Will The Detroitization Of America Change Anything?

0 Shares
152498332

As the Detroitization of America continues with the official bankruptcy of Detroit itself, many conservative economists, like my friend Steve Moore, believe that it might be the best thing that could ever happen to the Motor City. The thinking is that Detroit’s corrupt politicians and public employee piggies may finally be forced to realize that reality yields to no one.

Lots of luck. The sad fact is that the greed and avarice of the public sector is insatiable, which is why it never learns anything. Just as the Federal government committed a crime by stealing from shareholders and handing over a big chunk of General Motors stock to the very workers who bankrupted the company in the first place, then took your money to make sure that those same workers could continue living the good life, so, too, will the Federal government not hesitate to take your money to bail out the entire city of Detroit.

Oh, it might result in some minor, temporary adjustments for public employees; but, long term, nothing will change. In fact, supposedly free-market economist Larry Kudlow says that Detroit should eliminate or drastically cut back on its highest-in-the-country property taxes on homes, highest-in-the-country commercial property taxes and second-highest-in-the country industrial property taxes. And, for good measure, Michigan should drastically lower its corporate tax rate.

All of that sounds good, except for one problem: Kudlow is only advocating that these cuts be temporary — perhaps three to five years! Then, once the reduced theft allows both Detroit and Michigan to get back on their feet, bring on the high taxes again and let the taxpayer-funded public-employee party swing back into full gear.

In other words, do what produces solvency only temporarily — until you get back to the point where you can afford to once again do what doesn’t workIt reminds me of the RINOs who keep insisting that you don’t raise taxes during a recession, implying that it’s fine to do so when times are good. The reason you don’t raise taxes in a recession is because higher taxes are bad for the economy. So if they’re bad for the economy, why would you want to raise them during a healthy economy? To make it unhealthy?

We already know that handing people free stuff doesn’t break the poverty cycle; and Detroit and San Bernardino and Stockton, Calif., are just the tip of the bankruptcy iceberg. Wake up, Americans: The entire country is broke! The best-kept economic secret in the world — and those who have figured out the power game work hard to keep it a secret — is that the best hope by far for the masses escaping grinding poverty is through capitalism.

All this should remind do-gooders once again that the world runs on individuals pursuing their self-interest. It has nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with human nature. Thus, self-interest drives things in both communist and capitalist countries.

Self-interest is simply a basic human trait — perhaps the most basic of all human traits — and is neither good nor bad. It is, in fact, neutral. The only question is whether it is used to create or destroy. Those who use it to create are a benefit to society. Those who use it to destroy cause both pain and poverty.

Henry Ford helped make Detroit what it once was — a thriving metropolis of 1.8 million people by 1950 (down now to a beleaguered city of about 700,000) — by revolutionizing the automobile industry. But he didn’t do it for altruistic purposes. He did it to build a successful company for himself and his family. He succeeded and, thanks to that omnipresent invisible marketplace hand, everyone in Detroit, the State of Michigan and throughout the country was better off for his success. His was a positive example of using one’s self-interest to create.

Of course, the far left will never accept the verdicts of history or any kind of empirical evidence that threatens their grip on power. So they employ their self-interest for social-engineering purposes.

Bankrupt cities come into being through the implementation of an arrogant, destructive self-interest idea — that some people are more qualified than others to organize society in a way that assures “social justice” will prevail. Social justice is, of course, an abstract — and a subjective one at that. One person’s idea of social justice might be equal material well-being for all, while another person’s idea is a society where everyone keeps 100 percent of what he earns through voluntary transactions in the marketplace.

Government grows primarily by redistributing wealth. Armies of workers are needed to administer redistribution programs, and government makes sure they are highly paid and highly pensioned (not to mention highly perked). These armies of workers — recipients of stolen loot from taxpayers — ultimately bankrupt their cities. Then, of course, they cry foul when the money runs out.

While it is true that the United States could slip into a dictatorship as a result of runaway inflation or a massive Great Depression (whether a result of an impeccably carried-out Cloward-Piven plan or through sheer stupidity), the likelihood is that the public-employee redistribution game will continue indefinitely.

That means Detroit will not change its ways after making its way through bankruptcy court — nor will San Bernardino, Stockton, nor bankrupt States like California, New York and Illinois. Because so long as their socialist allies in Washington are in control, they can simply extract the money from the good folks in places like Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota and Texas and bail out the same States, cities and municipalities over and over again.

Not to worry, though. Remember what Lord Keynes told us about the long run. At least he gave us a certainty we could all look forward to.

–Robert Ringer

Personal Liberty

Robert Ringer

is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times.To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    “It is … unimaginable what has happened to Detroit … It was in fact entirely PREDICTABLE. Detroit was one of the great cities in the world.

    “It was among the richest and most successful cities in this country…It was the envy of the world, and now it’s the biggest city in the United States to ever go bankrupt. And why? Two things that are actually under the same umbrella: UNIONS and unchecked LIBERALISM have led to the bankruptcy of Detroit… Detroit, now bankrupt, was where companies first started offering health care benefits…And now those very benefits have killed the city of their birth, the
    birth of the health care benefit. I mean, the CHICKENS HAVE COME HOME TO ROOST, in the famous words of Reverend Wright. Is that not something? The city where health care benefits were created have been brought down, essentially, by health care benefits and pensions and unions…

    “Detroit is the epitome of everything that’s wrong with the Democrat Party … Detroit has been run EXCLUSIVELY by the Democrats for over 51 years, folks… Only one Republican has been elected to the city council in Detroit since 1970 … In 1960, 53 years ago, the city of Detroit actually had the HIGHEST PER CAPITA INCOME in the entire nation. And since then, in the last 60 years, the population of Detroit has fallen by 63% (from 1.8 million people to about 700,000 people)” – Rush Limbaugh

    Universally respected economist Thomas Sowell noted:
    “Before the ghetto riot of 1967, Detroit’s black population had the highest rate of home-ownership of any black urban population in the country, and their
    unemployment rate was just 3.4 percent. It was not despair that fueled the
    riot. It was the riot which marked the beginning of the decline of Detroit to
    its current state of despair.”

    Detroit’s destruction is completely men-made.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYVMe6w5awY

    • IsThisAmerica

      I’m waiting for Mexifornia to file for bankruptcy. Luckily our governer (R) has a rainy day fund. I hope it stays that way.

    • Bill

      Good comments Alondra.
      Free market capitalism and the policies of Ronald Reagan are the only hope for saving this country

      • smilee

        Then why have they hot saved the country as we are still using his economic policies today after a generation of trying them and still experancing their failures it is time to abandon them

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Because Reagan, as much as he talked differently, presided over a large increase in Government Spending.
          We haven’t had anything close to Free Markets since Theodore Roosevelt.
          What we are experiencing, Sleepee, is the failure of Socialism.

        • Bill

          We are not promoting free market capitalism and we are mimicking the policies of Jimmy Carter.
          You sound like you are very young

          • smilee

            Does 72 sound young to you, difference being inflation was up to 21% during the Carter years and now it is only a fraction of that. Are you old enough to remember that.

          • Bill

            I think your mind is starting to go, comrade Smilee.
            The inflation rate was 15%, the mortgage rates were 21%, unemployment was 10% and the GDP was 1-2% during your buddy Jimmy carter. Reagan turned the whole economy around in three years showing GDP’s in the 7-8% range.
            Your buddy obama has had 5 years and he can’t get the GDP over 2%

          • smilee

            You are right about the inflation, Reagan’s recession was very different and his disguised stimulation packages which he deferred the cost of them coming home to roost until Bush 41 became president and created the Resolution Trust Corporation to clean up his mess soon after he took office and when he signed it into law he said he had created a monster, remember he called Reagan’s economic policies voo doo economics and we now know in hindsight he was right. Obama inherited a much worse economic condition so the two are not comparable and a much different different congress whose first priority was that he fail with the hopes of defeating him in 2012 they failed badly at that but succeeded in holding the economy back and still hold to keeping it slow in an effort to making him a failed presidency and if there had been cooperation from them things would have been much better by now. It is a real shame and in fifty years historians will put this all in perspective as t by then this will be all clear

          • Bill

            And do you say all of that in one breath?
            And do you also believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny too?

          • smilee

            No but I do believe very strongly in telling the truth even if it appears to you to be in one breath and this was all true

    • Ron r

      And that’s just Detroit . The entire country went into an economic tail spin because of unchecked conservatism , deregulation of wall stree, the banks and that age old repub-fascist Bush tax cuts and a Cheney ,Halliburton war.

      • Vigilant

        Another idiot who can’t tell the difference between “neoconservatism” (a misnomer) and Conservatism.

        • Ron r

          Conservative and neoconservative .Stupid and stupider

          • Vigilant

            Idiot thou art.

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Where do you get that Wall Street is deregulated, Ron?
        http://www.scribd.com/doc/144210931/Wayne-Crews-Ten-Thousand-Commandments-An-Annual-Snapshot-of-the-Federal-Regulatory-State-2013
        This paragraph is something ever Freedom-Loving reader should understand and commit to memory, so you have ammunition the next time a Progressive tells you how important regulations are:
        “The Anti-Democracy Index, the ratio of regulations issued by agencies relative to laws passed by Congress and signed by the president, stood at 29 for 2012.Specifically, 127 laws were passed in calendar year 2012, whereas 3,708 rules were issued. This disparity highlights a substantial delegation of lawmaking power to unelected agency officials”.

