|
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Boater wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. wrote: Harry, I have never known anyone Reggie, I *don't care* who you have or haven't known, or what you think. Got it? So why the need to respond, WAFA? |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
|
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Don White wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:12:10 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:03:17 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm Well, that's kind of the point. What data do you trust? The Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fine - but what caused the increase? Something has to change - what was it? Who should benefit from the obvious productivity increase - the company or the workers? Historically, when productivity increases, there may be a lag, but wages also increase. What's changed? The answer to that, is far more devastating to this country's long term economic health, than the middle-class not getting their share. You raise some important questions and frankly, I don't have an answer for you - I'll admit it. Obviously, its far to simplistic to blame the fat cats and corporate executives. Perhaps there has been a fundamental shift in how money is distributed, the money supply being managed - there's a whole host of factors that could explain it, but I'm not an economist although I do play one on TV. :) I watch CNBC a lot - in particular the early show Squawk Box or if I'm out and about, I listen on Sirius. When you watch two opposing sides take the same sets of data and make them fit their own agendas and viewpoints, you begin to wonder if anybody really and truly knows what's going on. Now for the really oddball opinon. I've often suspected that "real wages" are being sucked up by government in various ways. I had an experience Friday that floored me. I was kind of messing around in the kitchen and I gathered up the bills for the paper pusher to handle. I just started looking through them - there are more fees, taxes and "adjustments' on my cable, telephone and wireless bills that I could shake a stick at - easily adding 3-4% to the cost of the bill and that's before sales/service taxes which add another - what, 6%? What are all these fees/taxes/access charges doing to real wages? What's the measure of productivity he's quoting? Per unit, per hour, per what? I would think that if a company over 8 years increased it's productivity by 20% (which is 2.5%/yr by the way) that's not a whole lot considering inflation, raw material costs, etc. And if your company has a high labor quotient to the cost of production, that's almost negligible. If you want to consider inflation, real wages have decreased. Well, I think the last time I could buy a decent cigar for .75¢ was about twenty years ago. :) You should see my water bill. After all the extras like waste water management and environmental protection fees aew tacked on, the basic charge and actual usage fees (per cubic meter) triples. Unbelievable.. Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 6:21*pm, RLM wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:15:33 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote: On Dec 14, 5:15*pm, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 22:10:09 +0000 (UTC), RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:57:41 -0500, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:51:27 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... That may, or may not be, but American workers are still the most productive workers on this planet. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20572828/ In all this discussion, you've never answered the questions asked by myself or Tom. A lot of side-stepping, but no direct answer. Do your own research to prove him wrong. Twenty years of welfare and nothing but questions. Too lazy to use the internet. Still on welfare.. Who holds your hand to cross the street? There was no research needed. They were simple questions. -- John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - snerk Is snerk a remark like snot? It's "snot" in the dictionary and it's "snot" making any sense. Snot at least is both of those. Is it just the best the group can muster. My answer to that snerk! * *snot- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - I usually say pffffftttt Seriously, most here are capable of deciphering the intense code we use here bsed on the content of the thread... |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Eisboch wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 7:06*pm, John wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:56:12 -0500, RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:31:09 -0500, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:21:32 -0500, RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:15:33 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote: On Dec 14, 5:15*pm, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 22:10:09 +0000 (UTC), RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:57:41 -0500, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:51:27 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... That may, or may not be, but American workers are still the most productive workers on this planet. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20572828/ In all this discussion, you've never answered the questions asked by myself or Tom. A lot of side-stepping, but no direct answer. Do your own research to prove him wrong. Twenty years of welfare and nothing but questions. Too lazy to use the internet. Still on welfare. Who holds your hand to cross the street? There was no research needed. They were simple questions. -- John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - snerk Is snerk a remark like snot? It's "snot" in the dictionary and it's "snot" making any sense. Snot at least is both of those. Is it just the best the group can muster. My answer to that snerk! * snot You need to do your own research about 'snerk'. I did. It means nothing. Just as your remark means nothing. As in doesn't exist. No value. I could go on. * * * * * snot Here, I've done it for you. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snerk Now, be nice. -- John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey, I thought he said he did his research;) |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 7:54*pm, D K wrote:
Don White wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in messagenews:hb2bk4hajnmh2b1j20bp36dtequoggrqt5@4ax .com... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:12:10 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:03:17 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm Well, that's kind of the point. *What data do you trust? The Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fine - but what caused the increase? *Something has to change - what was it? Who should benefit from the obvious productivity increase - the company or the workers? Historically, when productivity increases, there may be a lag, but wages also increase. *What's changed? The answer to that, is far more devastating to this country's long term economic health, than the middle-class not getting their share. You raise some important questions and frankly, I don't have an answer for you - I'll admit it. Obviously, its far to simplistic to blame the fat cats and corporate executives. *Perhaps there has been a fundamental shift in how money is distributed, the money supply being managed - there's a whole host of factors that could explain it, but I'm not an economist although I do play one on TV. *:) I watch CNBC a lot - in particular the early show Squawk Box or if I'm out and about, I listen on Sirius. *When you watch two opposing sides take the same sets of data and make them fit their own agendas and viewpoints, you begin to wonder if anybody really and truly knows what's going on. Now for the really oddball opinon. *I've often suspected that "real wages" are being sucked up by government in various ways. *I had an experience Friday that floored me. *I was kind of messing around in the kitchen and I gathered up the bills for the paper pusher to handle. *I just started looking through them - there are more fees, taxes and "adjustments' on my cable, telephone and wireless bills that I could shake a stick at - easily adding 3-4% to the cost of the bill and that's before sales/service taxes which add another - what, 6%? What are all these fees/taxes/access charges doing to real wages? What's the measure of productivity he's quoting? *Per unit, per hour, per what? *I would think that if a company over 8 years increased it's productivity by 20% (which is 2.5%/yr by the way) that's not a whole lot considering inflation, raw material costs, etc. *And if your company has a high labor quotient to the cost of production, that's almost negligible. If you want to consider inflation, real wages have decreased. Well, I think the last time I could buy a decent cigar for .75¢ was about twenty years ago. *:) You should see my water bill. *After all the extras like waste water management and environmental protection fees aew tacked on, the basic charge and actual usage fees (per cubic meter) triples. Unbelievable.. What's "aew", dummy? *Is that some Canadian thing?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Must be something, after the dim wit has been the resident spell checker lately.. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
BAR wrote:
Don White wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:12:10 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:03:17 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm Well, that's kind of the point. What data do you trust? The Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fine - but what caused the increase? Something has to change - what was it? Who should benefit from the obvious productivity increase - the company or the workers? Historically, when productivity increases, there may be a lag, but wages also increase. What's changed? The answer to that, is far more devastating to this country's long term economic health, than the middle-class not getting their share. You raise some important questions and frankly, I don't have an answer for you - I'll admit it. Obviously, its far to simplistic to blame the fat cats and corporate executives. Perhaps there has been a fundamental shift in how money is distributed, the money supply being managed - there's a whole host of factors that could explain it, but I'm not an economist although I do play one on TV. :) I watch CNBC a lot - in particular the early show Squawk Box or if I'm out and about, I listen on Sirius. When you watch two opposing sides take the same sets of data and make them fit their own agendas and viewpoints, you begin to wonder if anybody really and truly knows what's going on. Now for the really oddball opinon. I've often suspected that "real wages" are being sucked up by government in various ways. I had an experience Friday that floored me. I was kind of messing around in the kitchen and I gathered up the bills for the paper pusher to handle. I just started looking through them - there