The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message . ..
Exactly! What I love is this, I told Joe and Shelikoff that the war in
Iraq cost us 9 billion a day. They can't figure out how that could
possibly be true. So far, I've not told them, waiting to see if they
ever stop and think about that $800 billion. Doesn't take a rocket
scientist!

Enlighten us Kevin.

Clue: How many days did the war last, when Bush officially called the
war over?
Clue: How much money was spent per day directly on the war?
Clue: How much has the war actually cost us for such things as pre-war
readiness, etc.? Current estimates are $200 billion.
Clue: Add to this the $800 billion that the Pentagon seems to have
"misplaced".

Now, are you and Shelikoff even STARTING to get it? Doubtful.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

It is a natural thing for businesses to want to increase productivity
while lowering costs.

Read this, it makes sense.

Common Sense: Labor vs. Management

Problem:

1.1. Management wants more productivity for less pay, Labor wants
more pay for less productivity.
2.2. The U.S. productivity, while highest in the world, has been
stagnant in recent years.
3.3. The U.S. is a capital intensive country, and with free trade,
that means that rewards go to the intensive factor (HO
theory), leaving labor, the scarce factor, to fight against a
market that is constantly exerting downward pressure on
wages.
4.4. U.S. industry must abide by the law of one price, or else go
out of business. This forces labor intensive industries to
either get more productivity out of their domestic work force or
transfer production to labor intensive countries.
5.5. The U.S. has lost many manufacturing jobs and industries to
foreign competition.

Solution:
Privatize unions. Organize them like employment agencies. Contracts
could be based on a lump-sum for a given level of
output. For instance, the auto industry could base a pay scale on the
average of the labor cost per auto of three competing
countries like Japan, Germany, and England. Lets say 20% of the cost
of a car is labor. The auto company would then contract
with the union for X# of cars. The labor union would then be given a
lump sum to distribute as it saw fit. If the union could do it
with fewer workers they get a higher average pay. Thus there is an
incentive to be more productive, AND REWARDED
FOR IT. There could also be a quality incentive based on warrantee
claims.

Benefits:
Labor controls their own destiny, they " own " the union in a
financial and voting sense, not just voting. Each member owns
shares in the union, each shares in the profits. The union would have
an incentive to increase the productivity of each member
and remove members that bring down the average output per worker, and
thus everyone's average wage. The union would also
have an incentive to replace the nonproductive with the productive,
creating a highly efficient globally competitive work force.
There is an incentive for productivity by having the worker have a
financial interest in the company for which they work. They
elect officers, choose staffing levels, and control membership. They
can also set their own productivity requirements for
membership. Business would have a fair, globally competitive, average
labor cost per unit of output, based on an international
average. They would also have reduced overhead by eliminating a large
part of their staffing, payroll, labor contract lawyer
fees, and other payroll and staffing expenses. This would result in an
improved competitive position, no strikes, greater
cooperation with labor, and the ability to select their preferred "
employment agency."

This could be taken further and privatize the entire production line
and employee benefits. The union could be given a lump sum
to build and maintain the production line. Once again, the sum would
be based on the average cost of competing countries. If
the union decides for a more ergonomic improvements and unrequired
safety devices, fine, but they now have a financial
interest is that decision. The union gets to choose their desired
level of safety and comfort in the work place. If they choose
more 15min breaks, fine, but they now have a financial interest in it.
The union could also be given a lump sum for their
pensions; no more unfunded pensions. They could invest their pension
money as they see fit. They could also be given a lump
sum to provide their desired employee benefits. In all these cases the
union can either provide the benefits or distribute the
money as it sees fit.

Benefits:

1.1. More union control of their destiny.
2.2. Increased competitiveness and productivity of the U.S. work
force.
3.3. Higher wages for labor.
4.4. Wages are tied to productivity, i.e., variable cost. No more "
sticky wages."
5.5. No strikes.
6.6. No incentive to drive the cost structure on a company up with
unnecessary breaks and excessive safety regulations.
7.7. Labor and Management base their contracts on international
averages, i.e., it is fair, not on bargaining strength or skill
of their lawyers.
8.8. Decreased labor/management strife.
9.9. No more unfunded pensions.
10.10. Increased ability to long term plan due to established values
used in contracting.
11.11. Greater long term survivability of the U.S. industry.
12.12. A great reduction in the companies overhead costs, i.e., the
company becomes more efficient.

Costs:

1.1. Labor must now compete and increase productivity. There is now
an incentive to eliminate the "free rider" who is
sitting-in, rather than, pulling the " wagon ".
2.2. Management must give up control of a large portion of the
production process.

This solution is an attempt to solve the current counter productive
position of labor vs. management that has led to a decrease in
U.S. competitiveness and industrial base. It requires cooperation and
compromise on both sides, labor and management. Each
side must give up a little. The loss to each side, however, is less
than what they gain. There is a net gain by both parties. This is
a market oriented position, because as anyone can see, the current
method of arguing with the market has chased a lot of jobs
across the boarder. This approach is doing little to stop the exodus,
which has only been worsened by the fall in the peso and
the passage of NAFTA.

If you agree with this or any part of this article please forward it
to Newspapers letters to the editors, congressmen, senators,
or anyone else who might also be interested. Help keep America working
and the jobs at home.

Marx was wrong in that he failed to make a connection between " from
each according to their ability " and "to each according
to their need ". Sounds good on paper but where is the incentive to
increase productivity. This is an outline to create a nation of
free-riders. Why work hard when your benefits are fixed and any
increase in your own productivity will only go to provide for
those who are not working as hard?



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Spirulina" wrote in message
...

You are a lousy stinkin' Socialist plain & simple. Go try and bull****
somebody else. No amount of spin will change your yellow anti-American
left-wing Socialist color.....

Better than a tax-cheatin' prick who doesn't want to pay his fair share for
the fine treasures this country bestows on you. Bein' a tax cheat and
selfish ******* is far more anti-american than anything I contemplate. I'm
for sharing the riches with more Americans, you're for keeping them in a
lockbox at the very top of the pyramid.

Selfish piece of **** you are.

G'day yourself, asshole.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message . ..
Exactly! What I love is this, I told Joe and Shelikoff that the war in
Iraq cost us 9 billion a day. They can't figure out how that could
possibly be true. So far, I've not told them, waiting to see if they
ever stop and think about that $800 billion. Doesn't take a rocket
scientist!

Enlighten us Kevin.


Just post ANY documentation that the cost of the war is 9 billion a day.

Just tell me you're too stupid to do any meaningful research, and yes,
I will do it for you.

The war lasted approx. 65 days.

Referring to the reasons behind America's attack on Iraq, the
legislator said that "oil is not the main factor." He is convinced
that Washington purses geopolitical objectives and says that the war
in Iraq and its post-war reconstruction will cost the US about $100
billion....

So, that is 100 billion to rebuild what we've smashed, following so
far? See, it's not hard. Now the tricky part (at least for you). The
total estimate is around 491 billion.

