Props to Indiana, workers no longer hostage to dues

[Diego in Seattle]

why are workers in right-to-work states treated so much more shabbily than their counterparts in non-right-to-work states?

They aren't.

Try getting out of your ivory tower, dumbfuck.

[mvscal]

Ivory tower?



Look, guy. This topic has nothing to do with grown men stuffing their cocks into the assholes of young boys, so there is nothing here of any possible interest to you.

Run along now, school is out.

[Diego in Seattle]

Left Behinder.....is that a white flag I see you waving?

[Diego in Seattle]

Left Behinder;
Here's another example from just today of how non-union businesses are so much better than union workplaces when it comes to cost effectiveness

Boy, Boeing management sure showed everyone who the smartest cookie is!

[Left Seater]

The worker had a choice to work at a union shop or to not work at a union shop before "right to work." Now freeloaders can leach off the union's benevolence while the hard working proletariat pay their dues.

Ok, and now they have the option of paying union dues and working under that structure and getting the representation, or not working under the structure and not getting the representation. Again, this is a win for the worker.

[Left Seater]

Clever Diego, borrow that from M2?

The 787 is certainly having it teething problems, but it isn't much different than any new plane that comes to market. When Boeing or Douglas or McDonald or Lockheed built and designed everything in house there were errors and omissions by union employees. It is to be expected. Even more so with the new technology of the 787.

Unionized workers hardly denotes an additional measure of quality. Look no further than my wife's vehicle with the sticker reading "proudly produced by united auto workers". This same vehicle has had 4 recalls, two of which are related to assembly.

[Sirfindafold]

Unionized workers hardly denotes an additional measure of quality. Look no further than my wife's vehicle with the sticker reading "proudly produced by united auto workers". This same vehicle has had 4 recalls, two of which are related to assembly.

A fucking recall on a UAW made vehicle!?! The hell you say.

[Terry in Crapchester]

Employees can also start their own company if they are being mistreated.

Much easier said than done. Trust me, I know that from personal experience.

[Left Seater]

Sure it is difficult and cost me plenty of hours of sleep, but if the 'MAN" is treating you so poorly, it is an excellent option.

[Derron]

Employees can also start their own company if they are being mistreated.

Much easier said than done. Trust me, I know that from personal experience.

Certainly a lot harder these days than it used to be, and you have to be very careful about what business you go into. Look for a lot more small business start ups with the unemployment rates what they are.

Don't expect the banks to loan you money....you will be self financed and should be in order to succeed. Debt kills business.

Been there and done that. 54 year old white guys with health history don't get yobs these days. You will eat what you kill..I am starting a bookkeeping / business services business..one person, home and internet based low capital requirements. Work at my own pace. Downsizing my life to meet my income abilities.

Don't miss the construction business, and will never go back. It simply does not pencil out or make work sense if you cannot do a million a year in gross sales.

[smackaholic]

Just feel free to link up some stats to back up up your fantasy bullshit, you painfully stupid fucking retard.

I have none. I don't need to look up any.

What I do have is common sense that says a 1800 dollar mortgage is gonna take two incomes in the large majority of households. A 900 dollar mortgage will not.

And yes, I realize that some paying that 900 dollar mortgage will just spend the difference on a bass boat. Some won't. Some will decide that maybe mommy should stay home and play mommy full time.

[Sirfindafold]

What I do have is common sense.

What is that?

sin,

McGoober

[Derron]

Possibly.

The overall point was that Indiana workers are no longer hostage to union dues. They now get the choice. Everything else aside, I have a hard time understanding how anyone would be against the worker having the choice to pay the dues or to not pay the dues.

The worker had a choice to work at a union shop or to not work at a union shop before "right to work." Now freeloaders can leach off the union's benevolence while the hard working proletariat pay their dues.

Ahh ...."the freeloaders" might be thinking on their own rather than toeing the union stranglehold they have put on every public employee union in the country. Dissidents will be handled in the correct manner.



