• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

It's the workers' fault that jobs go overseas.

Ferocious

Diamond Member
here's the entire commentary quoted:

Citizens of America, wake up! Neither President Bush nor any other president was the one who lost American jobs, but the workers themselves. The workers kept wanting higher wages, more paid holidays, longer vacations, and who was going to pay for all this?

Companies cannot keep giving and giving and still stay in business. When the economy falters, sales drop off and the companies have a setback. What do they do? They lay off people, cut jobs and wait. But their expenses still go on, and then what happens? Workers squawk, ?We want this? and ?We want that,? and they are holding out for more.

So for the companies to stay in the good graces of their stockholders, what do they do? They go someplace else where the employees are happy to have a job and will work for a reasonable salary, and the company, stockholders and those who are working are happy.

That is why companies are closing and going to foreign places. Lost jobs are not the fault of Bush, Clinton, Reagan or Roosevelt. They are the fault of workers!
(Roosevelt??)


Nancy from Ohio
 
Whose fault is it that prices continue to rise and you need more and more to live ? I suppose you can make it on an Indian's salary?
 
I wonder if Nancy knows that alot of the jobs going overseas pay like 1/10 or so the wages here? I also think that if a senior official from an administration is telling a group in a foreign country that the US will keep sending jobs to them, then it doesn't wipe that president's hands clean.

But I'm sure Nancy from Ohio knew that already.
 
As harsh as the reality is ... this is largely true.

Unions have ruined this great country. Why endlessly lament lost jobs when the wages were artificially high to begin with?

Hit the books America - there are still plenty of skilled jobs to go around.

:beer:😀
 
Wow, that does sound pretty true. The only unions, for the most part, I like are the police and firefighter unions.

Even if this is the workers fault. Outsourcing is good for the company. A lot of people are probably thinking of the auto companies, so look at them. Lets say you have GM, they put there stuff overseas. That is cheaper labor and in the long run, will benefit the company bringing in more revenue. The big companies make more money the better off the company is, the more the shareholder benefits off it.
 
Wow, that does sound pretty true. The only unions, for the most part, I like are the police and firefighter unions.

I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for police and firefighters...

But in reality, even police and firefighter unions exist primarily to inflate wages, and provide an additional layer of bureaucracy between local municipalities and the workers.

These unions severely limit a city's ability to terminate surplus workers, and adjust workers' wages to the market rate for their service. Because unions make it nearly impossible to fire surplus workers, cities are usually very reluctant to hire new workers - even when times are good. As for wages, these are maintained at an artificially high level, at the expense of taxpayers.

Whose fault is it that prices continue to rise and you need more and more to live?

(continuing from above...) The more wages in a region which are maintained at an artificially high level, the more of a surplus of money you will have in that region. Perceiving a surplus of money in the market, providers of goods and services will adjust their prices upward to absorb this surplus, and you have a tendency towards inflation. As you can see, one cause of inflationary pricing is the surplus wages from unionized workers in your region.

:beer:😀
 
Funny, I heard that some jobs are so badly paid that you would need 2 jobs to have your economy working. BTW our (danish) minimum wages are are around $13 an hour, and we have one of the lowest unemployments in EU.

Also the more money a worker get the more stuff he an buy, accelerating trade and thereby increasing the demands for jobs.
 
Originally posted by: gsaldivar
As harsh as the reality is ... this is largely true.

Unions have ruined this great country. Why endlessly lament lost jobs when the wages were artificially high to begin with?

Hit the books America - there are still plenty of skilled jobs to go around.

:beer:😀

While I may agree we need to "hit the books", my experience has been (as a manager) that "highly skilled and educated" people like to work 32 hour weeks and play a lot of golf. This isn't just the Union's fault, it's the lazy culture here too!

The Union is going to happen, there's no stopping it. Once all of the manufacturing jobs leave for another country, and they unionize there, we will not only lose the jobs, but also pay more for the products.

It's time that we get off our dead butts and go to work!!!




