| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
What $100 Billion Buys...
Yes, there is something inherently wrong with an older man who takes advantage of his position of power and authority to exploit a young female intern who is at the bottom rung of power. Especially when it is an office as important as the President of the United States. Sexual exploitation and/or manipulation does not belong in the workplace. But you don't get that do you? The office of the President is essentially a meaningless figurehead position. The true minds and influential players are his/her cabinet. I don't fault Bush directly for his failed policies. Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Ashcroft etc break down the president to make these decisions. Bush isn't evil or dangerous...he's just a pompous fool who's out of touch with the ordinary American. The fact that Clinton received some sexual favors from Ms. Lewinsky apparently helped him to perform his job quite well, promoting peace in the mideast instead of pandering to the religious right so firmly trying to set the stage for Israel according to their interpretation of Revelations. I'm ashamed to be of the same congregation as these freaks. The very same conservatives I hear spewing that garbage about libs not getting it are the same individuals who cowardly speak about what they'd like to do to their female co-worker/subordinate along with their colleagues during a happy hour conversation, then going home to their wives...hypocrital mofos. You gotta admit, it's a lot more interesting than running a secret society called the presidency for the past 4 years, head up by a supposedly moral individual taking *way* too many vacations, skipping out on National Guard service, insighting nationalistic, but mistaken for patriotic, thoughts. Gore "skipped out" of his tour of duty over in Vietnam. How come you and others of your ilk never mention that fact? What by the way are your military credentials or accomplishments? Gore skipped out in Vietnam. There, I mentioned it. Bush skipped out of service with the Guard in Texas. Which do you think is more cowardly and unpatriotic? My military accomplishments mean nothing. Never served. Proud of being a civilian. Bush should say the same. There was nothing wrong with doing Coke and drinking a lot. He should admit that too. People would have a lot more respect for him (of course, he's lose out on a lot of hypocritical conversative votes too) |
What $100 Billion Buys...
And they water down the wage rates and benefit packages which undercuts many skilled workers. And the resulting product leaves much to be desired on the part of the American consumer. I have personally witnessed whole blocks of residential housing being built without anybody that can speak English building them. Pseudo electricians without any form of license or proof of qualifications, pseudo plumbers etc.. etc.. and these homes have NUMEROUS code violations. How can a proper home be built by unqualified workers who can't possibly read the National Electrical Code because they can't speak English and their own education from their native country is on the grade-school level? Taking jobs that nobody wants? Hardly. However a qualified, intelligent and skilled electrician would certainly look elsewhere rather than work for the watered down peanut wages that most homebuilders offer. Home builders get away with these insulting wages (and code violations) by exploiting immigrant workers AND taking advantage of over-worked and underpaid city code enforcement officers any way that they can. You are forgetting simple supply and demand factors that are covered by economics 101. Too much supply equals reduced wages and benefits. Quite simple. The allowing of hordes of illegal aliens reduces the wage and benefits packages for many Americans. You misunderstand me. Aside from my flaming response above in the thread, I completely agree with you on this particular issue. Quality suffers greatly when immigrant work is hastily dumped on us. Responsible trade slowly assimilates workforce from these other countries into our own economy. Slapping together an infrastructure based out of Mexico or India is asking for trouble. Similarly, homebuilders inflating profits by dumping illegal immigrants into our workforce damages long-term viability of these companies: Centex, D.R. Horton, etc. I don't know which large homebuilders heavily rely on this particular labor force, but it sure makes me think about who will build my next home later this year. I may just have to buy a house circa 1980 or so... The only saving grace is the failing of companies due to bad labor. In my case, I've witnessed this problem with programs written very badly we've been fixing. As a contractor, I relish this situation, but it may take some time for the "debugging" field to fluorish, as bad code sets in across the board. But, there's a problem when an Indian, whose education and living expenses are often government subsidized (ergo no student debt), attempts to steal a job from a highly educated person just because they cost a lot less. A shame that companies have learned a painful lesson by embracing the tactic too quickly, with the breached privacy, inferior quality, and backlash among the U.S. workforce. The real shame is, when a recovery is in the works after the imminent demographic switch (retirees fleeing the job market), they are the ones who'll be interviewed by the interviewees. Have you ever offshored a major component of your business? Yes, see ya! My business is staffed by family and friends and those that I know and trust when I need them (as in American citizens). I would rather go out of business than hire illegal aliens or 'offshore' portions of it to foreign workers. You can offshore certain portions of your business, but only if it's properly managed (vague term indeed), and the work involves less critical processes to your business. A few Fortune 500 companies actually lost money on the transition, and are faced with bad PR as well as lower profitability. Double whammy. |
