To those saying flipping burgers or dunking fries deserves 15.00 per hour...

[JoeB131]

I've posted many times how a family of 4 can eat very well on 400 a month

Yeah, if they like Oatmeal.

Maybe we should brand them with scarlet letters.

 

[JoeB131]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I've posted many times how a family of 4 can eat very well on 400 a month

Yeah, if they like Oatmeal.

Maybe we should brand them with scarlet letters.

So what?

Are you too good to eat oatmeal?
Are you too good to eat what are staple foods all over the world?

I eat rice and beans quite often and no one gives a shit that I do

It must be sad to be so dependent on what others think of you that you can't make your own decisions

 

[Papageorgio]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

It also seems that the US pays more than Japan does per hour. Hmmm....
Average Houry Rate for Auto Workers in Select Countries | TopForeignStocks.com

Looks like Japan lags behind the US. by almost $9 an hour, which is also below the liberals $15 per hour minimum wage.

 

[beagle9]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

. Sounds like Toyota might have been corrupted by them evil corrupt American greed loving elitist/CEO'S.. lol. The Japanese leaders are now a total disgrace to their Japanese emperor, and now they should hang their head's in shame for such disgraceful actions, ohhh wait those were American workers working those jobs. Pay back for Hiroshima is Hell ain't it ??

 

[Papageorgio]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

. Sounds like Toyota might have been corrupted by them evil corrupt American greed loving elitist/CEO'S.. lol. The Japanese leaders are now a total disgrace to their Japanese emperor, and now they should hang their head's in shame for such disgraceful actions, ohhh wait those were American workers working those jobs. Pay back for Hiroshima is Hell ain't it ??

Yep, in Japan they pay their union workers almost $9 an hour less, which puts them below the sacred $15 an hour. Now I know cost of living and other issues will vary the wages, like Japan having single coverage, however, there is a cost to everything and nothing is free.

We need to ween America off of corporate welfare and with more and more employees, the US worker needs to play to their strengths and not apply or work for low wages.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Businesses don't open up to provide for families, businesses open up to produce products or services for a profit. That's it. Nobody opens up a business as a social obligation. If I decide to open up my own lawn care business, I do so because I no longer want to work for somebody else. I took my hard earned money so I can advance myself in life like everybody should. I'm taking a huge gamble that one day I might make enough to live well and possibly grow my lawn care business. I didn't open up my business to provide for others. I have work that needs to be done, and this is what I'm willing to pay to get that work done.

I agree with what you're saying here; however, the people on the right will still reject their own beliefs given the right set of circumstances. For example:

Given what you said, an employer ought to be able to hire undocumented foreigners. They should also be able to hire an all white workforce, an all black one, or one that does not accept gays. It's like you said, it's their business. Why do they owe anyone in the private sector a job? If the employer should be able to decide how much to pay, why not allow the employer to decide who they will and will not offer the job to?

Because we have laws against discrimination. And companies do hire all black workers. In fact a few of our customers replaced all their white workers with blacks because blacks will work for less money. They don't discriminate against whites, it's just that white workers will not accept their low pay offers.

That same government could put laws in place mandating $15 per hour minimums. Are you really this dense or are you playing a game?

What's dense about telling the truth? We DO have customers that replaced their all white crew with blacks because they lowered their pay scale. It's perfectly legal too!

. Hmm, if found that any white was discriminated against in the situation you claim, then there is nothing legal about hiring an all black or all white staff in the workplace under penalty of violating civil rights laws pertaining to discrimination in the workforce. There is never a case where you have all whites or all blacks refusing a job based upon the amount the job might or might not pay. Sounds like a crooked employer to me.

No, they don't discriminate against anybody. It's just that they lower the pay so much that no whites will take the job. It takes a few years to accomplish that, but they do it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why is it the duty of an employer to furnish you with a living wage if you decide to have no children or 12? Is it not your own responsibility to live with in your means?

why should people's value only be based on their ability of the One Percent to make money off of them? Why not have a living wage for everyone, and just be done with it? You want to do business, provide a living wage.

