Skip to main content

View Diary: View From the Ground: Oakland City Workers' Strike Amidst BART Carclasym. (38 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Or they can go on strike and win (3+ / 0-)

    a wage increase. You know, like they're doing.

    If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

    by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:14:36 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah (0+ / 0-)

      Paid for mostly by the poor and middle class in their respective cities, people who can't go on strike and are dependent on whatever the market offers for wages and benefits.

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:29:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Just because they don't have a union (3+ / 0-)

        yet doesn't mean other people can't have unions. Nor does it mean they can't go on strike. You say that like there's no way to form unions in the private sector.

        And yes, California has a fairly regressive tax code because the Neoliberals started their anti-tax jihad here and passed prop 13 so the state is stuck with a shitty tax situation that benefits the rich. And BART continues to raise fares even when it doesn't pay workers more.

        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

        by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:43:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It doesn't matter (0+ / 0-)

          Public unions are never justified, because there's never a justification for paying public employees more than similar private employees.

          If you had a situation where the private sector was 100% unionized, you still wouldn't need public unions because public employees would just jump ship to the superior private sector. The market would force increased public salaries.

          Besides, if it's so easy to set up high paying private union jobs why hasn't it already been done?

          In the current state of affairs, in any case, there are basically no private unions and few well paying opportunities for people with BART worker skill sets, so it's basically a lottery for who can get a BART job, with the losers subsidizing the winners by paying higher taxes or rider fares.

          (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
          Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

          by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 09:55:23 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sigh, you really don't (0+ / 0-)

            acknowledge reality do you?

            Besides, if it's so easy to set up high paying private union jobs why hasn't it already been done?
            I know you aren't an idiot so I'm going to assume that you are purposely ignoring the large number of private sector union jobs that exist and, even more so, the history of unions and how they have been undermined through neoliberalism.

            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

            by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 10:38:08 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Re (0+ / 0-)

              Again, irrelevant.

              The only question before us is: do you believe there is a justification for paying public workers more than their qualifications in the private sector would otherwise get them? And taking the extra to cover it out of private salaries?

              That's basically the core issue here. Even if all your theories about neoliberalism and other nefarious activities were true, it still wouldn't be a reason to pay public workers more than equivalent private ones. If public workers want to be paid more, they need to work to drive up private salaries.

              (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
              Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

              by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 11:51:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  If it's irrelevant then why did you bring it up? (2+ / 0-)

                It obviously isn't irrelevant.

                And strong unions are the best way to bring up wages across the board, so I support strong unions. Higher public salaries will increase private sector salaries and put money into the economy.

                If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 12:04:13 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Re (0+ / 0-)
                  Higher public salaries will increase private sector salaries and put money into the economy
                  They won't. They can't. If your economic views are based on this fiction, it's hard for us to have a conversation.

                  (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                  Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                  by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:58:54 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Actually California has one of the most (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          AoT, jpmassar

          progressive tax policies of the states.

          Same income tax rate for capital gains and dividends as ordinary income and a top tax rate of 13.3%.  Try to find another state that comes close to that.

          Sales tax does not apply to food purchased as groceries nor to rent, nor public transit.  There is even a renters tax credit.

          Keep in mind that California has a high concentration of poor people - so it has higher demands for public social spending and raising tax revenues.  While California has about 10% of the US population, it has about 35% of the people living below the Federal poverty level.

          The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

          by nextstep on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 12:20:22 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  In regards to property taxes (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jpmassar

            was more what I was thinking. The corporation are screwing the state out of tons of money with that one. It should have been reformed already.

            There is even a renters tax credit.
            I obviously haven't been paying enough attention when I do my taxes.

            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

            by AoT on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 12:25:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Wait! Stop the race to the bottom? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AoT

      Now that's just crazy talk. [/snark]

      •  All economic improvement... (0+ / 0-)

        ...must start with the private sector. If private sector salaries rise, public ones will rise also. Using politics to raise public sector salaries without organic private sector increases to match just creates a set of winners (public) and losers (private) artificially.

        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

        by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 06:20:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Must? (0+ / 0-)
          must start with the private sector
          Please provide supporting evidence for this extraordinary claim.
          •  It's basic economics (0+ / 0-)

            (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
            Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

            by Sparhawk on Tue Jul 02, 2013 at 07:19:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No. Supply and demand is basic economics (0+ / 0-)

              The claim that the public sector can't act first is a right wing talking point.

              Which studies that back up your claim?

              •  The private sector pays... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                soros

                ...for the public sector all the time 100% of the cost.

                Look at Detroit as an example of a place with a 'strong' public sector and weak private sector.

                All income to a city or state comes from private activity. Except in very few cases, all income comes from private economic activity, usually sales of exportable goods and services. You can have all the government you want, but when the local factory packs up and leaves town, you are screwed.

                (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 08:59:03 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The private sector pays 9% of the federal revenues (0+ / 0-)

                  Which is down from 26% in the booming 1950s.

                  The Office of Management and Budget's data show the exact opposite of your claim. Huffpo put it in chart form, for the numerically challenged

                  40% is in the form of income taxes paid by the public, and another 35% are the payroll taxes paid by the public.