What $100 Billion Buys...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message news:c3dhc2g=.5e4b8952ea1a9d772e28d61b97dfa2dc@107 8328834.nulluser.com... Henry Blackmoore wrote: I have personally witnessed whole blocks of residential housing being built without anybody that can speak English building them. Pseudo electricians without any form of license or proof of qualifications, pseudo plumbers etc.. etc.. and these homes have NUMEROUS code violations. How can a proper home be built by unqualified workers who can't possibly read the National Electrical Code because they can't speak English and their own education from their native country is on the grade-school level? Taking jobs that nobody wants? Hardly. However a qualified, intelligent and skilled electrician would certainly look elsewhere rather than work for the watered down peanut wages that most homebuilders offer. Home builders get away with these insulting wages (and code violations) by exploiting immigrant workers AND taking advantage of over-worked and underpaid city code enforcement officers any way that they can. The reality is, most homebuilders (single-family houses, townhouses, and low-rise apartments, the "stick-built" stuff), do not pay wages. They pay via what one might call "piece work." So much to frame a house, so much to wire a house, et cetera. And *that* is one reason why why most skilled craftsmen have nothing to do with the contractors who build houses. And due to the increasing number of construction defect claims stemming mainly from residential construction, some of the large national insurance companies are no longer insuring construction contractors and builders who primarily do residential construction (or a residential construction exclusion is provided on the general liability and completed operations coverage's). |
What $100 Billion Buys...
In article , Harry Krause wrote:
I expect the dirtiest campaign ever from the Repubicans. Bush cannot run on his record, because his record as president is horrible. He has to go on the the attack. Maybe the Bush camp can hire some Demorat experts in the dirty department? There isn't any shortage of em'. Many would sell out for good money.... |
What $100 Billion Buys...
In article c3dhc2g=.5e4b8952ea1a9d772e28d61b97dfa2dc@1078328 834.nulluser.com, "Harry Krause" wrote:
Henry Blackmoore wrote: I have personally witnessed whole blocks of residential housing being built without anybody that can speak English building them. Pseudo electricians without any form of license or proof of qualifications, pseudo plumbers etc.. etc.. and these homes have NUMEROUS code violations. How can a proper home be built by unqualified workers who can't possibly read the National Electrical Code because they can't speak English and their own education from their native country is on the grade-school level? Taking jobs that nobody wants? Hardly. However a qualified, intelligent and skilled electrician would certainly look elsewhere rather than work for the watered down peanut wages that most homebuilders offer. Home builders get away with these insulting wages (and code violations) by exploiting immigrant workers AND taking advantage of over-worked and underpaid city code enforcement officers any way that they can. The reality is, most homebuilders (single-family houses, townhouses, and low-rise apartments, the "stick-built" stuff), do not pay wages. They pay via what one might call "piece work." So much to frame a house, so much to wire a house, et cetera. And *that* is one reason why why most skilled craftsmen have nothing to do with the contractors who build houses. And the resulting subcontractors who bid for that "piece work" hire sub-standard workers (non-licensed etc..) for peanut wages. If the hordes of cheap labor were taken away and proper enforcing of licensing standards were upheld then subcontractors could no longer low-bid the job down where it doesn't pay a sustainable wage for their workers. They would have to bid higher or refuse jobs that don't meet their cost requirements. It wasn't that long ago that many residential homes around here were built by union labor (translation real skilled & licensed workers). This is evident by the union "bug" stamped in the concrete of walkways leading up to older homes in many older neighborhoods. The quality of these homes is usually superb. Anyway that you cut it cheap illegal immigrant labor waters down the wage benefit packages for American workers and the end result besides lost jobs is poorer quality craftmanship and work for the American consumer. |
What $100 Billion Buys...
|
What $100 Billion Buys...
