(07-25-2013 11:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:24 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 10:59 PM)john01992 Wrote:  a big part of detroits problems was the fact that other states were paying workers less, & had lower safety standards. plus the "big 3" could not make a longterm viable business plan if their lives depended on it

Well John, when there is a high school educated bus driver making 100k in Madison Wisconsin, it might help you understand what happened in Detroit. It's happening all over the midwest. Companies are moving to places it's easier make a profit. When unions make companies pass union costs on to the consumer, they have no choice but to leave or outsource.

Right to work is more about keeping union employees from having unfair protection that ends up hurting the company. I know it's hard for liberals to grasp that companies are the good guys. They are the job creators and make society possible. And when public unions force the People the people to fit the bill, you end up getting your bargaining rights stripped.

There is no reason a public bus driver with a high school education should be making a doctor's salary.

and you cant seem to grasp that lowering the national standards for wages and safety is not an economically viable option. sure it helps big business, but it sure doesnt help working class families. throughout history we see examples of states (nations) weaken themselves because they depend on their low wages for innovation rather than innovation

We lower the national average for wages by allowing illegal immigrants to work our jobs. Thank that roofer or landscaping company you see parked at 7-11 with the truckload of Mexicans for that. That is not why the unions are fleecing companies. It's a crime operation based in greed. They used to serve a noble purpose. The mafia took control of them over half a century ago.

oh so i guess that lets billion dollar corporations off the hook who do the exact same thing.

illegals take jobs that help mostly small business and only make up like 4% of the working population. plus most of them perform the jobs that business's struggle to find people to perform.

yeah i know they do cause issues and the problem should be fixed, but blaming them as the reason for the downfall of this country economically is just ridiculous

yes, many corporations are guilty of hiring illegal aliens. With almost half of Americans on govt assistance and between 11-30 illegal aliens in the country right now, I find that percentage questionable. You tell that to the American born construction worker.

Other states lowering the national wage is not what happened in the midwest. Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies. This is more than right to work. There are a plethora of incentives for companies to move south and east. If the north wants to compete in the future, they will need to do the same. Otherwise it's just one big Detroit.

blame the unions all you want, but at the end of the day the cause of all our problems......

the "big 3" who opted to focus on SUVs while the international competition was focused on small cars. the oil companies who continue to think that drilling is a longterm viable option, or the companies that outsource their labor to china/india who work for 50 cents a day in a factory that has 17th century safety standards all while continuing to get tax breaks from congress. plus the local politicians who give massive tax breaks to companies who move if their location even if those said companies dont plan on staying long term.

and while were at it dont forget all those banks who were handing out housing loans like candy. but lastly i think the genius who decided two major wars was a good idea while giving tax breaks to the rich and the idiots who reelected him gets the cake on that one. (especially since they wanted to elect someone with almost the same plan in 2012)

I think those guys did a lot more damage than unions having too much power or illegal immigrants working on 40 bucks a week to paint your fence.

Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

(07-25-2013 11:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

I don't even understand what that means.

(07-25-2013 11:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:24 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 10:59 PM)john01992 Wrote:  a big part of detroits problems was the fact that other states were paying workers less, & had lower safety standards. plus the "big 3" could not make a longterm viable business plan if their lives depended on it

Well John, when there is a high school educated bus driver making 100k in Madison Wisconsin, it might help you understand what happened in Detroit. It's happening all over the midwest. Companies are moving to places it's easier make a profit. When unions make companies pass union costs on to the consumer, they have no choice but to leave or outsource.

Right to work is more about keeping union employees from having unfair protection that ends up hurting the company. I know it's hard for liberals to grasp that companies are the good guys. They are the job creators and make society possible. And when public unions force the People the people to fit the bill, you end up getting your bargaining rights stripped.