Now, the Pentagon is estimating (they have to estimate because bills
are still coming in, and will be for a long time) that misc. awards,
claims, and payouts will reach 30 billion.

Pending contracts........60 billion and rising.

Iraq has international debt that must be paid. World Bank/Bank for
International Settlements puts the figure at $127.7 billion, including
$47 billion for accrued interest. Think oil will pay for this? Wrong,
it will be YEARS before Iraqi oil is once again operating in the blue.

Okay, we have $491 + $60 + $127.7 = $678.7 billion dollars....agree?
Now, we simply divide by the number of days of war, okay? Again, I'm
not quite sure when Bush declared the war over, so I'm saying 65 days.
If that number is incorrect, tell me the number, and I'll revise the
math so that you'll understand. So $168.7 billion / 65 = $10.442
billion dollars. Knowing that these are government estimates, I
rounded down to an even $9 billion. I hope that this clears the
overall scope to you so that you'll understand the TRUE cost of the
war.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Joe" wrote in message
. ..
Exactly! What I love is this, I told Joe and Shelikoff that the
war in
Iraq cost us 9 billion a day. They can't figure out how that could
possibly be true. So far, I've not told them, waiting to see if
they
ever stop and think about that $800 billion. Doesn't take a rocket
scientist!

Enlighten us Kevin.


Just post ANY documentation that the cost of the war is 9 billion a day.

Just tell me you're too stupid to do any meaningful research, and yes,
I will do it for you.

The war lasted approx. 65 days.

Referring to the reasons behind America's attack on Iraq, the
legislator said that "oil is not the main factor." He is convinced
that Washington purses geopolitical objectives and says that the war
in Iraq and its post-war reconstruction will cost the US about $100
billion....

So, that is 100 billion to rebuild what we've smashed, following so
far? See, it's not hard. Now the tricky part (at least for you). The
total estimate is around 491 billion.

Links please

Now, the Pentagon is estimating (they have to estimate because bills
are still coming in, and will be for a long time) that misc. awards,
claims, and payouts will reach 30 billion.

Pending contracts........60 billion and rising.

Iraq has international debt that must be paid. World Bank/Bank for
International Settlements puts the figure at $127.7 billion, including
$47 billion for accrued interest. Think oil will pay for this? Wrong,
it will be YEARS before Iraqi oil is once again operating in the blue.

Okay, we have $491 + $60 + $127.7 = $678.7 billion dollars....agree?
Now, we simply divide by the number of days of war, okay? Again, I'm
not quite sure when Bush declared the war over, so I'm saying 65 days.
If that number is incorrect, tell me the number, and I'll revise the
math so that you'll understand. So $168.7 billion / 65 = $10.442
billion dollars. Knowing that these are government estimates, I
rounded down to an even $9 billion. I hope that this clears the
overall scope to you so that you'll understand the TRUE cost of the
war.


You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral costs" to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

jps wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Tim Tisdale wrote:

It is a natural thing for businesses to want to increase productivity
while lowering costs.

Read this, it makes sense.

Sure it does. But since making sense is often diametrically opposed to
the liberal's sense of emotional satisfaction, they do not accept it.

Listen up Dave. My company once created a simulation for the Federal
Reserve Bank. They wanted a "game" that would show people the relationship
between fiscal and monetary policy.

Everytime I put a Republican in front of the interface, they'd continue to
hit the "Lower Taxes" button until inflation went through the roof and their
constituents threw them out of office.

I'm sure they did it as a gag, since proper planning for government
spending is much more than a single simple act. Besides, this game was
designed to operate around the limited conditions and parameters, of the
person who programmed it. They do not necessarily respond the same as
the unpredicatable variables, and dynamics of reality. If you could
accurately predict economic stimulous and conditions, then you'd be
bigger than Alan Greenspan. Most of this stuff is smoke and mirrors, and
exercises in reflection.


Marx was wrong in that he failed to make a connection between " from
each according to their ability " and "to each according
to their need ". Sounds good on paper but where is the incentive to
increase productivity. This is an outline to create a nation of
free-riders. Why work hard when your benefits are fixed and any
increase in your own productivity will only go to provide for
those who are not working as hard?

Exactly! That has been my biggest flaw with socialism. There is no
incentive to better oneself. The end result is a nation of mediocrity.
Competition is what drives us to be better. it's what placed this nation
at the forefront of technology. Socialism would condemn this nation to
third world status in a generation.

Dave, I hate to break it to you but we are capitalists, not socialists.

Really? Then why do you favor the redistribution of wealth from the
"rich" to cover "the poor" by an unfairly biased progressive tax plan?
Why do you guys on the left want to raise the wages for unskilled
workers, beyond what the free market dictates they should be worth?
That's not capitalism. You can't mix the two. The current healthcase
crisis, is a prime example of what heppens when you try an originally
capitalist enterprise (Healthcare) with socialism (Insurance subsidies).
The result is spiraling costs as the care providers are free to raise
their prices, since the subsidies cover the increases, and the common
citizen does not have to deal with it, therefore there is no market
pressure to put a lid on rising costs. Take away all healthcare
insurance, and how long do you think the free market could support those
high costs?


I don't want to give away everything I've earned.

But you have no problem telling other people how much of their pay they
"need" to contribute to programs which *YOU* feel are beneficial.


I just want to make certain
we're investing in things that have value. Not smart bombs, smart people.
Not smart prisoners, productive taxpayers. Not nation building, consensus
building.

That would make a great democratic sound byte. Full of fluff, but at the
core, really no substance. It makes no effort to explain the casues of
our problems, and indeed, implies that the solution to many of our
social ill's, is just to throw money at it. A typcial democratic
attitude.


Get with it Dave. We're no more in favor of Karl Marx than you are. We're
in favor of doing the right thing and giving everyone an opportunity to
succeed.

Which of course, is subjective, and based upon your particular view of
what's "right".


Your party wants to keep all the money in one place and they use
stupid, beer swillin', poorly educated idiots to gather the votes to do it.

Here's where you really become stereotypical and inconsistant. If "my
party" is the party of the rich, and we want to "horde" all the money,
then why would the beer swilling idiots be a party to it? Those poorly
educated idiots are normally the fodder for democratic votes. Democrats
promise these individuals free money to "help" them, and they vote for
it. If they were in a higher wage earning income bracket, who actually
had to PAY for these programs, they wouldn't be too happy to see more of
their paycheck shrinking.


Get a clue Dave. Leave the dark side and their selfish ways.

There is nothing selfish about wanting to keep what you rightfully EARN.
Everyone else has the same opportunity to make something better of
themselves. So go do it.

Dave

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message . ..
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Joe" wrote in message
. ..
Exactly! What I love is this, I told Joe and Shelikoff that the
war in
Iraq cost us 9 billion a day. They can't figure out how that could
possibly be true. So far, I've not told them, waiting to see if
they
ever stop and think about that $800 billion. Doesn't take a rocket
scientist!

Enlighten us Kevin.


Just post ANY documentation that the cost of the war is 9 billion a day.

Just tell me you're too stupid to do any meaningful research, and yes,
I will do it for you.

The war lasted approx. 65 days.

Referring to the reasons behind America's attack on Iraq, the
legislator said that "oil is not the main factor." He is convinced
that Washington purses geopolitical objectives and says that the war
in Iraq and its post-war reconstruction will cost the US about $100
billion....

So, that is 100 billion to rebuild what we've smashed, following so
far? See, it's not hard. Now the tricky part (at least for you). The
total estimate is around 491 billion.

Links please

If you are too stupid to do simple web research, you shouldn't have
stuck your ignorant nose into the subject. I know you didn't get
involved to learn, you're way too closed minded for that to happen.

Now, the Pentagon is estimating (they have to estimate because bills
are still coming in, and will be for a long time) that misc. awards,
claims, and payouts will reach 30 billion.

Pending contracts........60 billion and rising.

Iraq has international debt that must be paid. World Bank/Bank for
International Settlements puts the figure at $127.7 billion, including
$47 billion for accrued interest. Think oil will pay for this? Wrong,
it will be YEARS before Iraqi oil is once again operating in the blue.

Okay, we have $491 + $60 + $127.7 = $678.7 billion dollars....agree?
Now, we simply divide by the number of days of war, okay? Again, I'm
not quite sure when Bush declared the war over, so I'm saying 65 days.
If that number is incorrect, tell me the number, and I'll revise the
math so that you'll understand. So $168.7 billion / 65 = $10.442
billion dollars. Knowing that these are government estimates, I
rounded down to an even $9 billion. I hope that this clears the
overall scope to you so that you'll understand the TRUE cost of the
war.


You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral costs" to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

Heehee! ALL of the above numbers are DIRECT costs of the war. What a
dolt.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Joe" wrote in message
. ..
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"Joe" wrote in message
. ..
Exactly! What I love is this, I told Joe and Shelikoff that
the
war in
Iraq cost us 9 billion a day. They can't figure out how that
could
possibly be true. So far, I've not told them, waiting to see
if
they
ever stop and think about that $800 billion. Doesn't take a
rocket
scientist!

Enlighten us Kevin.


Just post ANY documentation that the cost of the war is 9 billion a
day.

Just tell me you're too stupid to do any meaningful research, and yes,
I will do it for you.

The war lasted approx. 65 days.

Referring to the reasons behind America's attack on Iraq, the
legislator said that "oil is not the main factor." He is convinced
that Washington purses geopolitical objectives and says that the war
in Iraq and its post-war reconstruction will cost the US about $100
billion....

So, that is 100 billion to rebuild what we've smashed, following so
far? See, it's not hard. Now the tricky part (at least for you). The
total estimate is around 491 billion.

Links please

If you are too stupid to do simple web research, you shouldn't have
stuck your ignorant nose into the subject. I know you didn't get
involved to learn, you're way too closed minded for that to happen.

Translation:

As usual, I pulled this from my ass


Now, the Pentagon is estimating (they have to estimate because bills
are still coming in, and will be for a long time) that misc. awards,
claims, and payouts will reach 30 billion.

Pending contracts........60 billion and rising.

Iraq has international debt that must be paid. World Bank/Bank for
International Settlements puts the figure at $127.7 billion, including
$47 billion for accrued interest. Think oil will pay for this? Wrong,
it will be YEARS before Iraqi oil is once again operating in the blue.

Okay, we have $491 + $60 + $127.7 = $678.7 billion dollars....agree?
Now, we simply divide by the number of days of war, okay? Again, I'm
not quite sure when Bush declared the war over, so I'm saying 65 days.
If that number is incorrect, tell me the number, and I'll revise the
math so that you'll understand. So $168.7 billion / 65 = $10.442
billion dollars. Knowing that these are government estimates, I
rounded down to an even $9 billion. I hope that this clears the
overall scope to you so that you'll understand the TRUE cost of the
war.


You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral costs"
to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent
DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

Heehee! ALL of the above numbers are DIRECT costs of the war. What a
dolt.


Your a fool.

PS: Where's my history lesson on judicial nominee filibusters?

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message news:UEzPa.79753$n%
Just post ANY documentation that the cost of the war is 9 billion a
day.

Just tell me you're too stupid to do any meaningful research, and yes,
I will do it for you.

The war lasted approx. 65 days.

Referring to the reasons behind America's attack on Iraq, the
legislator said that "oil is not the main factor." He is convinced
that Washington purses geopolitical objectives and says that the war
in Iraq and its post-war reconstruction will cost the US about $100
billion....

So, that is 100 billion to rebuild what we've smashed, following so
far? See, it's not hard. Now the tricky part (at least for you). The
total estimate is around 491 billion.

Links please

If you are too stupid to do simple web research, you shouldn't have
stuck your ignorant nose into the subject. I know you didn't get
involved to learn, you're way too closed minded for that to happen.

Translation:

As usual, I pulled this from my ass

Translation:
I too stupid and narrow minded to use the web to do some simple
research.
You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral costs"
to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent
DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

Heehee! ALL of the above numbers are DIRECT costs of the war. What a
dolt.


Your a fool.

Do you disagree that the above costs are DIRECT costs of the war? How?
Please provide reference to refute.

PS: Where's my history lesson on judicial nominee filibusters?
Go back and read it V E R Y slowly, you effing dumb ass, and you just
may comprehend it.

Now, I've given examples, all of which are readily available to ANYONE
with enough intelligence and enough fortitude to get there lazy ass
off of the couch, put out the cigarette, finish there beer, and LOOK.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Translation:

As usual, I pulled this from my ass

Translation:
I too stupid and narrow minded to use the web to do some simple
research.

You are the one who made the claim, not me. You provide the proof.
You cant because your full of ****.

You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You
must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral
costs"
to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent
DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

Heehee! ALL of the above numbers are DIRECT costs of the war. What a
dolt.


Your a fool.

Do you disagree that the above costs are DIRECT costs of the war?

Yes

How? Please provide reference to refute.

Again, you made the claim you provide the proof.


PS: Where's my history lesson on judicial nominee filibusters?
Go back and read it V E R Y slowly, you effing dumb ass, and you just
may comprehend it.

Do you still believe a judicial nominee has ever been filibustered?

Here is your statement (wrong)

Currently, a minority of senators, composed entirely of Democrats, is
blocking the nominations of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia and Texas Supreme Court
Justice Priscilla Owen to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, even
though both nominees have the support of at least 51 senators.
Democrats have also threatened to filibuster the nominations of
Carolyn Kuhn to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and Alabama
Attorney General William H. "Bill" Pryor to the 11th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals if their nominations are brought to the floor

And then my post for which you never responded:

In 1968, 24 Republicans and 19 Democrats opposed the elevation of Supreme
Court Justice Abe Fortis to the position of chief justice of the United
States. Fortis' nomination was withdrawn when only 46 senators agreed to
support for the nominee.

He was NOT filibustered.

http://new.crosswalk.com/news/1206583.html

Your wrong again.

Now, I've given examples, all of which are readily available to ANYONE
with enough intelligence and enough fortitude to get there lazy ass
off of the couch, put out the cigarette, finish there beer, and LOOK.

Your full of ****.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

snip
You whole premise is predicated on the assumption that government
workers are efficient, and that the private sector workers are lazy and
corrupt. Yet, in another breath, you throw accolades at unions. That
seems to be an inconsistant viewpoint.

My complaint was your generalization that all unions are corrupt, and all
union workers are lazy. The union worker I have worked with have been pretty
good.


If you are going to privatize everything tell my how we won't pay more
in
the way of profit for the company doing the work.

A for-profit company comes up with a price up front, based on a mutual
understanding of the scope of work. If they fail to meet the deadline,
they lose profit. That's the incentive for them to get the job done.
Inspectors, ensure that the job is done properly.


Is your only answer in
letting some private company cut wages and benefits for the worker so
you
can have a clean conscious about screwing the worker doing the job? Or
is
the saving going to be in the corners cut?

Why must every answer involve screwing over someone? Even at inflated
union wages, the private sector is still more efficient than the
government.

I don't advocate that the services have to be delivered in an inefficient
way. I advocate that they be delivered. If you want to make the delivery of
government services efficient, then we are on the same page.

Can private enterprise be part of this? I would have to agree that this is
so in many cases. Perhaps not in all. I have trouble with certain jobs being
performed by the private sector. The apportionment between public and
private delivery of these services is what good governance is all about.

The selection of what services *should* be part of every life should be the
heart of the political discussion.

Take health care. I agree that the government is likely to be a poor choice
for delivery of this service. This should be administered by the employer.
The government role in this is an effective and enforced set of rules that
all employees should receive this service. You work, you get healthcare. As
it stands, a big chunk of the economy now bypasses this rule by claiming
that all the 39.9 hours per week jobs are not full time, so there is no need
to provide this service. This drives many poor onto the welfare roles so
they have the care they need for their children. Now I have to pay for these
welfare moms so you get $1.00 burgers. Allowing these sorts of loop holes is
services provided is bad governance. We end up paying a much higher price in
the long run.

As far as my personal experience with privatizing government services;
In
the USA the military has gone to private subcontractors to do the lab
calibration work. Since this has started we have seen a massive increase
in
shoddy work and just plain incompetence in the work done to the
equipment we
provide to the military.

The obvious conclusion: The company you were using, was not a good one.
It's a stretch to project that the whole concept of privatization, is
somehow at fault.

You don't get the picture. The labs that do this work are scattered all over
the country. As the military has privatized this service, I have seen a
massive increase in shoddy work on our equipment all over the country. We
are suffering greatly for this, as the problems look like they are
originating in our equipment. In all cases that I have investigated, the
problems are coming from sub-standard work by private contractors.

The "magic' of the marketplace does not
automatically insure that we will get better and cheaper services.

It does as long as there is competition.

Do keep in mind that in nature it is acceptable for a species to die out. If
a necessary service is "not economical" to provide that does not lessen our
dependence on it.

Effective competition involves a bundle of conditions to work effectively. A
manipulated economic environment may not favor the most effective answer.
Take an example: The rail service. This is easily the most efficient way to
move good long distances. From a purely technical point of view, containers
and rail should be moving almost everything between every major city. I have
no question in my mind that had evolution of the system continued, rail
would be vastly more efficient and useful than it is now. Automated loading,
unloading, scheduling and dispatch could easily make the rails a valuable
addition to companies like UPS. Rails could be moving goods and passengers
at 300 mph between city centers at low cost. Instead, the influence of big
money has brought this valuable resource to virtual ruin. The odds of
another private rail system springing up to take its place are virtually
nil.

As far a bureaucracies go - I have a lot of respect for ours. When you
flush
a toilet, it does, thanks to some officious government workers hounding
private contractors until they get it right.

It should. The government is willing to pay $300 for a toilet seat. The
private sector is a little more discriminating.

Bad example. Do a little research on this case. That seat was not the one
you use at home. This was part of the fancy molded assembly on an aircraft
toilet assembly. Aerospace materials + low volume = high prices.

Better example: The $300 hammer. This is what happens when an agency puts an
item out for bid and nobody bids on it. You should like this part: These
second offerings like this are listed in the federal register; a private
industry has sprung up around filling these orders. They get to charge large
fees as the only providers of the part. I know how you believe that
competition will magically solve every problem; here is your chance to get
rich! You can go into this business and charge less.

These silly rules about putting items up for bid are a response to rampant
corruption. Before this, buyers made bad deals for huge kickbacks. Now we
have open competitive bidding for the items the military buys. I see it as a
failure of the private market to respond to the open bids the government
puts out. Now, how should we fix this?

We pay our government workers
enough that pervasive corruption is not a part of our lives.

You think the very human weakness of greed and corruption, is magically
removed once you're in the government? You must think Bush is a saint
then.......

Nice sarcasm.

I am leaving for Indonesia for a 1.5 week trip today. I will be looking at
all the example of how well their government works with poorly paid
government workers. Do you think I will get the same good services I am used
to in the USA? Assuming that I don't get kidnapped and held for ransom, I
will report back what I see.

In countries
where they have lower taxes and pay the workers less you must still pay
everybody to do their jobs; you grease every palm in sight to get
anything
done. They still have to make a living; think of it as user fees: you
pay to
get your letters mailed or delivered, you pay to get the police to leave
you
alone, you pay to get your marriage license, you pay to get your trash
picked up.

I do much of that now. Hell, I find that the trash men now consider it
an insult, if you don't "tip" them. A TIP for doing what they're
supposed to do? Gimmeabreak....

This is my point. You live in the USA and can't image having to pay
government workers to get something done that is supposed to be part of
their job.

You *would* pay the government workers if you lived in India. Or else you
would not get any services. Ask anybody who has lived there. Anybody else on
the list want to weigh in on having to pay little bribes to get government
services in either the USA or other countries?

It goes on and on. Ask anybody who has spent any time in India or
China. Bribes are a fact of life, it sucks - lots. From what I have
seen,
the jobs are usually done very poorly. The big problem is when you pay
your
bribe to get your permits, the quality of the job has nothing to do with
it.
That is why building fall down in these countries after earthquakes.

You're going on that wild ride again, and painting a picture that looks
more like a Mexican jail, than the private sector of the US.

Please elaborate. Are you saying that the fussy USA building inspectors
don't really do anything? Or are you saying that the building inspectors in
Iran do? Before you answer you may wish to do a little google'ing on the
damage and loss of life by earthquakes in various parts of the world.

You may not like paying the full price for government service, but you
really do need to see how bad it is when you don't pay much for it; you
don't get very much!

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see the waste that a bloated
bureaucracy such as a governmental agency has. As long as they don't
have to show a profit, or are accountable to the people who pay them
(The taxpayers) they are free to dip a little deeper whenever they run a
little short. There is simply no incentive for a government agency to be
the most efficient. Where is the competition?