are more fees, taxes and "adjustments' on my cable, telephone and wireless bills that I could shake a stick at - easily adding 3-4% to the cost of the bill and that's before sales/service taxes which add another - what, 6%? What are all these fees/taxes/access charges doing to real wages? What's the measure of productivity he's quoting? Per unit, per hour, per what? I would think that if a company over 8 years increased it's productivity by 20% (which is 2.5%/yr by the way) that's not a whole lot considering inflation, raw material costs, etc. And if your company has a high labor quotient to the cost of production, that's almost negligible. If you want to consider inflation, real wages have decreased. Well, I think the last time I could buy a decent cigar for .75¢ was about twenty years ago. :) You should see my water bill. After all the extras like waste water management and environmental protection fees aew tacked on, the basic charge and actual usage fees (per cubic meter) triples. Unbelievable.. Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. Licensed plumbers? Well, no work there for Joe the Plumber. You probably should move out of Montgomery County and down to South Carolina, where the living is easy and thousands of tons of chicken **** flow daily into the aquifers. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 8:59*pm, Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. *When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. *Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. *Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. * The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. *The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. *Everyone had the same opportunity. *Some did, some didn't. *In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. *The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. *Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - They wanted you to work slow so there was less to re-do after you were done.. silver spoon boy... |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"Boater" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work. That's fine Harry, but it's not what this discussion was about. Eisboch |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work. That's fine Harry, but it's not what this discussion was about. Eisboch Sure it is. We worked as teams inside boilers, and everyone was conscious of how productive they were compared to the other workers. By the end of the first month, my pace had picked up to the point where I no longer slowing anyone down. Tough work, working outside on a loading platform in the summer, inside an old boiler, but the pay was terrific for a summer job. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "Boater" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work. That's fine Harry, but it's not what this discussion was about. Eisboch Sure it is. We worked as teams inside boilers, and everyone was conscious of how productive they were compared to the other workers. By the end of the first month, my pace had picked up to the point where I no longer slowing anyone down. Tough work, working outside on a loading platform in the summer, inside an old boiler, but the pay was terrific for a summer job. Were you getting paid $12.50 an hour in 1970 for this job too? |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
BAR wrote:
Sure it is. We worked as teams inside boilers, and everyone was conscious of how productive they were compared to the other workers. By the end of the first month, my pace had picked up to the point where I no longer slowing anyone down. Tough work, working outside on a loading platform in the summer, inside an old boiler, but the pay was terrific for a summer job. Were you getting paid $12.50 an hour in 1970 for this job too? I think it was 1964, actually, and I don't remember the rate. But it was a hell of a lot more than my buddies were making at their summer jobs. I had three college summers of relatively high-paying jobs because of unions. It sure as hell was better than joining the Marines. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"D K" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:12:10 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:03:17 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm Well, that's kind of the point. What data do you trust? The Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fine - but what caused the increase? Something has to change - what was it? Who should benefit from the obvious productivity increase - the company or the workers? Historically, when productivity increases, there may be a lag, but wages also increase. What's changed? The answer to that, is far more devastating to this country's long term economic health, than the middle-class not getting their share. You raise some important questions and frankly, I don't have an answer for you - I'll admit it. Obviously, its far to simplistic to blame the fat cats and corporate executives. Perhaps there has been a fundamental shift in how money is distributed, the money supply being managed - there's a whole host of factors that could explain it, but I'm not an economist although I do play one on TV. :) I watch CNBC a lot - in particular the early show Squawk Box or if I'm out and about, I listen on Sirius. When you watch two opposing sides take the same sets of data and make them fit their own agendas and viewpoints, you begin to wonder if anybody really and truly knows what's going on. Now for the really oddball opinon. I've often suspected that "real wages" are being sucked up by government in