Page 123 of 154 FirstFirst ... 2373113121122123124125133 ... LastLast
Results 1,221 to 1,230 of 1532

Thread: Walmart workers demand better wages

  1. #1221
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    As would I. In fact, I see no reason for the qualifier - anyone who would lie and murder for money is worthy of being considered a criminal.


    However, this is a thread about Wal-Mart; and specifically how some of their employees are upset about being low-value labor, and instead of deciding to do something about that by improving themselves, seem to prefer to blame their employer for their own lack.
    Im sure you didnt see it..but I posted two last week about pharmacuetical companies killing people by hiding the risks to life that they knew existed from the public and the doctors..no one goes to jail just fines..
    Thats what infuriates me..big banks..big pharma big anything that get caught stealing billions or hundreds of millions from the public..no one goes to jail and they get a 100 million dollar fine for stealing a half a billion...its all bs cp..there are many components to the reasons I feel the way I do...the difference is..you only look for the good in corporations and there is good to find...I look for the bad and theres plenty of that too.

  2. #1222
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Ok, now lets look at what those "greedy" shareholders made. So far this year, Walmart stock bottomed out at $57.36 (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.: NYSE:WMT quotes & news - Google Finance) and annualized dividends for 2012 are $1.46 (Walmart Corporate - Dividends & Stock Splits), so at it's lowest stock price, it would take the average investor 39.3 years to make back, from dividends, the dollar amount they paid. (Current rates, $72.10 and $1.59, it would take 45.3 years). So it would take over $40 years for an investor to make back their investment if the relied upon dividends being paid.

    I don't know about others, but waiting 40+ years to get back what I put in and actually start making money off of an investment is not being greedy. I would make more money off of selling that stock that I purchased at $57.36 for $72.10 than I would ever make off of dividends. Dividends are the distribution of profits, those not used for other things, to share holders. Walmart hardly appears "greedy" when you consider return upon the investment in the company.

    How many walmart employee's want to wait 40+ years to get the pay they earned on their investment of labor? Looked at this way, who is being "greedy"?
    Well if you add in capital appreciation, it won't take 40 years.
    Not to mention, that dividends tend to grow over time and that Walmart employees get a company match on stock, which is 15 cents on the dollar.
    They automatically profit from investing in company stock.
    Last edited by Harry Guerrilla; 12-03-12 at 06:38 AM.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  3. #1223
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Of course people that have more responsibility get paid more. Thats how it should be. But that has nothing to do with cooperatives. The individual has more responsibility so they get paid more. The individual that has less gets payed less. Thats the way it should be.
    No, the right and moral way is to go and sit at a table and discuss merits. Not go outside and make a scene chanting some slogan that is worthless costing the company money. That just creates bad feelings and hardship for people that have nothing to do with your dispute.
    They do have a say in thier wage. All they have to do is accept or not accept the wage offered at the date of hire. If they get hired and want more later on down the line then they should ASK, like adults. Not through temper tantrums like spoiled children.
    First of all, it has nothing to do with responsibility ... It has to do with the Capitalist will always pay himself the most he can, and the workers the least he can. The way it should be is whatever pay you can get, that's the market, its not a meritocracy, it never has been.

    Second of all, sitting down and "asking" for more pay because you think you deserve it won't do ****, unless you can back it up with some sort of power, and you can have a lot more of that with a union, the capitalist controls all the capital, so if workers want leverage they need to fight collectively.

    What you're basically saying is the workers should just play the game the way the Capitalist wants them too ... Nonsense, you play the game in a way that where you have the highest leverage, thats how capitalists do it, thus that is how workers should do it.

    And how do they first get control of that capitol? Through thier mental acuity. It certainly isn't by sitting on thier ass.
    mental activity AND institutional frameworks and institutional advantages and so on.

    Gotta love these silly statements. A company cannot work as a democracy. Again, look at our Senate and Congress to see what a democracy is like in action.
    The senate and congress are examplse of a currupt plutocracy, where the representatives answer to buisiness leaders.

    also WE HAVE TONS AND TONS OF EXAMPLES THAT WORK AS DEMOCRACIES .... the richest area in europe, Emilia-Romagna, is famous for its cooperatives ...