Period. Done.

Or conversely, provide everyone with a basic income, and then if they want more, then WalMart or whoever can provide it.

You see, the real problem is the old model of "you work for a living' is really based on the system being able to produce job. That's simply not the case anymore. Time to do something different.

. Provide everyone with a basic income eh ? And just who is everyone ???. Without the struggle in learning, hoping, teaching, working, then how does one regulate the decision making process in life ?? If you are giving anything for free, it breeds the thinking that one doesn't have to be responsible in ones critical choices in life.

Example: If you don't have gas enough to go to town two times that week, then you make sure you make a list and check it twice, and if you are going to consider children, then you figure on how many by what you can afford, and not what the state can help you afford. Welfare and food stamps has been that basic income for years, and it is set to the level that keeps a person having a hunger to not remain at the welfare level forever.

The problem is that welfare encourages people to not try.

Basic income was introduced in Switzerland some time ago. It failed by vote, but I was fascinated by the concept.

What they thought of was getting rid of every single social program they had and replace it with Basic Income. Running the numbers, it would have saved the country money in the long run.

In comparison, it would be like giving every adult in the US $18,000 a year. You can do what you like with that money. If you can live on that alone, good for you. If you want to use it to supplement your income, better yet.

In any case, it could solve a lot of problems we have with our social programs. For instance, there would be no more grudges between the rich and the poor. Working people would get the same thing that non-working people get. Or for instance you may have heard me complain about HUD people living in my suburb. Basic Income would take care of that because they wouldn't' be able to live here because the rent and home purchases would be too expensive.

No more complaining about food stamps, Medicaid, Obama phones, nothing. Basic Income would wipe all that out.

Because not many people can live on 18K a year, it would encourage them to work. They wouldn't have to worry about how much they made either, because your BI check would not change even if you hit the lottery.

If you work and healthcare insurance is your problem, you can use a large portion of your check to provide insurance. If you have a problem affording advanced education for your children, you could use your check for that as well. Nearly everybody could afford college because remember, your children are now over 18 and they too would get a BI check. Together, that would be 36K a year for educational investment.

Imagine the money you would have if you paid off your mortgage. BI can achieve that for you. More people would be invested in the stock market or make some other financial investments.

So I think Basic Income is very intriguing. I know it would do me a world of good and save the government money at the same time.

. So the government who would supply this living wage, would basically become the very thing in which you hate Ray (A Union) ??? Wouldn't people sit on their aces instead of struggle to do better in life or would they even bother to build endurance or stamina in order to get out of future situations, make choices, build wealth, condition themselves in order to do better if they we're somehow caught up in a dead end job, and all because they knew they had too in some way ?? Hey in some cases (if investigated properly), the government should step in and help people against a bad situation. No I'm not for the government becoming the nations worker's union. No !!!! So you are ok if the government pays this living wage as long as your company doesn't have to eh ?? Well where does the government get this money Ray ? It gets it from my tax dollars. So you are for corporate welfare or subsidizing companies employee wages off of the backs of the working stiffs in this nation Ray ??

Now the government to give everyone 18 and over $18,000 dollars in a healthcare savings account would make more sense to me. The account starts out with $18,000 dollars, and it can only be used for healthcare. If $600.00 of it is used in the year, then the difference would be put back in to start the new year with the $18,000 in the account again. The roll over would be what wasn't spent the year before. Say if 20 years old and working, and your company was offering a health insurance policy, well if you joined that policy, then it wouldn't go against the government Healthcare savings account, because the government Healthcare account would remain, and would act as a supplemental insurance against that policy if needed.

A couple of things here: First off, how would we pay for it? Well if we ran the numbers, what we would probably find is if we eliminated all social programs, B.I. would be cheaper, so it would actually be saving the government money; almost self-funded.

