Or, perhaps, read the "Domestics vs. Imports" thread in this forum. He seems to have the right idea!!!

 

Well, you said it, not me. Isn't this GREED? I agree, big people in big places with big money are the ones that make things like that happen, yet if you knew the WHOLE truth, you'd probobly be suprised to know that the big plant is actually getting to write-in the full cost-to-produce against their product's price-as-charged to their customers, who are probably 3 states away. So their customers are providing them large margins on products that really were "discounted" to the plant due to the local incentives you mentioned... Taxpayers foot the direct bill for the tax-breaks and utility charges, AND the consuming public gets to pay the same elevated prices for the plant's end product ANYWAY.
That's double-dipping the working stiff if you ask me, and it's WRONG.

I know the same thing happened in SC when BMW moved into Spartanburg, because the tax-package is what helped SC win the site over NC's bid. That fact not withstanding, BMW, Honda, Toyota, and others are STILL proving themselves more profitable than domestic car compnies WITH American labor and sub-contractors. And I know that a Ford or GM plant would get the same fight for tax-advantages that a Hyundai plant would here.

I don't get it? Do you want to know what I make or how much I could stand to lose and get by? I am not a union member - nor will I be. I am self-motivated and I WANT to fend and fight for my own stake and earnings. I want to do as I see fit for my interest and the interest of my employer - without being regulated or charged for my own self-management. If I don't like my job or anything about it, I'm not going to gripe to my union rep - I'll quit and do something else. After all, this is America - the land of opportunity! (or at least for a few more years i hope )

Don't give up just to give in, dude! Look, if nobody buys a $50k CTSv, then GM will learn that it is futile to make such a car and put such a price on it. Likewise, if you stop buying $18 music CD's, the dealers WILL drop their price or they'll go out of business, and the star singers won't be signing $10-million record deals either. If you stop paying $65 for a seat at a ball game or NASCAR race, the price WILL drop, or the places will go broke. Ball players will stop getting $30-million/3-year deals, and NASCAR races will stop paying out $8-million winnings at every race. THESE are the things we can do to impact things where they matter. It's not like we need to stop buying a gallon of milk to spite the grocery store - but we end up killing the farmer instead - that would be silly and futile. And I don't want to be stupid with my actions at all, I want to send a clear and concise message about how I value my earned money.

We need to discuss these point in public, and the public needs to react en-masse to get the message across - "We are sick and tired of being fleeced for the general increased wealth of the elite and/or policy makers."
I'm personally sick and tired of being nickled and dimed to death. I'm fighting it already. You can join me, or you can go it alone. That's the beauty of our fine nation - freedom to speak, and freedom to choose.


Well, I think we're on close grounds anyways.
I don't think most sensible people really want "something for nothing" as you indicate, I think most people just want "something of fair quality for a fair price". I know that's how I feel anyways.

Thanks for replying!

 

OK - Is there anybody in this forum/thread that doesn't think we're gettin' gouged by the automakers?

Anybody...

If so, please speak up now before this gets REAL ugly...

ANYBODY who doesn't beleive that we (the American car buyer) are not victims of a conspiracy, by the carmakers and their dealers, to maintain car prices as high as possible in our "wealthy" nation... READ THIS.

Same cars can cost oodles less in Canada from Yahoo Neswire - dated today.

"Odds are that new car you bought in the USA is being sold for less money -- maybe thousands less -- in Canada. "

"...automakers have attempted to crack down on sellers and buyers. In turn, the automakers have been sued on behalf of buyers. If the automakers can't stop the import numbers from growing, they face yet another erosion of profit..."
Who are they (automakers) to crack down on THE BUYER for getting a good deal!!! I praise the dealer willing to sell a vehicle for a modest profit instead of a king's ransom! The factory obviously got what they wanted for the car, or it would have not been delivered, or better yet reported stolen.

"Automakers call the price differential ''pricing to the market.'' They say they price cars lower in Canada -- anywhere from 1% to 40% -- because wages and economic conditions are below those in the USA, and taxes are higher. It's what the market will bear, they say."
Ahhh yes, "WHAT THE MARKET WILL BEAR". Have you guys heard me say that anywhere else in this thread? Now you've heard it from THEM too.

"But some U.S. dealers, brokers and buyers say it's price gouging. ''It's not right,'' says Dave Pierce, a Great Falls, Mont., new car dealer"
Yeah, no sh1+ Sherlock. That's what I've said for years - welcome to the 20th century...
My problem with him is that he's mad because he can't gouge the public because of where he lives, and he's crying about it.

