Wages for unskilled labor.

  • Thread starter Thread starter WinterBorn
  • Start date Start date
apple0154 said:
The funny thing is a GOP-created depression plays right into the idea of leveling the playing field between countries, a step necessary for the emergence of a "one world government" and the people most opposed to "one world government" support the GOP.

I'm always reminded of the part of the Desiderata which reads, "And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should." (http://www.fleurdelis.com/desiderata.htm)

Ya gotta love the Repubs. :lol:
Click to expand...

You mean like how Obama has allowed Mexican truck drivers to come into this country and compete with the US TRuckers?

Exempt from EPA mandates?

Oh,,,,,, I'm sorry.

Obama is not a republican.
 
Liberty said:
You mean like how Obama has allowed Mexican truck drivers to come into this country and compete with the US TRuckers?

Exempt from EPA mandates?

Oh,,,,,, I'm sorry.

Obama is not a republican.
Click to expand...

"Eighty percent of Republicans are just Democrats that don't know what's going on"
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

2008 - Democrat controlled Congress, Republican controlled White House


House votes to end highway access for Mexican trucks
By JIM ABRAMS Associated Press
Sept. 9, 2008, 6:26PM

WASHINGTON — Dismissing a White House veto threat, the House voted Tuesday to end a pilot program giving Mexican trucks access to U.S. highways.

The Bush administration stressed that the United States is obligated, under the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, to open up American roads to Mexican truckers, and that terminating the year-old demonstration project would have repercussions for American trucks allowed into Mexico. Passage of the House bill, it said "would pose significant and immediate risks to U.S. interests."

But the pilot project, which permits up to 500 trucks from 100 Mexican companies access to U.S. roads, is opposed by trucking, consumer and environmental groups who say it would eliminate American jobs and that Mexican trucks are subject to less stringent safety regulations. They say Mexico lacks adequate drug testing and hours-of service standards and that the program could contribute to smuggling or insurance fraud.

"I'm outraged that the Bush administration for political purposes would jeopardize the safety of the traveling public in the United States," said Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., chairman of the House Transportation subcommittee on highways.

The 395-18 House vote was well above the two-thirds needed to override a presidential veto. The bill would end the authority of the administration to go forward with the program without congressional approval. The Senate Appropriations Committee has attached similar language to a transportation spending bill, although that bill is unlikely to be enacted before President Bush leaves office.

Congress last December passed legislation banning funding to "establish" a program to allow U.S.-certified Mexican trucks to carry loads across the border, but the Transportation Department said that bill did not apply to a program that had already started. Several groups, including the Teamsters, Sierra Club and Public Citizen, have gone to federal court to challenge that interpretation.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, on the other hand, sent House members a letter urging opposition to the bill, saying the cross-border program "is a long overdue step toward reducing congestion and air pollution at the U.S.-Mexico border while promoting growth and jobs."

The administration last month said it intended to continue the pilot program for two more years.

Read more: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5992420.html#ixzz1RaN4Hbf2
 
How much credit card debt did american families have in the 70's.
I grew up in a middle class hood and no families I knew had much debt at all.
The economy doesn't suck becuase most people take on too much debt.
 
Bfgrn said:
In the America liberals created from the New Deal through the Great Society, the American dream was this: If you are willing to work hard, you can make enough money to raise a family and provide for them.

We have not had a living wage in this country since 1973. It is no coincidence that the conservative era began around that time. Conservatism ALWAYS tried to create an aristocracy...ALWAYS
Click to expand...

You mean like the Kennedy's and Rockefellers?

You are such an idiot. A job that is done by an unskilled worker should not be providing enough income to have a home, food, clothing, health care etc... that job should be done by teenagers/college students/spouses looking for an extra income.
 
WinterBorn said:
So you think someone with no marketable skills should be paid enough to purchase decent housing, food, clothing and whatever, plus they should be provided medical insurance?

And the company gets what?
Click to expand...