        • Vis Fac

          Dave–liberal one dimension idiot-ology dictates they not provide proof of fact but regurgitate as much nonsense as possible.(You have my permission to use this) — Liberals believe that if they cannot dazzle us with brilliance they can baffle us with [expletive deleted]. Much like Mr. KGB attempts to do.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      More from Thomas Sowell about Detroit:
      http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/corruption_is_two_way_street_jva6Wj5tgE7gScwPNZzR3N

      Here’s a good idea, but one which the Liberal Progressives will fight tooth and nail, as it would put the final nail in their coffin:
      http://mises.org/daily/6489/Declare-Detroit-a-Free-City

  • laura merrone

    Social justice only works as long as there is a free flow of money. When that runs out, then bankruptcy ensues. I’m afraid other cities, too are ready to collapse as well as Detroit. What caused the fall of Rome? They ran out of money and couldn’t do the “bread and circuses” any more. We are following the same pattern with our socialism. Again, it only works using other people’s money until the money runs out…

  • Wolfman

    Only in America the land of the not so free anymore and race appropriations double standards.

    Black people call each other the N word all day long and it is ok but don’t let a white person use it Facebook will suspend your account for using the N word but not for using the C word another liberal media circus racial double standard. Abe Lincoln is rolling over in his grave. Obama and his brother Holder have to go.

    Here is the real big problem most blacks today including the Obamas still don’t trust the white man and the system due to slavery and other social injustices. Abe Lincoln realized this but it was to late for him to fix it now he is again rolling over in his grave. If you don’t like the truth just delete and move on.

  • KG

    The people of Detroit made the same mistake most conservatives made 30 years ago. They trusted that Business would actually believe in America and want the place where they reside and make their money to be as prosperous as they are. They really thought that to be American was important. However, when Reagan fired the PATCO strikers, he sent a message – American Workers Suck. At that point, It didn’t matter where or how a company could make it;s profits. To build all of those shiny new factories in Right-to-work states required lots of capital – capital stolen from the workers and citizens of Detroit. If you actually work for a living (not one of those ‘coffee drinkers in the big buildings) you know who the enemy is. Marx was correct:

    Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct
    feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more
    and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes
    directly facing each other — Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.

    And what was the mistake? They trusted what Reagan said. They became entremanuers and didn’t pay into Social Security. They are ready to retire but cant. Sorry about that.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      KGB says — “when Reagan fired the PATCO strikers, he sent a message – American Workers Suck”.
      No, he sent a message that he wouldn’t let greedy self-serving Unionists endanger the lives of other people to get what they want. Those “underpaid” Unionists were quickly replaced. One might wonder — “Who would want such “underpaid” jobs?”. The answer — “Lots of people”.

      KGB says — “To build all of those shiny new factories in Right-to-work states required lots of capital – capital stolen from the workers and citizens of Detroit”.
      Stolen? So now in a Unionist’s mind it is “stealing” to offer what they won’t to consumers? Only a Socialist Progressive could think that.

      KGB says — “If you actually work for a living”.
      That leaves out KGB and buds. If they really worked for their livings, they wouldn’t need to use coercive force to steal from their employers and their employers’ customers.

      • Vis Fac

        Dave–Well said KGB as you label him (apropos) uses liberal rhetoric cited from other sources and is obviously a paid union shill to try and antagonize and promote union membership. In the next few replies he will start his character assassination and label you a snowball or make some other derogatory comment.

        • Cashu

          I can’t really see where an ad hominem attack by a communist is worthy of angst. More likely you can see it as an affirmation of the correctness of your views. When you need to worry is when this inclined-to-brain-farts lost soul begins to lionize you. I’d wear his criticism as a badge. Just my opinion…

          Cashu

          ======================

          • KG

            It’s not an ad hominem attack when its true is it?

          • Vis Fac

            I never start the ad hominem however if I am slandered maligned or abased I retaliate in kind. I’ve been around the block a few times and I have a little ammunition in my arsenal to use as I see fit.

        • smilee

          The last thing that union organizers do is antagonize potential future members as they have to vote in a secret ballot election before that happens, antagonize or harass them and you are most likely get a no vote from them in the election. Union organizers treat them with kid gloves in hope of getting a yes vote from them. Unions cannot compel a persons attendance in their organizing meetings as their employer can as it is legal
          insubordination to not attend a employer meeting intended to talk you out of going union and they can fire you if you do not even if you are union and involed in a desert election. The rhetoric you spew is the corporate rhetoric that they been very successful in hooking suckers like you with it but there is not a kernal of truth in it.

        • smilee

          The last thing that union organizers do is antagonize potential future members as they have to vote in a secret ballot election before that happens, antagonize or harass them and you are most likely get a no vote from them in the election. Union organizers treat them with kid gloves in hope of getting a yes vote from them. Unions cannot compel a persons attendance in their organizing meetings as their employer can as it is legal
          insubordination to not attend a employer meeting intended to talk you out of going union and they can fire you if you do not even if you are union and involed in a desert election. The rhetoric you spew is the corporate rhetoric that they been very successful in hooking suckers like you with it but there is not a kernal of truth in it.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Sleepee says — “The last thing that union organizers do is antagonize potential future members as they have to vote in a secret ballot election before that happens, antagonize or harass them and you are most likely get a no vote from them in the election”.
            Put down that doobie, Sleepee. Why do you think they have pushed so hard for Card Check? Because they’re so nice? Unions are all about Coercion, whether it be directed at their Replacement Workers, The Company, or the Customers of the Company:
            http://archive.mises.org/8954/employee-free-choice-act/

          • KG

            If I told you where the bathroom was, you would accuse me of coercion.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Don’t know about that, KGB, but I do accuse you of using this board as your public potty.

          • smilee

            Thank God he has so much less to dump here than you whom dumps ten times as much as he does and your’s stinks worse too.

          • smilee

            Card Check is and has always been the method used for organizing members by unions this is the wrong word to describe what I think your talking about which was used to describe that proposed law. The card check referral was to give the NLRB the power to not hold an election if over 50% of the employees in a declared bargaining unit had received from the union over 50% of the units cards

          • smilee

            CONTINUED: signed by the employees requesting union membership. Companies now can ask for a cancellation of the election (they never do but have the right to) and unions wanted in law the same option to request the same so as to have the same options as the company. I have been union member for almost 50 years and voted in three elections during that time and the I only experienced coercion or harassment from the company never from the union. In organizing unions would most likely lose a yes vote if they did that and I have never seen it done in fact the opposite is true they treat you very nice with hopes of getting your vote and when I have volunteered in other organizing that is stressed by those in charge, what I hear from those like davy whom only knows the rhetoric from those whom wish to destroy unions and really know nothing about it as he clearly does not. Those of us with wide experience know it is all lies

          • smilee

            I have fifty years of experience and not once have i seen what you describe, go back and read what card check is all about and has nothing to do with what you describe it as..Card Check would give unions the same options companies have now in that they can ask the NLRB to cancel the election if 50% plus one or more requested union representation and had signed a card. Card Check has been the method used since day one and this law does not address that but only if elections must be used when a majority have requested the union to represent them in writing. . Davy know nothing personally about unions and thinks he does and only repeats the rhetoric of those opposed to unions and never the truth.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Please spare me, Sleepee, from your conjecture. Provide a link please to support your contention about Card Check because you have no credibility on this board.

          • smilee

            Look up the proposed law itself on Congress’s web sites Your so damn lazy, you set back and demand others do things you are capable for doing for yourself, Don’t be so lazy/ No credibility is your take and that means in reality I do have credibility.

          • Vis Fac

            I omitted People after antagonize. I know unions “play nice” until their in power after which it’s tough luck!

          • smilee

            Bull, after during 40 years active in the union and ten retired it was all good luck for all our members, they always had our back so I have no idea what you saying except I know it is not true

          • Vis Fac

            Forty years of extortion you mean. Unions are the scourge of industry they only keep a underachieving employee from being terminated while forcing the public to pay higher prices for the union extorted wages and benefits from the employer. The NEA the biggest farce of all has done nothing to produce quality education they keep sub par teachers on staff while sucking up funds that should be used on students. The ONLY reason you were employed was not because of your work ethic or talent but because you had a group of thugs coercing the employer into capitulating to your demands. Now that is BS and you know it!

          • smilee

            No, what I know is that everything in your post is false, pure BS and nothing but you expressing hate for something you know little about and probably have no personal experience with.. Forty years of personal experience with unions and and I have had none of the experiences you describe as they simply do not exist in the real world. I was very good at my job and my employer many times acknowledged that and as they knew me and you do not only proves you are so filled with hatred of us whom had the good life and were paid almost as much as we were worth. In fifty years of personally knowing many union officials i have yet to meet a union thug, I do not know what one looks like but I know there are dozens of them whom are the finest people I have ever known whom always had our backs. In that 40 years we never had a strike and only one arbitration as both the union and the company respected each other and believed in solving problems mutually satisfying and we proved that working together can be beneficial for all. The head of the Company negotiating team that I met in 1967 and worked with across the table with him until 2001, he always said we are here to get an agreement with you and if we do not then one or both of us did not do our jobs and we do not plan for that to be us. The union agreed but that is not likely to happen if it involves people like yourself whom are so full of hatred for unions insuring conflict. He is now dead and now they have a anti union stance. i was retired before they changed and change such as that is sad and hurts all.