various ways. I had an experience Friday that floored me. I was kind of messing around in the kitchen and I gathered up the bills for the paper pusher to handle. I just started looking through them - there are more fees, taxes and "adjustments' on my cable, telephone and wireless bills that I could shake a stick at - easily adding 3-4% to the cost of the bill and that's before sales/service taxes which add another - what, 6%? What are all these fees/taxes/access charges doing to real wages? What's the measure of productivity he's quoting? Per unit, per hour, per what? I would think that if a company over 8 years increased it's productivity by 20% (which is 2.5%/yr by the way) that's not a whole lot considering inflation, raw material costs, etc. And if your company has a high labor quotient to the cost of production, that's almost negligible. If you want to consider inflation, real wages have decreased. Well, I think the last time I could buy a decent cigar for .75¢ was about twenty years ago. :) You should see my water bill. After all the extras like waste water management and environmental protection fees aew tacked on, the basic charge and actual usage fees (per cubic meter) triples. Unbelievable.. What's "aew", dummy? Is that some Canadian thing? "Aew" this Canadian thing, dummyboy |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
wrote in message ... Must be something, *after the dim wit has been the resident spell checker* lately.. ************************************************** **************** Would you like to re-phrase that into common english? |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"BAR" wrote in message ... Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. That's the same as here...buy why are you worried about costs? |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 10:53*pm, "Don White" wrote:
wrote in message ... Must be something, *after the dim wit has been the resident spell checker* lately.. ************************************************** **************** Would you like to re-phrase that into common english? Nope, most with even limited education could figure out what I meant, unless of course they were just dim bulbs or trying to be an idiot.... |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"Don White" wrote in message ... "BAR" wrote in message ... Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. That's the same as here...*buy* why are you worried about costs? Should be *but*. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:04:38 -0500, Boater wrote:
You probably should move out of Montgomery County and down to South Carolina, where the living is easy and thousands of tons of chicken **** flow daily into the aquifers. I had heard of all those pig farms down in North Carolina. Anyway, I was driving through, and started to smell this ungodly smell. This went on for about 1/2 hour, and I'm thinking how do people live with this? What kind of place is this? etc. etc. I finally passed the pig truck. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Boater wrote:
BAR wrote: Sure it is. We worked as teams inside boilers, and everyone was conscious of how productive they were compared to the other workers. By the end of the first month, my pace had picked up to the point where I no longer slowing anyone down. Tough work, working outside on a loading platform in the summer, inside an old boiler, but the pay was terrific for a summer job. Were you getting paid $12.50 an hour in 1970 for this job too? I think it was 1964, actually, and I don't remember the rate. But it was a hell of a lot more than my buddies were making at their summer jobs. I had three college summers of relatively high-paying jobs because of unions. It sure as hell was better than joining the Marines. I seriously doubt you were earning $12.50 in 1964 cleaning boilers. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"Boater" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work. Not what was being discussed. Speed and working hard are not the same. I worked piece work building pallets during highschool Late 1950's. Made great money, but all depended on how hard I worked. I had to build the pallet to spec so, if I slacked off I still made the same pallet, but I lost $0.31-$0.60 for each pallet I failed to complete. You had to clean the boiler to spec. but you got paid by the hour, so were not really encouraged to learn how to work smart and do the job faster. Probably one of the higher paying jobs I ever had considering inflation. Made $5-6 an hour. Minimum wage was about $0.75. I went to work for Western Electric, union job, in 1961 in the warehouse. Made $72 a week when I quit 9 months later. They had gone on strike for 9 weeks for a $0.10 an hour raise shortly before I went to work. Same thing the company offered in the first place. Seems as if the union leaders were stupid. But they got paid during the strike. the stupid ones were the workers who struck and did not get paid. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"CalifBill" wrote in message m... Seems as if the union leaders were stupid. But they got paid during the strike. the stupid ones were the workers who struck and did not get paid. When unions go on strike it affects more than their own membership and the company. If the strike is in the auto industry, car shipments are delayed, the production of customer ordered vehicles are delayed or the sale is cancelled. Non-union parts suppliers have to cut back on production. In other industries a trade union strike often results in non-union employees being laid off for the duration of the strike. These people receive no union strike "benefits", didn't have a vote in the strike decision, yet suffer the consequences by losing their job. I remember this happening often at the old Bethlehem Ship Yard in Quincy, MA. Back in the 50's and 60's it was a major employer on the south shore of MA. When a trade union went on strike, everybody suffered. I also remember violent confrontations occurring between union and non-union people who were trying to report to work but had to cross picket lines to get in. My family knew several people, union and non-union, who worked at the "Shipyard" and I recall horror stories of some of them being threatened and physically blocked from entering the yard. As a youngster at the time, maybe those stories are what turned me off about unions. Eisboch |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 20:49:23 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message .. . On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. Don't agree with that. I always want to excel at what I do, and I think most others do too. It was no different with most of my union mates when I was UAW. You'll always find slackers, no matter what occupation, but most people like competition. Whether it was pushing pieces or management/customer feedback in IT, I've always measured myself against others. Besides being human nature, it shows up in your pay, and how others treat you. What many have trouble doing is getting outside their own skin. They think they are the cat's meow. Get a few of them together kissing each others ass and they create their own reality. GM management might be an example of that. I've worked with guys who were sharper than me, and guys who were duller. Everybody has value. The trick is to extract it. The big difference with factory piecework is the limitations of the job process itself. A process dependent on a machine's speed and the operators' coordination and strength is a special kettle of fish. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. Sometimes, and some skated for their entire tour. Especially the cooks (-: In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Not at all. And unless you always worked 60-80 hour weeks and avoided vacations there are others who operate that way - some very successfully - who would consider you a slacker. "Performance" is often a moving target. Once "taking care of business" is defined, some can simply do it in less time than others. There are more paths to success than there are to failure. Regarding piecework though, it's very easy to understand if you ever watch 3 people do the exact same job on different shifts. Unless they are clones there will be very noticeable differences. Companies time these type of jobs to determine reasonable productivity expectations. Work, safety and quality are all considered. How it worked at IH when I was there is the timer would set the 100% base rate. He would watch you work for a shift and expected a good day's work or he'd squawk. It's easy to see if somebody is slow and inefficient, or dogging a job. If you took a new job you had 3-5 days to perform at the 100% rate. Otherwise you couldn't get the job. If you were capable of it, and the job process itself allowed it, you could hit 120% every day and make some extra cash. Incentive. Some couldn't do that. They weren't physically capable. Didn't make them bad or unproductive. I never personally saw a job that could exceed 120%, so the timers knew what they were doing. Here's something I never forgot. I left the U.S Steel mills to go to IH because a mate got laid off and went there. He told me the pay was double, so I applied for a job there When I get to the interview with the personnel guy at IH it starts to drag it out after the normal pro forma chatting. He starts hemming and hawing with me about job availability, and thinking he's playing with me, I got ****ed off enough that I just said "You've got my phone number," got up and started walking out. He jumped up and stopped me, and took me on the floor to meet Al Fask, the gen foreman of Dept 27, heat treating. I was 5'9" and 160 lbs then. 21 years old. We walk in to Al's office, and he raises his head from some paperwork, looking at the personnel guy and then me. I still remember his face, sort of a "Now what?" expression. The personnel guy says "I got somebody for the shoe press." Fask looks at me again, blows up, and yells "WHAT THE ****!" The personnel guy says, "Hey, he says he's strong." Fask is now reduced to slowly shaking his head back and forth. He says to me, "You got 5 days to qualify." Never talked with the guy again to my memory, but I remember that. Next day I show up for second shift on the press. The guy I'm replacing is a lean black guy named Roy. About 6'3" Sort of a younger Morgan Freeman as I recall. Patient and matter of fact. All business. He's already working, and the yellow hot track shoes are floating through the air on his tongs. It was dark in that old plant, and it was a pretty sight. Grab from the furnace, pivot 180, thrust in the press knocking the last one out, hit the switches, pivot back for the next one. Piece of cake. Lots of BLAM BLAM of the steel and the press, but as Roy pirouettes from furnace to press it's all smooth and those shoes float through the air, so they must be light. After all, they're yellow too. He finishes pulling the heat, and the furnace has to recover. He gives me the lowdown on how to do the job. Furnace recovers, and it's my turn. I hit the wide foot pedal to open one of the 3 heavy furnace doors. It doesn't budge. "Put some weight on it!" Roy yells. I muscled the door open then, and the heat