Профсоюзы Школа Коммунизма

[arbat]

Ну, или инструмент его строителей.

Вчерась Кремль Белый Дом пригрозил судом фирме Боинг, - за то, что они хотят перевести производство в Южную Каролину из профсоюзного Вашингтона. Правительство Обамы рассуждает так. У рабочих есть право бастовать, да? Ну вот, а переводя производство в другой Штат, буржуи их этого права лишают

Comments

[nyc_guy]

First of all, calculate the amount of Boeing's revenues from government contracts as well as number favors they get from the US government lobbying on their behalf in foreign countries. If you do that, you would realize that Boeing, as any other big companies in the US, is not pure capitalist company.

[arbat]

Well, as far as I am informed, Government does not just give Boeing money, - it buys planes that it needs. When the Government lobbies on Boeing behalf abroad, - it does it not as a favor to Boeing, - but out of belief that is it good for the US economy in general.

More importantly, - all that does not matter. My questions were:

1. Why are you choosing side of the unionized workers in WA, - as opposed to the non-unionized workers in SC? Neither government contracts nor lobbying has any relevance to this issue.

2. Do you consider it moral, ethical and non-criminal - when the government forces private firm on behalf of a certain group, - while the ruling party accepts tangible favors from that group?

[nyc_guy]

It was exactly my point -- Boeing is not totally independent of the US government. I am sure Boeing spends shitload of lobbying money to make sure that contracts go their way and not Airbus way. It seems that you have no qualms about the government doing a lot of favors for Boeing. As for union vs non-union, I would care less about it. I am sure Boeing wastes a lot of taxpayer money as much as any corporation that does contracts with the government - just check the reports of Halliburton overcharging Defense Department in Iraq.

[arbat]

"It seems that you have no qualms about the government doing a lot of favors for Boeing"

Not true. I have no qualms when government is buying from Boeing. This is not a "favor". I have no qualms when the government give Boeing some guarantees, - after all, if Boeing makes a bomber and the Government prohibits selling it abroad, - it must, in exchange, guarantee some sales for them.

I do mind when the Government does some "favors" that can't be justified the way I described.

Anyway, here is a proposal, - let's agree not to make baseless personal accusations against an opponent?

"As for union vs non-union, I would care less about it."Wait, but this was what I was asking

[nyc_guy]

I think you need to wake up to reality. Boeing profits from and uses the US government big time just as all big corporations do. The government does a lot of favors to Boeing that can't be justified except for the fact that there was extensive lobbying in terms of tax breaks, favorable contracts etc. In addition, when Boeing builds a factory anywhere in the US, they probably get bag tax breaks from states as well.

[arbat]

Ok, now I am mostly convinced that either this is a pure trolling, or you are not reading my commentaries at all.

So, I am going to ask you two questions:

1. Please, explain what exactly makes you think that I am not "awaken to the reality". I insist that you produce exact quotes - with the links, - and the explanation how it proves that I am not awaken.

2. Please, explain how exactly this "reality" you talk about is related to my post that you are commenting on, and the questions I asked. Again, I want a clear explanation, - and "oh, they both have words Boeing and Government" will not suffice.

As I warned before, - in my info, and in a special post, people who want to comment in my journal, and use a share of my time, - take upon themselves certain obligations. Trolling violates those obligations.

[nyc_guy]

I don't have time to search and provide you with the links.

We can go back and forth forever, but my original point is that you tend too look at only one side of the story -- how government screwed up Boeing (hence your original post), but not looking at the full picture of Boeing in the world and in the U.S., how it benefits from the government and other tax breaks etc. It is quite very easy to pick and choose the narrow topics (i.e. union vs non-union) and ask people's opinions about it in isolation of everything else as opposed to try to break down the benefits and costs that Boeing gets from different federal and state entities. If you try to do just that, you may or may not come to different conclusions. That's all I was trying to say.

[arbat]

1. I told you that I do mind when the Government provides unearned benefits to the owners of a private company - you did not read that part, but I did write it. Furthermore, I described what I consider "earned".
   
   You, apparently, think that if the government robs Peter to give to Paul, and then robs Jim to give to Peter, - it means that we have TWO sides of the story.
   
   I see only one: government robs.
   
   
2. You posted a long thread, without any relation to the topic of my post, - despite few reminders. I ban people who do that.
   
   You used an ad hominem argument. I ban people who do that.
   
   You refused to support your ad hominem with the evidence that I did what you said. I ban people who do that - with extreme prejudice.
   
   Now, you have a choice. You can either try to prove your ad hominem attack above, or you can admit that it was baseless. I insist on getting one of the two. If you post anything else - you will be banned.
   
   One exception: you, if you chose to, may answer the original question in my post. But this is it.
   

[nyc_guy]

I told you my point. Have fun in your journal and ban whoever you like. I would care less.

[arbat]

I offered you a chance to do a decent thing.
You declined.

So be it.