Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I have problems with the opposite side of the coin as well. I was/am pissed that unions have driven the cost of buying a car to rates I cannot afford because they need to afford to pay a moron $25 - $50 an hour to stand on an assembly line and tighten bolts for a living. So I'm also against unions.
I'm for a fare wage. If someone works for a living they should be able to live decently on those wages. Not extravagantly but decent. And for those who can't go to college because of money or iq they don't deserve to be treated as less than human. Living wages for them too. College should get you better than living wages not just living wages.
I think I undrrstand your point, but at the same time I don't believe you grasp the economic impact. If these people are willing to risk their lives for the status quo, why not bump them up to a legalized status, ensure they have adequate living provisions while here and can return home seasonally for wages they are willing to work for?
That is not slavery, it is supply/demand. When self appointed government tyrants get involved, economies shit the bed.
So your justifying paying slave wages because it allows you to undercut your competition.That's just dirty.
In the end, I end up taking away your customers and you eventually have to close up. Why? Because I can produce widgets cheaper than you can, and as I stated, consumers respond to lower prices. Nobody wants your widgets for $7.00 each if they can buy mine for $4.50 each.
So your justifying paying slave wages because it allows you to undercut your competition.In the end, I end up taking away your customers and you eventually have to close up. Why? Because I can produce widgets cheaper than you can, and as I stated, consumers respond to lower prices. Nobody wants your widgets for $7.00 each if they can buy mine for $4.50 each.
There is no subject on which more people are stupider than on economics.
This farmer cannot find Americans to work for a price he can afford to pay and stay in business.
So if farmers had to hire Americans and the price of milk went from $3.40 to $3.89 per gallon to cover the increase in wages, the farmers would go out of business? All the dairies would shut down and America would be a country without milk for our cereal? Is that what you think?
You keep harping on milk, one of the least labor intensive agricultural products. Why not make this same calculations for lettuce or strawberries or grapes.
Thanks for proving my point for me! Even with the robot picker there are still a dozen people doing the packing, which way more than it takes to run a dairy farm
It's not just price. If there are two plumbers in town, one who charges $20/hour but can't handle hooking up a sink without fucking up, leaves oil stains everywhere, doesn't show up when promised, and another who charges $50/hour and who does great work on time cleanly, the $20-/hour guy will go out of business first.I have problems with the opposite side of the coin as well. I was/am pissed that unions have driven the cost of buying a car to rates I cannot afford because they need to afford to pay a moron $25 - $50 an hour to stand on an assembly line and tighten bolts for a living. So I'm also against unions.The reality is we can't compete with countries who don't care about their slaves./citizens who pay them barely enough to survive unless we become like them. Or we stop importing from them.That's just dirty.
Maybe, but it's also reality. It's a philosophy that liberals hate the most called Action/ Reaction.
If you and I decided to meet at a bar one night, and I extend my hand to shake yours, you will respond accordingly in most cases. This is action/ reaction. A positive action usually results in a positive reaction.
But if we met and I pushed you into the wall instead, it's likely you'll push me back even harder. A negative action which caused a negative reaction.
It's just nature is all. But the reason liberals hate it is because they try to convince their followers that if they take a negative action, it will cause a positive reaction. Most of their followers believe them too in spite of it's failed history.
GW did try to do good for America. He tried to make a positive action in the US, but knew it would be a negative action with our trading partners. All is fair in love and war I guess.
That's true, but ask yourself: is that political policy or in the hands of regular Americans?
If you ask me, I say it's the American consumer that caused a lot of our problems. When we shop, we shop to save the most money that we can while being able to obtain the products we really want. We don't care where our products are made, how much automation they use, how much they pay their workers. Just get me my products as cheaply as possible. It's why Walmart is number one and has been for many years.
Until our attitude about buying goods changes, no American policy can have any real impact. If I have to pay three or four bucks for a head of lettuce that was produced and processed by Americans only, I'm willing to spend the money. But unfortunately, I'm not like most American consumers.
I'm for a fare wage. If someone works for a living they should be able to live decently on those wages. Not extravagantly but decent. And for those who can't go to college because of money or iq they don't deserve to be treated as less than human. Living wages for them too. College should get you better than living wages not just living wages.