There is no reason a public bus driver with a high school education should be making a doctor's salary.

and you cant seem to grasp that lowering the national standards for wages and safety is not an economically viable option. sure it helps big business, but it sure doesnt help working class families. throughout history we see examples of states (nations) weaken themselves because they depend on their low wages for innovation rather than innovation

We lower the national average for wages by allowing illegal immigrants to work our jobs. Thank that roofer or landscaping company you see parked at 7-11 with the truckload of Mexicans for that. That is not why the unions are fleecing companies. It's a crime operation based in greed. They used to serve a noble purpose. The mafia took control of them over half a century ago.

oh so i guess that lets billion dollar corporations off the hook who do the exact same thing.

illegals take jobs that help mostly small business and only make up like 4% of the working population. plus most of them perform the jobs that business's struggle to find people to perform. yeah i know they do cause issues and the problem should be fixed, but blaming them as the reason for the downfall of this country economically is just ridiculous

You must believe every propaganda leftist idea that you have ever heard. Baloney. So wrong.
We made things work before we had 13 to 40 million illegal invaders, and we have never needed them.
Ranchers may give you that crap about needing them, but it's mainly because they got used to paying illegal invader prices.

(07-25-2013 11:43 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

I don't even understand what that means.

those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

if you havent figured out that thats what im saying then i should probably find someone more literate to argue with

(07-25-2013 11:47 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:24 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Well John, when there is a high school educated bus driver making 100k in Madison Wisconsin, it might help you understand what happened in Detroit. It's happening all over the midwest. Companies are moving to places it's easier make a profit. When unions make companies pass union costs on to the consumer, they have no choice but to leave or outsource.

Right to work is more about keeping union employees from having unfair protection that ends up hurting the company. I know it's hard for liberals to grasp that companies are the good guys. They are the job creators and make society possible. And when public unions force the People the people to fit the bill, you end up getting your bargaining rights stripped.

There is no reason a public bus driver with a high school education should be making a doctor's salary.

and you cant seem to grasp that lowering the national standards for wages and safety is not an economically viable option. sure it helps big business, but it sure doesnt help working class families. throughout history we see examples of states (nations) weaken themselves because they depend on their low wages for innovation rather than innovation

We lower the national average for wages by allowing illegal immigrants to work our jobs. Thank that roofer or landscaping company you see parked at 7-11 with the truckload of Mexicans for that. That is not why the unions are fleecing companies. It's a crime operation based in greed. They used to serve a noble purpose. The mafia took control of them over half a century ago.

oh so i guess that lets billion dollar corporations off the hook who do the exact same thing.

illegals take jobs that help mostly small business and only make up like 4% of the working population. plus most of them perform the jobs that business's struggle to find people to perform. yeah i know they do cause issues and the problem should be fixed, but blaming them as the reason for the downfall of this country economically is just ridiculous

You must believe every propaganda leftist idea that you have ever heard. Baloney. So wrong.

whats the lowest price you are willing to be paid to stack the half ton of wood i just bought?

(07-25-2013 11:40 PM)john01992 Wrote:  blame the unions all you want, but at the end of the day the cause of all our problems......

the "big 3" who opted to focus on SUVs while the international competition was focused on small cars.

Because their labor agreements, specifically the costs of retirement benefits, made it impossible for them to build a small car at a profit.

Quote:the oil companies who continue to think that drilling is a longterm viable option,

It is. Until some other viable option comes along--and we have no viable substitute for oil today--drilling is absolutely a viable option. Just ask Brasil.

Quote:or the companies that outsource their labor to china/india who work for 50 cents a day in a factory that has 17th century safety standards

So the companies that build high-tech factories in places like Germany or Poland where labor works for wages comparable to here and environmental standards are comparable to, or higher than ours, but whose tax rates are lower and whose regulatory and litigation processes more certain--those are okay, even though those are the ones that would pay wages to support an upper middle class lifestyle? And the Nike factories that would pay wages on the low end of our scale if they were here, those are the ones we need to be worrying about? Yeah, right, got it.

Quote:
all while continuing to get tax breaks from congress.

