In article ,
says...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 11:40:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 10:19:26 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

Tell me where the unions invest their pension funds? Mattresses? Tin
cans buried in the back yard? Stuffed in boxes in basements?

there are no unions in the US.

Certainly there are, they cover teachers,

7% of american workers are covered by unions. there are no unions in
the US. as the 'economist' magazine pointed out last month, the US has
the most anti-union work environment of 30 industrialized countries


And that is a good thing.

Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

On Sun, 9 May 2010 13:46:11 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 11:40:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 10:19:26 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

Tell me where the unions invest their pension funds? Mattresses? Tin
cans buried in the back yard? Stuffed in boxes in basements?

there are no unions in the US.

Certainly there are, they cover teachers,

7% of american workers are covered by unions. there are no unions in
the US. as the 'economist' magazine pointed out last month, the US has
the most anti-union work environment of 30 industrialized countries


And that is a good thing.

Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

and how did wall street do in the last 3 years? number of jobs
created? none.

pay increases to the middle class? none

unemployment? 8,000,000 jobs lost

thanks wall street!

On 09/05/2010 12:40 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 9 May 2010 13:46:11 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 11:40:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 10:19:26 -0400, wrote:

Tell me where the unions invest their pension funds? Mattresses? Tin
cans buried in the back yard? Stuffed in boxes in basements?

there are no unions in the US.

Certainly there are, they cover teachers,

7% of american workers are covered by unions. there are no unions in
the US. as the 'economist' magazine pointed out last month, the US has
the most anti-union work environment of 30 industrialized countries


And that is a good thing.

Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

and how did wall street do in the last 3 years? number of jobs
created? none.

pay increases to the middle class? none

unemployment? 8,000,000 jobs lost

thanks wall street!


About 90,000,000 jobs. And think, the taxpayer didn't pay for any of them.

More like 20,000,000 but who is counting.

How many jobs did GM bailout create? Zero. They were long gone jobs.
Plenty a UAW/CAW out of work. Because people didn't need nor want their
over priced crap. So keep a GM, loose a Ford job...corruption.

Unions need a leash.

--
There is a sucker born every minute, liberals and our politicians are
counting on it.

On Sun, 09 May 2010 14:15:28 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 09/05/2010 12:40 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Sun, 9 May 2010 13:46:11 -0400, wrote:


Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

and how did wall street do in the last 3 years? number of jobs
created? none.

pay increases to the middle class? none

unemployment? 8,000,000 jobs lost

thanks wall street!


About 90,000,000 jobs. And think, the taxpayer didn't pay for any of them.

and unemployment would have been worse except for the bailout and the
TARP that you hate.


More like 20,000,000 but who is counting.

How many jobs did GM bailout create? Zero. They were long gone jobs.

how many jobs did wall street create in the last 10 years?

zero

how much of a wage increase did the middle class get in the last 10
years?

zero



Unions need a leash.

america has no unions

and it's wall street that needs a leash. you just refuse to see
reality

On Sun, 09 May 2010 17:32:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 17:05:44 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

About 90,000,000 jobs. And think, the taxpayer didn't pay for any of them.

and unemployment would have been worse except for the bailout and the
TARP that you hate.


I find it strange that you demonize the billionaires on Wall Street
and then support a bailout that only benefited them, leaving main
street largely unaffected.
You really drank the Kool Ade on that one.

i find it strange that you havent studied history and dont realize
that NOT bailing out the billionaires would have led to a 1929 style
collapse

ever hear of the great depression?

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:42:09 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 19:06:41 -0400, bpuharic wrote:


ever hear of the great depression?


Yes and it took a world war to break it.

uh, no. what it took was a MASSIVE GOVT SPENDING PROGRAM and MASSIVE
DEBT.

a war will do that. so will obama's deficit spending.

All of the FDR programs left
us still in a depression with no real light at the end of the tunnel.
Our problem then was unused industrial capacity.
The war filled that void.

gee. just like obama's deficit spending

Today we have shipped most of our industrial capacity to Mexico and
China. We have a crisis of not really doing anything here.

and wall street...uh, how did the TRILLIONS of dollars that wall
street paid itself in bonuses

uh...how did that benefit jobs since there have been NO net jobs
created in the last 10 years?

any comment from the deluded right wing?


