• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Corporate Profits hit a new record high!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
This isn't about profits, it is all about union busting.
Remove the union, and workers wages fall sharply as well as benefits.
Along with decent work environments.
So naturally, that alone means more cashola for the corporation and less for the employee.
Math doesn't get much more simpler as this.
Unions don't punish corporations, they simply protect and give workers a fair and decent cut of the rewards they themselves have created for that corporation.

A business can't serve up a tasty burger without someone flipping the meat over a burner.
And not one CEO sitting behind a desk can produce a tasty burger without some person cooking the meat.

But the day will come when the playing field is once again leveled.... You can count on that.

ITT: A retard whom thinks working 12+ hours mining coal in 110+ degree weather is equivalent to a dumb bitch teacher banking on $76k average salary working in the cool crisp air conditioner all day. I love this shit. The men whom actually came up with the original concept of what a union was made for are rolling over in their grave in utter disgrace.

LULZ, the narrow mindedness of a liberal that thinks Unions have anything to do with helping out workers as far as general health and abuse go. Because working at a cash register is very intense labor. And with all those AMAZING skills, you should be paid more. It's not like you could find 5 people on the street and ask them "Can you work a cash register at a retail store?" I'm pretty sure 5/5 wouldn't have a problem answering "Yes" 😉

tl;dr: Unions: Get paid to do as least work as possible with false job security. It's the American Way Baby!! :awe:
 
Let me put it another way.

Fags, that want to forcibly take money from other people.

-John

Dude, are you allowed to say that? I know they let us namecall in here but that is like calling someone the N word these days...even Eminem can't do it.
 
Profits hire well ya . Its doesn't matter there are fewer jobs and illegals are still fllowing in at millions a year. So we have to put that number of people on welfare . As there are NO magic Job oppertunities that help the debt crisis. Gooberment jobs only add to the problem . as the pay that job offers comes from taxes adding to to crisis problems . The gooberment as an employer is the worse idea of all time. Because it will always out grow revenue. DEBT DEBT DEBT . NO chance of escaping debt = bankrupt .. All of us here would be out on the streer if we operated like the gooberment . That is unacceptable and can't be maintained. IF it can be maintained than there is no need for taxes to pay debt as it will never be paid . Hell they won't even give back to SS the 7 trillion they stole. Freaken welfare people stole working peoples SS. There is a war coming and if the cliff happens . Which I hope it does . It will align the middle with the wealthy against the poor . I was afraid it might go the other way . But it won't . It will be the poor who willl be destroyed first . Than the middle until the poplulation reaches a sustainable number. Thats what happens in a godless world . In god world the rich all perish along with billions of others . But not 1 rich person shall remain. I like my god world end results better than the godless world end result.
 

Everyone can mention BS about top execs getting more money.


How about things such as this:
-The top 4 execs took a $0.01 Penny salary when they were going through their first bankruptcy. Does your liberal media bias mention that important gem?
-Top Execs are in ridulous high demand. When you have someone experienced onboard, and you are onboard a sinking bankrupt titanic - in order to keep those people on board, you better fucking give them an incentive to stay.
-Worker bee's in a factory are a dime a dozen.
-You would jump ship too - don't kid yourself :awe:
 
So are you angry at corporations limiting their tax burden or the laws that allow them to do so?

They could just divest their international subsidiaries, elect their own board members to the new company, issue new stock to current owners on any exchange of their choosing, and still keep their profits outside the country. The only difference is that there won't be a piece of paper with some words on it saying they're affiliated with the US.

There's no bargain, no allegiance, and no reason to say you're part of the US or any other country except when it's beneficial for the company. It's the world we live in and you will always lose if you try to demand or legislate it away.

All of which would make them entirely subject to the laws where they're incorporated, outside the protection of the US govt. It would also limit their accessibility to the biggest capital market in the world.

You essentially offer that corporations are above the law, and that view is what's wrong with the US economy today. They want to enjoy all the protections with none of the obligations, not just to have corporate personhood but to have super-citizenship.
 
Everyone can mention BS about top execs getting more money.


How about things such as this:
-The top 4 execs took a $0.01 Penny salary when they were going through their first bankruptcy. Does your liberal media bias mention that important gem?
-Top Execs are in ridulous high demand. When you have someone experienced onboard, and you are onboard a sinking bankrupt titanic - in order to keep those people on board, you better fucking give them an incentive to stay.
-Worker bee's in a factory are a dime a dozen.
-You would jump ship too - don't kid yourself :awe:

Where are the links supporting your claims?
 
