Unregulated truckers are raping our roads and murdering motorists. Doesn't sound any sillier to me.
A road cannot be raped. A road has no will.
A motorist can be murdered, however. Unfortunately, your statement is inconsistent with the facts. These 100 drivers haven't murdered anyone. And in the history of "unregulated truckers", only an incredibly small percentage have "murdered" someone.
If you can provide the same level of service to the company where I work as I do for half the pay they'd be stupid not to hire you. The people I work with are far from stupid so I'm guessing they haven't found anyone who can.
You keep harping on geography. All you are doing is basing your discrimination on nationality. Let it go.
Dude, so if people in a different country are willing to do the job for a dollar a week and your company decides they'll get rid of you and their American presence...then what? Then you have to work for 75 cents a week to bring the business back here. This is the risk we run in this new global economy. It's not racism, or discrimination or whatever else you want to call it. It's about a decent quality of life.
so if everyone is equal (they are) and if you think it is ok for americans to lose jobs to foreigners, then i guess you would/do suppirt the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to other counties?
Yes.
i guess you dont mind good paying jobs being outsourced to india and china, while in america they are replaced with service industry jobs such as wal-mart? give me a fucking break. nice country and infrastructure your willing to leave for future generations.
I don't mind. And you sound like the people who whined 50 years ago about their jobs being outsourced. They were replaced by the jobs you're now whining to keep. So which is it? If outsourcing leaves shitty jobs, why are you trying to protect those jobs now?
and if you think the employers give a shit about the "equality of man" than you are sadly mistaken.
As an employer who does give a shit about the "equality of man", I can tell you that you are sadly mistaken.
they will take your job and ship it to the country with the lowest bidder without losing sleep. so it is up to us, AMERICANS, to protect our fucking jobs and future. period.
Hehe....crank up the fear machine and assemble the empire!!!!!!
A motorist can be murdered, however. Unfortunately, your statement is inconsistent with the facts. These 100 drivers haven't murdered anyone. And in the history of "unregulated truckers", only an incredibly small percentage have "murdered" someone.
If you can provide the same level of service to the company where I work as I do for half the pay they'd be stupid not to hire you. The people I work with are far from stupid so I'm guessing they haven't found anyone who can.
You keep harping on geography. All you are doing is basing your discrimination on nationality. Let it go.
do you support the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to other country's?
so if everyone is equal (they are) and if you think it is ok for americans to lose jobs to foreigners, then i guess you would/do suppirt the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to other counties?
i guess you dont mind good paying jobs being outsourced to india and china, while in america they are replaced with service industry jobs such as wal-mart? give me a fucking break. nice country and infrastructure your willing to leave for future generations.
and if you think the employers give a shit about the "equality of man" than you are sadly mistaken. they will take your job and ship it to the country with the lowest bidder without losing sleep. so it is up to us, AMERICANS, to protect our fucking jobs and future. period.
How is that any different than my example about hiring an IT manager. If everyone's equal, then you have to find something to differentiate. If someone is willing to do the same job for less, they get it.....because ultimately they will get it anyway.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Yep - we're hiring an IT manager at our company. If we have 2 candidates who appear equal on paper but one wants $5K less in salary, who do you think we're going to offer it to?
do you support the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to another country?
(most outsourcing takes place because of lower wages, less benefits, and a lack of labor laws)
How is that any different than my example about hiring an IT manager. If everyone's equal, then you have to find something to differentiate. If someone is willing to do the same job for less, they get it.....because ultimately they will get it anyway.
so you support the outsourcing of american jobs to foreign country's?
do you support the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to another country?
(most outsourcing takes place because of lower wages, less benefits, and a lack of labor laws)
I support the market and private companies having a free choice to give jobs to whomever they want.
I'm not saying that outsourcing is a good thing for Americans...but it might be for the people who get the jobs in another country. So again...as long as someone gets it and benefits from it, what's the difference?
If there's 2 people and 1 job available, someone isn't going to get the job. If I'm not one of the 2 people, why should it matter to me?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Of course I am. Nearly 50% of my labor is stolen from me.
Even if I accept your "theft of my money" argument (which I don't), that doesn't make you a slave. That makes you a victim of theft. They're not the same.
so you support the outsourcing of american jobs to foreign country's?