Dave

If you just think that stopping the services is the right answer, then we
are in disagreement.

You see ways to deliver these services more efficiently? For all citizens
equally? Bring it on; I will be right there with you.

I get no joy out of wasting my money. It is our shared responsibility to
keep the system efficient. That said, I think that our system works better
than anywhere else I have ever been. I see what we get here and compare it
to what I see when I travel the rest of the world and I like what I get in
the USA.

Mark Browne

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message ...
Translation:

As usual, I pulled this from my ass

Translation:
I too stupid and narrow minded to use the web to do some simple
research.

You are the one who made the claim, not me. You provide the proof.
You cant because your full of ****.

You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You
must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral
costs"
to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent
DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

Heehee! ALL of the above numbers are DIRECT costs of the war. What a
dolt.


Your a fool.

Do you disagree that the above costs are DIRECT costs of the war?

Yes

How? Please provide reference to refute.

Again, you made the claim you provide the proof.


PS: Where's my history lesson on judicial nominee filibusters?
Go back and read it V E R Y slowly, you effing dumb ass, and you just
may comprehend it.

Do you still believe a judicial nominee has ever been filibustered?

Here is your statement (wrong)

Currently, a minority of senators, composed entirely of Democrats, is
blocking the nominations of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia and Texas Supreme Court
Justice Priscilla Owen to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, even
though both nominees have the support of at least 51 senators.
Democrats have also threatened to filibuster the nominations of
Carolyn Kuhn to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and Alabama
Attorney General William H. "Bill" Pryor to the 11th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals if their nominations are brought to the floor

And then my post for which you never responded:

In 1968, 24 Republicans and 19 Democrats opposed the elevation of Supreme
Court Justice Abe Fortis to the position of chief justice of the United
States. Fortis' nomination was withdrawn when only 46 senators agreed to
support for the nominee.

He was NOT filibustered.

http://new.crosswalk.com/news/1206583.html

Your wrong again.

Now, I've given examples, all of which are readily available to ANYONE
with enough intelligence and enough fortitude to get there lazy ass
off of the couch, put out the cigarette, finish there beer, and LOOK.

Your full of ****.

No....I've given examples. Did you check them out? If so, you'd KNOW
that I'm right, but because you're lacking any semblance of manhood,
you have to try to make yourself look correct, so you spin, and
spin....must be getting dizzy, because you're certainly incorrect.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message ...
Translation:

As usual, I pulled this from my ass

Translation:
I too stupid and narrow minded to use the web to do some simple
research.

You are the one who made the claim, not me. You provide the proof.
You cant because your full of ****.

You said:

" True enough. Fact is, the cost of the war is far from over. You
must
understand that it's not just the 9 billion a day we are spending
DIRECTLY on the war, but there are many, many peripheral costs
involved"

You are now trying to use very suspect estimates of "peripheral
costs"
to
try to validate your asinine statement of "9 billion a day spent
DIRECTLY on
the war"
Note, DIRECTLY in caps by you, not me.

You're an idiot.

Heehee! ALL of the above numbers are DIRECT costs of the war. What a
dolt.


Your a fool.

Do you disagree that the above costs are DIRECT costs of the war?

Yes

How? Please provide reference to refute.

Again, you made the claim you provide the proof.


PS: Where's my history lesson on judicial nominee filibusters?
Go back and read it V E R Y slowly, you effing dumb ass, and you just
may comprehend it.

Do you still believe a judicial nominee has ever been filibustered?

Here is your statement (wrong)

Currently, a minority of senators, composed entirely of Democrats, is
blocking the nominations of Miguel Estrada to the U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia and Texas Supreme Court
Justice Priscilla Owen to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, even
though both nominees have the support of at least 51 senators.
Democrats have also threatened to filibuster the nominations of
Carolyn Kuhn to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and Alabama
Attorney General William H. "Bill" Pryor to the 11th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals if their nominations are brought to the floor

And then my post for which you never responded:

In 1968, 24 Republicans and 19 Democrats opposed the elevation of Supreme
Court Justice Abe Fortis to the position of chief justice of the United
States. Fortis' nomination was withdrawn when only 46 senators agreed to
support for the nominee.

He was NOT filibustered.

http://new.crosswalk.com/news/1206583.html

Your wrong again.

Now, I've given examples, all of which are readily available to ANYONE
with enough intelligence and enough fortitude to get there lazy ass
off of the couch, put out the cigarette, finish there beer, and LOOK.

Your full of ****.

Funny, this article, by a republican senator, makes reference to one.

SENATOR JON KYL

East Valley Tribune (Mesa, Arizona)

March 2, 2003





As I write this, Senate Democrats are continuing a weekslong
filibuster of Miguel Estrada, who would be the first Latino ever to
serve on the D.C. Circuit Court, the second-highest court in the
nation.



On Wednesday this paper urged Senate Democrats to end the filibuster -
a commendable position taken by more than 50 other newspapers across
the country.



But while indicating that the filibuster was wrong, the editorial
excused the behavior with the argument that the obstruction of Estrada
is mere political "payback" for similar transgressions by Republican
senators against nominees selected by President Clinton.



That argument is false. President Clinton got the vast majority of his
judicial nominees (90 percent) confirmed by the Senate, even though it
was controlled by Republicans for six of his eight years in office.



Nearly every one of the circuit court nominations he made during his
first two years won Senate confirmation within that time frame. And
overall, the number of President Clinton's confirmed judges was just
five short of the all-time leader in confirmations, Ronald Reagan.



Most of Clinton's judicial nominees who did not get a Senate vote were
nominated at the end of Clinton's second term, when there was little
time to go through the full confirmation process.



While over 90 percent of Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton circuit court
nominees were confirmed in their first two years in office, less than
half of President Bush's original circuit court nominations have even
had an up or down vote in the Senate. Some have waited nearly two
years for even a hearing.



Senate Democrats have repeatedly tried to change the rules in the
confirmation process - some arguing, for example, that judges might
even have a presumption of disqualification until they prove
otherwise.

Miguel Estrada did not receive a committee vote for 20 months!



The Estrada filibuster is, in fact, an unprecedented departure from
past judicial battles. It marks the first time in Senate history that
any political party has used such a tactic to obstruct a nominee for
the federal circuit court.



Only once in Senate history has there been a filibuster against any
judicial nominee, and that was a bipartisan effort against a Supreme
Court Justice, Abe Fortas.



This is not mere "payback." It is an escalation of a bitter battle by
Senate Democrats to keep judges with potentially conservative
political views off the courts at any cost.



That is extremely disappointing. And dangerous. If the Democrats
succeed with this filibuster – which requires 60 votes to break - they
will have effectively changed the rules that have governed our country
since its founding.



Henceforth, any nomination that a minority faction finds
"controversial " would no longer need majority support - 50 votes -
but a supermajority of 60. That is a recipe for endless gridlock and a
terrible disservice to the American people.



