Never A Dull Moment From This Girl

[Cecilie1200]

Just a joke really. But it strikes me funny at how many on the left claim to be independently wealthy, have their own business, work from home, or retired early from a business they previously owned. That must be it because they are all here posting during normal working hours.

Me? I'm the only truck driver here.

What's more peculiar than that is how they all have this empathy for people who don't work or didn't do anything to improve their worth to employers. None of these well-to-do libs ever suggest that these poor people should do what they did. The only people that suggest that are people on the right who claim they too are either doing very well financially or wealthy themselves.

How much would your company make if you didn't do your job?

I can answer that. They'd make the same amount, because they'd hire someone else.

Really? I thought you did the work of three people.

Your question was directed at Ray. While I'm sure he's an excellent truck driver, and it's certainly not a job that just anyone can do, there are still a lot of good/excellent truck drivers in the world, and people who could learn to be. So if he wasn't there to do his job, they'd hire someone else to do it.

I'm a fairly special case, because I'm an unusual person. So it would cost my company a lot more to replace me, since they'd likely have to hire more than one person to do it. That being said, I am still replaceable. My basic job skills as listed on my resume are far from uncommon.

If there wasn't anyone to do Ray's job the company would make no money. His job is more important to the financial health of the company than almost anyone else.

You say you are replaceable, but multiple people would have to do the job that you currently perform. So it stands to believe that you should be making as much as those multiple people.

And if wishes were horses, everyone could ride. Talking about an impossible hypothetical like "Well, but what if there was no one in the world capable of or willing to drive trucks for money?" is a waste of everyone's time. Well, MY time, anyway, because unlike you, I have useful things to do. There ARE people to do the job, quite a few people, which is why Ray doesn't get paid as though he's a completely unique, rare, one-of-a-kind person.

You assume because Ray's company needs trucks driven, that's the ONLY job they need done to make money and stay in business. But what the fuck would he carry in his truck without the people who work with existing clients and find new ones? How would he know where to go without the scads of people who manage the reams of paperwork (electronic paperwork now) that control and document every load? How would he even have a job without the human resources people who manage the hiring? How would he get paid without the bookkeeping people who manage the payroll and the billing? And while we're on the subject, how would he get paid without the owners of the company who provide the capital for it to exist, and who gathered all of those people together to do the work? Why the hell do you think companies employ and pay all of the people they do if none of them are essential to the existence and functioning of the business, you pinhead?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Just a joke really. But it strikes me funny at how many on the left claim to be independently wealthy, have their own business, work from home, or retired early from a business they previously owned. That must be it because they are all here posting during normal working hours.

Me? I'm the only truck driver here.

What's more peculiar than that is how they all have this empathy for people who don't work or didn't do anything to improve their worth to employers. None of these well-to-do libs ever suggest that these poor people should do what they did. The only people that suggest that are people on the right who claim they too are either doing very well financially or wealthy themselves.

How much would your company make if you didn't do your job?

I can answer that. They'd make the same amount, because they'd hire someone else.

Really? I thought you did the work of three people.

Your question was directed at Ray. While I'm sure he's an excellent truck driver, and it's certainly not a job that just anyone can do, there are still a lot of good/excellent truck drivers in the world, and people who could learn to be. So if he wasn't there to do his job, they'd hire someone else to do it.

I'm a fairly special case, because I'm an unusual person. So it would cost my company a lot more to replace me, since they'd likely have to hire more than one person to do it. That being said, I am still replaceable. My basic job skills as listed on my resume are far from uncommon.

If there wasn't anyone to do Ray's job the company would make no money. His job is more important to the financial health of the company than almost anyone else.

You say you are replaceable, but multiple people would have to do the job that you currently perform. So it stands to believe that you should be making as much as those multiple people.

Second half of your post:

You are correct that it would cost them more to replace me at the level at which I perform than it would to keep me. And my employer is aware of it, which is why I get the perks of my position that I do. Doesn't mean I'm not technically replaceable; just that it would be a far less desirable outcome. The company's not going to stop existing and functioning if I die.

