stimulus survey
-
Or maybe introduce legislation so that companies after H1-bs have to prove they tried to recruit domestically first? Seems reasonable and they aren't discriminating against people who have already immigrated.
Visit http://www.notreadytogiveup.com/[^] and do something special today.
let me see if I'm following your argument. you're proposing that companies do not attempt to hire the best available tallent at the most competitive price, instead hiring people whose houses are near their operation at an uncompetitive rate? that should go a long way to making organizations more competitive. moron.
-
Synaptrik wrote:
That means WORK.
It means PRODUCTIVE work.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
You do remember what we're talking about don't you? You're straying away from the original point. You can't receive a wage if you quit your job. Stay on point Stan. You're overriding need to be against anything contrary to your model is betraying you.
This statement is false
-
I don't subscribe to that theory. What pulled the US out of the depression was the post WWII era when the US had the only significant industrial capacity left standing. That capacity created real productive jobs and wages.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
What pulled the US out of the depression was the post WWII era when the US had the only significant industrial capacity left standing.
The unemployment rate did not drop from depression levels until the economic impact of World War II was felt. The high level of demand during that war reduced the unemployment rate to minuscule levels. While the unemployment rate should be the defining characteristic of economic depression, the standard definition is in term of GDP. The first year that the US GDP exceeded 1 trillion dollars was 1941. It grew to 1.8 billion by 1944 and then shrank to 1.7 billion as the war wound down in 1945. It shrank again to 1.5 billion in 1946. It did not exceed 1944's high water mark until 1952, the second year of the Korean War. Even more telling is the fact that between 1933 and 1955 the GDP-per-capita grew every year except during the peacetime between the end of WWII and the Korean War. The exact years when you claim the U.S. was pulling out of the depression :confused:
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Synaptrik wrote:
You can't pay people dirt wages
That's where the *free country* part comes in. If I'm paying dirt, you are free to leave. One mans dirt may be anothers living wage. People can decide that for themselves without union interference.
Synaptrik wrote:
Unions didn't start with nothing. Why did they start?
Pretty sure I covered that in my first list.
-
Exactly. There is a cause and effect relationship between them. But the cause was several decades ago and the effect never has waned. There are now laws that protect workers, laws that provide for your first list. Unions now only serve to drag companies down (and keep nostalgic communists stirred up).
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Oakman wrote:
So you think Americans should work for the same slave-wages that Mexicans and Indians do?
Tough call, are we talking workers with the same skills. If so it would seem the only reason to pay them differently would be either racism or artificially created market conditions(unions/minimum wages/ and such). I'm not saying the Bush-Clinton-Bush trifecta didn't add to this. But in the last few decades the economy seems to have become much more global. Factories are going to go where they can operate at the least expense. Unions take part of the blame for making sure the least expense isn't here.
I would call unions an organic response to the hierarchical nature of employment. You question the boss and get fired. No leverage. As long as there is a co-dependency, you need workers to produce your product, they need work to feed themselves, then there will always be levelers. Cause and effect. The only leverage available to workers is the union. When you're hungry, or when all of the employers agree on what a job is worth, then the workers have no recourse.
This statement is false
-
thrakazog wrote:
Tough call, are we talking workers with the same skills. If so it would seem the only reason to pay them differently would be either racism or artificially created market conditions(unions/minimum wages/ and such).
The most skilled Mexican in that country can live like a king on money that you wouldn't consider a reasonable wage, because he, in turn, is living in an economy where a great many peons work for nothing.
thrakazog wrote:
But in the last few decades the economy seems to have become much more global. Factories are going to go where they can operate at the least expense.
And then surprise, surprise the country where the factories used to employ two or three shifts wakes up from an artificially (and illegally) created boomlet and its people stop buying the products of those overseas factories because they don't have jobs. Then the senior managers fly into Washington on private jets and demand handouts so they can continue to pay themselves 20M bonuses. What fracking good does it do to have a factory producing widgets at the lowest possible cost, if no-one can afford to buy widgets? American Business has been playing a form of The Prisoners Dilemma for at least thirty years. The best possible course of action for any factory manager is, as you say, to go where they can operate at the least expense - as long as everyone else keeps their factories in the U.S. But as more and more businesses try to lower their costs by putting Americans out of work, the pool of consumers in this country gets smaller and smaller. Ultimately it gets too small and so you see the government stepping in with makework programs trying to undo the damage by ripping off our kids and grandkids. Henry Ford, who pretty much invented American industry, got it right a long time ago: "There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wage possible." Take away one leg of that three-legged stool and it won't stand up. It isn't standing up. And there's no reason to believe that government can pass a law saying that two-legged stools must stand up. As I somewhat facetiously pointed out, the government can start a war which will immediately employ a very large number of people thus creating higher wages in the civilian job market and increasing demand further by burning through men and materials l
Oakman wrote:
Henry Ford, who pretty much invented American industry, got it right a long time ago: "There is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wage possible."
Correct and his notion of stimulating his economy when struggling was to give them all raises and encourage them to buy cars. Win-win. And it worked.