          • Vis Fac

            Apparently you don’t know squat. You only know the BS the union people want you to know. FYI I had my own engineering firm for 30+ years I have seen the ins and outs of how unions operate and most importantly who runs them. You were never a business owner the only thing you see are the carrots that are dangled in front of your myopic face. You have been fed a load of horse crap and have eaten it up with gusto. Union try and muscle their way in and use any tactic they can even as far ad death threats. Being a Marine I don’t take kindly to treats so I had on several occasions called their bluff. In the end I paid my people better than any union could get them plus benefits. and the union never had a chance.
            Your BS is the denial that unions do not force business overseas or a cause of job loss. I’ve got some news for you. Employers need to stay solvent if they cannot compete with non union shops they do one of two things. Lay people off or outsource. You want you union benefits buy I’ll be willing to wager you buy foreign knockoffs instead on American made goods. Your auto for one and most likely hand tools made in China.
            The reason so many items are made in China is because UNIONS drove wages and benefits through the roof causing the manufacturer to raise prices to meet labor costs and maintain a profit. The American public refuses to pay these higher costs and buys imported products THAT IS NO BS!!! SO don’t keep trying to blow smoke up our collective asses and tell us that unions are all that and NOT the problem or what I said above isn’t true.
            If you do we will know you are a union lackey who has no work ethic or skill and needs a union to keep employed.

          • smilee

            How many years were your employees represented by a union??????? I betting none!!! Your post is just a loud buzz from a know nothing union hater who knows nothing about my work ethic but assumes he does and your the type of employer unions were designed to protect employees from employer abuse.

          • Vis Fac

            I told you earlier but being a liberal moron you cannot comprehend that MY employees REFUSED to have union representation because they would not have it as good if they did. I am a firm believer that you get what you pay for I realized that because I was one a “forced” union member (closed shop) I saw lethargy and loss of production because workers knew they couldn’t be fired and sloughed off on the job. This is typical with union labor do enough to get by and nothing more. So I DO know about union member’s work ethic.
            I paid my employees more then 10% above the prevailing wage and offered benefits to family members. That along with performance bonuses that virtually guaranteed production would be as efficient as possible. Bonuses were given quarterly and I provided a monthly picnic for everyone. My turn over rate was about half a percent because it costs money to train people I would much rather keep them happy.
            As far as your claim for employer abuse that is a crock! There is no anchor tied to your ass preventing you from seeking better employment elsewhere. If you don’t like the job, management, or the working conditions then I would like I do to people who don’t like OUR country invite them to leave.
            Abuse by the employer is NOT the reason as it once was NOW id legalized coercion to extract as much as you can without killing the employer much the same as a parasite does to its host. Except eventually Unions like parasites get greedy and always kill the host Detroit San Bernardino CA are just two cities who have succumbed to union greed there will be more. My advice to you is enjoy it while you can.

          • smilee

            your very rude and crude as most abusive employers are. The presence of unions motivates employers like you to pay greater than prevailing wages to avoid being unionized and as we both know unionizing of your employees is something you have no real control over other than to pay them more and hope they will not as the law protects them from you and you get no vote or say in the matter if they request an election to unionize. Employer abuse was much greater when I retired than when I started my job as my non union friends there will tell you and they were very aware of the growing difference in working conditions, wages and benefits and the abusive nature of our employers and envied us as we were not subject to the same abuse they were because of the union protections preventing that abuse. I worked there 40.5 years and was happy with my job and so a better job held no interest if there was one out there I liked the job and (was very good at it), management (albeit not every individual in management we had some jerks in management holding the same cruel beliefs that you hold but upper management and the union kept them in tow and some were transferred and some fired), and the working conditions. The union was the insurance that made sure that over zealous abusive management individuals did not destroy the good working conditions we had with the company.

            As your employees were never union you never had the opportunity to know and understand unions and your posts make clear your ignorance of them. Did you ever make veiled or out right threats to discourage your employees from organizing as that is the most common complaint unions get from employees wishing to organize today as they fear retaliation including job loss and loss of health care benefits if they get found out and I have been told this by many people wanting to organize. Obamacare should change the health care fear though. If you had paid attention lock outs are more common today than strikes. Many times the reasons and motivations behind them are abusive as they designed to destroy their union employees. Your last paragraph is pure garbage totally devoid of truth and cannot be addressed with any intelligent response as it mostly an expression of your hatreds by blaming unions for every thing that goes wrong in society today and on that you are so wrong and so far out in right field you cannot even see center field much less left field. You come off to me as a despicable human filled with pure hate.

          • Vis Fac

            If you think I an rude and crude you have a few things to learn about being crude. I can tell a lot about people listening to them talk and in particular what they say.
            You think you know everything regarding the industrial world and union activity. You haven’t the ability to comprehend what others say because you are caught up in being in a union and know nothing else. What II imparted to you earlier obviously soared miles above your head.
            I related that the employees not me told the union to bug off and not me. I allowed the union reps in the shop to give their speeches. I also related being threatened which I don’t take kindly to I called their bluff and like the paper tigers they are NOTHING transpired.
            Another thing that you FAILED to understand that I had been in business for quite some time and the reason I paid higher than the prevailing rate was to cut down on turn overs which costs more to train people who are hired on. Not withstanding My employees did not feel the need for a union as their needs were met. I might add that there were several employees who left their union jobs to come work for me and I can assure you they were (as was I) quite familiar how unions operate. So that argument doesn’t hold water.
            As you claim to be working for forty years I can only imagine you sitting at some conveyor doing the same thing repeatedly. With your incessant blathering on how goo unions are I can only surmise your skills are somewhat below average and if it weren’t for the union you would only qualify working at a pepper mill separating fly [expletive deleted] form the pepper.
            One more thing: I have learned long ago that you never argue with an idiot of which you plainly demonstrate yourself to be. If I were to argue with you (the idiot) you would manage to drag me down to your level where you would best me with your experience.

        • smilee

          You hold the distinction of the most use of character assassinations and name callings so why pick on others if they return in kind??

      • smilee

        Davie, How do you feel about all the welfare we have paid since the Reagan days to full time workers because of all those low wages that no longer cover all the their living expenses and to allow their employers to no longer be concerned about their employees welfare and cost of living and you and I are now paying for that because of these large reduced wages. Welfare today is large earned income credits, child care subsidies, medicaid, food stamps, rent subsidies etc.non of these were very large before Reagan, they are huge now ( I have filed taxes for persons who received total welfare combined be as high as $17,000.00 per year per tax filer) and the welfare reform in the nineties increased that greatly probably beyond what Reagan would have been in favor of. Now everyone is paying for what the unions used to prevent you from paying. Many today do work for a living but only receive starvation wage for working hard. You ignore all this reality. Look at the whole picture not just those parts you have hatred for.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Are you saying you’re against welfare, Sleepee?
          The whole picture, Sleepee, is that I am a Libertarian, and as such, I know that it is not the Government’s money to give — whether to Unionists or Non-Unionists. I’ve never said otherwise.

          • smilee

            I believe companies if they have sufficient profits should rebate to the US treasury all welfare monies their employees qualify for and actually received before they pay their stockholders or themselves their shares. Government has every legal right to lay and collect taxes as they are empowered to do so by the Constitution and once collected they are to dispense it as allotted by law so it is the governments money to give per the authority of our Constitution. I long ago figured out you hate our Constitution and also know you cannot, despite all your rhetoric, change anything created under the Constitution. Remember Obamacare?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            So you would rather have people on welfare doing absolutely nothing instead of at least supplying partial productivity to our economy, Sleepee?

          • smilee

            Your words not mine as I never said or indicated anything like that

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, but you implied it, Sleepee, by whining about Walmart workers getting assistance.

          • smilee

            I never said Walmart workers were doing nothing nor did I imply it

    • Bill

      And here we have comments from KG, who promotes the policies that destroyed this city. Share your wisdom with us, KG, we need to learn how to destroy more cities

      • Vis Fac

        KG is a radical union Marxist thug who never answers direct questions. Two days of direct questions I have posed to him were met with character assassination, abuse, labeling, and repeating what others say. No one should give an iota of credence to anything he has to say.

        • momo

          We don’t.

    • Ciccio

      I think it is far more correct to say that society is splitting into two classes, those that work and those that don’t. I am as sick of that lumpenproteleriat as I am of those “poor sufferers of the legacy of slavery” who seem to have forgotten that slavery in the US was abolished at about the same time as the Russian serfs were freed.In many cases the Irish and Scottish peasants who were thrown off their lands were worse off than the US slaves. The Mediterranean coast was almost depopulated by the constant Arab slaves raids, raiders who went as far as Ireland and who are estimated to have taken over a million slaves from Europe . The point is slavery has been over for 150 years, so has colonialism, the rule of the Church and a lot of other things and many white American died to stop slavery yet you don’t hear their descendents whining for compensation. .As for that capital stolen form the workers, that is not a point I could ever argue because anyone coming out with this Marxist trash is so far beyond understanding the very basics of economics that I would no more try argue the point than I would try teach a pig philosophy. I would most likely have more success with the pig.

    • Frank Kahn

      Your communistic, Marxist, hatred for capitalism is well known. You are free to leave and go to the 1970’s Russian economic philosophy. Marxism failed there and it will fail everywhere. The proletariat is not who should rule the world of business.

      • KG

        I don’t hate capitalism, I do hate that it produces the same cycle of boom and bust that America’s entire history is evidence of. Back then, they weren’t called ‘recessions’ but ‘panics’. The panics were the exactly like what we saw in 2008. However, with no government intervention or tracking, they were much more devastating to the Average worker. Imagine having to loose your entire personal possessions every few years? That’s what happened in America until FDR and the new deal programs and reforms which allowed America not to have a panic for almost 80 years.

        • Frank Kahn

          Capitalism does not create boom and bust. If left to natural market forces all changes should be gradual, unless there is some outside force that interferes. Most boom and bust cycles can be traced to government involvements in the market. And your love affair with Marxism will not solve the problem of boom and bust, other than to remove the boom part.