And unlike you, I am aware of the other considerations at hand that my employer has to consider. The first is that there are other employees in this company. I am the only person holding my particular job position in my department, but there are lots of others who do the same job for other departments. They get paid less than I do, because they have more people covering the responsibilities, and they accept that . . . to a certain point. If I start getting paid more than the managers do, my coworkers are not going to accept that, and neither would anyone they hired to replace them. And while we're on the subject, the managers aren't going to accept that, either. My manager is pretty unique in that she could see that I was a rare and lucky break for the company and pushed for me to get paid beyond the going rate for my job, but there are limits. And if she were to leave, a replacement manager who wasn't here to see the difference between the job without me and the job with me wouldn't tolerate for a second having a subordinate who got paid more than she did.

There's also me to consider. If I start getting paid far outside of the going rate for my job description, I'm basically trapped at this company. No other company is ever going to pay me that outrageous amount of money, which means any sort of career change would require accepting a massive pay cut. And that's not even to mention the fact that even if I decided to accept that, no employer in the world would look at my past pay history and even consider hiring me, because they would assume that I would never be happy with so much less money, and would leave.

Now, you might say, "Well, if you were making that much money, you would never WANT to leave." To that I say, shit happens. I like my last job very much, but I was forced to leave because it required a ton of telephone work and I lost my hearing and could no longer do it. One or several of my coworkers could leave and be replaced by utterly intolerable people I can't stand to be around every day. The company could decide to relocate my office to another city, or even another country; after all, the owner of the company lives in Israel.

Bottom line is, I could probably demand more money if I really wanted to push it. But it would be shortsighted of me in the extreme, for a lot of reasons. And there's no way they're going to agree to pay me three times the basic going rate for my job title, and it's completely reasonable for them to take that position. After all, if they're going to have to pay for three salaries anyway, there's not much point in having ME around, is there? I kinda lose my special value to them at that point.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I'm curious to hear why you think that people who don't have job skills that warrant a higher wage should be given one simply because you think it's a "moral responsibility" of employers to do so?

Why would you think that workers don't have job skills? All of the 450 employees that I have today have job skills. All of the 10's of thousands that I employed in the last 40 years had job skills. Why would you think that workers don't have job skills?

People of character (like me) take into account their moral obligations to their employees because employees make them all of their money.

That's how we know you're a phony. If you actually did own a business and were paying people whatever your "moral obligation" was, and your competitors were paying their employees what they were worth, you would be out of business.

You're writing that employers without character don't pay a living wage to their employees that make them all of their money?

Employers do not give a damn about subjective BS like "living wage". What you need to run your life is YOUR problem. They're your boss, not your mother or your babysitter.

Sack the fuck up and act like a man. Or at least an adult.

There you have it; Employers don't give a damn. Thank You!!!!

They give a damn. They just don't give the damn that you arbitrarily think they should because you're too pathetic to take control of and responsibility for your own life.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I heard that. I'm apparently rare and shocking because I actually tell people I'm a mid-level administrator for a small business.

SOMEONE in this country has to work and pay the bills. Being an Internet "billionaire" isn't actually all that useful to anyone.

Being a "mid-level administrator for a small business" my bet is that you aren't being paid your worth to the company.

In my very particular case, probably not. When I was hired, I took the place of the three people who were doing my job before me. On the other hand, when they realized that they didn't have to hire anyone to replace those people because I was able to do it all myself, they did give me a raise that puts me at about a dollar an hour short of what my supervisor makes, and which puts me well above what I could command at another company were I to look for another job. And they afford me a level of freedom and autonomy in my work that is virtually unheard-of in office work, not to mention that I have job security normally only found in civil service.

Your supervisor needs a raise in pay.

No, my supervisor, while a very nice woman and quite competent at her job, makes slightly above the going rate for her job in this city.

An employee is an employers best asset. Why would one pay their best asset.....going rate? Answer: CHEAP

Uh, no, it's because only a damned fool like you would pay more for ANY asset than the going rate.

