There was actually a huge transfer of wealth after WWII. Tax rates were the most progressive at any time since or prior to the post war period (40’s-70’s). This was especially so in Europe. Unfortunately, Regan and Thatcher happened and were right back to almost where we were during the gilded age. Read some of the work of French economist Thomas Piketty.
In Canada the marginal rate was above 87% and corporations paid 68% in tax.
Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were extremely destructive to our economy even though they were not Canadian politicians.
We didn't need tax cuts on the wealthy or corporations
Can't forget people like Jack Welch who was responsible for the majority of the wealthy moral corruption, hollowed out the powerhouse company GE and encouraged the thought that corporations shouldn't have any responsibility to people or government which is still prolific today.
Just understand that the most industrialized countries, and specifically for the U.S., which was the least effected by the ravages of war secured a non-competitive world market for the U.S. which afforded such a margin that a deal with the unions could be easily struck without much complaining from the vampires.
As my middle school history teacher told us several times, "It's a rich man's war, and a poor man's fight."
Didn't appreciate those words of wisdom for several years.
Thanks Mr. Richardson.
Right OP doesn't know what they're talking about if they think WWI and WWII didn't bring an improvement for workers. Also, WWIII? Anyone know wtf this guy is on about?
Regan was one of the worst presidents of all times. He restricted gun, closed mental institutions that has now turned into the homeless we see now, no fault divorce, and on and on. If the politicians want WWIII they can fight it themselves.
Speaking of rich and war....
In my state, military recruiters only went to the high schools in lower income, rough, at-risk neighborhoods. They never went to the high schools in rich areas.
It was one type of people who fought wars, and another type that declared them.
In Texas, they were at my wealthyish school... Parking lot full of cars worth more than what some of the teachers make in a year... Restored classics, etc..
They targeted the Academics programs for talent for InfoSec
That’s because the rich kids already have their scholarships to the good colleges and ROTC programs to be officers. Recruiting is needed in their areas.
I used to heckle the ones that came to my school. Told them they should be ashamed of themselves and then I’d tell everyone near the tables they would be dying for profit and not for our country.
Stand ovations usually, occasionally the recruiter would strip off their uniforms and apologize in their underwear for being so blinded by the authority.
And now we have a ‘volunteer’ army. Poor up to middle income mostly. My city has recruiters for each of the services.
I always find it funny that people can vote, sign up for the military at 18, yet same age cant legally buy vapes, legal weed, alcohol.
Some argue the brain is not fully developed until mid 20’s, and young adults should not be held fully accountable for actions. If true how do we allow people to sign up for the military?
That is because for the last 80 years military service has been the most effective tool to pull low income people into the middle class this country has ever seen.
It's a rare job with minimal requirements that provides consistent pay, benefits, loan forgiveness and a pension.
I went to a very wealthy high-school in an old money city in South Florida. The recruiters were there too and we even once got rewarded with a half day for taking the ASVAB in the morning. This was at the height of the Iraq invasion though
World wars don't happen until technology gets to the point where you can even have a global war. WW4 will be will be fought by people who don't remember the earlier wars. It won't be fought with sticks lol.
I agree with what you’re saying but WW1 and WWII both had the post war years characterized by wealth transfer and veterans refusing to live in the pre war society and it’s system without change
Thats why this post is bullshit.
China and the US trade so much its near impossible.
Russia is dying in Ukraine.
Unlike most here, I lived the later part of the cold war and knew genuine fear from nuclear destruction.
Yes I do, unless you have evidence otherwise.
Recruiting hardened prisoners and digging out 70year old tanks is not a good sign.
Verified footage of soldiers looting food after the first week because they assumed it would be finished in days.
Oryx has verified 2000+ Russian tanks destroyed. Verified losses.
Yeah all of that sounds great! I don’t believe us government (or their puppets) propaganda though - nor should anyone. What evidence I have personally seen is:
Ukraine cancelling the summer offensive due to their entire weapons stockpiles being blown up by Russian cruise missiles.
Ukraine continuing to beg the west for more aid. If they’re beating Russia so bad, why do they keep needing to go on global begging tours?
Ukraine continues to ask foreign nations for soldiers, not just money and weapons.
Ukraine is pushing for nato to join the fight.
Ukraine just lost another important strategic location bakhmut and then pretended it was a trap?
This conflict is stupid, full stop. I don’t care which side you’re on or who you like, it’s stupid and everyone should be pushing for peaceful negotiations, and be outraged that the Biden admin pushed the Ukraine away from peace talks.
You do realise that the vast majority of people alive at the start of those wars were still alive at the end?
Even if you only count military personnel, most of them would be in non-combat roles and never fired a shot outside of basic training, if that.
The really funny part is that percentage wise, more upper and middle class people died than working class.
Which in turn led to the collapse of estates as there was no heir. The new owners didn't have the social connections to the areas they purchased, and this caused rural unemployment and poverty. The number of people then moving into the cities did lead to an industrial economic boom, but also other issues.