Yes. someone with no marketable skills should be paid to purchase decent housing, food clothing and whatever, plus medical insurance. This is true because markets have been perverted by allowing labor from totalitarian slave states to warp labor markets.

The company can fuck off. corporations are just another collectivist abstraction.
 
apple0154 said:
Exactly! That's why government programs are essential. Should 100 people or 1,000 people scrimp and save and deny their family necessities just in case they may be involved in a pile-up?

Just consider all the money tied up by people in their 50s saving for that imagined catastrophic illness that will strike when they retire. Money that could be used to help their children buy a home or their grandchildren attend university. Or money just to help someone.

How can we expect people to help others when they know there is no guaranteed help for them?

How much money is enough? If a person knows they can't rely on their government in a time of need can we blame them for not wanting to pay taxes to help the poor? How can we expect people to be concerned about others when no one is concerned about them?

Some people can't grasp the reason behind government programs. The cycle of "me against the world" has to be broken in order for society to evolve.
Click to expand...

1) That 'guarantee' COSTS them just as much if not more. It is money withheld in the form of TAXATION. It is money that could be more effectively spent.

2) In the 50's and 60's health care costs were far less. Why? Because people paid for their day to day needs out of pocket and had catastrophic insurance coverage in case of that 'pile up' type incident occurring.

3) It was with the advent of corporate planes/HMO's/PPOs and the mentality that EVERYTHING should be covered including all the day to day that was a large part of jacking up rates. In addition, the 'guaranteed coverage' simply meant that EVERYONE would pay the rates of the lowest common denominator. That we would all be responsible for subsidizing care for those who refused to take care of themselves via eating healthy and exercising. We became unbelievable lazy and subsequently became a very OBESE nation (I wonder what that does to health care costs overall?).

4) Does the above mean there aren't people that need assistance and deserve it? No. There most certainly are. Medicaid is a program that subsidizes the poor. But due to the above it is becoming expensive along with the rest of health care. We need to go back to individual qualifications for health care. Get the corps out of it. Get the HMO's and PPO's out of it. No more guaranteed coverage. Then address the practices of defensive medicine and out of control litigation and we can begin the process of reversing the insane rise in health care costs. That leaves us capable of providing for the poor etc...
 
(\(\(\/)/)/) said:
The GOP-created depression will drive costs for corporations lower and they can sell their goods and services cheaper in the emerging economies in Asia while avoiding taxation here.

America's sponge is squeezed dry.
Click to expand...

Socialism created this depression. (Rep & Dem)
 
AssHatZombie said:
Nope. Globalization caused this depression.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen you for a while.

Where have you been?

How about those Mexican truck drivers being allowed to compete here in the US with our American truck drivers?

Obama sure loves the American worker.

I guess drugs will get cheaper.
 
Liberty said:
I haven't seen you for a while.

Where have you been?

How about those Mexican truck drivers being allowed to compete here in the US with our American truck drivers?

Obama sure loves the American worker.

I guess drugs will get cheaper.
Click to expand...

I've been just a squirrel trying to get a nut.
 
Those US truckers might belong to a union, Liability, and you hate unions, so competition from cheaper Mexican workers is good, isn't it?
 
the economy is growing
I'm a dumbass cajun and make 6 figures doing accounting and 6 figures on investment gains.

you can fight the power or get the power, it's choice
 
(\(\(\/)/)/) said:
Those US truckers might belong to a union, Liability, and you hate unions, so competition from cheaper Mexican workers is good, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Just for the record, I don't hate union workers. I hate it when people refer to union workers as the American worker as if to exclude 90+% of all other American workers.

I also hate it when the union's lobby congress to pass legislation that strangle the private sector, (tax payers) and non union worker opportunity.

I had no problems with unions a few years ago, (ignorant as I was) until they got bailed out with my money.

Then watching them in Wisconson cry like babies because they expect tax payers to keep bending over and paying for what they can't offered.

Unions are pissing off a lot of tax paying voters. Like it or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top