          • KG

            Ummm… Here’s a list of economic ‘busts’ in America since the panic of 1797:

            The Great Recession of 2007
            The Recession of 1980
            The Recession of 1973
            The Recession of 1958 – 1961
            The Recession of 1945
            The Great Depression of 1929 – 1942 including the Recession of 1937
            The Recession of 1918 – 1921
            The Recession of 1913
            The Panic of 1910
            The Panic of 1907
            The Panic of 1896
            The Panic of 1893
            The Long Depression of 1873 – 1885: Includes the Panic of 1873 and Recession of 1882
            The Panic of 1857
            The Panic of 1837 followed by the Depression of 1839
            The Recession of 1825 – 1826
            The Recessions of 1822 – 1823
            The Depression of 1815 – 1821
            The Depression of 1807
            The Recession of 1802
            The Panic of 1797

            most of these happened BEFORE any kind of ‘outside force (government) was available. Capitalisms record is clear on this point. Every period of unsustainable growth is followed by economic collapse. That is, unless you want prosperity for the few who survive these through their ill-gotten gains.

  • To tell the truth

    The myriad of reasons proferred are basically academic bloviating….unions and union excesses kill everything around them. Unions are the only parasite that hasn’t learned it’s not smart to kill the host. Seems to be a theme the black community could embrace, too. Work, enterprise, self-reliance are better tools than sucking on the public teat to get to the middle class.

    • me

      I don’t think unions were totally to blame even though wages in automobile factories were way overdone. I think it was the way the city was run by the polititions. The hell ov it is the at the whole country is headed for the same path. Everything this country’s government is doing is very similar to the way Detroit went. They say the government will need a new debt limit in September. Hoow much longer will this go on before the whole country becomes like Detroit? It will get too big to become affordable. The worthless money printing will do no good by then.

      • Vis Fac

        If it weren’t for union greed you wouldn’t be paying almost $2000 per vehicle extra to cover costs to cover union workers wages and perks as well as graft from UNION thug leadership.

        • smilee

          How about the $3000.00 to $10,000.00 or more per tax filer that many non union employees get as wage subsidies and/or other welfare because of low wages which you pay for each year too. Union employees do not qualify as they are not underpaid. Graft in union leadership is low compared to .Corporate leaderships at about a ratio of 100:1, Do you then think they are super thugs.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Did you mean 1 to 100, Sleepee?
            Do you have any evidence for your claim?

          • smilee

            The top paid Teamster gets less than a quarter million per year as opposed to 6-10 million each year for many company executives. Also the teamster president being a lawyer could make much more than that if he practiced law. The average business agent gets as low as i/100th of the head of the companies whose employees he represents. Records are readily available for those not to lazy to check it out.

          • JeffH

            Teamster Official’s Salaries:
            http://tdu.org/files/final.pdf

          • smilee

            Hoffa gets 268,000 + as salary I was of 18 thousand and I admit I have not checked it in a couple of years but it does not change my point

          • http://batman-news.com samurai

            WWWWWWWWWWhhhhhhhhhhoooooooooommmmmmmmmmpppppppppp! Did you hear that sound? That was the sound of sleepee getting his butt kicked. Ha, ha, ha, ha! Here is aomething about you “messiah” in the White House.
            http://www.westernjournalism.com/document-expert-could-topple-the-obama-administration/
            FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
            You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.
            “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves.”
            Proverbs 13:8-9

          • Frank Kahn

            You, sir, are putting the horse before the cart. The unions caused massive inflation. This is why non-union workers can’t afford to live off their incomes. That is a direct cause of their need for government assistance. If union workers were not greedy, they would share their massive over compensation with the non-union workers.

          • smilee

            Government assistance is all based on income or lack there of and when employees qualify for any welfare it is because they are underpaid and have low wages. Union workers make enough so they do not qualify for welfare in your opinion greedy workers for making enough to support themselves without government assistance. Companies are the one’s who are greedy as they are showing record profits and paying their workers so little they qualify for government assistance. Inflation was not caused by unions anymore than huge profits and other reasons. Union workers make enough so they do not have to have government assistance but not enough to pay others without then needing government assistance themselves, so that is not a realistic solution except in you over simlified mind.., Over compensation is the biggest and dumbesgt joke you have cracked to date

          • Frank Kahn

            Stupidity reigns supreme in the world of smileeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

            Cause and effect are something that is researched. It is not subject to stupid liberal BS.

            “Government assistance is all based on income or lack there of and when employees qualify for any welfare it is because they are underpaid and have low wages.”

            Communistic Union BS. They do not qualify because they are underpaid, they qualify because the unrealistic greed of fascist union workers has destroyed the ability of capitalism to function properly. And “LOW WAGES” is not a term you are authorized to use. You are incapable of comprehending what is normal, so low is beyond your realm of reality.

            “Union workers make enough so they do not qualify for
            welfare ”

            Of course they “MAKE ENOUGH” THEY MAKE ENOUGH FOR 10 FAMILIES TO AVOID ASSISTANCE.

            “in your opinion greedy workers for making enough to support themselves without government assistance. ”

            THIS IS NOT MY OPINION, IT IS FACT. UNION WORKERS ARE OVERPAID LARD ASSES. THEY ARE PAID 5 OR EVEN 10 TIMES THEIR TRUE MARKET VALUE. THEY DON’T NEED FOOD STAMPS OR WELFARE BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT ALREADY SUBSIDIZES THEIR EXISTENCE WITH POLICIES THAT ALLOW THEM TO RAPE THE NATION.

            “Companies are the one’s who are greedy ”

            MORE COMMUNISTIC BS. THE DESIRE FOR PROFIT IS THE MAIN IF NOT THE ONLY REASON FOR OWNING A COMPANY. CORPORATE GREED IS NOT THE CAUSE OF OUR PROBLEM, IT IS THE PERSONAL GREED OF SLIME LIKE YOU USING UNIONS TO DESTROY THE ECONOMY.

            “as they are showing record profits and paying their workers so little they qualify for government assistance. ”

            ONCE AGAIN, YOU MORON, IT IS THE INFLATION CAUSED BY YOUR GREEDY UNIONS THAT CAUSED THEM TO NEED GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE.

            “Inflation was not caused by unions anymore than huge profits and other reasons. ”

            YOU SERIOUSLY NEED TO TAKE A COURSE IN ECONOMICS. THE INSANE DEMANDS OF KILLER UNION FORCED BENEFITS HAS DRIVEN INFLATION. YOUR STUPID ASSERTION THAT YOUR GREED SHOULD BE OFFSET BY CORPORATIONS MAGNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTING LOSSES IS INSANE.

            “Union workers make enough so they do not have to have government assistance ”

            UNION WORKERS MAKE SO MUCH THAT EVERYONE ELSE HAS TO SUFFER AND GET GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE.

            “but not enough to pay others without then needing government assistance themselves, ”

            BS, I TALK WITH UNION MORONS ALL THE TIME THAT CLAIM THEIR MEASLY $250,000 A YEAR SALARY IS JUST BARELY ENOUGH TO GET BY. THEY NEED THEIR 3,500 SQ/FT HOUSE, 2 SUV’S, 2 SPORTS CARS, TV IN EVERY ROOM, HEATED SWIMMING POOL, 30 DAY BAHAMA VACATION AND IVY LEAGUE COLLEGE FOR THEIR 2 KIDS. THEY ALSO NEED TO BUY THEIR CHILDREN NEW CORVETTE’S EVERY YEAR SO THEY WILL FEEL SPECIAL. THEY COULD LIVE OFF $50,000 QUITE COMFORTABLY AND SUPPORT 4 OTHER FAMILIES TO BOOT.

            “so that is not a realistic solution except in you over
            simlified mind.., ”

            MOST GOOD SOLUTIONS ARE SIMPLE ONES. IF YOU GET PAID MORE THAN THE MINIMUM NECESSARY TO SURVIVE, YOU CAN AFFORD TO HELP THOSE WHO DONT HAVE ENOUGH.

            “Over compensation is the biggest and dumbesgt joke
            you have cracked to date”

            NOT A JOKE, AND NEITHER IS THE PATHETIC BULL CRAP THAT UNION WORKERS PERPETRATE ON SOCIETY. UAW BENEFIT PACKAGES HAVE DRIVEN UP THE COST OF AMERICAN AUTOMOBILES BY SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS EACH. CARE TO EXPLAIN HOW THAT IS NOT INFLATION?

          • smilee

            I never seen so much manure in one post before and the only thing it reveals is how ignorant and out of touch with reality you are. JUST ONE POINT: Formulas used to calculate qualifications for welfare is based on the applicants income and nothing else and income comes from their employer not anyone else. Low wages is the term I use to identify those wages that are low enough so that you qualify for welfare. SIMPLE FOR INTELLIGENT MINDS impossible for simple minds. Your take on reality is unreal and only reveals how really ignorant you really are!!

            Stupidity reigns supreme in the world of frankieEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            So, Sleepee, do you think welfare should be eliminated?

          • smilee

            If you eliminate the need for it, I think that would be a great goal but probably not fully possible but reducing it greatly is not.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            That isn’t what I asked.

          • smilee

            Its the only answer you are going to get and it does respond to what you asked even if it is not the answer you wanted.to hear

          • Frank Kahn

            your first sentence is laughable, you should try reading the horse manure in your posts.

            “I never seen so much manure in one post before and the only thing it reveals is how ignorant and out of touch with reality you are. ”

            Ignorance is either your state of being or stupidity when you make your next assertion.

            “JUST ONE POINT: Formulas used to calculate qualifications for welfare is based on the applicants income and nothing else ”

            Wrong, income is only one part of the equation. There is also size of your family. Some welfare benefits are based on gender also.

            “and income comes from their employer not anyone else. ”

            Wrong again, income can come from many sources, including SS and disability. Child support is also a consideration in the income equation.