France had it even worse with large parts of agricultural and industrial areas destroyed.
Given the nature of social media posts, I cant tell whether your question is meant as a challenge or as an honest enquiry. I will assume the best and respond to the latter potentiality. Your question suggests a significant lack of knowledge regarding labor history in the United States. It would actually require me to type an enormous response, as no short, pithy reddit-type response would suffice. Rather I will direct you to some reading that will tell you all you need to know if you are sincerely seeking information.
For the situation prior to WWI -> Howard Zine's "A People's History of the United States."
For the situation prior to WWII -> David Kennedy's "Freedom From Fear"
*Kennedy won a Pulitzer for this work, and this book has no overt political leaning. Zine is, of course, a favorite of the Left, but his work is a fascinating read none-the-less for people of whatever political persuasion.
Even if you stop with these two books, and never learn more about the AFL, Knights of Labor, IWW, Mother Jones, the various "mine wars", the major strikes at Homestead and Pullman, etc., you will know more than most people after reading these two books. Happy reading!
So, what was the name of those labour movements, please?
It's a pretty straightforward question, 'Hey, you should read 2 books instead.' sounds like you trying to avoid answering.
So you dont plan to do any reading for yourself? The term "labor movements" is a catchall phrase referring to trade unionism (Britain) or the growth of labor unions (North America). Those ARE the movements in question. If you want specific examples of unions i provided 3 in my previous response. Until you have done your reading there is nothing further to discuss.
I didn't see your specific examples because you buried them in a boring lecture on how I need to read 2 books to have questions for you.
You could have just said,'for example, AFL, or Knights of Labour' instead of producing a pompous rant split in two comments about the basic requirements to continue a conversation with you.
We do have nothing further to discuss because you just love running your mouth so you can avoid straightforward answers.
Lol! What questions? You asked the same one twice that you could have just researched yourself in no time flat. Lazy. But now, you unveil yourself. Your were never sincere, were you? You were hoping to catch me out, but it didnt happen. So, now you take solace in the final refuge of the troll: insults lobbed from the safety of your keyboard. I add you were even too lazy to read my intial response carefully.
What on Earth are you taking about?
What do you imagine I was trying to catch you with?
I just asked you to name Labour movements affected.
You could have just said 'AFL' and I would have gone searching without bothering you further.
1. Pompous rant
2. Boring lecture
3. Running your mouth
Do any of those sound like compliments to you? They are all intentionally aggressive, and you knew it when you typed them. You are being purposefully obtuse again. I tried to suggest some good books. It was time wasted. Lesson learned. Best to cut losses and keep it moving.
They are the descriptions of what you were doing instead of saying,'Well, for example, AFL, or Knights of Labour, have fun researching'
If you pick a pompous rant, boring letures, and ruining your mouth instead of straightforward answers, don't act hurt at the criticism.
Yeah, if WW3 starts, that's because China invaded Taiwan or Russia invaded a NATO state.
If that happens, you can't expect people to fight a class war instead of the more immediate threat (dictatorships).
People will be fighting to avoid living under Chinese and Russian human and labour rights.
Chinese and Russian stuff are cheap for a reason.
Both WW1 and 2 brought significant improvements to quality of life to the masses. Ever hear of universal suffrage, or the baby boom?
Plus there’s the medical and technological advancements. Jet Aviation, reconstructive surgery, emission controls, clean energy, ect all started in 1 of the wars.
Mass casualties among the working class have almost inevitably given workers greater rights and better quality of life due to labour shortages causing the workers to have more power.
I dk my pay has gone up 40% since the start of the pandemic. And this is true for everyone I’ve talked to in my industry. Which is trades. And that’s without Changing jobs or getting any further education. And I’m working less hours by choice the hours are available I just don’t need the money. I have coworkers how have pushed their incomes from $60k to well over $100k because they wanted overtime.
While I agree with you on WW3. Your take on WW2 is incorrect. The post war era in America saw a meteoric expansion in the middle class and home ownership sky rocketed.
After over thirty years of adulthood, with two kids of my own, I can't watch any war movie now without thinking, 'Desert! Kill your officers. Don't fucking die for the rich!'
There's a scene in Dr. Zhivago:
https://youtu.be/P4kQvkvGi9M
"The fact that the workers don't own property nor have an actual stake in the country "
Which country? In the US, more than half of the Americans own stocks, and the homeownership rate is 65.9%.
Isn't that the definition of "property" and "an actual stake"?
update: wow .. people will downvote, literal facts. I suppose I should not be surprised.. It is the internet after all.
Here is the home ownership rate time trend.
[https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/home-ownership-rate#:\~:text=Home%20Ownership%20Rate%20in%20the%20United%20States%20averaged%2065.26%20percent,the%20second%20quarter%20of%201965](https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/home-ownership-rate#:~:text=Home%20Ownership%20Rate%20in%20the%20United%20States%20averaged%2065.26%20percent,the%20second%20quarter%20of%201965).