"a new loaded Dodge Caravan that costs me $28,000 from the factory, I could get delivered to my door from Canada for $19,500."
Oh Noooo, nothing wrong with this picture. Heck, it's probably got something to do with "knowing the right person", or getting the guy in a "dealing mood", huh?

Dammit guys, if y'all can't see what's going on in front of us after reading this whole thread and especially this article, WE'RE DOOMED.

The best way to rob your granddad blind is to take a quarter or dime at a time - that way he'll never notice until the change jar is virtually empty, and then it's too late.

The same thing is going on with our economy and corporate structure today. In all sectors and markets - they are robbing our nation BLIND, but they are doing it to us a little at a time, and the general public collectively thinks everything is just peachy-keen.

$19 for a music CD?!?!
I can buy 100 CD-RW's for $19 retail for heaven's sake!, so it sure isn't due to material costs.

$28k for the same exact car that costs someone else $19.5k... retail?!?!
That $28k figure represents a (19500/28000 =) 69% margin above a RETAIL price for heaven's sake!!!

Convince me now just how "lean" these carmakers and dealers are pricing their stuff and what good deals we are getting.
And convince me how expensive cars are to actually make too while you're at it.

I'm all ears...

 

I think one of the central problems comes down to complexity. If the automakers produced a product, set a SINGLE retail price, and a SINGLE wholesale price, then they would not have:

1. The cost of administering the various pricing programs in whatever countries they sell in.
2. The cost of administering any rebates and incentives.
3. The cost of 0% financing and any other "hidden" incentives.

Instead, we have this complex panorama of incentives to the consumer and dealer, invoice price, holdbacks, kickbacks, shared marketing costs, periodic "clear out the inventory" discounts, ad infinitum, ad nauseum. What does this support? A huge army of middle-management bureaucracy that adds no value to the vehicle whatsoever.

"But that's how cars are sold these days," you whine. "People NEED to think they're getting a good deal!"

Let's see, so you sell a car worth $19,000 for $25,000, and have a $3000 rebate, which brings it down to $22,000 and spend the remaining $3K above its actual value on administering all these various programs. Then you argue that $25K is what everyone else is charging, so it's OK.

Why not just sell it for $19K and TAKE THE MARKET?

 

The problem here is that the AMERICAN workers at BMW, Honda, Toyota, etc. are non-union workers and they are just as happy working there as flipping burgers at McDonalds. (Maybe a bit happier there since they get paid better, but that's only because those companies have to compete somewhat with the union shops in order to get people to stay once they have some training.)



What I want to know is how you think you have any job security when by your own arguments you put out the premise that your company should be looking at the most cost-effective labor. Either you don't get paid anywhere near what you are worth (thereby feeling you ARE the most cost-effective option), or you feel that this cost-effective labor initiative will stop at your job level. (Believe me, it MAY NOT stop until your whole plant is in another country!!)



Some people WANT a $50k car. Some people want a $2k beater to drive every day. Just because a singer, athlete, etc. makes a lot of money doesn't make it Anti-American. If you stop paying $65 a seat at a ballgame the only thing it will accomplish is making more room for the people who do pay $65 to park their $50k cars!! (That's ok, at those prices they probably feel better if no one is parked next to them anyway.) And if you stop paying $18 for a music CD the only thing it will do is put the poor counter-guy at Tower-Records out of a job. (Because if you start buying at DISC-GO-ROUND the second-hand CD store it's probable the owner is the only employee.)

Not to be inflamatory or anything, but looking through a few of PROUDPONY's posts it seems to me that he has some issues with the fact that while he went to school, got training, does his best to come up with helpful ideas for his company, etc., the fresh-out-of- high-school kid (Billy-Bob) out on the shop floor is still making 3/4 as much as he is. He should be doing a LOT better than Billy-Bob! Well it just don't work that way!! Sure, Billy-Bob just sits and stares at his machine for 8 hours and then goes home, but--1. The company must think he knows what he is staring at or they wouldn't be paying him. 2. He's there every day staring at it. If you go down a level or two in the job market you will find a LOT of people who can't seem to manage to be there EVERY day!! 3. Maybe Billy-Bob got lucky and landed him a good job. So what? If he doesn't contribute more than his 8 hours he will be one of the first to go anyway. In the meantime, if Billy-Bob, and Norma-Jean don't show up every day PROUDPONY is soon not going to have a job to do. 4. If PROUDPONY's company replaced Billy-Bob, and Norma-Jean with lower paid labor, (they would have to replace them since now that they have tasted $$ they won't take a pay-cut) perhaps PROUDPONY would have too much to do. (Since B-B and N-J at least know enough about the machines they are staring at to not screw them up too much!) ---Of course then maybe PROUDPONY gets pissed because he has too much to do now, he quits, (because he was never paid enough anyway) and the guy whose job went to Mexico can just step right in!!! INTERESTING.