    So? 50 years ago we also had more morals, and less greed. We have changed alot in 50 years.

    And that is not what you are saying at all. You are saying that you want the grunts to have just as much say as those that built the company. Even the ones that just started working.
    Thats rediculous ... thats like arguing that the reason black people are better off now is because black people have better morals now.

    Thats nonsense, people were just as greedy 50 years ago as they are not, the difference the institutions.

    Or is it that everyone suddenyl got more greedy at the same time the US made neo-liberal reforms, and the reforms had nothing to do with it. Common now.

    Wrong. The very first form of "government" if you can call it that was strength makes right. If you're stronger than the other guy then you can take what he has. Capitalism started the moment when Strength makes Right stopped being the main thing and people started trading one item for another. Even Germany, which you tout as being socialistic (which its not) (or at least the picture perfect way of unions) is based on capitalism.
    Wrong, just based on facts. the first governments were tribal, i.e. run by elders and relatively democratic, when land became more important you had monarchies and theocracies with mostly command economies, even in major cities like in Rome and greece, markets were not the main distributive method, trading was mainly between societies not within.

    Capitalism started with the industrial revolution. Also Capitalism =/= Markets, it is the Capitalist mode of production.

    As far as Germany, yeah ... its not socialist, but it has a lot more socialistic policies than other places which are a big reason it's successful.

    Name me one socialist country that has worked.
    There has never been a socialist country, you have cooperatives, and areas that were socialistic and countries that implimented socialistic policies, but there hasn't been a socialist country.

    Contradictory. If its a socialistic idea (which its not) how can it also be based on capitalism which is the anti-thesis of socialism? Do you even know what socialism actually is?
    Like I said ITS NOT A SOCIALIST OR A CAPITALIST IDEA .... It's just a fact on how Capitalism works.

    And yeah, I do know what socialism is, its economic democracy.

    Sure they will. And do. 7% of our working force is in a union in the US. 53% of our workforce is either middle class or rich....going by US standards of wealth. I would have to say that those that are middle class and rich easily get thier labor's worth. The lower 47% is debateable as to thier worth. And you cannot go by what the individual thinks that they are worth because they will always claim that they are worth far more than they really are.
    No ... its not by what they think they are worth, the metric I'm going by is the value they actually produce, and by that workers by definition don't get waht they are worht otherwise capitalism (profit) would'nt work.

    So? Considering the CEO has more invested into the company than the common worker it only makes since that they are not the first to get cut. Why should they be? Just because YOU don't see them doing anything does not mean that they don't.
    Most of the time the CEO isn't that invested in the company, they have investments all over the places and are many times on boards of other companies, they have reall big golden parachutes and a lot less stake in a company than a worker who's livelyhood depends on it.

    I wasn't arguing that CEO's don't do anything btw.

    Beats me. I'm not a CEO. I'm one of those lower 47% people. But it is quite possible with the advancements in technology making things easier to keep track of things that a CEO needs to keep track of.
    Wiat what???? So why are you not rich? Are you just lazy?

    Also are you arguing seriously that CEOs got 300% more compensation because their job god easier????

    Also technology made workers more productive too ...

    The fact is the same, CEO's paid themselves more because they could ... nothing more nothing less.

    So? Power does not equal bad. Power is neutral. It is how the power is used that makes good or bad.
    Given that I'm taking it you have no problem with dictatorships ... as long as they are benevolant.

    Oh yes, the whole unionized Germany bit. Do you even know the differences between the US and Germany? I tried to point towards it once before but you ignored it. I'll ask again, How much greed is there in Germany compared to the US? (and yes, I already know the answer)
    Its not just Germany, its Sweden, Norway, Emilia-Romagna, and other places, the common demoniator is strong Unions and strong social democracies and cooperative ... Not some moral differences.

    People are JUST AS GREEDY in Germany as they are everywhere else, the difference is the institutional frameworks, i.e. the economic system.

