Keith Nuttle wrote:
On todays production lines the volume can be increased without a
corresponding increase in the effort of the individual.

Todays production lines? What percentage of GDP do you think
that represents?

On Aug 12, 9:03*pm, wf3h wrote:
On Aug 12, 8:19*pm, Tim wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:53*pm, wf3h wrote:

that's correct. i work honestly for my living. i don't sell CDO's,
derivatives, REIT, or other financial instruments that have made the
rich so rich, and, when they trashed their own bank accounts, they
came and raided mine

many wealthy do too!,

tell you what. you go find the record of how many middle class people
work their way into the top 2% of americans and get back to us on
that...

find out how many children of blue collar workers go to the ivy
league...the gateway to networking...actually i know the answer to
that. it's less than 3%

so, actually, many wealthy don't work. they take my money so they
don't have to work for theirs. they kill my pension plan, destroy my
401K, and get me to pay for their bailouts

THEN they get people like you to tell me how fortunate i am they let
me do this.

Well actually, "they" don't get me to do much of anything for "them"
and I'm not "they're spokesman, but your statement is correct when you
say "so, actually, many wealthy don't work. " and you're correct. I
wouldn't' work if I were rich either.

Now you keep saying things like "pay for bailouts"

hmmm, I think you are bagging those of wealth and labeling them all
as financial institutions employees, aren't you?

It seems that way or at least it does to me.

On Aug 13, 4:34*am, Tim wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:03*pm, wf3h wrote:





On Aug 12, 8:19*pm, Tim wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:53*pm, wf3h wrote:

that's correct. i work honestly for my living. i don't sell CDO's,
derivatives, REIT, or other financial instruments that have made the
rich so rich, and, when they trashed their own bank accounts, they
came and raided mine

many wealthy do too!,

tell you what. you go find the record of how many middle class people
work their way into the top 2% of americans and get back to us on
that...

find out how many children of blue collar workers go to the ivy
league...the gateway to networking...actually i know the answer to
that. it's less than 3%

so, actually, many wealthy don't work. they take my money so they
don't have to work for theirs. they kill my pension plan, destroy my
401K, and get me to pay for their bailouts

THEN they get people like you to tell me how fortunate i am they let
me do this.

Well actually, "they" don't get me to do much of anything for "them"
and I'm not "they're spokesman, but your statement is correct when you
say "so, actually, many wealthy don't work. " and you're correct. I
wouldn't' work if I were rich either.

Now you keep saying things like "pay for bailouts"

hmmm, I think you are bagging those of wealth and labeling them all
as financial institutions employees, aren't you?

It seems that way or at least it does to me.-

uh...who owns those financial institutions? those folks are called
'wealthy'

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:19:35 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 13, 4:34*am, Tim wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:03*pm, wf3h wrote:





On Aug 12, 8:19*pm, Tim wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:53*pm, wf3h wrote:

that's correct. i work honestly for my living. i don't sell CDO's,
derivatives, REIT, or other financial instruments that have made the
rich so rich, and, when they trashed their own bank accounts, they
came and raided mine

many wealthy do too!,

tell you what. you go find the record of how many middle class people
work their way into the top 2% of americans and get back to us on
that...

find out how many children of blue collar workers go to the ivy
league...the gateway to networking...actually i know the answer to
that. it's less than 3%

so, actually, many wealthy don't work. they take my money so they
don't have to work for theirs. they kill my pension plan, destroy my
401K, and get me to pay for their bailouts

THEN they get people like you to tell me how fortunate i am they let
me do this.

Well actually, "they" don't get me to do much of anything for "them"
and I'm not "they're spokesman, but your statement is correct when you
say "so, actually, many wealthy don't work. " and you're correct. I
wouldn't' work if I were rich either.

Now you keep saying things like "pay for bailouts"

hmmm, I think you are bagging those of wealth and labeling them all
as financial institutions employees, aren't you?

It seems that way or at least it does to me.-

uh...who owns those financial institutions? those folks are called
'wealthy'

Well, I'm part owner of a couple, and I don't consider myself
'wealthy' (in the material sense, that is).
--
John H

All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

On Aug 13, 5:19*am, wf3h wrote:
On Aug 13, 4:34*am, Tim wrote:



On Aug 12, 9:03*pm, wf3h wrote:

On Aug 12, 8:19*pm, Tim wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:53*pm, wf3h wrote:

that's correct. i work honestly for my living. i don't sell CDO's,
derivatives, REIT, or other financial instruments that have made the
rich so rich, and, when they trashed their own bank accounts, they
came and raided mine

many wealthy do too!,

tell you what. you go find the record of how many middle class people
work their way into the top 2% of americans and get back to us on
that...

find out how many children of blue collar workers go to the ivy
league...the gateway to networking...actually i know the answer to
that. it's less than 3%

so, actually, many wealthy don't work. they take my money so they
don't have to work for theirs. they kill my pension plan, destroy my
401K, and get me to pay for their bailouts

THEN they get people like you to tell me how fortunate i am they let
me do this.

Well actually, "they" don't get me to do much of anything for "them"
and I'm not "they're spokesman, but your statement is correct when you
say "so, actually, many wealthy don't work. " and you're correct. I
wouldn't' work if I were rich either.