One shouldn't complain just because the guy next door is making a living, or (God forbid) maybe even making more than oneself. If you want to live in a penthouse, be a CEO. If you want free burgers, work at McDonalds. If you are too good for one, but not good enough for the other, find your niche and be happy.

Besides, if PROUDPONY wanted to be a millionaire, why did he take engineering, instead of getting a nice, overpaid, medical degree???? It's the AMERICAN WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

If so, go to CANADA, buy the car for $19000, and then come back and post to all of us how much tax you paid. I think we could all use the lesson in perspective. (Or, why does the guy in Tennesee go to Illinois to buy stuff?? 8.5% sales tax is why!!---Also the reason retail prices are slightly cheaper in Tenn.) Taking a look at ALL your posts PROUDPONY it seems to me you are trying to make us a third-world economy in order to have lower prices. Sure the companies price things to meet the market, it's called CAPITALISM!!!

 

I don't think any of us here have a problem with fair market competition and capitalism . . . I think the real problem is that competition has become wink-wink, nudge-nudge "competition" with prices fixed by some very large players and rules that are so complex that nobody wins.

If you want to take market share, come up with something that upsets the value equation! That's how a REAL market works.

 

Do you really beleive that? The local BMW plant accepts applications, processes the person, applies the appropriate tests and skill examinations, scores the individual, and then places them on a waiting list for jobs in which they are best suited. They call the individual if/when an opening occurrs. The list is about 2.5 years out last I heard. Doesn't sound to me like they are struggling to keep people employed for their "wage offerings".

My company is actually VERY active in local sourcing. We have entered into some partnerships overseas to at least maintain a 50% stake in the business that we would have otherwise lost all together. But I am actively involved in getting work into local shops, creating local plants, and using local retailers. We CAN and DO make it work here. That's one of the reasons why I am so happy to have my job - it's one of the few remaining that offer some patriotic satisfaction. I have been through the layoffs and takeovers twice. I know I am disposeable at my company. But I also know that they recognize that I can make them great deals of money, and I think they would weigh that before axing me over Billy-Bob.

As for feeling like I'm not paid what I'm worth - that's a poor assumption on your part. I am happy with what I make, or I'd leave and do something else. I was simply pointing out that I have no guilty conscience about taking home what pay I do - because I am "giving back more than I'm taking". I like to think that my contributions are helping my fellow American workers KEEP their jobs, and make their jobs more pleasurable to bear as well.

I get the feeling that you resent your job in some way, and feel that everyone else must too. I don't - I actually enjoy it - that's why I do it.

You've missed my point alltogether. If we COLLECTIVELY stop paying for the $65 seats - the price WILL drop! I didn't say that someone else would just step in and pay it - that is what is happening right now. It's fuel on the fire.

If you want to spend a days' wages on a 2-hour evening for you and the wife/ g/f at the stadium and have nothing to show for it - that's YOUR perogative. I've decided to spend my get-away time at the beach, fishing, or hunting with my family. The cost is less, the time is more appreciated, and I'm not helping to make some multi-millionaires even wealthier with my hard-earned cash. Let the wealthy swap money with the wealthy - I'll keep my money for other uses. That's MY perrogative.

I'd rather support the modest, hard working guy at DISC-GO-ROUND anyways - KUDOS to him for working his **** off trying to grow his own business. If his business grows due to Tower-Records going under, he can hire the kid from Tower Records and tech the kid how honest and fair business practices helped him to prevail.
You see, I'm creative too!

You don't need to refer to me in third party pal - I'm gonna read the post anyways.

And yes, you are exactly right. I feel people shold EARN what they get, not fall into it or have it handed to them via some union process or favor-cashing. I don't know of any Billy-Bobs in my current company, but they are RAMPANT in our customers' shops. Ford, GM, and others are notoriously riddled with Billy-Bobs.

