Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

nowthenadir t1_j5y4nb9 wrote

Reply to comment by indoninja in Major railroad posts record earnings, spends more on share repurchases than on its employees by esporx

I mean, we disagree. What are you gonna do?

1

indoninja t1_j5y5btz wrote

Republicans at one point filibustered a law strictly to protect sick veterans. It’s completely on track for them to be completely against helping out unions with sick days, if you really wanna insist, you think they would’ve seen the light and supported it, despite them actually voting against that position, when given a chance, nothing I can say will change your mind.

1

nowthenadir t1_j5ybu99 wrote

I mean, Ted Cruz voted for the sick days as a separate bill. So we can postulate whether or not the republicans would have “crashed the economy” rather than give some blue collar guys a few sick days, but the bottom line is, we’ll never know, because the fight wasn’t framed that way.

The right to strike is exactly that, a right. It’s part of the NLRA signed in 1935 or something. You may be comfortable stripping rights away from people in the name of the economy, but I’m not. If we can’t engineer an healthy economy based on a fair exchange between labor and capital on a leveled playing field, then I don’t give a shit if we have one or not.

You may be able to convince me that, in general, the Democrats are incompetent rather than complicit, but the end result when it comes to income inequality and the decline of the working class is the same, and so my original point is the same. Some Dems are awesome and have their hearts in the right place; I’m thinking specifically of Warren and AOC. In general, establishment Dems don’t have a great track record.

My argument is absolutely flawed in that it ignores important social issues like bodily autonomy, but my original point wasn’t that the Dems were just as bad as Republicans when it comes to everything. It’s my opinion that we have a very flawed political system that basically presents the average American with a choice between awful and bad.

1

indoninja t1_j5yg7xm wrote

> So we can postulate whether or not the republicans would have “crashed the economy” rather than give some blue collar guys a few sick days, but the bottom line is, we’ll never know, because the fight wasn’t framed that way.

It was framed that way and recognized that way by all the adults paying attention.

> If we can’t engineer an healthy economy based on a fair exchange between labor and capital on a leveled playing field, then I don’t give a shit if we have one or not.

I dont think we should cut off or nose to spite our face.

And those are the options as long as we need 11 republicans to support sick days for rail workers.

> In general, establishment Dems don’t have a great track record.

dont have a great track record of helping against x isnt in the same league as actively working against.

And you can insert anything in as x from education and healthcare to labor rights and environment.

1

nowthenadir t1_j5z0ra7 wrote

Look, I don’t need you to agree with me. This is my opinion. It’s based on my experience and my knowledge. You’re entitled to have a different one. My point is that neither party has a track record of advocating for the working class in both words and actions.

There has been a steady decline in the share of wealth controlled by the middle class for decades. This has occurred under administrations of both parties. The economy was great under Clinton, it was also the period of the greatest redistribution of wealth to the upper class in the last 50 years.

You’re allowed to think the democrats have the working classes interests at heart if you want. I’m pretty convinced that while their words appear to, their record doesn’t. Was it a Republican president that kicked thousands of people off welfare with the welfare reform bill? Was it a Republican president that lowered the capital gains tax? Was it a Republican president that presided over the recovery from the 2008 financial crisis where 95% of the wealth created went to the top 1%?

I’m not sure what you’re trying to do. Like, are you trying to have a discussion based on good faith? Or are you trying to prove my opinion wrong and yours right? Because it seems more the latter than the former.

1

indoninja t1_j5z1usa wrote

Looks like you are ignoring congress under Clinton.

Looks like you are hlossing over the republicans threatening to shut down the givt over Obama wanting to end bush tax cuts for people making over 250k.

Looks like you are ignoring Bidens plan to tax any increase in wealth for people who have over a billion (ie directly adress the gross growth in income inequality from on people who make most their money outside “income”).

Edit-way ti back up your well points by blocking me.

1

nowthenadir t1_j5z67jk wrote

Nope, not ignoring congress at all. At no point did I give Republicans a bye. The laws I mentioned were signed by a Democratic president however. The recovery that I mentioned with Obama was under a unified democratic government.

I am ignoring Biden’s plan until it becomes a reality.

I don’t know what your problem is, but you’re obviously more into proving my opinion wrong than having a discussion based on good faith. I don’t give a shit what you think. You want to root for Dems like they’re you’re local football team, have fun. I think it’s naive, but it’s your life and you’re allowed to believe what you want.

1