goes on, flame knocking me back. My eyebrows, eyelashes, and a chunk of head hair disappear. Roy grabs me and says, "If you hear those burners click on, duck." Allright. I pop the door open again and clamp the tongs on a shoe - think they were TD-18's - and pull. Nothing happens. The shoe is stuck to the next shoe. They lean against each other on the rails. My hands and arms start getting real hot. The tongs are about a yard long. "Give it a jerk!" yells Roy. I squeeze the tongs hard and jerk. Two shoes start sliding off the furnace rails and onto the table, still stuck together. Roy grabs the tongs and says "Watch. Jerk up a little to unstick, that's all. Then it'll slide off." He does the shoes for that door. They float to the press. Gives me the tongs, and I open the next door, do the jerk and slide that shoe onto the table. Now I got it. Imitating him, I start the pivot. Hey, it's only ballet. However, as the shoe leaves the table it doesn't float. It almost hits the floor and I stumble to recover, almost falling. This thing is HEAVY. That yellow color don't mean anything. Anyway, think I did 3 shoes before my arms gave out. Only need about 700 a shift. 18 tons for 120%. Uh-oh. Think I didn't even manage a push of 12 shoes that first night. Roy did about 70% of the work. He was helpful but non-committal the first 2 days. By the end of the 3rd day, he warmed up to me. Said I was going to make it, and he could get off that job and on to a different one that was easier on the bones. For a few weeks I spent an hour in a tub full of hot water after each shift, and slept at least 10-12 hours. Ate like a horse. I was doing 100% after the five days, and 120% by the end of the second week It wasn't until then that my crew would give me the time of day. My loader, quencher and unloader/grinder were hungry. They had looked upon my arrival with doubt. But I kept them happy, and made the shoes float. My weight went to 185 inside a month. My waist size stayed at 28" Damn, being 21 was GOOD. And so was that job. Guys on break would come over and watch me work. Never forget finishing a pull and an older guy who had been watching says to me, laughing, "Son, just watching you work makes me tired. OoooWee!" Frankly, I'm plain proud of that work, more than any job I ever did. Worked hard to be able to do it, and it was a nightly grind to keep doing it. I've gotten plenty of kudos for various IT accomplishments, and a hell of a lot more salary, but it all pales in comparison. That's might sound strange, but there it is. Probably something to do with the "manly" bull****. Left it after less than a year when they killed the shift, and I didn't want to go first shift. Besides, it was boring as hell when my body made the shoes float without pain. Wore out 3 right shoes, the pivot shoe. The only guy who did it more than 2 years had ****ed up knees. It was soon automated, and anybody could do it. My press crew was young too, but I had other jobs there where I had an older or weaker helper, and I would pace myself to his capabilities. That's simple teamwork, and it happens everywhere I've worked. I never felt any less of myself for making those adjustments. --Vic |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:28:47 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote: Get a few of them together kissing each others ass and they create their own reality. GM management might be an example of that. OH boy - I couldn't have said it better if I tried. It's also true in politics. And in personal relationships. It's part of how humans work. :) |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:09:57 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "Vic Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800 (PST), wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... Piece work is sort of a special deal. When I pushed pieces I was aware that I was in my 20's and strong as a horse. The guy on the next shift might be 50 and not so healthy or strong. If I was being timed I had to go slower. Still worked hard, but shortened my break times. Didn't want to screw up the older guys. They did plenty of work. --Vic Many of us have never had the type of work experience where you had to be conscious of how productive you are compared to your fellow worker. The closest I ever came to that I guess is 9 years in the military, but nobody pressured you to hold back in doing a good job, or even a better job than others. The benefit of doing a good job was learning your job code, advancing in rank and earning more money. Everyone had the same opportunity. Some did, some didn't. In the military if someone was noticed to be purposely holding back, he/she would be in a world of hurt. In my civilian experiences of almost 30 years now, the companies I've worked for were too small to have a cast of thousands all doing the same kind of work. The motivation to do a good job was the fact that your performance contributed to the overall efforts and if you slacked off, it would be very noticeable. Often, I was the only one doing a particular function, so screwing up, performing well or being lazy had an immediate impact on the company and was usually noticed by the management. So, you people with other experiences have to realize that the concept of "backing off" in performance is totally foreign to some of us. Eisboch Doing a "good job," and doing a job quickly are not always compatible, as I am sure you know. When I worked cleaning and rebuilding the innards of boilers, I was told to work at a slow, careful pace to make sure I took enough time to do the job properly. All of the guys I worked with, guys