Who do you support for Governor in Ohio in 2010?

phkksk wrote:

<quoted text>
You just don't see the point for the opposition of this. If you don't want to join a union, you shouldn't have to. However, the person who opts out of joining should have NO ties with the union and not receive the better wages, benefits, and legal representation the union provides. If RTW (For Less) was only about employment conditions and the right to choose, the bill would stop there. But it doesn't because the objective is not about employment. It's about union busting to lower wages and benefits across the board. When union workers' wages and benefit stagnate or fall, so do the non-union wages and benefits. Your example of the blustering, out of control teenager is exactly what RTW (For Less) does. It creates a "free rider" environment perfectly written to bankrupt unions.

South of Tracks wrote:

after reading all this stuff, i think i'll support myself.

The Old Cold Warrior wrote:

Considering the enemies that Kasich has had, everything that he has been doing has not been that bad, each and every speech making them hatefully demonstrate and screech.

xxxrayted wrote:

<quoted text>
Why would unions represent those who are not members of their union? If you don't pay membership dues, then to my knowledge, there is nothing forcing a union to represent you. It's simply the way it is in non-union places: the employer and the employee. Now if unions insist on representing you whether you pay dues or not, that's on them.
RTW states will always have an advantage over states that have no such law because you are correct, wages are lower. Taxation is also another factor. So if you are a company looking to expand, where are you going to locate?

Judged:

1

1

1

phkksk wrote:

<quoted text>
If I were a typical American Corporation, it would financially benefit the shareholders and owners of the corporation to move overseas to cheaper labor markets and where there are little or no environmental regulations. Honestly, I wouldn't even waste my time with a factory over here due to all the regulations.

But, I'm not a Corporation, I have a conscience and morals, so I would always put my country first.

Hairy Weed wrote:

One Problem with overseas manufacturing is the low quality of materials and poor workmanship due to lack of oversight of quality control. Lead paint, poor quality of castings, low standards of workmanship are helping to drive manufactuing back to the US. The savings of foreign made goods is lost when the parts of the products have to be replaced.
<quoted text>

xxxrayted wrote:

<quoted text>
CEO's don't have that option. They are required by law to make the best profit they can for their company. Keeps down corruption I guess.
You might be surprised to learn this, but many companies have no choice but to move after a while. One of their American competitors moves over seas, then another one, and before you know it, you find your company is losing customers to your competitors who moved overseas, and then you have no choice but to do the same.
These companies did put their country first, but their country let them down. Consumers jump at anything cheap in this country, and manufacturers have no choice but to provide. In many of these cases, it's either move out or close up shop.

phkksk wrote:

<quoted text>
If I were a typical American Corporation, it would financially benefit the shareholders and owners of the corporation to move overseas to cheaper labor markets and where there are little or no environmental regulations. Honestly, I wouldn't even waste my time with a factory over here due to all the regulations.
But, I'm not a Corporation, I have a conscience and morals, so I would always put my country first.

queteam1911 wrote:

You are forgetting about the tax breaks the companies recieve after moving their companies overseas. How can you blame a consumer for not wanting to pay more for an equal product? The government could enforce the tariffs that are already in place. But, because China funded the Iraq war our government allows them to do whatever they want as far as trade that's why nothing happened with the lead paint on the toys.

phkksk wrote:

<quoted text>
This is why I buy American products. CEOs and Corporations would have no choice but to return factories here, even though less profitable if we all stuck by our country and bought American made products. That is the only way to keep jobs here unless we want to work for pennies on the dollar to work cheaper than the Chinese. I agree, people want everything cheap. Nobody seems to care about quality these days such as "Harry Weed" said. Most people CAN afford to buy American made products, but it requires you to spend less and purchase less of the stuff that you "want" just so you can have a bunch of "stuff" for whatever reason. That's just wasting money.

phkksk wrote:

<quoted text>
This is why I buy American products. CEOs and Corporations would have no choice but to return factories here, even though less profitable if we all stuck by our country and bought American made products. That is the only way to keep jobs here unless we want to work for pennies on the dollar to work cheaper than the Chinese. I agree, people want everything cheap. Nobody seems to care about quality these days such as "Harry Weed" said. Most people CAN afford to buy American made products, but it requires you to spend less and purchase less of the stuff that you "want" just so you can have a bunch of "stuff" for whatever reason. That's just wasting money.