My company does all its work on computers, so we own A LOT of laptops, and we have to buy new ones periodically. If Computer Supply Company A charges us the same amount per computer for ten of them as it would for buying only one, and Computer Supply Company B says, "If you'll buy all ten from us at one time we'll give you a discount", do you honestly think there's some sort of noble, moral superiority to my employer saying, "No! They are too important, and I am going to show how much we value them by paying more than I have to!"?

Like it or not, labor is the same way. If someone is able and willing to do the work for what they offer, then why in the hell would they pay more than that?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Just a joke really. But it strikes me funny at how many on the left claim to be independently wealthy, have their own business, work from home, or retired early from a business they previously owned. That must be it because they are all here posting during normal working hours.

Me? I'm the only truck driver here.

What's more peculiar than that is how they all have this empathy for people who don't work or didn't do anything to improve their worth to employers. None of these well-to-do libs ever suggest that these poor people should do what they did. The only people that suggest that are people on the right who claim they too are either doing very well financially or wealthy themselves.

How much would your company make if you didn't do your job?

How much would I make if I didn't have a company to work for?

It's not about YOU! How much would YOUR COMPANY THAT YOU WORK make if YOU didn't do your job?

Your argument is ridiculous.

Let's say that I was selling a car that you wanted to buy. We agree to meet and do the sale. You can't claim that I'm in any better of a position because I have your money for the car. Nor can I claim you are in a better position because if for not me selling you the car, you'd have no transportation.

It was a mutual agreement. I wanted X for my car, and you agreed to buy the car for X money. We both benefited equally.

It's the same thing in the employer/ employee world. The employer offers X money and benefits to do a job, and you agree to work for X benefits and money to do a job. Me having a job and my employer having a good worker benefits us both.

It's your argument that is ridiculous.

Most employers/businesses lack morals and ethics which is why we have rules like minimum wage.

Memo to you: disagreeing with the likes of you is NOT the definition of "lack of morals and ethics." It's the definition of "smart and successful enough to ignore a moron whose opinion doesn't matter."

 

[Cecilie1200]

That's how we know you're a phony. If you actually did own a business and were paying people whatever your "moral obligation" was, and your competitors were paying their employees what they were worth, you would be out of business.

You're writing that employers without character don't pay a living wage to their employees that make them all of their money?

Yes, that's the way it works. Just because an employer is not paying what an employee would like does not mean they lack character. If whatever pay they are offering is not attracting workers, then they need to increase their offer. If they find people for the wages and benefits offered, then there is no reason to pay any more.

We non-employers do this in our lives. If you get three estimates from lawn care companies to take care of your yard, you choose the lowest bid. If you get three bids to have your transmission rebuilt in your car, you take the lowest price. We all do it, not just businesses.

It must be a full moon!

Employers without character don't pay a living wage.

You NEVER take the lowest bid. If you get three, you take the middle.

Any mechanical rebuild, you ALWAYS take the one with the best warranty, because it WILL break again.

No, I'm talking about all three doing the same quality of work. I don't know what you do, but most Americans pick the cheapest one.

You would never pay $20.00 for a watermelon, would you? Then why would you pay an employee more money than you have to? When did you become the arbiter of character anyway?

People don't open up businesses as a social obligation. People open up businesses to provide products or services for a profit. If you overpay your employees, you will eventually join them in the unemployment line when your competitors put you out of business.

No business in history ever failed because they overpaid their employees.

Possibly because no business in history overpaid its employees.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It all depends on the product. If the product is created through automation, all the worker does is press buttons. That's hardly worth anything. They may help in some of the packaging processes depending on the device. However it's a low skill talentless job that an employer can get anybody to do.

If nobody pressed the button, the company wouldn't make any money. So the button pusher is key to the success of the company. How much do you pay a key success?

All they do is the job they are getting paid for. The employee needs the employer more than the other way around. That's why the employee is not in the position to ask for a resume from the employer or tell the employer what he or she must pay. The employer picks the worker, the employer interviews the worker, the employer decides what the wages will pay.

Answer the question! If nobody pressed the button, the company wouldn't make any money. So the button pusher is key to the success of the company. How much do you pay a key success?