                  Both public and private sectors provide economic activity. The payee who pays payroll and income taxes can be employed by either public or private sector. School teachers, firefighters, public works employes, town clerks, mayors, military service members, and so on all pay income and payroll taxes. All of those income taxes are being paid entirely due to public sector spending.  Even those living entirely on unemployment benefits are paying income tax on those benefits.

                  So 75% of federal revenues come from the people who are getting paid, regardless of who pays them.

                  Parroting right wing talking points is different from providing citations. Please provide citations for your claims.

                  •  Re (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    soros
                    40% is in the form of income taxes paid by the public, and another 35% are the payroll taxes paid by the public.
                    All of this is paid for by corporations and similar private economic activity. No corporations: no income tax, no payroll tax, nothing. If your local factory leaves town, all of these revenue sources vanish. Regardless of who actually writes the check, the ultimate source of all of these funds is private economic activity. Public activity is supported from private activity, which pays all the bills all the time.

                    (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                    Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                    by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 09:29:15 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  What an enlightening citation (0+ / 0-)

                      Still refusing to provide any data to back up your claims. I don't blame you, since actually linking to your sources would get you bounced.

                      It's utterly ludicrous to imply that the private sector is the only source of income in a community.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that if a factory leaves town, the town then magically has no firefighters, teachers, police, town clerks, etc.? Really? They all just "poof!" disappear?

                      Since literally everyone in the country lives in a community that has lost private employers over the years, you'll have a hard time convincing them that their towns completely folded up and disappeared in the aftermath.

                      •  Re (0+ / 0-)
                        It's utterly ludicrous to imply that the private sector is the only source of income in a community.  Do you really expect anyone to believe that if a factory leaves town, the town then magically has no firefighters, teachers, police, town clerks, etc.? Really? They all just "poof!" disappear?
                        Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. With no private sources of income your town dries up and blows away.
                        Since literally everyone in the country lives in a community that has lost private employers over the years, you'll have a hard time convincing them that their towns completely folded up and disappeared in the aftermath.
                        Yeah, because nearly all towns and cities have more than one private employer. But the fewer private jobs there are, the harder it is to maintain those services, until they all vanish.

                        It is impossible to have a town with only police, fire, health care, etc and no export industries. How do you propose to do it? Tell me how the town buys toilet paper from the outside world...?

                        (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
                        Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

                        by Sparhawk on Wed Jul 03, 2013 at 06:37:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Links? (0+ / 0-)

                          You're still missing citations.

                          In the mean time, this discussion isn't about whether or not there should be any private sector, it's about your claim that the public sector CANNOT act before the private sector.

                          You have still failed to provide any links in support thereof.

                          I've provided data from the OMB that shows your "100%" claim to be completely false. Here's a link showing that government spending in the Great Depression got the economy moving again.

                          Total expenditures on WPA projects through June 1941, totaled approximately $11.4 billion. Over $4 billion was spent on highway, road, and street projects; more than $1 billion on public buildings, including the iconic Dock Street Theater in Charleston, the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles, and the Timberline Lodge on Oregon's Mt. Hood.
                          And
                          The Public Works Administration (PWA), part of the New Deal of 1933, was a large-scale public works construction agency in the United States headed by Secretary of the Interior Harold L. Ickes. It was created by the National Industrial Recovery Act in June 1933 in response to the Great Depression. It built large-scale public works such as dams, bridges, hospitals, and schools. Its goals were to spend $3.3 billion in the first year, and $6 billion in all, to provide employment, stabilize purchasing power, and help revive the economy.
                          There were also the Social Security Act, the institution of Unemployment insurance, the National Labor Relations Act, and the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus the creation of the Resettlement Administration (RA), the Rural Electrification Administration (REA), rural welfare projects sponsored by the WPA, National Youth Administration (NYA), Forest Service and Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC), Tennessee Valley Authority, Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA), National Recovery Administration, and so on. In addition, there were a number of laws passed to rein in the financial industry's excesses, and end private wealth hoarding.

                          Most of the funding came from the government printing money, and using it to pay people. Those people then bought toilet paper, among other things, with that money. Ironically, the businesses that provided the toilet paper and other things couldn't tell the difference between the money from the government programs and the money from private employers, and gladly accepted both forms.

                          Once again, I'd like to see links to any proof of any kind that any of your claims in the thread could hold any weight whatsoever.

                          Alas, since we both know you can only find such "proof" at right wing think tanks, we also both know you can't post the links, since it'll result in instant application of the ban hammer. You've been having too much fun promoting this moronic winger tripe here in the great orange den of lefties to let yourself be banned so easily.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (124)
  • Community (62)
  • Bernie Sanders (42)
  • Elections (39)
  • 2016 (36)
  • Climate Change (32)
  • Environment (31)
  • Culture (29)
  • Hillary Clinton (28)
  • Republicans (25)
  • Science (25)
  • Barack Obama (24)
  • Media (24)
  • Civil Rights (23)
  • Education (20)
  • Law (20)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (19)
  • Economy (18)
  • Congress (16)
  • Labor (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site