two US teens show how NOT to be sociopaths

PostmodernProphet said:
???...you think someone sat down and said..."you know what would be great?......let's have an economic down turn!".......
Click to expand...

You don't think big business and the politicians knew what would happen if a huge chunk of good paying jobs left the country and were replaced with shitty ones?
It was an attack on American labor, financed with our tax dollars through incentives and tax cuts for outsourcing. American Business called in their chips for all that campaign money, lobbying dollars and most likely a bunch of backdoor kickbacks.

Corporatism at it's finest....let's not forget our banking sector either.
 
Steelplate said:
Hey...it may not be slave wages to THEM....But it's certainly nothing that no worker in THIS country can afford to compete with.
Click to expand...

Ok, so you are pissed that their cost of living standards are lower? You now acknowledge that companies aren't paying their workers 'slave wages'? Good. That is a start.

The fact that we are able to produce at a low cost, while building up the middle class over there is good for OUR overall economy. It provides us with technology, goods that most Americans would not be able to afford if the same companies made the products here. This is basic economics. For the good of society as a whole, you produce the goods in the most efficient manner possible (including cost efficiencies).

This shift has been going on for decades, if a person in the US is still expecting that type of job, then they need someone to sit them down and explain reality to them. Get an education, get a job that IS available in the US.

BTW, just about every country in the world EMBRACES some sort of SOCIAL measures...be it health care, education, housing, whatever.... we don't. We expect to compete with the rest of the world AND expect everyone to pay their own bill for everything.
Click to expand...

This is complete nonsense. We have had social security, medicare, medicaid, welfare, food stamps etc... for decades. Since the 60's we began shifting health care costs over to corporations rather than the workers. It used to be everyone had their own plan. Then it went to companies paying for 'guaranteed coverage'. They paid the bulk of health care expenses... and most large companies still do. Check your health care insurance at work. What percentage do you pay vs. your employer? That part may not be the government providing the social 'measure' but it is a social measure being provided.
 
Steelplate said:
They didn't necessarily ignore anything....the situation changed so rapidly with outsourcing, downsizing and the crash if '08 that revenues dropped dramatically. Think about it....before the crash, it was never an issue worth mentioning.

But we can't hold corporate America accountable for anything, can we?
Click to expand...

1) the word you are looking for is off-shoring (a common mistake)
2) It has not happened rapidly, it has been going on for decades
3) The government is most certainly kicking the can down the road, they too have been doing that for decades
4) Corporate America is doing what it SHOULD be doing. You are just wrapped up in nationalism and lines on a map.
 
Don Quixote said:
not really, the current repugs and dims have just 'discovered' how deep the hole is that their predecessors have dug for them and they are sweating bullets looking for a way out...
Click to expand...

I would agree they are sweating bullets, but they knew all along how deep the hole was... they just were hoping not to be the ones in charge when the time came that we needed to climb out of said hole.
 
Steelplate said:
They didn't use to be a problem until the Private Sector decided that paying employees good wages was so passe, and decided that...."hey, we could make a killing if we just had slave labor....you know there are many countries that are so dirt poot that we could get them to make our shit for pennies on the dollar!"

But now, since the vast majority of our population relied on those jobs, and they were replaced by shitty ones....now all of a sudden it's the Public Sector worker that's the enemy.

Like it's our fault that big business fucked the country....well, us...the poor and the elderly, that is.

Yes, public sector pensions will and should change. But don't fuck over the people who have dedicated their lives to public service and are nearing retirement. Start with new and low seniority employees that have the time to make the adjustment.
Click to expand...
Great post, thanks. :good4u:
 
Superfreak said:
1) Sweatshop labor is also a severe stretch. Read up on the cost of living in those third world countries. Read what these jobs do to help build their economy (which is beneficial to all of us)

2) Those cheap consumer goods allow more people to enjoy them rather than just those with wealth.

3) While I understand some people may have been expecting the life of their parents where they worked for one company doing manual labor for thirty years and retired with a pension, the fact remains is that those days are gone. Not because corporations are evil. But rather because the corporations realized that the pensions were unsustainable and unpredictable. It does nobody any good if the corporations go out of business. Their job is to make a product that the rest of us can afford to buy. How many people would be able to have an ipad, HDTV, cell phone etc... if they were manufactured in the US?

This country has not gone in a downward spiral. Not in the least. Things may have stagnated in terms of wages, but that is in large part due to many benefits being paid for today that weren't paid for in the 1950's-60's by companies. That said, I would be interested to learn what it is that you are seeing that makes you think things are worse.
Click to expand...

When jobs go to third world countries, our employees lose out and our economy suffers. It sounds like you're saying we should put up with a crappy economy if it helps build up a third world country. Say it isn't so.
 
christiefan915 said:
When jobs go to third world countries, our employees lose out and our economy suffers. It sounds like you're saying we should put up with a crappy economy if it helps build up a third world country. Say it isn't so.
Click to expand...

Christi, that's not necessarily true. If lower paying American jobs are ship overseas and are replaced by higher paying jobs that certainly doesn't hurt our economy.
 
Superfreak said:
That is not what I want, I was commenting on his posts. He is the one that mentioned that the jobs were shipped to third world countries for 'slave wages'. I was pointing out that those wages were NOT considered 'slave wages' in third world countries as those wages were actually considered middle income there due to cost of living differences.