 
Originally posted by: Ferocious
here's the entire commentary quoted:

Citizens of America, wake up! Neither President Bush nor any other president was the one who lost American jobs, but the workers themselves. The workers kept wanting higher wages, more paid holidays, longer vacations, and who was going to pay for all this?

Companies cannot keep giving and giving and still stay in business. When the economy falters, sales drop off and the companies have a setback. What do they do? They lay off people, cut jobs and wait. But their expenses still go on, and then what happens? Workers squawk, ?We want this? and ?We want that,? and they are holding out for more.

So for the companies to stay in the good graces of their stockholders, what do they do? They go someplace else where the employees are happy to have a job and will work for a reasonable salary, and the company, stockholders and those who are working are happy.

That is why companies are closing and going to foreign places. Lost jobs are not the fault of Bush, Clinton, Reagan or Roosevelt. They are the fault of workers!

Nancy from Ohio

Wow, CAD & Co are really getting around.
 
CEOs ask for more and seem to be able to get more than most common workers, but I don't see their jobs going overseas...
 
Outsourcing is about profit enhancing, not cost reducing... this is bs. The only people
who benefit from this are people in the top of the chain and those from the other country.
Meanwhile we lose tax revenues (and give out tax exemptions to those companies), lose
income into the Social Security pool, and have to do more, with less paying job. Inflation
doesnt stop for unemployment.

Id say maybe those companies should tax their "outside" employees and pay fees for
the fun of working overseas. They could stay here and be labeled "real american companies"
and get other incentives.

Im against globalization. Let each one struggle for their own. But is hard to do when
your oportunities start going away.
 
Im against globalization. Let each one struggle for their own. But is hard to do when your oportunities start going away.

Wait a minute...

I thought that "evil corporations" and "thug CEOs" were sucking the life out of American workers?

Shouldn't anarchist birkenstock-wearing hippy tree-huggers (like yourself) be grateful that you're finally being freed from the yoke of corporate oppression?

When all the "good American companies" have left America in search of foreign workers who actually appreciate the "opportunity" of having a job, then you'll only have to worry about pulling your own weight!

Wait a minute... that's a troubling thought.

:beer:😀
 
Originally posted by: gsaldivar
[When all the "good American companies" have left America in search of foreign workers who actually appreciate the "opportunity" of having a job, then you'll only have to worry about pulling your own weight! Wait a minute... that's a troubling thought. :beer:😀

How would this apply to the thousands of people who lost their jobs to some guy working in India for a pittance? This seems to have the effect on American workers that you either work for what I'm willing to pay, or we ship it over to Bombay. Trouble with this is while the American may well say "sure I'll work for that" - he will also say "but I'll have to have nights off so I can work at Dominos".

How can a person live on what they are paying these days? Did you see the $350 a week thread? This is for real folks! Our company just signed on a new college grad that started at $26k. He's doing much the same work as guy we have at $47k that's been here for about 4 years. How comfortable does that guy feel? Maybe he's next when we get another $26k grad? Or will it be $24k?

Add up what it takes to live a bare minimum lower middle class existence and you may quickly see that what they're paying just doesn't add up. It's not the worker's fault that he needs to have a certain income because he wants to live somewhat of a normal life - meager as it may need to be. So you got that $26k job and want a house? A new car? Even cable TV and cell phones start being a luxury you may consider doing without. After all there's the important stuff like $2 gas, insane auto and health insurance costs. Oh yea, maybe retirement savings will just have to start a bit later.

So is this the fault of the worker that he doesn't realize the value of the simple "opportunity" to have a job? I don't think so and ask anybody that just got downsized how they feel about maintaining their current level of lifestyle. Not too optomistic I would guess...

Between house, cars, food, insurance, etc etc etc I need to net $3200 a month minimum. That's like $46k a year. This is just the basics folks. At this level there would be no new toys, dinners out may get cutbacks and all the little things you just pull your debit card out for would probably need the credit card instead. And if my job goes to an Indian, $46k is probably right where I'll be - probably even less. No choice of my own, just the dynamics of the current job market.