This statement is false
-
What filibuster? Three Republican Senators have already agreed to vote for this monstrosity, and that's all that's needed for cloture call. Reid is just stalling, because he wants more "Bipartisanship" on the bill (in case it turns out to be the disaster even many Democrats fear it might be). I just finished reading through the Senate version, and am appalled at the abandon with which they are spending money... You should read it for yourself, maybe your opinion would change.
-
Synaptrik wrote:
The depression happened as a result of
government attempting to stmulate the economy, then engaging in protectionist legislation.
Synaptrik wrote:
So, go follow your own advice and read up on the depression.
I have, the very reason I recommend it.
Synaptrik wrote:
I'm not against the free market. I'm not communist, I'm a capitalist. But... free market unbounded doesn't work. Free market in a corral works just fine. But we can see what happens when allowing it to run amok.
Unbounded is the only way it works.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Unbounded is the only way it works.
Where has it worked again? Can you cite a single country where it has been unbounded? Besides Somalia and Iceland as it doesn't work there. Truth is it is an ideal that is unproven.
This statement is false
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
What pulled the US out of the depression was the post WWII era when the US had the only significant industrial capacity left standing.
The unemployment rate did not drop from depression levels until the economic impact of World War II was felt. The high level of demand during that war reduced the unemployment rate to minuscule levels. While the unemployment rate should be the defining characteristic of economic depression, the standard definition is in term of GDP. The first year that the US GDP exceeded 1 trillion dollars was 1941. It grew to 1.8 billion by 1944 and then shrank to 1.7 billion as the war wound down in 1945. It shrank again to 1.5 billion in 1946. It did not exceed 1944's high water mark until 1952, the second year of the Korean War. Even more telling is the fact that between 1933 and 1955 the GDP-per-capita grew every year except during the peacetime between the end of WWII and the Korean War. The exact years when you claim the U.S. was pulling out of the depression :confused:
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports) I'll explain that to you if you like just in case your education in arithmetic has been as lacking as your education in history.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
The depression happened as a result of the tax cuts and deregulation of the 20s. This will be the second republican depression. Since removing the top tier of taxes on the rich Reagan set the stage for this current one. Kennedy while lowering the actual tax rate from 92 to 74 or whatever the real numbers were, actually produced more tax revenue as he closed loopholes. During the years where there was a high tax on wealth there was solid economic growth. During the years following deregulation and tax cuts on the wealthy we've seen bubbles followed by a crash. So, go follow your own advice and read up on the depression. I'm not against the free market. I'm not communist, I'm a capitalist. But... free market unbounded doesn't work. Free market in a corral works just fine. But we can see what happens when allowing it to run amok. But keep coloring the debate with those buzz words..messiah.. heh. let the sophistry continue..
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
The depression happened as a result of the tax cuts and deregulation of the 20s. This will be the second republican depression.
Its time you do some thorough research in economics. Ignorance like yours created the depression.
-
You do remember what we're talking about don't you? You're straying away from the original point. You can't receive a wage if you quit your job. Stay on point Stan. You're overriding need to be against anything contrary to your model is betraying you.
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
You can't receive a wage if you quit your job.
Sure you can. Its called entitlement.
-
I don't mind paying my taxes. Roughly around 30%. But wages means more work for more people. More people working means more people spending which translates to more demand which translates to a stimulated economy. And I don't oppose middle class tax cuts. But in this climate would that be enough or would it cause people to actually save instead?
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
But in this climate would that be enough or would it cause people to actually save instead?
I'd stuff it away, and I'm betting a lot of people would. However, if they took that trillion and split it up among citizens, I could spend a good chunck of that wad of dough, though there's no way in hell they'd do that, they want to use the majority of that money to fund their little socialist experiment. I don't know what the answer to this problem is, but I'm pretty sure frisbee golf courses and the like are not it. And I friggin LOVE frisbee golf! (Though I can't imagine a course costing more than a few thousand to build) Personally, actually, if it were me, I'd put as much money as possible into building a make shift structure to support some wide spread disaster like relief first and foremost and in a damn big hurry (which may be what all the new Rex84 business is about). Which may be an overreaction, but better safe than sorry. Whatever's coming down the pipe is big and nasty, and obviously noone anywhere near a decision making position has a fargin clue what it is, how bad it is, or what the hell to do about it. I'd set up a relief structure fast, (which would mean lots of jobs), and then start looking at what to do to bring the economy back around. I'd worry that doing that would cause a panic, but that seems to be his aim now anyway. I can't explain it, but for some reason my instincts are telling me that something wicked this way comes, the likes of which noone alive has a memory to relate it to. I find myself wondering if I have enough ammo, where I would hide a gun, how I would feed the family and get clean water if all services went down for an extended period. The thoughts seem completely irrational to me, but there it is. But bottom line, if it's really as dire as he wants to portray it, then this bill needs to get serious and drop all the BS, which is at least 60%. But then, I think he has other plans. Nothing coming from DC makes any sense AT ALL, which makes me think we're not privy to the real story. Couple all that with Russia rattling sabers again, DPRK and Iran on the verge of nukes, China growing way to big way to fast while dealing with Russia and funding anti-American shinanagans through Iran and NKorea, Iraq and Afghanastan, Africa being Africa, Mexico ready to collapse, cartel wars on the Mexican border, Israel and Hamas, and a full throttle communist in the White House, and I'm more than a littl
-
Synaptrik wrote:
The depression happened as a result of the tax cuts and deregulation of the 20s. This will be the second republican depression.