Union benevolence ?? Bwwahhh....fucking bastards get paid well for any thing they do..benevolence don't have shit to do with it.

With voter turnouts the way they are, the unions can swing any election they want to. Pure math fact.

Love it when the words "free loader, union benevolence, and proletariat" work their way into Comrade Smacks post.

[OCmike]

Possibly.

The overall point was that Indiana workers are no longer hostage to union dues. They now get the choice. Everything else aside, I have a hard time understanding how anyone would be against the worker having the choice to pay the dues or to not pay the dues.

The worker had a choice to work at a union shop or to not work at a union shop before "right to work."

That would be fine if the union didn't use strongarm tactics to require (for example all public works projects to be completed by union workers only.

Face it, unions have buttfucked themselves by overestimating their position of leverage, overplaying their hand and pricing themselves out of the market.

[Derron]

That would be fine if the union didn't use strongarm tactics to require (for example all public works projects to be completed by union workers only.

Only where the local governments have been corrupted to that point. We did probably 50 public works projects as a sub contractor over 10 years and never heard union once.

Face it, unions have buttfucked themselves by overestimating their position of leverage, overplaying their hand and pricing themselves out of the market.

Yep..they have really priced themselves out of the market. Might want to say "private" trade unions maybe.

Sin,

Every public employees union in the United States
The NEA
AFSCME
California Corrections Union

[OCmike]

There are exceptions, of course, but the prison guards aren't one of them. Because of their ridiculous compensation and pension rates, thousands will be laid off under Gov Brown's new plan which will transfer many/most non-violent offenders to county jails. Oops.

Same goes for the police union in cities like San Jose. The union bullied their way to unsustainable wages and pensions, refused to make concessions so that they wouldn't appear weak, and 67 cops (out of less than 300) got pink slips as a result. That must be some of that "union benevolence" BSmack was crowing about.

[Goober McTuber]

Just feel free to link up some stats to back up up your fantasy bullshit, you painfully stupid fucking retard.

I have none. I don't need to look up any.

What I do have is common sense that says a 1800 dollar mortgage is gonna take two incomes in the large majority of households. A 900 dollar mortgage will not.

You're fantasizing some 1950's scenario with mom at home raising the kids. You're full of shit, as usual. BTW, Mr. Common Sense, $1800/month will get you almost $400,000.

[smackaholic]

Just feel free to link up some stats to back up up your fantasy bullshit, you painfully stupid fucking retard.

I have none. I don't need to look up any.

What I do have is common sense that says a 1800 dollar mortgage is gonna take two incomes in the large majority of households. A 900 dollar mortgage will not.

You're fantasizing some 1950's scenario with mom at home raising the kids. You're full of shit, as usual. BTW, Mr. Common Sense, $1800/month will get you almost $400,000.

Bullfukking shit.

Not in the northeast it won't with our oppressive tax rates. Remember, as a general rule, taxes are paid from escrow which is part of your mortgage. My place, on a good day might bring 200, 225 with a bit of landscaping. OK, a fukkload of landscaping. :) My prop tax is 4500, insurance about 600. That is getting fairly close to 5 bills a month without paying a nickle of mortgage. A 400K shack will likely have 8000 taxes, a grand insurance. There goes half of that 1800 bucks.

As for fantasizing of the 50s scenario, yeah, I do a bit. I think it would be nice to live in a place where the average shmuck with an average yob can have a decent little house and an OL at home if she wants to be. Of course our nanny state can't have anyone at home taking care of their own. Gubmint will do it, honey. Get to work and make me some money!!!!

[smackaholic]

There are exceptions, of course, but the prison guards aren't one of them. Because of their ridiculous compensation and pension rates, thousands will be laid off under Gov Brown's new plan which will transfer many/most non-violent offenders to county jails. Oops.