"Well it just don't work that way!!"
No Ch1+! That's why I am advocating fair play and fair trade in this thread! Why do people have to be so scerewed up?
centric made a great point with his analysis above...
"Let's see, so you sell a car worth $19,000 for $25,000, and have a $3000 rebate, which brings it down to $22,000 and spend the remaining $3K above its actual value on administering all these various programs. Then you argue that $25K is what everyone else is charging, so it's OK. Why not just sell it for $19K and TAKE THE MARKET?"
EXACTLY!!!
Why isn't Billy-Bob paid what he's WORTH, as opposed to what his union contract demands... goofy.

Problem is the guy next door is in China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, etc. He's not your neighbor anymore. In case you haven't noticed, unemployment is at an all-time high since the great depression of the '30's. I don't belittle anybody making a ot of money - as long as they do it honorably and fairly.

How do you know I'm not a millionaire? I DO more than work for a company 9 hours a day...
You should do what you enjoy doing - making money at it will come if you do it well.
BTW, there are many MD's out here who are far from wealthy and commit themselves to work volunteer jobs in poor neighborhoods and free clinics - my kind of guys/gals, giving back to the bigger picture. KUDOS to them.

Thanks for the spirited debate pal. I really do appreciate the thought you put forth. It means you are at least thinking about the issues, good or bad, which is more than many people can admit to.

 

I think that varies some depending on the local job market. We have a John-Deere plant near-by that works along those lines. Their biggest problem is when they get around to calling people the people are not interested anymore. (You have to be there for a number of years to have a "decent" job, until then you are a "labor pool" worker.)



I didn't say they would axe you over B-B. I said that in the process of developing a "cost-effective" workforce, they MAY axe EVERYBODY and ship production elsewhere.---I'm not sure I understand how you can say in the same paragraph that "We have entered into some partnerships OVERSEAS to at least maintain a 50% stake in the business that we would have otherwise LOST ALL TOGETHER.--And then say things like,---We CAN and DO make it work here.--And---That's one of the reasons why I am so happy to have my job - it's one of the few remaining that offer some patriotic satisfaction.---Perhaps the process of "cost-effectivness" is already started at your company???






No, actually I'm quite happy with my position. I'm just not so fond of what is happening to (and will happen to) good people who make an honest, good faith, effort to support their employer, and are then treated with extreme disregard when the company is forced to move. (Believe me, out of 650 people, who ALL believe they will get what's entitled to them, maybe 50 will leave with FULL benefits (pension, severance, etc.) the rest are to be "bought off" for a fraction of whats due. After all, with no job they will except whats offered.)


You miss MY point. We ARE NOT going to collectively stop paying for what we want. No way--No how--Ain't gonna happen!!!

Perhaps here is the problem. IF your two hour evening costs you a days pay, then most likely you will resent the price. Perhaps, it would be more enjoyable to get the wife/gf/whatever, grab some brews and chews, and watch a game at home on T.V.? (But don't watch the commercials, those people will try to screw you out of your hard earned cash!!)








Sure the guy in China, etc. is making money too. And I don't think it is fair to throw everybody who has a buck together and imply that they didn't make it "honorably and fairly". But, is it possible you are not really sure about your neighbor? Lots of people in this country are making money. (Or at least they were until the market screwed up!) Also, as of today, the unemployment rate is aprox. 6.5% nationwide, that's FAR below the 11% to 14% it was at times during the 70's. (I was there, I remember.)


To end, I originally started these posts to comment on why the big three can charge $50k for a car. The reason is that there are, (and always will be ) people who will pay that price for what they deem is a quality product. Now granted, a $50k car is NOT meant for everybody, but I believe the people it is meant for are not complaining about the price. (Although there are a number of people who want to believe it is meant for them, and they WILL complain, not so much because of the price, but because they are either unable, or unwilling to afford one.) In short, using a different example, if a concert costs $150 a seat and you only make $150 a day at your job, you either go and enjoy an experience you will have to remember, OR you don't go, use you money elsewhere, and except that it is your choice. You DON'T complain that the price is to high because of some conspiracy to jack up the costs of everything in this country so that the "fat-cats" can get rich at the poor peoples expense. That's not reality, reality is that not EVERYTHING is meant for, or priced for, EVERYBODY. If YOU were the singer at this concert would you feel the price is due to your talents? Or, due to some conspiracy? In the end we generally get what we work for. Some people work harder than others and get more, they don't generally get more because it was handed to them, or because they ripped off the public.