So it's the workers fault? Maybe think twice on that statement...
 
Originally posted by: MisterMe
Originally posted by: gsaldivar
[When all the "good American companies" have left America in search of foreign workers who actually appreciate the "opportunity" of having a job, then you'll only have to worry about pulling your own weight! Wait a minute... that's a troubling thought. :beer:😀

How would this apply to the thousands of people who lost their jobs to some guy working in India for a pittance? This seems to have the effect on American workers that you either work for what I'm willing to pay, or we ship it over to Bombay. Trouble with this is while the American may well say "sure I'll work for that" - he will also say "but I'll have to have nights off so I can work at Dominos".

How can a person live on what they are paying these days? Did you see the $350 a week thread? This is for real folks! Our company just signed on a new college grad that started at $26k. He's doing much the same work as guy we have at $47k that's been here for about 4 years. How comfortable does that guy feel? Maybe he's next when we get another $26k grad? Or will it be $24k?

Add up what it takes to live a bare minimum lower middle class existence and you may quickly see that what they're paying just doesn't add up. It's not the worker's fault that he needs to have a certain income because he wants to live somewhat of a normal life - meager as it may need to be. So you got that $26k job and want a house? A new car? Even cable TV and cell phones start being a luxury you may consider doing without. After all there's the important stuff like $2 gas, insane auto and health insurance costs. Oh yea, maybe retirement savings will just have to start a bit later.

So is this the fault of the worker that he doesn't realize the value of the simple "opportunity" to have a job? I don't think so and ask anybody that just got downsized how they feel about maintaining their current level of lifestyle. Not too optomistic I would guess...

Between house, cars, food, insurance, etc etc etc I need to net $3200 a month minimum. That's like $46k a year. This is just the basics folks. At this level there would be no new toys, dinners out may get cutbacks and all the little things you just pull your debit card out for would probably need the credit card instead. And if my job goes to an Indian, $46k is probably right where I'll be - probably even less. No choice of my own, just the dynamics of the current job market.

So it's the workers fault? Maybe think twice on that statement...

It's the workers' fault because all workers are Communists, that's why Communist Parties are often called "Socialist Workers Parties". Therefore, all workers are bad, and the only real patriotic Americans are nonworking shareholders, CEOs, and the unemployed.

Zephyr
 
The only thing CEO cares is how to inflate his own paycheque and turn the most profit for the companies so he can keep his cushy jobs. If its mean outsourcing and loss of jobs for Americans, so be it. Now, how many of you will behave differently if put in the same situation? 😛
 
Maybe it is the worker's fault that they want too much money? hmmmm....

Who's complaining about that tech job that was posted awhile back?
 
Companies have been moving manufactoring to areas where labor is cheaper and environmental protection laws are looser for about 40 years. My father thought it was an insane economic mistake to buy any product not made in the US. He was raised in area that depended on the automobile industry. Most of his family worked directly or indirectly in the automobile

Now I am beginning to agree with him. It now make sense to me to pay more for a product knowing that it was made in the US where labor makes a decent living and the environment is protected.
 
It's sad to say but I agree with some of this. I live in a "steel" town and over the last twenty years I have seen their unions garner more wages for the employees over and over again while at the same time the "mill" and the steel industry in general, steadily falters. We have men with barely a high school education making over a hundred a year in these industries while those with masters can't find jobs in other fields. Unions were nessecary in the beginning but once they became so powerful they became as greedy and negative as the people they originally were created to combat.
 
The basic contention is utter claptrap, for a variety of reasons.

Many modern corporations aren't run for the benefit of the stockholders, but rather for the benefit of the executives and the BOD. As we've seen recently, it's quite common for executives to receive enormous compensation even as they run the company into the ground, pampering the BOD all along the way.

It's also impossible for US workers to compete against some foreign workers earning 10% as much, also to compete against the stacked deck in terms of tax advantages and environmental non-regulation, not to mention UHC in many competing workforces.