People don't start companies and create jobs as a social obligation, people open up and maintain companies to produce products or services for profit...... that's it. Your labor is only worth as much as your employer can pay another person to do the same quality of job. They are not obligated to make sure you or anybody else makes a living wage (whatever that is).
College is one option, but trade school is a better one. If you choose a field where workers are in high demand, you can make a decent living and easily be able to repay your loans. But the problem with trade schools is that most trades require physical work; a no-no for many millennials today.
So you and I both decide to open up a widget company. In my company, I pay as little as I can for labor while at the same time, be able to find workers. In your company, you believe in a living wage, so you overpay your workers.
In the end, I end up taking away your customers and you eventually have to close up. Why? Because I can produce widgets cheaper than you can, and as I stated, consumers respond to lower prices. Nobody wants your widgets for $7.00 each if they can buy mine for $4.50 each.
We live in a representative democracy. Of course there was a very long national dialogue surrounding trade liberalization that dates all the way back to GATT. It didn't just begin with NAFTA.I'm not sure who you mean by "rubes", but the free trade true believers are found along K St and in a sprinkling of libertarians around the country. Free trade has never been a "one-issue-voter's kind of issue". In other words, it isn't so much that the "rubes" swallowed anything, but, rather, they weren't asked.Yes, of course I'm talking about NAFTA. NAFTA devastated Mexico's agrarian communities.The biggest economic hit on rural Mexico was NAFTA, and the biggest cultural hit has been mass illegal immigration to the US. The villain is globalism, nationalism is the cure.Anyone that supported free market capitalism. Primarily conservatives and neo-liberals..Who, exactly, "destabilized" Mexican "agricultural communities"?You idiots destabilized Mexican agricultural communities and now you don't like the repercussions
And yes I know Clinton signed it into law. But it was years in the making and the outcome was telegraphed from the outset, Reagan laid out the vision and the rubes swallowed his shit and begged for more. Reagan and Bush Sr. did the heavy lifting, Clinton was there in time to get the accolades.
Globalism was sold to the rubes as free market capitalism. Government is the problem they said. We have to allow our corporations to compete globally they said. And the rubes begged for it. Now they wallow in their own stupidity and look for a savior to reverse course. Only their ignorance has led them to the greatest con man we have seen thus far. Trump is not a nationalist, he is an opportunist and a megalomaniac.
It's not just price. If there are two plumbers in town, one who charges $20/hour but can't handle hooking up a sink without fucking up, leaves oil stains everywhere, doesn't show up when promised, and another who charges $50/hour and who does great work on time cleanly, the $20-/hour guy will go out of business first.I have problems with the opposite side of the coin as well. I was/am pissed that unions have driven the cost of buying a car to rates I cannot afford because they need to afford to pay a moron $25 - $50 an hour to stand on an assembly line and tighten bolts for a living. So I'm also against unions.The reality is we can't compete with countries who don't care about their slaves./citizens who pay them barely enough to survive unless we become like them. Or we stop importing from them.Maybe, but it's also reality. It's a philosophy that liberals hate the most called Action/ Reaction.
If you and I decided to meet at a bar one night, and I extend my hand to shake yours, you will respond accordingly in most cases. This is action/ reaction. A positive action usually results in a positive reaction.
But if we met and I pushed you into the wall instead, it's likely you'll push me back even harder. A negative action which caused a negative reaction.
It's just nature is all. But the reason liberals hate it is because they try to convince their followers that if they take a negative action, it will cause a positive reaction. Most of their followers believe them too in spite of it's failed history.
GW did try to do good for America. He tried to make a positive action in the US, but knew it would be a negative action with our trading partners. All is fair in love and war I guess.
That's true, but ask yourself: is that political policy or in the hands of regular Americans?
If you ask me, I say it's the American consumer that caused a lot of our problems. When we shop, we shop to save the most money that we can while being able to obtain the products we really want. We don't care where our products are made, how much automation they use, how much they pay their workers. Just get me my products as cheaply as possible. It's why Walmart is number one and has been for many years.
Until our attitude about buying goods changes, no American policy can have any real impact. If I have to pay three or four bucks for a head of lettuce that was produced and processed by Americans only, I'm willing to spend the money. But unfortunately, I'm not like most American consumers.
I'm for a fare wage. If someone works for a living they should be able to live decently on those wages. Not extravagantly but decent. And for those who can't go to college because of money or iq they don't deserve to be treated as less than human. Living wages for them too. College should get you better than living wages not just living wages.