No they are not the key to success. The key to success of the company is the person(s) who took hard earned money and invested it; the people who erected or leased a building to run their operations; the people who purchased the necessary equipment to produce a product; the people who pay the taxes and utility bills; the people who pay for the maintenance of the property. That's who the key to success is.

A worker does one thing, work.

The efforts of the worker make all the money for the business. How much do you pay someone that makes you all of your money?

Wrong.

There are far more people working in a business than the ones fools like you term "workers". And they ALL "make all the money for the business". And you pay them the going rate, because otherwise, there's no money left, and then what's the point?

 

[Cecilie1200]

All they do is the job they are getting paid for. The employee needs the employer more than the other way around. That's why the employee is not in the position to ask for a resume from the employer or tell the employer what he or she must pay. The employer picks the worker, the employer interviews the worker, the employer decides what the wages will pay.

Answer the question! If nobody pressed the button, the company wouldn't make any money. So the button pusher is key to the success of the company. How much do you pay a key success?

No they are not the key to success. The key to success of the company is the person(s) who took hard earned money and invested it; the people who erected or leased a building to run their operations; the people who purchased the necessary equipment to produce a product; the people who pay the taxes and utility bills; the people who pay for the maintenance of the property. That's who the key to success is.

A worker does one thing, work.

The efforts of the worker make all the money for the business. How much do you pay someone that makes you all of your money?

As little as you can. That's how a business becomes successful and able to compete with foreign made products. Again, why would you pay $20.00 for a watermelon when the $7.00 watermelons are sitting right next to them?

When it blows-up it blows-up big!

Knight-Swift Agrees to $100 Million Settlement in Misclassification Lawsuit

Aren't businesses ethically partly responsible for the economy?

Way to misunderstand the story.

Businesses are ethically responsible to fulfill the terms of their contracts. They are not responsible, ethically or morally or any other way, to people outside of those contracts or for anything outside those contracts. Get over the notion that you have some objective, overarching claim on other people and their businesses, or that you are arbitering any sort of "morality" onto people.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How much would your company make if you didn't do your job?

I can answer that. They'd make the same amount, because they'd hire someone else.

Really? I thought you did the work of three people.

Your question was directed at Ray. While I'm sure he's an excellent truck driver, and it's certainly not a job that just anyone can do, there are still a lot of good/excellent truck drivers in the world, and people who could learn to be. So if he wasn't there to do his job, they'd hire someone else to do it.

I'm a fairly special case, because I'm an unusual person. So it would cost my company a lot more to replace me, since they'd likely have to hire more than one person to do it. That being said, I am still replaceable. My basic job skills as listed on my resume are far from uncommon.

If there wasn't anyone to do Ray's job the company would make no money. His job is more important to the financial health of the company than almost anyone else.

You say you are replaceable, but multiple people would have to do the job that you currently perform. So it stands to believe that you should be making as much as those multiple people.

And if wishes were horses, everyone could ride. Talking about an impossible hypothetical like "Well, but what if there was no one in the world capable of or willing to drive trucks for money?" is a waste of everyone's time. Well, MY time, anyway, because unlike you, I have useful things to do. There ARE people to do the job, quite a few people, which is why Ray doesn't get paid as though he's a completely unique, rare, one-of-a-kind person.

You assume because Ray's company needs trucks driven, that's the ONLY job they need done to make money and stay in business. But what the fuck would he carry in his truck without the people who work with existing clients and find new ones? How would he know where to go without the scads of people who manage the reams of paperwork (electronic paperwork now) that control and document every load? How would he even have a job without the human resources people who manage the hiring? How would he get paid without the bookkeeping people who manage the payroll and the billing? And while we're on the subject, how would he get paid without the owners of the company who provide the capital for it to exist, and who gathered all of those people together to do the work? Why the hell do you think companies employ and pay all of the people they do if none of them are essential to the existence and functioning of the business, you pinhead?

Fake one-percenter doesn't understand that you can't make any money driving an empty truck around. If I was as valuable as he says, I would lease my own truck and trailer and do all the things my boss does now to provide me with work and a job.

