BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
BIMMERPOST Universal Forums Off-Topic Discussions Board Politics/Religion Hillary or Bernie?

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      03-13-2016, 09:49 AM   #331
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3.0L View Post
In the final analysis, folks have lost their integrity and work ethic. If folks actually had an honest work ethic today, we would need no laws.

I fail to see why you continue to blame Obama for every problem. Corporations and big business have been screwing workers for many, many decades.

Your assignment: Read Grapes of Wrath.
Read it. Sorry. Ethics is 20% of every financial license you get. I can't think of a more ethical subgroup than financial people. As for screwing workers if you don't like your job the way it used to work was get a different one. Now thanks to Obama that's pretty impossible. Just ask the 2 college grads living in your basement that would have had 3 job offers to pick from under Reagan.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 11:36 AM   #332
3.0L
Lieutenant Colonel
3.0L's Avatar
United_States
1299
Rep
1,987
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
Read it. Sorry. Ethics is 20% of every financial license you get. I can't think of a more ethical subgroup than financial people. As for screwing workers if you don't like your job the way it used to work was get a different one. Now thanks to Obama that's pretty impossible. Just ask the 2 college grads living in your basement that would have had 3 job offers to pick from under Reagan.
...and you dodge the story line.

How would characterize the land owners treatment of their employees?
__________________
///M235i | Mineral Grey Metallic | Premium Package | Technology Package | Driver Assistance Package | Dakota Coral Red/Black Leather | Harman/Kardon Premium 360 watt sound system | 8-speed automatic

Want a Cookie?.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 12:58 PM   #333
3.0L
Lieutenant Colonel
3.0L's Avatar
United_States
1299
Rep
1,987
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
Read it. Sorry. Ethics is 20% of every financial license you get. I can't think of a more ethical subgroup than financial people. As for screwing workers if you don't like your job the way it used to work was get a different one. Now thanks to Obama that's pretty impossible. Just ask the 2 college grads living in your basement that would have had 3 job offers to pick from under Reagan.
Pure rubbish, Mr. Zealot. Try this on for size:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhart.../#512ae03a20bc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_c...idential_terms

It appears that Obama is doing far better than his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Also, it looks like Clinton did quite well in terms of jobs, too.
__________________
///M235i | Mineral Grey Metallic | Premium Package | Technology Package | Driver Assistance Package | Dakota Coral Red/Black Leather | Harman/Kardon Premium 360 watt sound system | 8-speed automatic

Want a Cookie?.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:00 PM   #334
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3.0L View Post
...and you dodge the story line.

How would characterize the land owners treatment of their employees?
Land owners? What are you talking about? The middle ages? The so called wall street execs get paid a lot, but they're just bosses of companies. No different than a boss of Ford, Boeing, starbucks, GE, or any other company. Similar pay, etc. The really rich ones are not wall street vtheyre the tech guys. Gates, dell, etc or the family ones, kraft, heinz( John Kerry's wif8e), or the investment guys that founded their own firms, Buffett, Bloomberg, Soros. Not the head of Morgan Stanley or Merrill Lynch. And notice, every result rich I listed are all liberals.

The difference is if the economy is bad, they get blamed. If it's good, the president gets the credit. Both are bs. The wall street companies don't make the economy good or bad. Legislators as a whole and their policies do. Then throw in foreign markets, market cycles, etc. In the 70s the economy died under the economic disaster that was carter. In the 80s, Reagan put it together and created 20 years of prosperity. He was able to do this because he had the right plan and through his leadership was able to work with congress to get things done. In the 90s Clinton worked with Gingrich to do the same and continue the Reagan economy, balance the budget, led by kasich, and do welfare reform. There were 2 market drops as bad as the '08 mortgage crisis. 1987 and 2000. Both were recovered from within a couple years because the regulations weren't dumped on wall street. Now, under obama, he works the least with congress, and in his first 2 years enacted crippling regulations that hampered the recovery. Without these regulations, the middle class would have been thriving, the wealthy no better off than they are now, and much fewer poor. The unemployment rate would be a real 5%, not the real 12% it is. On and on.

So no. This isn't wall street's fault. Like any other corporation, their job is to profit under the rules they operate. When they make money, they employy people, fund company growth which creates more and better paying jobs, etc etc etc. Right now, those rules favor the rich and screw the poor and we're put there by Obama. So if you want to blame someone for the countries anemic economy, poor job growth, wealth gap, etc, blame the current administration and the democrat congress of 2008-2010 who put the rules in place that wall street operates under and who didn't go back to the rules of the Reagan years that produced 20 years of prosperity for everyone, especially the middle class.