What tax breaks from congress? Leftists keep screaming about tax breaks from congress, but none of you seem to be able to identify what they are? Is it just a talking-point mantra that has no substance? One thing that people seem to be talking about when they say this is that Ireland's top corporate rate, for example, is 12.5%, so you can save a lot of taxes by moving your operations to Ireland. But that's a tax break from the Irish parliament, not from congress.

Quote:plus the local politicians who give massive tax breaks to companies who move if their location even if those said companies dont plan on staying long term.

Proving that tax breaks attract business. And what does it matter what the company plans are? If you keep your place attractive to them, they will stay.

Quote:and while were at it dont forget all those banks who were handing out housing loans like candy.

Why was it the banks who were lending and not the liars who were borrowing who were the problem? And if you know anything about how banks do business, why was lending to people who could not or would not pay back a desirable business practice? How much blame goes to the regulations and regulators who forced the banks to abandon prudent lending practices? And yes, they did precisely that.

Quote:but lastly i think the genius who decided two major wars was a good idea

The bigger problem was fighting even one war without intending to win it. But two wars that you don't intend to win is clearly worse than one war that you don't intend to win. And the genius in the white house now hasn't exactly fought them to win either.

Quote:while giving tax breaks to the rich and the idiots who reelected him gets the cake on that one. (especially since they wanted to elect someone with almost the same plan in 2012)

What problems did this cause and how did it cause them? I'm no fan of the "Bush tax cuts" because as you note they were aimed at rewarding the people who elected him instead of supply-side cuts that would help the economy. But they have gotten blamed for a lot of things that they did not possibly cause. On balance, I'd guess that they were probably about a push--we had much faster growth in the 3-4 years after they took effect than we have gotten in the same time frame from Obama's economic moves. But that sadly did not last past 2007. Umm, what happened in 2007, anyway?

If you're going to post half-true talking points, at least have the integrity to post the "rest of the story."

(07-25-2013 10:38 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 10:05 PM)Pony94 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 08:38 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 07:23 PM)john01992 Wrote:  they call it "right to work" but what it really should be called is "right to work.....for less"

when you have states gaining economically only because they are paying lower wages to unskilled workers, or weaker safety/environmental standards rather than being innovative its not hard to see that they are not only holding us back but weakening us.

That's not the purpose of or the outcome of right to work.

I know plenty of Toyota workers in SA making $25-$50/hour plus benefits which is way above normal for the area

and again do you understand what "average wages" mean?

I'm taking it you don't understand the phrase "cost of living" John. (Or pretty much as you've shown, anything about economics).

(07-25-2013 11:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:43 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

I don't even understand what that means.

those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

if you havent figured out that thats what im saying then i should probably find someone more literate to argue with

You just use phrases that sound interesting, but have no inherent meaning. Simple-minded cliches that have no basis in reality, but serve as rhetoric b/c dialectic fails.

What is innovating? What is selling out? And why do libs hate "big business" so much, but still want jobs there?

(07-25-2013 11:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:43 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

I don't even understand what that means.

those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

Those businesses aren't innovating?

(07-26-2013 08:55 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:43 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

I don't even understand what that means.

those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

Those businesses aren't innovating?

No, we're piling cash in the rainy day fund to get ready for Obamacare. Innovation (and hiring) has been stifled by liberal policies for 5 years now.

(07-26-2013 03:25 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 08:55 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:43 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:42 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Southern states attracted business by making the region more attractive to companies.

yeah for all the wrong reasons.....

I don't even understand what that means.

those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

Those businesses aren't innovating?

No, we're piling cash in the rainy day fund to get ready for Obamacare. Innovation (and hiring) has been stifled by liberal policies for 5 years now.

innovation is making your cost of production cheaper because you came up with robots to do the work, not going to mexico/china where you can produce the same stuff while only paying workers 25 cents a day

(07-26-2013 05:08 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 03:25 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 08:55 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:43 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  I don't even understand what that means.

those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

Those businesses aren't innovating?

No, we're piling cash in the rainy day fund to get ready for Obamacare. Innovation (and hiring) has been stifled by liberal policies for 5 years now.

innovation is making your cost of production cheaper because you came up with robots to do the work, not going to mexico/china where you can produce the same stuff while only paying workers 25 cents a day

Let's grant that this is true, though it's not. Which would you prefer?

