Can Hillary reduce the debt?

[Kulindahr]

We face similar realities in Greece with salaries in my line of work reduced by fifty percent over the past five years, and pensions slashed by similar percentages. Times are tough when facing a national unemployment in Greece of 25 pct. Count your blessings for the American unemployment rate is 5 pct.

That's capitalism at work for you.

And these days government connives with it -- that's how you get the unrealistic official unemployment number in the U.S. of merely 5%. If you count all those too discouraged and depressed by the economy who would actually like to have jobs the figure is much higher. And why are they discouraged and depressed? Because jobs pay so little it's not worth the grind to try to find one. If more of the value added by labor was returned to the worker, that would change.

 

[Kulindahr]

With high immigration it can only get worse, as the spuuly of workers exceeds the demand. The unemployment rate is misleading as it does not include the tens of millions who have stopped looking..

This is why neither party really wants to do anything about immigration: their corporate owners don't want it stopped. The wealthy who control the big corporations don't care if it means terrorists can sneak across the border or if wage levels mean there have to be massive government outlays, because those costs are externalized so they can haul in revenue. If corporations were forced to do honest accounting, they'd be begging the government to be allowed to finance and build Trump's wall.

 

[Benvolio]

The economy in those forty years after WWII resulted from socialist intervention in capitalism, e.g. massive building of roads, extension of electrical power to rural areas, the G.I. Bill. If capitalism had been left alone without heavy government 'guidance', those years would have been some of the most miserable in U.S. history.

Your uncle benefited from something almost universally despised by Trump followers, namely union efforts without which employers would never have paid enough to buy a house, etc. He didn't complain about being exploited by capitalists because they were restrained from doing so, or he would never have benefited.


This is historical reality: capitalism has fought tooth and nail against benefiting the worker; it has only done so when restrained by the forces of civilization. So when your uncle and others sang/sing the praises of the America economic system, they can do so not because of capitalism the horse but because of its riders, unions and government.

At the end of world war II US industry wss dominant in most area, through innovation and because of the wars destruction. Yes the unionswere able to exrort excessive wages and benefit from emoloyers with little ability to resist as required by law to negotiate. But ut could not last. It was inevitable that the unions would destroy some industries and destry the ability of others to resist foreign competition. Union bosses dare not be reasonable. They dare not stop squeezing as they will lose dues payers. Unions have won that battle by destroying companies and weakening others by lobbying Congress for ever increasing burdens on businesses. Businesses must now compete with foreign companies and their workers must therefore compete with foreign labor here and abroad.

 

[Kulindahr]

^

No such thing was or is "inevitable". It is only true because American corporations decided on an antagonistic approach to dealing with their workers.

That attitude of antagonism is the biggest problem in American society, responsible for most of our misery from crappy wages to violent crime. It's why comparisons to other developed countries so often turn out in their favor: American society is diseased.

 

[Benvolio]

^

No such thing was or is "inevitable". It is only true because American corporations decided on an antagonistic approach to dealing with their workers.

That attitude of antagonism is the biggest problem in American society, responsible for most of our misery from crappy wages to violent crime. It's why comparisons to other developed countries so often turn out in their favor: American society is diseased.

Unionization ensures that it will be an adversarial relationship. Unions exist to get more of everything, and must always demand more and keep their employees unhappy to justify their existence, large dues and fat salaries for the union bosses.
Further, the democrats have encouraged adversity by encouraging unions, and by imposing ever increasing burdens on employers.Plaintiffs trial lawyers are among the biggest democrat contributors, so the democrats love to think up laws against employers for discrimination real and imagined, harrassment, whistleblowers, etc. Employers who hire or promote the best people without regard to protected status are asking for trouble. They must discriminate to avoid being accused of other discrimination . Democrats have always thought "we are the good guys because we are on the side of employers against employees."

Historicaly the democrat party is a collection of minorities; their power has come from incouraging division between minorities and the historic majority. You can clearly see this at work in universities where liberals are encouraging movements like black lives matter . Some schools are preaching white privelege, microagression, and speech codes prohibiting ever more exaggerated speech offences. Some students are told all whites are racisis. Groups are allowed/ encouraged to exclude whites. Schools, lead by liberals, are actively encouraging racial division and hostility.

