Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Dwight Stewart wrote:
Family farms don't hire that many outside workers. Instead, the practice is seen most often on the large, corporate owned, farms - the farms owned by industries generating billions of dollars in profits each year. And nobody is going to convince me these corporations cannot afford to pay higher wages. If my grandmother can do it and still make good profits, these much more wealthy corporations can certainly do so. I'm a city boy, so I don't know much about farming, except for a vague idea that farmers grow stuff that gets converted to food sold at supermarkets. And that there are massive government subsidies for farmers. To make for cheap food in the USA. Or something like that........ |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
"Kim W5TIT" wrote:
I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to be paying the price of your philosophy noted above. Oh. And how dare you tell me "nonsense," Dwight. I am relaying to you things from my own experience and you say to me, "NONSENSE?" The nonsense was directed at your conclusions, Kim. How can you possibly say "no one" is willing to do the work? As I said, the main reason most people aren't willing to (and actually cannot) do those jobs is because of the wages are too low, not because they're not willing to work. People are willing to work if the pay is decent. And you'd better be ready to not be able to afford almost anything you buy cheaply right now BECAUSE of things as they are. I've already given several ways wages can be increased without significantly increasing the costs of consumer goods. Uh, I don't know what home you're talking about, but my kids were not spoiled rotten. (snip) Your kid was used as a metaphor for all kids in general. That should have been obvious since it is clear I don't know your specific kid. Didn't say you aren't willing to work. (snip) Actually, you did pretty much say that, Kim. About me and all other non-immigrant Americans. Your exact words were "no one is willing to do the work a lot of our immigrant population are willing to do." Of course, that simply isn't true (not even close). (snip) And you're comments above about how tough those jobs are for very little pay and how you wouldn't do them...just highlights exactly what I was saying. I said nothing about how tough those jobs are. Those jobs are the venue of younger people without the aches and pains of older age. I did those jobs when I was younger, but have since moved on to more substantial work over the years to the point of owning my own businesses today. However, there are plenty of young people today more than willing to work. But, as I said, they're not going to be thrilled about working in jobs with wages so low they cannot feed their families and have to live twenty to a hotel room or apartment to help keep living costs down (like so many poor illegal immigrants do today). If this overall trend continues, Americans in the not so distant future, perhaps your grandchildren, are going to be living just like people do in third-world countries. That's the real future we're leaving future generations. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
"N2EY" wrote:
That would be farm work, but not migrant farm labor, Dwight. Migrant farm labor travels around the country, following the harvest and the crops, and has to support themselves on whatever they get paid. There is no difference in the actual work done on the farm, Jim. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message hlink.net...
But those that are unwilling to work when they are able to, shouldn't expect the handout (IMHO). Cheers, Bill K2UNK This, I gotta frame! 73 de Bert WA2SI |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message link.net... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote: No, you don't get it, Dan. There is nothing in my comment about the federal government or state governments taking anything. Throughout this discussion, I've only talked about government policies to stimulate fair wages and reasonable business practices. OH, I see! - You're talking about the government being intelligent enough to keep it's hands off of the economy so that it can mature and grow! I couldn't agree with you more. - And you have history on your side, in this arguement. Every recorded instance of governmental meddling with the parameters of the economy has resulted in fiasco, a net loss. Keep swinging, Dwight! Let people out there know that trying to legislate prosperity is nothing short of gross stupidity, right up there on par with trying to legislate morality. Tell them that they might as well try to wrap up a gallon of water with a sheet of aluminum foil. Charles Brabham, N5PVL |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes: "N2EY" wrote: That would be farm work, but not migrant farm labor, Dwight. Migrant farm labor travels around the country, following the harvest and the crops, and has to support themselves on whatever they get paid. There is no difference in the actual work done on the farm, Jim. Agreed! But there's a difference between doing it for a summer at a relative's place, and doing it all year long at various locations all over the country or all over a region. And there's a difference between doing it for a relative and doing it for one's living. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