Right now we are just printing money and hoping we won't ever have to
back it up because we still have not created any real employment for
most of the people who are out of work.

and the economy is improving. over the last quarter more jobs were
created than lost

i realize to the right wing this is a tragedy since they hate the
middel class...but those are the facts

Over 40% of our GDP is nothing but the shuffling of paper assets on
Wall Street (3 times what it was in the 60s and early 70s). We are not
creating any real wealth by hiring workers and making something we
sell, we are just printing money and passing it around to make it look
like we are prosperous.

gee. and that's EXACTLY what the rich have been doing. inventing
financial instruments, selling them back and forth and destroying jobs

but you right wingers think that's great.

When the real crash comes, it will be fast and it will be deep. Money
as we know it could be worthless. All it will really take is the
Chinese, Japanese and Europeans not renewing our bonds.

ROFLMAO!! ever hear of keynes' observation:

if you owe the bank $1000, you have a problem

if you owe the bank $1,000,000 the bank h as a problem

do you think that, with 2 TRILLION in US dollars, china's gonna tell
us to go get ****ed?

On Sun, 09 May 2010 23:59:39 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:58:01 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 22:42:09 -0400, wrote:

All of the FDR programs left
us still in a depression with no real light at the end of the tunnel.
Our problem then was unused industrial capacity.
The war filled that void.

gee. just like obama's deficit spending

Didn't you just tell us the market was crashing again?

for a day. shows the wonderful rationality of markets, doesn't it?


Today we have shipped most of our industrial capacity to Mexico and
China. We have a crisis of not really doing anything here.

and wall street...uh, how did the TRILLIONS of dollars that wall
street paid itself in bonuses

uh...how did that benefit jobs since there have been NO net jobs
created in the last 10 years?


I am confused. Are you arguing with yourself here? You seem to be
doing a better job than me so I will just sit back and watch you
fight.

as a right winger, i know what you're sitting back doing. i hope you
don't type with that hand

On 09/05/2010 11:46 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 11:40:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 10:19:26 -0400, wrote:

Tell me where the unions invest their pension funds? Mattresses? Tin
cans buried in the back yard? Stuffed in boxes in basements?

there are no unions in the US.

Certainly there are, they cover teachers,

7% of american workers are covered by unions. there are no unions in
the US. as the 'economist' magazine pointed out last month, the US has
the most anti-union work environment of 30 industrialized countries


And that is a good thing.

Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

No argument there.

--
There is a sucker born every minute, liberals and our politicians are
counting on it.

On 5/9/10 4:12 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 09/05/2010 11:46 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 11:40:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 10:19:26 -0400, wrote:

Tell me where the unions invest their pension funds? Mattresses? Tin
cans buried in the back yard? Stuffed in boxes in basements?

there are no unions in the US.

Certainly there are, they cover teachers,

7% of american workers are covered by unions. there are no unions in
the US. as the 'economist' magazine pointed out last month, the US has
the most anti-union work environment of 30 industrialized countries


And that is a good thing.

Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

No argument there.




All the so-called union corruption from 1950 to the present day does not
add up to a large percentage of corporate corruption since 1980.

--
The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name.

On 09/05/2010 2:16 PM, hk wrote:
On 5/9/10 4:12 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 09/05/2010 11:46 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 May 2010 11:40:05 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 May 2010 10:19:26 -0400, wrote:

Tell me where the unions invest their pension funds? Mattresses?
Tin
cans buried in the back yard? Stuffed in boxes in basements?

there are no unions in the US.

Certainly there are, they cover teachers,

7% of american workers are covered by unions. there are no unions in
the US. as the 'economist' magazine pointed out last month, the US has
the most anti-union work environment of 30 industrialized countries


And that is a good thing.

Since 1950 the unions have succeded in two areas, corruption and killing
jobs.

No argument there.




All the so-called union corruption from 1950 to the present day does not
add up to a large percentage of corporate corruption since 1980.


Agreed there. Corporate and governemnt corruption also had a part.

Ever notice how government revenue goes up and personal wealth goes down?

Hell, my gross is great it is the net after taxes that sucks.

--
There is a sucker born every minute, liberals and our politicians are
counting on it.