DakotaT
11 years ago
We all owe our current labor laws to unions. What always bothered me about either auditing businesses or preparing their taxes is the complaining of the customer that would go along with the tax bill. And I would always comment that one way the business owner could escape paying so much tax is to compensate their employees better in either wages or benefits. And in almost every situation they felt they were overcompensating their employees already. And this is the fundamental flaw in thinking that brings about poor company moral and a total breakdown in the American workforce. People want security, and our current business model is not providing that anymore and this is plain and simply chalked up to that abomination called greed.
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago

We all owe our current labor laws to unions. What always bothered me about either auditing businesses or preparing their taxes is the complaining of the customer that would go along with the tax bill. And I would always comment that one way the business owner could escape paying so much tax is to compensate their employees better in either wages or benefits. And in almost every situation they felt they were overcompensating their employees already. And this is the fundamental flaw in thinking that brings about poor company moral and a total breakdown in the American workforce. People want security, and our current business model is not providing that anymore and this is plain and simply chalked up to that abomination called greed.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



It didn't even occur to you that maybe they WERE over-compensating their employees? It should also occur to you that the main aspect of the current business model that is unstable or insecure is employee cost. Part of that, of course, is the damn government with its OSHA and other intrusive regulation, but a large part of it is unions who go way beyond just negotiating for higher pay; They are more than willing to kill the whole process by failing to compromise to the point of bankrupting the business - like the Twinkie/Hostess example.

Yeah, I give unions a LOT of credit historically for forcing the labor laws and for basically creating the strong comfortable working class that sets this country apart from almost everywhere else in the world. But in the last half century or so, two things have happened: the unions have been co-opted by leftist politicians - even on the payroll of the big unions AND unions have gone beyond the bounds of reason to the point where companies simply can't afford to compete if they have union labor. I suppose that sword cuts both ways, and the companies using non-union workers are partly to blame, but it seems a lot more American to let choice and the law of supply and demand prevail rather than having laws forcing workers to be unionized - or do you disagree about that?


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Pack93z
11 years ago
The Unions at one point most definitely helped shape labor laws and had a proper place in the labor pool. But they also got lazy and focused on protecting all workers under the umbrella (IE the lazy); not to mention mismanagement of the union funds; lost most of their credibility and have become nothing but an albatross around the productive workers neck.

Like it or not, the surplus of potential employees has allowed the leverage to shift to the employers at the moment. And unless the dynamic swings back to the employee and cost based sense for the number cruncher's shows that the American work can compete in the labor costs, I don't see it returning to the employees favor anytime soon. Select trades still hold leverage.. but for the majority of factor laborers, there is zero leverage for the most part.

Several factors lead into this from my viewpoint:

- The general work ethic of the American worker has declined.
- The upper management is retaining a larger slice of the profits generated.
- Insurance costs have become unmanageable in terms of cost, and before it is all blamed on Obama, this trend dates back to right around the turn of the century, if not before.
- Importing products crafted with cheaper labor is too cost incentive at the moment, part of the "bad" of a free trade market. $$ rule.
- Economy struggles and the notion that every citizen "has" to own a house.
- Generally, we in America have to own more than we really need and many because they are in competition with thy neighbor.

I am sure we could list dozens more.. but you get the point.

I certainly cannot absolve the fat cats at the top... but they are not the only dynamic causing the problem.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago
Good Analysis, pack93. What gets lost in this whole discussion, it seems to me, is that workers - like everybody in this country - have it pretty damn good compared to the rest of the world, compared to historic levels of living standards, etc. A lot of complaint DOESN'T come from the workers themselves, but from the unions - who don't like it that in so many cases, the workers got that well off without unionization. Just look at Walmart hahahaha.

One thing you said that concerns me - maybe because I used to be in the real estate business. It is NOT a bad thing that virtually all workers strive to be homeowners. Historically, and nowadays more than ever, owning a home is cheaper for the same quality level than renting. It seemed to me you were implying that striving for ownership was not a good thing.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

- The general work ethic of the American worker has declined.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



I credit Unions for this, and also the decline (my opinion) in parenting properly.
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago

I credit Unions for this, and also the decline (my opinion) in parenting properly.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



The former I agree; The latter is kinda a stretch hahahaha.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Pack93z
11 years ago


One thing you said that concerns me - maybe because I used to be in the real estate business. It is NOT a bad thing that virtually all workers strive to be homeowners. Historically, and nowadays more than ever, owning a home is cheaper for the same quality level than renting. It seemed to me you were implying that striving for ownership was not a good thing.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



It is not a bad thing to "strive to" own one.. but many that do shouldn't do to their financial situation or that they buy "too much" house and cannot afford it.