And btw, Bernie's plan has failed in every country it's been tried. And Hillary's is the same as Obama's. So if you want the country to thrive, a good job, middle class growing, poor shrinking and becoming middle class, etc. then you may want to rethink feeling burnt again.

Last edited by Fundguy1; 03-13-2016 at 01:20 PM..
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:26 PM   #335
Frozen
Captain
Frozen's Avatar
United_States
388
Rep
712
Posts

Drives: Frozen Red e92 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
And btw, Bernie's plan has failed in every country it's been tried. And Hillary's is the same as Obama's. So if you want the country to thrive, a good job, middle class growing, poor shrinking and becoming middle class, etc. then you may want to rethink feeling burnt again.
If you say Hillary is going to get me the same results as Obama, then Sign me up!!!

Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:27 PM   #336
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

I order of people who are still running and how they would probably be for fixing the economy from best to worst
Kascich
Trump
Rubio
Cruz
Hillary
Bernie

The economy will explode, dow 30k, 40mm new jobs, household income up 20%, expandng middle class, poor shrinking by 30% under the first 4. It will languish under hillary, and suffer huge blows for everyone even worldwide under sanders.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:41 PM   #337
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Jobs created
14mm vs 16mm under Reagan. However, on my 9mm since 2009. And population is much larger now. Net result is for Obama's tenure, it's been about half the rate of Reagan and hasn't even outpaced population increases. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmit.../#3e639d613c92
Unemployment was the same rate is is now when he took over. However if you include the gentrification of the US, and the fact that now unlike then, 10s of millions are no longer counted in the figures because they've been unemployed over 2 years, it's actually closer to 10% now. Still up 5% from when he took office. Throw in many people have worse jobs or part time Jobs now and underemployment is even worse.
Gdp was down for a year in 2099 from the mortgage crash. That's cherry picking the best Stat to make him look better. Here's the reality. The detwo dropped under Clinton thanks to the Republican congress led by Gingrich and Kasich.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:47 PM   #338
Frozen
Captain
Frozen's Avatar
United_States
388
Rep
712
Posts

Drives: Frozen Red e92 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
I order of people who are still running and how they would probably be for fixing the economy from best to worst
Kascich
Trump
Rubio
Cruz
Hillary
Bernie

The economy will explode, dow 30k, 40mm new jobs, household income up 20%, expandng middle class, poor shrinking by 30% under the first 4. It will languish under hillary, and suffer huge blows for everyone even worldwide under sanders.
I disagree as does Wall Street. Hillary will be the best for the economy. Bill Clinton was pretty good for the economy, right?

Wall Street: Anyone but Trump

Some of Wall Street's most respected voices can't agree on a single 2016 White House contender, but there's one they all seem to agree they don't like.

Speaking to CNBC's "Fast Money" this week, some of the deans of the finance world expressed varying views on the U.S. economy that ranged from calls for a 4 percent interest rate to anticipation of a 10 percent drop in the S&P 500.

However, when it came to politics, bulls and bears alike delivered a universal message: Donald Trump would be a disaster for stocks and trade.

read more:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/12/wall-...rap-trump.html
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:50 PM   #339
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Uninsured rate vs insurance costs is silly. They include illegals in the rate, etc. Nobody was dying in the streets and now Healthcare costs are skyrocketing only to keep doing so. A free market system would fix this and if taxpayers just paid to insure the 8% that Obama care forces costs net would drop dramatically. Stopping frivolous lawsuits and allowing insurance to cross state lines would drop the price of health care in half.

Wind and solar power is a crock. You'd have to cover the entire state of Nevada with a giant solar panel to meet the nation's energy needs. Cost is astronomical compared to fossil fuel.

Hay marriage should be left to the states. Obama, hillary, etc have all made statements against it. I really don't care either way.


And because if their inept leadership we will have to go back with troops to Iraq instead of just sitting with a small amount keeping the peace. Millions have died for their inept pull out. We also probably have to invade Iran now too. It's inevitable no matter who takes office.
Appreciate 1
      03-13-2016, 01:50 PM   #340
Frozen
Captain
Frozen's Avatar
United_States
388
Rep
712
Posts

Drives: Frozen Red e92 ZCP
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
That's cherry picking the best Stat to make him look better. Here's the reality. The detwo dropped under Clinton thanks to the Republican congress led by Gingrich and Kasich.
OK OK now I get it. If a democratic president does something poorly, then it's their fault and they suck. If they do something well, it was because of a republican congress. Once again, another reason why political discussions are insane.