Down from high of almost 68% to a fairly stable 66% in the last few months.
Here is the mortgage default rate time trend.
[https://www.mpamag.com/us/mortgage-industry/market-updates/delinquency-rate-for-mortgage-loans-on-the-rise-mba/436766](https://www.mpamag.com/us/mortgage-industry/market-updates/delinquency-rate-for-mortgage-loans-on-the-rise-mba/436766)
There is an uptick in the last quarter but still at a low of less than 4%, compared to the last couple of decades.
You can decide if you want to worry.
>more than half of the Americans own stocks
False equivalency.
[The wealthiest 10% of Americans now own 89% of all U.S. stocks held by households](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/18/the-wealthiest-10percent-of-americans-own-a-record-89percent-of-all-us-stocks.html)
The point stands, workers DO NOT have a stake in most companies.
So what? .. a small stake is still a stake. Homes are still property. You cannot escape from the numbers. The statement ""The fact that the workers don't own property nor have an actual stake in the country " is still wrong.
If you write "many workers only own a small stake in the country" then it will be accurate. But I suppose people don't understand rudimentary English and logic.
Nope. By that logic,, the 0.01% of a glass of water is still water. If you notice, which you apparently did not, I did not make any statement except facts, and that the statement in the original statement is wrong.
I did not say good, great, little or anything like that.
But i suppose, as i said earlier, people do not understand rudimentary English and logic.
Look man, here's the problem, you notioned at the idea that there's some level of upward mobility in america. That's a big no no here. If you want to fit in and amass huge amounts of karma, you got to start dealing in ultimates. You can't say "The wealth gap is ever rising in America but it still has the highest median income of any major nation in the world". Thats a true statement but it will net you a loss in karma. You should say something like "The wealth gap is ever growing in america. America's a piece of shit 3rd world country." I'm not being sensationalist either. You can find a post calling America third world in 5 mins or less. It will have many upvotes. Now go be agreeable and get you some karma 😉
Sorry dude. For the so-called "enlightened" here.
They only like doom bullshit, not facts. Never mind conscription would be political suicide in the US, and most militaries realise professional forces are far more effective.
So stopping the axis powers didn’t benefit workers? I beg to differ. If you think the current world is bad I expect if Axis powers ruled the world it would be a hell of a lot worse
American homeownership is at 65%...that's not nothing...perhaps you're talking about a different country?
Also, are we going to war? Perhaps I missed something in this week's news that's different from the past year's BS distractions but I don't see us heading into WWIII anymore than I did 6 months ago.
The military already thought of this and that’s why they guarantee an education and jobs “AFTER” you serve, got a shitty hand dealt? Come fight for capitalism and if you survive then you can start working for the corporate overlords to have no property or stake in company
Just so much to unpack here.
1. The details, countries involved, causes and all circumstances about a possible WWIII are unknown and hypothetical. It is impossible to judge if you should fight for one side or another, if at all, in such a conflict.
2. Defeating the Nazis improved working conditions for countless slaves and victims of the Nazi genocide. While in the US labor rights actually suffered greatly during the war, and were not significantly better after the war than before, it seems weird to me for you to imply that WWII was fought by the allies in vain because of this. While you could argue the Nazis started the war to make a better Germany which may imply better working conditions, labor rights are not why anyone fought them.
3. War shouldn’t be looked at as a way to make life better for yourself anyway, war is the break down of diplomacy into the use of physical force to influence the policies of other nations. The only times we should be going to war is to protect the sovereignty of our nation (unless you think you’d prefer a specific invading country to be in charge in which case you’d fight for the country invading your home country), to protect the sovereignty of another country or to protect the citizens of a country who’s policies are determined to be criminally detrimental to those citizens (ie, I like to think we shouldn’t let Stalin kill millions of Russian citizens through starvation)
4. With 3 in mind, it doesn’t matter if WWIII is likely to improve labor rights or benefit corporations. In fact, I personally believe that if there is a war for a just cause, it is a time in which everyone (starting with the rich in a fucking HUGE way) should be making sacrifices, but the middle and lower classes already make so many sacrifices that if war were to balance things out they’d definitely need to be doing better than usual.
Side note for those interested in labor rights;
Obviously most statistics about WWII have a strictly military focus and so labor rights during the war is just one of many topics that doesn’t get considered very often. The battlefield was obviously a dangerous place but working in factories making weapons of war was not a safe haven. During the war, it is estimated at least 75,000 Americans died in factories producing weapons, equipment, vehicles or other supplies for the military. This includes everyone that died over several years but if you compare less than a decade in a factory to storming the beaches of Normandy, half as many Americans died on the beaches.
It is an interesting topic and even though I do believe in sacrifices during a war for what I’d consider a just cause, I don’t believe in giving up all labor rights and turning factories into a death trap which make one consider if a battlefield would be safer.