    Arguing that its just moral differences is moronic, and akin to arguing that black people in America are more poor because they are just dumber.

    If you want to get semantical any right is a social construct. But guess what. It doesn't matter what you think or not because in the US capitalist property (property period) IS a right. It is even in the Constitution. 5th and 14th Amendment.
    The difference is, I can speak and do what I want with my body without any social isntitution ... I don't own capitalist property beyond my possessions without a social instituion, without that its just a claim as valid as me claiming I'm the king of New Zealand.

    And items on shelves don't affect other peoples lives either. But we're not talking about inanimate objects. We're talking about you, your property.

    BTW, if we want to expand on your idea that a CEO did not build the company from the ground up because of society then the same would apply to your living room. Because without society your living room would not have been able to have been built. Using your same arguement those that built your house has a right to say how that house is treated, lived in, what is in it, how much they should get for you living in it etc etc.
    The difference is no one relies on my living room for lively hood, nor does my living room affect society. Giant corporations do.

  4. #1224
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You apparently only read what you wanted to read and ignored the part (if you even looked for it) that unions had in Hostess's downfall. You should also probably note that I never ONCE said that the CEO's of Hostess never messed up. But they were not he only reasons for Hostess going downhill. And it wasn't the union wanting to put a stop to Hostess's mismanagement. The wanted to be paid more. Which is not very smart to demand of a company that is on the brink of bankruptcy...wouldn't you say? But no. They had to demand more knowing that Hostess was struggling. Knowing that they couldn't take a strike. Was even warned that if the workers didn't get back to work then Hostess WOULD fold and have to liquidate. Yet the workers did not care that Hostess was struggling. They didn't care that a continued strike would bankrupt them. All they cared about was getting more money. Not caring that they were asking for more than Hostess could give.

    But you don't care about that either do you? You only care that Hostess CEO's were making more than the workers and by your definition of morality that is just wrong. Because you see everyone as equal. Regardless of the fact that people are not equal in the things that matter to a buisness.
    You're forgetting that the Union had already taken cuts as management gave themselves raises ... So obviously Hostess COULD give their executives tons of money ... and thus not cut workers. This was redistribution upwards, the bankruptcy had nothing to do with the Union.

    Its not immoral that the CEO was making more ... What was immoral was teh CEO raising his own pay while cutting the workers pay, claiming the company was in trouble.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    You should really take a look at what the unions do in Germany and Germany itself before comparing it to the US. We have two totally different cultures.
    The Unions had WAY WAY more power in Germany, meaning they didn't have to strike as much ... That is the difference, it's not culture its economics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    As for the crappy worker. 1: Democracy does not work when running a company. 2: A crappy worker can still be well liked. That alone would keep him in his position if it was up to a democracy. Just look at Obama. He's a crappy President yet he is well liked by enough people to keep him in office. And don't even try to claim that I think Romeny or any of the other politicians that ran for POTUS was good. I thought that they were ALL crap.
    1. Empirically false as shown over and over again.
    2. The same with an executive, since he chooses the board that selects the executive, which is why crappy executives get giant pay packages and don't get fired.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    He/should will still do that even with a union. As he/she should. In a company the owner is always the most important. Everyone else is replaceable with other workers compared to the owner.
    In most companies the owners have almost no stake in the company, since they are liquid and dispersed shareholders.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Yes shareholders of today have very little interest in long term. But that has nothing to do with the stock itself and has everything to do with greed and short term thinking. If a shareholder wanted they could take over the company long term. Just because it doesn't happen doesn't mean that it can't happen.


    Thinking that lieing is irrelevent is one huge problem with you youngsters these days.


    All of it that you did not already respond to.
    First paragraph: I'm talking the real world here not the theoretical world ... the reason Capitalism works this way in the US isn't because people in the US are immoral or especially greedy, its becuase of the insitutions of Capitalism.

    2nd: You havn't pointed to any specific lie, at all, just asserted that they must do it.