If that's the case then why do we care at all who is the president? Let's just focus only on getting our guys into congress.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 01:57 PM   #341
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e90m305 View Post
OK OK now I get it. If a democratic president does something poorly, then it's their fault and they suck. If they do something well, it was because of a republican congress. Once again, another reason why political discussions are insane.

If that's the case then why do we care at all who is the president? Let's just focus only on getting our guys into congress.
The poorly of Obama was a democrat president and Congress. As I stated, this happened the first 2 years he was in office. At least you agree they screwed up. Clinton gets credit because he worked with the Republican congress. Reagan the same with the Democrat congress. It only screw up when both are democrats.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 02:04 PM   #342
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Clinton was good for the economy for a couple reasons. He was riding off the Reagan bush economy. The technology boom happened on his watch. Just timing not withstanding Al Gore inventing the Internet lol, and the republican Congress kept spending under control, even shutting down the government to force Clinton to balance the budget. He was bad in that he created the mortgage bundling that led to the mortgage crisis in 2008. He didn't do anything to actually make the economy grow. He just babysat Reagan's work.
Appreciate 1
      03-13-2016, 02:04 PM   #343
ASAP
Bavarian Motor Works
ASAP's Avatar
No_Country
2898
Rep
4,493
Posts

Drives: '20 M2C
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: USA

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e90m305 View Post
If you say Hillary is going to get me the same results as Obama, then Sign me up!!!

1) Starbucks jobs
2) Starbucks jobs
3) Perhaps... but highly arguable how much Obama has to do with that.
4) At the expense of others that were dropped, and as a result of premiums going up substantially.
5) Well hell... its been 8 years... what would we have still been doing there?
6) Really?
7) double really?
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 02:09 PM   #344
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Don't forget frackng jobs. Obama created this when he locked up federal lands to energy exploration, sending the price of oil through the roof, funding Russia and Arab states with oil money, hurting the economy, and making fracking viable.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 02:20 PM   #345
3.0L
Lieutenant Colonel
3.0L's Avatar
United_States
1299
Rep
1,987
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
Land owners? What are you talking about? The middle ages?
We were talking about the Grapes of Wrath. Right?

And still again, you remain greasy and avoid the topic, which is how big operations abuse their workers.

I wouldn't have much of a problem with low wages, except for the fact that the top executives continue to increase their compensation to never before seen obscene levels. The wage disparity these days is unbelievable.

If top executives were making say, 3 or 4 times their average employee, then fine. That's reasonable. 300+ times is not reasonable. How a CEO or other highly paid executive can sit there and say their compensation is reasonable while paying low wages escapes me. Of course, they, like you, will quickly blame the president. Great cop out.

I can even provide a real-life example of the abuse and excuse and justification crowd.

My brother had just completed his 14th year at HP when he and 31,999 of his co-workers were laid off. This was under Carly Fiorina's tenure. From there, my brother found a job with a major computer memory manufacturer. Less pay and not a perfect fit for him. That job lasted about one year.

Next, he hired on with a drone manufacturer that contracted with our military, training military personnel how to set up and fly the drone. Hard work with decent pay, but lousy working conditions.

About a year or so later, HP began hiring again, only this time the only way back in was through an independent hiring agency. My brother jumped at the chance to get his old job back... at less pay and no benefits, including no health insurance - not even a partial premium assistance from his employer.

So, he's now sitting in the exact same cubicle, doing the exact same job... for less. Much, much less.

Now, one could argue that this is a result of the economy. Or the president's fault. But I don't buy it. Not when the CEO and high executives continue to lavish themselves with obscene compensation, obscene severance packages, even if they under perform. Or the company under performs.

The shrinking middle class is a reality that cannot be denied.

Meanwhile, the rich get richer.

The deck is stacked against the rank-and-file worker and there is no end in sight. Big corporations and the ultra-wealthy heavily influence our so-called representatives, leaving the voter in the dust.

Welcome to the US of Oligarchy.
__________________
///M235i | Mineral Grey Metallic | Premium Package | Technology Package | Driver Assistance Package | Dakota Coral Red/Black Leather | Harman/Kardon Premium 360 watt sound system | 8-speed automatic

Want a Cookie?.
Appreciate 1
      03-13-2016, 02:38 PM   #346
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3.0L View Post
We were talking about the Grapes of Wrath. Right?

