Cont: The Biden Presidency (4)

I just watched coverage of President Biden supporting the UAW union strikers.

In general, I’m in favor of unions. But it’s not a simple as unions=good; corporations=bad. In this case, the union demands seem large enough to hurt the Big 3 car manufacturers. As such, I don’t think it’s wise for the president to take what can be painted as an anti-business position. Maybe there’s a good reason prior presidents have tried to not take sides in so obvious a way.
 
In further developments of the Biden laptop story -

There is no laptop: Hunter Biden sues Rudy Giuliani

Additionally, the suit reminds the court—and everyone else—that for all the talk of “Hunter Biden’s laptop,” there is no laptop. There never was. Instead, “Defendants themselves admit that their purported possession of a ‘laptop’ is in fact not a ‘laptop’ at all. It is, according to their own public statements, an ‘external drive’ that Defendants were told contained hundreds of gigabytes of Plaintiff’s personal data.”

According to Giuliani, the data on that drive came from John Paul Mac Isaac, the former owner of a computer repair shop, who claimed to have data taken from one of Hunter Biden’s laptops and who offered to send it to Giuliani. According to the lawsuit, neither Isaac nor Giuliani ever maintained any kind of chain of custody on this data, and the data they have has been not just accessed but also tampered with, manipulated, altered, and damaged.
Click to expand...
 
One has to admire grudgingly the cunning trick of people like Rudi, that they start their crime spree when they know they will probably be dead before they will have to go to prison.
It's some version of the Perfect Crime.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I just watched coverage of President Biden supporting the UAW union strikers.

In general, I’m in favor of unions. But it’s not a simple as unions=good; corporations=bad. In this case, the union demands seem large enough to hurt the Big 3 car manufacturers. As such, I don’t think it’s wise for the president to take what can be painted as an anti-business position. Maybe there’s a good reason prior presidents have tried to not take sides in so obvious a way.
Click to expand...

Nothing is that simple. I agree.

Seems to be large enough to hurt the big three? Shouldn't workers be able to expect a living wage? The workers over the years have seen their wages and benefits cut by their own rising costs. They don’t just deserve better wages, they need them.

It's not anti-business, it's just a recognition that people are not just costs to a company but an essential reason that the company exists. That stockholders aren't the only reason.
 
With 5% of those companies' profits being spent on employees currently, they could double it and be all the way up to a crippling, bankruptcy-guaranteeing 10%. The financial gore & bloodbath is almost unthinkable! Won't someone pleeease think of the barons?!
 
acbytesla said:
Nothing is that simple. I agree.

Seems to be large enough to hurt the big three? Shouldn't workers be able to expect a living wage? The workers over the years have seen their wages and benefits cut by their own rising costs. They don’t just deserve better wages, they need them.

It's not anti-business, it's just a recognition that people are not just costs to a company but an essential reason that the company exists. That stockholders aren't the only reason.
Click to expand...

Biden isn't specifically endorsing the Unions line by line demands. He is simply saying workers deserve a better deal, and it's a good statement to make.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I just watched coverage of President Biden supporting the UAW union strikers.

In general, I’m in favor of unions. But it’s not a simple as unions=good; corporations=bad.
Click to expand...

That seems to be a pretty good summary in this case.

In this case, the union demands seem large enough to hurt the Big 3 car manufacturers.
Click to expand...

Good. They made billions more in profits. The workers are just asking for the same raise as that the C suite got.

As such, I don’t think it’s wise for the president to take what can be painted as an anti-business position. Maybe there’s a good reason prior presidents have tried to not take sides in so obvious a way.
Click to expand...

In certain cases, maintaining a veneer of neutrality is taking a side. Especially when you've spent 40 years bending over backwards to give one side everything they want.
 
Donal said:
That seems to be a pretty good summary in this case.



Good. They made billions more in profits. The workers are just asking for the same raise as that the C suite got.



In certain cases, maintaining a veneer of neutrality is taking a side. Especially when you've spent 40 years bending over backwards to give one side everything they want.
Click to expand...