In article .net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes: "Kim" wrote: I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to be paying the price of your philosophy noted above. Oh. And how dare you tell me "nonsense," Dwight. I am relaying to you things from my own experience and you say to me, "NONSENSE?" The nonsense was directed at your conclusions, Kim. How can you possibly say "no one" is willing to do the work? Dwight, I think that when Kim writes "no one" in a context like that, she really means "almost no one" or "hardly anyone" rather than the literal standard meaning "not a single person" or "nobody at all". Of course there's the economic concept, derived from supply-and-demand, that if you have something nobody seems to want, you have to make it more attractive. With a product, that can me a lower price; with a job, that can mean higher wages/better benefits. Just MHO 73 de Jim, N2EY 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message . .. Dee D. Flint wrote: I would like to add that very few companies make astronomical profits. Most make just enough to manage to stay in business. You would think they would pay their CEO's a tad less then! - Mike KB3EIA - You would think so but then again, the CEO's salary is only a drop in the bucket as a percentage of their operating expenses. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article . net, "Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes: In the beginning........there was Philadelphia. It's still here. It was decided to have a loooooose confederation of states brought together under a weak Federal government. The purpose of which was to provide such things as; common roads, common monies, common rules and regulations pertaining to INTERSTATE commerce. And if needed to provide for the defense of one, or all of the states. Yep - Articles of Confederation. What the hell happened? Simple - the founders discovered that the Articles simply didn't work. Without a strong central (federal) government, there was no way to force any of the states to work for the common good if they didn't want to. Common roads, common monies, common rules and regulations pertaining to interstate commerce and defense of one, or all of the states all require a certain amount of central authority and funding. If New York's legislature decided they didn't want to honor money from South Carolina at face value, who was there to make them? Or if a ship from Maryland didn't want to take orders from an admiral from Maine, what authority was there to require them to do so? And when it came to taxes..... End result was another convention here in Philadelphia in 1787, when the Constitution was written and ratified by representatives from all of the states. Three did not sign - they refused to do so because there was no Bill of Rights in the original Constitution. That was rectified by the first ten amendments. You may not like everyhting the Feds do - I know I sure don't! - but the founders tried the loose confederation idea and it didn't work. And when it was tried again (1861-1865, 11 states) it ran into the same problems all over again. In some ways the Feds have been moving towards a weaker central government, by cutting domestic spending - and letting the states take up the slack. Of course the Feds don't give up regulatory control, just funding.... What functions would you have the Feds turn over to the states? 73 de Jim, N2EY There has always been quite a debate over what the federal government should do versus what the state should do versus what should be left up to individuals. This is due to the fact that the Constitution has words in it to the effect that what is not explicitly allocated to the federal government is reserved to the states and what is not allocated to the states is reserved to the people. So there has always been a tug of war between those who want to see the federal government run more and those who think they should run less. Those who want the federal government to do everything are relying on the preamble's words about providing for the common good and interpreting that to mean carte blanche overlooking the fact that it is just a preamble and that the federal government's actual responsibilities, structure, etc is spelled out the clauses of the body of the Constitution, including the amendments. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Kim W5TIT"
writes: No, the damned rub is in how much our products would cost if the jobs migrant and transient workers do were paid at much higher pay scales!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do we really know how much a head of lettuce would cost if the farm workers got better wages? Does anyone know how much of the cost of various food items goes to those workers - and how much goes to the retailer, wholesaler, transportation, processing, etc.? Might be surprising. Not that I want to see anyone suffering... However, I doubt you'd find the workforce needed to do the jobs even *with* a higher payscale... Physical labor is an art these days. Which explains a lot of modern society's problems... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FS Large Lot of NEW NOS Tubes | Homebrew | |||
FS Large LOT Of NEW Tubes | Boatanchors | |||
FS Large Lot of NEW NOS Tubes | Homebrew | |||
FS Large Lot of NEW NOS Tubes | Homebrew | |||
FS Large Lot of NEW NOS Tubes | Homebrew |