Professor PC
Banned
fixed it for ya
Harley may leave Milwaukee
- Thread starter slednek
- Start date
fixed it for ya
anonomoose
New member
While NAFTA dealt with NORTH America, it was the keystone for an open house to all other nations, Favored Nation Status opened up to the 38 ton gorilla we have now invited into your homes, and garages.
Everyone has heard that the pen is mightier than the sword...well, cheap voluminous labor can kill you just as effectively as any bomb or gun powder ever thought of doing. Usually these things level out over time, but from my perch on top of my hill, all I can see is 3rd world countries, just champing at the bit to enter in and compete.
Just like unions there needs to be a balance, and right now the table is very tipped in the wrong direction. Eventually we will come to realize this and work to correct it....almost certainly. But I fear for my grandkids.
thunderstruck88
New member
Attachments
Last edited:
Thanks. I didn't know I should pray to the unions when I go to bed at night. I thought it was just to the president and the government. Glad there are so many people looking out for me. And here I thought my employer hired me because I have a skill to offer for which both of us can make money.
Anonomoose-
What you say is true-minimal argument there. However, my class is now in session.
Unions came about for the reasons you cited, and they were necessary to curb worker abuse and to create the new middle class in America. However, unions became strong because America was growing its manufacturing base in the 1950s as soldiers came home, started families, bought houses, and purchased cars and appliances. This was the start of the "baby boom". This gave rise to a large scale manufacturing buildup in the great lakes rust belt as companies built plants in Flint and Detroit, mills in Pittsburgh and Gary, and farm equipment in Racine and Moline. America, so rich in resources, needed one critical item to make this happen, and that was a reliable workforce. Unions provided that reliability, employers responded with wages and benefits, and everyone made money. In the 1950's 35% of American workers were union.
Manufacturing in America is in severe retrenchment. America has a much reduced need for a high priced reliable workforce. Much of the work performed by that workforce is now automated, and rather than hiring workers to assemble and paint things, companies have robots to do the work. If the job is assembly line work, companies have it outsourced to China or build plants in Mexico. Unions now represent only 12% of the workforce, only 7.4% of non-government workers are union.
The laws of supply and demand dictate that the side with the supply must change price to meet demand, or the demand will go elsewhere. With 10% reported unemployment (18% estimated) the supply of workers far exceeds demand, and the cost of those workers must come down until supply and demand are in balance. If not, the demand will go elsewhere.
While America continues to work, we have become a service and consumer economy. Those industries have historically had low union membership, and large numbers of affordable workers have lowered the barrier to growth. Meanwhile our large manufacturing legacy companies continue to fail (GM) while their competitors with non union workforces in this country (Toyota) succeed.
Think about it...it is cheaper to build a TV in Taiwan, load it on a ship, sail it across the Pacific, unload it to a truck, take it to a rail yard, piggyback it to Chicago, unload it to a truck, and drive it to the WalMart distribution center near Eau Claire than to build it at the Zenith plant in Melrose Park and truck it to Eau Claire.
You are correct, unions were instrumental in the building of our middle class in the 1950s and 60s. Unfortunately, they were instrumental in the destruction of that middle class in the 1990s and 2000s by failing to respond to the changing world economy, and now the goose that laid the golden eggs is dead.
And now, class is dismissed.
What you say is true-minimal argument there. However, my class is now in session.
Unions came about for the reasons you cited, and they were necessary to curb worker abuse and to create the new middle class in America. However, unions became strong because America was growing its manufacturing base in the 1950s as soldiers came home, started families, bought houses, and purchased cars and appliances. This was the start of the "baby boom". This gave rise to a large scale manufacturing buildup in the great lakes rust belt as companies built plants in Flint and Detroit, mills in Pittsburgh and Gary, and farm equipment in Racine and Moline. America, so rich in resources, needed one critical item to make this happen, and that was a reliable workforce. Unions provided that reliability, employers responded with wages and benefits, and everyone made money. In the 1950's 35% of American workers were union.
Manufacturing in America is in severe retrenchment. America has a much reduced need for a high priced reliable workforce. Much of the work performed by that workforce is now automated, and rather than hiring workers to assemble and paint things, companies have robots to do the work. If the job is assembly line work, companies have it outsourced to China or build plants in Mexico. Unions now represent only 12% of the workforce, only 7.4% of non-government workers are union.
