Dear Republicans.

Originally posted by Wolf321

Public unions. Federal minimum wage. Federal public education. None of that was included in the Constitution or in our founding. It was never the role of the Federal government to be invovled in these arenas.

Please prove otherwise.

So you think that poor people arent entitled to a decent education and fair pay? because without public education/minimum wage and unions the only people who will suffer are the poor/middle class. then again im sure you would find no problem with people like the Koch brothers being the ones funding the schools and choosing what is taught to our children

reply to post by Wolf321


Public unions are pretty much a misnomer. While taxes should not be used to fund union activities, government employees have the right to unionize.

Education: I agree. The Federal government does not have the constitutional powers, even though Jefferson tried to mandate it. But it is within the powers of the States to do so.

As far as minimum wage: Take a look at this.

Nearly 70 years ago, the United States Supreme Court unanimously rejected this same Tenth Amendment argument and upheld the constitutionality of the federal minimum wage. In United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100 (1940), the Supreme Court found that, although the Constitution does not expressly give Congress authority to mandate a federal minimum wage, the Tenth Amendment does not deprive Congress of “authority to resort to all means for the exercise of a granted power which are appropriate and plainly adapted to the permitted end.” Id. at 124. The Court found that based on Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce, Congress could enact reasonable legislation in furtherance of its policy of excluding from interstate commerce any goods produced under substandard labor conditions. Thus, the Court held that the federal minimum wage is not unconstitutional.

Source

ETA: It is these sorts of policies that separate us from the likes of China or other nations that use child/uneducated labor.

reply to post by Wolf321


I get so tired if the education system is not in the constitution argument.

Please tell me, what is supposed to fund education in the first place?

Please do not tell me there was education before the fed, because hat was a different time with a different population. Also look at he education levels back then.

So you expect the corporations to pay for education?

What about the poor, who cannot even pay the bills to survive in a modern world?

Please tell me who pays for the educatumion, which regulates the education, and lastly who says ho must get an education to begin with.

I love this country, I believe that we have steered away from freedoms, but I also believe that as a nation we need to evolve with he times.

The population is no longer a couple of million.

reply to post by Wolf321


You would do well to read some Adams and Jefferson when it comes to public education;

Laws for the liberal education of youth, especially of the lower class of people, are so extremely wise and useful, that, to a human and generous mind, no expense for this purpose would be thought extravagant.

-John Adams, Thoughts on Government

An amendment to our constitution must here come in the aid of public education. The influence over government must be shared among all people.

-Thomas Jefferson, 1806 State of the Union address

Originally posted by MastaShake
So you think that poor people arent entitled to a decent education and fair pay? because without public education/minimum wage and unions the only people who will suffer are the poor/middle class.

I think everyone should get an education. I also know that is not the role of the Federal government. If a state wants to have public schools, that is great.

Minimum wage is a joke. Setting a minimum only allows producers to raise the price of their products and services accordingly. It's an artificial inflation.

Unions, in their infancy served a purpose, and that was safety. They have gone way beyond that now. People have the power to work together in dealing with their employers without being strong-armed into paying dues and creating pseudo-mafias for harassing people. Unsustainable benefits forced on businesses by unions in non-right-to-work states inflate prices on products and are to blame for such things as the need for the auto-bailouts. Public unions should not exist period.

If people would recognize their own power as individuals, prices would be lower, wages would be fair, there would be more jobs and we would have less groups/individuals to take money and harrass people.

reply to post by Wolf321

Minimum wage is a joke. Setting a minimum only allows producers to raise the price of their products and services accordingly. It's an artificial inflation.

You fail to recognize the value in that it provides the worker with 1 (one) specific right, outside of union representation, that will guarantee a business cannot take complete advantage of the worker.

Unions, in their infancy served a purpose, and that was safety. They have gone way beyond that now. People have the power to work together in dealing with their employers without being strong-armed into paying dues and creating pseudo-mafias for harassing people. Unsustainable benefits forced on businesses by unions in non-right-to-work states inflate prices on products and are to blame for such things as the need for the auto-bailouts. Public unions should not exist period.

I actually agree. Unions can get carried-away with their demands and that has to be put in check as well. Too much of anything is a bad thing.