Now you keep saying things like "pay for bailouts"

hmmm, I think you are bagging those of wealth and labeling them all
as financial institutions employees, aren't you?

It seems that way or at least it does to me.-

uh...who owns those financial institutions? those folks are called
'wealthy'

I thought the owners were share holders who own publicly traded
stock.?

On Aug 13, 6:13*am, JLH wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:19:35 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:



On Aug 13, 4:34*am, Tim wrote:
On Aug 12, 9:03*pm, wf3h wrote:

On Aug 12, 8:19*pm, Tim wrote:

On Aug 12, 6:53*pm, wf3h wrote:

that's correct. i work honestly for my living. i don't sell CDO's,
derivatives, REIT, or other financial instruments that have made the
rich so rich, and, when they trashed their own bank accounts, they
came and raided mine

many wealthy do too!,

tell you what. you go find the record of how many middle class people
work their way into the top 2% of americans and get back to us on
that...

find out how many children of blue collar workers go to the ivy
league...the gateway to networking...actually i know the answer to
that. it's less than 3%

so, actually, many wealthy don't work. they take my money so they
don't have to work for theirs. they kill my pension plan, destroy my
401K, and get me to pay for their bailouts

THEN they get people like you to tell me how fortunate i am they let
me do this.

Well actually, "they" don't get me to do much of anything for "them"
and I'm not "they're spokesman, but your statement is correct when you
say "so, actually, many wealthy don't work. " and you're correct. I
wouldn't' work if I were rich either.

Now you keep saying things like "pay for bailouts"

hmmm, I think you are bagging those of wealth and labeling them all
as financial institutions employees, aren't you?

It seems that way or at least it does to me.-

uh...who owns those financial institutions? those folks are called
'wealthy'

Well, I'm part owner of a couple, and I don't consider myself
'wealthy' (in the material sense, that is).
--
John H

All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

John I suppose you could be right. We need to define wealthy, and rich.

On Aug 13, 7:13*am, JLH wrote:


Well, I'm part owner of a couple, and I don't consider myself
'wealthy' (in the material sense, that is).
--


yeah so am i. i own about 10 shares of goldman sachs in my 401k
portfolio. big shwoop.

On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:22:21 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 13, 7:13*am, JLH wrote:


Well, I'm part owner of a couple, and I don't consider myself
'wealthy' (in the material sense, that is).
--


yeah so am i. i own about 10 shares of goldman sachs in my 401k
portfolio. big shwoop.

Then quit ****ing and moaning about the owners being wealthy (in the
material sense, of course).

Oh, and quit calling names and hurling personal insults. They don't
help your arguments. Krause has been doing it for years. Hasn't helped
him at all.
--
John H

All decisions, even those made by liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

D wrote:
jps wrote:
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 22:03:52 -0700, "CalifBill"
wrote:

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:10:59 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

jps wrote:
Feel like you're working a lot harder these days, putting in longer
hours for the same pay - or even less? The latest round of government
data on worker productivity indicates that you probably are.

The Labor Department said Tuesday that the American work force
produced, at an annual rate, 6.4 percent more of the goods they made
and services they provided in the second quarter of this year
compared
to a year ago. At the same time, "unit labor costs" - the amount
employers paid for all that extra work - fell by 5.8 percent. The
jump
in productivity was higher than expected; the cut in labor costs more
than double expectations.

That is, despite the deep job cuts of the past year, workers who
remain on the payroll are filling in and making up the work that had
been done by their departed colleagues. In some cases, that extra
work
came with a smaller paycheck.


Full story here...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32374533...n_the_economy/
On todays production lines the volume can be increased without a
corresponding increase in the effort of the individual. So a 6.4%
increase in production does not mean that the employee is being
overworked as implied.
Don't know if you're heard, we don't have production lines here
anymore. We're in the service business and military arms. The
productivity gains come from less workers doing more, working longer
hours for pay that doesn't keep up with the rising cost of living.
No production, so we could not raise productivity. You kept all your
deadwood.

You don't have to produce on a line to be productive.

We write software, it doesn't benefit from a faster production line.
We are doing more with less people. When times are lean, that's the
way it works.

Did you ever work for an entreprenurial company or only behemoths?

How well are those German screwdrivers helping you write software?

That's what I was thinking, how do you write software with a
screwdriver! He's lying like Harry of course, you'll see no evidence of
his work.

On Aug 13, 7:28*am, JLH wrote:
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:22:21 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 13, 7:13*am, JLH wrote:

Well, I'm part owner of a couple, and I don't consider myself
'wealthy' (in the material sense, that is).
--

yeah so am i. i own about 10 shares of goldman sachs in my 401k
portfolio. big shwoop.

Then quit ****ing and moaning about the owners being wealthy (in the
material sense, of course).

ROFLMAO!! why? do you think that having had the big boys raid my 401k
to maintain their lifestyles makes me rich? you right wingers have
quite an imagination.

Oh, and quit calling names and hurling personal insults. They don't
help your arguments. Krause has been doing it for years. Hasn't helped
him at all.
--
?? now let's see...the right invents lies such as obama putting people
in concentration camps, forming death panels, etc.

THEN when they get called on it, they moan they're being treated
unfairly...