And still again, you remain greasy and avoid the topic, which is how big operations abuse their workers.

I wouldn't have much of a problem with low wages, except for the fact that the top executives continue to increase their compensation to never before seen obscene levels. The wage disparity these days is unbelievable.

If top executives were making say, 3 or 4 times their average employee, then fine. That's reasonable. 300+ times is not reasonable. How a CEO or other highly paid executive can sit there and say their compensation is reasonable while paying low wages escapes me. Of course, they, like you, will quickly blame the president. Great cop out.

I can even provide a real-life example of the abuse and excuse and justification crowd.

My brother had just completed his 14th year at HP when he and 31,999 of his co-workers were laid off. This was under Carly Fiorina's tenure. From there, my brother found a job with a major computer memory manufacturer. Less pay and not a perfect fit for him. That job lasted about one year.

Next, he hired on with a drone manufacturer that contracted with our military, training military personnel how to set up and fly the drone. Hard work with decent pay, but lousy working conditions.

About a year or so later, HP began hiring again, only this time the only way back in was through an independent hiring agency. My brother jumped at the chance to get his old job back... at less pay and no benefits, including no health insurance - not even a partial premium assistance from his employer.

So, he's now sitting in the exact same cubicle, doing the exact same job... for less. Much, much less.

Now, one could argue that this is a result of the economy. Or the president's fault. But I don't buy it. Not when the CEO and high executives continue to lavish themselves with obscene compensation, obscene severance packages, even if they under perform. Or the company under performs.

The shrinking middle class is a reality that cannot be denied.

Meanwhile, the rich get richer.

The deck is stacked against the rank-and-file worker and there is no end in sight. Big corporations and the ultra-wealthy heavily influence our so-called representatives, leaving the voter in the dust.

Welcome to the US of Oligarchy.
Companies don't abuse their workers. If anything unions abuse companies and everyone else. There's no forced labor. Companies are required by law to meet working standards. Wages are paid in accordance with the job market. If there's a surplus of workers, which there is due to obamas high unemployment and illegals, wages stay low. If there's high job grow the like under Reagan, companies pay a premium to attract quality labor.

Wage disparity isn't the issue. It's wealth disparity. The current Obama economy favors the rich. Only they can get credit to invest in their business, houses,etc so they profit.

Hp was a destroyed company. Carly brought it back by cutting the waste. This is necessary in a healthy economy. Your brother had 14 years of experience to get a different job if there were any. Hp or any other company doesn't owe any employee anything. Nobody deserves anything. This is called the real world.

The top execs making the 300times wages of their employees are typically the entrepreneurs who invented, founded, and risked to make their company. The tech guys are a perfect example. Liberal all. The Wall Street execs don't make this money.

Compensation is dictated by the marketplace. Not the corporations. If the economy creates jobs, it goes up as they need to pay a premium to attract people. It's not people stealing to get rich. Want wages to go up, look at government policy restricting job growth and corporate expansion.

So yes, your brother in law is making less thanks to Obama. His policies have stagnated the economy, expansion, job growth, so there are many more people competing for jobs, so companies can pay less. Want his and everyone's wages to grow? Remove the stupid Obama and liberal regulations killing the economy, let the economy grow, create more jobs, then he will have other employers trying to hire him for more wages, and hp will have to pay more to keep him. It's basic 101 economics.


I'm not being greasy and avoiding anything. I just didn't think I needed to explain how labor works.
1 companies must pay the least possible for whatever including their biggest expense, labor. This is so they can have their bosses, the shareholders of their stock who is anyone with a 401k, ira, etc, profit from loaning them money from investing in their company by buying their stock.
2 labor cost is dictated by the labor market. If there is a lot of people competing for the same job, they can pay less and get someone to do it. If there are a lot of jobs competing for the same laborer, they must pay more to attract the worker. Low jobs, low wages. High jobs, high wages.
3 obamas policies created in his first 2 years of office in conjunction with democrat congress through laws like Dodd-frank and obamacare have killed jobs and job growth.
4 as a result, the rich still get paid, and the rest get screwed.
5 the uber rich you keep referring to as Wall Street aren't Wall Street. Wall Street is investment banks and firms. These uber rich are CEOs of corporations they typically created. Facebook, Intel, apple, etc. they ate mostly liberal and democrats but they still deserve to get whatever they can because 1 nobody owes anybody anything and 2 they were the innovator and risk taker who created the company to begin with.
6 big companies started as small ones and grew. They create product, jobs, wealth h for all. Democrat policies have killed small business and favor large corporations. Want small guys to grow and create high paying jobs? Get the government out of the way. More are going out of business than being created for the first time in our history due to the Obama regulations on business