That is my view upon it.. even I a financial conservative think I probably extended to far, even though my house is modest and the land was owned for years. But I am a mostly a tightwad in my aging days, lol.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

I credit Unions for this, and also the decline (my opinion) in parenting properly.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



when I worked in a factory (while in college) I saw the laziest people that I had ever met, to that point in my life. I worked in 3 different plants over the four years and saw the same mentality in different people. That was, "You can't fire me I am a union member and I will file a grievance and tie this up with the lawyers." That is not just the factory or blue collar workers, college professors, with tenor would express that same thing. Granted the professors would not sneak into the back warehouse and sleep during their shift like several blues did. They did not walk out the back door with merchandise or tools like many of my fellow workers did. They simply didn't not care to instruct the students to the best of their abilities. Many required the students to purchase books that they authored. (Some of them were the worst written and least instructive I have ever picked up.)


wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member Topic Starter
11 years ago

It is not a bad thing to "strive to" own one.. but many that do shouldn't do to their financial situation or that they buy "too much" house and cannot afford it.

That is my view upon it.. even I a financial conservative think I probably extended to far, even though my house is modest and the land was owned for years. But I am a mostly a tightwad in my aging days, lol.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



Back in the late 80's my younger brother and I were leaving Peoria after a meeting and heading back home. We drove past homes were Caterpillar employees lived. I asked my brother what was different about these houses than the ones in our town. He couldn't see any difference. I pointed out that almost every home had 3 or more cars. While some homes in our town did, most of them didn't. Over 75% of the homes had boats, 4 wheelers, snowmobiles or campers as well.

I don't mind it if they have all those toys. They were right along the river and it is more than common to have such things. But my point is that a greater number of people in the stretch between Peoria and Henry,IL which is about 25 miles long, have an over abundance of toys than in other areas of Illinois at that time. The common factor was the Cat plant. Cat was still King in those days and most everyone worked for them.

If they had saved up and paid cash more power to them. Being in insurance it was my experience that the majority of them did not. Banks were more than willing in those days to loan money.
texaspackerbacker
11 years ago
A lot of good points being made in this thread.

Yeah, when I was in real estate, I wish I had a commission for every buyer who failed to qualify because they wanted more house than the mortgage company said they had income for. And most who did get houses were at the upper limit.

Regarding toys, whether on credit or not, to me that is a sign of workers making good income. We would be wrong to begrudge them that just as it's wrong for Dakota to begrudge business owners healthy profits. Somebody else's good fortune has NO bad effect on one's own situation. That's my nice side talking hahahaha.

Now for my not so nice side: what I SHOULD have said regarding work ethic is that it is an oxymoron. Work is a damn four letter word, and there is nothing ethical about it. The relationship between employer and employee is ADVERSARIAL - the worker does the least and worst he can get away with for the most money he can squeeze out of the boss. Conversely, the boss works the employee's ass off for as little pay as he can get away with giving him. Of course, most people on both sides of that situation are too nice to stick the knife in to the hilt, but that's the nature of the relationship. It's the same with landlord/tenant, policy holder/insurance company, creditor/borrower, etc. Dakota talked about the "abomination of greed"; No - greed is the norm. A bunch of individuals acting in their own greedy self interest will result in maximization of the common good for everybody. That's the theory anyway hahahahaha.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Fan Shout
TheKanataThrilla (6h) : Hope to see everyone in the Chat tonight!!! Go Pack Go!!!
TheKanataThrilla (6h) : Jeanty would be a great pick-up for the Bears. I see Warren mocked to them as well who I think would be a great selection.
Zero2Cool (7h) : GameDay Chat is open. Posting bits an tids in there.
Zero2Cool (7h) : Excellent Source: The Bears have a deal in place to move up to 5 if Jeanty is there.
Zero2Cool (7h) : Probably not until 10pm will be making pick
dfosterf (9h) : But it is still not tonight. Lol
wpr (9h) : Today is finally here.
dfosterf (10h) : I should have put it in quotes
dfosterf (10h) : It is the title of a you tube video.
dfosterf (10h) : I'm not assuming anything
beast (16h) : If they aren't doing it, then why are you assuming they know how to do it?
dfosterf (22h) : Mackelvie
dfosterf (22h) : Michael Macelvie- NFL teams know how to draft- Why don"t they?
dfosterf (22h) : Youtube
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.
dfosterf (23-Apr) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha
wpr (23-Apr) : Tomorrow is almost here.
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : JW is done......stick a fork in him
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.
packerfanoutwest (23-Apr) : don't care
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?
packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat
wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.
wpr (22-Apr) : now 3
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?
beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?
Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast
wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!
dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am
wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days
beast (18-Apr) : 6 days
wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep
dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire
dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"
dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.
dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

9h / Packers Draft Threads / wpr

22-Apr / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

17-Apr / Random Babble / wpr

13-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

12-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Zero2Cool

11-Apr / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Rockmolder

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

1-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

31-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.