On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 19:32:52 +0000, Henry Blackmoore wrote:
Yes, there is something inherently wrong with an older man who takes advantage of his position of power and authority to exploit a young female intern who is at the bottom rung of power. Especially when it is an office as important as the President of the United States. Sexual exploitation and/or manipulation does not belong in the workplace. But you don't get that do you? I do, it was a despicable act, with a power imbalance more approaching rape than consensual sex. And of course Bill Clinton was very effective dealing with terrorists after the first World Trade Center attacks. His putting everything off onto the office of the next President was a very strategic move. Maybe not with terrorists, but he did disarm Iraq. If our present President had realized this, we could have saved 500 American soldiers and a couple of hundred billion dollars. |
What $100 Billion Buys...
"Henry Blackmoore" wrote in message hlink.net... In article , Harry Krause wrote: I expect the dirtiest campaign ever from the Repubicans. Bush cannot run on his record, because his record as president is horrible. He has to go on the the attack. Maybe the Bush camp can hire some Demorat experts in the dirty department? There isn't any shortage of em'. Many would sell out for good money.... ....a la Dick Morris. |
What $100 Billion Buys...
In article , thunder wrote:
On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 19:32:52 +0000, Henry Blackmoore wrote: Yes, there is something inherently wrong with an older man who takes advantage of his position of power and authority to exploit a young female intern who is at the bottom rung of power. Especially when it is an office as important as the President of the United States. Sexual exploitation and/or manipulation does not belong in the workplace. But you don't get that do you? I do, it was a despicable act, with a power imbalance more approaching rape than consensual sex. And of course Bill Clinton was very effective dealing with terrorists after the first World Trade Center attacks. His putting everything off onto the office of the next President was a very strategic move. Maybe not with terrorists, but he did disarm Iraq. If our present President had realized this, we could have saved 500 American soldiers and a couple of hundred billion dollars. Did Clinton disarm Iraq after Feb 17th 1998 or before?? It doesn't appear that anybody (but you) knew about Clinton disarming Iraq including other high-ranking Democrats. "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998 "There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 "I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 |
What $100 Billion Buys...
|
What $100 Billion Buys...
On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:07:18 +0000, Henry Blackmoore wrote:
Did Clinton disarm Iraq after Feb 17th 1998 or before?? It doesn't appear that anybody (but you) knew about Clinton disarming Iraq including other high-ranking Democrats. Hey, I didn't know it at the time, but with the clarity of hindsight, Clinton did a great job ridding Iraq of those pesky WMDs. Again, if our present President was aware of the great job Clinton did, we could have saved a couple of hundred billion dollars and 500 American soldier's lives. |
What $100 Billion Buys...