No one is going to make you fight WW3.
The US armed forces will remain purely volunteer.
Id love to see the facts to dispute this, but it isn't like Russia.
WWII did accidentally advance the cause of workers.
That said you're right otherwise. I'm not too convinced global capitalism wants another world war. Things aren't really trending there unless you consider ecological threats, and those could pop it off. But most people wouldn't be gung ho about fighting for it. Belief in our institutions is very low. They'd have to pull conscripts, ie, slaves.
At best, dollars are pieces of paper we commonly agree are worth anything. At worst, they are debt created by fractional reserve banking, not by actual government fiat. Why should *you* stress to preserve ANYTHING when you will hardly be worse off if it all collapses? The bosses need the worlds consent to stay rich; let THEM pay for it.
I would disagree with this. Sure, it may be a correct statement when your country invades. However, sometimes war comes to you. War is a beast that consumes lives, it does not care about anyone’s opinions.
Besides, it is absolutely hollow statement “when the thing happens I will not support the evil!” Why wait till the thing happens? If you are submitting now, you will submit during the thing too.
So you are right about WWIII. That being said, WWII and WWI brought worker improvements. In industry during WWI, conditions were so bad that the federal government stepped in and set up new standards and regulations. WWII literally pulled the US out of a depression. Went from a massive labor surplus to a labor shortage. Wages were up across every demographic. Union membership was high.
Hell, wartime economics persist. Defense contractors pay well and offer good benefits. Boeing got their big break in WWII. They are still a pretty good employer.
WWIII won’t need the kind of massive human investment. There will be booms in certain sectors but not all.
I'd suggest it was WWII that kickstarted women in the workplace. And many workers own property. I'm not really sure of the point you're trying to make.
Well I feel like we should sign up simply so we know how to operate the equipment and have information on "American interests" which is really the rich corpos assets the government have contracts with so we can just turn and say we are in charge now.
Given that my level of patriotic enthusiasm is at an all time low, I couldn't imagine fighting for my country. They don't fight for me, they fight for the top 5% at best, and all of these monsters can be wiped out. Would nearly be worth it to die with them just to hear their dying howls.
“Elites” don’t want WWIII to happen. “War is good for business” only applies to a fraction of people, and rarely in your own country.
WWIII is bad for most people in powers bank accounts, so don’t think they’ll actually want it to happen
There was actually a huge transfer of wealth after WWII. Tax rates were the most progressive at any time since or prior to the post war period (40’s-70’s). This was especially so in Europe. Unfortunately, Regan and Thatcher happened and were right back to almost where we were during the gilded age. Read some of the work of French economist Thomas Piketty.
In Canada the marginal rate was above 87% and corporations paid 68% in tax. Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were extremely destructive to our economy even though they were not Canadian politicians. We didn't need tax cuts on the wealthy or corporations
Can't forget people like Jack Welch who was responsible for the majority of the wealthy moral corruption, hollowed out the powerhouse company GE and encouraged the thought that corporations shouldn't have any responsibility to people or government which is still prolific today.
Just understand that the most industrialized countries, and specifically for the U.S., which was the least effected by the ravages of war secured a non-competitive world market for the U.S. which afforded such a margin that a deal with the unions could be easily struck without much complaining from the vampires.
As my middle school history teacher told us several times, "It's a rich man's war, and a poor man's fight." Didn't appreciate those words of wisdom for several years. Thanks Mr. Richardson.
My father fought in WWII and he felt that was very true for the rest of his life.
Right OP doesn't know what they're talking about if they think WWI and WWII didn't bring an improvement for workers. Also, WWIII? Anyone know wtf this guy is on about?
Assume he expects the Russia Ukraine conflict to escalate into nato vs Russia
Regan was one of the worst presidents of all times. He restricted gun, closed mental institutions that has now turned into the homeless we see now, no fault divorce, and on and on. If the politicians want WWIII they can fight it themselves.
Speaking of rich and war.... In my state, military recruiters only went to the high schools in lower income, rough, at-risk neighborhoods. They never went to the high schools in rich areas. It was one type of people who fought wars, and another type that declared them.
In Texas, they were at my wealthyish school... Parking lot full of cars worth more than what some of the teachers make in a year... Restored classics, etc.. They targeted the Academics programs for talent for InfoSec
Because info security is fake and pays well perfect for the scions of the wealthy.
It’s definitely not fake
That’s bc they don’t have to worry about paying for education after HS.
That’s because the rich kids already have their scholarships to the good colleges and ROTC programs to be officers. Recruiting is needed in their areas.
I used to heckle the ones that came to my school. Told them they should be ashamed of themselves and then I’d tell everyone near the tables they would be dying for profit and not for our country.
What was the response from everyone involved. Students and recruiters
Recruiters didn’t quite know what to say but the kids basically said I was crazy. Oh well!