Dude, are you allowed to say that? I know they let us namecall in here but that is like calling someone the N word these days...even Eminem can't do it.


I think he has the right to and PC should never get in the way

I believe that the harshest language can be used against those who want to take your money, government, bureaucrats, welfare leeches and idiot leftists/progressives
 
I think he has the right to and PC should never get in the way

I believe that the harshest language can be used against those who want to take your money, government, bureaucrats, welfare leeches and idiot leftists/progressives

Are you aware that the majority of these leeches live in Red States and the majority of them are white?
 
All of which would make them entirely subject to the laws where they're incorporated, outside the protection of the US govt. It would also limit their accessibility to the biggest capital market in the world.

You essentially offer that corporations are above the law, and that view is what's wrong with the US economy today. They want to enjoy all the protections with none of the obligations, not just to have corporate personhood but to have super-citizenship.


You do know there are other developed countries in the world? The US government isn't somehow special that you're doomed to fail if you're not here. The point is that when the negatives of being incorporated in the US out way the positives, they'll leave.

Are you suggesting that any person born here or any company formed here has to be here forever?

"Limit their accessibility to the biggest capital market." What does that mean? They can still make their product here, sell their product, sell their stock, get investors, seek patent protection. Sure, some of it might take a little more work, but it's all a cost-benefit analysis. It's called free trade, and if you're going to play the game, you win by being an attractive place for investment, not by taking as much profit possible.

Corporations aren't above the law; in fact, they're following it, you just don't like the law. However, they are above the restraints of any one country, just like you are if you have a lawyer, a useful skill, and don't like it here.
 
Are you aware that the majority of these leeches live in Red States and the majority of them are white?

I dont care about that their race or any other information, I just want them cut off from it

Why is it that liberals constantly engage in racial politics and like to divide groups
 
I dont care about that their race or any other information, I just want them cut off from it

Why is it that liberals constantly engage in racial politics and like to divide groups

What party are you going to support then when the Republican party become irrelevant then and why do you wrongfully associate "Welfare leeches" with the Democratic party when they most definatly come from YOUR party? I am engaging in "Racial Politics" LMAO This is really astonishing since your Party in the last Election lost the Latino vote,Black vote AND the Asian vote. If the Democrats are playing "Racial politics" then why are these Ethnic groups bailing off the Republican ship then? Is that because they all want "free stuff" ?
 
Last edited:
You do know there are other developed countries in the world? The US government isn't somehow special that you're doomed to fail if you're not here. The point is that when the negatives of being incorporated in the US out way the positives, they'll leave.

Are you suggesting that any person born here or any company formed here has to be here forever?

"Limit their accessibility to the biggest capital market." What does that mean? They can still make their product here, sell their product, sell their stock, get investors, seek patent protection. Sure, some of it might take a little more work, but it's all a cost-benefit analysis. It's called free trade, and if you're going to play the game, you win by being an attractive place for investment, not by taking as much profit possible.

Corporations aren't above the law; in fact, they're following it, you just don't like the law. However, they are above the restraints of any one country, just like you are if you have a lawyer, a useful skill, and don't like it here.

Nice string of false attributions. The US is very much a tax haven for the rest of the first world, particularly via Delaware corporations. Not that we hear much about it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/b...-corporate-tax-haven.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Interesting claim of what used to be called extraterritoriality, as was practiced in China prior to the revolution. Even when you were in China, you weren't subject to their laws, but rather those of your own country. Modern corporations take it a step further, follow the laws of whatever country where they choose to rent a mail dropbox. Some of those countries are noticeably void of much business law or taxes at all. Basically, they make their livings by hiding corporate income from other govts.

It is, as you point out, legal, but only superficially so.
 
I dont care about that their race or any other information, I just want them cut off from it

Why is it that liberals constantly engage in racial politics and like to divide groups

I remember some speech... something about with us or against us... something somebody said about 47% of the country... lots of generalized raving & fearmongering about islamofascist communist Kenyans, fags, dykes, single women & brown people ruining this country & making the baby jesus cry... something about how it was tough to make ends meet on $250K/yr, about jerb creators & tax cuts, about all the hard work of inheriting millions, about how tax amnesty for undeclared offshore accounts was truly an inconvenience, how unions are the scourge of the Earth, govt workers completely useless, so forth & so on...

