Comments by "bighand69" (@bighands69) on "" video.

  1. The interstate network is fine for time critical small scale deliveries but it would never able to compete on a per cost bases with large bulk transport of waterways. A series of barges can transports many orders of magnitude of load for a fraction of the cost of a road system. The road system also helps to fill in the gaps of the water and rail system but it in no way has caused the water ways to be reduced in their operations. What has really happened is that productivity has increased at a national level but the water ways simply have not been utilized if they were the cost of US goods would dramatically reduce.
    15
  2. Can you explain how an enterprising business person could over come the Jones Act, Unions, democratic party and Republican party?
    10
  3. Modern "environmentalism" has nothing to do with the environment.
    6
  4. It has nothing to do with quality of life.
    2
  5. if Unions want to thrive they need to push free market economics the forefront of American culture. That means less regulations on American industry but it does not mean no regulations at all. It just means being more efficient with regulations. None of this is complicated. If American water ways were open trade with in the US would become more efficient. At present about 85% if US trade is internal and with good waterways, local manufacturing, good ports, good train ports and so on that figure could end up higher than 90% which would dramatically improve a middle class working economy.
    2
  6. I am afraid that is just nonsense.
    2
  7. Unions have a bad rap because since the 1920s they have been heavily infiltrated by Marxists who simply are not interested in the workers. In the UK the USSR had infiltrated the unions which culminated in the UK unions trying to bring down the UK economy in the 1970s when it was on its knees after the war.
    2
  8. They are paid above average industrial wages. Their salaries are better than those that work in food plants, supermarkets, construction and so on. They have some of the best safety standards of the industrial world. Their collective bargaining has enabled that. Paid sick leave is not a thing they should be pushing for. If they want that they just need to start up their own insurance system that could get government capital to start with and then be self sustaining with payments from employees.
    2
  9. Paid sick days is a terrible idea. It sounds great to a reasonable person because most people would never abuses such a system but there are those that will abuse it and it will cost more for everybody else.
    2
  10. It will not give any benefits at all. If the strikes are vicious enough and they are willing to go far enough what will happen is that alternatives such as the waterways may end up coming into play and that could be disastrous for a local union worker whose very livelihood depends on a particular system such as rail. There are other countries were the railways collapsed because they played that very same game.
    1
  11. If they get paid sick leave it will mean that the cost increases and it also means that employees that are not sick will have to pay for those that are off. In Europe where sick leave is enforced by law there is a proportion of the workforce that will take advantage of that and use it as a holiday system. So instead of taking a holiday they will just phone in sick. At first the cost will not be that high but after a few years it will increase the cost of an employee's overall earnings by a few percent per year and over 40 years of working that employee will be $400,000 less well off. If Unions members want sick leave their solution is simple they can start an insurance system to cover those that fall into these hard times. Such a system will not be open to the same level of abuses and it could also have company contributions.
    1