            “Low wages is the term I use to identify those wages that are low enough so that you qualify for welfare. ”

            Actually you used the phrase “under paid”, which is a liberal “UNION” BS determination, based on their personal over inflated gross over payments for work. Then you followed it with “low income”, in the same sentence, thereby attributing their level of income on the idea that they are under paid. Since no union employee is capable of understanding their true value, they cannot be considered competent to determine what under paid low wage income is.

            “SIMPLE FOR INTELLIGENT MINDS impossible for simple minds. ”

            Wrong, you are not seeing the true picture. You have been spoiled by a lifetime of pampering by the Unions, getting paid for things that you dont earn. One of your statements, to another poster, is proof of your greed and even hypocrisy. You want to claim that a 1,600 percent, per month, return on investment is a just reward for being a union jackass.

            “Your take on reality is unreal and only reveals how really ignorant you really are!!”

            Get a fn clue, the facts are all over the place. Unions not only destroy businesses, they destroy cities and states as well. They cause bankrupt accounting to be performed to attempt to pay for the gross insane benefits that you jackasses think the world owes you just because you can intimidate the managers of businesses.

            You are truly a despotic person, devoid of human compassion or feelings for your fellow humans. You say, screw all you pathetic people that don’t demand unfair compensation.

            I contribute over 25% of my total income to the less fortunate. What do you give?

          • smilee

            Ignorance is either your state of being or stupidity when you make your next assertion.

            “JUST ONE POINT: Formulas used to calculate qualifications for welfare is based on the applicants income and nothing else ”

            Wrong, income is only one part of the equation. There is also size of your family. Some welfare benefits are based on gender also.

            RESPONSE: These only become relevant if the income is low enough to consider them and if not then none apply and we are only talking about employed persons no unemployed for what ever reason

            “and income comes from their employer not anyone else. ”

            Wrong again, income can come from many sources, including SS and disability. Child support is also
            a consideration in the income equation.

            RESPONSE:True, but we were only addressing recipients whom were employed and you know that

            “Low wages is the term I use to identify those wages that are low enough so that you qualify for welfare. ”

            Actually you used the phrase “under paid”, which is a liberal “UNION” BS determination, based on their personal over inflated gross over payments for
            work. Then you followed it with “low income”, in the same sentence, thereby attributing their level of income on the idea that they are under paid.
            Since no union employee is capable of understanding their true value, they cannot be considered competent to determine what under paid low wage income is.

            RESPONSE: Under paid being a union determination is your words underpaid in reality is persons not making enough to be self supporting and has nothing to do with unions albeit union members make enough to not be under paid the rest is just your stupid statement that is only based on your hate of unions and you have no facts to support these which is typical and usually your problem.

            “SIMPLE FOR INTELLIGENT MINDS impossible for simple minds. ”

            Wrong, you are not seeing the true picture. You have been spoiled by a lifetime of pampering by the Unions, getting paid for things that you dont earn. One of your statements, to another poster, is proof of your greed and even hypocrisy. You want to claim that a 1,600 percent, per month, return on investment is a just reward for being a union jackass.

            RESPONSE” That is the Dept of labor statistics not mine so therefore it is true and not my claim, My employer of 40 years would tell you other wise about me. I was never pampered or spoiled and I earned them a lot less than I was paid and as they knew my skills and work ethic and you know nothing but hate which motivates you to make such stupid and silly statements that are totally false and are made totally without any real knowledge of what you commented on

            “Your take on reality is unreal and only reveals how really ignorant you really are!!”

            Get a fn clue, the facts are all over the place. Unions not only destroy businesses, they destroy cities and states as well. They cause bankrupt accounting to be performed to attempt to pay for the gross insane benefits that you jackasses think the world owes you just because you can intimidate the managers of businesses.

            RESPONSE: I stick with my original statement as you cannot prove any of what you say as it is all false and nothing but an expression of pure hate

            You are truly a
            despotic person, devoid of human compassion or feelings for your fellow humans.
            You say, screw all you pathetic people that don’t demand unfair compensation.

            RESPONSE: more of you statements expressing pure hate
            and totally devoid of any truth or facts

            I contribute over 25% of my total income to the less fortunate. What do you give?

            RESPOND” Your hatred of those of us whom were
            financially successful because of unions suggests you were grossly under paid and then 25% may not be a lot in real dollars.

          • Frank Kahn

            You will never be anything but a stupid useless moron unless and until you can learn how to understand the American English language.

            “RESPONSE: Under paid being a union determination is your words underpaid in reality is persons not making enough to be self supporting and has nothing to do with unions ”

            Trying to educate an idiot liberal is an impossible task but we try for your sake. You are so pathetically ignorant of the words you use that it is impossible for you to understand reality

            “un·der·pay
            [uhn-der-pey] Show IPA
            verb (used with object), un·der·paid, un·der·pay·ing.
            to pay less than is deserved or usual.”

            http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/underpaid

            That, smirky, is the dictionary definition of underpaid. It does not mention anything about not making enough to live on or enough to stay off government assistance. It means to be paid less than you are worth. Ergo, when you use it you are using a biased Union definition of normal, deserved or usual pay. I, on the other hand, used it correctly in my assessment of your insane diatribe.

            “albeit union members make enough to not be under paid ”

            OF COURSE NOT, THEY ARE SO GROSSLY OVER PAID THAT THE WHOLE COUNTRY IS SUFFERING FROM LACK OF JOBS DUE TO YOUR F’N GREED.

            “the rest is just your stupid statement that is only based on your hate of unions and you have no facts to support these ”

            LETS SEE IF WE CAN GO BACK AND FIND THE FACTS THAT YOU HAVE REFERENCED IN THIS DISCUSSION……………………. STILL LOOKING…………. WAIT…………… NOPE JUST OBFUSCATION AND NAME CALLING. WELL CAN’T SEEM TO FIND ANY FACTS FROM YOU. I DON’T HATE UNIONS, I DON’T HATE YOU, I HATE STUPID, SO I HATE WHAT YOU AND UNIONS STAND FOR.

            “Which is typical and usually your problem.

            “SIMPLE FOR INTELLIGENT MINDS impossible for simple minds. ”

            Wrong, you are not seeing the true picture. You have been spoiled by a lifetime of pampering by the Unions, getting paid for things that you dont earn. One of your statements, to another poster, is proof of your greed and even hypocrisy. You want to claim that a 1,600 percent, per month, return on investment is a just reward for being a union jackass.

            RESPONSE” That is the Dept of labor statistics not mine ”

            I AM SORRY, DID MY COMPUTER FAIL TO DISPLAY SOME STATISTICS, THAT YOU POSTED? I HAVE SEEN NUMEROUS BALD ASSERTIONS, MOSTLY WHICH ARE LIES, BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY STATISTICS EITHER WITH OR WITHOUT LINKS FOR VERIFICATION. ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL ME THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR SAYS SMILEEE IS NOT GREEDY?

            “so therefore it is true and not my claim, My employer of 40 years would tell you other wise about me. I was never pampered or spoiled and I earned them a lot less than I was paid ”

            NOW HERE WE HAVE WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS A FREUDIAN SLIP. YOU ARE BEING ACCURATE AND TRUTHFUL FOR A CHANGE. YOU JUST ADMITTED THAT YOUR EMPLOYER PAID YOU MUCH MORE THAN YOU EARNED.

            “and as they knew my skills and work ethic ”

            IF YOUR SKILLS AND WORK ETHIC WAS SO VALUABLE TO THEM YOU WOULD NOT NEED A UNION TO FORCE THEM TO PAY YOU MORE.

            “and you know nothing but hate which motivates you to make such stupid and silly statements that are totally false and are made totally without any real knowledge of what you commented on ”

            YOUR OWN STATEMENTS CONDEMN YOU AS AN OVER PAID GREEDY AND SELFISH PERSON, IT DOES NOT TAKE HATE TO SEE THIS IN YOUR POSTINGS.

            “Your take on reality is unreal and only reveals how really ignorant you really are!!”

            Get a fn clue, the facts are all over the place. Unions not only destroy businesses, they destroy cities and states as well. They cause bankrupt accounting to be performed to attempt to pay for the gross insane benefits that you jackasses think the world owes you just because you can intimidate the managers of businesses.

            RESPONSE: I stick with my original statement as you cannot prove any of what you say as it is all false and nothing but an expression of pure hate ”

            DETROIT IS DROWNING IN DEBT DUE TO UNFUNDED BENEFITS DEMANDED BY THE UNIONS. CALIFORNIA IS DROWNING IN DEBT DUE TO UNFUNDED BENEFITS DEMANDED BY UNIONS. THE TEACHERS UNION IN ONE PLACE IS MORE INTERESTED IN GETTING THEIR BOOB JOBS AND FACE LIFTS PAID FOR THAN HAVING SUPPLIES FOR THE CHILDREN. ALL PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS HAVE EXTREMELY BLOATED BENEFIT PACKAGES THAT PAY THEM MORE IN RETIREMENT THAN MOST AMERICANS MAKE WHILE WORKING. THIS IS BANKRUPTING THE ENTIRE NATION. THE AMERICAN AUTO INDUSTRY COULD NOT COMPETE WITH FOREIGN CAR MANUFACTURERS BECAUSE OF THE EXTREME COST OF LABOR FORCED ON THEM BY AMERICAN UNIONS UAW. IN 1969 A BRAND NEW FORD MUSTANG COST $1,900, THAT SAME CARE COST OVER $26,000 TODAY. THAT IS MORE THAN 1000% INFLATION ON PRICE IN ONLY 44 YEARS. IN 1969 I WAS MAKING $10 AN HOUR, OR ABOUT 20k A YEAR. TO EQUAL THAT RATE OF INFLATION I WOULD NEED TO BE MAKING 200k NOW. I AM PRETTY SURE THAT A LUMBER MILL WORKER DOES NOT MAKE 200k THESE DAYS.

            “You are truly a despotic person, devoid of human compassion or feelings for your fellow humans.
            You say, screw all you pathetic people that don’t demand unfair compensation.

            RESPONSE: more of you statements expressing pure hate and totally devoid of any truth or facts”

            AN ANALYSIS OF YOUR STATEMENTS. YOU HAVE NO REGARDS FOR THE INEQUITY IN PAY THAT YOUR UNIONS HAVE CAUSED.

            “I contribute over 25% of my total income to the less fortunate. What do you give?

            RESPOND” Your hatred of those of us whom were
            financially successful because of unions suggests you were grossly under paid and then 25% may not be a lot in real dollars.”

            SEE ANOTHER PERSONAL GREED STATEMENT. THE VALUE OF CHARITY IS IN THE SACRIFICE NOT THE VALUE OF THE GIFT.

            AND YOUR ASSESSMENT OF ME IS WAY OFF TARGET. I WAS NEVER UNDERPAID, I WAS ALWAYS PAID WHAT I WAS WORTH. I NEGOTIATED MY OWN PAY, I DID NOT RELY ON UNION THUGS TO FORCE MY EMPLOYER TO PAY ME. TWO YEARS AGO I DONATED OVER $10,000 TO NEEDY FAMILIES, AND I AM RETIRED. I WAS FINANCIALLY SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE OF MY SKILLS NOT BECAUSE OF A UNION.

          • smilee

            First of all I did not claim 1600 percent that was your calculation not mine and I did not challenge
            it in your previous post but I assume you calculated that from my monthly dues estimated at $50 (reasonable amount) and based on the national average of $800 per month greater wages for union members as opposed to non union which can be found on the labor dept. web site as that is their calculation and not one I made up as you seem to infer. Congratulations that would be a 1600% return on investment for one month. Do you honestly believe you can get that kind of return anywhere else. Yet you criticize it. Not all union members would get $800 more as that is the national average some world get less and some more, some would pay more dues some would pay less never the less it is a great return from paying union dues which people like you ignore.

            Frankie, I find your posts just a big pile of garbage coming from a man filled with hate and also you are a braggart and display an air of superiority
            that I find to be false. You come off to me as a
            despicable human being filled with pure hatreds. I have had enough of your garbage and
            bragging and will say good bye on this issue as It seems each reply of yours gets just gets more obscene and hateful.

          • Frank Kahn

            Unlike you, I don’t have a reading comprehension disorder. Your post stated that YOU pay $50 a month in union dues, and YOU got a $800 raise because of union negotiations. Your post does not, at any point, say that the average, or reasonable dues is $50. It also does not make mention of the department of labor statistics for the $800 increase in salary. And your post included the statement that you saw that increase in YOUR bank account. Then it continued to state that YOU considered YOUR investment to be a good one.

            Now, if you can find some way to change your use of the personal identifier “I” into the collective identifier “WE”, I will admit that my comprehension of what YOU said was wrong.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Sleepee says — “so that is not a realistic solution except in you over simlified mind”.
            Speaking of simple minds, Sleepee, where do the Unionists get their higher wages from? Since Companies must make a profit to exist (otherwise they might as well put their money in CDs or some other investment) and since higher Union wages would impact that profit, what does a company do to raise the money if their Union Payroll goes up?
            And what happens, Sleepee, if we all become Union? Then whose shoulders will the Unionists ride on?

          • smilee

            Your are so confused davie, If we all became union no employee would be have to be on welfare so nobody would be standing on anyone’s shoulders, is that to deep for you??

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Who would pay our higher wages if we were all Union, Sleepee?
            When Unionists extort higher wages from their employers, they must either raise their prices (if the consumer will let them), lay off other workers, sell their assets (temporary fix only), move to another country, or go out of business if they can’t make a decent profit.
            So if the company raises their prices, the Unionists are making their above-market salaries at the expense of their consumers.
            If the company lays off other workers, the Unionists’ above-market salaries comes at the expense of those laid-off workers, and since the company is now less productive (fewer workers) they will still need to raise their prices, or produce fewer goods and services, which affects their consumers also.
            If they sell assets, their balance sheets become more unstable which puts them at risk of bankruptcy, in which case all the workers will lose.
            If they move to another country, ignorant Liberal Progressives will whine about that, and all their American workers will lose.
            The only way Unionists can get their higher wages is if other people shoulder the burden for their higher wages. If we were all Union, we would be shouldering each other’s burdens, plus the Union Parasitic Leadership would be paid for non-productivity, so by necessity we would all have less buying power in the end.

          • smilee

            you are!!!

          • Vis Fac

            I don’t know where you get your figures but the only subsidies are given to the agricultural business that employs migrant and transient labor that Americans refuse to do. If your argument were true then every burger joint restaurant and retail store worker would be rolling in dough. Next time do some research BEFORE you make a fool of yourself.

          • KG

            It’s a known fact that applicants for jobs at Walmart are given applications for food stamps and public aid because they don’t offer any health insurance for new part-time employees . Walmart makes its money off of the federal government just like every other rich person.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Do you have any evidence, KGB, or do all we get is your conjecture?

          • KG

            Ask anyone who worked for Walmart in the 80’s, like myself.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I’m asking you.

          • smilee

            Its been all over the news for years much of it coming out of the mouths of Walmart employees themselves. Pay attention davy

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Then you Liberal Progressives should have no problem finding a link for an example.

          • Vis Fac

            You are so full if it your eyes are brown. I said to you previously that you parrot what others as stupid as you say this case is no exception. I know a few Wal*Mart employees and they ALL say that Wal*Mart does NOT provide applications for food stamps or other public assistance. Applications for ANY public assistance are ONLY available at State and County Offices (or websites) that is unless Wal*Mart is a government employer. I Guess you don’t need a high IQ to become a union laborer.

          • momo

            It’s a known fact you’re full of sh!t.

          • smilee

            Earned income credit, child care subsidies, rent subsidies, medicaid, food stamps and others that’s where I got my figures, I once did a income taxes forms for a person whose overall welfare from these was just under $17,000.00 that year, most are less but almost half of the population qualifies for some welfare now, remember the 47% Romney was whining about. Most retail and fast food and many other restaurants are rolling in the dough. Sure there are companies who are not but the large corporations are seeing record breaking profits and if you had done your research you would not have make a fool out of yourself.

        • Cashu

          I suspect the figure is a he77 of a lot more than two grand… but you’re right on the money with the hourly, the benefits and the thuggery. If the big three had been fiscally vigilant in dealing with the thugs, perhaps they would remain the dominant AMERICAN automakers. My Toyota PU was made right here in this country and I bought it PRIMARILY because I wanted to support the American work force. I’m always tickled when those who drive one of the big three thumbs his nose at me. Shows how abysmally ignorant STUPID Americans can be…

    • Bill

      Good comments, Truth

    • smilee

      How do you explain all the non union businesses that left and went to China and other Asian countries, can not blame the unions for that can you? Unions never make management decisions or were they the major reason for Detroit’s demise, Corporate greed was the major cause and corrupt politicians are the extension of corporate power as the play a major part in their elections and the laws the make and they only answer to them not WE the People and We the People keep putting them back in office. The fault belongs to We the People whom do have the power to come to their senses and say enough is enough, Do not forget union wages are high enough so they do not qualify for all the welfare and subsidies that non union employee’s do and you and I are paying for that too. Have not you noticed that about half of employees are now underpaid and receive various welfare subsidies in lieu of union wages and as wages went down as the number of union employees went down. Higher wages produces more tax dollars and a healthier economy. You may want to think it all the way through not just focus on your whipping boy!

      • Cashu

        The concept of unions is not good or bad. Back in the days of Samuel Gompers, the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organization, unions were a means of protecting the WORKING CONDITIONS of labor from the uncontrolled avarice of management as per “The Jungle” by Upton Sinclair. Membership in a union was a means of ensuring you could avoid being forced to work in unsafe, unhealthy environments. Union membership also ensured you could disagree with your boss about being forced to work in the above mentioned conditions WITHOUT BEING FIRED for the disagreement. Unions also allowed you to have a certain peace of mind that you wouldn’t arbitrarily be cast aside after decades of faithful service because you became less useful than a newly hired younger worker.

        Only a decade or so after the strife and death of the birth of organized labor into unions – as opposed to feudal guilds – did union members suddenly realize they had the power to coerce management through the arbitrary use of go-slows, sit-down occupations and outright strikes. And that nefarious behavior was perfected in the UAW and its affiliates. They have taken confrontational collective bargaining to a very refined level, to where they have total power of success or failure of their host companies. They can – and do – break individual companies as a coercive threat to the other companies in their purview to comply – or else. Notice that UAW does NOT negotiate with all the auto manufacturers? They pick out the weakest and coerce its management into a contract on the union’s terms and extends that language to the rest. It’s very effective, but it’s not in the country’s best interest – witness the rise and dominance of foreign manufacturers – BUILDING VEHICLES IN THE U.S.!!

        Essentially unions have a place as the protector of the worker, but modern unions, as they are defined today, are anything but good for the country. If nothing else, their outrageous wage demands, their featherbedding and their benefit demands cause a rising tide of inflation to spread in a ripple effect across the entire economy as a major cause of inflation. And, as we all know, inflation is the major killer of retired folks…

        Cashu

        =====================

        • smilee

          Unions, what you call modern unions, are so powerless today that nothing you say currently exists and you pick what could be the exception from years ago not the rule and ignore the abuse of the workers, that led to their work stoppage etc in response to refusal of the companies to negotiate agreements thus forcing their refusal to work. It takes two to tango and companies often did not want to dance.The lack of union jobs has placed a heavy burden on the taxpayer that benefits the employer equally as much as the employee but the employer has the means to do better and refuses and the employee has little choice. Are you OK and like paying all these taxes for big companies financial gain at your expense because of current unions lack of power to combat.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Sleepee says — “Unions, what you call modern unions, are so powerless today that nothing you say currently exists”.
            Pure conjecture, Sleepee.
            We need merely look at the GM debacle where Unionists ran off with the company at the expense of the true Owners — The bondholders:
            http://reason.org/news/show/lasting-implications-gm-bailout

            Sleepee says — “you pick what could be the exception from years ago not the rule and ignore the abuse of the workers, that led to their work stoppage”.
            Abuse of the workers? If they were being abused, why didn’t they just seek work elsewhere or start their own companies?

          • smilee

            Do you like paying out of your taxes all the living costs of employees that union contracts used to make companies pay for themselves before companies lobbied so hard for those welfare reform programs enabling them to shift it onto you and I and the rest of the taxpayers. Welfare reform was not for the poor but for the rich and that is why they lobbied for it and it has since created a lot more poor people. They are laughing at you and I all the way to their banks.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            We all pay for your Big Government, Sleepee, one way or the other, Union or not.

          • smilee

            Oh come on!! You dodged responding, what are you afraid of

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            How can I respond to such nonsense, Sleepee? Liberal Progressives have still not caught on that there is No Free Lunch. If you gain above-market wages, other people have to suffer for them.

          • smilee

            Well for the first half of my career living union wages,(most non union paid union level wages too) were paid and none needed welfare so it has worked before and there should be a way to do it again and these were not above market wages but were market and livable. No one suffered and i do not believe any suffered because of the wages. Of course profits were reasonable then and not always setting records as they do now. When things are balanced your questions would not be relevant in any way but too many today support unbalanced methods and that causes many to suffer and that is what why we see so many suffering now.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The only way Unionists can get above-market wages is if somebody else suffers for them through higher prices for their consumer goods, or some other method of suffering.
            If Unionists are a small percentage of the population the suffering is not so noticeable. It’s like having a boil on your butt. It’s painful when you sit, but it isn’t generally life-threatening.
            Unionists are just one group of many non-productive groups supported by Big Government who are riding on the rest of our backs.

          • smilee

            You view of unions simply is not true. There no above market wages but they are not so low as to be eligible for welfare’s. either and they pay taxes that in part go to subsidize non union workers so they do not have to be in poverty which their wages reflect. Is it not interesting that they are that small and those on welfare has sky rocketed and they help those riding on their backs. you got it backwards government does not subsidize union persons but does non union persons through welfare subsidies. How does government support unions and just how are they riding on others backs as they are a group of the most self reliant employees we have and proven more productive and even my employer admitted we wee more productive than their non union employees and most trusted to do it right. Your so indoctrinated with corporate propaganda leaving you ignorant of the real truth

          • Cashu

            I disagree with the relevance of your opinion about what I have carefully outlined; I stand by it. You’re entitled to your opinion as long as you remain civil.

            But on the question of taxes, I would assert that all income taxes and all corporate taxes are un-Constitutional. I disagree that the 16th amendment was properly ratified, and therefore those supposed income taxes and property taxes are unapportioned, indirect taxes, in violation of the intent of the framers. With the consequent failure of the precious metal standard, and the ascendancy, under Nixon, of the fiat currency standard, we now are subject to uncontrolled direct taxation in violation of Constitutional law. I think we would be far better off to have suffered upon WJB’s “Cross of Gold” than where we are today.

            Of course, those who don’t think that the seventeen trillion dollar debt is important and that we, as property owners, should be held up paying “rent” to the state on our own property probably can’t think clearly enough to realize how duped they’ve been by the oligarchy we call “a government large enough to take care of us.” It has indeed “taken care of us” in the worst sense of the phrase.

            Take some time to check out the Mises Institute website for an in-depth study of the whole question. It really does come down to a choice between Keynesian economics vs. Austrian economics…

            Cashu

            ==========================

          • smilee

            How can any part of the constitution be unconstitutional itself as it is the supreme law and we are free to make what we want constitutional as long as we do it by the manner set forth in the Constitution and the 16th was created that way despite what you believe and I am aware there are those who wrongly think as you do but your opinions are wrong and mean nothing as it will change nothing in reality. What I cited as your inaccuracies in your first port are in fact inaccurate. I guess you do not understand how large the subsidies of wages and other welfare for working people are and is something you ignore. Since unions became weak and companies lobbied to shift their previous union contract obligations on to the taxpayers and now we pay very much of their employees living costs instead of unions insuring the companies pay their own.. You ignore the good that unions did and still do but on a very small scale now. Most of that debt was created after the weakening of Unions and have nothing to do with them and we could pay it off quicker from taxes from those higher wages if it was available.

          • JeffH

            smilee says “Unions, what you call modern unions, are so powerless today…”

            Powerless you say? I say that their money(dues extracted by force) says they are not powerless.

            Modern American unionism depends on government
            support. As a result, unions have a strong interest in politics and spend a lot of time and money on political activity.

            7 of the top 10 all time donors are unions and their investment (crony partnership with government) is keeping the top feeders well fed.
            http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

          • smilee

            Unions do not get government subsidies. Dues increases are voted on by the membership as are all contracts, officers etc. That extraction by force as you call it yields on average nationwide $800.00 per month in more wages in addition to more benefits, it is much more like an investment. Imagine putting $50.00 (represents your monthly dues) in your savings account on the first of the month and coming back the first of the following month and finding a balance of $800.00. You call it extraction but I call it an investment. Where I worked about 40% at my location was union and my pension is about $1000.00 per month more than my non union friends there and social security about $400.00 more as my wages were much higher so I now get $1400.00 a month more for life than my non union friends there. You call itextraction but by bank account says different, much different. That is the reality of Union Dues or extractions by force as you call it..Unions as well as many many other entities spend a lot of money on politics. the chart you give is a total of 23 years and does not include the spending changes that came about since citizens united and is partial even for the time it represents so it is not give a total picture.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Upton Sinclair was a Socialist, Cashu. And his book “The Jungle” was fiction:

          http://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Meat_packing

          Cashu says — “unions were a means of protecting the WORKING CONDITIONS of labor from the uncontrolled avarice of management”.
          No, Unions were a means of bullying companies into paying above market wages to Unionists, at the expense of the companies, the consumers, and the non-Union Workers. The workers could protect themselves by going elsewhere for work or starting their own companies.

          • smilee

            Your hatred of unions despite all the good they have done has blinded you to that reality as hatge always does.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            What good have they done?

          • smilee

            I am not going to dignify that with an answer, it is so obvious

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Humor me, Sleepee.

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Sleepee says — “How do you explain all the non union businesses that left and went to China and other Asian countries, can not blame the unions for that can you?”.
        Which companies were those, Sleepee?

        Sleepee says “Higher wages produces more tax dollars and a healthier economy”.
        Hardly. If that were so then we could just mandate $200,00/hour jobs for everybody and the economy would be great.
        More tax dollars? Like we aren’t already feeding the Leviathan Beast too much?
        Healthy economies are created by productive people. And people are most productive when they get to keep what they work for, instead of being half-slaves to the Government.

        • smilee

          Lots of them, to many to mention, like usual you never pay attention to what is going on in the real world. The rest of your post is so ridiculous and distorts what I said and responds to your balony with pure BS

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Are all you Liberal Progressives working from the same boiler room?
            How come none of you will ever back up his/her conjecture?

          • smilee

            I REPEAT: Lots of them, to many to mention, like usual you never pay attention to what is going on in the real world. The rest of your post is so ridiculous and distorts what I said and responds to your baloney with pure BS

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You don’t have to name them all, Sleepee. Just one or two would be great.

          • smilee

            FORGET IT LAZY, IT IS NOT THAT HARD TO FIND

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’re the one who claims they exist, Sleepee. Why would I waste my time looking for a needle in a haystack, especially since I only have the word of a non-credible Liberal Progressive to go on?

          • smilee

            THAT IS NO EXCUSE FOR BEING SO OVERLY LAZY

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            So why are you, Sleepee?

          • smilee

            I’m am not you just think I am, it is not i that wants the info, if I did I would find it because I am not lazy

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, Sleepee, you won’t find the info because you know it would be too difficult being that it is likely a very rare case.

          • smilee

            It is not rare and if you were not so lazy you would that out!!

          • momo

            You’re making the argument smilee, its incumbent on you to back it up.

          • smilee

            Why, if it means so much to you prove me wrong rather than trying to play boss which you are not

          • http://batman-news.com samurai

            Here is an article showing what we need to do in this great country.
            http://www.westernjournalism.com/a-time-of-reflection/
            Here is an article dealing with the lying from secularists about our founding, as usual.
            http://www.westernjournalism.com/separation-nonsense-from-lying-secularists/
            Here are some more about Obama bin Laden.
            http://www.westernjournalism.com/obama-buys-bombs-to-kill-syrian-christians/
            http://www.westernjournalism.com/mike-zullo-gives-update-on-obama-id-fraud-case/
            All this possible by people like sleepee and other sheeple. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
            You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.
            “When rulers are wicked, their people are too.”
            Proverbs 29:16

      • Ibn Insha

        Businesses that move operations overseas do so because of high cost of doing business in the USA.

        In response to your belief that higher wages bring more tax money and healthier economy I would like you to read the comments of DaveH below who commented, and I agree with, lets raise the wages to 200,000/ hr and there would be sunshine and lollypops all over the place. That cannot happen. When wages go up as a result of value added to a product only then it brings prosperity. If wages go up a result of government force it causes inflation and poverty.