Judged:

1

1

1

queteam1911 wrote:

You are forgetting about the tax breaks the companies recieve after moving their companies overseas. How can you blame a consumer for not wanting to pay more for an equal product? The government could enforce the tariffs that are already in place. But, because China funded the Iraq war our government allows them to do whatever they want as far as trade that's why nothing happened with the lead paint on the toys.

xxxrayted wrote:

<quoted text>
First off, there are no tax breaks for companies who moved overseas. That's a myth. Secondly, tariffs were tried during the Bush administration on steel. The end result was other countries doing the same with our exported products. Believe it or not, we heavily depend on our exports to keep our economy going. We tax imports from other countries, and they tax ours coming in. It's a wash and a failure.
Nearly all the spending by the DumBama administration was borrowed money from China, so don't believe for one minute Bush is the main culprit.
70% of our national budget is for social programs. Our military pales in comparison. So the first thing we must address is how to get out of these social obligations. What we really need is to make Americans more responsible for themselves, and less dependent on government. What do I mean by that? Let me give you some statistics:
Nearly half of the people in this country pay no income tax. Payroll tax, property tax, SS and Medicare, yes. But not income tax.
The top ten percent of wage earners in this country fund 71% of the federal taxes collected.
One out of ever seven Americans lives on food stamps.
20% of our population is totally dependent on government. By totally dependent, I mean income, medical care, housing, food, utilities, everything.
Half of our population depends on a government check of some kind.
When you have more people pulling the cart than those in it, it moves along. When you have more people in the cart than those pulling it, the cart slows down or stops completely. That's where we are at today.

xxxrayted wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't know if you've noticed, but KFC's are closing down all over. Why? Because Americans would rather have a Big Mac combo for $5.25 than pay $8.00 for a great chicken meal. Americans are so cheap, they have even lowered their standards on dining.
When the three KFC's in my area closed down nearly at once, I became suspicious. So I dug around the internet, and what I found is that KFC moved their operations to China. In China, KFC is the hottest thing going on, and they don't sell much chicken either. I don't know what they are selling, but whatever it is, it inspired the company to close down most of it's outlets in the US, and open up new ones in China.
I'm 50 years old, and I can remember what a real Big Mac tasted like. Same with a Whopper or Big Boy's. Today, they taste nothing like they did when these great fast-food sandwiches came out. Understanding the consumer movement, they cheapened their products to lower the cost.
So it's not corporations, business or politics. It's us--the American consumer causing most of the problems. That's why Wal-Mart is the number one store in America today.

phkksk wrote:

<quoted text>
This is why I buy American products. CEOs and Corporations would have no choice but to return factories here, even though less profitable if we all stuck by our country and bought American made products. That is the only way to keep jobs here unless we want to work for pennies on the dollar to work cheaper than the Chinese. I agree, people want everything cheap. Nobody seems to care about quality these days such as "Harry Weed" said. Most people CAN afford to buy American made products, but it requires you to spend less and purchase less of the stuff that you "want" just so you can have a bunch of "stuff" for whatever reason. That's just wasting money.

xxxrayted wrote:

<quoted text>
Why would unions represent those who are not members of their union? If you don't pay membership dues, then to my knowledge, there is nothing forcing a union to represent you. It's simply the way it is in non-union places: the employer and the employee. Now if unions insist on representing you whether you pay dues or not, that's on them.
RTW states will always have an advantage over states that have no such law because you are correct, wages are lower. Taxation is also another factor. So if you are a company looking to expand, where are you going to locate?