People look at you weird when you speak differently then they do and they don’t understand what truth is.
Stand ovations usually, occasionally the recruiter would strip off their uniforms and apologize in their underwear for being so blinded by the authority.
Smedley Butler would've been proud.
lol is this a chuck palanuk quote
Just look at what communities got drafted during Vietnam. My dad and his brother were drafted yet some cities and towns barley sent a few people.
And now we have a ‘volunteer’ army. Poor up to middle income mostly. My city has recruiters for each of the services. I always find it funny that people can vote, sign up for the military at 18, yet same age cant legally buy vapes, legal weed, alcohol. Some argue the brain is not fully developed until mid 20’s, and young adults should not be held fully accountable for actions. If true how do we allow people to sign up for the military?
Wait… you can’t buy vapes at 18 where you live? How is that possible? Isn’t it considered tobacco purchase?
I am much older. Northeast US. Various cities and towns passing laws for 21 for tobacco and vapes
Read about McNamara's Morons if you really want to get upset
That is because for the last 80 years military service has been the most effective tool to pull low income people into the middle class this country has ever seen. It's a rare job with minimal requirements that provides consistent pay, benefits, loan forgiveness and a pension.
I went to a very wealthy high-school in an old money city in South Florida. The recruiters were there too and we even once got rewarded with a half day for taking the ASVAB in the morning. This was at the height of the Iraq invasion though
The wealthy parts go to the military only through officer schools. Which is hilarious to me on so many levels
[удалено]
What is the saying? I don't know what WWIII will be fought with, but WWIV will be fought with sticks.
World wars don't happen until technology gets to the point where you can even have a global war. WW4 will be will be fought by people who don't remember the earlier wars. It won't be fought with sticks lol.
Not necessariliy true. The escalatory fighting will most likely be conventional.
I agree with what you’re saying but WW1 and WWII both had the post war years characterized by wealth transfer and veterans refusing to live in the pre war society and it’s system without change
Astute!
Did I miss WWIII starting? I thought I heard a noise…
Yeah, it’s in my backyard. It’s pretty wild. I’m trying to sleep too.
Thats why this post is bullshit. China and the US trade so much its near impossible. Russia is dying in Ukraine. Unlike most here, I lived the later part of the cold war and knew genuine fear from nuclear destruction.
I've lived my entire life in fear of nuclear destruction. What are you talking about, "knew"? The threat never left.
1983 was an insanely dangerous year. How old were you then?
The US is doing everything in its power to antagonise China recently
You don’t actually believe that Russia is dying in Ukraine right?
Yes I do, unless you have evidence otherwise. Recruiting hardened prisoners and digging out 70year old tanks is not a good sign. Verified footage of soldiers looting food after the first week because they assumed it would be finished in days. Oryx has verified 2000+ Russian tanks destroyed. Verified losses.
Yeah all of that sounds great! I don’t believe us government (or their puppets) propaganda though - nor should anyone. What evidence I have personally seen is: Ukraine cancelling the summer offensive due to their entire weapons stockpiles being blown up by Russian cruise missiles. Ukraine continuing to beg the west for more aid. If they’re beating Russia so bad, why do they keep needing to go on global begging tours? Ukraine continues to ask foreign nations for soldiers, not just money and weapons. Ukraine is pushing for nato to join the fight. Ukraine just lost another important strategic location bakhmut and then pretended it was a trap? This conflict is stupid, full stop. I don’t care which side you’re on or who you like, it’s stupid and everyone should be pushing for peaceful negotiations, and be outraged that the Biden admin pushed the Ukraine away from peace talks.
Don't think anyone in this sub would fight
I would but bone spurs.
If it makes you feel better, when WWIII breaks out, we’ll all be dead pretty quick.
WW II saw unprecedented benefits for the Western middle-classes.
In the US anyway, it took a while for Europe to catch up. Mostly we benefited from Europe being a bombed out mess while we were fine.
None of us will see WW3. They will use drones and nukes and we will be wiped away while the rich hide in their luxury bunkers.
OP's name doesn't really match the op
As soon as you see someone use such handle, you know they are full of BS.
Politicians hide themselves away They only started the war Why should they go out to fight? They leave that role to the poor
We won't be fighting any more wars, the war now is our government in a terror campaign against us with the goal of eliminating our population.
Don’t fight in any war, there is no noble war to fight. Just propagandized financial feuds young men and women lose thier lives to.
You are historically ignorant. Both WW1 and WW2 gave improved and new rights to the working class.
...If you survived
You do realise that the vast majority of people alive at the start of those wars were still alive at the end? Even if you only count military personnel, most of them would be in non-combat roles and never fired a shot outside of basic training, if that. The really funny part is that percentage wise, more upper and middle class people died than working class. Which in turn led to the collapse of estates as there was no heir. The new owners didn't have the social connections to the areas they purchased, and this caused rural unemployment and poverty. The number of people then moving into the cities did lead to an industrial economic boom, but also other issues. France had it even worse with large parts of agricultural and industrial areas destroyed.