Next is the HSA. The HSA should be law of the land whether you have company insurance or not. If you are covered by your company, the HSA will save their insurance company a lot of money which of course keeps premiums from going up so much. But back to Basic Income:

Could some people live on BI alone? That might be tough especially if you are younger and want to have children. Could it be done? Of course it can. But currently, people are living on the government and those are the people that would likely not work anyway.

So a single mother with two children is trying to make it on 18K alone. Even if she has an apartment for $800.00 a month, that only leaves her with $700.00 a month for everything else: utilities, food, car and insurance, gasoline, clothing for the children, medical care for the children, everything. It could be done, but what it would also do is prohibit her from having more children because she wouldn't be able to afford anymore. With our current system, the poor have many children because they don't have to support them--the taxpayer does. It's an unfair system because only working people can have two children or less in most cases if they have any children at all.

Remember too that cost of living is different in different places. Here you can get a nice apartment for $800.00 a month, but in NYC, a $800.00 a month apartment is ghetto. IT would be very difficult for a single person to make it on 18K yet alone one with children.

 

[beagle9]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

It also seems that the US pays more than Japan does per hour. Hmmm....
Average Houry Rate for Auto Workers in Select Countries | TopForeignStocks.com

Looks like Japan lags behind the US. by almost $9 an hour, which is also below the liberals $15 per hour minimum wage.

. To be fair looking at that wage scale, don't the cost of living or the value of currency play a huge role in these rates or wages ? Otherwise is the wage $1.09 in India, otherwise translated into $23.83 U.S. ?? I mean how far does that $8.72 per day go for an India worker in India's economy verses an American worker in an American economy ?

 

[Humorme]

Businesses should be financially responsible for their employees families.

Businesses don't open up to provide for families, businesses open up to produce products or services for a profit. That's it. Nobody opens up a business as a social obligation. If I decide to open up my own lawn care business, I do so because I no longer want to work for somebody else. I took my hard earned money so I can advance myself in life like everybody should. I'm taking a huge gamble that one day I might make enough to live well and possibly grow my lawn care business. I didn't open up my business to provide for others. I have work that needs to be done, and this is what I'm willing to pay to get that work done.

I agree with what you're saying here; however, the people on the right will still reject their own beliefs given the right set of circumstances. For example:

Given what you said, an employer ought to be able to hire undocumented foreigners. They should also be able to hire an all white workforce, an all black one, or one that does not accept gays. It's like you said, it's their business. Why do they owe anyone in the private sector a job? If the employer should be able to decide how much to pay, why not allow the employer to decide who they will and will not offer the job to?

Because we have laws against discrimination. And companies do hire all black workers. In fact a few of our customers replaced all their white workers with blacks because blacks will work for less money. They don't discriminate against whites, it's just that white workers will not accept their low pay offers.

That same government could put laws in place mandating $15 per hour minimums. Are you really this dense or are you playing a game?

What's dense about telling the truth? We DO have customers that replaced their all white crew with blacks because they lowered their pay scale. It's perfectly legal too!

I'm definitely not talking about that. What do you find wrong with an employer hiring the person they see fit for the job? Blacks get picked over whites because the squeaky wheel gets the grease... and they are the squeakiest of the bunch.

Whites don't work because you have 20, 30, 40 and beyond whites living with mommy, receiving welfare/ Socialist Security / etc. and an allowance from the their parents not to work.

 

[Papageorgio]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

It also seems that the US pays more than Japan does per hour. Hmmm....
Average Houry Rate for Auto Workers in Select Countries | TopForeignStocks.com

Looks like Japan lags behind the US. by almost $9 an hour, which is also below the liberals $15 per hour minimum wage.

. To be fair looking at that wage scale, don't the cost of living or the value of currency play a huge role in these rates or wages ? Otherwise is the wage $1.09 in India, otherwise translated into $23.83 U.S. ?? I mean how far does that $8.72 per day go for an India worker in India's economy verses an American worker in an American economy ?