The laws of supply and demand dictate that the side with the supply must change price to meet demand, or the demand will go elsewhere. With 10% reported unemployment (18% estimated) the supply of workers far exceeds demand, and the cost of those workers must come down until supply and demand are in balance. If not, the demand will go elsewhere.
While America continues to work, we have become a service and consumer economy. Those industries have historically had low union membership, and large numbers of affordable workers have lowered the barrier to growth. Meanwhile our large manufacturing legacy companies continue to fail (GM) while their competitors with non union workforces in this country (Toyota) succeed.
Think about it...it is cheaper to build a TV in Taiwan, load it on a ship, sail it across the Pacific, unload it to a truck, take it to a rail yard, piggyback it to Chicago, unload it to a truck, and drive it to the WalMart distribution center near Eau Claire than to build it at the Zenith plant in Melrose Park and truck it to Eau Claire.
You are correct, unions were instrumental in the building of our middle class in the 1950s and 60s. Unfortunately, they were instrumental in the destruction of that middle class in the 1990s and 2000s by failing to respond to the changing world economy, and now the goose that laid the golden eggs is dead.
And now, class is dismissed.
michaeladams
New member
sorry anonomoose,in my company we have represented and non represented employees have a higher wage and better bennys than the union workers do and we do the same job.everyone can have thier own opinion but todays unions are partially to blame for certain economy problems the members are facing.the unions have become the bullies telling the workers it is better to not have a job than it is to suck it up and give something up.bash me if you want but the truth is hard for some people to hear.
Well, maybe just a little argument...from 1994 to 2007, net manufacturing employment has declined by 3,654,000. Those workers' wages are 0% of what they were.
Thankyew, Thankyew!I am going to do a Nash
I woulda done it, but I was busy designing a bridge!
700classic
New member
Well said DCS!
thunderstruck88
New member
Thankyew, Thankyew!
I woulda done it, but I was busy designing a bridge!
yerwelkome Nash anythyme for ya'll have fun buildin a Bridge may it look like this
Attachments
700classic
New member
I think he is using Crayola.
thunderstruck88
New member
Hey, y'all are on a roll today!sure it wasn't a Sharpay !!!!! lol
I think Crayola is the best answer.
And it actually wasn't so much bridge design, just bridge siting! But that's a part of the design process, right?
Hey, y'all are on a roll today!
I think Crayola is the best answer.
And it actually wasn't so much bridge design, just bridge siting! But that's a part of the design process, right?
I've been siting [sic] on my butt all day!
Siting, verb: assigning a location to (as a bridge), like that?
anonomoose
New member
Siting, verb: assigning a location to (as a bridge), like that?
HEY...aren't bridges usually designed over water?
You can't fool us fools with that won, Nash...there ain't no water in that state unless you start cutting down all the kacktusses....and even den, dats only enough to drink...
.....or is THIS that famous bridge to nowheres???
thunderstruck88
New member
anonomoose
New member
DC says,"...Manufacturing in America is in severe retrenchment. America has a much reduced need for a high priced reliable workforce.
Think about this...statement. If this is true then America's middle class is going to shrink significantly. What the importers and exporters have NOT taken into consideration is the fact that if the work force gets smaller and/or wage rates fall relative to the middle classes, then EXACTLY WHO WILL HAVE THE WAGES TO BUY THESE EXPENSIVE PRODUCTS? In effect they will be pricing the consumer right out of the market. After all it is supply and DEMAND...and if you can't afford stuff...you won't be demanding it and this so called "service industry" will be unable to sustain itself. It is positively reticules to assume that we can do a wholesale replacement of industry that America developed, over to a mostly service economy.
Much of the work performed by that workforce is now automated, and rather than hiring workers to assemble and paint things, companies have robots to do the work. If the job is assembly line work, companies have it outsourced to China or build plants in Mexico. Unions now represent only 12% of the workforce, only 7.4% of non-government workers are union.
