Popular Posts
-
GUESS WHICH ONE....... Even if you aren't a sports fan this is very interesting! 36 have been accused of spousal abuse 7 have been arr...
-
You ever use a word in conversation and wonder what it means, according to the dictionary, or its origins? I do. One such word is the witty....
-
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 08 Jul 2010 at 02:49:39 PM GMT is: Single Day Debt Increase more than deficit in 2007 - Obama officia...
-
Several of you have complained in a very nice way that I bombarded you inbox with updates...some of you were resentful, others wonder why th...
-
Why do some people have such envy for those who earn more than they do? A little background… I think I peaked out salary wise two ...
-
http://www.realbeer.com Good resource for finding locally made beer and ales wherever in USA you are
-
Does anyone remember July 7? I am sitting here wondering what went on this week that I forgot, something significant. Not my dog’s birthda...
-
I saw this concert- good greif, youtube is everywhere!
-
Soooo, I'm home on a Friday night. I am officially a loser. Honey and I would like to go out, but Friday(in fact Friday thru Sunday) e...
-
“ I will say that if you are impressed by the "touch features" in the iPhone , you'll be blown away by what's coming ...
That was in a different era. You did not have heads of corporations making tens, or twenties, or thirties, million dollar a year salary while the working class had to endure minimum wage. I know you are of the mindset that giving huge tax cuts to the wealthy creates jobs, yet when Bush did, no jobs were created, or at least not in the US. The wealthy just took the money and laughed all the way to the bank. Now Obama-man wants to cut taxes on corporations. The corporations will just laugh all the way to the bank and continue to take jobs out of the US. The way to keep from losing jobs in the US is to find a way to punished corporations for taking jobs outside of the US, not reward them. Companies move out of the US because they don't have to deal with any of the labour laws; they have slave labour in Asia. I don't see why the US law for minimum wage would not apply to the corporation, and not the worker. In other words, the law should apply that the corporation has to pay their workers US minimum wage regardless as to where that worker resides. You have to punish them for taking jobs overseas, you have to make it where the benefits to having slave labourer working 18 hour shifts doesn't pay.
ReplyDeleteThe 21st Century is beginning to look just like a Charles Dickens image of exploitation. Obummer didn't make any news the other night. Just more lies and generalities.
ReplyDeleteI understand what you are saying...My thoughts are that the US has not tried to impose minimum wage on corporations globally is because it would be unenforcible. IBM simply sold their entire PC/laptop operations to the Chinese, Lenovo.Undoubtably there would also be complaints filed under international treaties, not to mention the idea of each nation imposes its laws on corporations operating within their borders, and would be reluctant to also follow laws imposed by another nation. The only way to achieve what you are saying is a international labor treaty.
ReplyDeleteThe larger point I was making in posting the speech was that a Democrat was actually trying to help the working person by reducing their personal income taxes from a high of 90% to something more rational. Today both parties seem to have lost sight of the fact that its only a broad middle class that makes this country great, not transfer of wealth from the middle class leading to an elimination of middle class.