 

[peeonme]

Unionization ensures that it will be an adversarial relationship. Unions exist to get more of everything, and must always demand more and keep their employees unhappy to justify their existence, large dues and fat salaries for the union bosses.
Further, the democrats have encouraged adversity by encouraging unions, and by imposing ever increasing burdens on employers.Plaintiffs trial lawyers are among the biggest democrat contributors, so the democrats love to think up laws against employers for discrimination real and imagined, harrassment, whistleblowers, etc. Employers who hire or promote the best people without regard to protected status are asking for trouble. They must discriminate to avoid being accused of other discrimination . Democrats have always thought "we are the good guys because we are on the side of employers against employees."

Historicaly the democrat party is a collection of minorities; their power has come from incouraging division between minorities and the historic majority. You can clearly see this at work in universities where liberals are encouraging movements like black lives matter . Some schools are preaching white privelege, microagression, and speech codes prohibiting ever more exaggerated speech offences. Some students are told all whites are racisis. Groups are allowed/ encouraged to exclude whites. Schools, lead by liberals, are actively encouraging racial division and hostility.

Before adversarial came along it was oppressive. Child labor ring a bell? Unions originally made the scene to make sure that a worker had decent and safe working conditions.
Henry Ford set the tone for higher pay with his $5.00 a day pay for his workers, this guy knew that they would buy the product that they built and thus by creating an expanding market for his cars.

I know first hand that the unions overstepped their original use and purpose. I listened to unskilled auto workers brag about their pay and how they screwed the company.
I also had to deal with their so-called journeymen skilled workers who had been laid off and came to our non union job shops, not only did they not want to work, but they didn't know how to do the job. They were skilled in name only.

The cure for this was not to dismantle the middle class as has been done. It amazed me how the unions stood by and said little when Clinton signed the trade deals.

Who in the hell is going to buy the product when America goes belly up? That day is coming, unemployment is much higher than the 5% professed, wages are stagnant and health care is destroying our economy with pharmaceutical companies charging unethical prices and by so doing pushing up health care premiums.

Everyone claims that they have a solution, a new idea, a plan.
I ask one thing, why not reverse what started this trouble? Revoke NAFTA and renegotiate the trade deals that make us a debtor nation to Red China?

 

[Benvolio]

Before adversarial came along it was oppressive. Child labor ring a bell? Unions originally made the scene to make sure that a worker had decent and safe working conditions.
Henry Ford set the tone for higher pay with his $5.00 a day pay for his workers, this guy knew that they would buy the product that they built and thus by creating an expanding market for his cars.

I know first hand that the unions overstepped their original use and purpose. I listened to unskilled auto workers brag about their pay and how they screwed the company.
I also had to deal with their so-called journeymen skilled workers who had been laid off and came to our non union job shops, not only did they not want to work, but they didn't know how to do the job. They were skilled in name only.

The cure for this was not to dismantle the middle class as has been done. It amazed me how the unions stood by and said little when Clinton signed the trade deals.

Who in the hell is going to buy the product when America goes belly up? That day is coming, unemployment is much higher than the 5% professed, wages are stagnant and health care is destroying our economy with pharmaceutical companies charging unethical prices and by so doing pushing up health care premiums.

Everyone claims that they have a solution, a new idea, a plan.
I ask one thing, why not reverse what started this trouble? Revoke NAFTA and renegotiate the trade deals that make us a debtor nation to Red China?

Perhaps but immigration causes unemployment and low wages by supply and demand.

 

[Kulindahr]

Unionization ensures that it will be an adversarial relationship. Unions exist to get more of everything, and must always demand more and keep their employees unhappy to justify their existence, large dues and fat salaries for the union bosses.

Bullshit. Your deliberate, willing ignorance in the face of substantial evidence repeatedly presented to you in this forum is appalling.

This is why it is not unreasonable to believe that you are actually a paid shill of the Left, posting here to make the RIght look so bad that people will flee from it.

 

[Benvolio]

Bullshit. Your deliberate, willing ignorance in the face of substantial evidence repeatedly presented to you in this forum is appalling.

This is why it is not unreasonable to believe that you are actually a paid shill of the Left, posting here to make the RIght look so bad that people will flee from it.

Nonsense. You mere opinions do not qualify as evidence, nor you rudeness as arguments.

 

[Kabluey]

Nonsense. You mere opinions do not qualify as evidence, nor you rudeness as arguments.

Neither do your opinions.

You've rattled off a series of unsupported opinions on here.

And you're victim blaming yet again.

Corporate America doesn't care whether the USA is unionised or not.