I think unions are one of the biggest factors pushing jobs to foreign countries. What good is it to have a union if no employers are willing to accommodate your demands?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
I support the market and private companies having a free choice to give jobs to whomever they want.
I'm not saying that outsourcing is a good thing for Americans...but it might be for the people who get the jobs in another country. So again...as long as someone gets it and benefits from it, what's the difference?
If there's 2 people and 1 job available, someone isn't going to get the job. If I'm not one of the 2 people, why should it matter to me?
It matters because a different country may not have healthcare, workers comp, fair wages, safe conditions etc etc. They may have no problem employing 9 years olds or forcing people to work 20 hour days.
For all of the bleeding hearts on this board I'm surprised that you support these kinds of practices just to bolster a corporations bottom line.
Even if I accept your "theft of my money" argument (which I don't), that doesn't make you a slave. That makes you a victim of theft. They're not the same.
A slave is a person who is forced to work, and whose purposes are determined by another. The state acts more as theif than as slave owner, yes, so I'll accept your differentiation to an extent up until the money that is expropriated from me begins to be used counter to my purposes.
What about your analogy that treats every voter as a potential slave owner?
I've never used that analogy. It all depends on what they're voting for. If they're voting for forcing others to provide their subsistence, then those voters are voting for slavery.
do you support the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to other country's?
I support choice. Much like I have the choice in how effective and efficient I am at work. I have the choice to make it a foolish decision to try to outsource my work or to have it make economic sense. I work for a company that only exists because we can bring a higher level of service than an outside company. If we should stop providing this service we should not depend onthe government to keep us in business.
Wal-Marts only exist because some people only care about the bottom line. If people didn't live their lives this way then there would be no need for Wal-Mart. I find it ridiculous you want to enact laws that uphold a life that people don't lead or want to lead. Or that you want to legislate companies to behave in a fashion that you don't expect of people.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
Again, I support that companies have a choice to do that if they want. I do not PROMOTE the outsourcing of jobs. I think there's a distinction there.
so you support a company that has made its success in America off the backs of americans, then sending their jobs over seas so they can pay workers less and provide fewer benefits? that is Promoting outsourcing IMO.
and some of the other like minded folks in this thread have already claimed to support the wholesale outsourcing of american jobs. which is just terrible IMO.
"Roger and Me" is a good movie to check out on this matter, and the REAL LIFE implications of outsourcing.
i just find it sad that people value a business's bottom line over the real world affects their greed has at home with our families and neighbors.
and some of the other like minded folks in this thread have already claimed to support the wholesale outsourcing of american jobs. which is just terrible IMO.
I support choice. Much like I have the choice in how effective and efficient I am at work. I have the choice to make it a foolish decision to try to outsource my work or to have it make economic sense. I work for a company that only exists because we can bring a higher level of service than an outside company. If we should stop providing this service we should not depend onthe government to keep us in business.
Wal-Marts only exist because some people only care about the bottom line. If people didn't live their lives this way then there would be no need for Wal-Mart. I find it ridiculous you want to enact laws that uphold a life that people don't lead or want to lead. Or that you want to legislate companies to behave in a fashion that you don't expect of people.
so you support wholesale outsourcing of jobs.
thankfully, my profession is in the human services field and it cant be outsourced. i live near 2 major auto plants, GM and Chrysler. lets just say it wont be good for my area if all those jobs are lost (which they are eventually)... again, we are talking REAL LIFE implications.
A slave is a person who is forced to work, and whose purposes are determined by another. The state acts more as theif than as slave owner, yes, so I'll accept your differentiation to an extent up until the money that is expropriated from me begins to be used counter to my purposes.
I've never used that analogy. It all depends on what they're voting for. If they're voting for forcing others to provide their subsistence, then those voters are voting for slavery.
In the society we live in, money is a necessity. Not a luxury, not some sort of game piece to be played with, but a necessity. All able bodied individuals "forced" to work - making you just as much of a slave owner as anyone.
Or, we can stop being hyperbolic, and start dealing with reality.
It matters because a different country may not have healthcare, workers comp, fair wages, safe conditions etc etc. They may have no problem employing 9 years olds or forcing people to work 20 hour days.