Ever take a gander at the working conditions and rates of pay these third world countries build industry under? Pollution is standard fair and none of the EPA requirements can be established because these countries don't give a rats butt if they pollute or not, and neither does the business man who is raking in the cash. Anything goes and in most...that's right...most cases, these plants pay slave wages, and pollute every bit as much as the turn of the century plants in the USA did. It is pure exploitation of the 3rd world country work force and paying off officials to allow the return of turn of the century issues that we thought WE would never see again. And guess what...there are NO unions in these countries to force the hand of business to do what they were required to do here 2 generations ago. So lay this on OUR unions if you want...but the fact is a weakened union is why the wage rate is going south and business is going over seas.
The laws of supply and demand dictate that the side with the supply must change price to meet demand, or the demand will go elsewhere. With 10% reported unemployment (18% estimated) the supply of workers far exceeds demand, and the cost of those workers must come down until supply and demand are in balance. If not, the demand will go elsewhere.
While America continues to work, we have become a service and consumer economy. Those industries have historically had low union membership, and large numbers of affordable workers have lowered the barrier to growth. Meanwhile our large manufacturing legacy companies continue to fail (GM) while their competitors with non union workforces in this country (Toyota) succeed.
GM, Ford and Chrysler are all bad business people? Toyota is the new kid on the block, with wages that had to closely match, but always a bit lower wage scale than the union force labor camps in the others. Toyota has NO legacy costs...NONE! Meanwhile they hire away some key engineers who have seen plans of what works and doesn't and wallah....they build cars and trucks that closely resemble what took decades to design and develop in Detroit.
Add to this fact that MUCH of Toyota and Honda was build and shipped here to begin with at margins of profit that stager the imagination. On top of that the countries that these transplant corporations came from laid out the red carpet and supported....yes their governments supported these businesses so that they could florish...and then eventually they come to the USA and begin building to avoid tarriffs...and if you were sick at either of these companies...you lost your job...where the other original companies had procedures in place brought about by UNIONW to prevent that. This is the "not so nice" side of the transplant companies. No union, don't yah know...means they could do whatever they wanted..and still do to this day.
Think about it...it is cheaper to build a TV in Taiwan, load it on a ship, sail it across the Pacific, unload it to a truck, take it to a rail yard, piggyback it to Chicago, unload it to a truck, and drive it to the WalMart distribution center near Eau Claire than to build it at the Zenith plant in Melrose Park and truck it to Eau Claire.
What's your point here? Cheap labor will usually suck these types of jobs and products away, and nobody disputes this...but every time this job gets gone here, there are workers who won't be taking home a paycheck. Now who is going to buy that product this guy was producing? Certainly not this guy nor none of his neighbors who don't have jobs or who are now flipping burgers to put food on the table. When labor is $5 per week on a third world country how are you supposed to compete with that? Answer is you can't and if you are to survive as a company against the likes of an ORIC XL vacuum that is made for about $7...you can't build them in the USA for anything close to that number...so you either are forced to go abroad yourself or go out of business. Meanwhile the guy who owns the vacuum company makes not just a decent profit...but an obscene profit that not only kills his competition, but it makes the guy wealthy beyond imagination.
There will always be another country to exploit the labor force from won't there?
You are correct, unions were instrumental in the building of our middle class in the 1950s and 60s. Unfortunately, they were instrumental in the destruction of that middle class in the 1990s and 2000s by failing to respond to the changing world economy, and now the goose that laid the golden eggs is dead.
Actually we would be doing just fine right now without importation of products. Every dime these "union members" made got spent right here in this country so that YOU could make YOUR paycheck and and buy YOUR stuff. Now that we can import, and that money no longer is in the "supply chain" who is going to buy this stuff...eventually...that answer will be --darn few, and only those who are amazingly rich...and the middle class will have passed away into the history books.
Think about this...statement. If this is true then America's middle class is going to shrink significantly. What the importers and exporters have NOT taken into consideration is the fact that if the work force gets smaller and/or wage rates fall relative to the middle classes, then EXACTLY WHO WILL HAVE THE WAGES TO BUY THESE EXPENSIVE PRODUCTS? In effect they will be pricing the consumer right out of the market. After all it is supply and DEMAND...and if you can't afford stuff...you won't be demanding it and this so called "service industry" will be unable to sustain itself. It is positively reticules to assume that we can do a wholesale replacement of industry that America developed, over to a mostly service economy.