My thanks to PROUDPONY for making this an enjoyable debate. This country does need EVERYBODY'S two cents! (And, if not the country, at least the "fat-cats" want your two-cents!!!!!!!!)

 

This is one of the most interesting threads I have ever read.

The problem isn't the price of the car itself. People are buying these cars, so they can most certainly afford them. Also, the price of cars overall hasn't risen that much since the 1950s. Sure, there was that $4,000 loaded GTO in 1969, but would you want to get paid what your job paid in 1969? Didn't think so.

The problem is that companies as a rule look for ways to maximize profits. Over the past 30 years, the favored way has been to reduce the workforce it has. Machines & Robots don't need medical, dental, off days, labor agreements, breaks, or any of those pesky things real people need. The excess savings went straight into management pockets. When you compare the average wage on the shop floor to the wage of the top earners in the company, the gap increase is simply astonishing! The percentage between the 2 is insane!

Labor leadership isn't free from blame either. Labor leadership is needed to keep management from screwing over it's employees (which they will do given the chance). How many times in the past decade has management demanded labor to take a pay cut, or a medical coverage cut, or a pension cut, but yet just months later, management recieves massive bonuses!

Where labor leadership has failed is that where there isn't any issues at negotiating time, it's just like politics, do something you can show to get reelected. If a person is assigned to inspecting brake lines is underemployed a particular day, why can't he be asked to inspect engine accesories if there's a back up of work there? Why can't a person's wage be tied to the number of areas he's trained to work in, creating incentive to become more knowledgeable in the plant, and at the same time having more of an emotional stake (or pride) in the plant he works at?

As for the paint booth guy making almost as much as the engineer, my view is so what? As long as he's execellent at his job, and that's the going rate, I say more power to him. He's not the reason why you are paying as much as you do for a new car. And with everyone and their brother going to college, it's in the trades which require apprenticeships where the shortage is, and in some instances that work shortage is going to result in a high school graduate (or dropout) to make more, and sometimes way, way more than you (wage earners work 40 hours, and anything more is overtime, while salary earners make the same amount whether you work 40, 50, 80 hours or more!).

There's enough blame to go around. GM's CEO makes $1.4 million per year, along with stock options, expenses, and a whole list of perks, basically meaning his salary goes straight to his account. But he's no where near the top in salary!! How about Nick Scheele (who isn't even the top guy at Ford) clearing $10.2 m-i-l-l-i-o-n in 2002, PLUS another $8 million in options! In fact, all top Ford executives get paid more the the head guy at GM. Even Dubya get's paid only $400,000 per year, and he came in under a pay raise!

(Adjusted for inflation, the president's salary in 1969, $200,000...perhaps the most money paid a president in real terms...equals $900,000 today!)

Compare this to America's highest paid business executive in 1969 (GM Chairman James M. Roche) at $795,000 while his average worker earned $5,602. By that difference, if the highest paid executive in the US is making $11 millon per year (a very low figure mind you), then his average worker should be making roughly $80,000 per year without overtime, which of course, ain't happening!!

So, the problem with your car's coast isn't union pay or benefits. I think that rates behind pay & bonuses to executives & the quest to show more bottom line cash for ever demanding stockholders.


http://media.gm.com/news/releases/020419_stock.html
http://www.forbes.com/2003/04/28/0428facesam.html
http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_16/b3625017.htm

 

The process of finding cheap labor started long ago in fact.
As for me making my comment about a partnership... We had a very large customer taking orders from NC for years, but they made a commitment to be a local supplier for a larger company that was moving to Asia. The choice was simple - "either make the product local to us, or we'll find somebody else". You don't give up 40% of your plant's dedicated business without a fight. We did not/do not want to have our own operations in Asia, so we created a partnership with the customer, and went in 50/50. Our technology and capital - their labor, land, and management. 50/50 on the sales too. We "engineers" then concentrated on converting our NC plant's capacity to other products that showed growth and promise here domestically. Nobody in our NC plant lost a job (out of 1400) even though 40% of the orders went to Asia in one fell swoop - I think that's pretty damn astounding in today's climate.