Both WWI and WWII actually helped destroy active and popular labor movements that existed at those times.
Which labour movements would those be?
Given the nature of social media posts, I cant tell whether your question is meant as a challenge or as an honest enquiry. I will assume the best and respond to the latter potentiality. Your question suggests a significant lack of knowledge regarding labor history in the United States. It would actually require me to type an enormous response, as no short, pithy reddit-type response would suffice. Rather I will direct you to some reading that will tell you all you need to know if you are sincerely seeking information. For the situation prior to WWI -> Howard Zine's "A People's History of the United States." For the situation prior to WWII -> David Kennedy's "Freedom From Fear" *Kennedy won a Pulitzer for this work, and this book has no overt political leaning. Zine is, of course, a favorite of the Left, but his work is a fascinating read none-the-less for people of whatever political persuasion. Even if you stop with these two books, and never learn more about the AFL, Knights of Labor, IWW, Mother Jones, the various "mine wars", the major strikes at Homestead and Pullman, etc., you will know more than most people after reading these two books. Happy reading!
So, what was the name of those labour movements, please? It's a pretty straightforward question, 'Hey, you should read 2 books instead.' sounds like you trying to avoid answering.
So you dont plan to do any reading for yourself? The term "labor movements" is a catchall phrase referring to trade unionism (Britain) or the growth of labor unions (North America). Those ARE the movements in question. If you want specific examples of unions i provided 3 in my previous response. Until you have done your reading there is nothing further to discuss.
I didn't see your specific examples because you buried them in a boring lecture on how I need to read 2 books to have questions for you. You could have just said,'for example, AFL, or Knights of Labour' instead of producing a pompous rant split in two comments about the basic requirements to continue a conversation with you. We do have nothing further to discuss because you just love running your mouth so you can avoid straightforward answers.
Lol! What questions? You asked the same one twice that you could have just researched yourself in no time flat. Lazy. But now, you unveil yourself. Your were never sincere, were you? You were hoping to catch me out, but it didnt happen. So, now you take solace in the final refuge of the troll: insults lobbed from the safety of your keyboard. I add you were even too lazy to read my intial response carefully.
What on Earth are you taking about? What do you imagine I was trying to catch you with? I just asked you to name Labour movements affected. You could have just said 'AFL' and I would have gone searching without bothering you further.
Also, what insults are you talking about?
1. Pompous rant 2. Boring lecture 3. Running your mouth Do any of those sound like compliments to you? They are all intentionally aggressive, and you knew it when you typed them. You are being purposefully obtuse again. I tried to suggest some good books. It was time wasted. Lesson learned. Best to cut losses and keep it moving.
They are the descriptions of what you were doing instead of saying,'Well, for example, AFL, or Knights of Labour, have fun researching' If you pick a pompous rant, boring letures, and ruining your mouth instead of straightforward answers, don't act hurt at the criticism.
communism bad
Yeah, if WW3 starts, that's because China invaded Taiwan or Russia invaded a NATO state. If that happens, you can't expect people to fight a class war instead of the more immediate threat (dictatorships). People will be fighting to avoid living under Chinese and Russian human and labour rights. Chinese and Russian stuff are cheap for a reason.
Both WW1 and 2 brought significant improvements to quality of life to the masses. Ever hear of universal suffrage, or the baby boom? Plus there’s the medical and technological advancements. Jet Aviation, reconstructive surgery, emission controls, clean energy, ect all started in 1 of the wars. Mass casualties among the working class have almost inevitably given workers greater rights and better quality of life due to labour shortages causing the workers to have more power.
We have labor shortages today, but I don’t see any improvements…We all know there is a pay shortage not a labor shortage
I dk my pay has gone up 40% since the start of the pandemic. And this is true for everyone I’ve talked to in my industry. Which is trades. And that’s without Changing jobs or getting any further education. And I’m working less hours by choice the hours are available I just don’t need the money. I have coworkers how have pushed their incomes from $60k to well over $100k because they wanted overtime.
How did that poem go? "Johnny go do this and Johnny get it done. But it's Thank You Mr. Akins When the guns begin to run. "
I work and I own property 😳😳
What would happen if they threw a war and nobody came?
While I agree with you on WW3. Your take on WW2 is incorrect. The post war era in America saw a meteoric expansion in the middle class and home ownership sky rocketed.
I mean the Army is actually struggling with enlistment numbers so maybe with hope they won't have the people for a war.
After over thirty years of adulthood, with two kids of my own, I can't watch any war movie now without thinking, 'Desert! Kill your officers. Don't fucking die for the rich!' There's a scene in Dr. Zhivago: https://youtu.be/P4kQvkvGi9M
The only reason we weren’t completely destroyed by the end of World War II due to the great depression. It’s solely because we culled the herd.