So if you want better job growth, wages, expanding middle class, etc. elect republicans not democrats.
__________________
'08 e93 AW 335i 6MT,Vargas Stg 2+ 20T clipped,VRSF catless dps & 7"FMIC,ER chargepipe&Tial, MMP inlets&outlets,Motiv Stg 2 fuel rail&dual disc clutch/fly, JB4G5,MHD w/Motiv tune,Fuel-it Stg 3 LPFP,Wavetrac LSD w/lockdown, KwV2,M3(Strut brace,frt control arms,steering wheel)AKE blk sub bush,re11 245/305,19x8.5et30&19x11et43,SmartTop,RE trans mounts,Msport rear bump & skirts,15%tint,ZSP knob,Stoptech rotors,241k miles

Last edited by Fundguy1; 03-13-2016 at 02:57 PM..
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 03:10 PM   #347
3.0L
Lieutenant Colonel
3.0L's Avatar
United_States
1299
Rep
1,987
Posts

Drives: M235i
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: California

iTrader: (0)

Since you are so eager to credit Obama for the shrinking middle class, don't you think it would be fair to include the entire picture, instead of simply cherry-picking the perceived bad points?

To be fair, let's include the fabulous and continuing and growing success of the CEO's and high management folks. Their wealth, pay and severance packages have never been better.

Meanwhile, keep drinking that red Kool-Aid.
__________________
///M235i | Mineral Grey Metallic | Premium Package | Technology Package | Driver Assistance Package | Dakota Coral Red/Black Leather | Harman/Kardon Premium 360 watt sound system | 8-speed automatic

Want a Cookie?.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 03:24 PM   #348
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Sure they have. This is skewed by the tech guys earnings though, apple, etc, and not the wall street ceo earnings. Please stop grouping in non wall street company earnings with wall street. It's two separate things. The left tries to make it one using the name wall street to signify corporate America. It's not the same.
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 03:34 PM   #349
bbbbmw
Major General
2379
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1
I order of people who are still running and how they would probably be for fixing the economy from best to worst
Kascich
Trump
Rubio
Cruz
Hillary
Bernie

The economy will explode, dow 30k, 40mm new jobs, household income up 20%, expandng middle class, poor shrinking by 30% under the first 4. It will languish under hillary, and suffer huge blows for everyone even worldwide under sanders.
Kasich wants to legalize illegal immigrants, and creates path to citizenship for them. That would be an economic disaster, and why I would never vote for the guy.
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 03:46 PM   #350
bbbbmw
Major General
2379
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3.0L
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
Land owners? What are you talking about? The middle ages?
We were talking about the Grapes of Wrath. Right?

And still again, you remain greasy and avoid the topic, which is how big operations abuse their workers.

I wouldn't have much of a problem with low wages, except for the fact that the top executives continue to increase their compensation to never before seen obscene levels. The wage disparity these days is unbelievable.

If top executives were making say, 3 or 4 times their average employee, then fine. That's reasonable. 300+ times is not reasonable. How a CEO or other highly paid executive can sit there and say their compensation is reasonable while paying low wages escapes me. Of course, they, like you, will quickly blame the president. Great cop out.

I can even provide a real-life example of the abuse and excuse and justification crowd.

My brother had just completed his 14th year at HP when he and 31,999 of his co-workers were laid off. This was under Carly Fiorina's tenure. From there, my brother found a job with a major computer memory manufacturer. Less pay and not a perfect fit for him. That job lasted about one year.

Next, he hired on with a drone manufacturer that contracted with our military, training military personnel how to set up and fly the drone. Hard work with decent pay, but lousy working conditions.

About a year or so later, HP began hiring again, only this time the only way back in was through an independent hiring agency. My brother jumped at the chance to get his old job back... at less pay and no benefits, including no health insurance - not even a partial premium assistance from his employer.

So, he's now sitting in the exact same cubicle, doing the exact same job... for less. Much, much less.