with many years of experience, worked faster than I did, but they all worked a different speeds. Slacking off was not a problem. Bad work that caused the boilers to fail when they were tested was. Rushed work usually resulted in bad work. That's fine Harry, but it's not what this discussion was about. Eisboch Amen. Except that Harry wants the thread to be about Harry. -- John |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 22:18:48 -0600, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 21:04:38 -0500, Boater wrote: You probably should move out of Montgomery County and down to South Carolina, where the living is easy and thousands of tons of chicken **** flow daily into the aquifers. I had heard of all those pig farms down in North Carolina. Anyway, I was driving through, and started to smell this ungodly smell. This went on for about 1/2 hour, and I'm thinking how do people live with this? What kind of place is this? etc. etc. I finally passed the pig truck. Harry has no business making comments about North Carolina. This problem is in his own back yard. http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2...4-07-30-10.asp Of course, he's had a tree planted in his name, so that helps. -- John |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:02:22 -0800 (PST),
wrote: On Dec 14, 7:06*pm, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:56:12 -0500, RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:31:09 -0500, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:21:32 -0500, RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:15:33 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote: On Dec 14, 5:15*pm, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 22:10:09 +0000 (UTC), RLM wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:57:41 -0500, John wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:51:27 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote: There is no way in the world the American worker of present day works harder than the guy in my dad's day. I have been victim to being told to slow down by a union. In all fairness (which we won't expect from the other side) I was also told to slow down while on piece work at Standadyne, a non union shop... That may, or may not be, but American workers are still the most productive workers on this planet. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20572828/ In all this discussion, you've never answered the questions asked by myself or Tom. A lot of side-stepping, but no direct answer. Do your own research to prove him wrong. Twenty years of welfare and nothing but questions. Too lazy to use the internet. Still on welfare. Who holds your hand to cross the street? There was no research needed. They were simple questions. -- John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - snerk Is snerk a remark like snot? It's "snot" in the dictionary and it's "snot" making any sense. Snot at least is both of those. Is it just the best the group can muster. My answer to that snerk! * snot You need to do your own research about 'snerk'. I did. It means nothing. Just as your remark means nothing. As in doesn't exist. No value. I could go on. * * * * * snot Here, I've done it for you. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snerk Now, be nice. -- John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey, I thought he said he did his research;) He was whining that he couldn't find anything. I'll admit it took several hours of diligent effort to find what I did. I even got someone to hold me hand as I walked across the street to the library. ~snerk~ -- John |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 18:02:22 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:
Snip snerk Is snerk a remark like snot? It's "snot" in the dictionary and it's "snot" making any sense. Snot at least is both of those. Is it just the best the group can muster. My answer to that snerk! * snot You need to do your own research about 'snerk'. I did. It means nothing. Just as your remark means nothing. As in doesn't exist. No value. I could go on. * * * * * snot Here, I've done it for you. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=snerk Now, be nice. -- John- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey, I thought he said he did his research;) If you use this expression in casual conversation, I'm sure with the limited friends you enjoy you are perceived as the brain trust of the group. Carry on! |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 9:04*pm, Boater wrote:
BAR wrote: Don White wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in messagenews:hb2bk4hajnmh2b1j20bp36dtequoggrqt5@4ax .com... On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:12:10 -0600, wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:03:17 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: http://www.bls.gov/lpc/prodybar.htm Well, that's kind of the point. *What data do you trust? The Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fine - but what caused the increase? *Something has to change - what was it? Who should benefit from the obvious productivity increase - the company or the workers? Historically, when productivity increases, there may be a lag, but wages also increase. *What's changed? The answer to that, is far more devastating to this country's long term economic health, than the middle-class not getting their share. You raise some important questions and frankly, I don't have an answer for you - I'll admit it. Obviously, its far to simplistic to blame the fat cats and corporate executives. *Perhaps there has been a fundamental