They've found countries where there are:
- no environmental laws,
- no real labour laws,
- easily corrupted regulators,
- impoverished populations full of desperate workers, and
- wages that are a fraction of that required to live in a developed country that has to pay for things like sewerage, waste disposal, public health, defence, streets, law and order, clean drinking water, welfare for the elderly and education for children.

 

[peeonme]

Perhaps but immigration causes unemployment and low wages by supply and demand.

Actually, before globalization we had a shortage of workers in many key areas in our economy. Immigration helped our nation by bringing in educated, talented, qualified workers. Visas were issued where shortages were halting services and production.

I am in favor of bringing productive people into our nation who wish to assimilate, if we need them.

 

[peeonme]

Neither do your opinions.

You've rattled off a series of unsupported opinions on here.

And you're victim blaming yet again.

Corporate America doesn't care whether the USA is unionised or not.

They've found countries where there are:
- no environmental laws,
- no real labour laws,
- easily corrupted regulators,
- impoverished populations full of desperate workers, and
- wages that are a fraction of that required to live in a developed country that has to pay for things like sewerage, waste disposal, public health, defence, streets, law and order, clean drinking water, welfare for the elderly and education for children.

We need to remember that our government in the USA paved the way for all of this with NAFTA, GATT, WTO, knowing that the American worker would be left high and dry and that workers on other shores would be exploited, that there would be no protection for the environment and that we would be in debt to an adversarial foreign power that is diametrically opposed to all of the principals that our men in uniform have fought for.

I don't call these trade deals "stupid' or "dumb" like Trump does. No, I call it treason.

 

[Kabluey]

We need to remember that our government in the USA paved the way for all of this with NAFTA, GATT, WTO, knowing that the American worker would be left high and dry and that workers on other shores would be exploited, that there would be no protection for the environment and that we would be in debt to an adversarial foreign power that is diametrically opposed to all of the principals that our men in uniform have fought for.

I don't call these trade deals "stupid' or "dumb" like Trump does. No, I call it treason.

NAFTA, GATT, WTO... these things weren't the cause of corporate outsourcing, they were created at the request of the corporates.

America's exceptional economic might during the mid twentieth century has always been contested by other economies. Those that have undertaken the Japan model of economic transformation have profited not just because of American consumers, they've also profited despite America.

How else do you think they've built the war chests needed to buy things like IBM's PC business and Motorola? That's not simply from supplying goods to Americans.

 

[Kulindahr]

Nonsense. You mere opinions do not qualify as evidence, nor you rudeness as arguments.

"Mere opinions."

You've been given so many links to credible sources showing that your line of drivel is just that, that it's a wonder to anyone paying attention that you spout the same stuff you did at the beginning. That you can't recall any of it, or more likely don't choose to, show you have no interest in learning, in understanding, or even in reality. All you have is ideology that is shown over and over again to be so shallow, even one-dimensional, that it has almost nothing to do with not just today's reality but any, ever.

You are the biggest argument in favor of all-out liberalism I've ever seen on this board.

And if you find the above to be rude, then you need to grow up and lean to listen, because nothing less than rudeness ever gets through to you, so when you find people being consistently rude it should be a wake-up call -- and that it isn't shows an inability to engage in cognitive discourse.

 

[Kulindahr]

NAFTA, GATT, WTO... these things weren't the cause of corporate outsourcing, they were created at the request of the corporates.

America's exceptional economic might during the mid twentieth century has always been contested by other economies. Those that have undertaken the Japan model of economic transformation have profited not just because of American consumers, they've also profited despite America.

How else do you think they've built the war chests needed to buy things like IBM's PC business and Motorola? That's not simply from supplying goods to Americans.

The irony about Japan is that after the war it built its economy on the best research about how to run manufacturing and related businesses, and thus left the U.S. behind by a generation. Where did that material come from? It was produced in the U.S> before the war, but America corporations were too arrogant to pay attention.

And THAT is what has killed American manufacturing more than anything: a continued arrogance that believes they have nothing to learn from anyone, so they neglect the expertise right under their noses. If American companies had paid attention to American universities, and later to Germany and Sweden and such, we would still have high-paying union jobs with the unions and corporations working as partners. But the American capitalist has almost invariably regarded workers as livestock, not as human beings, so it's no surprise that unions reacted by treating corporations as enemies to be defeated.