Over the last 40 or so years worker wage increases are behind profit increases, we deserve about a 45% raise in general to make things equal at least with the increased salaries for the top earners.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I just watched coverage of President Biden supporting the UAW union strikers.

In general, I’m in favor of unions. But it’s not a simple as unions=good; corporations=bad. In this case, the union demands seem large enough to hurt the Big 3 car manufacturers. As such, I don’t think it’s wise for the president to take what can be painted as an anti-business position. Maybe there’s a good reason prior presidents have tried to not take sides in so obvious a way.
Click to expand...

I see no reason why a special concession to underpay workers should be a strategy to keep failing businesses open. If they really can't afford to pay labor what it costs to do business, they deserve to fail.

Not that I find it particularly believable. The Big 3 could trim the fat in many other ways, starting with executive compensation, to make ends meet.
 
You know it's the right move because one of the worst ghouls of the Obama administration, Steven Rattner, is crying about it:

“For him to be going on a picket line is outrageous,” Steven Rattner, who headed former President Barack Obama’s auto industry task force, said in an interview. “There’s no precedent for it. The tradition of the president is to stay neutral in these things. I get the politics. The progressives all said, ‘We don’t want a mediator; we want an advocate.’ And he bowed to the progressives, and now he’s going out there to put his thumb on the scale. And it’s wrong.”
Click to expand...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-makes-history-striking-auto-workers-picket-line-rcna117348

If private equity ghouls are wailing, you're probably doing the right thing.
 
Delvo said:
With 5% of those companies' profits being spent on employees currently, they could double it and be all the way up to a crippling, bankruptcy-guaranteeing 10%. The financial gore & bloodbath is almost unthinkable! Won't someone pleeease think of the barons?!
Click to expand...


It is times like this I think that we can all agree on this.

 
So apparently Biden's dogs just can't stop biting people with is... a thing.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I just watched coverage of President Biden supporting the UAW union strikers.

In general, I’m in favor of unions. But it’s not a simple as unions=good; corporations=bad. In this case, the union demands seem large enough to hurt the Big 3 car manufacturers. As such, I don’t think it’s wise for the president to take what can be painted as an anti-business position. Maybe there’s a good reason prior presidents have tried to not take sides in so obvious a way.
Click to expand...

Ford has accepted the terms.

Mary Barra of GM said she only makes two million a year. The rest is performance bonuses. Whose performance???
 
ZiprHead said:
Ford has accepted the terms.

Mary Barra of GM said she only makes two million a year. The rest is performance bonuses. Whose performance???
Click to expand...

I was under the impression she made 32 million in total last year.

Bonuses that are 15 times one's salary is kind of absurd.
 
TurkeysGhost said:
I see no reason why a special concession to underpay workers should be a strategy to keep failing businesses open. If they really can't afford to pay labor what it costs to do business, they deserve to fail.

Not that I find it particularly believable. The Big 3 could trim the fat in many other ways, starting with executive compensation, to make ends meet.
Click to expand...

they don't even need to. they're posting record profits, like all the other giant companies. the companies are saying "we made more profit than has ever been made in the history of the industry, $21B in the last six months and forecast $32B for the year" and also "we can't afford to pay you anymore"

you see this all across the country, companies posting record profits while driving inflation, and blaming rising wage costs that aren't even keeping up. nobody should be buying into that.
 
ZiprHead said:
Ford has accepted the terms.

Mary Barra of GM said she only makes two million a year. The rest is performance bonuses. Whose performance???
Click to expand...

oh man, only two million per year. what a ******* saint
 
ZiprHead said:
Ford has accepted the terms.

Mary Barra of GM said she only makes two million a year. The rest is performance bonuses. Whose performance???
Click to expand...

acbytesla said:
I was under the impression she made 32 million in total last year.

Bonuses that are 15 times one's salary is kind of absurd.
Click to expand...

I'm sure she'll be happy to agree that employee bonuses should be the same percentage of hers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom