Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/24/15 9:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:38 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been
well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the
more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of
K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their
first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade
unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with
17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a
union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does
collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the
unfunding and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and
benefits, the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract
employees with no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et
cetera.


Global competition makes doing business far more complex. It's not the
'50's or 60's.




It's greed.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On Saturday, May 23, 2015 at 8:06:13 PM UTC-4, True North wrote:

In the Army it was a lot safer to be middle management. (officer), you got to stay clean, comfy and safe when the rank and file are out doing the dangerous fighting.

Like you do (sitting on your fat ass) while your WIFE shovels the driveway?

**** OFF ASSHOLE.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On Sunday, May 24, 2015 at 7:08:41 PM UTC-7, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 9:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:38 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been
well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the
more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of
K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their
first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade
unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with
17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a
union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does
collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the
unfunding and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and
benefits, the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract
employees with no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et
cetera.


Global competition makes doing business far more complex. It's not the
'50's or 60's.




It's greed.

And you act like stupidity is a virtue.

Actually you're in remorse because the golden days of union thuggery are coming to an end.

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 9:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:38 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been
well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped
when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the
more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would
have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of
K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their
first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real
student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler,
while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade
unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with
17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a
union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private
sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does
collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same
purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back
then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the
unfunding and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and
benefits, the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract
employees with no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et
cetera.


Global competition makes doing business far more complex. It's not the
'50's or 60's.




It's greed.


Correct. The union leaders are a greedy bunch of assholes and criminals.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/24/2015 10:08 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 9:37 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:38 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been
well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped
when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the
more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of
K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their
first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade
unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with
17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a
union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does
collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the
unfunding and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and
benefits, the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract
employees with no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et
cetera.


Global competition makes doing business far more complex. It's not the
'50's or 60's.




It's greed.


Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with 17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the unfunding
and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and benefits,
the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract employees with
no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et cetera.

Biggest underfunded of pensions are employers with unions! University of
California. Unionized. A couple billion underfunded. Just an example of
lots of those employers that are unionized. Sure the union can strike for
$500 an hour. And the company will promptly ,move the manufacturing out of
the country. Global economy. We have to also compete on costs.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for
an upheaval.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On Sun, 24 May 2015 19:54:04 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with 17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be union.


In my county, teachers cannot strike. The most they can do is 'work to the rule' - no
after-school help, no homework grading, etc.
--

Guns don't cause problems.
Gun owner behavior causes problems.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On Sun, 24 May 2015 20:38:37 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with 17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the
unfunding and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and
benefits, the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract
employees with no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et
cetera.

I suppose by threatening to strike for more money, larger pensions, higher health
costs, etc, the unions would prevent manufacturing jobs from moving overseas?

Is that the way it works?
--

Guns don't cause problems.
Gun owner behavior causes problems.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/25/2015 8:52 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 24 May 2015 20:38:37 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 5/24/15 8:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 8:25 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 7:54 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with 17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be
union.




It's not really "want to be."


Based on my work experience it is. Unions don't serve the same purpose
they did way back when.



Actually, there's more need for them now then there was "way back then,"
what with the wholesaler exportation of manufacturing jobs, the
unfunding and underfunding of pensions, the elimination of pensions and
benefits, the replacement of full time payroll workers with contract
employees with no benefits, the vulture capitalists, the banksters, et
cetera.

I suppose by threatening to strike for more money, larger pensions, higher health
costs, etc, the unions would prevent manufacturing jobs from moving overseas?

Is that the way it works?



Harry thinks so.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/25/2015 8:50 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 24 May 2015 19:54:04 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 5/24/2015 4:24 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 3:13 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 12:37 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 6:44 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when
the 'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially
when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have
found you
hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when
management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y
or a jar of Vaseline.

So unions are racists from your viewpoint.


What? Your brain has deflated, Bilious.

Autocorrected fascists to racists.



Fascist? What's fascist about "taking care" of scabs and their first
cousins?

Do it my way, or we kill or damage you. Seems a lot illegal.






So, if something is illegal, it is fascist? You're a real student of
history...in 1933, trade Unions were outlawed by Adolf Hitler, while
collective bargaining and the right to strike was abolished. Hitler
created a "right to work" country.

Hardly relevant. Hitler did a lot more than simply outlaw trade unions.

Interesting statistics about unions from Wiki:

"In 2013 there were 14.5 million members in the U.S., compared with 17.7
million in 1983. In 2013, the percentage of workers belonging to a union
was 11.3%, compared to 20.1% in 1983. The rate for the private sector
was 6.7%, and for the public sector 35.3%."

The last sentence is the most revealing.

Guess what? Unions remain perfectly legal in the USA as does collective
bargaining and the right to strike (with a few exceptions related to
public safety). It's just that fewer and fewer workers want to be union.


In my county, teachers cannot strike. The most they can do is 'work to the rule' - no
after-school help, no homework grading, etc.


Would you believe that a social worker employed by a building materials
stacking union makes $125,000? No wonder Harry thinks unions are swell.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

Why would boaters care about...
 

Username wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when the
'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have found
you hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y or a
jar of Vaseline.


Interesting choice of words...
"I did work for" implies that he lied about others. "I worked for"
would have been the normal response.
What's with the cursing?
--
Rob

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/25/2015 10:46 AM, areyou? wrote:
Username wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/23/15 2:09 PM, John H. wrote:

The NEA was courting me with all they had. I must have been well
qualified. Of
course, I told them to shove it. Oh, the courting stopped when the
'steward' saw I
was talking new teachers out of joining.

Damn shame.



1. Doubtful if the NEA was courting you very hard, especially when the
local leaders realized you were just a racist P.O.S.

2. Too bad you weren't in the bargaining unit of one of the more
aggressive unions I did work for in the 1970s. They would have found
you hanging from a hook in a meat locker.

3. You're a real management puke, the sort of guy that when management
says bend over, you bend over and hand the managers a tube of K-Y or a
jar of Vaseline.


Interesting choice of words...
"I did work for" implies that he lied about others. "I worked for"
would have been the normal response.
What's with the cursing?

Oh! I see you don't know Harry Krause AKA Asshat AKA ESAD AKA FOAD AKA.
It won't take you long to get a handle on him. Welcome to Rec.boats.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality -
aka, "ignorance uber alles"

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized
colleges? And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time
college/university faculty members, anyway?

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/26/15 1:15 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!



Awwww. So, highly educated professors put in 30 hours in the classroom
and at least two hours of preparation and research outside of the
classroom for each hour in, and that's more than you ever earned, and
you're ****ed. Too bad. Oh, and the average annual salary for a full
professor is under $100,000 a year. And most teaching is not done by
TA's, although TA's are more active in the lower level classes.

In your next life, perhaps you can be a political science professor.

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 1:15 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!



Awwww. So, highly educated professors put in 30 hours in the classroom
and at least two hours of preparation and research outside of the
classroom for each hour in, and that's more than you ever earned, and
you're ****ed. Too bad. Oh, and the average annual salary for a full
professor is under $100,000 a year. And most teaching is not done by
TA's, although TA's are more active in the lower level classes.

In your next life, perhaps you can be a political science professor.

Average includes part time profs. And you know how much I was paid? And
if it is full time profs, then California Profs are really overpaid!

Why would boaters care about...
 

On 5/26/15 12:27 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 1:15 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!



Awwww. So, highly educated professors put in 30 hours in the classroom
and at least two hours of preparation and research outside of the
classroom for each hour in, and that's more than you ever earned, and
you're ****ed. Too bad. Oh, and the average annual salary for a full
professor is under $100,000 a year. And most teaching is not done by
TA's, although TA's are more active in the lower level classes.

In your next life, perhaps you can be a political science professor.

Average includes part time profs. And you know how much I was paid? And
if it is full time profs, then California Profs are really overpaid!



Doubtful if the stats include part-timers, aka adjuncts, who are
notoriously and grossly underpaid.

As for your opinion about professors being overpaid, well, that is
nothing more than your opinion.

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 12:27 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 1:15 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!