But I work for a small company; less than a dozen employees. The owner comes in nearly every day and puts in 9 hours minimum, and at time takes work home with him for further processing. I would never want to do all that.

 

[Rigby5]

It is obvious that capitalism does not work at all.
The most important strategic resources the US needs to depend on are steel, consumer electronics, and alternative energy like photo-voltaic.
But capitalists have sold out the US on all of those, giving China a monopoly over all of them.
So if we ever got into a fight with China, we would be at a serious risk due to the traitorous economic actions of short sighted capitalists.

It should be clear that the US needs socialism to create sufficient US steel production.
We also should tariff Chinese consumer electronics and should have socialize Solyndra.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is obvious that capitalism does not work at all.
The most important strategic resources the US needs to depend on are steel, consumer electronics, and alternative energy like photo-voltaic.
But capitalists have sold out the US on all of those, giving China a monopoly over all of them.
So if we ever got into a fight with China, we would be at a serious risk due to the traitorous economic actions of short sighted capitalists.

It should be clear that the US needs socialism to create sufficient US steel production.
We also should tariff Chinese consumer electronics and should have socialize Solyndra.

Capitalism is the greatest system in the world. It's one of the reasons why millions are trying to get into this country.

The people who hate capitalism are those who never involved themselves in it. They go to work every day, spend their money on the newest iPhone, video games, cable television, highest speed internet, cars, and outside of perhaps their home or company provided IRA, made no investments with their money. They never made any sacrifices.

The only problem with capitalism is that it depends on consumers. If a consumer always chooses the cheapest products, then the only way to provide that consumer with such demand is to have products made outside of the US away from the unions and government taxes and regulations.

Alternative energy is more expensive and less reliable. That's why capitalists don't invest in it. Socialism is a system that doesn't reward properly. Capitalism is a system that does. After all, which horse will run faster, the horse that has a carrot dangled in front of him or the horse that is fed carrots all day?

 

[thereisnospoon]

She’s drunk with power and doesn’t realize there are consequences to spouting your mouth off when you don’t know of what you speak

 

[thereisnospoon]

She's 100% correct.

About WHAT?
Hey genius, capitalism allows you to post your insipid drivel...

 

[thereisnospoon]

What I can't understand is why these people want to make our country like every other country of their desire instead of just moving to one of those glorious places. The problem is there is only one USA. Once they F this place up by turning into all the others, there is no other USA to move to after we realize our mistake.

And with that, the world's economy goes into free fall and then we have darkness.

 

[Rigby5]

It is obvious that capitalism does not work at all.
The most important strategic resources the US needs to depend on are steel, consumer electronics, and alternative energy like photo-voltaic.
But capitalists have sold out the US on all of those, giving China a monopoly over all of them.
So if we ever got into a fight with China, we would be at a serious risk due to the traitorous economic actions of short sighted capitalists.

It should be clear that the US needs socialism to create sufficient US steel production.
We also should tariff Chinese consumer electronics and should have socialize Solyndra.

Capitalism is the greatest system in the world. It's one of the reasons why millions are trying to get into this country.

The people who hate capitalism are those who never involved themselves in it. They go to work every day, spend their money on the newest iPhone, video games, cable television, highest speed internet, cars, and outside of perhaps their home or company provided IRA, made no investments with their money. They never made any sacrifices.

The only problem with capitalism is that it depends on consumers. If a consumer always chooses the cheapest products, then the only way to provide that consumer with such demand is to have products made outside of the US away from the unions and government taxes and regulations.

Alternative energy is more expensive and less reliable. That's why capitalists don't invest in it. Socialism is a system that doesn't reward properly. Capitalism is a system that does. After all, which horse will run faster, the horse that has a carrot dangled in front of him or the horse that is fed carrots all day?

Sorry, but I disagree.
The reason why people want to immigrate into the US is that they want to follow their money.
Colonialism and imperialism means extracting wealth from other countries without earning it.
England was calculated to have taken 173 billion dollars out of India.
The US makes billions off the dictators we spread across South and Central America.
Its just like when ancient Rome was pillaging and plundering, and everyone wanted to go to Rome, the only place that was safe from the Romans.