American workers are also subject to other forces beyond their control, like rising costs for energy, healthcare, housing, etc., meaning tha wages have to go up to maintain our consumer based economy. If we all worked for less, we'd have less to spend, meaning less demand, meaning less production, meaning fewer jobs for everybody... at home and abroad...
 
Now I am beginning to agree with him. It now make sense to me to pay more for a product knowing that it was made in the US where labor makes a decent living and the environment is protected.

You're entitled to your opinion. 🙂

Just don't complain about companies who are packing their bags and headquartering abroad, where they won't have to subsidize your inflated union wages and benefits.
 
Originally posted by: MisterMe
Originally posted by: gsaldivar
[When all the "good American companies" have left America in search of foreign workers who actually appreciate the "opportunity" of having a job, then you'll only have to worry about pulling your own weight! Wait a minute... that's a troubling thought. :beer:😀

How would this apply to the thousands of people who lost their jobs to some guy working in India for a pittance? This seems to have the effect on American workers that you either work for what I'm willing to pay, or we ship it over to Bombay. Trouble with this is while the American may well say "sure I'll work for that" - he will also say "but I'll have to have nights off so I can work at Dominos".

How can a person live on what they are paying these days? Did you see the $350 a week thread? This is for real folks! Our company just signed on a new college grad that started at $26k. He's doing much the same work as guy we have at $47k that's been here for about 4 years. How comfortable does that guy feel? Maybe he's next when we get another $26k grad? Or will it be $24k?

Add up what it takes to live a bare minimum lower middle class existence and you may quickly see that what they're paying just doesn't add up. It's not the worker's fault that he needs to have a certain income because he wants to live somewhat of a normal life - meager as it may need to be. So you got that $26k job and want a house? A new car? Even cable TV and cell phones start being a luxury you may consider doing without. After all there's the important stuff like $2 gas, insane auto and health insurance costs. Oh yea, maybe retirement savings will just have to start a bit later.

So is this the fault of the worker that he doesn't realize the value of the simple "opportunity" to have a job? I don't think so and ask anybody that just got downsized how they feel about maintaining their current level of lifestyle. Not too optomistic I would guess...

Between house, cars, food, insurance, etc etc etc I need to net $3200 a month minimum. That's like $46k a year. This is just the basics folks. At this level there would be no new toys, dinners out may get cutbacks and all the little things you just pull your debit card out for would probably need the credit card instead. And if my job goes to an Indian, $46k is probably right where I'll be - probably even less. No choice of my own, just the dynamics of the current job market.

So it's the workers fault? Maybe think twice on that statement...

Originally posted by: Pepsei
Maybe it is the worker's fault that they want too much money? hmmmm....

You heard them MisterMe, Pepsei, CAD & Co want everyone to live in Cardboard boxes on the street since they can't afford a house on that $6 hr salary, nevermind the cable TV. Americans no longer have any rights to a chicken in every pot, hell Americans don't have the right to the pot even anymore. Next we aren't entitled to the water either.



 
Originally posted by: gsaldivar
Now I am beginning to agree with him. It now make sense to me to pay more for a product knowing that it was made in the US where labor makes a decent living and the environment is protected.

You're entitled to your opinion. 🙂

Just don't complain about companies who are packing their bags and headquartering abroad, where they won't have to subsidize your inflated union wages and benefits.

Good riddance to them. Real Americans will fill the needs without greed in a heartbeat. Get em the hell out here.


 
Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
Companies have been moving manufactoring to areas where labor is cheaper and environmental protection laws are looser for about 40 years. My father thought it was an insane economic mistake to buy any product not made in the US. He was raised in area that depended on the automobile industry. Most of his family worked directly or indirectly in the automobile

Now I am beginning to agree with him. It now make sense to me to pay more for a product knowing that it was made in the US where labor makes a decent living and the environment is protected.

Be careful and don't be fooled. Just because it says Ford, Chevy or Dodge does not an American built make. A lot of the Japanese "imports" are actually built in the US, using real American workers. Knowing who built is becoming as important as where it's built.
 
Back
Top