Had corporations been willing to learn, Japan and Germany would have taken another generation to catch up because American industry would have still been leading the way. But American CEOs still act as though they have nothing to learn from other countries, so we are still suffering from problems others have solved.

 

[peeonme]

NAFTA, GATT, WTO... these things weren't the cause of corporate outsourcing, they were created at the request of the corporates.

America's exceptional economic might during the mid twentieth century has always been contested by other economies. Those that have undertaken the Japan model of economic transformation have profited not just because of American consumers, they've also profited despite America.

How else do you think they've built the war chests needed to buy things like IBM's PC business and Motorola? That's not simply from supplying goods to Americans.

If you have ever read anything I have posted you might have noticed that I never contested or complained about Japan.

Japan, where ever it got it's knowledge about manufacturing from beat us at our own game. It built the better mouse trap.
I remember when the first Japanese cars appeared, people pointed and laughed, they scoffed and then they bought them.
They were reliable and more importantly they were efficient.

In the machine tool industry Japan put out a better, less expensive and highly efficient product. Again they beat us.
If we want to go to radios, stereos and other electronics, they did it again.

Japan created a strong middle class of consumers while it did this. They took care of those who did the work.

China pimped out it's workers, they stood them on the street corner of the labor market and sold them like meat. China did not build a better mouse trap, it stole ours. Then in most cases used inferior materials while building it. Few people have good reports about goods made in China.

Had China produced a quality product they took some market share from an American company I would say to the victor goes the spoils.
There is a vast difference between Japan and China when it come to trade.

Japan has a middle class, China has a market of consumers which is small in proportion to it's labor force.
Japan is a free nation and China is not.

Of course NAFTA and the other trade agreements were created because the corporations wanted them, the corporations have both parties in their pocket and own them.

 

[Benvolio]

The irony about Japan is that after the war it built its economy on the best research about how to run manufacturing and related businesses, and thus left the U.S. behind by a generation. Where did that material come from? It was produced in the U.S> before the war, but America corporations were too arrogant to pay attention.

And THAT is what has killed American manufacturing more than anything: a continued arrogance that believes they have nothing to learn from anyone, so they neglect the expertise right under their noses. If American companies had paid atktention to American universities, and later to Germany and Sweden and such, we would still have high-paying union jobs with the unions and corporations working as partners. But the American capitalist has almost invariably regarded workers as livestock, not as human beings, so it's no surprise that unions reacted by treating corporations as enemies to be defeated.

Had corporations been willing to learn, Japan and Germany would have taken another generation to catch up because American industry would have still been leading the way. But American CEOs still act as though they have nothing to learn from other countries, so we are still suffering from problems others have solved.

The excess expense of union labor reduced the ability of companies to retool and reorganize, while Japan and Germany were able to build new with much cheaper labor.

 

[Benvolio]

The irony about Japan is that after the war it built its economy on the best research about how to run manufacturing and related businesses, and thus left the U.S. behind by a generation. Where did that material come from? It was produced in the U.S> before the war, but America corporations were too arrogant to pay attention.

And THAT is what has killed American manufacturing more than anything: a continued arrogance that believes they have nothing to learn from anyone, so they neglect the expertise right under their noses. If American companies had paid attention to American universities, and later to Germany and Sweden and such, we would still have high-paying union jobs with the unions and corporations working as partners. But the American capitalist has almost invariably regarded workers as livestock, not as human beings, so it's no surprise that unions reacted by treating corporations as enemies to be defeated.

Had corporations been willing to learn, Japan and Germany would have taken another generation to catch up because American industry would have still been leading the way. But American CEOs still act as though they have nothing to learn from other countries, so we are still suffering from problems others have solved.

Your credible sources are never more than opinions driven by liberal ideology and democrat partianship.

 

[gsdx]

Your credible sources are never more than opinions driven by liberal ideology and democrat partianship.

As opposed to Fox News, I suppose?

 

[Kulindahr]

Your credible sources are never more than opinions driven by liberal ideology and democrat partianship.

You use that smear every time a source shows you wrong. But most of the material hasn't been mine, and it's been from government and academia.

I'm sure Opinterph will be thrilled to know that his carefully researched material is "driven by liberal ideology and democrat partianship". Or maybe he;ll be amused, as I am about your accusation about "democrat partianship", since the only reason it seems I sound like a Democrat (or democrat) is because you make the position of the right sound so odious that any rational person will appear to be standing with those you so ineptly oppose.