I know how to play the games with taxes, banks, insurance, etc., and I make more than enough money off capitalism, but that does not change the fact it is totally corrupt, immoral, rigged, and hopelessly inefficient.

Alternative energy does not have to be expensive or unreliable, such as fission, tidal, geothermal, etc. Solar requires being stored for night, but otherwise is the least expensive, virtually free.
Capitalists don't invest in it because it is less profitable, not because it is less practical.
And in the long run, alternative energy is far better for the country.

With socialism you do not need to reward the investor for risk, because there is no risk.
The people pool their own money, in order to make what they really need and want, at costs instead of huge markup profits. For example, health care. We pay over twice what the world does for health care, because we don't pay the doctors directly, but instead pay the insurance companies, who then pay the health corporations, who then pay the doctors. The middlemen do nothing but add layers of cost. Makes no sense.

The horse that will last the longest is not the one you over work and under feed to save money.
You get the most work out of the one you treat the best.
Capitalism is always short sighted, and always puts whole companies out of business.

In the case of steel, consumer electronics, and energy, capitalism may have destroyed the US and given the world over to China.

 

[Rigby5]

She's 100% correct.

About WHAT?
Hey genius, capitalism allows you to post your insipid drivel...

Actually, the Internet, and almost all computer technology was created by public investments and discoveries.
If you look at anything, from planes to gasoline engines, it is all funded by government grants.
And we never would have heard of these things otherwise.
Look at the wonders of the world, from the Eiffel Tower to the pyramids of Egypt, and you will only see public works.

 

[Rigby5]

What I can't understand is why these people want to make our country like every other country of their desire instead of just moving to one of those glorious places. The problem is there is only one USA. Once they F this place up by turning into all the others, there is no other USA to move to after we realize our mistake.

And with that, the world's economy goes into free fall and then we have darkness.

A planned economy can never have any problem at all because the people can then vote to control the money supply
It is only in a capitalist economy where investors get frightened, they fail to invest, which prevents production, which then becomes the self fulfilling prophesy of a recession or depression
Every single recession and depression was caused by either deliberate capitalist manipulation, or capitalist stupidity where fears are made to become reality.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is obvious that capitalism does not work at all.
The most important strategic resources the US needs to depend on are steel, consumer electronics, and alternative energy like photo-voltaic.
But capitalists have sold out the US on all of those, giving China a monopoly over all of them.
So if we ever got into a fight with China, we would be at a serious risk due to the traitorous economic actions of short sighted capitalists.

It should be clear that the US needs socialism to create sufficient US steel production.
We also should tariff Chinese consumer electronics and should have socialize Solyndra.

Capitalism is the greatest system in the world. It's one of the reasons why millions are trying to get into this country.

The people who hate capitalism are those who never involved themselves in it. They go to work every day, spend their money on the newest iPhone, video games, cable television, highest speed internet, cars, and outside of perhaps their home or company provided IRA, made no investments with their money. They never made any sacrifices.

The only problem with capitalism is that it depends on consumers. If a consumer always chooses the cheapest products, then the only way to provide that consumer with such demand is to have products made outside of the US away from the unions and government taxes and regulations.

Alternative energy is more expensive and less reliable. That's why capitalists don't invest in it. Socialism is a system that doesn't reward properly. Capitalism is a system that does. After all, which horse will run faster, the horse that has a carrot dangled in front of him or the horse that is fed carrots all day?

Sorry, but I disagree.
The reason why people want to immigrate into the US is that they want to follow their money.
Colonialism and imperialism means extracting wealth from other countries without earning it.
England was calculated to have taken 173 billion dollars out of India.
The US makes billions off the dictators we spread across South and Central America.
Its just like when ancient Rome was pillaging and plundering, and everyone wanted to go to Rome, the only place that was safe from the Romans.

I know how to play the games with taxes, banks, insurance, etc., and I make more than enough money off capitalism, but that does not change the fact it is totally corrupt, immoral, rigged, and hopelessly inefficient.