shift in how money is distributed, the money supply being managed - there's a whole host of factors that could explain it, but I'm not an economist although I do play one on TV. *:) I watch CNBC a lot - in particular the early show Squawk Box or if I'm out and about, I listen on Sirius. *When you watch two opposing sides take the same sets of data and make them fit their own agendas and viewpoints, you begin to wonder if anybody really and truly knows what's going on. Now for the really oddball opinon. *I've often suspected that "real wages" are being sucked up by government in various ways. *I had an experience Friday that floored me. *I was kind of messing around in the kitchen and I gathered up the bills for the paper pusher to handle. *I just started looking through them - there are more fees, taxes and "adjustments' on my cable, telephone and wireless bills that I could shake a stick at - easily adding 3-4% to the cost of the bill and that's before sales/service taxes which add another - what, 6%? What are all these fees/taxes/access charges doing to real wages? What's the measure of productivity he's quoting? *Per unit, per hour, per what? *I would think that if a company over 8 years increased it's productivity by 20% (which is 2.5%/yr by the way) that's not a whole lot considering inflation, raw material costs, etc. *And if your company has a high labor quotient to the cost of production, that's almost negligible. If you want to consider inflation, real wages have decreased. Well, I think the last time I could buy a decent cigar for .75¢ was about twenty years ago. *:) You should see my water bill. *After all the extras like waste water management and environmental protection fees aew tacked on, the basic charge and actual usage fees (per cubic meter) triples. Unbelievable.. Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and *you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? *The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. Licensed plumbers? Well, no work there for Joe the Plumber. You probably should move out of Montgomery County and down to South Carolina, where the living is easy and thousands of tons of chicken **** flow daily into the aquifers.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Typical. Harry doesn't live there, so it's awful. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Dec 14, 5:13*pm, Boater wrote:
wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:57:41 -0500, John wrote: In all this discussion, you've never answered the questions asked by myself or Tom. A lot of side-stepping, but no direct answer. Well Colonel, I'm not in the service. *Why in the hell, would I take orders from you? *Answer your own strawman. *snerk These "demands" are mostly an attribute of the righties, several of whom seem to get indignant when you don't play by their rules. Herring does this, as does BAR, and a few others on that shrinking side of the fence, as does Loogy, who isn't a rightie, but is just confused. I get indignant about your many, many lies. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:57:43 -0500, RLM wrote:
as the brain trust of the group. Um....there's a rec.boats brain trust? Damn... |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:57:43 -0500, RLM wrote: as the brain trust of the group. Um....there's a rec.boats brain trust? Damn... Well, they have to be stored somewhere. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Don White wrote:
"Don White" wrote in message ... "BAR" wrote in message ... Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. That's the same as here...*buy* why are you worried about costs? Should be *but*. So why didn't you type that in the first place, dummy? You are the group's resident spell checker. |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 08:57:43 -0500, RLM wrote: as the brain trust of the group. Um....there's a rec.boats brain trust? Damn... Are there brains engaged while typing in wreck.boats? |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
"D K" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Don White" wrote in message ... "BAR" wrote in message ... Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. That's the same as here...*buy* why are you worried about costs? Should be *but*. So why didn't you type that in the first place, dummy? You are the group's resident spell checker. I'm imitating your Lt Colonel.................. "Do as I say, not as I do" |
Bridge loan to nowhere..
Don White wrote:
"D K" wrote in message ... Don White wrote: "Don White" wrote in message ... "BAR" wrote in message ... Here in my county you are charged for each gallon of water coming in and you are charged for that same gallon of water twice going out as waste. So if you pay .10 cents for the gallon coming in you get charged for .20 cents for the gallon going out in the sewage line. The next logical question is why am I charged for sewage for watering my garden and lawn? The answer is you can pay about $1000 to get a meter placed on your sewage to meter your outgoing flow. The meter costs about $200 and you have to use the water company's licensed plumbers to install the meter and that costs about $800. So, the grass turns brown in the summer and the flowers die. That's the same as here...*buy* why are you worried about costs? Should be *but*. So why didn't you type that in the first place, dummy? You are the group's resident spell checker. I'm imitating your Lt Colonel.................. "Do as I say, not as I do" What the hell are you talking about? Did you take ALL of your meds today, dummy? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com