Education, or lack thereof, is precisely how we're going to get "their".. Ignorance on everything from minute details like simple grammar to broad-reaching concepts like personal responsibility is what's killing The United States of America.

Thanks for spelling it out for us.

↓↑report

"27 dollars to 18, wow. In a time when CEO's make over 300 times as much as their workers it really sad to see this happening. I am sure their are plenty of idiots who will come on and fault the workers and the unions, but I really can't see that logic."

Line workers can't do what CEOs do. There's a high value placed on CEOs for a reason. You've read enough about the unions strong-arming GM and the other domestics. If you think those socialist tactics are fair then it's no wonder you're blind to "that logic."

"On a level playing field the American worker is the best in the world. I am so sick of the China argument. Chinese workers will work for 2 dollars an hour and the quality of their work is garbage and their standards are criminal. Pet food that poisons, shoes that fall part, tires that kill drivers, lead children's jewelery......"

A matter of opinion and not much else. The American worker needs a wake-up call to the tune of "make yourself marketable." I'm tired of hearing about how much the American worker suffers - it's old news spouted by those with an axe to grind and an agenda to advance. To be sure, there are steps the US government can take to level the playing field, but is anyone else as beyond sick as I am of hearing only about what the government should do while we routinely avoid talking about the *personal responsibility* of these line workers? We do it out of some twisted desire to be politically correct. What utter crap. I've been laid off before, twice. I've bounced back because I apply myself to be someone worth hiring and paying to do the job correctly. No one has the right to a job nor do you have the right to happiness. You have the right to PURSUE happiness. Get back to me when you figure that one out.

Concerning China, let the market vote on that. No one's forcing you to buy their inferior death traps. Be an informed consumer and take responsibility (there’s that word again) for yourself and your family. If China's wares really are the garbage you say they are, then you can rest assured they won't be able to compete in a free market so long as the government gets the out of the way and stays there.

"Twenty years from now this country will be one big mess and you'll all wonder how we got their. This is how."

And just where the hell have you been the last 20 years? Please, spare us and don't respond with an answer referencing The United States of America. For one, you need not prove my point even more succinctly by demonstrating how completely out of touch you are, and for another, the thought of you voting in any election is just down-right depressing.

When I speak of Education, I'm not just talking about simple arithmetic. I'm talking about being smart enough to own yourself and your destiny. Even when factors in your life are contingent on decisions made by "CEO's [who] make over 300 times as much as their workers" you still own yourself. Resigning yourself to be someone else’s property or entirely at their mercy is just plain weak. Reality check: You may not be able to control the wind, but you can adjust the sails. If you had the slightest inclination to understand the concept I just expressed here, the explanation featured in this post wouldn't be required. Indeed, I wouldn’t be responding to your tripe because you’d never have written such ignorance in the first place.

You're not interested in debate - you're interested in advancing arguments borne out of class envy. Your dim wit and lack of education would be of no concern if it wasn't so painfully status quo.

Your grammatical error de jour illustrates my point - but alas, you're blind to "that logic" as well. Business as usual. But hey, feel free to look as stupid as you want when discussing topics of intellectual significance.

Oh, and please, don't feel remotely compelled to offer any solutions from your cookbook of pseudo-morality, just whine and complain about how hard it is.

This "gimme" mentality that has replaced the "I’ll do it" mindset is at the very core of why America rots from within.

↓↑report

There's really no rational justification for what CEO's take home today. In theory what you say about CEO pay is right but practically speaking the impact of most CEO's is fairly minimal.

↓↑report

There's a perfectly rational justification; just because you don't do a job doesn't mean you have any idea what's involved or why it would be so highly valued.

Take secretaries, otherwise known as "Administrative Coordinators" or "Executive Assistants" -- most people never figure out just what kind of pressures these with which people have to live day to day as part of their mostly thankless jobs. I didn't know myself until I spent an hour with one helping her to complete a complex project for a Vice President within the company. I still don't know, but I can tell you this: there's a lot more to that job than you think.

There's a reason they get paid big bucks when they reach the higher levels in the field, and yes, there is such a thing as a bona fide professional Executive Assistant.

No insult intended, but I think the syntax that better describes what you're getting at here goes something like: "There's no rational conclusion I can draw to explain why CEOs take home so much pay."

I don't claim to know why "they make so much" myself, but I fully understand the concept behind the reason.

↓↑report

And please tell me how the line workers are to fault for GM's problems? Do line workers now design products? Did line workers decide to ignore fuel efficiency? Did line workers cut corners on interior materials?

No, but their wage and benefit increase demands plus the unions unwillingness to adapt to the reduced workforce needs forced the GM bean counters to cut corners trying to stay price competitive.

↓↑report

"twenty years ago I was..........eight. I apologize to the board that I was not fighting globalization in grammar school. I am truly sorry."

You should have paid more attention in school. Particularly in history class.


"I started working(after school) at the age of 15 and I haven't stopped. I worked two jobs to pay for college. yes I did attend college. Unlike Kaptain Grammar I don't assume that everyone who disagrees with me is an ignoramus."

But you are: that's precisely how and why you insist on taking the position that your options are limited when you should better. You have more options than you know, but you're *ignorant* of them. If this is how you respond every time someone calls you on your BS it's no wonder you're not getting anywhere.


"After college I took a job working for a company that was non-union. The employees tried to unionize but the company came in and through blatantly illegal means busted up the union. This was prior to my arrival, but the court battle still continues on to this very day."

Blatantly illegal? That's why this case has been tied up in court for years right? I know our system of justice isn't the fastest on Earth, but open and shut cases don't routinely last for years on end. Clearly there's more to it than your simple non-explanation here.


"At the non-union shop I was paid way under my industries average. My overtime was by the week and not the day, so if I worked three 12 hour days, but called in sick or went on vacation later that week I lost those OT hours. My medical benefits were weak and management relations were strained."

So instead of going some place else to get a better deal, you demand management accommodate you without you having to do anything to earn it. Let me guess, it's because that's the "fair" thing to do, right?


"I made about 30k a year, which is in my opinion not a "decent" amount, certainly not trying to live in NY. After three years of working there and a few awards in my field, I moved to a bigger union shop."

Promise you won't crumble to shambles over this next question, OK? Here goes: how is this any of management’s fault? Did someone point a gun to your head and force you to work for that amount? Or did you eventually figure out that you have to pay your dues (in a manner of speaking – I’m sure the union has plenty of real ones for you) in order to prove yourself worthy or more money? Good on you for winning awards – if you used them to leverage a better position elsewhere, then that's great. That's the way it's supposed to work.


"All I can say is, I love my union. Over time by the day, people looking out for my safety, someone looking out for my interests. I make three times as much as I did at my old shop. I am buying a house, I can go on vacations, I can have a family."

You love the union.. that's effectively all you have said that rings with any connection to reality. Why stand up for yourself when you can just have someone else do it for you? In principle, the Union sounds great and does good things. Problem in the auto industry is that unions always want more and more.. it gets to the point where they want more than they are worth. Riddle me this - I wonder if you love the company as much as you love the union? Would you say even half as much? I won't hold my breath on that one. FYI: the company is the entity bankrolling your home, your vacations, and your lifestyle – not the union. But facts be damned, there's emotional comfort at stake. Even so, I don’t blame you for being grateful to the union for helping you, but really, can't you stand to muster even a little perspective? Keeping an adversarial mindset with the company (us vs. them attitude) isn’t healthy – it leads to an over-developed sense of entitlement, victimization, and displays of ridiculous caterwauling on internet car blogs - all of which have so far been omnipresent in your posts.


"The company benefits as well. Instead of paying for health care (which can be pricey). The company contributes money(a set amount for everyday I work) into a fund for me that the union manages. I use that account to pay for my medical benefits every quarter. Since I am only one chapter of a large network my union has much more bargaining power then my company when it comes to dealing with the health care provider. This is a huge cost saving to my company.(please make sure you ignore this in your response, thanks)"

I wonder if your HR department and/or the equivalent Union Relations team would agree with you on just how much the company benefits. I'm not part of any of those teams so I won't speak for them. Interesting that you do, considering you appear more interested in working for your union than you are for the company that pays you. That said, I think the benefit of the doubt is appropriate here: if the company really is saving money, then I think we can agree that's a good thing. That being the case, I'm still disappointed -- albeit not surprised -- you feel the compulsion to further prove my original point; ever thought about taking personal responsibility and managing your own health care? Bleedin’ Christ. It’s your health and you see not the slightest thing wrong with turning management of it over to a union, a company, or anyone other than yourself. I’m sure you can’t wait to point out how that’s not possible or feasible. Putting aside that it is, who do you have to thank for strongly encouraging a system of collectivity over individuality? (Hint: you’re in love with them.) When the whole endeavor goes sour like we’ve seen time and again in the news then it’s up to the tax payers to save you because you can’t be bothered to take care of yourselves since you’re too busy blaming CEOs who “make over 300 times as much as their workers.” Typical union mentality. Sometimes I don’t know why I bother with you people. Same reason people slow down at crash sites I suppose.


