ExiledInIllinois Posted November 23, 2005 Posted November 23, 2005 So, not like it's been brought up, or anything... Does a person who makes three spot welds 100 times per day deserve to make $50 per hour plus benefits PLUS pension? That's a simple yes or no, kids. 511341[/snapback] And now the obvious bomb. You know I am going to say YES... Of course they DESERVE it. Who doesn't DESERVE it? More power to 'em... Actually does my heart good to know that somebody might be doing less than I do at work and making more money at it. I would rather have the spot welder drive up the cost of the vehicle. That cost I would gladly pay... The common man getting ahead, not a step behind. Why should we begrudge this? Why the resentment for paying this price? Monotonous work handsdown is the hardest work. We just don't value it much in society because we all need it.
Bill from NYC Posted November 24, 2005 Author Posted November 24, 2005 And now the obvious bomb. You know I am going to say YES... Of course they DESERVE it. Who doesn't DESERVE it? More power to 'em... Actually does my heart good to know that somebody might be doing less than I do at work and making more money at it. I would rather have the spot welder drive up the cost of the vehicle. That cost I would gladly pay... The common man getting ahead, not a step behind. Why should we begrudge this? Why the resentment for paying this price? Monotonous work handsdown is the hardest work. We just don't value it much in society because we all need it. 511477[/snapback] Are you being nice and trying to take the heat off me?
KD in CA Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 And now the obvious bomb. You know I am going to say YES... Of course they DESERVE it. Who doesn't DESERVE it? I'm sure that applies to executive comp too, right? And since everyone DESERVES the most money they can make, I guess companies choosing to move jobs overseas is a-ok as well. Which brings us right back to the start -- the GM employees in this case have no one to blame but their greedy, corrupt union bosses for their current situation. Glad we agree on that!
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Are you being nice and trying to take the heat off me? 511511[/snapback] Of course Bill... I'll take all the flak now! Aren't I a stand-up guy?
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 I'm sure that applies to executive comp too, right?And since everyone DESERVES the most money they can make, I guess companies choosing to move jobs overseas is a-ok as well. Which brings us right back to the start -- the GM employees in this case have no one to blame but their greedy, corrupt union bosses for their current situation. Glad we agree on that! 511519[/snapback] Yes. Yes. Just as long as things are consistent. Blaming one side over the other is not consistent. Why do you think the domestic automobile industry lasted this long... Compared to other industries?
Alaska Darin Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Yes. Yes. Just as long as things are consistent. Blaming one side over the other is not consistent. Why do you think the domestic automobile industry lasted this long... Compared to other industries? 511592[/snapback] Marketing.
Adam Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Michael Moore is an idiot- he's the lefts answer to Rush
Ghost of BiB Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 And now the obvious bomb. You know I am going to say YES... Of course they DESERVE it. Who doesn't DESERVE it? More power to 'em... Actually does my heart good to know that somebody might be doing less than I do at work and making more money at it. I would rather have the spot welder drive up the cost of the vehicle. That cost I would gladly pay... The common man getting ahead, not a step behind. Why should we begrudge this? Why the resentment for paying this price? Monotonous work handsdown is the hardest work. We just don't value it much in society because we all need it. 511477[/snapback] You're just so precious when you're being a complete ass.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Marketing. 511602[/snapback] You don't think it (your automobile) is a personal symbol to the rest of the world out there? I guess that is marketing. People see the little badge that is on the back... It is a very public symbol.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 You're just so precious when you're being a complete ass. 511642[/snapback] Believe me, I am not trying to be a complete ass... As my wife puts it, that just naturally happens. I am just trying to cut through the petty personal issues people have about paying labor. The more they need it, the less they want to pay for it.
Ghost of BiB Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Believe me, I am not trying to be a complete ass... As my wife puts it, that just naturally happens. I am just trying to cut through the petty personal issues people have about paying labor. The more they need it, the less they want to pay for it. 511671[/snapback] There comes a limit, though. That 50 bucks per hour in wages translates to about a hundred, for the company. Times how many workers? As shiddy as this will sound, a lot of people do more imortant work, and get paid far less. People should get paid on their individual merit. When you have a "strong" union, the guy who never takes a sick day, works his ass off and does the best he can makes the same amount as the guy who could give a shidd less, comes in late hungover and is probably responsible for the "Monday Morning Lemon" you have to take back to the dealer every three months for warranty work. Off the top of my head, from what I recall, roughly 60% of the cost of an American made car relates one way or another to labor. What was the cost of a new Lincoln in 1970 vs. the cost now? Figure in inflation, it doesn't wash. Why are we expected to pay as much for a nice car now, as I did on a 3 bedroom, 2 bath home on an acre in 1982? UAW. And I expect any UAW (or any other union) member to defend this to death. Shidd, If I could make $50 per hour, plus benefits, plus pension knowing I'm going to get overtime - for pointing a spray gun, I'd leave what I'm doing in a fuggin heartbeat. And, I mean that very seriously.