If people would recognize their own power as individuals, prices would be lower, wages would be fair, there would be more jobs and we would have less groups/individuals to take money and harrass people.

Not so.

Even though most business owners operate under some sort of moral guideline, others don't give a damn and will take advantage of hard economic times to justify an unfair wage upon it's people.

That's why unions exist and even though it may get out of control, their value still exists and will always remain so in a civilized society.

reply to post by Wolf321


What you believe is a fantasy world.

Unions while they have their downside protect workers rights and a right to fair pay.

Corporations are making record profits. They are doing this despite of minimum wages. We as workers would not have to fight for a fair wage if companies would pay fair wages.

Without the worker protection laws companies would pay less and still charge more. It is driven by wall street and the cronies want higher profits and less overhead.

What you speak of sounded good decades ago. Now corruption has taken control. You just want to hand over the keys to total control.

As far as people fighting for their own wages and such. Why are immigrants commingle here in the first place?BEcausr they will settle for something instead of nothing. Without workers rights hat is what you would have, a bunch of people settling for scraps bacause that is all there.

Corporations do not give a damn about the workforce never has. I do not get where you think they would "play fair". After all that is why we have labor laws and union, it didn't work out so well before.

You need to seriously take a step back and think about what you speak of because it sounds more like a Hollywood movie than real life.

People are unable to fight for fairness if here is always someone ready to do the work for less than fair.

Originally posted by liejunkie01
Unions while they have their downside protect workers rights and a right to fair pay.

Corporations are making record profits. They are doing this despite of minimum wages. We as workers would not have to fight for a fair wage if companies would pay fair wages.
...
People are unable to fight for fairness if here is always someone ready to do the work for less than fair.

Define fair? By every sense of the word, if both parties agree to it, it is fair. The minimum amount someone is willing to work for is the fair amount.

Consumers and the workforce have ALL the power. If the workers wont work for a certain wage or benefits, then the employer cannot produce anything and has no business. You and others here seem to agree that someone will come in and work for what you would consider an unfair wage.

Let's assume that everyone here was willing to negotiate their pay to a point they agree to work. If this were the case in the entire economy, prices would be super low, and the low wages would not be an issue at all. If a worker made $10k a year but his cost of living for home, food, tansportation etc was $7-8k, then the fact that his wages bring in $10k are irrelavant. In fact, this employee has a pretty comfortable life.

Consumers then have the power to accept a companies practices are not. 40+ years ago, this was significant. People had ethics and morals and would stand up for principles. This isn't the case now, as our society has become more concerned with satisfying desire over princples. A consumer who knows a company tries to screw over employees can not buy the product/services of such a company.

What you speak of sounded good decades ago. Now corruption has taken control. You just want to hand over the keys to total control.

You think coruption is a new thing? There was far more corruption decades ago than there is now. However, athough there is less corruption, what has survived is far more sophisticated and skilled at being corrupt.

The only rights an employee should have is a right to work and safely. Pay and benefits should be a personal negotiation between the employee and employer.

Originally posted by liejunkie01
Please tell me, what is supposed to fund education in the first place?
...
So you expect the corporations to pay for education?

The States should run their own public education programs, paid for by taxes and donations.

There is no reason or need for the federal government to run the program. If anything, the federal government should just be tasked with collecting information on the state programs for comparison so everyone can discover and learn of the best ways to provide the best education and help kids succeed.

I find it the height of arrogance that with a win (2% margin) the left feels that it now has a mandate to pontificate to the rest of the country.

Enjoy the win, gloat if you must, but now YOU own the economic mess. YOU own the foreign policy mess. YOUR domestic policies will be exposed.

Can't blame the GOP or Bush for any of this now.

I personally believe that this Obama win will usher in a 3rd party candidate in 2016.

So keep yapping dems.

You're only helping us.

reply to post by MastaShake


Lost all credibility with 'in line with republican beliefs.' HAHAHAHA.

No. Just because Obama says "Reagan would have supported this" does not mean that Republicans are there by required to get in line behind Obama.

Compromise comes when you earnestly prepare your own ideas, not when you come with a list of what your opponent should ideally believe.