  5. #1225
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by OpportunityCost View Post
    1. They do smaller manufacturing runs and their manufacturing industry was smaller in scope post WW2. It was much cheaper for them to retool with a smaller machine base.

    2. Unions were strongest in the US in early 60s into the late 70s---at which point decline in auto manufacturing began. You still arent getting the point about German unions being vastly different from US unions. US unions are adversarial in nature, German unions work with management and have open information policies. Its not just unions in the US, management is just as guilty.

    3. Go look it up. Im not going to explain something to you thats common knowledge on supply chain management. GM focuses on redundancies in their supply chain, Toyota focuses on building relationships with sub contracting manufacturers. Japanese companies follow that model and Germans do the same thing. It could have arisen from lack of having a lot of manufacturers competing in niche markets, I dont know. I just know that it is.

    4. No, son, thats marketing.

    5. Yeah we werent. Where are most US electronics made again? Asia? We are still engaging in a push economy in several sectors. The second consideration is combatting the illegal trade activities China is engaging in from piracy, to copyright theft, to product dumping. US innovation is great, our ability to capitlize on it long term? Not so much.
    1. And they grew to much larger runs and are still doing fine ... BECAUSE OF THE SYSTEM THEY HAVE.

    2. Unions were losing ground in the late 70s. The reason German unions are different is because of the economic system of co-determination, not some genetic difference between germans and americans.

    3. Germany has policies that put a lot of restricutions on companies ... I don't know about Japan, but for comapnies to move or shift they have to go through many political loopholes, basically they have more public accountability. Putting that all to simple cultural or moral differences is rediculous ... BOTH countries firms want to make a profit and need to focus on short term profits ... the difference is the institutional framework.

    4. Thats subjective ... and there is no way to show it at all, also marketing is the result of management.

    5. And why do US companies outsource and German companies do not? Do German Companies like paying more for labor? No ... its the difference in the institutions.

    Also its not JUST germany, its other social democratic countries too, or is it just a coincidence that social democracies have good morals and culture and neo-liberal ones do not?

  6. #1226
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Psst, check your Lean. Socialist. Many of us know that Marx's socialist theories and methods called for Government theft as a means of bring about change from capitalism. Of course, as a socialist, you may not view the government seizing the assets and properties of those who fight against socialism as theft. So either you are not a real socialist (an adherent of Marx) and are really a sudo-socialist, or you are ignorant of what Marx wrote or you support government theft of private properties/monies.

    No, capitalism is not failing. The sudo-socialistic economic policy of regulated capitalism is failing. True, unfettered capitalism does not exist in the US and hasn't for a very longtime now, if it ever existed. Our current economic failings can all be tracked back to the introduction of greater and greater governmental controls and the introduction of "social" policy in the government.

    No one, at least that I have read, ever said that walmart workers, as individuals would not be better off, at least for a time. You are only looking at the effects upon a portion of the 1.4 million walmart employees. You are not taking into account what it would do the the far greater number of walmart shoppers. You seem to think that it would only effect walmart workers and walmart management. It affects far more people than that. The savings to customers has been what has driven walmart to the place it now is. To meet the pay levels that some workers demand and the whole "living wage" idea, it would have to greatly increase it's pricing. The people who can only afford walmart pricing will no longer be able to afford much of anything. People who can afford walmart prices on non essential products may no longer be able to afford them, decreasing consumer sales in an already depressed and fragile economy. This would not just affect walmart either, it will affect everyone in the chain that gets the products manufactured and delivered to the individual stores. Walmart is big enough that it may have a significant effect upon the whole economy.

    As a socialist, you approach the matter from the view point that all people have a minimum value and that each persons value is equal. This lack of a realistic concept of value is at the core of the failures and the falsehood of the promised paradise preached by socialist. However, to a company, any company, an individuals value to that company is directly related to what that individual contributes to the company. A person value to society is only what that individual gives to society and since we do not have nor can we ever have equal input to a society, every person in the society cannot have equal value to the society. There are many in our society that only take from it and never give back, or give back only a very small amount compared to what they take. Pure logic would dictate ridding society of those who have a negative value, however, because they are a person, we do not follow pure logic but instead try to act humanly towards them.

