If the dems win the House

[turok]

Ah, it's the fault of those evil capitalists. Got it. But if wages weren't bloated in the US, why would those evil capitalists go elsewhere? that makes no sense. You're right about one thing, it does mean unions - they're the ones that drove wages well above the value of the labor.

I don't post like that at all, I post like someone who understands that unions drove companies to look elsewhere for labor because American laborers were too expensive.

Unions never drove business elsewhere, it was their headlong pursuit of unfettered profits and unregulated operations that did so. It wasn't until the 80s that blue collar labor began to be offshored en-masse, and we could still buy electronics and most appliances, tools, and machinery mfg in the US until then. I recall white collar tech and skilled workers touting their sheepskin awards and higher salaries until broadband internet began to rapidly and increasingly siphon off their jobs after the turn of the century.

But anyway, maybe you will live to see the day when just traveling down a local boulevard will come with a corporate toll cost and virtually everything but the hybrid "Theogarchy" government will be automated, AIed, privatized and monopolized. Then you will have your fondest of Randian dreams come true.

 

[Spartanmack]

Not to get into the middle of this but as I recall, that had been prevented by George Bailey and his father through innovative and creative financing provided by the Bailey Building and Loan to members of the community through the free market.

That said, in the pivotal bank run scene, George said a lot of things to both the borrowers and depositors that called for cooperation and a degree of collectivism.

Although we never saw beyond the end of the movie, there were a number of foreshadowing events that indicated that George would one day gain the upper hand over Potter through providing a better and more useful service.

I've only seen about 10 minutes of that movie.

 

[Spartanmack]

Unions never drove business elsewhere, it was their headlong pursuit of unfettered profits and unregulated operations that did so. It wasn't until the 80s that blue collar labor began to be offshored en-masse, and we could still buy electronics and most appliances, tools, and machinery mfg in the US until then. I recall white collar tech and skilled workers touting their sheepskin awards and higher salaries until broadband internet began to rapidly and increasingly siphon off their jobs after the turn of the century.

But anyway, maybe you will live to see the day when just traveling down a local boulevard will come with a corporate toll cost and virtually everything but the hybrid "Theogarchy" government will be automated, AIed, privatized and monopolized. Then you will have your fondest of Randian dreams come true.

this is simply wrong. It's painfully obvious the cost of labor made American companies less competitive. You could buy a cheaper, better made Japanese car because they didn't carry an average of $4k in legacy costs that American cars did - FYI legacy costs are the cost of retired laborers. Then you add in the higher labor costs for the people who built the cars and it was clear, the US just simply couldn't compete. The quality was inferior, they were less reliable and the cost was way higher. The American makers didn't have to ship their products (cars are pretty big and heavy and therefore expenseive to ship) across an ocean just to get them to market and they still couldn't compete. The idea that it is was merely corporate greed is asinine, period. If labor wasn't overpriced, manufacturers wouldn't have felt they were overpaying and wouldn't have sought cheaper labor markets - oh, and they would have been able to compete on costs but they clearly were not.

 

[Spartanmack]

If Demtards win the house nothing changes.

If Trumpanzees win the house nothing changes.

I agree with the first line, and that's the problem. The second line could also be true, but it's not obvious - at least there would be a chance for change I could believe in (see what I did there?).

 

[tigermud]

What the rust belt gavith the rust belt can takith away

https://www.bloombergquint.com/poli...elt-flash-a-2020-warning-for-trump#gs.aVvAwQY

My biggest disappointment was how many dems won races in MI. Far as I can tell its the Health Care issue allowing for this.

I do hope all the dems in MI can at least do something about the high car insurance rates here, we are #1 in that category which is just ludicrous.

If you live in MI there is a good chance you are

#Insurance Poor

Car Instance, Health Care, Property Taxes etc.. it all adds up and just kills the middle class.

 

[turok]

MI has had the highest permissible loaded semi-trailer weights in the US for decades, esp those double trailers loaded with gravel which cause a great deal of damage to our roadways and bridges. MI is surrounded by 4 of 5 of the Great Lakes, which cause a moderating effect to winter and early spring temps resulting in much more freeze/thaw cycles, along with frequent lake-effect snowfalls. This means that we are the pothole Kings of the nation, and ruined tires and wheels are the result.

That adds to our vehicle insurance premiums, but of course is not the biggest reason for the high cost of insurance here. We were one of the first states to implement the "no-fault" law, so perhaps that needs to be reviewed and compared to other Rust-Belt states. Dunno if the more recent helmet-less motorcycle rider permissions have also affected insurance rates here.

 

[tigermud]

Well something needs to be done cuz the rates are f’n ridicouls

https://www.freep.com/story/money/2018/08/23/no-fault-auto-insurance-lawsuit-mike-duggan/1071905002/

 

[turok]

//

Well something needs to be done cuz the rates are f’n ridicouls

https://www.freep.com/story/money/2018/08/23/no-fault-auto-insurance-lawsuit-mike-duggan/1071905002/

"Attorney George Sinas, a no-fault expert who teaches auto insurance at Michigan State University College of Law and is general counsel for CPAN, said a major flaw in Duggan's lawsuit is its disregard of the role insurance companies have in setting rates, using factors such as credit scores, professions and whether or not someone has a college degree."

This is so fucking ridiculous. What does someone's credit score have to do with setting their insurance rates? If he/she cannot pay the monthly premium, the coverage is then cancelled by the insurer. And how does someone's profession and education enter into it? Is a college grad somehow less likely to get into an accident, whether @ fault or not, than one with a HS diploma? What about the amount of miles and time spent driving on the streets and roads? Wouldn't that be much more of a factor in the likelihood of being involved in an accident?

Texting while driving is the newest and most dangerous activity that an insured driver can do outside of being drunk or drugged. I would be all for a change in the no-fault law where if a driver was found to have been distracted while texting resulting in causing an accident, then he or she and their insurer should be solely responsible for all costs involved.

 

[tomdalton22]

I never understood why Michigan has no-fault insurance. That system has never made any sense to me.