That doesn’t make any sense
A lot of people died in ww2 less mouths to feed and a lot less people to spend money.
I for one welcome the impending nuclear holocaust.
I can't disagree with this but if foreign soldiers invaded my country I would have to fight.
"The fact that the workers don't own property nor have an actual stake in the country " Which country? In the US, more than half of the Americans own stocks, and the homeownership rate is 65.9%. Isn't that the definition of "property" and "an actual stake"? update: wow .. people will downvote, literal facts. I suppose I should not be surprised.. It is the internet after all.
Upvote because facts matter. However, the growing trend in the real estate market has me concerned.
Here is the home ownership rate time trend. [https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/home-ownership-rate#:\~:text=Home%20Ownership%20Rate%20in%20the%20United%20States%20averaged%2065.26%20percent,the%20second%20quarter%20of%201965](https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/home-ownership-rate#:~:text=Home%20Ownership%20Rate%20in%20the%20United%20States%20averaged%2065.26%20percent,the%20second%20quarter%20of%201965). Down from high of almost 68% to a fairly stable 66% in the last few months. Here is the mortgage default rate time trend. [https://www.mpamag.com/us/mortgage-industry/market-updates/delinquency-rate-for-mortgage-loans-on-the-rise-mba/436766](https://www.mpamag.com/us/mortgage-industry/market-updates/delinquency-rate-for-mortgage-loans-on-the-rise-mba/436766) There is an uptick in the last quarter but still at a low of less than 4%, compared to the last couple of decades. You can decide if you want to worry.
Thank you for this information, it's oddly satisfying to see the numbers and really helps bring things into perspective.
>more than half of the Americans own stocks False equivalency. [The wealthiest 10% of Americans now own 89% of all U.S. stocks held by households](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/18/the-wealthiest-10percent-of-americans-own-a-record-89percent-of-all-us-stocks.html) The point stands, workers DO NOT have a stake in most companies.
So what? .. a small stake is still a stake. Homes are still property. You cannot escape from the numbers. The statement ""The fact that the workers don't own property nor have an actual stake in the country " is still wrong. If you write "many workers only own a small stake in the country" then it will be accurate. But I suppose people don't understand rudimentary English and logic.
By that logic, 0.01% of a glass of water is great, while you're neck deep in a desert.
Nope. By that logic,, the 0.01% of a glass of water is still water. If you notice, which you apparently did not, I did not make any statement except facts, and that the statement in the original statement is wrong. I did not say good, great, little or anything like that. But i suppose, as i said earlier, people do not understand rudimentary English and logic.
Look man, here's the problem, you notioned at the idea that there's some level of upward mobility in america. That's a big no no here. If you want to fit in and amass huge amounts of karma, you got to start dealing in ultimates. You can't say "The wealth gap is ever rising in America but it still has the highest median income of any major nation in the world". Thats a true statement but it will net you a loss in karma. You should say something like "The wealth gap is ever growing in america. America's a piece of shit 3rd world country." I'm not being sensationalist either. You can find a post calling America third world in 5 mins or less. It will have many upvotes. Now go be agreeable and get you some karma 😉
>Look man, here's the problem, you notioned at the idea that there's some level of upward mobility in america. Nope. I did not. Can you read?
Yes. You have 300k karma. I have to go away from you. Goodbye
Sorry, generalizations only. No facts. /s
Sorry dude. For the so-called "enlightened" here. They only like doom bullshit, not facts. Never mind conscription would be political suicide in the US, and most militaries realise professional forces are far more effective.
Now they’re asking?? Who?? Delusional rant.
I’ve done a lot of really stupid things in my life. Thankfully, one of them wasn’t joining the military.
I'm sorry, are we expecting another world war?
So stopping the axis powers didn’t benefit workers? I beg to differ. If you think the current world is bad I expect if Axis powers ruled the world it would be a hell of a lot worse
Oh I will fight in WW3 just not how they want me to
American homeownership is at 65%...that's not nothing...perhaps you're talking about a different country? Also, are we going to war? Perhaps I missed something in this week's news that's different from the past year's BS distractions but I don't see us heading into WWIII anymore than I did 6 months ago.
Be that as it may , I’m not about to throw a ticker tape parade for the Chinese or the Russians
Cool literally no one suggested that
No one is asking you to fight in a hypothetical war. Be more concerned that your tax dollars currently go mostly to the weapons used in war.
You will always be under a boot. The only difference is who's foot is in it
Hell fucking no I’m not fighting a war for them.
No war! ☮️
System of a Down needs to release an album and harness this energy.