I agree with you, joe made the statement that the Japanese autoworker made as much as the American worker, and if the benefits were added they’d make more and its not even close.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Businesses don't open up to provide for families, businesses open up to produce products or services for a profit. That's it. Nobody opens up a business as a social obligation. If I decide to open up my own lawn care business, I do so because I no longer want to work for somebody else. I took my hard earned money so I can advance myself in life like everybody should. I'm taking a huge gamble that one day I might make enough to live well and possibly grow my lawn care business. I didn't open up my business to provide for others. I have work that needs to be done, and this is what I'm willing to pay to get that work done.

I agree with what you're saying here; however, the people on the right will still reject their own beliefs given the right set of circumstances. For example:

Given what you said, an employer ought to be able to hire undocumented foreigners. They should also be able to hire an all white workforce, an all black one, or one that does not accept gays. It's like you said, it's their business. Why do they owe anyone in the private sector a job? If the employer should be able to decide how much to pay, why not allow the employer to decide who they will and will not offer the job to?

Because we have laws against discrimination. And companies do hire all black workers. In fact a few of our customers replaced all their white workers with blacks because blacks will work for less money. They don't discriminate against whites, it's just that white workers will not accept their low pay offers.

That same government could put laws in place mandating $15 per hour minimums. Are you really this dense or are you playing a game?

What's dense about telling the truth? We DO have customers that replaced their all white crew with blacks because they lowered their pay scale. It's perfectly legal too!

I'm definitely not talking about that. What do you find wrong with an employer hiring the person they see fit for the job? Blacks get picked over whites because the squeaky wheel gets the grease... and they are the squeakiest of the bunch.

Whites don't work because you have 20, 30, 40 and beyond whites living with mommy, receiving welfare/ Socialist Security / etc. and an allowance from the their parents not to work.

And you don't think you have that with black people? Think again. Trust me, I live in a black community.

It's hard to figure out what you're talking about half the time; not just with me, but many others here apparently.

Blacks work for lower wages because the cost of living in inner-cities are lower. A three bedroom apartment in the inner-city can cost them $350.00 a month while in the white burbs, the same kind of apartment costs $900.00 a month or more.

Plus it's less of a race issue than a cost of living issue. For instance I make deliveries in the sticks. All white communities usually with lower paying jobs. However the cost of living in the country is much lower than in the city and suburbs. People can get along just fine on lower wages for that reason, and people in the country have no problem working 50 to 60 hours a week.

 

[Humorme]

I agree with what you're saying here; however, the people on the right will still reject their own beliefs given the right set of circumstances. For example:

Given what you said, an employer ought to be able to hire undocumented foreigners. They should also be able to hire an all white workforce, an all black one, or one that does not accept gays. It's like you said, it's their business. Why do they owe anyone in the private sector a job? If the employer should be able to decide how much to pay, why not allow the employer to decide who they will and will not offer the job to?

Because we have laws against discrimination. And companies do hire all black workers. In fact a few of our customers replaced all their white workers with blacks because blacks will work for less money. They don't discriminate against whites, it's just that white workers will not accept their low pay offers.

That same government could put laws in place mandating $15 per hour minimums. Are you really this dense or are you playing a game?

What's dense about telling the truth? We DO have customers that replaced their all white crew with blacks because they lowered their pay scale. It's perfectly legal too!

I'm definitely not talking about that. What do you find wrong with an employer hiring the person they see fit for the job? Blacks get picked over whites because the squeaky wheel gets the grease... and they are the squeakiest of the bunch.

Whites don't work because you have 20, 30, 40 and beyond whites living with mommy, receiving welfare/ Socialist Security / etc. and an allowance from the their parents not to work.

And you don't think you have that with black people? Think again. Trust me, I live in a black community.

It's hard to figure out what you're talking about half the time; not just with me, but many others here apparently.

Blacks work for lower wages because the cost of living in inner-cities are lower. A three bedroom apartment in the inner-city can cost them $350.00 a month while in the white burbs, the same kind of apartment costs $900.00 a month or more.