Its time you do some thorough research in economics. Ignorance like yours created the depression.
CSS_Shadow(); wrote:
Its time you do some thorough research in economics.
Economic theory and you! :laugh: Aren't you the bloody genius who can't even keep a bank account balanced?
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
-
GDP = consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports − imports) I'll explain that to you if you like just in case your education in arithmetic has been as lacking as your education in history.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
I'll explain that to you if you like just in case your education in arithmetic has been as lacking as your education in history.
Stan, you're quoting Wikipedia. What do you propose to do in your explanation, actually cite the article? But I am curious, why do you think that quoting a standard definition of GDP in any way proves that you are right? Do you think I was making up my figures? Maybe calculating them on some non-standard basis? Now if you wanted to ask whether I was using nominal GDP or real GDP in my economics lesson, you would sound like you knew what you were talking about.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Synaptrik wrote:
But in this climate would that be enough or would it cause people to actually save instead?
I'd stuff it away, and I'm betting a lot of people would. However, if they took that trillion and split it up among citizens, I could spend a good chunck of that wad of dough, though there's no way in hell they'd do that, they want to use the majority of that money to fund their little socialist experiment. I don't know what the answer to this problem is, but I'm pretty sure frisbee golf courses and the like are not it. And I friggin LOVE frisbee golf! (Though I can't imagine a course costing more than a few thousand to build) Personally, actually, if it were me, I'd put as much money as possible into building a make shift structure to support some wide spread disaster like relief first and foremost and in a damn big hurry (which may be what all the new Rex84 business is about). Which may be an overreaction, but better safe than sorry. Whatever's coming down the pipe is big and nasty, and obviously noone anywhere near a decision making position has a fargin clue what it is, how bad it is, or what the hell to do about it. I'd set up a relief structure fast, (which would mean lots of jobs), and then start looking at what to do to bring the economy back around. I'd worry that doing that would cause a panic, but that seems to be his aim now anyway. I can't explain it, but for some reason my instincts are telling me that something wicked this way comes, the likes of which noone alive has a memory to relate it to. I find myself wondering if I have enough ammo, where I would hide a gun, how I would feed the family and get clean water if all services went down for an extended period. The thoughts seem completely irrational to me, but there it is. But bottom line, if it's really as dire as he wants to portray it, then this bill needs to get serious and drop all the BS, which is at least 60%. But then, I think he has other plans. Nothing coming from DC makes any sense AT ALL, which makes me think we're not privy to the real story. Couple all that with Russia rattling sabers again, DPRK and Iran on the verge of nukes, China growing way to big way to fast while dealing with Russia and funding anti-American shinanagans through Iran and NKorea, Iraq and Afghanastan, Africa being Africa, Mexico ready to collapse, cartel wars on the Mexican border, Israel and Hamas, and a full throttle communist in the White House, and I'm more than a littl
BoneSoft wrote:
But bottom line, if it's really as dire as he wants to portray it, then this bill needs to get serious and drop all the BS, which is at least 60%. But then, I think he has other plans. Nothing coming from DC makes any sense AT ALL, which makes me think we're not privy to the real story.
You, too?
BoneSoft wrote:
Couple all that with Russia rattling sabers again, DPRK and Iran on the verge of nukes, China growing way to big way to fast while dealing with Russia and funding anti-American shinanagans through Iran and NKorea, Iraq and Afghanastan, Africa being Africa, Mexico ready to collapse, cartel wars on the Mexican border, Israel and Hamas, and a full throttle communist in the White House, and I'm more than a little bit nervous these days.
Couple that with the fact that we can, at any time, have another Katrina, or another magnitude 7.9 Earthquake in California, like the one that hit in 1857.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
BoneSoft wrote:
But bottom line, if it's really as dire as he wants to portray it, then this bill needs to get serious and drop all the BS, which is at least 60%. But then, I think he has other plans. Nothing coming from DC makes any sense AT ALL, which makes me think we're not privy to the real story.
You, too?
BoneSoft wrote:
Couple all that with Russia rattling sabers again, DPRK and Iran on the verge of nukes, China growing way to big way to fast while dealing with Russia and funding anti-American shinanagans through Iran and NKorea, Iraq and Afghanastan, Africa being Africa, Mexico ready to collapse, cartel wars on the Mexican border, Israel and Hamas, and a full throttle communist in the White House, and I'm more than a little bit nervous these days.
Couple that with the fact that we can, at any time, have another Katrina, or another magnitude 7.9 Earthquake in California, like the one that hit in 1857.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
another Katrina, or another magnitude 7.9 Earthquake
Yeah, I hadn't even considered that.
Oakman wrote:
in California
That might be a blessing in disguise. ;)
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.