You really ought to do yourself a favor and stick to things you actually KNOW something about, not just what you've been told or "feel in your heart" to be true.

(07-26-2013 05:28 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 05:08 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 03:25 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(07-26-2013 08:55 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:53 PM)john01992 Wrote:  those states should be growing economically because they are innovating not being sell outs to big business

Those businesses aren't innovating?

No, we're piling cash in the rainy day fund to get ready for Obamacare. Innovation (and hiring) has been stifled by liberal policies for 5 years now.

innovation is making your cost of production cheaper because you came up with robots to do the work, not going to mexico/china where you can produce the same stuff while only paying workers 25 cents a day

Let's grant that this is true, though it's not. Which would you prefer?

You really ought to do yourself a favor and stick to things you actually KNOW something about, not just what you've been told or "feel in your heart" to be true.

designing robotics takes a lot of work and is something only those with college degrees can do. focusing on robotics puts a lot of pressure on those types of degrees and allows our population to be more educated. it advances our technology skill set and thus helps us with more inventions down the road. wed be much better focusing on skills like that over focusing on an unskilled worker making a simple part only because wes willing to work for less than those in michigan.

but thats not to say robotics is the only way to be innovative. that was just an example i came up with off the top of my head, states can be innovative in a number of different ways without killing off the working class like robotics. the point is attracting business just because you have lower wages does nothing to advance the country and lets big business triumph at the cost of the working class and keeps wages from rising. its not an economically stable model because sooner or later someone else will offer less wages and whisk away all that business

Just reading that made my head hurt. Lot's of words that say next to nothing.

What I'm getting from the latter part of the blather is that you don't like competition. Whether it's from AUTOMATION, not r2d2's running around , or from plants relocating things like assembly because they can't remain competitive in a GLOBAL market.

What's clearly unsustainable is the old model of what has caused the demise of much of our industrial base. When it's cheaper to take the materials from the US, ship it overseas to make steel, then ship the steel back here for sale, you don't see a problem? Figure out why companies are leaving, you'll be halfway home.

(07-25-2013 07:17 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Maybe this article will smoke Rebel out of hiding? Seriously, it's well written and thought provoking.

http://www.alternet.org/south-dragging-r...paging=off

I'm from the north and that article was neither well written nor thought provoking. There were so many errors I couldn't even keep track. The lack of actual data to back up any of the wild statements was also glaring.

(07-25-2013 11:56 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:47 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:24 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(07-25-2013 11:18 PM)john01992 Wrote:  and you cant seem to grasp that lowering the national standards for wages and safety is not an economically viable option. sure it helps big business, but it sure doesnt help working class families. throughout history we see examples of states (nations) weaken themselves because they depend on their low wages for innovation rather than innovation

We lower the national average for wages by allowing illegal immigrants to work our jobs. Thank that roofer or landscaping company you see parked at 7-11 with the truckload of Mexicans for that. That is not why the unions are fleecing companies. It's a crime operation based in greed. They used to serve a noble purpose. The mafia took control of them over half a century ago.

oh so i guess that lets billion dollar corporations off the hook who do the exact same thing.

illegals take jobs that help mostly small business and only make up like 4% of the working population. plus most of them perform the jobs that business's struggle to find people to perform. yeah i know they do cause issues and the problem should be fixed, but blaming them as the reason for the downfall of this country economically is just ridiculous

You must believe every propaganda leftist idea that you have ever heard. Baloney. So wrong.

whats the lowest price you are willing to be paid to stack the half ton of wood i just bought?

Not germane to the discussion.

Those freeloading hillbillies love to sop it up at the government trough and then vote for their favorite GOP goon in order to stick it to the poor, black & gay.

(07-26-2013 08:09 PM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  Those freeloading hillbillies love to sop it up at the government trough and then vote for their favorite GOP goon in order to stick it to the poor, black & gay.

Racist.