Plus it's less of a race issue than a cost of living issue. For instance I make deliveries in the sticks. All white communities usually with lower paying jobs. However the cost of living in the country is much lower than in the city and suburbs. People can get along just fine on lower wages for that reason, and people in the country have no problem working 50 to 60 hours a week.

The reason people don't understand me is that I am neither left or right. Most of the posters on this thread seem to only want an angle by which to flame someone. I've told them: it's largely because they want to get in an argument, but are too much of a coward to go try their insults in public.

If I see that the left has a point, I admit to it. If the right makes a point, I will agree with them. That does not mean that I agree with their solutions.

I live in a town that, in 1980 was 87 percent white. Today, whites are less than 49 percent of the population (countywide.) And this isn't East Bumphuck. This is the second most populous county in Georgia... and there are over 150 counties in this state.

Over the last four decades, there have been a host of reasons why black people flood places like this. But, make no mistake I am one of those people that will work some jobs that only black people get. Insofar as your generalization, here is my latest experience:

I went to Kaiser Medical a few weeks ago. In the waiting area I was in, I was the only white guy. There were approximately 25 people in that area. A lady comes out of an office and asks those who were there for a job opening to come inside. When it was over, only three of us remained to see a doctor. ALL of those applying for the job (s) at Kaiser were black. Those aren't low wage jobs.

I've been going to that facility for over ten years. It is a 24 / 7 operation. In all that time, I've only know four doctors to be white Americans and maybe six foreign born whites. We're talking a facility that is like a small hospital!

Nobody notices when a company locks out whites. IF you complain, you will be stigmatized as a racist.

Don't know how that plays into this discussion except that big business will continue to hire non-whites, pay them crap wages, and the whites won't do anything constructive to change the bottom line.

 

[Papageorgio]

Because we have laws against discrimination. And companies do hire all black workers. In fact a few of our customers replaced all their white workers with blacks because blacks will work for less money. They don't discriminate against whites, it's just that white workers will not accept their low pay offers.

That same government could put laws in place mandating $15 per hour minimums. Are you really this dense or are you playing a game?

What's dense about telling the truth? We DO have customers that replaced their all white crew with blacks because they lowered their pay scale. It's perfectly legal too!

I'm definitely not talking about that. What do you find wrong with an employer hiring the person they see fit for the job? Blacks get picked over whites because the squeaky wheel gets the grease... and they are the squeakiest of the bunch.

Whites don't work because you have 20, 30, 40 and beyond whites living with mommy, receiving welfare/ Socialist Security / etc. and an allowance from the their parents not to work.

And you don't think you have that with black people? Think again. Trust me, I live in a black community.

It's hard to figure out what you're talking about half the time; not just with me, but many others here apparently.

Blacks work for lower wages because the cost of living in inner-cities are lower. A three bedroom apartment in the inner-city can cost them $350.00 a month while in the white burbs, the same kind of apartment costs $900.00 a month or more.

Plus it's less of a race issue than a cost of living issue. For instance I make deliveries in the sticks. All white communities usually with lower paying jobs. However the cost of living in the country is much lower than in the city and suburbs. People can get along just fine on lower wages for that reason, and people in the country have no problem working 50 to 60 hours a week.

The reason people don't understand me is that I am neither left or right. Most of the posters on this thread seem to only want an angle by which to flame someone. I've told them: it's largely because they want to get in an argument, but are too much of a coward to go try their insults in public.

If I see that the left has a point, I admit to it. If the right makes a point, I will agree with them. That does not mean that I agree with their solutions.

I live in a town that, in 1980 was 87 percent white. Today, whites are less than 49 percent of the population (countywide.) And this isn't East Bumphuck. This is the second most populous county in Georgia... and there are over 150 counties in this state.

Over the last four decades, there have been a host of reasons why black people flood places like this. But, make no mistake I am one of those people that will work some jobs that only black people get. Insofar as your generalization, here is my latest experience:

I went to Kaiser Medical a few weeks ago. In the waiting area I was in, I was the only white guy. There were approximately 25 people in that area. A lady comes out of an office and asks those who were there for a job opening to come inside. When it was over, only three of us remained to see a doctor. ALL of those applying for the job (s) at Kaiser were black. Those aren't low wage jobs.