More than that, it is a great injustice to Miguel Estrada, an
immigrant success story and a role model for the Latino community.



This is a man whose qualifications no one seriously disputes, who
overcame a speech impediment and a language barrier to become a
Harvard-trained lawyer, a Supreme Court clerk, and an attorney for
both the Bush and Clinton administrations. The American Bar
Association - by whose standards Democrats insist all judicial
nominees be measured - unanimously rated him "well qualified." And
he's been endorsed by the Hispanic civil-rights organization LULAC,
the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, and even Vice President Gore's
former chief counsel.



Senate Democrats have tried in vain to piece together a coherent
argument against Estrada's confirmation. Yet, as even the Washington
Post - no ally of President Bush - recently editorialized, the
Democratic opposition to Mr. Estrada's confirmation "range from the
unpersuasive to the offensive."



The injustice being committed against Miguel Estrada must not be aided
by ignorance of judicial battles in the past. He should be given an up
or down vote in the United States Senate, a courtesy given to nearly
all of President Clinton's nominees.



Mr. Estrada certainly deserves better than being cavalierly shrugged
off as just another victim of Washington infighting.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Funny, this article, by a republican senator, makes reference to one.

SENATOR JON KYL

East Valley Tribune (Mesa, Arizona)

March 2, 2003


snip

He is as wrong as you are.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message ...
Funny, this article, by a republican senator, makes reference to one.

SENATOR JON KYL

East Valley Tribune (Mesa, Arizona)

March 2, 2003


snip

He is as wrong as you are.

So, Joe, are you now saying that you know more about politics than a
senator? You must think you're quite something. You know more about
politics than a politician, you know more about engineering than an
engineer, you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist. Your heads going to explode, you pompous ass.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

So, Joe, are you now saying that you know more about politics than a
senator?

No I don't, but I do research things that interest me. When Sen. Cornyn was
quoted saying "There has never been a filibuster of a judicial nominee, now
there are two" it sparked my curiosity. After some research I found he was
right and most everybody else was wrong. The corrections and retractions are
now beginning.

http://cornyn.senate.gov/060403filibusterrules.html

you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

Your heads going to explode, you pompous ass.

From what, toying with you? Never.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message ...
So, Joe, are you now saying that you know more about politics than a
senator?

No I don't, but I do research things that interest me. When Sen. Cornyn was
quoted saying "There has never been a filibuster of a judicial nominee, now
there are two" it sparked my curiosity. After some research I found he was
right and most everybody else was wrong. The corrections and retractions are
now beginning.

http://cornyn.senate.gov/060403filibusterrules.html

you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

haaahaa!!!! THAT'S a good one!!!! You are a liar.

Your heads going to explode, you pompous ass.

From what, toying with you? Never.

You don't toy with me, you show your stupidity to me.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

snip
you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

haaahaa!!!! THAT'S a good one!!!! You are a liar.

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification, and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats


Where's yours?

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message .. .
snip
you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

haaahaa!!!! THAT'S a good one!!!! You are a liar.

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification, and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats


Where's yours?

Now you're an engineer?? In WHAT discipline? Licensed in what states?

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message .. .
snip
you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

haaahaa!!!! THAT'S a good one!!!! You are a liar.

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification, and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats

there blank. nothing there.


Where's yours?

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification,
and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats

there blank. nothing there.


Bull****.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification,
and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats


Where's yours?

Now you're an engineer?? In WHAT discipline? Licensed in what states?

My title is "Telecommunications Infrastructure Engineer". I am licensed in
Fl and Ga as a Limited Energy Specialist, and hold the professional
designation of RCDD. (Registered Communications Distribution Designer)

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 13:58:23 GMT, "Joe" wrote:

My title is "Telecommunications Infrastructure Engineer"

Then why are you using Microsnort Outlook Express. That piece of crap
is riddled with security holes!!!

Try Pegasus Mail -- excellent mail client (and free, but you can
contribute)
Try Free Agent newsreader -- The best newsreader around. They also
Sell Agent (check my headers!!!)

Regards

--
Q

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message .. .

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification,
and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats


Where's yours?

Now you're an engineer?? In WHAT discipline? Licensed in what states?

My title is "Telecommunications Infrastructure Engineer". I am licensed in
Fl and Ga as a Limited Energy Specialist, and hold the professional
designation of RCDD. (Registered Communications Distribution Designer)

Licensed as an Engineer? No.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message . ..

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification,
and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats

there blank. nothing there.


Bull****.

Ah, there they are. They prove NOTHING. I can post crap like that all
day long. I can be a lawyer, doctor, even try to get people to think
I'm a mechanic.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Wow, now you are putting down people who work with their hands, you limo
liberals are such hypocrites.
"jps" wrote in message
...
"Joe" wrote in message
...
snip
you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

haaahaa!!!! THAT'S a good one!!!! You are a liar.

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification,
and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats


Where's yours?


Wow, I've never met Mr. Goodwrench. Shoulda guessed he'd be right winger.
He always looks kinda podunky in the commercials. I used to make a living
turning wrenches when I was a punk too. That was 25 years ago and I
didn't
waste my time working on boring US trashmobiles. Had a whole dang box o'
Snap On by the time I retired from grease monkeyhood.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
"Joe" wrote in message
...
snip
you know more about engineering than an engineer

I am an engineer.

you know more about mechanics/machinist than an aircraft
machinist.

While now expired, I have held top certifications from ASE.

haaahaa!!!! THAT'S a good one!!!! You are a liar.

Here ya go Asslicker, here's a link to a pic of my ASE certification,
and
one of my GM Certifications (have a few more, have to find them).
Sorry, but my Engineering Cert is not going through my roller scanner. I
will be happy to post that also once I have access to flatbed scanner.

http://photos.yahoo.com/recboats


Where's yours?


Wow, I've never met Mr. Goodwrench. Shoulda guessed he'd be right winger.
He always looks kinda podunky in the commercials. I used to make a living
turning wrenches when I was a punk too. That was 25 years ago and I
didn't
waste my time working on boring US trashmobiles. Had a whole dang box o'
Snap On by the time I retired from grease monkeyhood.

Think what you want, but I'm proud of once being a certified mechanic. I
paid my own way through school and was training on computer control systems
long before most people knew what a PC was. This exposure to electronics and
computer systems was key in guiding me towards my current career path, for
which I am grateful.
Big bad GM, trained me, paid me exceptionally well, and helped me through
school.

All of my memories as a mechanic are good ones. I'm sorry to see that yours
are remembered as being a punk in grease monkeyhood.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

I was a mechanic you simp.

I still find great pride in working with my hands. I found that working
with my brain a more efficient trade for worldly resources.

I do all my own maintenance, including major overhauls. How about you?


"Put Name Here" wrote in message
news:KDQRa.89913$H17.28358@sccrnsc02...

Wow, now you are putting down people who work with their hands, you limo
liberals are such hypocrites.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Joe" wrote in message
...