Oh dude - we AGREE on this... don't get me wrong!!!
I'm in TOTAL agrement with you here.
I saw one of my machine builders get let go after 32 years service - not in the same company, but the same DEPARTMENT!!! He was making @$22/hr. He missed early retirement by less than 6 weeks. He also got 2-weeks pay for every year of service, and that was all. I was LIVID over losing him - he knew ALL the machines in the plant and was a valuable resource to me, as well as my golf buddy, lunch buddy, and a friend. We had no union there. He was screwed.

But let's be honest with ourselves - WHO MADE THE CALL TO CAN THIS GUY? It sure wasn't his supervisor - that was ME! It was our plant manager, and he told me he was directed to cut 54 people out of the labor force - by our Director. And the directors (later) discussed how to trim costs in one of their quarterly meetings with the board and CEO/CFO. Funny how the guys making the big decisions can do that sort of thing, huh?

All I'm saying in addition to your point is that unions have shot themselves in the foot on occasion too. There is plenty of blame to go around. The CEO's and Directors are the largest chunk of the problem IMO, because they are making every decision based on ONE result - PROFITS - instead of good "business sense" decisions that might offer a brighter future but reduce todays profits.


And my new goal in life is to be one step in front of people with this attitude at every juncture, selling them $5-bills for $10/each too. "Ahhh yes my darling, there's a sucker born every minute."

If you go to the Winston race next weekend - I GUARANTEE you will spend more than a day's take-home wages after parking, admission, concessions, etc. (much less a T-shirt or couple koozies). And it got you a thrill between 8:00 and 11:00. It also made many millionaire owners, drivers, and track owners MUCH more wealthy for their time as well. When it was $15-25 bucks/seat and $2-parking, I was there a bunch. Now it's more like $80/seat, $10/park, and $4/beers - SCREW THAT!

And you are correct again regarding the wife and kid at home. That IS our favorite activity - being together, enjoying each others' company, and keeping our money for better uses.

LOL at your commercial crack too. Count the # of 0% commercials you see between 8 and 9pm!!!

Alot of people were high in the 70's and have clouded memories too!
Unemployment rates from 1920-2002 are linked [/B][/QUOTE] HERE , given in every other year.
1970 4.9%
1972 5.6%
1974 5.6%
1976 7.7%
1978 6.1%
1980 7.1%
Not quite 14%. Unless you want to concede that the current 6% is wrong too - which it is - because when a person's unemployment benefits expire (various periods between 6-18 months), they fall off the "unemployed list" whather they found a job or not. Unemployment also doesn't include those in school due to job loss, or those working part time as crossing guards or burger flippers since they can't get a real 40-hour career job.

THIS link to the Department of Labor reports 6% as of last Friday. It also points out the fallacies I noted above, and includes such text as ...
"In April, 4.8 million persons were working part time even though they would have preferred a full-time schedule. The number of such workers increased by about 600,000 over the year."

"In April, 1.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, the same as a year earlier. These individuals wanted and were available to work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed, however, because they did not actively search for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.."

"Manufacturing job losses totaled 95,000 in April, more than twice the average monthly decline for the prior 12 months (-40,000)."


My problem is not that a car is made to accomodate the rich, my problem is when Corporate America thinks EVERYBODY is rich!

My main problem is the American attitude - we are fat, wealthy slobs who are living today on the merits and benefits of our ancestors' hard work, good morals, and determination to do what was right for the previous 150 years. Go back to 1945 and drive your BMW down Main St - USA... or flip on your Sanyo receiver to listen to WAR news. Find something here made n China in 1972...
Instead of "settling" for what we have now, we could be the economic superpower of the world. Instead, we throw out more food than most people are lucky enough to get in some countries, we burn gas like it's water, we kill trees by the millions to make paper and cardboard we throw in the landfill, etc. We, as a society, are SLOBS - big fat wasteful SLOBS, totally comfortable with WASTING ANYTHING, from food to money. And we are so oblivious to what is happening because we have been so strong for so long, we are being reduced to commonality with the rest of the world AND WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IT OR CARE.

THAT'S why I'm posting in this thread.
You see, it's not whether or not you can afford it... It's why it even costs that much in the first place.


My thanks to PROUDPONY for making this an enjoyable debate. This country does need EVERYBODY'S two cents! (And, if not the country, at least the "fat-cats" want your two-cents!!!!!!!!)
I reciprocate - you have been an amicable and very worthy debating partner. I've enjoyed it too!

