Sport Bikes banner

81 - 100 of 125 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,900 Posts
hybrid said:
I would suspect that a lot of the jobs that are coming into play are underpaid, overworked, shit jobs that people take and still struggle to live.
We can discuss this more after I find work for which I am unquestionably qualified and able to do after our company closing our local office. While kissing the corporate ass, submitting to having your piss tested, and dealing with management decisions might certainly be classified as overworked shit jobs, underpaid is more of a current trend as I see the direct results of attempts to drive down the cost of engineers and developers while CEO salaries continue to rise.
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
hybrid said:
On the subject of unemployment...I would suspect that a lot of the jobs that are coming into play are underpaid, overworked, shit jobs that people take and still struggle to live.
I would as well. Several members of my immediate extended family have been forced out of jobs and are now either working or looking for jobs in lower paying industries (such as general service) where benefits suck, but the pay is still enough to live off of - but just barely.

So yeah, unemployment may be down. But is that necessarily a good thing, when you consider the circumstances?
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
BusaDave said:
We can discuss this more after I find work for which I am unquestionably qualified and able to do after our company closing our local office. While kissing the corporate ass, submitting to having your piss tested, and dealing with management decisions might certainly be classified as overworked shit jobs, underpaid is more of a current trend as I see the direct results of attempts to drive down the cost of engineers and developers while CEO salaries continue to rise.
Just out of curiousity, what is it that you do (or did)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
Fargin_Bastige said:
How the hell does any of this have to do with unemployment?

Are you guys planning on shooting the unemployed with illegally converted automatic weapons?
Its simply the last gasp excuse to explain a Republican vote. It doesn't have to do with anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
516 Posts
jim schmidt said:
There's only one problem with that. If unemployment falls below, say 3%, workers will be in the driver's seat and wages will show significant rise.

That's a very un-Republican situation, letting the value of this commodity rise. That's why they oppose a rise in the minimum wage; not because it would hurt the bottom line by itself, but because it might make the next tier up able to command a raise. We can't let those workers get all uppity, you know. :rolleyes
3 things:
1) While the decrease in unemployment may give workers the ability to demand more pay, wouldn't that also then raise the cost of what you buy? Companies aren't going to suck up a pay increase with their already declining profit margins. There is a certain level of unemployment that will exist. I don't know what that magic number is, but my gut tells me it's above 3%. My economics prof has a few good articles pulled from the Economist talking about this phenom. I can't access the website from my work computer, but the URL is http://facstaff.uww.edu/kashianr The .pdf file I'm talking about has to do with European Unemployment, but I can't for the life of me remember the title. There's some other good papers on there as well.
2) Same goes for the minimum wage. There's only so much a company will absorb. I think most companies will resist raising employee pay rates with a minimum wage increase. Then all you'd see is further degeneration in middle class incomes. Personally, I'd prefer to keep my earning power where it is. Being in manufacturing, we walk a fine line on pricing on a daily basis. With the complaints about outsourcing and whatnot, I'd guess you'd see an even greater outflow of capital with said increase. Although, I think you'll see a regional shift in businesses before you see a shift moving more overseas. Much of the northern cities are being decimated by lackluster automotive performance and lower cost options in the southern states. I honestly don't thinking pumping up the minimum wage is going to benefit the nation as a whole economically. And in the short-term, I tend to feel that by doing so, you would only accelerate the demise of places like Detroit and the surrounding areas in Michigan.
3) If you're going to stereotype businessmen as Republican, then you might as well say Democrats are for total unionization and what that brings. The website and paper I referenced has a section pertaining to this. They did a study in Europe (which has much higher levels of union participation than in the US) pertaining to high levels of unionization and the unemployment rate, and found that the only correlation between low levels of unemployment and unionization is when there was a state of mutual cooperation in negotiations between the union and company management, where both understood the other's needs. Pumping control to one group because the opposing group had control isn't necessarily the right or beneficial solution.
 

·
Shitbike
Joined
·
9,822 Posts
Triple_Z said:
Pumping control to one group because the opposing group had control isn't necessarily the right or beneficial solution.
This line of though should be applied to the political process as well. There's far too many cutthroat politicians that want their party to be in control and want the opposite side to be dragged along for the ride.
 