    Even those who do not go as far as a socialist but still feel that a worker should have a minimum value, though not equal are following down the path towards socialism, thus they are socialistic, even if they don't admit it. If they were to achieve their goal of a "living wage" with benefits for all, they would not stop there but would immediately start working to eliminating what they see as inequities in the system. Unions, especially collective bargaining, are following down this path. As we have seen, this has caused total failure in a case like Hostess and massive outsourcing in other businesses. It has also caused some to start calling for greater and greater government actions to stop these failures in the economy, however, the government cannot stop the effects of this causal factor without becoming socialist. You may desire this affect, but some of us can use logic and reason and see that this failure of value in socialism will only lead to failure of a socialist systems. Socialism depends on everyone acting idealistically and we all know that greed influences far more people than any idealistic model.
    Son of a bitch .... First of all MARXISM IS POSTIVE ECONOMICS ... get that through you're head ... its an analysis of Capitalism. Socialism was before marx and after marx, socialism is no an adherant of marx tat is what a marxist is.

    Capitalism IS failing. True unfettered capitalism never existed and can never exist, the closer you get to it the more you end up at the great depression of much of the third world. post 70s' much of the west moved toward more unfettered capitalism and the result is in.

    Our current economic failings are traced back to reagenomics ... i.e. the dismanteling of the new deal and great society politics and institution of neo-liberalism ... this is fact.

    You could increase every workers wage 30%, not change prices and not change exective pay and Walmart would still be profitable, and that isn't taking into accoutn increased aggrigate demand ... so claiming that infaltion would undo the positive effects is plainly false, and claiming that rising wages are undone by inflation has been disproven OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, and if you want em to show why AGAIN, I'll do it.

    As a socialist I don't argue that all peoples value is equal ... Thats nonsense, and thus a strawman. My arguemnt is that labor is value ... not ownership of capital ... of coarse a doctor is more valuble than a secretary.

    Socialism is economic democracy ... So enough of the strawmen. Unions are an example of a democratizing force in the economy.

    As far as Hostess that's already been answered, it was management, not unions that ruined the company, kept giving themselves raises and bonuses while running the company into the ground and cutting workers benfits.

    Outsourcing happened after Union decline.

    The reast of you're argumetns are just strawmen. If you don't want the state the stop failures in capitalism, then watch capitalism collapse ... Capitlaism is inherently unstable and naturally grows until it bursts, I don't want governmetn action to stop that, I want to change the whole institutional framework to make it more democratic.

    No no more strawmen.

  7. #1227
    Sage
    OpportunityCost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,782

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    1. And they grew to much larger runs and are still doing fine ... BECAUSE OF THE SYSTEM THEY HAVE.

    2. Unions were losing ground in the late 70s. The reason German unions are different is because of the economic system of co-determination, not some genetic difference between germans and americans.

    3. Germany has policies that put a lot of restricutions on companies ... I don't know about Japan, but for comapnies to move or shift they have to go through many political loopholes, basically they have more public accountability. Putting that all to simple cultural or moral differences is rediculous ... BOTH countries firms want to make a profit and need to focus on short term profits ... the difference is the institutional framework.

    4. Thats subjective ... and there is no way to show it at all, also marketing is the result of management.

    5. And why do US companies outsource and German companies do not? Do German Companies like paying more for labor? No ... its the difference in the institutions.

    Also its not JUST germany, its other social democratic countries too, or is it just a coincidence that social democracies have good morals and culture and neo-liberal ones do not?
    1. They make more profit per item because their product price point is higher. They still do not produce the volume of US companies. Go look it up.

    2. The unions are a different animal. The disclosure laws in both the US and Germany are different as well as the arbitration laws. A different environment has created a different union. Codetermination was made law post WW2 to avoid the violent outbreaks that were occurring in the US in establishing unions.

    3. Nonsense. Shorter supply chains have a lot to do with quality control. Redundancy prevents work stoppages, but if you dont have to worry about that why bother? Its not institutional, its business based.