 

Just a couple of quick facts, unemployment rates for various years according to U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.


Year Ann Avg
1939 17.2
1940 14.6
1941 9.9
1942 4.7
1943 1.9
1944 1.2
1945 1.9
1946 3.9
1947 3.9
1948 3.8
1949 5.9
1950 5.3
1951 3.3
1952 3.0
1953 2.9
1954 5.5
1955 4.4
1956 4.1
1957 4.3
1958 6.8
1959 5.5
1960 5.5
1961 6.7
1962 5.5
1963 5.7
1964 5.2
1965 4.5
1966 3.8
1967 3.8
1968 3.6
1969 3.5
1970 4.9
1971 5.9
1972 5.6
1973 4.9
1974 5.6
1975 8.5
1976 7.7
1977 7.1
1978 6.1
1979 5.8
1980 7.1
1981 7.6
1982 9.7
1983 9.6
1984 7.5
1985 7.2
1986 7.0
1987 6.2
1988 5.5
1989 5.3
1990 5.6
1991 6.8
1992 7.5
1993 6.9
1994 6.1
1995 5.6
1996 5.4
1997 4.9
1998 4.5
1999 4.2
2000 4.0
2001 4.7
2002 5.8

And while my 6.5% was slightly off, (Unemployment is 6.0% as of April 2003) AND my 1970's rates were more a product of memory than research, (Remember kids, ALWAYS do your HOMEWORK!!) PROUDPONY is incorrect in stating "unemployment is at an all time high since the Great Depression in the 1930's" or whatever. While rates in the 1930's were far higher than today, rates in the mid 70's to mid 80's were also higher. (So therefore, the rates are not higher than the 30's YET!!) THANKS, Gotta Run!!!!!

 

HEY - you posted my link! J/K!
(I didn't want to post every year, just the 70's.)

So did you understand my point about the change in how unemployment is calculated? We didn't have unemployment benefits in the 30's like we do today, nor in the '70's for that matter. And CERTAINLY, you didn't get dropped off the "list" of unemployed back then just because you had expired your term for the unemployment benefits package. Simple fact is, if you don't have a job, your UNEMPLOYED. I don't care if you are drawing unemployment or not. That's a goofy technicality that politicians and beaurocracies can utilize to make things appear better than they really are.
NBC News did a great piece on just this subject last Friday night. I'd love to find a write-up on that segment Brian Williams did.

When you have 4.8 million people working part time because hey can't find a full-time job - YOU HAVE A PROBLEM.
When you have 1.4 million people marginally attached to the labor force but not fully employed - YOU HAVE A PROBLEM.
When you have 95,000 people in manufacturing alone LOSING their job in a single MONTH - You HAVE A PROBLEM.
"Employment in amusement and recreation services and in hotels decreased by 41,000 and 20,000, respectively."
"Total nonfarm payroll employment edged down by 48,000 in April to 130.3 million, seasonally adjusted. This followed 2 months of job losses totaling 477,000..."

And to pile on to the issue of unjustified wage that Billy-Bob was earning while he was sitting on his keester watching a machine do the actual work - as of last Friday...
[i]"...average workweek for production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls declined by 0.3 hour in April to 34.0 hours..."]/i] (That's 6 hrs short of 40 hrs/week there bud.)
"Average hourly earnings of production or nonsupervisory workers on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 2 cents in April to $15.11."
"Reflecting the decline in weekly hours, average
weekly earnings decreased by 0.7 percent to $513.74/week."

All data taken from my original link - The US Department of Labor - Bureau of Labor and Statisticsfound HERE.

That's right fellas - $500/week is the average working guys EARNINGS - not take home, not net. Take 30% out of that for taxes and the average Joe American is bringing home $350/week!!!
Now if ANYBODY wants to try to justify to me why Billy-Bob should get $50k/year ($960/week) when Joe American is earning $26,715 ($500/week) doing manual labor and adding value to his product - knock yourself out. I will content that Joe American's eyes are 20/20 just like B-B's, his hands have 10-fingers, his IQ is comparable, they are both healthy, capable guys, and Joe's **** will hold down a stool just as good as Billy-Bob's **** will - maybe better - and for 1/2 the price.

It's all good mcmb - I have actually developed a good bit of respect for you throughout our conversation. At least you seem passionate about the subject - regardless of our different views on certain areas - and that's more than can be said for most people.