All of my memories as a mechanic are good ones. I'm sorry to see that
yours
are remembered as being a punk in grease monkeyhood.

I have fine memories of greasemonkeyhood. I still enjoy getting my hands
dirty, but enjoy it far more as a hobby than a profession.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

As a newbie to rec.boats, it is funny to read some of the posts and not know
the history behind the people, but it is reasonable to assume you hold
mechanics to be a lower life form when you make the following posts:
" I used to make a living turning wrenches when I was a punk too.
That was 25 years ago and I didn't waste my time working on boring US
trashmobiles. Had a whole dang box o' Snap On by the time I retired from
grease monkeyhood."

It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose you are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


"jps" wrote in message
...
I was a mechanic you simp.

I still find great pride in working with my hands. I found that working
with my brain a more efficient trade for worldly resources.

I do all my own maintenance, including major overhauls. How about you?


"Put Name Here" wrote in message
news:KDQRa.89913$H17.28358@sccrnsc02...

Wow, now you are putting down people who work with their hands, you limo
liberals are such hypocrites.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Bill Cole wrote:



It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose you are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


If US cars are crappy, and some of them truly are, it isn't the fault of
the workers. They assemble what they are given to assemble. Recently, I
rented a Pontiac four-door sedan for a couple of days from Avis. The car
was almost new. While it wasn't falling apart, it certainly was a
p.o.s., badly engineered, with a lousy ride, so-so brakes and an engine
ill-matched to its transmission. Nothing about the car was related to
the assembly line workers.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

OK, so the US workers are all first class, but US management suck, I guess
it does make sense to ship all our production overseas, since the workers
can not do any better than the product, management gives them. Should we
ship our production to Japan or Germany?


Well that does not sound any better than someone saying
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill Cole wrote:



It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of
our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


If US cars are crappy, and some of them truly are, it isn't the fault of
the workers. They assemble what they are given to assemble. Recently, I
rented a Pontiac four-door sedan for a couple of days from Avis. The car
was almost new. While it wasn't falling apart, it certainly was a
p.o.s., badly engineered, with a lousy ride, so-so brakes and an engine
ill-matched to its transmission. Nothing about the car was related to
the assembly line workers.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Should we
ship our production to Japan or Germany?



No. Japan and Germany are far too expensive. As a result much of our industrial
production is shifting to China,
India, Malayasia and anywhere else people will work for $100 US a week. Or
less.

Skilled engineeers and professionals are going (literally) begging in the
former Soviet Union, and many will work for about 10% of the cost of employing
a American in a similar capacity.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill Cole wrote:



It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of
our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


If US cars are crappy, and some of them truly are, it isn't the fault of
the workers.

Your right for once. It has much to due with the UAW tactics.

From Time.com-

Warmer Labor Relations

Contrary to popular belief, workers' wages and benefits at the transplant
factories - none of which are unionized except for joint ventures with
Detroit - are comparable to those at factories organized by the United Auto
Workers (UAW). Assembly-line workers, regardless of their location, earn
about $45,000 to $100,000 a year (depending on experience and overtime).
Bonuses are typically tied to profitability, and health-care and pension
benefits vary only slightly.

But job classifications at transplant factories are broader. Line workers
are trained in a variety of tasks - say, spot welding as well as interior
assembly - and they rotate jobs frequently. They're less susceptible to
boredom and repetitive-stress injuries. They're also trained to do
preventive maintenance. At Toyota plants, every assembly-line worker has the
authority to stop the line if he or she spots, say, a flaw in a windshield.
More important, workers are encouraged by management to do so.

The long and often bitter relationship between the Big Three and the UAW
means that their work practices are rooted not in mutual trust but in a
system of sometimes picky rules. A "skilled tradesman" may be required to
change a fuse in an assembly-line machine, a task that an assembly worker
could easily be trained to perform. Work rules differ from plant to plant
because agreements are negotiated with local union leaders. If a tradesman
notices a line worker fiddling with equipment, he may file a grievance,
claiming that his job is being undercut by a lower-paid employee.

A flexible work force is especially critical for maintaining line speed if
the model mix changes frequently. After a switch, a worker who formerly
needed two minutes to help install a wiring harness might need only 90
seconds, meaning he or she could do another job - if allowed. But at some
Big Three plants, assigning a new task to a worker requires consulting the
local union leader, who might approve the extra job but insist on a quid pro
quo - say, extra break time. Such complications can make it more costly to
adjust the vehicle mix - leading to unsold vehicles and requiring more
profit-eating 0% financing.

Since the early 1980s, the UAW has mounted campaigns to organize the
transplants' hourly workers, but they have consistently voted against
joining, in part because of strong community support for the manufacturers
and a sense of mutual loyalty. "Nissan takes care of its employees, and if
the union tries to organize us, I'll probably oppose it," says Murphy
Wilson, 27, a newly hired technician in Canton. The UAW has tried four times
to win over Nissan's Smyrna work force but was voted down 2 to 1 in its last
try in 2001. "We have not given up on the transnationals," says UAW
president Ron Gettelfinger, who claims that "fear, intimidation and threats
hold workers back" from inviting unions into transplant factories. In 2001
some organizers publicly accused Nissan managers of strong-arming employees
in Smyrna.

In the next round of national labor negotiations this summer, the Big Three
are expected to demand benefit cuts and broader job classifications. Griping
has already begun. "They want us to do more and more and offer us less and
less," says Bill Parker, president of UAW Local 1700 in Detroit and head of
a Chrysler work force. In theory, Detroit could emulate the transplants and
set up nonunionized shops in the South, but the UAW would probably bring
assembly operations to a halt.

http://www.time.com/time/globalbusin...451002,00.html

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Then why are you using Microsnort Outlook Express. That piece of crap
is riddled with security holes!!!


Renifleur d'âne

Regards

Joe

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Among the criteria for job satisfaction IMHO is admiring the engineering,
manufacture and assembly of the machinery. Finely crafted cars are a joy to
work on. I wouldn't have cared where the cars were manufactured or who
manufactured them. As it turned out, I worked on German cars. They were
infinitely more interesting, pleasing and rewarding to work on. And,
because it took more than an average Joe to work on them, I made more money
than those working on American cars.

As for mechanics, most of them are parts replacers. If you asked them to
solve a problem that didn't have a part # associated with it or a diagram
for assembly, most of 'em would throw up their hands. Automobile repair
used to be much more of a craft. There is great beauty in machines and the
more the mechanic is an admirer of the craft, the closer that person would
be to my own point of view. Mr. Goodwrench probably wouldn't fit my
expectation of a craftsman.

A good marine engine mechanic is far more likely to be a craftsman.

Next point: I don't think American workers are inferior. I think they're
among the best in the world. Unfortunately, they have crappy (any Ford, GM
or Chrysler) or boring (Honda Accord) products to work on. The Americans
were the ones who came up with planned obsolescence and I wouldn't be
surprised if Detroit weren't the ones who paved the path.

