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.