For all of the bleeding hearts on this board I'm surprised that you support these kinds of practices just to bolster a corporations bottom line.
I don't support those practices, but if the people over there are starving and have no jobs at all, isn't it better for them to have some employment and income - even with less than ideal conditions - as opposed to no prospects at all. Let's face it, they are probably willing to put up with lower wages and worse conditions because they have NOTHING without the job.
I'll take it one further - In the U.S. a worker can get unemployment compensation, so isn't it better for the U.S. worker to be receiving unemployment and the foreign worker to have a job than it would be for the U.S. worker to have the job and the foreign worker to have nothing?
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
In the society we live in, money is a necessity. Not a luxury, not some sort of game piece to be played with, but a necessity. All able bodied individuals "forced" to work - making you just as much of a slave owner as anyone.
Or, we can stop being hyperbolic, and start dealing with reality.
Hehe...yes, let's. Here's a very realistic question that might help you determine what money really is:
What is "necessary" about money in "the society we live in"?
so you support a company that has made its success in America off the backs of americans, then sending their jobs over seas so they can pay workers less and provide fewer benefits?
Companies do not make their success of the backs of anyone. Unless you believe Pearl Jam is exploiting you. Maybe you believe they should be doing free shows in your backyard?
Companies, like individuals, profit by exchanging goods or services for more money than they take to produce. There is no exploitation involved. No one can ever take advantage of anyone who has not already submitted to accepting the behavior. At that point there can be no exploitation.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I don't support those practices, but if the people over there are starving and have no jobs at all, isn't it better for them to have some employment and income - even with less than ideal conditions - as opposed to no prospects at all. Let's face it, they are probably willing to put up with lower wages and worse conditions because they have NOTHING without the job.
I'll take it one further - In the U.S. a worker can get unemployment compensation, so isn't it better for the U.S. worker to be receiving unemployment and the foreign worker to have a job than it would be for the U.S. worker to have the job and the foreign worker to have nothing?
When we "provide" jobs to these workers, we are simply enabling the systems under which they live. If we refused to deal with the countries in which they live, then those countries' governments would eventually have to bow to our demands, or they'll have to deal with their own populations. By us "employing" those workers (i.e., allowing them to remain enslaved - this time for reals farfromglorified), we are propping up their abuse.
When we "provide" jobs to these workers, we are simply enabling the systems under which they live. If we refused to deal with the countries in which they live, then those countries' governments would eventually have to bow to our demands, or they'll have to deal with their own populations. By us "employing" those workers (i.e., allowing them to remain enslaved - this time for reals farfromglorified), we are propping up their abuse.
That's a pessimistic way of looking at it. I see it as giving the people a start or a hope. Once the business becomes entrenched there, they can then organize and make demands to try and improve their conditions. Without the jobs, they have no bargaining power.
That's the way it happened in the U.S.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Hehe...yes, let's. Here's a very realistic question that might help you determine what money really is:
What is "necessary" about money in "the society we live in"?
Food and shelter for yourself and your family. I'll agree that most beyond that is "luxury" to an extent - in that eating a hot, freshly served hamburger is a "luxury" compared to pulling a cold one out of the trash.
Comments
A road cannot be raped. A road has no will.
A motorist can be murdered, however. Unfortunately, your statement is inconsistent with the facts. These 100 drivers haven't murdered anyone. And in the history of "unregulated truckers", only an incredibly small percentage have "murdered" someone.
Dude, so if people in a different country are willing to do the job for a dollar a week and your company decides they'll get rid of you and their American presence...then what? Then you have to work for 75 cents a week to bring the business back here. This is the risk we run in this new global economy. It's not racism, or discrimination or whatever else you want to call it. It's about a decent quality of life.
Yes.
I don't mind. And you sound like the people who whined 50 years ago about their jobs being outsourced. They were replaced by the jobs you're now whining to keep. So which is it? If outsourcing leaves shitty jobs, why are you trying to protect those jobs now?
As an employer who does give a shit about the "equality of man", I can tell you that you are sadly mistaken.
Hehe....crank up the fear machine and assemble the empire!!!!!!
do you support the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to other country's?
