What is a Neocon?

[cranky]

I doubt the far left would consider anyone remotely right of layton as a moderate. I am definitely an economic conservative in that I don't believe in government running deficits or piling up debt. I don't think people should borrow willy nilly either but it is their money ,not mine. All in favor of free enterprise but not rampant capitalism. As far as social policy goes I am liberal up to the point where it costs us all money. Don't care if gays marry or where they work. Skin color is irrelevant. You want to have a church, fine. Just don't try to force your religious ideas on me. Where I draw the line is when socialists decide they want taxpayers to finance a program that I have no need or desire for, especially when all it does is create jobs for bureaucrats to tell us what we can or cannot do.
Does that make me a moderate? YJ calls me a liberal like it is a dirty word whereas SJP accused me of being a Harper acolyte.

I think that is really up to you to decide. but here's something that I thinks has a ring of truth to it: conservatives have less of a problem with left wing ideaologies co-existing, than socialists have for the idea of right wing ideaologies co-existing.

 

[JLM]

I think that is really up to you to decide. but here's something that I thinks has a ring of truth to it: conservatives have less of a problem with left wing ideaologies co-existing, than socialists have for the idea of right wing ideaologies co-existing.

Yep, that point was made abundantly clear to me by Union honchos and "bretheren". Loyalty to the employer (who never did me any harm) was adamantly verboten. Now, having said that what I did NOT say is that Unions are all bad! :smile:

 

[cranky]

most aren't all bad, most are wishy washy, therefore they enjoy wishy washy support and produce wishy washy results.

can you imagine what they could acomplish if they had strong support from strong workers?

 

[JLM]

most aren't all bad, most are wishy washy, therefore they enjoy wishy washy support and produce wishy washy results.

can you imagine what they could acomplish if they had strong support from strong workers?

That could be a "Catch 22", strong workers, quite often, can fend for themselves! :smile:

 

[YukonJack]

That could be a "Catch 22", strong workers, quite often, can fend for themselves! :smile:

That is exactly the reason I never needed a union speak for me.

 

[cranky]

That could be a "Catch 22", strong workers, quite often, can fend for themselves! :smile:

it is possible, but do you agree that strong workers are sometimes strong at what they do everyday, that doesn't make them strong at dealing with things that they dont do everyday.

That is exactly the reason I never needed a union speak for me.

Really, if the union said ' go ahead mr. bossman, we don't need any pension' do you really think that the pension provided to salary workers would be safe and secure?

everything is relative

 

[YukonJack]

it is possible, but do you agree that strong workers are sometimes strong at what they do everyday, that doesn't make them strong at dealing with things that they dont do everyday.



Really, if the union said ' go ahead mr. bossman, we don't need any pension' do you really think that the pension provided to salary workers would be safe and secure?

everything is relative

Don't know about other companies, but at the one where I spent 37 mutually satisfactory years, it was.

 

[Cliffy]

And your left remember? Left or right, us and them... Hello! Your not the sole, pure source of objectivity that your trying to claim to be.

Your acknowledgment of a Creator is admirable, but how did the Creator intend us to be? For you to claim that its possible to become "a little less" that what it "made us", you must therefore know how we're "suppose to be".

Actually, I'm not on the political spectrum because I think it is smoke screen that is there to entertain us while those who really control everything go about doing whatever the hell they please. I can't take it seriously but I find the left/right debate amusing and people who think politics have some meaning rather funny. To me, politics is akin to the Monty Python skit, The Ministry of Silly Walks. Just because I'm against war and police states doesn't mean I'm left politically, it just means I have a conscience.

 

[JLM]

it is possible, but do you agree that strong workers are sometimes strong at what they do everyday, that doesn't make them strong at dealing with things that they dont do everyday.

Absolutely, we all have our strengths and weaknesses- like me I'm strong at 5 AM. but not so strong by 2 P.M. As for pensions, they are no feather in the Union's cap no one is "given" a pension it's just an option of getting our wages later instead of now.

 

[cranky]

Absolutely, we all have our strengths and weaknesses- like me I'm strong at 5 AM. but not so strong by 2 P.M. As for pensions, they are no feather in the Union's cap no one is "given" a pension it's just an option of getting our wages later instead of now.

I prefer to be modest about my superior manly man strength, so I won't comment on my strength.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that a pension isn't a credit to the union if you can make a case that supports that the company would have paid it to them anyways. I agree. I also agree that taking away the union would not necessarily mean that the company would knock everyone down to min wage. I think the reality is in between. I think that the difference between a unionized worker and his nonunionized worker could be considered a credit or discredit to the union. would you not? And, if we go back to the original point that I was referring to, I was basically suggesting that a manager's benefits can be typically set relative to what the workers get. ie if the workers strike for 8 months to win an increase of any sort, you can bet that the staff will get the same relative increase especially if the worker's increase placed them above the staff. Now does that mean the company finally had a change of heart and decided that all their employees deserved the increase? absolutely not, in many cases, they aren't conceding to that point with the workers, instead they are giving in to get their business back to work. Summary? the staff can and will benefit from the gains made by the union.

 

[TenPenny]

it's just an option of getting our wages later instead of now.

That would only be true if it were a defined contribution pension. A defined benefit pension, with indexing, is not getting your wages later, it's getting guaranteed wages later with everything topped up by the employer if need be.

 

[cranky]

That would only be true if it were a defined contribution pension. A defined benefit pension, with indexing, is not getting your wages later, it's getting guaranteed wages later with everything topped up by the employer if need be.

30 years ago, there was a secret passed around board rooms on how to offer your employees a pension plan, and make money doing it.

Now there are other secrets being passed around, like: how to renege on your pension plan responsibilities, and how to take away benefits and make money doing it.

 

[JLM]

I prefer to be modest about my superior manly man strength, so I won't comment on my strength.

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that a pension isn't a credit to the union if you can make a case that supports that the company would have paid it to them anyways. I agree. I also agree that taking away the union would not necessarily mean that the company would knock everyone down to min wage. I think the reality is in between. I think that the difference between a unionized worker and his nonunionized worker could be considered a credit or discredit to the union. would you not? And, if we go back to the original point that I was referring to, I was basically suggesting that a manager's benefits can be typically set relative to what the workers get. ie if the workers strike for 8 months to win an increase of any sort, you can bet that the staff will get the same relative increase especially if the worker's increase placed them above the staff. Now does that mean the company finally had a change of heart and decided that all their employees deserved the increase? absolutely not, in many cases, they aren't conceding to that point with the workers, instead they are giving in to get their business back to work. Summary? the staff can and will benefit from the gains made by the union.

I look at Unions as being a fourth level of government and overloaded with bureaucrats. I'm the first to admit that not ALL employers, managers etc. are a "jewel" to work for but if you are good at what you do you can always quit and find a better job. In today's competitive market, if a proprieter is not both smart and shrewd, he's not likely to survive. A smart manager recognizes the people who make money for the outfit and gladly pay them the extra dollar to get two in return.