On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:54:18 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 4/19/12 11:46 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:18:46 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Being opposed to the way corporations have ruined this country does not
make me a fan of the Castro brothers. In their own way, they are the
corporationists of Cuba.

===

Who says the country has been ruined? That may happen yet because of
your free spending, money printing partners in the executive branch
but meanwhile free enterprise seems to be alive and well. Free
enterprise is what made this country great in the first place and it
will ultimately be free enterprise that bails us out of our current
slump.



snerk

"Free enterprise" as it has devolved since the Reaqan Administration has
no interest in rebuilding the middle class and without a middle class
this country has no future. How is "free enterprise" going to bail us
out, Wayne? By getting rid of the minimum wage, worker safety
regulations, environmental regulations, medicare? And then what? Serfdom
for all but the super rich? That sort of economy and country deserve to
go down the drain.

====

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.

On 4/19/12 1:48 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:54:18 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 4/19/12 11:46 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 11:18:46 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Being opposed to the way corporations have ruined this country does not
make me a fan of the Castro brothers. In their own way, they are the
corporationists of Cuba.

===

Who says the country has been ruined? That may happen yet because of
your free spending, money printing partners in the executive branch
but meanwhile free enterprise seems to be alive and well. Free
enterprise is what made this country great in the first place and it
will ultimately be free enterprise that bails us out of our current
slump.



snerk

"Free enterprise" as it has devolved since the Reaqan Administration has
no interest in rebuilding the middle class and without a middle class
this country has no future. How is "free enterprise" going to bail us
out, Wayne? By getting rid of the minimum wage, worker safety
regulations, environmental regulations, medicare? And then what? Serfdom
for all but the super rich? That sort of economy and country deserve to
go down the drain.

====

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.

On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

On 4/19/2012 4:32 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

No, he has it in for folks who never went to school, never got a skill,
making the same money as a trained and schooled engineer...

On 4/19/2012 4:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 4/19/2012 4:32 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth
having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

No, he has it in for folks who never went to school, never got a skill,
making the same money as a trained and schooled engineer...

More money in most cases. Nothing would please me more than to see
Krause's union retirement package go tits up.

On 4/19/12 4:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 4/19/2012 4:32 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth
having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

No, he has it in for folks who never went to school, never got a skill,
making the same money as a trained and schooled engineer...


Obviously, neither you nor Wayne have spent much time in manufacturing
plants where "products" are turned out. Yes, there are some really
low-skilled jobs, but most of the workers on the assembly line or in
factories have a lot more in the way of factory/assembly/manufacturing
skills than either you or Wayne.

Unlike either of you, I worked in manufacturing and assembly factories.
These were jobs I held during summer breaks while I was a college
student. I worked as a truck loader for Shick Razor and also drove a
forklift, was trained and worked as a welder at a boiler factory, and
worked loading trucks at a brewery. At the razor factory, there were
many very highly skilled workers running all sorts of machines. They
were paid a lot more than us warehouse grunts, but I was glad for the
work. Same at the boiler factory...my job mostly had to do with cleaning
out boilers returned to the factory for refurbishing, and there were
welders there far more skilled than I was, and they were paid more.

But even the lowest of workers who work hard in a factory are entitled
to earn a decent living wage and have benefits sufficient for decent life.

Wayne would deny them that so he can live a bit higher off the hog on
his dividends.

On 4/19/2012 5:10 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 4/19/2012 4:32 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle
class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth
having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

No, he has it in for folks who never went to school, never got a skill,
making the same money as a trained and schooled engineer...


Obviously, neither you nor Wayne have spent much time in manufacturing
plants where "products" are turned out. Yes, there are some really
low-skilled jobs, but most of the workers on the assembly line or in
factories have a lot more in the way of factory/assembly/manufacturing
skills than either you or Wayne.

Unlike either of you, I worked in manufacturing and assembly factories.
These were jobs I held during summer breaks while I was a college
student. I worked as a truck loader for Shick Razor and also drove a
forklift, was trained and worked as a welder at a boiler factory, and
worked loading trucks at a brewery. At the razor factory, there were
many very highly skilled workers running all sorts of machines. They
were paid a lot more than us warehouse grunts, but I was glad for the
work. Same at the boiler factory...my job mostly had to do with cleaning
out boilers returned to the factory for refurbishing, and there were
welders there far more skilled than I was, and they were paid more.

But even the lowest of workers who work hard in a factory are entitled
to earn a decent living wage and have benefits sufficient for decent life.

Wayne would deny them that so he can live a bit higher off the hog on
his dividends.




What's wrong with Wayne living a tad higher off the hog than a lug-nut
turner? I'm sure you expect to do a little better, don't you?

On Thursday, April 19, 2012 5:10:05 PM UTC-4, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:56 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 4/19/2012 4:32 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth
having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

No, he has it in for folks who never went to school, never got a skill,
making the same money as a trained and schooled engineer...


Obviously, neither you nor Wayne have spent much time in manufacturing
plants where "products" are turned out. Yes, there are some really
low-skilled jobs, but most of the workers on the assembly line or in
factories have a lot more in the way of factory/assembly/manufacturing
skills than either you or Wayne.

I have spent time there, and know something about it. For example, UAW assembly line workers perform low skilled, repetitious jobs that you could train a monkey to do. But have huge compensation packages that very few enjoy.. You really can't defend that.

Everybody wants the PS3 with a big screen, Suburban in the driveway, all the premium channels on cable with PPV football on the weekends, take the 3 kids to Vegas and Disney twice a year, and all on a C average high school education. The middle class union-driven greed took down middle class in American.

On 4/19/2012 4:32 PM, X ` Man wrote:
On 4/19/12 4:23 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 19 Apr 2012 13:50:37 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

Can we infer that you'd prefer an economy of unionized, make work,
government employees who make a living by taxing each other? Without
free enterprise you'd have no incentive for innovation or efficiency.
The former Soviet Union found that out the hard way.


No, Wayne, you cannot infer that, and I'm not advocating Sov-style
communism. I am in favor of steps that help rebuild the middle class in
this country, though. I see no point in a country that exists only to
enrich the rich.

====

When you talk about rebuilding the middle class, are you really
refering to the unionized working class? Frankly I'd like to think
that the days of $80/hour unskilled assembly line workers are over.



I am referring to the jobs that provide goodm family supporting wages to
working Americans, with either company or government paid health care,
retirement, vacation and similar benefits, because the concept of
buying those benefits on your own with today's wages and livings costs
is pretty much shot. In fact, in today's greed-driven,
corporate-dominated America, those sorts of jobs are pretty much shot.
And without those jobs, there really is no point to this country, is
there? A country that benefits only the rich isn't a country worth having.

You really have it in for working class Americans, don't you, Wayne?

He probably has a problem with union social workers making $150 K plus
benefits. Its the unions who got too greedy, that caused all the labor
problems. Corporations had to move their labor resources offshore to
protect their chances for survival. The unions played a huge part in
demise of American capitalism. Greed got the best of you Krauses,
evidenced by your lifestyle of excesses.