    4. Marketing frequently is the basis for everything that follows. Listening to customer feedback and actively seeking it are part of the marketing process, if you want to make a better product, you engage in that part of the process so you can know what customers want done differently. US markets did not do this for a long time, they were engaged in a push market rather than pull market.

    5. Its not the institutions. Companies dont do things for altruistic reasons. The quality control in German companies is tighter and the German product model is based in quality. EVERY product. Not just cars.

    LOL that statement is idiotic. Easiest refute: The Yugo. I rest my case.

    Explaining business concepts to you is like explaining fur to a fish. You have some pie in the sky socio liberal response to it that doesnt bear any resemblence to reality and its getting tiresome whack a moling your misguided concepts.

  8. #1228
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by Mustachio View Post
    I chose my job according to what I feel good about doing.

    snip

    I support local businesses, I go to farmer's markets and "ma and pa" stores, and I have no problem paying a little more for a responsible business.

    snip


    I don't make much money and I can do it. Other people can, too.

    Well, goody for you....What do you want? a prize? My question to you, as it is to all libs when it gets to this point is this, Who the heck do you think you are to tell others where they should work, how they should live, or where they should shop? The arrogance of liberals to think that only they have a lock on the way everyone should live is stunning. It works for you great. I'll make my own decisions in life thank you.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #1229
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,322

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by RGacky3 View Post
    Son of a bitch .... First of all MARXISM IS POSTIVE ECONOMICS ... get that through you're head ... its an analysis of Capitalism. Socialism was before marx and after marx, socialism is no an adherant of marx tat is what a marxist is.

    Capitalism IS failing. True unfettered capitalism never existed and can never exist, the closer you get to it the more you end up at the great depression of much of the third world. post 70s' much of the west moved toward more unfettered capitalism and the result is in.

    Our current economic failings are traced back to reagenomics ... i.e. the dismanteling of the new deal and great society politics and institution of neo-liberalism ... this is fact.

    You could increase every workers wage 30%, not change prices and not change exective pay and Walmart would still be profitable, and that isn't taking into accoutn increased aggrigate demand ... so claiming that infaltion would undo the positive effects is plainly false, and claiming that rising wages are undone by inflation has been disproven OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, and if you want em to show why AGAIN, I'll do it.

    As a socialist I don't argue that all peoples value is equal ... Thats nonsense, and thus a strawman. My arguemnt is that labor is value ... not ownership of capital ... of coarse a doctor is more valuble than a secretary.

    Socialism is economic democracy ... So enough of the strawmen. Unions are an example of a democratizing force in the economy.

    As far as Hostess that's already been answered, it was management, not unions that ruined the company, kept giving themselves raises and bonuses while running the company into the ground and cutting workers benfits.

    Outsourcing happened after Union decline.

    The reast of you're argumetns are just strawmen. If you don't want the state the stop failures in capitalism, then watch capitalism collapse ... Capitlaism is inherently unstable and naturally grows until it bursts, I don't want governmetn action to stop that, I want to change the whole institutional framework to make it more democratic.

    No no more strawmen.

    If socialism is so great then two questions....

    1. Why is it that no socialist country in the world has ever achieved the wealth, prosperity, and living standard of the United States? Why does it never succeed?

    2. Why does it have to be enforced at the point of a gun?

    You may want, or dream to be a slave to the state and toil away at a job to support someone who doesn't, but I don't. I prefer freedom.
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #1230
    Sage
    RGacky3's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Last Seen
    08-25-15 @ 05:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,570

    Re: Walmart workers demand better wages

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    If socialism is so great then two questions....

    1. Why is it that no socialist country in the world has ever achieved the wealth, prosperity, and living standard of the United States? Why does it never succeed?

    2. Why does it have to be enforced at the point of a gun?

    You may want, or dream to be a slave to the state and toil away at a job to support someone who doesn't, but I don't. I prefer freedom.
    1 and 2 ... No one is talking about Leninism ... Nor is anyone talking about state socialism (its actually state capitalism).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •