Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:44:46 -0500, "Gene Kearns"
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:39:19 -0500, John H
wrote:


Because cheaper labor increases the profit margin.


Thanks, John, but I sorta considered it a rhetorical question....

Sorry, I guess I got you confused with basskisser.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:39:19 -0500, John H
wrote:


Because cheaper labor increases the profit margin.


Thanks, John, but I sorta considered it a rhetorical question....


Well, here's a non-rhetorical question:
How do you keep jobs from going overseas when the employee costs to the
corporations are reduced by 90%?

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

So you couldn't answer the question.

Don, Bass, come on, it is an easy question. How haven't the unions caused
this massive migration? You seem to think that the unions are the best thing
here in the west since whatever, but you dummies failed to see the damage
that they have been bottling up, and finally this bottle released. You union
dummies have screwed the west once and for all. Lets look at a say 10 year
frame here, in 10 or even 20 years window. What do you think the
unemployment rate will be? What do you think the debt will be? The states is
near 7trillion, Canada near 600billion,
See you union dummies tried to do some thinking, you forced yourselves to
have say in the firm. You collectively made changes in the whole economic
situation and you screwed up. Now the entire western economic structure will
be disrupted because of your stupidity and greed.
There, I answered the question for you morons.






"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:39:19 -0500, John H
wrote:


Because cheaper labor increases the profit margin.


Thanks, John, but I sorta considered it a rhetorical question....


Well, here's a non-rhetorical question:
How do you keep jobs from going overseas when the employee costs to the
corporations are reduced by 90%?

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 14:29:08 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


Well, here's a non-rhetorical question:
How do you keep jobs from going overseas when the employee costs to the
corporations are reduced by 90%?


That isn't the right question, that is a defeatist's question. The
proper question is, why have our elected officials stood there like
goggle-eyed tourists and watched it happen? .... and continue to do
so.


For the same reason you avoided answering my question...there's no easy,
short-term fix.

If you conceive the world as one economy (which is really what this is
all about), with the poorest 3 countries with a GDP of less than $560
and the richest three countries with a GDP of over $33,000...


This is obviously not a level playing field and unless you'd like to
assume a lifestyle much closer to the $560 than the $33,000, you'd
better accept some form of "field leveling" technology, taxes,
tariffs, whatever

Let's look at your solutions:
1) "field leveling" technology--
how would that help? Then you'd have robots doing the labor instead of
$2/day Chinamen

2) taxes--
on who? Corporations? Then they'd just cut even deeper into the employee
costs

3) tariffs--

don't work. The Hawley-Smoot Tariff just managed to deepen and prolong the
Great Depression. The recent steel tariff that Bush tried just ended up
increasing costs to the manufacturers and end-users that depended upon it

4) whatever--
I like this solution.


to bring the 59:1 discrepancy more in line with
something workable.

The best thing we can do is require that the governments who want to do
business with us impose similar regulations (Fair Labor Standards,
environmental controls, etc) on their manufacturing sector as we impose on
ours.


Anybody, no matter how incompetent, can run a business with these
sorts of discrepancies.... and this is borne out in the all time high
(Feb '04) trade deficit figures. With high tech jobs and industries,
now headed overseas in droves... for the same reasons..... things
aren't going to get any better just standing there watching it happen.


Agreed. But you still haven't answered the question: What's *your*
solution?

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

John H wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:44:46 -0500, "Gene Kearns"
wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:39:19 -0500, John H
wrote:


Because cheaper labor increases the profit margin.


Thanks, John, but I sorta considered it a rhetorical question....

Sorry, I guess I got you confused with basskisser.

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

You are easily confused. Just like when you thought that everyone
would buy your lie about contacting Yamaha, U.S.A. Do you have the
contact's name yet? If not, why not call *her* back, and GET her name.
I really would love to talk to her.

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

" Tuuk" wrote in message ...
Thunder

Give the head a shake there dummy, you have no clue of what your talking
about. What your saying is that the unions are responsible for our 40 hour
work week, child labor laws, safe working conditions, living wages,, come on
there Thunder, I thought that our government and labor laws were responsible
for those.
Don't try to defend your unions, you cannot, they have done so much damage
for us here in the west that it is irreversible.
Thunder, if you and your buddy asskisser don't know what your talking about,
then shut it.

Shut "it" for me, you idiot! I realize that you are dumber than a
post, but here it is in a nutshell. Before organized labor in the
United States, there was no incentive for a 40 hour work week, nor
child labor laws. The UNIONS are the ones that got our government to
realize these situations, and do something about them. The unions of
today serve the same damn purpose, to lobby our government for new and
better laws to protect us. You are a moron if you think that the
government would have done anything otherwise.

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

"NOYB" wrote in message news:UEKYb.9860
Well, here's a non-rhetorical question:
How do you keep jobs from going overseas when the employee costs to the
corporations are reduced by 90%?

By making a comparable economy. Quite simple, actually. The cost of
production is hugely influenced by lining the cofers of the
corporations. Multi million dollar wages, etc. Inflation. If we reduce
the cost of living, then we can reduce the cost of doing business in
the U.S. as opposed to other countries. You do understand that, in
some of those other countries, if a person were to make $10.00 per
hour, they would be rich, don't you? So, it's a question of GLOBAL
economy.

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

Not too bright, are you?
Canada has been showing a surplus the last few years and using some (not
much) to pay down the debt.
Therefore, one has to assume the debt will actually shrink ...not grow.
From your posts I get the impression you are some kind of low level
supervisor in a small industry.
Keep sucking up to the bosses and you might get to supervise a whole
department of 'call centre' employees.


Tuuk wrote in message
...
So you couldn't answer the question.

Don, Bass, come on, it is an easy question. How haven't the unions caused
this massive migration? You seem to think that the unions are the best
thing
here in the west since whatever, but you dummies failed to see the damage
that they have been bottling up, and finally this bottle released. You
union
dummies have screwed the west once and for all. Lets look at a say 10 year
frame here, in 10 or even 20 years window. What do you think the
unemployment rate will be? What do you think the debt will be? The states
is
near 7trillion, Canada near 600billion,
See you union dummies tried to do some thinking, you forced yourselves to
have say in the firm. You collectively made changes in the whole economic
situation and you screwed up. Now the entire western economic structure
will
be disrupted because of your stupidity and greed.
There, I answered the question for you morons.






"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 17 Feb 2004 17:39:19 -0500, John H
wrote:


Because cheaper labor increases the profit margin.


Thanks, John, but I sorta considered it a rhetorical question....


Well, here's a non-rhetorical question:
How do you keep jobs from going overseas when the employee costs to the
corporations are reduced by 90%?

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

Where did I say that I love unions? I simply stated that Yamaha
U.S.A.'s operations centers, distribution centers, etc. use organized
labor. You don't have a freakin' CLUE what the thread was about.
Where did I "defend" unions?

Why would someone like Dirtball Kraus claim he love Unions and would then
purchase a Japanese outboard?

Yamaha unions - basskisser, where are you?
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message news:UEKYb.9860
Well, here's a non-rhetorical question:
How do you keep jobs from going overseas when the employee costs to the
corporations are reduced by 90%?

By making a comparable economy. Quite simple, actually. The cost of
production is hugely influenced by lining the cofers of the
corporations. Multi million dollar wages, etc. Inflation. If we reduce
the cost of living,

LOL. basskisser favors *DEFLATION* as a means to stop the efflux of
jobs!?!?

The cost of living has gotten that way because many overpaid union people
are earning three times what the prevailing wage would be if free-market
forces were allowed to take place. The COL has also risen because of the
abundance of cheap money via financing. You can finance virtually anything
nowadays.

People from all levels of income believe they have a right to expensive
electronics, nice cars, the latest appliances, etc. If we all lived within
our means, there'd be less demand for the items, and they'd cost less.