What does any of this have to do with BPL?????

Carl - wk3c

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Clint wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
t...

Hey, you want a theory?

How about an effort made to get African Americans (traditionally
Democrat)to move back to the south to balance out the political leanings
of the area?


That's a little far-fetched... a conspiracy to get millions to move just
for
political reasons?

Would you up and move all the way across the country, family and ALL,
your entire LIFE change drastically, just so a ceratian politician will
get
1 more vote?

Not if that was the direct approach, but people with agendas tend to
approach things obliquely on occasion.

I recall a few years back when some minorities encouraged lots of
children so as to eventually become much less of a minority. I can think
of some funny names to describe that process! 8^)

Life is so strange.....

- Mike KB3EIA -

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

What does any of this have to do with BPL?????

Carl - wk3c

This topic drifted a long time before I ever started posting on it.
It's had a lot of racism accusations, a lot of work ethic comparisons,
and even some thought on how the guv'mint should be run. Probably more
of that than BPL.

Chalk it up to topic drift.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Kim" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message

At least here in EPA, we have a decent selection of independent diners
as an alternative to the fast food chains. The food in them is not
much more expensive than the chains, and usually better for you. The
workers in those places make at least as much as the fast food chains.
One reason for their survival is that they don't spend bazillions on
advertising. Another is local loyalty of customers.

So what's the answer, Dwight - Ryan - Kim?

73 de Jim, N2EY

I'm out of it...speculation won't solve a thing and I choose not to be
as
depressed and bitter and hateful as others...

Kim,

I hope you weren't referring to me....

73 de Jim, N2EY

Oh goodness...no. I was specifically referring to Dwight...

Kim W5TIT

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
. ..
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

What does any of this have to do with BPL?????

Carl - wk3c

This topic drifted a long time before I ever started posting on it.
It's had a lot of racism accusations, a lot of work ethic comparisons,
and even some thought on how the guv'mint should be run. Probably more
of that than BPL.

Chalk it up to topic drift.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Yep, and for me it's been more interesting... :o

Kim W5TIT

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...

The
average wage around here, what is considered the alleged "living" or
minimum
wage is between $5.25-6.00 per hour.

Keep in mind that the minimum wage was NEVER intended to be a "living" wage.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Kim W5TIT wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
. ..

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:


What does any of this have to do with BPL?????

Carl - wk3c

This topic drifted a long time before I ever started posting on it.
It's had a lot of racism accusations, a lot of work ethic comparisons,
and even some thought on how the guv'mint should be run. Probably more
of that than BPL.

Chalk it up to topic drift.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Yep, and for me it's been more interesting... :o

Funny how some threads get better when this happens! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

What does any of this have to do with BPL?????

Carl, this isn't a newsgroup, it's a CHAT ROOM for the regulars
and their buddies. All can talk on anydamnthingtheywant
because they got licensed as amateurs. One can only talk
about actual amateur radio policy issues someplace else... :-)

LHA

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

What does any of this have to do with BPL?????

Carl, this isn't a newsgroup, it's a CHAT ROOM for the regulars
and their buddies.

Nope, not even the use of CAPITAL LETTERS makes this a chat room. It is
still a newsgroup.

All can talk on anydamnthingtheywant
because they got licensed as amateurs.

All can discuss any topic because it isn't outlawed. As you've been
quick to point out, this is an unmoderated group. You've frequently
gone quite far afield in your postings. We'll chalk this up as another
"Do as I say and not as I do" comment.

One can only talk
about actual amateur radio policy issues someplace else... :-)

What's it to you? You aren't ivolved in amateur radio.

Dave K8MN

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...

The
average wage around here, what is considered the alleged "living" or
minimum
wage is between $5.25-6.00 per hour.

Keep in mind that the minimum wage was NEVER intended to be a "living" wage.

It wasn't? I'd be interested in a reference on that.

I think what we're really seeing is inflation outpacing the minimum wage.

Fun fact: In 1976 I started a job as a degreed engineer at the princely sum of
about $12,000/yr - about $6 an hour. About minimum wage today, but back then
the prices of most things (particularly housing and transportation) was so much
lower that it was a lot of money - to me, anyway.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote:

So.... basically, one way or another people have to
pay for it, be it in higher service/product costs or
paying in taxes for a government program.


Let me start by saying I don't have all the answers either, Ryan. However,
it is fairly easy to see where some of the biggest problems are. The most
obvious is corporate profits today. Product quality is dropping (plastics),
wages are relatively stagnated, product prices certainly haven't dropped
much, but corporate profits have went through the roof. Perhaps a mechanism
to reel in or put a cap on corporate profits is the answer. How to do that
is the ten thousand dollar question (or, in this case, trillion dollar
question). I'm somewhat radical, so I prefer the outright purge method - a
cap on product price increases for several years and an immediate increase
in overall wages (with caps on immigration or other negative factors
effecting workers). This will drive some marginal companies out of business
(the purge) and will slow down the economy sharply. But, over a several year
period, more streamlined companies will eventually replace those put out of
business and the economy will recover. At that point, the cap on product
prices can be reduced, letting competition once again drive the market.

The second most obvious is the concentration of marketplaces. So, if the
above isn't acceptable, perhaps this is the place to look. What I'm talking
about here is larger corporations gobbling up whole market segments, driving
smaller companies out of business. Lets take an example. Wal-Mart moves into
a town offering a wide range of products. Of course, the new store doesn't
offer a wide selection in any department, but it does carry the basics in
each department - just enough to take away what local businesses call their
bread-and-butter products (the products stores depend on to pay employees,
rent, and so on). As that happens, local stores are forced to depend on the
sale of high end products where sales are far less predictable. The
inevitable result is that many smaller stores simply collapse. And this
isn't just happening in the retail industry. It is happening in many
industries (publishing, news, entertainment, manufacturing, transportation,
and so on).

The next most obvious is credit. In many markets, high prices are
supported only by massive credit activity. For example, the automobile
market. Prices have climbed sharply mainly because credit is much easier to
get, in much higher amounts, than just a few decades ago. Put a regulatory
cap on credit in this market and prices have to drop if companies want to
sell cars. Of course, the same is true for other markets (home construction,
consumer goods, and so on). The biggest danger to this solution is the
tendency for companies to pass on any initial losses to consumers (lower
quality products) and their own employees. The first will correct itself
over time, but the second requires additional labor protections (wage
increases, a cap on immigration, and efforts to prevent companies from
moving overseas).

Like I said, I certainly don't have all the answers. Even some of the
problems are elusive. However, it is clear that even minor regulatory
modifications, not massive government programs, can have a dramatic impact.
The idea offered in the first paragraph also has the advantage of keeping
product prices down for consumers. The idea in the second paragraph requires
more effort, but offers greater returns over a longer period of time. The
idea in the third paragraph offers the most benefits, but will have the most
negative impact on consumers in the short term. For a truly robust economy,
perhaps parts of all three should be considered.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/