Really!....never stop posting.
Most of your posts smack of crackpot Randist philosophy. I read Atlas Shrugged, it is a sloppy comedy. About all I learned from the book is that she likes rough sex. I couldn't remember the lead character's name in the book I had to look it up. It's not John Laurie it's John Galt, you may want to consider changing your handle.
Name dropping is pretentious, arrogant and & does not convey your message well if the reader is not as familiar with the names dropped
The best democracy is one that blends economic liberalism with a proactive social safety net. Free markets with the protection needed to look after the most vulnerable. American CEO's make five times more than their Japanese and South Korean counterparts, that simply isn't right.
The best democracy as described by you is your opinion & not an absolute
Society as a whole may value social safety nets and protection to a different extent than you
@85K a year, 2 1/2 months vacation + no worries about retirement planning, exactly how vulnerable are teachers?
Any chance some of those compensation $ we spend on teachers might be better spent on the truly vulnerable?
It is one thing to have high and mighty principles about how things should be in your utopian world
It is all together a different matter when trying to reconcile those principles with real world practicalities
The best democracy is where unilateral action (higher taxes and / or increased debt load) is not force upon taxpayers by special interest groups. (in my opinion)
What a CEO makes is really
none of your business unless you are a shareholder or a customer.
If you are shareholder you can vote for changes to the comp or sell your shares
If you are a customer, you can stop buying the service / product
What choices / options do taxpayers have wrt comp of public sector employees?
None
And Blackie, thanks for the data. But I'm a man of the streets, I know what I see. For example %50+ of automotive assembly line workers are addicted to Oxycontin, the car companies have a huge problem.
That would appear to be a rather huge problem for both the car companies & the unions
Having drug addicts for half your workforce is a pretty serious safety issue & will impact quality
As long as unions view issues as we vs. them, or a fight (i.e. 'fighting for fair compensation" ), they will never maximize their economic benefit because the economic potential of the company will always have unproductive & unnecessary barriers.
The Car companies offered a partnership with increasing shares to the unions in the late 1980s or early 1990s, the unions turned them down, demanding / extorting and obtaining an unsustainable comp package
This caused a decrease in financial flexibility, a lack of funding in design and engineering, a reduced ability to compete, loss of market share, an increased debt load and the inability to weather the economic downturn of 2008
The end result was the bankruptcy, assumption of obligations by the taxpayer, an industry contraction of 1/3 and a lot of destroyed lives for union members
The management teams of the car companies are not blameless in this fiasco, however unions should be considering how things may have worked out far better if they had embraced a partnership rather than sucking at the tit till the tit went dry
What is very disturbing is the same philosophy (we vs. them) is being applied by the public sector unions
The end result for Ontario's finances is not that hard to predict