And Bill Clinton was in touch? With his gays in the military and national health care plants (ala' Hillary). The fact that Clinton received some sexual favors from Ms. Lewinsky apparently helped him to perform his job quite well, You think that the whole resulting scandal and perjury/impeachment trial "helped" Clinton to perform his job well? Are you feeling okay? You might be coming down with something. Think about what you are saying. I feel great, albeit a bit tired today. I thought about what I said. I vaguely remember the prime minister of Israel and Arafat shaking hands during Clinton's presidency, and Bill Clinton's team transitioned the facts about Al-Qaeda to Bush's team, where the administration in it's infinite wisdom began Operation Ignore. Operation Ignore was in full swing until the eventful day of September 11, 2001. The administration realized that Operation Ignore was not successful, then proceeded with the successful campaign of Operation Freedom to neutralize Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Very successful campaign indeed (considering the minds surrounding Bush, my cat could have run it with similar success). This moment of triumph was followed with another phase of Operation Ignore in Afghanistan, very similar to the one conducted by the CIA following the opposition to the Soviet Union. Warlords and the Taliban bought their time, and now control all of Afghanistan sans Kabul in their own Operation Haha. However, during this Operation Haha, another operation was in place that required our immediate attention. Operation Imperialism and Operation "steal their oil because the world is running out" began shortly after...the target...well, ya know... You are talking about just the act itself. But what kind of leader and person in a position of such great power would jeopardize their office and career (not to mention their family)? A very short-sighted one perhaps? One in which their libido in the short-term is much more important than the health and welfare of their country/constituents in the long. What kind of leadership did the American people get from this dishonorable scandalized man while he was tied up and busy with lawyer, courts, interrogatories and the like? Scandals and Bush are the closest of friends. Bush has been a little smarter by running a much more secretive presidency. Most articles (even the right winged Economist magazine) claim their administration is one of the most secretive ever, even outside military operations. On-the-job sexual solicitation of subordinates (and manipulation) is not ethical or moral behavior that is fitting for any company or corporation in America let alone the Oval Office. If you don't get this then you are beyond help. My supervisor just got promoted by the actively republican CEO of a regional health care company after the weekend he proposed to the CEO's daughter. Don't know which situation is worse to tell you the truth, as many people strive to achieve his position for 20 years (and he's 25). One thing for sure though Clinton was the Houdini who produced the impossible-- a Republican Congress. LOL The Republican Congress is fairly good. It's the President's who's whacked out. You assume I'm a Democrat. Clinton also left behind a horrid ethical legacy. Clinton redrew the rules of politics itself.. it used to be that if you got caught redhanded, you were ashamed, and then you were gone. Not anymore! :^) Bush proved that with scandal after scandal. promoting peace in the mideast instead of pandering to the religious right so firmly trying to set the stage for Israel according to their interpretation of Revelations. I'm ashamed to be of the same congregation as these freaks. And of course Bill Clinton was very effective dealing with terrorists after the first World Trade Center attacks. His putting everything off onto the office of the next President was a very strategic move. The very same conservatives I hear spewing that garbage about libs not getting it are the same individuals who cowardly speak about what they'd like to do to their female co-worker/subordinate along with their colleagues during a happy hour conversation, then going home to their wives...hypocrital mofos. I see. Liberal Democrats are all immune to this? Both sides are guilty. Liberals think it's cool, while conservatives tend to cower and lie. You gotta admit, it's a lot more interesting than running a secret society called the presidency for the past 4 years, head up by a supposedly moral individual taking *way* too many vacations, skipping out on National Guard service, insighting nationalistic, but mistaken for patriotic, thoughts. Gore "skipped out" of his tour of duty over in Vietnam. How come you and others of your ilk never mention that fact? What by the way are your military credentials or accomplishments? Gore skipped out in Vietnam. There, I mentioned it. Bush skipped out of service with the Guard in Texas. Which do you think is more cowardly and unpatriotic? Leaving one's fellow men behind in 'Nam. It took a lot more guts to fly a jet than to be a Thai-stick smoking Remington raider eating ice cream far from enemy lines because of daddy's suction... Debatable comparison. My military accomplishments mean nothing. Sure it does. No, it doesn't Never served. It figures but you are calling implying or calling others cowards for "skipping out"? I didn't need to skip out. The draft is not in effect. Proud of being a civilian. Bush should say the same. There was nothing wrong with doing Coke and drinking a lot. He should admit that too. How do you know that he used cocaine? The evidence isn't there like it was for Clinton and Gore as far as drug use. Please point me to the appropriate DejaNews files showing your harping on these points back in the Clinton era? Clinton didn't exactly admit to using marijuana with his famous "but I didn't inhale" line. Nor did he admit to having a "nose like a vacuum cleaner" for coke (but his half-brother readily admitted it. Bush used cocaine because he doesn't want to talk about it. Court of public opinion requires full statement of your actions, or you are considered guilty. Pleading the 5th is not a proper response in this particular court. Doesn't matter. It's a moot point, because the character issue doesn't decide elections. Perhaps primaries, but certainly not general elections. People would have a lot more respect for him (of course, he's lose out on a lot of hypocritical conversative votes too) IYO Media giants like Howard Stern say so, so it's almost as good as fact. Hundreds of thousands of swing voters in swing states follow exactly what he tells others to do. Ask Christie Whitman how important someone like him is to the swing voters. She said, without HS, she would not have been governor. And she doesn't even like him! |
What $100 Billion Buys...
In article , jps wrote:
In article , says... The office of the President is essentially a meaningless figurehead position. The true minds and influential players are his/her cabinet. I don't fault Bush directly for his failed policies. Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Ashcroft etc break down the president to make these decisions. Bush isn't evil or dangerous...he's just a pompous fool who's out of touch with the ordinary American. The fact that Clinton received some sexual favors from Ms. Lewinsky apparently helped him to perform his job quite well, promoting peace in the mideast instead of pandering to the religious right so firmly trying to set the stage for Israel according to their interpretation of Revelations. I'm ashamed to be of the same congregation as these freaks. The very same conservatives I hear spewing that garbage about libs not getting it are the same individuals who cowardly speak about what they'd like to do to their female co-worker/subordinate along with their colleagues during a happy hour conversation, then going home to their wives...hypocrital mofos. You help restore my "faith" that Americans are still capable of common sense. Faith? And from an athiest?? jps |
What $100 Billion Buys...
In article , thunder wrote:
On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 23:07:18 +0000, Henry Blackmoore wrote: Did Clinton disarm Iraq after Feb 17th 1998 or before?? It doesn't appear that anybody (but you) knew about Clinton disarming Iraq including other high-ranking Democrats. Hey, I didn't know it at the time, but with the clarity of hindsight, Clinton did a great job ridding Iraq of those pesky WMDs. Again, if our present President was aware of the great job Clinton did, we could have saved a couple of hundred billion dollars and 500 American soldier's lives. Clinton wasn't even "aware of the great job Clinton did". Get real.. |
What $100 Billion Buys...
"NOYB" wrote in message hlink.net... =================== The situation at Eastman Chemical Co. may be sort of unique among large companies. This huge plant, one of the largest chemical plant sites in the world, was originally a division of Eastman Kodak. ----------------------------- Does Eastman Chemical make the chemicals that are used for film processing...like developing x-rays, etc? If that's the case, then they're just a victim of new technology. The world is going digital. I see it first hand in the health fields. We haven't developed a radiograph in our office in over 4 years. Recently, Kodak made the decision not to spend any more R&D money on film technology. In the dental field, they just acquired Practiceworks, Inc. and Trophy Radiologie...two companies that played a large role in the obsolescence of dental film. They've accepted the fact that digital has taken over. I suspect the Eastman plant is just a victim of that technology. http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pres...30721-01.shtml ==================================== No, Eastman Chemical Co. doesn't make photographic chemicals. Many of their products are used in the plastics industry. They are the world's largest producer of PET plastics that soft drinks are packaged in. They also make a very large percentage of the cigarette filters produced. They developed a very large chemicals-from-coal plant (coal gasification) that produces acetic anhydride/acetic acid among other things, very important feedstocks for the petrochemical industry. Also chemical for food preservatives and many, many other chemicals. The plant site is over 1,000 acres and produces all of it's electrical needs through several huge fossil plants. It has many miles of private road, large railroad system, fire & rescue departments, medical facilities, movie theatres and a first rate concert hall. The whole plant is located right in the edge of the main part of the city. Folks seeing it for the first time at night remark that it looks like a very large city in itself. The daylight view convinces them. See: www.eastman.com David S. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:29 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com