·
Autobots! Roll Out!
Joined
·
2,061 Posts
jim schmidt said:
Its simply the last gasp excuse to explain a Republican vote. It doesn't have to do with anything.
Now Jim, I've been quite disappointed in the last several weeks with your posts, not very entertaining :). Now I know you and I view almost everything different inside of the politics forum. However, in the bike forum, we probably share a lot in common so I guess I can tolerate you in that respect :D. These little anti-republican posts are getting very petty tho. I consider myself a moderate, that leans on the conservative side, but I don't go and slam democrats every chance I get. I guess it's good we agree to disagree, after all, you're getting up there and will be dead soon, so it's not like your opinion matters :lao :joke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
Truck said:
Now Jim, I've been quite disappointed in the last several weeks with your posts, not very entertaining :). Now I know you and I view almost everything different inside of the politics forum. However, in the bike forum, we probably share a lot in common so I guess I can tolerate you in that respect :D. These little anti-republican posts are getting very petty tho. I consider myself a moderate, that leans on the conservative side, but I don't go and slam democrats every chance I get. I guess it's good we agree to disagree, after all, you're getting up there and will be dead soon, so it's not like your opinion matters :lao :joke.
You're about as moderate as Mussolini, son. Remember me when I'm gone... :lao
 

·
Autobots! Roll Out!
Joined
·
2,061 Posts
You tend to pick topics that strike a nerve, it doesnt help that your about as far to the left as humanly possible while still living in this country :D.
 

·
RESIDENT ASSHOLE
Joined
·
8,497 Posts
BusaDave said:
We can discuss this more after I find work for which I am unquestionably qualified and able to do after our company closing our local office. While kissing the corporate ass, submitting to having your piss tested, and dealing with management decisions might certainly be classified as overworked shit jobs, underpaid is more of a current trend as I see the direct results of attempts to drive down the cost of engineers and developers while CEO salaries continue to rise.
License2ill sure does know the quote "Do you want fries with that?" Maybe a qualified guy like yourself could be manager some day?

Seriously that sucks, and its the primary reason Ive always worked for myself. Then I can only blame me for shit things.

I hope you find something equateable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
Baby boomers are retiring at alarming rates. I work in the IT industry - and we lose about five day here. I know of places that are getting ready to lose their entire IT departments because they're manned by guys who are going to retire within a year.

Now, what happens to those jobs? They get outsourced to India (off shore, some would like to call it - it sounds neater). Now, the Americans retire - so that lowers the workforce numbers, and because there is no job there to fill - because it's been outsourced - the numbers aren't there either. So, the unemployment rate is at an all time low because companies are allowed to outsource, and because baby boomers are retiring at high rates. Make sense?

George Bush is doing nothing but benefitting from a moment in time - the moment where there are more people retiring than entering the workforce. The next president may reap some of these benefits, too - but then it will all even out within the next eight to ten years, and then we're all back in the same boat.

Folks on this thread are right, you can't blame George Bush for unemployment. But other folks are right, too - you can't commend him for lowering the unemployment rate - it was going to happen anyway! It'll catch up - give it some time. Then, we'll see what the outcome of "off shore" outsourcing is - and I don't think we're gonna like it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
Triple_Z said:
3 things:
1) While the decrease in unemployment may give workers the ability to demand more pay, wouldn't that also then raise the cost of what you buy? Companies aren't going to suck up a pay increase with their already declining profit margins. There is a certain level of unemployment that will exist. I don't know what that magic number is, but my gut tells me it's above 3%. My economics prof has a few good articles pulled from the Economist talking about this phenom. I can't access the website from my work computer, but the URL is http://facstaff.uww.edu/kashianr The .pdf file I'm talking about has to do with European Unemployment, but I can't for the life of me remember the title. There's some other good papers on there as well.
2) Same goes for the minimum wage. There's only so much a company will absorb. I think most companies will resist raising employee pay rates with a minimum wage increase. Then all you'd see is further degeneration in middle class incomes. Personally, I'd prefer to keep my earning power where it is. Being in manufacturing, we walk a fine line on pricing on a daily basis. With the complaints about outsourcing and whatnot, I'd guess you'd see an even greater outflow of capital with said increase. Although, I think you'll see a regional shift in businesses before you see a shift moving more overseas. Much of the northern cities are being decimated by lackluster automotive performance and lower cost options in the southern states. I honestly don't thinking pumping up the minimum wage is going to benefit the nation as a whole economically. And in the short-term, I tend to feel that by doing so, you would only accelerate the demise of places like Detroit and the surrounding areas in Michigan.
3) If you're going to stereotype businessmen as Republican, then you might as well say Democrats are for total unionization and what that brings. The website and paper I referenced has a section pertaining to this. They did a study in Europe (which has much higher levels of union participation than in the US) pertaining to high levels of unionization and the unemployment rate, and found that the only correlation between low levels of unemployment and unionization is when there was a state of mutual cooperation in negotiations between the union and company management, where both understood the other's needs. Pumping control to one group because the opposing group had control isn't necessarily the right or beneficial solution.
1 and 2. I think a lot of poor people (and a staistical majority of the middle class) would be willing to take the chance. In a time when corporations post record profits, poverty is rising, and middle-class buying power is falling, it is sound economic policy to restore the balance.