People don't start companies and create jobs as a social obligation, people open up and maintain companies to produce products or services for profit...... that's it. Your labor is only worth as much as your employer can pay another person to do the same quality of job. They are not obligated to make sure you or anybody else makes a living wage (whatever that is).
College is one option, but trade school is a better one. If you choose a field where workers are in high demand, you can make a decent living and easily be able to repay your loans. But the problem with trade schools is that most trades require physical work; a no-no for many millennials today.
So you and I both decide to open up a widget company. In my company, I pay as little as I can for labor while at the same time, be able to find workers. In your company, you believe in a living wage, so you overpay your workers.
In the end, I end up taking away your customers and you eventually have to close up. Why? Because I can produce widgets cheaper than you can, and as I stated, consumers respond to lower prices. Nobody wants your widgets for $7.00 each if they can buy mine for $4.50 each.
We live in a representative democracy. Of course there was a very long national dialogue surrounding trade liberalization that dates all the way back to GATT. It didn't just begin with NAFTA.I'm not sure who you mean by "rubes", but the free trade true believers are found along K St and in a sprinkling of libertarians around the country. Free trade has never been a "one-issue-voter's kind of issue". In other words, it isn't so much that the "rubes" swallowed anything, but, rather, they weren't asked.Yes, of course I'm talking about NAFTA. NAFTA devastated Mexico's agrarian communities.The biggest economic hit on rural Mexico was NAFTA, and the biggest cultural hit has been mass illegal immigration to the US. The villain is globalism, nationalism is the cure.Anyone that supported free market capitalism. Primarily conservatives and neo-liberals..Who, exactly, "destabilized" Mexican "agricultural communities"?
And yes I know Clinton signed it into law. But it was years in the making and the outcome was telegraphed from the outset, Reagan laid out the vision and the rubes swallowed his shit and begged for more. Reagan and Bush Sr. did the heavy lifting, Clinton was there in time to get the accolades.
Globalism was sold to the rubes as free market capitalism. Government is the problem they said. We have to allow our corporations to compete globally they said. And the rubes begged for it. Now they wallow in their own stupidity and look for a savior to reverse course. Only their ignorance has led them to the greatest con man we have seen thus far. Trump is not a nationalist, he is an opportunist and a megalomaniac.
Of course Reagan kicked it into high gear. He sold the people on the idea that the government was the problem and business needed to be free from its persuasion. Freeing capital to seek out the cheapest labor, totally ignoring the costs to our society here at home. Yet the idiots that hung on his every word, and do to this day, ignore the fact that in the US we have a people's government. Government isn't the problem, the problem is that globalists are in control of it. Just as they were in control of Reagan. Reagan sold their message and the rubes still hold him up reverentially, seemingly unaware of how they have been played.
Oh my God. This is why democracy can't work. Do you actually believe what --never mind. It's obviously a waste of time.
It is unbelievable that that is put out by the USDA. This quote alone:
The most recent data from ERS indicate that labor accounted for 42 percent of the variable production expenses for U.S. fruit and vegetable farms, although labor’s share varied significantly depending on the characteristics of the commodity and whether the harvest was mechanized.In the first place, labor doesn't account for 42 percent of the retail consumer cost, it's 42 percent of the "variable production expenses". So that probably doesn't include cost of machinery, cost of storage, cost of transportation, taxes, the farmer's profit, etc. It is likely only the labor, seed, irrigation, fertilizer, and, possibly, tillage, so, yeah, it could be 42 percent, that STILL is a negligible part of what you pay in the store for a box of strawberries.
I live with illegals, and they aren't the darling poor little victims they are made out to be. Au con·traire! And it's pretty obvious IF you actually had anything to do with them you would know what a phony exaggerated issue this is.
I remember watching a show months ago where they were talking about immigration and when the apple season comes in Oregon, Mexicans come from Mexico, go up there and pick apples for something like $15-$18 a hour. They hustle, they work hard, they send some money home then I guess they go back after it is all over.
Long way up from Mexico? Expensive round trip? Do they all pile in an un-insured Pontiac? Where do they live? Eat? Shower? Who pays their medical? 60 hours = $1000/week. 5 week job? $2K round trip? Maybe they never go back? Food stamps, sect8
...he said an American tried it and gave up after one box.