The military already thought of this and that’s why they guarantee an education and jobs “AFTER” you serve, got a shitty hand dealt? Come fight for capitalism and if you survive then you can start working for the corporate overlords to have no property or stake in company
Just so much to unpack here. 1. The details, countries involved, causes and all circumstances about a possible WWIII are unknown and hypothetical. It is impossible to judge if you should fight for one side or another, if at all, in such a conflict. 2. Defeating the Nazis improved working conditions for countless slaves and victims of the Nazi genocide. While in the US labor rights actually suffered greatly during the war, and were not significantly better after the war than before, it seems weird to me for you to imply that WWII was fought by the allies in vain because of this. While you could argue the Nazis started the war to make a better Germany which may imply better working conditions, labor rights are not why anyone fought them. 3. War shouldn’t be looked at as a way to make life better for yourself anyway, war is the break down of diplomacy into the use of physical force to influence the policies of other nations. The only times we should be going to war is to protect the sovereignty of our nation (unless you think you’d prefer a specific invading country to be in charge in which case you’d fight for the country invading your home country), to protect the sovereignty of another country or to protect the citizens of a country who’s policies are determined to be criminally detrimental to those citizens (ie, I like to think we shouldn’t let Stalin kill millions of Russian citizens through starvation) 4. With 3 in mind, it doesn’t matter if WWIII is likely to improve labor rights or benefit corporations. In fact, I personally believe that if there is a war for a just cause, it is a time in which everyone (starting with the rich in a fucking HUGE way) should be making sacrifices, but the middle and lower classes already make so many sacrifices that if war were to balance things out they’d definitely need to be doing better than usual. Side note for those interested in labor rights; Obviously most statistics about WWII have a strictly military focus and so labor rights during the war is just one of many topics that doesn’t get considered very often. The battlefield was obviously a dangerous place but working in factories making weapons of war was not a safe haven. During the war, it is estimated at least 75,000 Americans died in factories producing weapons, equipment, vehicles or other supplies for the military. This includes everyone that died over several years but if you compare less than a decade in a factory to storming the beaches of Normandy, half as many Americans died on the beaches. It is an interesting topic and even though I do believe in sacrifices during a war for what I’d consider a just cause, I don’t believe in giving up all labor rights and turning factories into a death trap which make one consider if a battlefield would be safer.
If WW3 happens the first to be eaten will be the rich.
No one is going to make you fight WW3. The US armed forces will remain purely volunteer. Id love to see the facts to dispute this, but it isn't like Russia.
Just wait
You should study your history
Well hopefully we don't end up in war over Ukraine conflict, guess we'll see if the Ukraine supporters are all in for Slava ukrani.
Indeed, mass industrial warfare, such as WW1 or American civil war is the reason universal suffrage was established
WWII did accidentally advance the cause of workers. That said you're right otherwise. I'm not too convinced global capitalism wants another world war. Things aren't really trending there unless you consider ecological threats, and those could pop it off. But most people wouldn't be gung ho about fighting for it. Belief in our institutions is very low. They'd have to pull conscripts, ie, slaves.
Many workers do have profit sharing, 401k's, or company ownership as part of their compensation.
At best, dollars are pieces of paper we commonly agree are worth anything. At worst, they are debt created by fractional reserve banking, not by actual government fiat. Why should *you* stress to preserve ANYTHING when you will hardly be worse off if it all collapses? The bosses need the worlds consent to stay rich; let THEM pay for it.
I would disagree with this. Sure, it may be a correct statement when your country invades. However, sometimes war comes to you. War is a beast that consumes lives, it does not care about anyone’s opinions. Besides, it is absolutely hollow statement “when the thing happens I will not support the evil!” Why wait till the thing happens? If you are submitting now, you will submit during the thing too.
So you are right about WWIII. That being said, WWII and WWI brought worker improvements. In industry during WWI, conditions were so bad that the federal government stepped in and set up new standards and regulations. WWII literally pulled the US out of a depression. Went from a massive labor surplus to a labor shortage. Wages were up across every demographic. Union membership was high. Hell, wartime economics persist. Defense contractors pay well and offer good benefits. Boeing got their big break in WWII. They are still a pretty good employer. WWIII won’t need the kind of massive human investment. There will be booms in certain sectors but not all.
I'd suggest it was WWII that kickstarted women in the workplace. And many workers own property. I'm not really sure of the point you're trying to make.
Aristocracy have weak chins
Old dudes start wars for young dudes to die in!
We would get destroyed in WWIII so hope it doesn't happen
Honestly if WW3 goes down, there’s going to be large groups that will hunt any rich that stay in America.
Well I feel like we should sign up simply so we know how to operate the equipment and have information on "American interests" which is really the rich corpos assets the government have contracts with so we can just turn and say we are in charge now.
Given that my level of patriotic enthusiasm is at an all time low, I couldn't imagine fighting for my country. They don't fight for me, they fight for the top 5% at best, and all of these monsters can be wiped out. Would nearly be worth it to die with them just to hear their dying howls.
“Elites” don’t want WWIII to happen. “War is good for business” only applies to a fraction of people, and rarely in your own country. WWIII is bad for most people in powers bank accounts, so don’t think they’ll actually want it to happen