Obviously, though, it's teh ebil Leftists! who use wedge issues like God, guns & gays, Voter fraud (only practiced by minorities) Welfare & so on... Righties are soooo inclusive, just like this guy offers-

http://www.grasstopsusa.com/df112912.html

We should just go back to our roots, when real men owned slaves, women knew their place & electricity was witchcraft... Things were so much easier to understand then...
 
I remember some speech... something about with us or against us... something somebody said about 47% of the country... lots of generalized raving & fearmongering about islamofascist communist Kenyans, fags, dykes, single women & brown people ruining this country & making the baby jesus cry... something about how it was tough to make ends meet on $250K/yr, about jerb creators & tax cuts, about all the hard work of inheriting millions, about how tax amnesty for undeclared offshore accounts was truly an inconvenience, how unions are the scourge of the Earth, govt workers completely useless, so forth & so on...

Obviously, though, it's teh ebil Leftists! who use wedge issues like God, guns & gays, Voter fraud (only practiced by minorities) Welfare & so on... Righties are soooo inclusive, just like this guy offers-

http://www.grasstopsusa.com/df112912.html

We should just go back to our roots, when real men owned slaves, women knew their place & electricity was witchcraft... Things were so much easier to understand then...

I love how you exaggerate when I never mentioned those things, you refuse to condemn radical Islam since you were making fun of the threat in the quote

The government has grown far too large and is spending too much money, I would have no problem with the welfare leeches and leftists like you being slaves, they keep stealing from us with the taxes and then use it for special interests
 
Wow, tons of anti-worker bullshit spewed up by the usual (and a few new) shitheads in this forum.

Read and learn or remain ignorant, your choice.

http://crooksandliars.com/kenneth-quinnell/truth-about-right-work-less

Federal law already prohibits any American from being forced to join a union. Since this is almost the only argument that conservatives put forth in supporting right-to-work laws, and it's 100 percent false, what is the real motivation for these laws?

Right-to-work laws don't grant any rights, they simply weaken unions

Federal law also prohibits unions from using member or non-member fees from paying for activities that might violate the political or religious beliefs of the worker. These laws allow workers who do not pay union dues to obtain the same benefits, including legal representation from unions, as union members without paying for them

Workers (union and non-union) in right-to-work states make more than $5,000 a year less, on average, than in other states.

States without right-to-work laws have healthier tax bases, which leads to better government programs and educational systems

Because unions lead in the fight to ensure safety and health standards for all workers, laws that weaken unions also weaken these standards. The workplace death rate is 51 percent higher in right-to-work states
Without strong unions to fight for benefits for workers, right-to-work states have 21 percent more people without health insurance

The infant mortality rate in right-to-work states is 16 percent higher

Without strong unions to fight for better wages for all workers, the poverty rate in right-to-work states is 2.3 percent higher

Right-to-work states offer a maximum weekly worker compensation benefit $30 less than other states

Right-to-work laws disproportionately harm women. Union women, on average, earn $149 more per week than non-union women

The wage gap between men and women in the United States is 32 percent. it is only 5 percent between union men and women

Right-to-work laws disproportionately harm people of color. Hispanic and Latino union members earn 45 percent more and African-Americans who are in unions see salaries 30 percent higher than African-Americans that are not in unions

The more workers that are unionized, the higher the wages that employers will offer, even to non-union workers, since workers are less willing to accept substandard wages

Higher wages mean more money is spent by working families, boosting the economy and leading to lower uneployment numbers

Higher rates of unionism lead to increases in productivity in both union jobs and non-union jobs, as employers must bring in new technology, new techniques and better training in order to attract better workers

Employers frequently offer higher wages to workers in order to prevent them from organizing a union, meaning that even the presence of unions and the possibility of their existence in a workplace increases wages

Right-to-work laws undercut unionized businesses in the states where they exist because non-union businesses can offer cheaper goods and services by exploiting their workers

Right-to-work laws interfere with empoyer-worker contracts by limiting what the two sides can engage in. These laws don't encourage freedom, they restrain it for all involved, placing the 'wisdom' of conservative politicians over that of both empoyers and workers
 
Last edited:
Back
Top