Alternative energy does not have to be expensive or unreliable, such as fission, tidal, geothermal, etc. Solar requires being stored for night, but otherwise is the least expensive, virtually free.
Capitalists don't invest in it because it is less profitable, not because it is less practical.
And in the long run, alternative energy is far better for the country.

With socialism you do not need to reward the investor for risk, because there is no risk.
The people pool their own money, in order to make what they really need and want, at costs instead of huge markup profits. For example, health care. We pay over twice what the world does for health care, because we don't pay the doctors directly, but instead pay the insurance companies, who then pay the health corporations, who then pay the doctors. The middlemen do nothing but add layers of cost. Makes no sense.

The horse that will last the longest is not the one you over work and under feed to save money.
You get the most work out of the one you treat the best.
Capitalism is always short sighted, and always puts whole companies out of business.

In the case of steel, consumer electronics, and energy, capitalism may have destroyed the US and given the world over to China.

No, it's just another example of what I'm talking about. Our producers want to create products at a cheaper cost. To do that, they need to import steel.

So what killed steel in this country? For one, environmentalists. Two is the unions.

A close friend of mine passed away a few years ago. His widow told me that with overtime, he was making six figures a year working at the steel plant. My friend had no advanced education or trade. He was just a worker at the plant.

When I was a teen I was a lead guitarist in a rock band. The other guitarist was a few years older than me and he worked at the steel mills. He asked me if I wanted to take a ride with him to the plant to get his check. It was summer and I had nothing better to do.

On the way there we had a discussion about the mills and I asked him what he did exactly? I knew he worked on the trains but didn't know what he did. He told me he was a coal man. Confused, I asked what a coal man did? He said a coal man shovels the coal into the train to make it run. Again confused, I asked if they still had those kinds of trains? He said "No they don't, but the union says there has to be a coal man on the train at all times." In other words, the union forced the mills to pay guys to ride around on trains and do nothing.

Another guy that worked at the mills was a neighbor of my friend. I went to his house and they were talking. He was a welder who just got home after a week away. As it turned out, he got into a fight with his wife, so he headed to the mills and stayed there for a week. Technically, he was an on-call welder. They had a room equipt with a stove, microwave, fridge, beds, television, a home away from home. And of course for every hour he spent there, he got paid overtime.

He told me only once in a great while would they ask him to work, but even then, it only took him a half-hour to weld something and then he'd go back to the welders room. He said he believes his wife manufactures arguments because she loves the money so much.

So of course we now get our steel from China.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What I can't understand is why these people want to make our country like every other country of their desire instead of just moving to one of those glorious places. The problem is there is only one USA. Once they F this place up by turning into all the others, there is no other USA to move to after we realize our mistake.

And with that, the world's economy goes into free fall and then we have darkness.

Exactly. Look at our economy today and look at Europe. When the housing bubble burst under Bush, it sparked off a world downturn. Well.....the economy is doing great today, and what goes on in Socialist countries has little to no impact on us.

 

[Rigby5]

It is obvious that capitalism does not work at all.
The most important strategic resources the US needs to depend on are steel, consumer electronics, and alternative energy like photo-voltaic.
But capitalists have sold out the US on all of those, giving China a monopoly over all of them.
So if we ever got into a fight with China, we would be at a serious risk due to the traitorous economic actions of short sighted capitalists.

It should be clear that the US needs socialism to create sufficient US steel production.
We also should tariff Chinese consumer electronics and should have socialize Solyndra.

Capitalism is the greatest system in the world. It's one of the reasons why millions are trying to get into this country.

The people who hate capitalism are those who never involved themselves in it. They go to work every day, spend their money on the newest iPhone, video games, cable television, highest speed internet, cars, and outside of perhaps their home or company provided IRA, made no investments with their money. They never made any sacrifices.

The only problem with capitalism is that it depends on consumers. If a consumer always chooses the cheapest products, then the only way to provide that consumer with such demand is to have products made outside of the US away from the unions and government taxes and regulations.

