So I came up with this. First Amendment protection of organizing covers state labor protection for organizing when such protection is the necessary condition for organizing in that state. Nor can fed labor law that was designed to make it safe for unions become the hermetic seal against state help — while doing nothing (in this era) itself. http://ontodayspage.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-restocking-of-american-labor-union.html
States: Preemption bars setting up union elections. Not prevent making union busting a felony — per First Amendment and Congressional original intent for NLRA.
The far-out wilder each may seem to the reader per cultural inertia — potentially the bigger the waves for everybody to (including media) to notice. We’ll see. ???
PS. Can’t get minorities out to vote because alienated and don’t expect anything for any candidate? Let alienated voters set up their own (favorite) ballot initiative (available in some form in most states — 12 go all the way to the law books in different steps) — then do the “shills around the block” supporting their self-dealt hand. Will vote Democratic while they are in there.
On the republican proposal: Note mentioned often is the end of the ability to defer income which a lot of top execs use, now it would be the case that the taxes are due when the money vests not when you withdraw it. (a lot of bonus eligible folks used this as a sort of backdoor additional 401k like feature, all be it the money was just an obligation of their employeer).
In addition the current loophole that allows companies to deduct performance based comp above $1 million would end. The to be consistent there is the 20% excise tax on non profits for comp above $1 million, (which is just balancing the for profit issue, as the 20%tax would also be applied to the execs comp above $1 million) so that no matter if an exec works for a profit or non profit firm comp above $1 million would be taxed.
On the deferred comp issue deferred comp really only makes sense if you expect long term for your tax rate to be lower which if this passes is unlikley to occur as I suspect that long term rates will rise.
On gun control, it appears that a lot of bureaucrats can not be bothered to input data into the relevant systems correctly about things that would disqualify folks from buying guns, the Texas Shooter, the Charleston Shooter (which apparently was a clerical error) and at least possibly the Va Tech shooter would have been banned if the right information had been entered and/or the types of convictions that qualified one for the database had been clear.
So in one sense no one can be bothered to input the information therefore we have not really tried the current laws out.
When I read this I guessed “yuppie” progressives might at last find (electoral) value trying to rebuild labor union density: “Republicans would have no place to hide.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/upshot/how-the-obama-coalition-crumbled-leaving-an-opening-for-trump.html
Nothing. So I came up with this. 3% of California voters could put making union busting a felony on the ballot — one step to law books.
http://ontodayspage.blogspot.com/2017/07/california-shills-around-block.html
Then I read about this. Preemption Chinese Wall — so everybody thought.
http://prospect.org/article/way-forward-labor-through-states
So I came up with this. First Amendment protection of organizing covers state labor protection for organizing when such protection is the necessary condition for organizing in that state. Nor can fed labor law that was designed to make it safe for unions become the hermetic seal against state help — while doing nothing (in this era) itself.
http://ontodayspage.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-restocking-of-american-labor-union.html
Still nothing Then I read this piece.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/11/01/democrats-add-to-better-deal-platform-with-a-slew-of-pro-labor-union-ideas/?utm_term=.9494ce60471d
MUCH BETTER DEAL, if you want to make waves that everybody (anybody) notices (even the media!).
Congress: Why Not Hold Union Representation Elections on a Regular Schedule?
Published November 1st, 2017 – Andrew Strom
Best idea yet — play perfectly into Repub tactic to force government unions to re certify yearly.
https://onlabor.org/why-not-hold-union-representation-elections-on-a-regular-schedule/
States: Preemption bars setting up union elections. Not prevent making union busting a felony — per First Amendment and Congressional original intent for NLRA.
The far-out wilder each may seem to the reader per cultural inertia — potentially the bigger the waves for everybody to (including media) to notice. We’ll see. ???
PS. Can’t get minorities out to vote because alienated and don’t expect anything for any candidate? Let alienated voters set up their own (favorite) ballot initiative (available in some form in most states — 12 go all the way to the law books in different steps) — then do the “shills around the block” supporting their self-dealt hand. Will vote Democratic while they are in there.
On the republican proposal: Note mentioned often is the end of the ability to defer income which a lot of top execs use, now it would be the case that the taxes are due when the money vests not when you withdraw it. (a lot of bonus eligible folks used this as a sort of backdoor additional 401k like feature, all be it the money was just an obligation of their employeer).
In addition the current loophole that allows companies to deduct performance based comp above $1 million would end. The to be consistent there is the 20% excise tax on non profits for comp above $1 million, (which is just balancing the for profit issue, as the 20%tax would also be applied to the execs comp above $1 million) so that no matter if an exec works for a profit or non profit firm comp above $1 million would be taxed.
On the deferred comp issue deferred comp really only makes sense if you expect long term for your tax rate to be lower which if this passes is unlikley to occur as I suspect that long term rates will rise.
On gun control, it appears that a lot of bureaucrats can not be bothered to input data into the relevant systems correctly about things that would disqualify folks from buying guns, the Texas Shooter, the Charleston Shooter (which apparently was a clerical error) and at least possibly the Va Tech shooter would have been banned if the right information had been entered and/or the types of convictions that qualified one for the database had been clear.
So in one sense no one can be bothered to input the information therefore we have not really tried the current laws out.