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 There comes a limit, though. That 50 bucks per hour in wages translates to about a hundred, for the company. Times how many workers? As shiddy as this will sound, a lot of people do more imortant work, and get paid far less. People should get paid on their individual merit. When you have a "strong" union, the guy who never takes a sick day, works his ass off and does the best he can makes the same amount as the guy who could give a shidd less, comes in late hungover and is probably responsible for the "Monday Morning Lemon" you have to take back to the dealer every three months for warranty work. Off the top of my head, from what I recall, roughly 60% of the cost of an American made car relates one way or another to labor. What was the cost of a new Lincoln in 1970 vs. the cost now? Figure in inflation, it doesn't wash. Why are we expected to pay as much for a nice car now, as I did on a 3 bedroom, 2 bath home on an acre in 1982? UAW. And I expect any UAW (or any other union) member to defend this to death. Shidd, If I could make $50 per hour, plus benefits, plus pension knowing I'm going to get overtime - for pointing a spray gun, I'd leave what I'm doing in a fuggin heartbeat. And, I mean that very seriously. 511678[/snapback] I hear you GhBiB. I think those 50 dollar wages get glorified and are much lower and to just over half that. Look at the price of housing now for that house. My parents purchased a new house in 1960 for 17,000 dollars. Think builders squeezed an extra house into an area that should have been set aside for drainage? Think of what you are getting now compared to that 1970 Lincoln... Safety, reliability, and longevity. Look at the rust buckets of the past. I just don't understand why people aren't driving these newer vehicles 10-15-20 years. In all, things are actually better today... Still there are headaches though.
/dev/null Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Michael Moore is an idiot- he's the lefts answer to Rush 511633[/snapback] If michael moore is their answer, maybe they're asking the wrong question
Ghost of BiB Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 I hear you GhBiB. I think those 50 dollar wages get glorified and are much lower and to just over half that. Look at the price of housing now for that house. My parents purchased a new house in 1960 for 17,000 dollars. Think builders squeezed an extra house into an area that should have been set aside for drainage? Think of what you are getting now compared to that 1970 Lincoln... Safety, reliability, and longevity. Look at the rust buckets of the past. I just don't understand why people aren't driving these newer vehicles 10-15-20 years. In all, things are actually better today... Still there are headaches though. 511698[/snapback] Because it's not cool. No one will take you seriously if you don't drive a new car. This is America. What's really funny, is I know some young guys really in debt with student loans, driving a cheaper leased Benz or BMW, because "chicks won't talk to them" if they don't have "the car". 20 something years old, competed like hell to get a junior job with a big player, and eating cat food, or running up incredible credit card debt to make an impression. Whatever, should be another thread, or forgotten. Probably not on the PPP side, but looking at the football posts, I'm sure plenty of our upwardly mobile young men will defend this practice too.
Bill from NYC Posted November 24, 2005 Author Posted November 24, 2005 Look at the rust buckets of the past. I just don't understand why people aren't driving these newer vehicles 10-15-20 years. 511698[/snapback] I can answer that. The days of the $75.00 water pump are over. Repair costs are SO high that they drive people toward new cars (btw who do we blame for this)? The worst car I ever had was a 1995 Dodge Intrepid. It was strikingly attractive; white with grey leather interior. First, the timing belt went. The water pump was next to it so I switched that too. It cost me close to $600 or more. Next, the AC compressor imploded and of course sent metal shavings throughout the system. An AC compressor can cost $1,500 - $2,000 because the entire system must be changed for the job to be done right. It is easier to plunk down the $1,500 on a new car, which is what people do. In any event, it is fun to talk about this stuff. Happy Thanksgiving to all, and your families and loved ones.
KRC Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Ken, are you taking the position along with IowaBill that there is never a need for workers to unionize? 511455[/snapback] IowaBill never said that. He said that you can get good wages, benefits, etc without joining a union. People do it every day, thus proving his and my point.
KRC Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 They only need to unionize it they want to make a decent wage. 511458[/snapback] So, are you saying that people are incapable of getting decent wages, benefits, etc on their own?
KRC Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 I agree, except for the word "only." Without unions, there would certainly be more indiscriminate firings and a whole host of other abuses. This is what history tells us Mickey. 511466[/snapback] ...and history tells us that there are a lot of union workers being paid to sit on their azzes and cannot be fired because they are a member of a union. Therefore, you need additional union workers to make up for the lazy POS's using their unions to protect their incompetent azzes. Do you need me to repeat my story of 5 union workers being necessary to log items being offloaded from a truck (one to carry the table, one to carry the chair, one to carry the clipboard, one to sit on the chair at the table with the clipboard and one to offload the truck). Gee, I cannot imagine why America cannot compete in the global marketplace.
Bill from NYC Posted November 24, 2005 Author Posted November 24, 2005 IowaBill never said that. He said that you can get good wages, benefits, etc without joining a union. People do it every day, thus proving his and my point. 511808[/snapback] >>>Unions are not needed for fair wages , good benefits, and safe working conditions.<<< This is what he said. I am saying that sometimes this is true, and sometimes it isn't. Don't you think that there are ANY companies/municipalities that would mistreat and/or underpay their workers were it not for unions? I don't see why you can't get this Ken. I am not absolving every union of any and all featherbedding/corruption. I am saying that the above quoted sentence (or at least the way I am reading it) creates an absolute which is simply not always true.
UConn James Posted November 24, 2005 Posted November 24, 2005 Gee, I cannot imagine why America cannot compete in the global marketplace. 511812[/snapback] That, and we have 20 million people who think they can make a living as a singer, actor, entertainer/personality rather than having anything like a real job where they actually have to do something like work. Perish the fuggin' thought. Not that politicians are making it easier/economical for businesses to create real jobs here. They've made it known we want all of the superficial jobs we can get.
Recommended Posts