Question.
How much does this farmer pay a fruit picker to pick one box of fruit?
Obviously, just enough to entice an illegal alien, but not enough to entice an American who has other employment options.
Solution.
Pay your workers more, enough so someone can actually live off what you are paying him, maybe enough for groceries, rent, utilties, with a little extra left to go to the movies on Saturday.
Illegal aliens don't need that. They live 12 to an apartment, eat rice and beans, and send the rest of their money to their families in Mexico or Central America.
So, the farmer wants us to let in illegal aliens so he doesn't have to pay a living wage for an American.
So, why are the Democrats AGAINST a living wage for American workers?
This is why Trump won the election, because American workers realized the Democrats have abandoned them.
/----/ Didn't the DemocRATS in Congress promise to seal the border in exchange for amnesty? Didn't said DemocRATS stab Reagan in the back and keep the borders open? Well did they punk?We are actually importing Mexicans to do the work that black people used to do. Stupid.
Reagan's pet wetbacks and the lack of enforcement has driven many black contractors out of the construction business, as well as honest contractors and employers. There are American citizens having to pretend to be 'illegal aliens' to get jobs through these 'staffing agencies' now. It's ridiculous.
/----/ Open an orchard and show us how it's done, Libtard...he said an American tried it and gave up after one box.
Question.
How much does this farmer pay a fruit picker to pick one box of fruit?
Obviously, just enough to entice an illegal alien, but not enough to entice an American who has other employment options.
Solution.
Pay your workers more, enough so someone can actually live off what you are paying him, maybe enough for groceries, rent, utilties, with a little extra left to go to the movies on Saturday.
Illegal aliens don't need that. They live 12 to an apartment, eat rice and beans, and send the rest of their money to their families in Mexico or Central America.
So, the farmer wants us to let in illegal aliens so he doesn't have to pay a living wage for an American.
So, why are the Democrats AGAINST a living wage for American workers?
This is why Trump won the election, because American workers realized the Democrats have abandoned them.
I am a democrat, but there are things I agree with in this post as a lot of democrats do too. Sounds like a greedy Farmer who is just coming up with an excuse why he can't give US Citizens jobs. I don't blame illegals I blame the greedy businessmen who prey on the poor and vulnerable illegals and don't pay them what their labor is worth.
...he said an American tried it and gave up after one box.
Question.
How much does this farmer pay a fruit picker to pick one box of fruit?
Obviously, just enough to entice an illegal alien, but not enough to entice an American who has other employment options.
Solution.
Pay your workers more, enough so someone can actually live off what you are paying him, maybe enough for groceries, rent, utilties, with a little extra left to go to the movies on Saturday.
Illegal aliens don't need that. They live 12 to an apartment, eat rice and beans, and send the rest of their money to their families in Mexico or Central America.
So, the farmer wants us to let in illegal aliens so he doesn't have to pay a living wage for an American.
So, why are the Democrats AGAINST a living wage for American workers?
This is why Trump won the election, because American workers realized the Democrats have abandoned them.
I am a democrat, but there are things I agree with in this post as a lot of democrats do too. Sounds like a greedy Farmer who is just coming up with an excuse why he can't give US Citizens jobs. I don't blame illegals I blame the greedy businessmen who prey on the poor and vulnerable illegals and don't pay them what their labor is worth.
It is unbelievable that that is put out by the USDA. This quote alone:
The most recent data from ERS indicate that labor accounted for 42 percent of the variable production expenses for U.S. fruit and vegetable farms, although labor’s share varied significantly depending on the characteristics of the commodity and whether the harvest was mechanized.In the first place, labor doesn't account for 42 percent of the retail consumer cost, it's 42 percent of the "variable production expenses". So that probably doesn't include cost of machinery, cost of storage, cost of transportation, taxes, the farmer's profit, etc. It is likely only the labor, seed, irrigation, fertilizer, and, possibly, tillage, so, yeah, it could be 42 percent, that STILL is a negligible part of what you pay in the store for a box of strawberries.
Actually, machinery, cost of storage, cost of transportation, taxes and more are counted as production expenses. There is a survey of farmers done every year called the Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) that ask all those and more. This is on top of monthly Ag Labor reports which tracks just the labor.
You really should learn what you are talking about prior to coming on such a forum as this.
