2010 Midterm Elections Thread

[AGDee]

EW: You and I are philosophically on completely different ends of the spectrum so this debate is fruitless. Your life experiences and my life experiences are so completely opposite that our basic belief systems will never reach congruence. The statements you make are not in any way consistent with what I have experienced or what I see. Unions elevated the poor into the middle to upper middle class and increased salaries in every sector as a result because other industries/sectors had to compete.

If government is supposed to do nothing, then why do they exist? I don't want to pay all those legislators to do nothing or to maintain the status quo because, quite frankly, the status quo sucks.

Neither branch is more powerful. Both need to be on the same page to get anything done.

ETA: On the plus side, Dingell is now at 50% of the vote so he has a chance still.

ETA (again!): Dingell is ahead 53-47.

[Elephant Walk]

Originally Posted by AGDee

Unions elevated the poor into the middle to upper middle class and increased salaries in every sector as a result because other industries/sectors had to compete.

The unions intentionally price out the poor from gaining jobs.

Walter E. Williams explains:

Labor unions are the major supporters of increases in the minimum wage. Even though the overwhelming majority of their members earn multiples of the minimum wage, they spend millions upon millions lobbying for minimum wage increases. They do it because higher minimum wages protect their members from competition with low-skill, low-wage workers. Most other minimum wage supporters are decent people with a concern for low-wage workers, but their actions suffer from a misguided vision of how the world operates.

Unions also used these same methods to keep lower-wage oppressed minorities away from working in Apartheid South Africa and the United States. The unions have very little concern for the poor. Their only concern is with maintaining jobs. The problem is that because they inflate their compensations so greatly they end up financially endangering the very business that provides them with jobs (see Michigan's situation). Then, they no longer have their jobs nor do the poor.

If government is supposed to do nothing, then why do they exist?

To maintain order. (well, that's why they were created. I'm not sure that actually happens but to be fair I border on anarchism)

Once it got past that, it failed.

I don't want to pay all those legislators to do nothing or to maintain the status quo because, quite frankly, the status quo sucks.

The status quo was created because of those legislators.

Neither branch is more powerful. Both need to be on the same page to get anything done.

You did graduate high school, right?

Congress ultimately holds the most power of the branches. Some may argue the Supreme Court, but I'm not sure that argument holds water.The least Constitutionally powerful is certainly the President. Guess which party has dominated Congress during this horrific downturn?