Same goes for the police union in cities like San Jose. The union bullied their way to unsustainable wages and pensions, refused to make concessions so that they wouldn't appear weak, and 67 cops (out of less than 300) got pink slips as a result. That must be some of that "union benevolence" BSmack was crowing about.

Same thing is going on here. A hartford cop with 20 years in can retire with a pension HIGHER than his normal salary!!!

And no, I ain't fukking making it up or exaggerating a bit. They are in a pension system that pays out according to best 3 years INCLUDING OT. So, these fukkers work the system to ensure that in your last 3 years, you receive unbelievable amounts of OT. Most of that, of course is spent sleeping in a cruiser at a construction site.

70K a year for life, from age 42. Not bad work, if you can get it!

[Dinsdale]

And no, I ain't fukking making it up or exaggerating a bit. They are in a pension system that pays out according to best 3 years INCLUDING OT. So, these fukkers work the system to ensure that in your last 3 years, you receive unbelievable amounts of OT. Most of that, of course is spent sleeping in a cruiser at a construction site.

70K a year for life, from age 42. Not bad work, if you can get it!

Wait, I missed something -- when did you move to Portland?

Sin,
Luther

[smackaholic]

most liberal affluent states have this sort of scam going with many public sector unions, especially in allegedly dangerous jobs such as police, firefighters, prison guards.

fortunately, even state and local gubmints don't have printing presses, so they are being forced to face reality and reign these benefits in for newer workers, but, the guys already retired are supposedly locked in. i think they will find out in the not to distant future that they are not as locked in as they think and will received reduced pensions.

is this fair?

it really doesn't matter. tax payers can be bled just so dry. so long as they have the option to move to a state that has been a little wiser with their finances, they will move when they just can't take it any more.

[Goober McTuber]

You're fantasizing some 1950's scenario with mom at home raising the kids. You're full of shit, as usual. BTW, Mr. Common Sense, $1800/month will get you almost $400,000.

Bullfukking shit.

Not in the northeast it won't with our oppressive tax rates. Remember, as a general rule, taxes are paid from escrow which is part of your mortgage. My place, on a good day might bring 200, 225 with a bit of landscaping. OK, a fukkload of landscaping. :) My prop tax is 4500, insurance about 600. That is getting fairly close to 5 bills a month without paying a nickle of mortgage. A 400K shack will likely have 8000 taxes, a grand insurance. There goes half of that 1800 bucks.

As for fantasizing of the 50s scenario, yeah, I do a bit. I think it would be nice to live in a place where the average shmuck with an average yob can have a decent little house and an OL at home if she wants to be. Of course our nanny state can't have anyone at home taking care of their own. Gubmint will do it, honey. Get to work and make me some money!!!!

Look, everyone here knows you’re a fucking moron. You don’t have to drive that point home every fucking day. An escrow account is not part of your fucking mortgage. It’s a forced savings account for fucking morons like you who can’t figure out how to set aside money to pay for homeowners insurance and property taxes.

Now get to work and find some links that back up your fucking moronic assertion that lower incomes in right to work states are due to a plethora of stay at home moms. BTW, the 50’s were not only the heyday of organized labor, it was also a time when the top marginal tax rate never dipped below 90 fucking percent.

[Derron]

fortunately, even state and local gubmints don't have printing presses, so they are being forced to face reality and reign these benefits in for newer workers, but, the guys already retired are supposedly locked in. i think they will find out in the not to distant future that they are not as locked in as they think and will received reduced pensions.

Bullshit.

Those liberal and "affluent " states that you cite are just that. Liberal and largely Democratic. Take Oregon for example, the Republicans have not held any state wide office since 1992, and the Governors chair in over 30 years. That means the AG, the State Court judges and other higher level offices are held by liberal Dems who are beholden to the public employee unions for their elections and the elected ones appointed the other positions. ALL those positions are under the PERS retirement system, and you have the fox guarding the hen house. No way is there going to be retirement system reform by the very people who are subject to being paid under that system. Been that way for over 30 years here.