The class of 2010 was elected to stop another Obamacare/Stimulus. They did their job and held the majority this Tuesday.

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by sheepslayer247

 

Public unions.

A "public union" is an organisation of private citizens who work for a government entitiy.

Congress shall make no law respecting [...] the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

reply to post by 200Plus


I'm not saying that the Democrats are completely infallible. Democrats have just as many flaws to them as the GOP does, but that's not the point of this thread and it's not the point I was trying to make.

Conservatives have lost a lot of key demographics across the board. They have lost this through idiocy and thinking that the agreement that people have with fiscal conservatism translates into an agreement with social conservatism.

Conservatives have to understand that the two ideologies aren't going to work together for everyone. Again, while I agree that the majority of Americans are fiscally conservative, (that is, that they want smaller more efficient government) they aren't socially conservative (that is, they want strict limitations on liberty for lifestyles other than their own narrow interpretation).

What lost this election wasn't because of Romney's 47% (or whatever) who want free stuff from the government. What lost them the election was the over the top socially conservative ideology.

reply to post by HauntWok


I wasn't trying to derail, nor was I trying to be argumentative. Sorry if I came off that way.

I get what you are saying and I do agree with that 100%

Originally posted by liejunkie01
reply to post by solidguy

 

That's right, keep blaming the unions.

Everybody should go to college for years and get paid minimum wage.

What is up with everybody against the working man/woman?

The education national system is seriously lacking in funding. Infrastructure is falling apart and kids are learning like it was the1800's, out of outdated books.

Grow up and quit blaming the employees trying to make a living.

The problem is obviously a lack of overall money, to completely give all of the children an education.

I have to supply cleaning supplies every year. Is that the teachers fault

The reason the education system is seriously lacking funding is because of the retirement and pension plans!

There's a serious problem when a school principal is allowed to retire at the age of 55 and get full pay for the rest of their lives, as seen in the town where I came from.

Trolling Dems... I'll tell ya what were going to get. What the US voted for. Gridlock. Four more years of the same last two years. Someones fiddling right now in the White House.

reply to post by MastaShake


S&F If they can't even accomplish their number one priority after 4 years of doing everything they can to make him look bad (to the point of not hiring employees!) and throwing billions in a hate campaign - what good are they? This is a team of people whose only skill I can determine is blowing things up. Hence the death grip on the second amendment while I'll bet none of them ever read the 4th Amendment because they sure don't recognize when it is in danger, perverted or stripped away altogether. Won't even fight for it... Even armed with the guns they let the Constitution be shredded by industrialists so they can sell us machines "to protect from terror" And they do all this while carrying signs that say "Don't Tread on Me."

That's a joke. I always want to ask them..."You mean, use a steamroller don't you?"

Originally posted by Variable
Trolling Dems... I'll tell ya what were going to get. What the US voted for. Gridlock. Four more years of the same last two years. Someones fiddling right now in the White House.

Yeah...aren't you one of the guys who told us Romney was going to win this thing in a landslide?

Can I borrow that crystal ball?

I need a paperweight.

Originally posted by snusfanatic
reply to post by MastaShake

 

Lost all credibility with 'in line with republican beliefs.' HAHAHAHA.

No. Just because Obama says "Reagan would have supported this" does not mean that Republicans are there by required to get in line behind Obama.

Compromise comes when you earnestly prepare your own ideas, not when you come with a list of what your opponent should ideally believe.

The class of 2010 was elected to stop another Obamacare/Stimulus. They did their job and held the majority this Tuesday.

They lost. Obamacare is the law of the land. And the stimulus is coming. When it works will you give any credit? Or will you call it a bailout for the middle class?

Boehner, Cantor and the right are still clinging to the false idealogy that tax breaks for the wealthy help the economy. Regardless of the fact that this has been proven false, they cling to it because their only concern is the 1%. This is just a fact.

IF the House really wanted to represent the American people, they would concede on this issue considering 2/3 of the American people want this. Obama ran the idea on letting the Bush cuts expire for top earners and extending the middle class cuts and he won.

Boehner and Cantor do not represent the American people and no one is talking about it.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com