How is that any different than my example about hiring an IT manager. If everyone's equal, then you have to find something to differentiate. If someone is willing to do the same job for less, they get it.....because ultimately they will get it anyway.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
do you support the wholesale outsourcing of jobs to another country?
(most outsourcing takes place because of lower wages, less benefits, and a lack of labor laws)
so you support the outsourcing of american jobs to foreign country's?
Of course I am. Nearly 50% of my labor is stolen from me.
That's correct. There is no one standing outside my door right now.
Your analogy that treats every truck driver like a potential murderer? No, that doesn't stand.
I support the market and private companies having a free choice to give jobs to whomever they want.
I'm not saying that outsourcing is a good thing for Americans...but it might be for the people who get the jobs in another country. So again...as long as someone gets it and benefits from it, what's the difference?
If there's 2 people and 1 job available, someone isn't going to get the job. If I'm not one of the 2 people, why should it matter to me?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Again, I support that companies have a choice to do that if they want. I do not PROMOTE the outsourcing of jobs. I think there's a distinction there.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
What about your analogy that treats every voter as a potential slave owner? Nope, doesn't sound any sillier to me.
I think unions are one of the biggest factors pushing jobs to foreign countries. What good is it to have a union if no employers are willing to accommodate your demands?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
It matters because a different country may not have healthcare, workers comp, fair wages, safe conditions etc etc. They may have no problem employing 9 years olds or forcing people to work 20 hour days.
For all of the bleeding hearts on this board I'm surprised that you support these kinds of practices just to bolster a corporations bottom line.
A slave is a person who is forced to work, and whose purposes are determined by another. The state acts more as theif than as slave owner, yes, so I'll accept your differentiation to an extent up until the money that is expropriated from me begins to be used counter to my purposes.
I've never used that analogy. It all depends on what they're voting for. If they're voting for forcing others to provide their subsistence, then those voters are voting for slavery.
Wal-Marts only exist because some people only care about the bottom line. If people didn't live their lives this way then there would be no need for Wal-Mart. I find it ridiculous you want to enact laws that uphold a life that people don't lead or want to lead. Or that you want to legislate companies to behave in a fashion that you don't expect of people.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
so you support a company that has made its success in America off the backs of americans, then sending their jobs over seas so they can pay workers less and provide fewer benefits? that is Promoting outsourcing IMO.
and some of the other like minded folks in this thread have already claimed to support the wholesale outsourcing of american jobs. which is just terrible IMO.
"Roger and Me" is a good movie to check out on this matter, and the REAL LIFE implications of outsourcing.
i just find it sad that people value a business's bottom line over the real world affects their greed has at home with our families and neighbors.
Then hire them all back.
so you support wholesale outsourcing of jobs.
thankfully, my profession is in the human services field and it cant be outsourced. i live near 2 major auto plants, GM and Chrysler. lets just say it wont be good for my area if all those jobs are lost (which they are eventually)... again, we are talking REAL LIFE implications.
Or, we can stop being hyperbolic, and start dealing with reality.
/\ and with that, i am done.
your future generations will be happy to know how willing you were to sell them out for a companies bottom line
I don't support those practices, but if the people over there are starving and have no jobs at all, isn't it better for them to have some employment and income - even with less than ideal conditions - as opposed to no prospects at all. Let's face it, they are probably willing to put up with lower wages and worse conditions because they have NOTHING without the job.
I'll take it one further - In the U.S. a worker can get unemployment compensation, so isn't it better for the U.S. worker to be receiving unemployment and the foreign worker to have a job than it would be for the U.S. worker to have the job and the foreign worker to have nothing?
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Hehe...yes, let's. Here's a very realistic question that might help you determine what money really is:
What is "necessary" about money in "the society we live in"?
i thought it was just me? he is fucking ridiculous :rolleyes:
Companies, like individuals, profit by exchanging goods or services for more money than they take to produce. There is no exploitation involved. No one can ever take advantage of anyone who has not already submitted to accepting the behavior. At that point there can be no exploitation.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
That's a pessimistic way of looking at it. I see it as giving the people a start or a hope. Once the business becomes entrenched there, they can then organize and make demands to try and improve their conditions. Without the jobs, they have no bargaining power.
That's the way it happened in the U.S.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
So, in a society without money, food and shelter wouldn't be necessary?