If it was able to make a referendum ballot for state wide vote, that brings the public employee union dynamic in to play that swings virtually every election in Oregon. PERS retirees, active duty public employees and their families make up well over the 35% average voter turnout in this state. The D's, fucking slam dunk every election, they go back to their offices, and the financial debacle continues. Only when there is a complete collapse of the PERS system, will these people turn and feed on the goose who shit the golden egg for them.

Court challenges to the system will be struck down by the affected and liberal judges every time. True reform will only come after financial collapse. Watch the government tit suckers scream when that shit goes down.

[Goober McTuber]

BTW, the 50’s were not only the heyday of organized labor, it was also a time when the top marginal tax rate never dipped below 90 fucking percent.

I would vote to bring that tax system back in a heartbeat. You could deduct just about anything. There was no alternative minimum tax. And thus, any small business owner with a decent tax lawyer and accountant could pay absolutely nothing in federal income tax on his earnings every year. Those truly were the days. That is why the alternative minimum tax statutes came into being. No one paid 90% of their income to the federal government unless they were completely and utterly insane.

Well, you’ve offered some fine anecdotal evidence there. Now, what portion of the population was comprised of small business owners, and what percentage of them were paying at the highest marginal tax rate?

[Derron]

Unionized workers hardly denotes an additional measure of quality. Look no further than my wife's vehicle with the sticker reading "proudly produced by united auto workers". This same vehicle has had 4 recalls, two of which are related to assembly.

A fucking recall on a UAW made vehicle!?! The hell you say.

If that would pay that dude more, he could stop smoking his roach down until it burned his fingers. $ 35 bucks an hour just don't make it in today's world.

[smackaholic]

fortunately, even state and local gubmints don't have printing presses, so they are being forced to face reality and reign these benefits in for newer workers, but, the guys already retired are supposedly locked in. i think they will find out in the not to distant future that they are not as locked in as they think and will received reduced pensions.

Bullshit.

Those liberal and "affluent " states that you cite are just that. Liberal and largely Democratic. Take Oregon for example, the Republicans have not held any state wide office since 1992, and the Governors chair in over 30 years. That means the AG, the State Court judges and other higher level offices are held by liberal Dems who are beholden to the public employee unions for their elections and the elected ones appointed the other positions. ALL those positions are under the PERS retirement system, and you have the fox guarding the hen house. No way is there going to be retirement system reform by the very people who are subject to being paid under that system. Been that way for over 30 years here.

If it was able to make a referendum ballot for state wide vote, that brings the public employee union dynamic in to play that swings virtually every election in Oregon. PERS retirees, active duty public employees and their families make up well over the 35% average voter turnout in this state. The D's, fucking slam dunk every election, they go back to their offices, and the financial debacle continues. Only when there is a complete collapse of the PERS system, will these people turn and feed on the goose who shit the golden egg for them.

Court challenges to the system will be struck down by the affected and liberal judges every time. True reform will only come after financial collapse. Watch the government tit suckers scream when that shit goes down.

I don't disagree with anything you've said. My point is taxpayers have a limit as to how far they will take the taxman's shlong in their arse. Many have already bagged. More will follow. This eventually leads to the a simple case of it being impossible to pay out these benefits when they can no longer tax or borrow more.

[Goober McTuber]

Thus, the first thing that should jump out at you is that under the 1950's income tax rates you cherish, the bottom 50% of income earners who collectively pay no federal income taxes under the present tax scheme would instantly see 20-22% of their income vacuumed out of their wallets and sent off to Washington DC. Everyone would have some skin in the game, which is probably a good thing. But I suspect that isn't where you were going with your "top marginal tax rate never dipped below 90 fucking percent" in the 1950's statement.