Awwww. So, highly educated professors put in 30 hours in the classroom
and at least two hours of preparation and research outside of the
classroom for each hour in, and that's more than you ever earned, and
you're ****ed. Too bad. Oh, and the average annual salary for a full
professor is under $100,000 a year. And most teaching is not done by
TA's, although TA's are more active in the lower level classes.

In your next life, perhaps you can be a political science professor.

Average includes part time profs. And you know how much I was paid? And
if it is full time profs, then California Profs are really overpaid!



Doubtful if the stats include part-timers, aka adjuncts, who are
notoriously and grossly underpaid.

As for your opinion about professors being overpaid, well, that is
nothing more than your opinion.

Your opinion they are underpaid.

Why would boaters care about...
 

Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 12:27 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 1:15 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an
upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!



Awwww. So, highly educated professors put in 30 hours in the classroom
and at least two hours of preparation and research outside of the
classroom for each hour in, and that's more than you ever earned, and
you're ****ed. Too bad. Oh, and the average annual salary for a full
professor is under $100,000 a year. And most teaching is not done by
TA's, although TA's are more active in the lower level classes.

In your next life, perhaps you can be a political science professor.

Average includes part time profs. And you know how much I was paid? And
if it is full time profs, then California Profs are really overpaid!



Doubtful if the stats include part-timers, aka adjuncts, who are
notoriously and grossly underpaid.

As for your opinion about professors being overpaid, well, that is
nothing more than your opinion.

Your opinion they are underpaid.

Adjuncts are underpaid. I did not comment further. Are you on LSD?
--
Sent from my iPhone 6+

Why would boaters care about...
 

Keyser Söze wrote:
Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 12:27 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/26/15 1:15 AM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 6:32 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/25/15 12:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
Keyser Söze wrote:
On 5/24/15 11:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:



Sometimes your comments suggest that you have never had to compete for
business or to make a living.

It's not that the USA has changed all that much. It's the fact that
the rest of the world has caught up in terms of productivity due to the
development of manufacturing technology. It makes
absolutely no sense for a corporation in the USA to have costs that are
ten times that of an offshore source for the same product. Even if they
tried for "moral" or patriotic reasons, they stand the risk of going out
of business. It's simple economics.

The way I see it, the only competitive advantage that exists in the USA
today is in some advanced technology areas and service related
industries. The latter won't always be so as more and more people find
themselves with less disposable income to pay for said services.
Advanced technology areas are also at risk due to a general brain drain
and loss of historical corporate knowledge.

You seem to think that corporate America can still operate the way it
did 30 years ago. To think they call me Luddite.



The US has changed a lot. The middle class is disintegrating, more and
more of the nation's wealth is being concentrated in the pockets of the
rich, college has become too expensive, lower and middle income workers
cannot live a decent life and save for retirement, the Republicans want
to take away what little remains of the safety net...we're heading for an
upheaval.

Maybe it is the unionized colleges that are raising costs excessively.


Maybe your post is just another example of your Fox News mentality - aka,
"ignorance uber alles"

No answer I see. Try to deflect.


I'm supposed to respond to a premise steeped in ignorance? Do you have
some evidence the faculty at "unionized colleges" is paid excessively in
comparison to their colleagues at similar stature non-unionized colleges?
And what do you believe is decent pay for full-time college/university
faculty members, anyway?

Decent pay is a hell of a lot less than the California university system is
paying. $180k a year for less than 30 hour week, with summers off. And
most teaching by TA's. Yup overpaid!



Awwww. So, highly educated professors put in 30 hours in the classroom
and at least two hours of preparation and research outside of the
classroom for each hour in, and that's more than you ever earned, and
you're ****ed. Too bad. Oh, and the average annual salary for a full
professor is under $100,000 a year. And most teaching is not done by
TA's, although TA's are more active in the lower level classes.

In your next life, perhaps you can be a political science professor.

Average includes part time profs. And you know how much I was paid? And
if it is full time profs, then California Profs are really overpaid!



Doubtful if the stats include part-timers, aka adjuncts, who are
notoriously and grossly underpaid.

As for your opinion about professors being overpaid, well, that is
nothing more than your opinion.

Your opinion they are underpaid.

Adjuncts are underpaid. I did not comment further. Are you on LSD?

Are you drunk again?