middle class is much more preferable and conducive to a healthy society than a permanent underclass of Government created dependence that seeks only to keep it's recipients enslaved. Go into any area living only on Government handouts, and poverty & despair is all you see. Go into area where people are NOT dependent on Government handouts, and you see prosperity. Most people prefer prosperity to handouts.
In fact, the wealthy pay the vast majority of taxes collected in this country, and a significantly higher amount of their earned income than the poor. Their taxes are certainly not limited, they are confiscated at exorbitantly high rates and then redistributed to mostly non tax paying citizens or certainly to people who have not paid into the system as much as they are being given by politicians who only promise to take more from those who have produced and give to those who either do not produce or produce very little in relation to what they are collecting.
So explain to me what I've posted here that is wrong. How do you see our wage and tax system operating as it should be?
If rich people earn their money from the poor, why are the poor where they are and the rich where they are? Why do Leftists insist the rich pay their "fair share" if the poor have all of the money? Why aren't they (poor) being asked to pay all of the taxes if they hold all of the money that rich people steal from them? How do poor people start out with all of the money, and then the rich come in and steal it from them leaving them still poor?
Who has the money to start with, and who does it eventually belong to?
Explain how that works?
He can't explain anything. Th nut has been exposed as the fraud and liar he is. The only serving he has ever done mostly likely is doing his job down at the local Dairy Queen.
I don't want to accuse him of anything, but I can hold him accountable for what he says, which is what I'm trying to do.
He calls Conservatives "stupid"...says we're "fooled" says "rich sponge off the backs of the poor".
OK
I want him to show me, and then offer the alternative that fixes it. I've tried to explain how Conservatives view these issues without calling him names or casting aspersions on his level of economic intelligence (which appears to me to be very limited) however I would like to hear his defense of his charges or what he believes is the solution to whatever he thinks is wrong with Free market entrepreneurial Capitalism.
His reluctance to engage me in honest give and take preferring instead to hurl childish insults is not only petulant but intellectually vapid.