Alternative energy is more expensive and less reliable. That's why capitalists don't invest in it. Socialism is a system that doesn't reward properly. Capitalism is a system that does. After all, which horse will run faster, the horse that has a carrot dangled in front of him or the horse that is fed carrots all day?

Sorry, but I disagree.
The reason why people want to immigrate into the US is that they want to follow their money.
Colonialism and imperialism means extracting wealth from other countries without earning it.
England was calculated to have taken 173 billion dollars out of India.
The US makes billions off the dictators we spread across South and Central America.
Its just like when ancient Rome was pillaging and plundering, and everyone wanted to go to Rome, the only place that was safe from the Romans.

I know how to play the games with taxes, banks, insurance, etc., and I make more than enough money off capitalism, but that does not change the fact it is totally corrupt, immoral, rigged, and hopelessly inefficient.

Alternative energy does not have to be expensive or unreliable, such as fission, tidal, geothermal, etc. Solar requires being stored for night, but otherwise is the least expensive, virtually free.
Capitalists don't invest in it because it is less profitable, not because it is less practical.
And in the long run, alternative energy is far better for the country.

With socialism you do not need to reward the investor for risk, because there is no risk.
The people pool their own money, in order to make what they really need and want, at costs instead of huge markup profits. For example, health care. We pay over twice what the world does for health care, because we don't pay the doctors directly, but instead pay the insurance companies, who then pay the health corporations, who then pay the doctors. The middlemen do nothing but add layers of cost. Makes no sense.

The horse that will last the longest is not the one you over work and under feed to save money.
You get the most work out of the one you treat the best.
Capitalism is always short sighted, and always puts whole companies out of business.

In the case of steel, consumer electronics, and energy, capitalism may have destroyed the US and given the world over to China.

No, it's just another example of what I'm talking about. Our producers want to create products at a cheaper cost. To do that, they need to import steel.

So what killed steel in this country? For one, environmentalists. Two is the unions.

A close friend of mine passed away a few years ago. His widow told me that with overtime, he was making six figures a year working at the steel plant. My friend had no advanced education or trade. He was just a worker at the plant.

When I was a teen I was a lead guitarist in a rock band. The other guitarist was a few years older than me and he worked at the steel mills. He asked me if I wanted to take a ride with him to the plant to get his check. It was summer and I had nothing better to do.

On the way there we had a discussion about the mills and I asked him what he did exactly? I knew he worked on the trains but didn't know what he did. He told me he was a coal man. Confused, I asked what a coal man did? He said a coal man shovels the coal into the train to make it run. Again confused, I asked if they still had those kinds of trains? He said "No they don't, but the union says there has to be a coal man on the train at all times." In other words, the union forced the mills to pay guys to ride around on trains and do nothing.

Another guy that worked at the mills was a neighbor of my friend. I went to his house and they were talking. He was a welder who just got home after a week away. As it turned out, he got into a fight with his wife, so he headed to the mills and stayed there for a week. Technically, he was an on-call welder. They had a room equipt with a stove, microwave, fridge, beds, television, a home away from home. And of course for every hour he spent there, he got paid overtime.

He told me only once in a great while would they ask him to work, but even then, it only took him a half-hour to weld something and then he'd go back to the welders room. He said he believes his wife manufactures arguments because she loves the money so much.

So of course we now get our steel from China.

You have that all confused.
The reason current unions are not really unions in the real sense of a guild or collective bargaining organization of all the people, is capitalism. With each individual out to get all they can, capitalist unions have sprung up that do not at all represent the will of the people in any collective sense. Current groups called unions are just another capitalist venture, attempting to make a profit off the work of others.
A REAL union has to be done with the popular input, voting, and representation of all the people.
And unions should be subsidized and socialized, not for profit capitalists.
That is the Scandinavian model that works.

The actual reason steel in the US shut down was that the infrastructure was over 100 years old, and a massive investment in modernization was needed. That would also have made the process much cleaner.
And the US companies simply bailed.
China offered them better short term profits, even though it was obvious the long term was a disaster.
Those steel companies should have been prosecuted for treason and their companies confiscated.
Sending steel production to China ensures the defeat of the US eventually.