We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Monday, February 10. 2014
This is a rather remarkable admission from the leadership of the Democratic Party. Have they merged with the Socialist-Worker's Party? Or with the Leisure/Artist Party?
I am, of course, opposed to "job-lock", but there is no job-lock, aka indentured servitude, in America today. America is seen as the land of opportunity for people all around the world who dream of getting here. What the heck are these Dems talking about? To whom are they pandering now?
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
"To whom are they pandering now?"
The OWS crowd, ya know, the other 99%. It is a stupid, immature message not fit for children.
If you prefer something I have to somethihg you have, and I prefer that same something you have to that same something I have, we can trade and we both come out ahead.
We disagree about value.
Our combined wealth increases by the amount of the disagreement. This is miraculous, because there's only a rearrangement.
Add up such voluntary trades over the nation, and the national standard of living rises by that amount.
The rule for generating the maximum amount of disagreement over value is: specialize and trade. The specialist values his output at much less than his customers do, and so he acquires a job. So long as the disagreements survive, his job is economically possible. The national economy booms.
Now suppose employment costs the employer a lot, in taxes, regulations, healthcare, and so forth.
There's lots less room for profitable disagreement.
That job disappears.
With it the national standard of living it generated.
Of course, with fewer workers and fewer hours, Dems will not just want, but need to raise taxes or borrow more to fund the myriad things they want to fund.
"there is no job-lock, aka indentured servitude, in America today"
nonsense. You're locked in a system in which you have to work just to survive, taxes are so high you can't do anything else, and it's impossible (or next to) to change career paths without bankrupting yourself or taking a massive step back in standard of living.
Even moving to another area is next to impossible because it lands you in massive debt because your mortgage is now 20-50% higher than the value of your property when you sell it to move to another town.
While in theory then you're free to work what and where you like, in reality you're pretty much locked to a location and career path.
You're an indentured servant to the government.
and it's impossible (or next to) to change career paths without bankrupting yourself or taking a massive step back in standard of living.
Freedom is not free. But most of us are not called to pay the fees in blood.
It is not too much of a surprise that the democrats are so hot to give people the leeway to take up avocations such as cowboy poetry. Neither should it be a surprise that the democrat party has been in league with socialists since the Wilson Administration. Remember Truman tried for universal health care during his tenure.
There is a "job lock", but I don't see how Obamacare breaks it. If you are staying with an employer for the benefits, i.e., compensation, even when you don't like the job, that is a choice. Some with family members with big health expenses, it is a rough choice. On the other hand, even with Obamacare, subsidies, employer plans are often much better due to co-pays and deductibles.
One way around this would have been moving the health insurance tax deduction to the individuals instead of the employer. On its face, it would be a shock for the employees to see the non-cash part of their compensation.
Also, if one wants to draw social security, you have to work and get your quarters. To qualify for disability, you have to have worked within a short period prior to your disability. So that is also job lock and your SS "benefit" is based on the amount you paid in which is based on salary/wages earned.
The Demoncrats seem to be making the calculation that there are enough people who are takers and clueless enablers that we have arrived at the tipping point. The welfare state was always a battle pitched between the "have nots" against the "haves" cloaked in the fluffiness of "compassion". Now, the fluffiness will probably be jettisoned and the argument will shift from compassion to "get yours". In addition to the core welfare recipient and long term unemployed, the baby boomers who are and will be retiring and demanding that they get their Social Security and Medicare will be joining the army of takers who will be clamoring for their "free stuff".
When the American middle class workers get tired of working so hard and decide to quit working -- either by holding a national strike like the Polish workers had in the 1980's or just having the "job-lock" for themselves, it will be the interesting to hear the Progressives, the JournoLists, and the Pravda media cover the story. It makes me wonder why the Federal agencies have been buying so much ammunition.
Very good point about the ammo buys. I guess the Federales see where this is going, too.
Geez. How far have these latter-day Socialists fallen?
I am pretty sure Socialists back in the day celebrated work. It wasn't a worker's indolence that empowered him, it was his labor.
This isn't even a plausible restatement of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need".
I don't think this emergent political state of mind has been named yet. Maybe gimme would work. In earlier times people with this attitude were simply run off from the cave, farm, ranch, village, town or whatever.
The Democrats and a few Republicans are indeed socialists and it is a socialist agenda that is driving this. But the idea of not working isn't a socialist dream it is all about votes. We have rasied, encouraged, fostered and otherwise created a vast underclass who will vote for "free stuff". The classic cartoon of someone standing on a corner with a sign that says "I will work for food" has been replaced by the motto "I will vote for free stuff". This is how NYC got de Blasio, how the nation got Obama and how most Democrat congresspersons got elected. It is a wave of the future. Well, until the printing press breaks and the lenders refuse to loan us anymore money. The left hopes to radically transform American into a socialist/communist state before that happens. Their plan "B" is when it happens and the economy is in the dumper they will "save" us with neosocialism or neocommunism or they will call it something more appealing but it will be the same thing. There will be some resistance of course but with every federal department and employee armed to the teeth the resistance will be labeled as terrorists and be "eliminated".
Job lock? Maybe.
School lock? Definitely.
Let's work on ending the public school monopoly.