CPCFTW

So do we collectively need to protect people from making poor investments? From not saving for retirement? From not living a healthy life and being unable to afford health care? From not getting fired/laid off? From not being able to support oneself in case of losing a job? From not using a condom when having sex? Etc. We're way beyond what we must do collectively.

Solid source.

It accelerated in 2007. I'm not sure what power you're talking about, but that's probably a result of globalization and having to compete with foreign workers.

It's called austerity these days. You may have heard of it. What happened to retiring at 65? What happened to guaranteed raises and bankable sick days? What's going on in Greece and Europe right now? How are median incomes doing in the US? What effect will the fiscal cliff have on entitlement spending? Will the "safety net" be as strong? How about those Chinese worker rights.. Is that what kick started the Chinese economy or was it adopting free market principles with minimal worker rights?

Maybe in lefty la-la land.

You're getting it backwards again. First there was a recession/slowdown, then workers starting losing power. Why is everyone moving from a DB to DC or no pension plan? Because the global slowdown made DB plans unaffordable. Workers lose their power/confidence when people around them are getting fired/laid off and stuck on unemployment for years. Workers have the power to demand higher wages/benefits when employers are lining up to hire people and few people are unemployed. It's a really simple concept. I'm not arguing that workers don't have to fight to get better benefits, working conditions, etc. I'm arguing that they can only win those fights if there is growth/wealth creation. The fight for a share of that growth is not the cause of growth. Growth/wealth creation is the cause, more worker rights is the effect. Again you made my point for me: workers are losing much of that power after a big and prolonged recession.

Cause. Effect. You just made my point for me. Economic growth gave people the power to demand more rights/privileges. Yes people are now born into relative privilege. We're arguing about the people who are fighting for more rights/privileges in a shrinking economy, we're not talking about the early 1900s.

Sorry it's not. Debating is easy!

Most corporations (other than financial firms like you mentioned) also don't do much investing outside of M&A and buying short-term money market instruments.. Most corporations would rather invest in their own growth/operations, or pay dividends to investors. Investors wouldn't be too happy if a non-financial corporation they had invested in spent a lot of capital on making their investment decisions for them. I'm not really sure where Michael is going with this.. I guess he's feeling like Michael Moore instead of Michael Hardner tonight?

I don't know who wealth is. I guess Warren Buffet? Poor people can fight for rights all they want but when there isn't enough wealth to support their entitlements then they are fighting to get blood from a stone... it's a losing battle.

You're both confusing cause with effect. It is wealth that gave people the power to fight for greater rights, not the other way around.

Right because we should believe that a baker that was getting paid $14-$16/hr was contributing $3/hr to his pension (on top of insurance, taxes, etc.) The pension was an underfunded defined benefit plan and will be taken over by the pension benefit guaranty corp... The pension plan had $56M in assets and $111M in liabilities. That means the union demanded defined benefits which their contributions couldn't sustain. The money's still there, it just wont pay out as much as the union demanded now that the company is bankrupt. Google it and feel free to come back and apologize for using dailykos as a source.

An editorial from a Hostess baker? Sounds unbiased...

Yes, doing the hard work of working less hard...

Nope.. But for how long?

Oh my mistake.. He'll easily get over 30k in this economy as a receiving clerk

He better hope there is a large demand for bakers.

It ends when we have full employment and demand for employees exceeds supply. Unions just artificially inflate prices and unemployment these days.

Lol well alienware is also $2000 more expensive than a comparable laptop from Acer. That's not exactly the low pricing standard.

Because if they don't they wind up unemployed, which is a much worse burden. Not only on themselves, but they'll now be a burden to society. Unions love to cut off their nose to spite their face.

How is it uninformed? The unions cost 18,000 jobs. Whether or not the company was poorly run, they would have continued as a going concern had the unions made the concessions. That means those unionized employees would still have jobs rather than be unemployed is a slow economy collecting unemployment insurance.

See Hostess. Someone can link to an article for me, I'm on my phone. Striking unionized bakery workers just lost 18,000 jobs. Bang up job guys!

What he said is true and exactly how I characterized the results of the election. Romney attempted to appeal to all Americans with one message. Obama just told everyone that he'd give them what they want and make the richers pay for it.

The biggest mistake most FPTP haters make is to assume that anyone who didn't vote CPC disagrees with any legislation they enact. People dont vote on a single issue, they vote on a party representing a platform. I might vote CPC because I agree with their stance on lowering taxes, but I might not support any anti-abortion or gay marriage legislation. However, my support for lowering taxes outweighs my concern from the fear-mongering of those other issues. Similarly, someone might vote NDP because they bought into the fear-mongering about gay marriage and abortion, and they didn't want to vote liberal because of adscam. However, they may also feel strongly that taxes and entitlements should be reduced. A FPTP hater's claim/belief is that the above person believes in higher taxes and maintaining entitlements since they voted NDP. "The will of the people" is a good catch phrase, but efficient governance created through a democratic process is a better goal for an electoral system.

I'd definitely call for Sun News to be shut down if it was taking 1B/yr from taxpayers to espouse their right-leaning views. I'm not a partisan hack like CBC supporters.