        Unions don’t make management decisions but unions force management’s hand to make a certain decision.

        Corrupt politicians are elected and reelected by common people and not by a few corporations. If those politicians make decisions that favor corporations and not the voters then why do voters keep reelecting the same corrupt politicians. Corporations can spend their whole net worth and cannot cast one vote for a politicians. Only people cast votes. Because these politicians give the voters goodies for nothing at the expense of those who work, be it individuals or corporations, they get elected again and again.

        • smilee

          Response to P1: They moved there because of slave level cost of doing business there and sure that makes cost of doing business high but not a good reason to do so but corporations today have loyalty to any nation and will not hesitate to put the screws to anyone it make a dollar

          Response to P2: Union wages are reasonable and not ridiculous as the example davy used, so by reasonable persons should be ignored so being reasonable I will ignore. it

          Response to P3; I disagree that force if it existed ever it was rare, those who hate unions like to spin it that way. Do you really think lock outs so common now are force and if you do it sure is not the unions bringing force is it.

          Response to P4: I agree only people cast votes but corporation propaganda and money has proven it can influence many voters and they have been very successful in getting their way with many and until the voters see that and vote for the good of the country and this would also be the way for their own best interest, You blame the workers for voting for goodies (as you call them) then how do you explain the lions share of goodies going to states that voted republican and then see them in turn voting in congress to take them away a little at a time, latest is the large reduction in food stamps at at time when need has never been greater. Some do in fact influence enough to get what they want and it is a shame

  • Nadzieja Batki

    What if the Dems/Progs/Leftists believe that they had to destroy a city to make it rise again as a phoenix rising out of the ashes? Supposedly making it bigger and better by more micromanaging and regulations.

  • Warrior

    Since the gubmint has chased manufacturing out of this country via trade laws, taxes and the epa, I would suggest Detroit be plowed over and become a nice vineyard. Don’t like that idea? Ok, how about a great “progressive” idea like some new casino’s! Remember, it’s for the “childrens”.

    • Bill

      Good Idea, Warrior
      How about a vineyard AND a casino

      • Kemosabe

        How about we GIVE DETROIT to the NATIVE AMERICANS and THEY can BUILD a CASINO. It’s only FAIR!!!

        • Bill

          Great idea Kemosabe

        • just saiyan

          Native Americans have been tortured enough by gubment screw ups why dump it on them.

  • Marshall Watson

    Social justice, social engineering, social welfare, wealth redistribution, never accomplish what their promoters tell us they will. You can never make everyone equally rich, but you can make everyone equally poor. Not everyone has the same ethical values, most people get tired of working hard to feed someone who is very willing to not work and let you feed him. Except for those who truly have no means or are so handicapped they cannot be gainfully employed, welfare should cease to exist. If you don’t want to work just because it is easier to let the government force those of us who are willing to work feed you, you don’t deserve to be fed.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Welfare should cease to exist in ALL cases. It is not the Government’s money to give. Truly needy people would have no problem getting help from Private Charities if Government wasn’t stealing 40% of our GDP every year.

  • TheOriginalDaveH

    Did the Cuban Leaders learn anything? Did the North Korean Leaders learn anything? Of course not. As long as they live better than the rest of the citizens, they are happy.
    It’s up to the people to get their heads out and figure out what’s going on — The sooner, the better.
    Read this to learn why Free Markets work, and Socialism doesn’t:
    http://library.mises.org/books/Kel%20Kelly/The%20Case%20for%20Legalizing%20Capitalism.pdf

    • boyscout

      American leaders have learned these lessons quite well, and they are doing just fine.

      • momo

        What planet do you live on?

        • John Woodbury

          Are you really that dumb? If you look at TODH’s post it says “as long as they live better ….they are happy.” And BoyScout pointed out American leaders have learn that lesson well. If you do not think pols do live better than us avg. people, what freaking planet do you live on?

  • me

    Chicago is next. the Democrat rulers will take it down in the same way. seems where the Democrats rule they are in trouble.

  • TheOriginalDaveH

    Good article, Robert.

  • Vigilant

    Hard hitting, accurate article.

  • Nadzieja Batki

    What if the politicos who destroyed Detroit do not care that the money is all gone, they will be replenished by the Federal gov or like typical predators they will go and find new territories to feed on.

  • Cashu

    Here
    is the truth once again, friends. Capitalism, driven by simple self
    interest is the only successful, FAIR way to a thriving economy for
    everyone, with equal OPPORTUNITY for everyone: success or failure based
    strictly on individual initiative, sacrifice and considered, planned,
    pragmatic, savvy decision-making.

    “Ants” succeed; “Grasshoppers” fail. That’s absolutely fair!!

    Redistribution,
    especially when overseen by small-minded, short-sighted,
    falsely-motivated, dishonest or biased bureaucrats, will ALWAYS result
    in bankruptcy – of cities, of counties, of states and we’re about to see
    that it also bankrupts large countries just as surely as the sun sets
    each night. Social welfare is not only unFAIR in the extreme because it
    robs producers of what they work hard for, and gives their money to
    deadbeats who don’t think it’s important to prudently plan for their own
    futures – it is always ultimately unsustainable. Soviet Russia is the
    best recent example to see how that system worked… or didn’t work…

    Maggie
    was right on the money when she opined that socialism works fine until
    the socialists run out of other peoples’ money, since money extorted
    from producing individuals is the real fuel that drives socialism. That
    has always been true and we’re now about to see the full extent of that
    truism.

    Fairness MUST be defined ONLY by equal opportunity – NOT
    by equal results based on arbitrary redistribution of wealth. That
    last concept has never worked in the entire history of the planet, and
    it won’t work now…

    Cashu

    ========================

  • Random Patriot

    If public office was low pay, long hours, tough assignments away from your home and social support, then it would be the military.Not a bad structure to operate from, efficient and organized more than current Government. Lets eliminate the perks of the job. It seems to me lobbyists are like drug dealers for politicians. We all know what and how powers are being abused. We just need to overhaul the system. I would rather adjust the model to correct the data, not rig the model to get the data I want you to see. Perhap what we need is a randomly appointed Mom and Dad to punish some of theses representatives that are behaving like children. Where checks? What balances? The have been usurped.

  • David169

    This is a very good article but it fails to draw the only logical conclusion.
    Our unfunded liabilities are between 100 and 200 trillion dollars. No one appears to be able to actually compute the actual amount of debt. This amount of debt even if it is only 50 trillion dollars is so tremendous that it can never be paid back. When the debt becomes so great that the federal government has no more credit and the printed money is worthless; there is no form of government except grass roots free enterprise and capitalism that will be able to exist. The Cloward-Piven plan is a flawed matrix just like communism. Neither can work because the foundation and initial premise of existence is wrong. They both require increased central authority. Under communism people must live like they do in North Korea or Cuba. The weight or expense of the government keeps everyone impoverished including the government. If North Korea and Cuba were not regularly propped up financially they would fail. China has a capitalistic economy run by a quasi-communist central government. They have been dropping tenants of communism and they are easing into a free market society. The Russian government bit the bullet and dropped communism altogether.
    The Cloward-Piven plan envisions loading the government with so much debt that the government collapses. That part of the plan is being done by entitlements which now amount to about 50% of the federal budget. We also had over 50% of the voters endorse the federal government continuing this program of destruction in the last election. However, those of us that still work cannot make enough to support the drones so the country goes farther in debt daily.
    Now lets suppose our federal government goes broke and a dictator takes over. It doesn’t matter if the dictator is communist, capitalist or just plain power mad. The new government will be saddled with so much debt it can’t exist and it has no where to turn for credit. What is worse is there is still that 50% of the people who demand that the federal government support them. Said another way there are 50% of the people in this country that cannot or will not produce enough to support themselves and require others to support them to some degree. That burden will crush any new form of government. If we can’t afford to support that 50% of the people with a functioning economy and unlimited credit how does anyone propose that they will be supported by a collapsed federal economy with no credit. The only way the economy can recover and the country prosper is those entitlements must be phased out and government reduced in size and cost.

    • John Woodbury

      Good comment, but the O has a plan, he wants the value of dollars to fall so far that 100 billion will become pocket change.

  • Stephan F

    Very nice to have Mr. Ringer back on Personal Liberty (don’t let him get away again Bob).

    With regard to Detroit, I’d like to pass along this quote: “Politics is the art of looking for trouble,
    finding it, misdiagnosing it, and then misapplying the wrong remedies.” — Groucho Marx

    • MyronJPoltroonian

      “Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.”- Ronald Reagan

  • Michael Shreve

    Bankrupting the U.S. IS a MAJOR part of the AGENDA. Bailing out Detroit, and all the OTHER Democrat, liberal, progressive, communist strongholds ADVANCES that agenda. The ONLY way to avoid be caught in the collapse is not to be PART of the U.S.

  • http://cowboybyte.com/ Alondra

    Milton Friedman – Redistribution of Wealth
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRpEV2tmYz4

    The Difference Between LIBERAL and CONSERVATIVE
    Thomas Sowell discusses characteristics that define liberals and conservatives, and his own personal TRANSITION from Marxism to libertarianism.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KHdhrNhh88

    Thomas Sowell – What Evidence Supports Affirmative Action?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5BMGYkVdX8

  • WTS/JAY

    People Sign Petition for “Mandatory Euthanasia” for Senior Citizens Under ObamaCare…

    http://savingtherepublic.com/blog/2013/07/people-sign-petition-for-mandatory-euthanasia-for-senior-citizens-under-obamacare/

  • MyronJPoltroonian

    ‘Government is like a baby: An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other.’- Ronald Reagan