Much of the work performed by that workforce is now automated, and rather than hiring workers to assemble and paint things, companies have robots to do the work. If the job is assembly line work, companies have it outsourced to China or build plants in Mexico. Unions now represent only 12% of the workforce, only 7.4% of non-government workers are union.
Ever take a gander at the working conditions and rates of pay these third world countries build industry under? Pollution is standard fair and none of the EPA requirements can be established because these countries don't give a rats butt if they pollute or not, and neither does the business man who is raking in the cash. Anything goes and in most...that's right...most cases, these plants pay slave wages, and pollute every bit as much as the turn of the century plants in the USA did. It is pure exploitation of the 3rd world country work force and paying off officials to allow the return of turn of the century issues that we thought WE would never see again. And guess what...there are NO unions in these countries to force the hand of business to do what they were required to do here 2 generations ago. So lay this on OUR unions if you want...but the fact is a weakened union is why the wage rate is going south and business is going over seas.
The laws of supply and demand dictate that the side with the supply must change price to meet demand, or the demand will go elsewhere. With 10% reported unemployment (18% estimated) the supply of workers far exceeds demand, and the cost of those workers must come down until supply and demand are in balance. If not, the demand will go elsewhere.
While America continues to work, we have become a service and consumer economy. Those industries have historically had low union membership, and large numbers of affordable workers have lowered the barrier to growth. Meanwhile our large manufacturing legacy companies continue to fail (GM) while their competitors with non union workforces in this country (Toyota) succeed.
GM, Ford and Chrysler are all bad business people? Toyota is the new kid on the block, with wages that had to closely match, but always a bit lower wage scale than the union force labor camps in the others. Toyota has NO legacy costs...NONE! Meanwhile they hire away some key engineers who have seen plans of what works and doesn't and wallah....they build cars and trucks that closely resemble what took decades to design and develop in Detroit.
Add to this fact that MUCH of Toyota and Honda was build and shipped here to begin with at margins of profit that stager the imagination. On top of that the countries that these transplant corporations came from laid out the red carpet and supported....yes their governments supported these businesses so that they could florish...and then eventually they come to the USA and begin building to avoid tarriffs...and if you were sick at either of these companies...you lost your job...where the other original companies had procedures in place brought about by UNIONW to prevent that. This is the "not so nice" side of the transplant companies. No union, don't yah know...means they could do whatever they wanted..and still do to this day.
Think about it...it is cheaper to build a TV in Taiwan, load it on a ship, sail it across the Pacific, unload it to a truck, take it to a rail yard, piggyback it to Chicago, unload it to a truck, and drive it to the WalMart distribution center near Eau Claire than to build it at the Zenith plant in Melrose Park and truck it to Eau Claire.
What's your point here? Cheap labor will usually suck these types of jobs and products away, and nobody disputes this...but every time this job gets gone here, there are workers who won't be taking home a paycheck. Now who is going to buy that product this guy was producing? Certainly not this guy nor none of his neighbors who don't have jobs or who are now flipping burgers to put food on the table. When labor is $5 per week on a third world country how are you supposed to compete with that? Answer is you can't and if you are to survive as a company against the likes of an ORIC XL vacuum that is made for about $7...you can't build them in the USA for anything close to that number...so you either are forced to go abroad yourself or go out of business. Meanwhile the guy who owns the vacuum company makes not just a decent profit...but an obscene profit that not only kills his competition, but it makes the guy wealthy beyond imagination.
There will always be another country to exploit the labor force from won't there?
You are correct, unions were instrumental in the building of our middle class in the 1950s and 60s. Unfortunately, they were instrumental in the destruction of that middle class in the 1990s and 2000s by failing to respond to the changing world economy, and now the goose that laid the golden eggs is dead.
Actually we would be doing just fine right now without importation of products. Every dime these "union members" made got spent right here in this country so that YOU could make YOUR paycheck and and buy YOUR stuff. Now that we can import, and that money no longer is in the "supply chain" who is going to buy this stuff...eventually...that answer will be --darn few, and only those who are amazingly rich...and the middle class will have passed away into the history books.