"As a younger employee I benefit greatly from the unions collective bargaining power. Old men like yourselves often see my age and try to undercut me with what they consider a "decent' salary. The union nullifies that. I am paid just as much as my peers. It works on the other end of the spectrum. Older workers, some who are near retirement but can no longer do the job are moved to less physically demanding positions until they reach retirement age. I know some of you would view this as fat cat union crony behavior. I know its an alien concept to take care of a man after giving a company 30+ years of service. I'm sure you would rather see him thrown out on the street and squander his nest egg as he struggles two or three years till he can collect ss."

I'm younger than you, but thanks for the compliment. Now for your free cluepon: your age has nothing to do with your salary – in a free market economy, that's supposed to be determined on a combination of your skill set, experience, education, fair market value for your services/position, and how much these individual traits are worth to the company. This would require you to make yourself marketable, and compete with your "peers" – but you die-hard union sycophants can't handle that. You can't step to the plate and prove you're the best for the job. You expect to be paid the same as everyone else in the same position regardless of the quality of your work or your experience. You call that fairness. I call it rewarding ineptitude. You inability – nay – outright refusal to recognize anything I’ve just said on this point demonstrates for the rest of us just how wastefully our tax money is pissed down the drain with our so-education system.

I know Personal Responsibility is an alien concept to leech such as yourself, but that make-believe man you put forth to tug at heart strings in your charming little example didn’t "give" 30 years of service to your fictional company – no one in the real world would. Such a man would expect to be PAID for his work. The company already fulfilled its part of the deal one paycheck at a time. You're saying the company owes even more – that it is obligated to "take care" of him by providing ADDITIONAL compensation even after he stops being of any benefit the company. What that man needs is a retirement plan, not a corporate teet. There are other companies who can help setup and maintain said plan, but that would require this man to "take care" of himself. Why do that when it’s just so much easier to have the company do it for you? The problem here is what counts as a fair contribution. Unions are never satisfied; I’d have less of a problem with a company "contributing" to retirement funds if the agreement was made in good faith as opposed to the threat of corporate ruin from a strike. That’s not an agreement, that’s coercion, and I'm not going to sympathize with union thugs who make a living forcing a pretend reality that's dangerous and ultimately unsuitable.

None of that matters as long you feel good about it. You trot out the poor, helpless old man with 30+ plus years of service when discussing retirement benefits, as though he's being ripped off, yet sweep him under the rug faster than you can say "mine!" when it comes to pay scales. You want to make as much as he does without having to go through what he did to get it. Having him in the same room while you try case with a straight face on this point can't all that good for morale. You want something for nothing and still expect to be taken seriously. I've seen this tack only from children, some older than you.

"As for the Chinese goods issue, who is being ignorant here? Do you think the children who bought jewelery made out of lead could have known this? The pet food that killed all of those animals was not labeled. Do people who buy American brand tires know where they are made? Are you actually faulting people for expecting government safety agencies to protect them? What about quality control from these American companies? Where is your contempt for them?"

How much time do you spend practicing to appear this asinine? Children buy jewelry? Since when can they earn a paycheck? Where are the parents? Being an informed consumer involves a few things, but changing the channel from American Idol and watching the news for a change would be a good start. I have no trouble with government agencies regulating safety in products. (Within reason, but that’s for another debate beyond your thus far demonstrated capability.) The issue here though is pretty basic: when you know something’s bad for you, don’t buy it. If you want to stop bringing "dangerous" products into your home, you don’t need to government to do anything – you simply need to stop buying it once you know it’s "bad". The market reacts faster than the government and always has. Concerning your question about expectations: Yes. I fault people for EXPECTING their government to protect them from themselves. The government should exist solely to promote our collective safety and enforce our agreements, not compensate for the infinite permutations of human stupidity and ignorance. Government cannot be all things to all people. That’s too big a job for anyone or anything, but who cares. Let’s just waste billions in taxes to have the government combat a problem we can solve faster and easier on our own. As long as we feel good, that’s all that matters.

"And please tell me how the line workers are to fault for GM's problems? Do line workers now design products? Did line workers decide to ignore fuel efficiency? Did line workers cut corners on interior materials? If this new batch of products is a hit and gm goes back into the black, will you call for a raise in wages for these workers who are now taking cuts?"