What jumps out at me is that either you have incredibly deficient math skills, or you don’t understand how marginal rates work, or you’re intentionally misrepresenting the facts on a grand scale. Using your numbers, someone making the median income today ($32,396) would pay $9.68 in taxes. Zero on the first $32,352, then 22% of $44.

I’m not suggesting the top marginal rate should return to 90%, but something above 40% on income in excess of $2,000,000 does not seem unreasonable. As for people off-shoring their income, I’m pretty sure that’s already happening.

[Goober McTuber]

88,

I apologize profusely. I misread the table and thought that the first level had zero taxes.

[Derron]

I don't disagree with anything you've said. My point is taxpayers have a limit as to how far they will take the taxman's shlong in their arse. Many have already bagged. More will follow. This eventually leads to the a simple case of it being impossible to pay out these benefits when they can no longer tax or borrow more.

And if you reread my post you will see how the public employees, appointees, judges and admin honks all control the ballot box. Until Joe Sheeple wakes the fuck up and puts down his remote long enough to get out and vote these cocksuckers out. As long as these people control the vote, they will keep voting these taxes and graft in and it will continue. When these people stop getting their gravy checks, because the gubmint be broke and unable to borrow more cash, then the shit might change, and in a hurry. At that point your point becomes very valid. But until that day comes, they will still keep taxing, they will still keep extracting every bit of money there is from those paying taxes to support the pork barrel way of life these people have come to expect. I wait to hear them all whine and wring their hands when they tell the gubmint.."But...but..you promised !"

Viva La Revolution !

[Goober McTuber]

88,

I apologize profusely. I misread the table and thought that the first level had zero taxes.

No biggie, man. Math can be a beyotch sometimes.

Of course, things were comparatively cheaper in 1955.

Average cost of a new house was $10,950, or 2.74 years of salary for a $4,000 income. Now it’s around $260,000, or 8.12 years of salary for a $32,000 income.

Average cost of a new car was $1,900, or 48% of a year’s salary for a $4,000 income. Now it’s around $29,000, or 90% of a year’s salary for a $32,000 income.

I do agree that it's not reasonable to really hammer people at the $250,000 level. My wife and I are over halfway to that level of income. I don’t feel we’re taxed unfairly, but I also wouldn’t want to see a significant rise if we improve our situation over the next few years.

[Goober McTuber]

My wife and I are over halfway to that level of income. I don’t feel we’re taxed unfairly, but I also wouldn’t want to see a significant rise if we improve our situation over the next few years.

How does she ~feel~ about you not being able to get a hard on?

Roach,

You have a truly disturbing obsession with my large American penis. Trust me when I tell you that my potency is never going to have a direct impact on your life. Sorry.

[smackaholic]

88,

I apologize profusely. I misread the table and thought that the first level had zero taxes.

No biggie, man. Math can be a beyotch sometimes.

Of course, things were comparatively cheaper in 1955.

Average cost of a new house was $10,950, or 2.74 years of salary for a $4,000 income. Now it’s around $260,000, or 8.12 years of salary for a $32,000 income.

Average cost of a new car was $1,900, or 48% of a year’s salary for a $4,000 income. Now it’s around $29,000, or 90% of a year’s salary for a $32,000 income.

I do agree that it's not reasonable to really hammer people at the $250,000 level. My wife and I are over halfway to that level of income. I don’t feel we’re taxed unfairly, but I also wouldn’t want to see a significant rise if we improve our situation over the next few years.

260 sounds awful high as an average price. Would have guessed it was more like 175. A person with a 32K income won't be buying one any time soon. One of the reasons we are in the mess we are now is people with those income levels were allowed to buy such houses with bullshit ARMs.

[smackaholic]

You must have gotten your bullshit avg home price from the same place you got your income numbers. Median household income is 51K. It was 4K in '55. Median worker income, including every part time burger flipper may be 32K. In '55, I suspect that avg income and median household income were quite a bit closer than they are today.