This is, in part, why the Clinton Years were so strong. People had money with which to buy products. It's not enough to take a simply cost-based approach to business, although this seems to be all some business leaders -- and business educators -- are able to do. Perhaps we'd all be better off if products cost 15% more, and all of that money found its way into the pockets of the people doing the buying. Trying to compete with China on worker compensation doesn't seem to be working. They rely on being able to sell thier products elsewhere, since most can't afford them at home. It's not really a model we want to emulate.

3. Where did you get that I said businesspersons were Republicans? Republican politicians have actively pursued an agenda which puts business at a competitive advantage over workers. But thinking of workers merely as inventory, rather than as also consumers just hasn't proven to be a successful economic policy.

Government that is supportive of business is good for everyone. But government run by business is good for no one. It's We the People, not We the Corporations...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,600 Posts
jim schmidt said:
There's only one problem with that. If unemployment falls below, say 3%, workers will be in the driver's seat and wages will show significant rise.

That's a very un-Republican situation, letting the value of this commodity rise. That's why they oppose a rise in the minimum wage; not because it would hurt the bottom line by itself, but because it might make the next tier up able to command a raise. We can't let those workers get all uppity, you know. :rolleyes

But...But...The Republican Governor and legislature of this state raised the minimum wage here to $1.00 more than the Federal...Does that mean Jeb is a closet Democrat???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,900 Posts
bumblebee said:
But...But...The Republican Governor and legislature of this state raised the minimum wage here to $1.00 more than the Federal...Does that mean Jeb is a closet Democrat???
I think it probably means Florida has a huge minimum wage labor lobby and gets a disproportionate portion of its revenue from tourism paid to such workers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,682 Posts
bumblebee said:
But...But...The Republican Governor and legislature of this state raised the minimum wage here to $1.00 more than the Federal...Does that mean Jeb is a closet Democrat???
Are you saying that Republicans aren't the major impediment to any rise in the minimum wage? Not with a straight face, right?

Jeb is running for President.
 

·
RESIDENT ASSHOLE
Joined
·
8,497 Posts
jim schmidt said:
Perhaps we'd all be better off if products cost 15% more, and all of that money found its way into the pockets of the people doing the buying.
Just exactly how would that benefit anyone? You up it 15% and the top 2% will keep the profits.

This has been shown time and time again be it the likes of Exxon.......Walmart and so on. You can jack up the prices all you want but the bottom line is that the current system is set up for the minority to hold power and wealth.

Trade needs to be re assessed and we need to figure out why it is that we allow and actually reward companies for sticking it to our own people.

I think any US based company should have to pay a pretty dirty tariff if they outsource the majority of their product which eliminates jobs here.

You think CEO's would be making the sick salaries the do if they were penalized for axing the american worker?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,622 Posts
hybrid said:
Just exactly how would that benefit anyone? You up it 15% and the top 2% will keep the profits.

This has been shown time and time again be it the likes of Exxon.......Walmart and so on. You can jack up the prices all you want but the bottom line is that the current system is set up for the minority to hold power and wealth.

Trade needs to be re assessed and we need to figure out why it is that we allow and actually reward companies for sticking it to our own people.

I think any US based company should have to pay a pretty dirty tariff if they outsource the majority of their product which eliminates jobs here.

You think CEO's would be making the sick salaries the do if they were penalized for axing the american worker?
The problem is that salaries used to rise at a rate roughly the same as the COL. This is no longer the case.

Cars, for example, have risen at a MUCH higher rate in cost to the consumer in comparison to the wage rate.

In other words, wage structure has to change. Either raise it comensurate with the COL or lower the cost of living.

This will never happen, as CEOs need their golden parachutes.
 

·
RESIDENT ASSHOLE
Joined
·
8,497 Posts
Fargin_Bastige said:
The problem is that salaries used to rise at a rate roughly the same as the COL. This is no longer the case.

Cars, for example, have risen at a MUCH higher rate in cost to the consumer in comparison to the wage rate.

In other words, wage structure has to change. Either raise it comensurate with the COL or lower the cost of living.

This will never happen, as CEOs need their golden parachutes.

Well we know that raising the wages is going to be a sour subject. I hear people bitching about how that would effect their profit as if thats the only thing on the planet to worry about.

We know what our government doesnt really give a fuck if companies like Exxon bend us over.

I mean seriously, if oil was based on supply and demand.............there cant possibly be any way that the supply was that bad.......or else they would have paid more for it and not made more of a profit. You cant tell me it was a S&D issue.......its a percieved issue that politicians let happen so they can line their own pockets.
 
81 - 100 of 125 Posts
Top