I won't dismiss your point that bad choices were made on GM's part – I agree with you here. Anyone who works in an office knows that the bean counters usually have too much power. But it takes two to tango – GM was building cars that made the bean counters happy (GM's fault) and kept the union satisfied. Let’s blame GM for that too since they just have to be evil. You need some new material here. Oldsmobile was shut down, in part, because the union didn't want to build better products. These "better products" would have required retooling at the plants, and the line workers would have needed some additional training to operate equipment and learn the very different platforms. These measures would result in costing amounts that GM wasn't in a position to absorb completely, so they asked the union for help. Apparently, it's "fair" when GM "contributes" to health care, but it's wholly tyrannical if GM asks the union to foot some of the costs save jobs – jobs that would also be more valuable because the workers in those positions would then have skills previously not there. A key requirement here was Education. None of that happened, partly because these advances would eliminate a few jobs. Union said no way, preferring to drown the whole ship instead tossing a few overboard on lifeboats. They held on to that right up to Oldsmobile going down. Airhead automatons not all that different from you followed them right to their own demise, the economical equivalent of Darwinism in action.

"The line workers signed a union contract and they met their responsibilities. That word again. I am sorry I don't share you view that our citizens are fat stupid lazy morons who have the nerve to want a good living. China uses slave labor, we ended slavery in this country over 140 years ago. I know it irks you. Don't worry though, at the rate we are going will get back there soon enough."

What irks me is that you don’t know enough about your own country to speak with any sense of credibility, but you can toss flashy terms like slave labor and expect that to carry merit in your loosely constructed juvenile half-arguments. Unless you've been hiding your credentials, I'd recommend you steer clear passing judgment on China, America or any other nation. Concerning the contract, when the company meets its part of the deal, that’s not good enough. When the line workers do, well then that counts. Why? Because you just *feel* it should be that way. No reason. No logic. No consistency. Just emotional drivel designed specifically to compensate for the intellectual capacity of a parsnip.

So far, your posts are nothing beyond emotional responses devoid entirely of any reason or logic – pretty much the basis of all your ranting so far. You're a hypocrite suffering from a severe case of emotional indigestion – you need more help than can be provided on an internet posting board.


"When I started working the min. wage was 4.25, now its 5.15. In over ten years it hasn't moved a dollar. How can you tell me we don't need unions?"

I don't, you do.
Haven't you been paying attention?

↓↑report

l.i.dave -

"When you can't beat 'em, insult 'em."

Remind me.. which rule number is the socialist playbook? I forget. :)

↓↑report

Think your response is long enough? A bit too much time on our hands?

Dude I got to be honest. I'm not going to read all that crap. Let's just chalk it up to your a douche and move on with our lives.

↓↑report

OK sweetie, I'll bite. I need a break for car shopping. Can't seem to find a Saturn Sky Redline at any of my local dealers.

"You should have paid more attention in school. Particularly in history class."

I was a great student, nice assumption honey.

"You have more options than you know, but you're *ignorant* of them. If this is how you respond every time someone calls you on your BS it's no wonder you're not getting anywhere."

Let's be honest I make twice as much as you do pumpkin. How is that for options?

"Blatantly illegal? That's why this case has been tied up in court for years right? I know our system of justice isn't the fastest on Earth, but open and shut cases don't routinely last for years on end. Clearly there's more to it than your simple non-explanation here."

Again you don't know anything about this situation, but don't let that stop you from blurting out some of you cute little dribble. The employees tried to unionize, they have the legal right to do this. I know it sounds crazy, workers trying to better their situation, but for the time being its still legal. The company caught wind and intimidated or fired all those involved. ILLEGAL. The employees took them to court and now the company is trying to drag it out in an effort to outspend and exhaust the former employees. Where's the mystery?

"So instead of going some place else to get a better deal, you demand management accommodate you without you having to do anything to earn it. Let me guess, it's because that's the "fair" thing to do, right?"

You need to work on the reading comprehension son. The place didn't offer competitive wages so I left. What don't you understand? Apparently a great deal.

"Promise you won't crumble to shambles over this next question, OK? Here goes: how is this any of management’s fault? Did someone point a gun to your head and force you to work for that amount? Or did you eventually figure out that you have to pay your dues (in a manner of speaking – I’m sure the union has plenty of real ones for you) in order to prove yourself worthy or more money? Good on you for winning awards – if you used them to leverage a better position elsewhere, then that's great."

Alrighty, try to keep up here. I worked for a place that paid below my industry standards. I worked hard and proved myself as an employee. I applied to a better shop and was offered a job. I told my employer about the offer. They counter with a much lower offer and I left.

"Why stand up for yourself when you can just have someone else do it for you? In principle, the Union sounds great and does good things. Problem in the auto industry is that unions always want more and more.. it gets to the point where they want more than they are worth.""

Are you in a union? Have you ever been in a union? No? Then how are you qualified to talk? In the end you just come off as a pompous imbecile.

"Riddle me this - I wonder if you love the company as much as you love the union? Would you say even half as much? I won't hold my breath on that one."