Your point, home prices as a function of income has risen is true. it's just nowhere near those bullshit figures.

If you figure in that the average house of '55, something like a 1200 sq ft 3bd, 1 bath ranch has become a 2000 sq ft 3 bd 2.5 bath place, I think you'll find that real prices haven't moved all that much.

I'll bet Indy has a master bath that measures 1200 sq ft.

[poptart]

Math can be a beyotch sometimes.

Yo, Antonio. How many kids you got?







I got Alonzo, who's five... ummm.. . err ...

[Goober McTuber]

You must have gotten your bullshit avg home price from the same place you got your income numbers. Median household income is 51K. It was 4K in '55. Median worker income, including every part time burger flipper may be 32K. In '55, I suspect that avg income and median household income were quite a bit closer than they are today.

Your point, home prices as a function of income has risen is true. it's just nowhere near those bullshit figures.

If you figure in that the average house of '55, something like a 1200 sq ft 3bd, 1 bath ranch has become a 2000 sq ft 3 bd 2.5 bath place, I think you'll find that real prices haven't moved all that much.

I'll bet Indy has a master bath that measures 1200 sq ft.

So what is it, you fucking moron? Are housing prices still the same, or are the houses bigger? Do a little research and get back to me when you have some facts. Not just your fucking moronic guesses.

The income numbers were 88's, take it up with him.

My calculations based on 88's income numbers and home prices in 1955 and 2011 are valid. Here, let me help you get started, you fucking moron:

http://www.wsjprimerate.us/new_home_sal ... istory.htm

[smackaholic]

I did do a bit of research. I was surprised that the average home price was that high. I then looked at median home price, which, as with income is a better way of looking at it.

Median numbers give a better idea of what you would consider "normal" simply because those on the high end with their 35 million dollar incomes and 25 million dollar homes, skew the numbers quite badly.

The numbers I found for median home price was around 165K, if I remember correctly. The median family income was 51K.

Compare this to your numbers of 10K and 4K and sure, home prices are up, but, not as much as your numbers indicated. And, as I said earlier, if you factor in the substantial increase in home size, you'll likely find that prices really haven't changed that much.

I used median family income rather than median personal income since this is the number that matters more when it comes to things like buying houses. The bank will loan more to a couple that works with a combined income of 100K than they will loan to a single person making 55K, even though his personal income is higher than theirs.

So, would you like to tell me what part of that is bullshit or just go back to the tried and true "you're a fukking moron" card that brain dead idiots are so fond of when they have little else?

[smackaholic]

Went back and looked at 88's charts again.

It did not say individual median income was 4k ('55) and 32K (today).

It said joint income, aka family income 4K ('55) and in the next column, that income in today's dollars. family median income is actually up over this period (51K).

Kind of interesting when the topic of income being flat or even dropping over the last 30 years comes up, the dems like to say it's because the unions have been weakened and the rich guys are hogging all the gains. No one seems to want to bring up a factor which should be painfully obvious. When the number of adults in the work force as a percentage of the total went up greatly, economics 101 says that average income will go down.

So, if you want 1965 income levels, everybody should just tell their OL's to get back in the kitchen and make them a fukkin' sammich.

[Mace]

I was one of the "freeloaders" who "benefitted" from having a public union job for over 30 years but never joined the union. The AFSCME union donated tons of money to political candidates that I'd never vote for, so I long ago decided that none of that money would be mine. One year the head of the State union was also convicted of stealing over $50k from the union, none of which was my money. I chose to spend my money for golf clubs and beer instead of feeding the fat cats of the union, and decided that was a fair trade, even though the union stewards would have let me swing if I'd ever fucked up. I never gave them that opportunity.

Derron: What infield conditioner do you sell?

[smackaholic]

you mean you actually kept your job by being a valued employee?

that's crazy talk!!

[dingus]

Derron: What infield conditioner do you sell?

Seriously, I'd like to know.