It most certainly does answer the question. Atlanta would absolutely love to pay Ground wages and without a union agreement in place they would do so.
LABOR
- Thread starter fred can shove it
- Start date
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Yeah, like UPS employees would accept that kind of deal with no consequences. It's people like you that are the downfall of the middle class and as long as your little scam goes your way, you're happy.
Sent using BrownCafe App
hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
I forgot my third point...
(C), it is estimated that the total corporate welfare is twice as much as social welfare. (92B verses 59B). So if being on the dole bothers you, you might want to go after the ones who take a much larger slice of the pie and at the same time need it less to insure their survival.
Do you pay any attention to what you say? Of course the UPS employees wouldn't accept that! They are the union! That was my point in the first place. UPS PAYS WHAT IT PAYS BECAUSE OF THEIR CONTRACT WITH THE IBT.
According to the Washington Post $75 Billion was spent on food stamps alone in 2012. The major welfare programs plus Medicaid added up to $668 Billion. With all the programs for the poor it totals about a trillion a year. The safety net is great for helping people in hard times. But not as a lifestyle choice. There's a huge amount of fraud also with some of these programs because there's a huge amount of money. Eliminate fraud and waste and be smart about how the money is spent.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Yep, all those black welfare queens driving Cadillacs and living in mansions....BS. The reason people are poor and getting poorer is all of the corporate welfare doled-out to your GOP CEOs. Maybe those Fortune 500 companies should pay their taxes.
Facts are facts amigo. I never said what you wrote but let's look at what you wrote. How are people poor and getting poorer due to corporate welfare? And will you please explain how schools aren't receiving funds due to corporations since they get their funding from property taxes? It's easy to attack the same suspects all the time but just how is it so other than you say it's so?
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Sure. Property value are still down from the Bush Depression. Lower values =lower tax revenues. Corporate tax loopholes and giveaways put a disproportionate burden on taxpayers and the race to the bottom for wages and benefits create more working and non-working poor.
Bush cut taxes so tell me how there was a disproportionate burden put on taxpayers? And the fact is the highest 20% in income pay most of the income taxes, the bottom 50% pay very little. Look it up. And as I pointed out spending on welfare, etc for the poor far outstrips corporate welfare and that was true during the Bush admin too. Here's the sad truth: global competition means fewer jobs in the U.S. and lower revenues. Get used to high unemployment because companies aren't going to create jobs just to be nice. It will probably take a big chunk of the Baby Boom generation to retire to put people to work. And very likely welfare will be greatly reduced because there will be jobs to be had. Isn't that what you want?
hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
He is right. People are getting poorer because of corporate welfare. When the corporations and the ultra wealthy get more and more tax cuts, that money has to be made up by higher taxes on the middle class in the form of higher fees and job losses to the government workforce. This has a ripple effect in that more people looking for work drives down wages. The poor face cuts in services and find it much harder to get assistance in the first place. We all suffer as our infrastructure crumbles without maintainance.
School districts dont get their revenue from property taxes alone. It varys from state to state but on average about 45% comes from local property taxes. The rest is from state taxes. Corporates taxes, sales taxes, other fees and lotteries. The federal gov contributes about 8%.
Corporations routinely ask for tax abatements from state governments, local governments and school districts. Usually with the threat that they will pull up stakes and move if they don't get them. Falsely claiming they can't operate without that tax break.
hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
That is absolutely correct but it does not tell the whole story.
Because more and more middle class and poor are without work, more and more have been forced to sign up to feed their families.
Also waste has been cut from the programs evidence by the fact the the cost per person has gone down over the past three years. This in spite of a steady increase in the cost of living over the same time frame. (GAO report).
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
Many more didn't.
Imaging you had a husband. Unfortunately his employer shuts down and he is out of work. He signs up for unemployment and is collecting $500 a week. He can take a full-time job flipping burgers for about $300.
$500 of free money or $300 for 40 hours of entry-level work, probably with a crappy schedule. I don't think you'll be urging him to pick up the spatula.
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
If you want to be prosperous and successful, go out and be prosperous and successful.
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
Good point. Corporate welfare is the lesser of 2 evils. Give a buck to a corporation and you're giving it to someone with a decent education who is responsible and will turn that buck into a buck-twenty. Give it to someone in the form of a Section 8 voucher and you're giving it to someone who may actually have graduated high school who doesn't understand what the big deal is about having kids out of wedlock that she can't raise.
What does that have to do with paying for union representation when the law says you can have it for free?
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
The four highest years for corporate tax revenues were 2005 through 2008, when corporations were getting all of these unfair tax cuts. Individual tax revenues were also at record highs from 2006 through 2008, when taxes were so low that we said they were "tax cuts on the backs of the poor."
Last edited:
hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
Unemployment isn't "free money". Its a tax paid for the employee by the employer and before you go there, almost all economist agreed that those are dollars that would have gone into the employee's paycheck.
So back to your hypothetical. Would I want my family that was used to his pre layoff check of 750 to live off 300, (assuming he could find a FT job flipping burgers. (Not very likely.) or would I want him collecting the unemployment benefits he earned while he looks for work that would support our family. Yea, I think the smart thing is for us to take unemployment.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Ooh, upper case lettering. Nice touch Scam. Of course everybody knows that. My original argument with Upstate was simply that drivers (regardless of whatever outlet they work for) are worth more than $15 an hour.What's so unreasonable about $20? You and him really don't care if everyone else is underpaid as long as you got yours eh? Oh well so it goes off the rails. No big deal. We move on.
hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
Give a buck to a corporation and the only thing they create is larger compensation packages for the executives and artificially high stock prices. Then he will turn around and ask for another buck. Give a buck to an unemployed mother and she will feed her child.
Back to the union dues. As my father would say, "just because you can, doesn't mean you should."