The thread was about organized labor. That's why I was talking about unions. I love the company I work for but I recognize that the reason my work environment is so good/safe is because of the union.

"FYI: the company is the entity bankrolling your home, your vacations, and your lifestyle – not the union. But facts be damned, there's emotional comfort at stake."

Its not a charity, I am working they are paying me. What your tiny mind can't seem to grasp is that the company and the union enter into a contract that both side negotiate. Once they agree and the contract is ratified, the unions only responsibility is to enforce the agreed upon terms.

"I wonder if your HR department and/or the equivalent Union Relations team would agree with you on just how much the company benefits. I'm not part of any of those teams so I won't speak for them."

You just did stupid.

"Interesting that you do, considering you appear more interested in working for your union than you are for the company that pays you."

It's a thread about unions. Again reading comprehension, it needs work.

"if the company really is saving money, then I think we can agree that's a good thing. That being the case, I'm still disappointed -- albeit not surprised -- you feel the compulsion to further prove my original point; ever thought about taking personal responsibility and managing your own health care? Bleedin’ Christ. It’s your health and you see not the slightest thing wrong with turning management of it over to a union, a company, or anyone other than yourself. I’m sure you can’t wait to point out how that’s not possible or feasible."

What are you talking about? Who manages his/her own healthcare? How is my situation any different? Some people are insured through their company. The company selects a plan through a provider and presents the employee with a package. My situation is the same, except my union does the work of the company. Where in the world does personal responsibility come in to play?

"Putting aside that it is, who do you have to thank for strongly encouraging a system of collectivity over individuality? (Hint: you’re in love with them.) When the whole endeavor goes sour like we’ve seen time and again in the news then it’s up to the tax payers"

You mean like Enron? Was that another example of "bad" organized labor? What about worldcom? Who was to blame for those messes?

"I'm younger than you"

Really? You are younger then me and you have been laid off twice? You must me a real winner ha ha ha.

"your age has nothing to do with your salary"

Really so race, gender, appearance etc have nothing to do with success in the work place? Wow. All I can say is wow? The naivety is simply stunning. At first I thought you were lying about being younger then me but it all makes sense now.

"in a free market economy, that's supposed to be determined on a combination of your skill set, experience, education, fair market value for your services/position, and how much these individual traits are worth to the company."

In a free market economy the jobs go to the cheapest labor. Stop being so foolish and idealistic.

"I know Personal Responsibility is an alien concept to leech such as yourself"

To leech such as yourself? English please? Oh and by the way I pay more in taxes then you earn. How's that for responsibility.

"but that make-believe man you put forth to tug at heart strings in your charming little example didn’t "give" 30 years of service to your fictional company – no one in the real world would. Such a man would expect to be PAID for his work. The company already fulfilled its part of the deal one paycheck at a time."

What are you talking about? Are you suggesting that whenever someone becomes ill or older that they should be thrown away like garbage? You'd be a real peach of a boss. If you want to talk about social responsibility, how about accommodating older workers? Its not a hand out.

"How much time do you spend practicing to appear this asinine?"

Clearly not as much as yourself.

"Children buy jewelry? Since when can they earn a paycheck? Where are the parents?"

Companies make cheap costume jewelry for kids. Their parents buy it for them. What is so hard to understand? The jewelry has unhealthy amounts of lead, like all of those paint chips you ate as a child. Lead is bad.

"The issue here though is pretty basic: when you know something’s bad for you, don’t buy it."

How are you to know your food has been poisoned? Tell me genius?

"If you want to stop bringing "dangerous" products into your home, you don’t need to government to do anything – you simply need to stop buying it once you know it’s "bad"."

So after you die from criminally defective product you should stop buying it? Check.

"I won't dismiss your point that bad choices were made on GM's part – I agree with you here."

Wow, the owner of a company are responsible? What a concept. No one forced GM to sign the contracts with its union.

"So far, your posts are nothing beyond emotional responses devoid entirely of any reason or logic"

You retorts are nothing more then a little boys rants. The angry drivel of a live with my mommy baby who thinks that because he has had it hard, so should everyone else.

What you really need is to end up in the hospital because of food poisoning from Chinese fish or to have you mother die in a fiery crash caused by Chinese tires. You are all theory and no perspective.

"When I started working the min. wage was 4.25, now its 5.15. In over ten years it hasn't moved a dollar. How can you tell me we don't need unions?"

I don't, you do.
Haven't you been paying attention?

I make twice as mush as you, and you know it. I don't need to pay attention to you, I'll be retired before I am 30. Call me a liar, I don't care. ( here is a clue E**i)

Ok, break over, back to finding a silver Sky Redline.

↓↑report