Look at the fine workmanship in the aerospace industry. That's what
American workers are capable of.


"Bill Cole" wrote in message
et...
As a newbie to rec.boats, it is funny to read some of the posts and not
know
the history behind the people, but it is reasonable to assume you hold
mechanics to be a lower life form when you make the following posts:
" I used to make a living turning wrenches when I was a punk
too.
That was 25 years ago and I didn't waste my time working on boring US
trashmobiles. Had a whole dang box o' Snap On by the time I retired from
grease monkeyhood."

It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


"jps" wrote in message
...
I was a mechanic you simp.

I still find great pride in working with my hands. I found that working
with my brain a more efficient trade for worldly resources.

I do all my own maintenance, including major overhauls. How about you?


"Put Name Here" wrote in message
news:KDQRa.89913$H17.28358@sccrnsc02...

Wow, now you are putting down people who work with their hands, you
limo
liberals are such hypocrites.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

It's more likely to go to Mexico.

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
news:s3gSa.100425$H17.30337@sccrnsc02...
OK, so the US workers are all first class, but US management suck, I guess
it does make sense to ship all our production overseas, since the workers
can not do any better than the product, management gives them. Should we
ship our production to Japan or Germany?


Well that does not sound any better than someone saying
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill Cole wrote:



It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose
you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of
our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


If US cars are crappy, and some of them truly are, it isn't the fault of
the workers. They assemble what they are given to assemble. Recently, I
rented a Pontiac four-door sedan for a couple of days from Avis. The car
was almost new. While it wasn't falling apart, it certainly was a
p.o.s., badly engineered, with a lousy ride, so-so brakes and an engine
ill-matched to its transmission. Nothing about the car was related to
the assembly line workers.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

jps wrote:

It's more likely to go to Mexico.

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
news:s3gSa.100425$H17.30337@sccrnsc02...
OK, so the US workers are all first class, but US management suck, I guess
it does make sense to ship all our production overseas, since the workers
can not do any better than the product, management gives them. Should we
ship our production to Japan or Germany?


Well that does not sound any better than someone saying
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill Cole wrote:



It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose
you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of
our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


If US cars are crappy, and some of them truly are, it isn't the fault of
the workers. They assemble what they are given to assemble. Recently, I
rented a Pontiac four-door sedan for a couple of days from Avis. The car
was almost new. While it wasn't falling apart, it certainly was a
p.o.s., badly engineered, with a lousy ride, so-so brakes and an engine
ill-matched to its transmission. Nothing about the car was related to
the assembly line workers.



Perhaps it is just manufacturing management that needs to be replaced, eh?





--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

Yeah, that's the ticket. We need to get rid of all of manufacture
management. We could go to Japan and Germany and hire the best managers
and that will solve our problems.

With genius like this so readily available, I am amazed we have any problems
being competitive in the world market.


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
jps wrote:

It's more likely to go to Mexico.

"Bill Cole" wrote in message
news:s3gSa.100425$H17.30337@sccrnsc02...
OK, so the US workers are all first class, but US management suck, I
guess
it does make sense to ship all our production overseas, since the
workers
can not do any better than the product, management gives them. Should
we
ship our production to Japan or Germany?


Well that does not sound any better than someone saying
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Bill Cole wrote:



It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose
you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all
of
our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality
products.


If US cars are crappy, and some of them truly are, it isn't the fault
of
the workers. They assemble what they are given to assemble. Recently,
I
rented a Pontiac four-door sedan for a couple of days from Avis. The
car
was almost new. While it wasn't falling apart, it certainly was a
p.o.s., badly engineered, with a lousy ride, so-so brakes and an
engine
ill-matched to its transmission. Nothing about the car was related to
the assembly line workers.



Perhaps it is just manufacturing management that needs to be replaced, eh?





--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

The Bush Economy Stinks...and Sinks
 

We all are learning so much in rec.boats. Harry has observed that the
problem with the US Manufacturing lies in poor management and JPS has so
wisely observed that the problem lies in product design. Our auto designers
are making cars that are too easy to repair. We need to design products so
the mechanics have to be craftsman to repair a car. This achieves two
objectives, it provides job satisfaction for the mechanic and helps to make
it more expensive to repair the car. Today, all a mechanic needs to do to
repair a car is replace a part, but if we designed the car correctly, it
would take a "craftsman" to be able to solve the problem. Think of the job
satisfaction the mechanic will receive by solving a problem that no one else
was able to solve. Think about how much money he will be able to make when
his skills are so much better than anyone else that he can charge twice the
price than the other mechanics who are not as good as he is.

jps has not only come up with a solution to help the US become more
competitive in the world marketplace, but he has also found a way to provide
increased enjoyment in the workplace.

Great job.
"jps" wrote in message
...
Among the criteria for job satisfaction IMHO is admiring the engineering,
manufacture and assembly of the machinery. Finely crafted cars are a joy
to
work on. I wouldn't have cared where the cars were manufactured or who
manufactured them. As it turned out, I worked on German cars. They were
infinitely more interesting, pleasing and rewarding to work on. And,
because it took more than an average Joe to work on them, I made more
money
than those working on American cars.

As for mechanics, most of them are parts replacers. If you asked them to
solve a problem that didn't have a part # associated with it or a diagram
for assembly, most of 'em would throw up their hands. Automobile repair
used to be much more of a craft. There is great beauty in machines and
the
more the mechanic is an admirer of the craft, the closer that person would
be to my own point of view. Mr. Goodwrench probably wouldn't fit my
expectation of a craftsman.

A good marine engine mechanic is far more likely to be a craftsman.

Next point: I don't think American workers are inferior. I think they're
among the best in the world. Unfortunately, they have crappy (any Ford,
GM
or Chrysler) or boring (Honda Accord) products to work on. The Americans
were the ones who came up with planned obsolescence and I wouldn't be
surprised if Detroit weren't the ones who paved the path.

Look at the fine workmanship in the aerospace industry. That's what
American workers are capable of.


"Bill Cole" wrote in message
et...
As a newbie to rec.boats, it is funny to read some of the posts and not
know
the history behind the people, but it is reasonable to assume you hold
mechanics to be a lower life form when you make the following posts:
" I used to make a living turning wrenches when I was a punk
too.
That was 25 years ago and I didn't waste my time working on boring US
trashmobiles. Had a whole dang box o' Snap On by the time I retired
from
grease monkeyhood."

It sounds like you don't like mechanics or US made cars. I suppose you
are
one of those who think US workers are inferior too. Let's ship all of
our
production to Germany and Japan where they can make quality products.


"jps" wrote in message
...
I was a mechanic you simp.

I still find great pride in working with my hands. I found that
working
with my brain a more efficient trade for worldly resources.

I do all my own maintenance, including major overhauls. How about
you?


"Put Name Here" wrote in message
news:KDQRa.89913$H17.28358@sccrnsc02...

Wow, now you are putting down people who work with their hands, you
limo
liberals are such hypocrites.