I've been going to that facility for over ten years. It is a 24 / 7 operation. In all that time, I've only know four doctors to be white Americans and maybe six foreign born whites. We're talking a facility that is like a small hospital!

Nobody notices when a company locks out whites. IF you complain, you will be stigmatized as a racist.

Don't know how that plays into this discussion except that big business will continue to hire non-whites, pay them crap wages, and the whites won't do anything constructive to change the bottom line.

What can we do to change the bottom line?

 

[Markle]

Businesses should be financially responsible for their employees families.

Why? What happened to personal responsibility? Did the business hire the family?

 

[Slyhunter]

Businesses should be financially responsible for their employees families.

Why? What happened to personal responsibility? Did the business hire the family?

If you want hardworking loyal employees you must give them what they need to match their priorities in return. They don't work for you because they love dealing with your asshole customers. They don't work for you because they love the company. They work for you because they need that paycheck to provide for their families.

 

[JoeB131]

what?

Are you too good to eat oatmeal?
Are you too good to eat what are staple foods all over the world?

I eat rice and beans quite often and no one gives a shit that I do

It must be sad to be so dependent on what others think of you that you can't make your own decisions

Wasn't my point at all.

People should not be forced to eat oatmeal because they can't afford meat, fruit and vegetables.

Let them eat Oatmeal! OH FUCK!

 

[JoeB131]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

It also seems that the US pays more than Japan does per hour. Hmmm....
Average Houry Rate for Auto Workers in Select Countries | TopForeignStocks.com

Looks like Japan lags behind the US. by almost $9 an hour, which is also below the liberals $15 per hour minimum wage.

That was clever, buddy, you tried to list ALL Labor costs instead of auto worker costs...

Here's the actual chart of what manufacturing compensation is. Please note the US is well below Germany aand only slightly ahead of Japan.

 

[JoeB131]

I agree with you, joe made the statement that the Japanese autoworker made as much as the American worker, and if the benefits were added they’d make more and its not even close.

actually, they are making just as much as we do.

also, Japan has a lower percentage of its population engaged in "low-wage" labor.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why? Because somebody has to pay for those benefits, and that somebody is the consumer. Then the consumer has to consider foreign cars that are competitively priced, but better built with a much better warranty like Toyota gives you.

But one more time... Japanese Auto Workers get paid the same as US auto workers and their union benefits are even better... Meanwhile, the CEO's don't make the obscene amounts AMericans do.

It's just like that widget scenario I posted earlier. And as my former mechanic told me, Toyota and other Japanese car makers put their money in quality parts and engineering while American companies put their money into union wages and benefits. So when you buy a car, your money can go to early employee retirements. When I buy a car, my money is going into the car I'm buying.

Well, your mechanic is kind of a moron. Japanese workers get just as good of wages as Americans, and their benefits are pretty impressive. The ONLY difference is that - wait for it - Japan has single payer health care and they are paying less for that than we do.

Is that why Toyota closed their only US union shop in 2009 and sent the work to non-union shops throughout America? Is that because they love the union?

It seems Toyota has lots of issues, Toyota: Corporate Rap Sheet | Corporate Research Project

It also seems that the US pays more than Japan does per hour. Hmmm....
Average Houry Rate for Auto Workers in Select Countries | TopForeignStocks.com

Looks like Japan lags behind the US. by almost $9 an hour, which is also below the liberals $15 per hour minimum wage.

That was clever, buddy, you tried to list ALL Labor costs instead of auto worker costs...

Here's the actual chart of what manufacturing compensation is. Please note the US is well below Germany aand only slightly ahead of Japan.

Yes, dollars alone. The big bucks come from benefits, especially legacy benefits. That's where the UAW workers surpass people in just about every country, and benefits have to be included in labor costs.