Comments on: Cause and Effect http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485 make it happen Tue, 07 Sep 2010 02:46:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2 By: darwin2500 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21142 darwin2500 Fri, 24 Apr 2009 22:12:26 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21142 1. Yeah I'm not trying to support unions I'm just trying to explain the observed phenomenon. 2. It depends on the quality of the union and what you mean by the economy. But it's a moot point because I don't believve those are the only options- the economy is probably helped best by well-run companies that can afford to supply good jobs and remain profitable, and the free market is all about making otehr companies that can't compete fold. 3. That's pretty much what I said, except I'd add that the government also hires people, and it pays it's executives a lot less. It also spends the money it takes on programs farmed out to private businesses. 1. Yeah I’m not trying to support unions I’m just trying to explain the observed phenomenon.

2. It depends on the quality of the union and what you mean by the economy. But it’s a moot point because I don’t believve those are the only options- the economy is probably helped best by well-run companies that can afford to supply good jobs and remain profitable, and the free market is all about making otehr companies that can’t compete fold.

3. That’s pretty much what I said, except I’d add that the government also hires people, and it pays it’s executives a lot less. It also spends the money it takes on programs farmed out to private businesses.

]]> By: Michael http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21132 Michael Fri, 24 Apr 2009 15:08:56 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21132 1. haha, so barring human nature, unions are great. Got it. 2. So which is better for the economy, 5 union jobs or 8 non-union jobs? Or, more aptly, 5 union jobs in an unprofitable company, or 5 non-union jobs in a profitable company? 3. Low taxes allow businesses to create more wealth and more jobs, and allow workers to keep more of that wealth for themselves instead of having it redistributed down the chain. Some companies in states with low taxes will be able to hire people who would need government help otherwise, turning would-be leeches into productive members of society. 1. haha, so barring human nature, unions are great. Got it.

2. So which is better for the economy, 5 union jobs or 8 non-union jobs? Or, more aptly, 5 union jobs in an unprofitable company, or 5 non-union jobs in a profitable company?

3. Low taxes allow businesses to create more wealth and more jobs, and allow workers to keep more of that wealth for themselves instead of having it redistributed down the chain. Some companies in states with low taxes will be able to hire people who would need government help otherwise, turning would-be leeches into productive members of society.

]]> By: darwin2500 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21107 darwin2500 Fri, 24 Apr 2009 00:53:11 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21107 1. Barring corruption and stupidity, unions are designed to prevent employee abuse and ensure good wages/benefits. 2. The issue isn't whether people will have good jobs or crappy jobs, the issue is which type of jobs companies will prefer to offer. I'm saying that companies which would have to provide good jobs to union members will move to union-free areas to offer crappier jobs. 3. 'Low' is a relative concept- the problem with zero taxes is we can't have a government, the problem with 50% taxes is we can't have an economy. The problem with lower taxes is the government can't do as much to help people, and the problem with higher taxes is it stifles industry. I don't know exactly what the correct percentage is, but I'm sure it's farily situational and very open to debate and interpretation. 1. Barring corruption and stupidity, unions are designed to prevent employee abuse and ensure good wages/benefits.
2. The issue isn’t whether people will have good jobs or crappy jobs, the issue is which type of jobs companies will prefer to offer. I’m saying that companies which would have to provide good jobs to union members will move to union-free areas to offer crappier jobs.
3. ‘Low’ is a relative concept- the problem with zero taxes is we can’t have a government, the problem with 50% taxes is we can’t have an economy. The problem with lower taxes is the government can’t do as much to help people, and the problem with higher taxes is it stifles industry. I don’t know exactly what the correct percentage is, but I’m sure it’s farily situational and very open to debate and interpretation.

]]> By: Michael http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21095 Michael Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:15:04 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21095 1. Who is abusing workers? 2. Would people rather have a crappy job or no job at all? 3. What's wrong with low taxes? 1. Who is abusing workers?

2. Would people rather have a crappy job or no job at all?

3. What’s wrong with low taxes?

]]> By: darwin2500 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21091 darwin2500 Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:11:48 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21091 Yeah, companies move jobs to places where they can abuse workers and not pay taxes. And pedophiles try to get jobs at daycare centers. That doesn't make it a good idea. Yeah, companies move jobs to places where they can abuse workers and not pay taxes. And pedophiles try to get jobs at daycare centers. That doesn’t make it a good idea.

]]> By: Michael http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21068 Michael Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:03:27 +0000 http://enableate.com/steve/2009/1485#comment-21068 So a freer market keeps more people employed while restrictive labor market and high income taxes hurt employment rates? Well I'll be damned. Who knew? So a freer market keeps more people employed while restrictive labor market and high income taxes hurt employment rates? Well I’ll be damned. Who knew?

]]>