Is that ok?
Click to expand...

When I read stories about Nike and the tiny Pakistani kids making soccer balls, or Kathie Lee Gifford's clothing line made in El Salvador where the women described 11-hour, six-day work weeks in sweltering conditions for a base wage of 60 cents an hour, I consider that slave wages no matter how little their actual living wage is.
 
christiefan915 said:
When jobs go to third world countries, our employees lose out and our economy suffers. It sounds like you're saying we should put up with a crappy economy if it helps build up a third world country. Say it isn't so.
Click to expand...

No... if we produce goods and services in third world countries, it builds their economies so they can buy more goods and services. In turn it provides cheaper goods for the people in the US to buy so that more people can enjoy the advances. The majority of Americans would not be able to afford the tech they have today if it were made here.

As I stated, the off-shoring of these jobs has been going on for decades. If you know of someone who was expecting this to change, you should sit them down and explain that they need to train for a job that is actually going to be here.
 
christiefan915 said:
When I read stories about Nike and the tiny Pakistani kids making soccer balls, or Kathie Lee Gifford's clothing line made in El Salvador where the women described 11-hour, six-day work weeks in sweltering conditions for a base wage of 60 cents an hour, I consider that slave wages no matter how little their actual living wage is.
Click to expand...

when sweat shops are discovered, everyone has that reaction.

You have the same problem many people in America do. You assume that $.60/hr is a 'slave wage' because it is unthinkable here. For one, read up on slavery and how much they made... then come back and call it slave wages again. Second, if you are not going to look at cost of living in each country and do an actual comparison based on that, then there is really no point discussing this as you are simply basing your comments on emotion rather than fact.

This is not to say that all working conditions are as they should be. This is simply a comment on the wage aspect of it.
 
Superfreak said:
when sweat shops are discovered, everyone has that reaction.

You have the same problem many people in America do. You assume that $.60/hr is a 'slave wage' because it is unthinkable here. For one, read up on slavery and how much they made... then come back and call it slave wages again. Second, if you are not going to look at cost of living in each country and do an actual comparison based on that, then there is really no point discussing this as you are simply basing your comments on emotion rather than fact.

This is not to say that all working conditions are as they should be. This is simply a comment on the wage aspect of it.
Click to expand...

It's more than just wages. Have we actually improved the quality of life in El Salvador if women work 66 hours a week for less than $40?

Let's say an American would get $7.15/hour and work a 40-hour week, grossing $286. The El Salvadorian works more than 1-1/2 times as long for 8% of that hourly wage. It's not morally right. The corporation could still turn a huge profit by paying, let's say, $2.00/hour for a 40-hour week in El Salvador. I understand corporations think they're raining largesse on these third world countries but they could do a lot better.
 
Last edited:
christiefan915 said:
It's more than just wages. Have we actually improved the quality of life in El Salvador if women work 66 hours a week for less than $40?

Let's say an American would get $7.15/hour and work a 40-hour week, grossing $286. The El Salvadorian works more than 1-1/2 times as long for 8% of that hourly wage. It's not morally right. The corporation could still turn a huge profit by paying, let's say, $2.00/hour for a 40-hour week in El Salvador. I understand corporations think they're raining largesse on these third world countries but they could do a lot better.
Click to expand...

Again... look at India, China, Taiwan, Indonesia etc... look at the rise of the middle classes there due to our offshoring of jobs. You continue to look at the hourly wage through the American cost of living perspective. Saying 'we could pay more' is true. We could. We could pay them $4/hr and still save money on labor. But the corporations would then raise prices on their goods to reflect the higher labor costs. Which means the poor and lower middle class here would not be able to afford as much of the goods/services that they currently get.

There is an economic balance in this. You don't over pay simply because you think corporations can afford to... you have to look at the entire picture.
 
Lucius Cornelius Sulla said:
You'd prefer they go to machines here instead? Machines don't spend money.
Click to expand...

I'm saying corporations are doing the absolute minimum in those third world countries, all the while bragging about how much they raised the standard of living. How many of those people even want or need the products they're making for Americans? All sentient beings understand that profit, not people, is the bottom line for corporations.
 
christiefan915 said:
I'm saying corporations are doing the absolute minimum in those third world countries, all the while bragging about how much they raised the standard of living. How many of those people even want or need the products they're making for Americans? All sentient beings understand that profit, not people, is the bottom line for corporations.
Click to expand...

And yet the two largest growing economies are China and India. I mean, if we're doing nothing for them (and by your own admission, their own corporations can't be doing it either), how is their standard of living increasing? Is it the economics fairy?
 
Lucius Cornelius Sulla said:
And yet the two largest growing economies are China and India. I mean, if we're doing nothing for them (and by your own admission, their own corporations can't be doing it either), how is their standard of living increasing? Is it the economics fairy?
Click to expand...

I'd say that their standard of living is increasing not because of American factories but in spite of them.
 
evince said:
that is why you have party members who can look the sandyhook families in the face and then vote to not even allow a discussion
Click to expand...

Which discussion? are you talking about the desire to disarm law abiding citizens, or do universal background checks, neither of which would have stopped any of the recent gun problems, let's have that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top