Now, one could argue that this is a result of the economy. Or the president's fault. But I don't buy it. Not when the CEO and high executives continue to lavish themselves with obscene compensation, obscene severance packages, even if they under perform. Or the company under performs.

The shrinking middle class is a reality that cannot be denied.

Meanwhile, the rich get richer.

The deck is stacked against the rank-and-file worker and there is no end in sight. Big corporations and the ultra-wealthy heavily influence our so-called representatives, leaving the voter in the dust.

Welcome to the US of Oligarchy.
Why do you care what payout people get at the top? If these people aren't worth what they are being paid, it still a private corporation, and they are welcome to do as they please. The Shareholders are the ones who are being held accountable, in that the value of their stock will tank if they hire and pay a screw-up.

Every employee is impacted by the decisions of management. If employees don't like it, they are free to leave. Unions have submarined any number of industries, including the auto industry. Where is the rage about overpaid, corrupt union bosses? They are far more damaging to a workforce than CEO's - look at the post office, for example.

If your brother was so abused by HP, why on earth did he "jump at the chance" to take his old job back? Why didn't he run away?
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 03:49 PM   #351
Fundguy1
Major General
Fundguy1's Avatar
1992
Rep
8,339
Posts

Drives: 335 e93
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Orlando, fl

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by bbbbmw View Post
Kasich wants to legalize illegal immigrants, and creates path to citizenship for them. That would be an economic disaster, and why I would never vote for the guy.
I agree. But I also know that they can't just kick them out ether. What they should do is like what Carson proposed. Set up a guest worker plan. Make them register, pay a fine, kick out any convicted felons, have them pay taxes, and let them stay and work if they meet the requirements. This way the criminals are gone, they pay their way so we don't keep paying billions in our tax money for them, and there's an incentive to go the legal route so they get all the rights of citizenship. Businesses legally get their cheaper labor but now need to pay more to cover the taxes making the jobs more desirable to citizens. It works for everyone. We only have this problem because the democrats want to swell the ranks of the Hispanic vote which has gone liberal so they can maintain their power at the cost of everyone else. They said they would fix this and could have done anything they wanted for the first 2 years of obamas tenure as evidenced by the debacle of obamacare but they didn't because they don't want to. The current setup favors them so they have done everything to undermine reform, weaken the border, and attract illegals they can while outright lying they want reform and a secure border.
__________________
'08 e93 AW 335i 6MT,Vargas Stg 2+ 20T clipped,VRSF catless dps & 7"FMIC,ER chargepipe&Tial, MMP inlets&outlets,Motiv Stg 2 fuel rail&dual disc clutch/fly, JB4G5,MHD w/Motiv tune,Fuel-it Stg 3 LPFP,Wavetrac LSD w/lockdown, KwV2,M3(Strut brace,frt control arms,steering wheel)AKE blk sub bush,re11 245/305,19x8.5et30&19x11et43,SmartTop,RE trans mounts,Msport rear bump & skirts,15%tint,ZSP knob,Stoptech rotors,241k miles
Appreciate 0
      03-13-2016, 03:57 PM   #352
bbbbmw
Major General
2379
Rep
6,083
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by e90m305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fundguy1 View Post
They got change. 59% unemployment among young black males. Worst economic recovery in the nation's history. First president to have lower average family incomes when leaving office than when he started. ISIS. On deck nuclear Iran. Shall I go on?
It seems to me that you don't remember where we came from to where we are now. Obama will be looked at very favorably by future historians.

[IMG]http://i67.tinypic.com/29g5eq.jpg[/IMG]
I think the picture of this chart cut off a few more stats:

1. 45% increase in the number of food stamp recipients since Obama took over,

2. Doubling of the national debt (not deficit) since Obama took over.

The "reduction in uninsured" is fake:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertla.../#4cbf887e5cb4

"Here's the bottom line. The Obamacare insurance exchanges aren?t enrolling anywhere near the number of people they were supposed to. And, there is no proof Obamacare has grown since the close of open enrollment. In fact the anecdotal and historical evidence would suggest it is now shrinking.

But we really don?t know because the Obama administration is just reporting the good news and a good share of the press appears to be happy to pass these numbers along?albeit in a technically correct but hardly complete way."

The number of illegal immigrants is off the charts, and every one of them is not insurance under Obamacare. Odd those numbers don't figure into any of Obama's stats?

And the employment numbers are also fake.

Obama was against gay marriage - wasn't that a Supreme Court decision?
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 AM.




bmw
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST