Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote:
My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). -- Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw |
#82
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 16 Aug 2012 15:25:11 GMT, Han wrote:
" wrote in : On 16 Aug 2012 11:27:21 GMT, Han wrote: Larry Jaques wrote in : trying something unique - snipping That's just it. Unemployment isn't running out. Some people have been on it for over three years, Han! I think that after whatever the initial run is (I think it was 13 weeks when I last used it, back in the '70s) and the unemployed person hasn't found work, they should be forced to take whatever job IS available in their town, at their unemployment office. If the wages are less than their unemployment check (usually for very highly paid people), maybe cover the difference? But the unemployment office isn't forcing anything. That should change. Forcing unearned money on people isn't good for anyone involved: Not the worker, not the EDD office, and not the taxpayers. I'm not familiar with all the laws about unemployment, especially since they seem to change often in terms of time periods covered. The problem is not unemployment compensation in general, but the way the US (in general) fails to generate employment and educational opportunities, Absolute nonsense. Everyone is offered an education, some several times. Because they choose not to participate isn't my problem. It shouldn't be the (federal) government's either. True, as well as false. My son-in-law teaches high school math in Paterson, NJ (read ghetto school). He delights in the observation he is making a difference there. He also is shown daily the deficiencies of the local school system (Paterson isn't exactly an example of how to educate kids), the indifference of parents, as well as the (lack of) culture among the kids. So, yes, if you are gung-ho to get educated AND get a committed mentor, you can get educated anywhere in the US. But it is really tough in some environments. So you're saying that *NONE* of the children in that school get an education? I'd say it's time to close it down. Here they have a thing called "charter schools". Perhaps it's time for a rich Northern state like New Jersey to learn from the poor South. especially when the economy turns sour. I think that covering the difference between previous high wages and the lower wages in current opportunities has been considered in some places. That's absurd. Why the hell would I work at a high-stress job if the government (you) is going to pay me to loaf? I wasn't loafing, and the high-stress job I had, I eventually ditched. Before that, though, I saw the high-stress job as a challenge, plus I was paid enough to live. I was able to buy my first home, and now have little debt on that home left. On the salary I made last, it would be really, really tough to buy this house now with just a meager deposit. Were we talking about *you*? I missed that part. Hell, I'll take a job greeting at Wallyworld if they'll pay me what I'm making now, complete with retirement and bennies. I could have stayed home with my wife last weekend and wouldn't have had to work every night this week. ...AND paid the bills. Kewl! I may like this Democrat thing. BTW, who pays for it all? John Gault? But that can get dicey very fast, especially in the middle income ranges. Example: Your previous job had generous benefits and pension arrangements, but you were RIF'ed. There is a new job somewhere else, but at 60% of your previous wages, with less benefits and pension arrangements. If you do take that, not only will you have to really limit your expenditures (including probably selling your house at a moment it isn't advantageous), but your resume will show that precipitous decrease. Not good for the next job. Maybe that scenario isn't too important for farm workers and others, but it is a very important point to a large portion of currently unemployed middle income people. If you want a life with no risk (but also with no reward), why did you move to the US, Han? Freedom to succeed is also the freedom to fail. You *can't* have one without the other. I moved to the US because upon finishing my masters in Holland I got offered a job as a technician in a Harvard lab, with the promise from my Dutch professor (Laurens van Deenen) that if my work was good enough there, I would get a (Dutch) PhD. Why couldn't you get the same opportunity in Holland? My alternative was compulsory military service (in 1969, there was a draft in Holland). I got a J-1 visa, later converted to a green card by reason of me being indispensable for the lab's work. My wife got an interview with a highly regarded professor at the Mass General Hospital for a technician's job, so we could live in Cambridge, Mass, not the cheapest place on earth. I took the chance because it seemed the way to start a career. I was unemployed for a 3 months (long story), but found a job in New York that I stayed with for 34 years. So yes, I did "fail" at some point, but was lucky/capable enough to get going again. So, one thing led to another, and as many, but not all in similar positions, I stayed in the US, not too far from where my grandchildren live. My son-in-law and daughter-in-law think we might the right choice, did and do the right things. Now I got pertussis and have to overcome that cough ... I don't need your life's story. OTOH, I don't understand how you can come here because the opportunities are better and turn around and want everything that crushed the opportunities where you're from. |
#83
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 16 Aug 2012 15:26:30 GMT, Han wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote in : Jesus, Han. You really -are- a liberal. sigh OK, how long did farmers (and others who employ illegals) have to comply with laws which were already on the books? How long did they have between the time the bill was introduced and passed? The time frame is likely _years, not just months. Why hadn't they rehired _legal_ replacements during those many months and years, hmm? This was sprung on them fairly fast. Perhaps they had hoped that the law would be overturned and gambled wrong. That's a lie. Governments don't do *anything* fast and this was no exception. |
#84
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 8/16/2012 8:42 AM, Jack wrote:
On 8/15/2012 2:10 PM, Just Wondering wrote: On 8/15/2012 6:13 AM, Jack wrote: On 8/14/2012 7:49 PM, HeyBub wrote: It is a federal crime for a non-citizen to vote for a federal office. It's a federal crime to break into our country and be here illegally, and the Feds ignore that crime as well... I've read the federal statute. It is not a crime to enter the country illegally. It is illegal (legally prohibited, a crime) to enter the country illegally. The first offense is a misdemeanor the first time and no jury trial is needed, but is a crime and the criminal is supposed to be deported. The feds ignore that crime. The second offense is a felony, and the criminal can go to jail. Please cite the federal statute making it a crime. The federal government is ignoring most all crimes related to illegal entry, and they are ignoring it hoping to garner votes to keep their sorry asses in power, the same reason the ignore voter fraud. Obummer is not alone, although his audacity is no less than spectacular. The consequences are all civil, not criminal. For example, an illegal alien can be deported, but without more cannot be sentenced to a prison term. Yes, some crimes are civil, some are criminal, but are crimes by definition. Nonsense. There's no such thing as a civil, noncriminal crime. If you disagree, you can prove me wrong by citing a statute as an example. But you can't because there isn't one. |
#85
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 8/16/2012 9:32 AM, Han wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote in : If people hadn't been living so _far_ above their means in the first place, the reduction wouldn't hurt nearly as bad and wouldn't cause many of them to lose their homes, etc. Yes, and yes. They believed what were essentially slick second hand car salesmen, both with their extravagant homes and mortgages. Any reasonably intelligent person should be able to figure out for himself if he can afford a purchase. |
#86
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 18:41:32 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
wrote: Mike M wrote: On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 14:20:13 -0400, "Mike Marlow" wrote: Larry Jaques wrote: I call BULL**** on that one, Han. With so many people out of work right now, I'd bet not one of those jobs went empty for very long if we were to finally deport all the illegals. Not so sure Larry. There have been more times when I've hears "i would not work for that wage", or "I would not do that", than would cause me to believe that the unemployment roles are filled with people willing to do that agricultural work. In fact - if that were the case, those people could be right at work besides the migrant workers even as we speak. How many unemployed people have you heard say that they would take those crop jobs? I am calling BULL**** on your comment. 'Course, I also believe that folks on unemployment should be given only a limited time of being able to turn down jobs not in their particular line of expertise. After 6 months (or less?), they should be required take any job they might qualify for (a couple days training or less?) to get off the unemployment roles. Unlimited unemployment checks breed worse things. Get 'em off their asses! Basically I agree with you, but hopefully some fairness should apply. Try to put yourself in their situation. Some traumatic medical condition has left you unable to do your former job, is it fair to go make you pick crops for minimum wage. I don't see a lot of us on this group surviving many days of agricultural work at our age. The only problem with agreeing with Larry's point is that there is no such thing as unlimited unemployment checks. Sounds good if you want to close with a statement like "Get 'em off their asses", but it's only rhetorical. Those two sentences only serve to show a lack of understanding for what the world of the unemployed really looks like today. I should have qualified it better I was actually more in agreement with you. Mike M |
#87
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:19:30 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard
wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Again, why would I bust my butt to do a difficult (impossible for others, even) job when I can be the best Wallyworld greeter in the world without breaking a sweat? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). No, simply a dumb idea. Why do you want the government, or any third party, to get between an employer and employee (both assumed to be adults). Can't we just let employers and employees decide for themselves? ...or is that too much like freedom? |
#88
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:49:26 -0400, "
Again, why would I bust my butt to do a difficult (impossible for others, even) job when I can be the best Wallyworld greeter in the world without breaking a sweat? Maybe you wouldn't, but some people take satisfaction out of doing a decent day's work, even if it doesn't pay a decent wage. To many, a job as a Wallyworld greeter is boring and demeaning and underpaying. |
#89
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 08/16/2012 10:25 AM, Han wrote:
SNIP as well as the (lack of) culture among the kids. That IS the problem in a nutshell and it's systemic across all the demographics. This was interesting: http://culturewrench.com/?p=10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk |
#90
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
On 08/16/2012 09:56 AM, Han wrote: SNIP Opinions versus facts. What I say are my opinions. I think I was paid what I was worth at most if not all points in my career. I know that others in similar positions and with similar capabilities were paid less and others more, but that is besides the point. My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. You're missing the point. Unless force it brought to bear to MAKE you take a job, you're always "paid what you're worth" because you are "worth" what the market will bear. So if there are way more people than jobs. Then a person's worth may be close to negligible because they all want to eat (people who want to eat are competing against one another)? As a society, do we really wish to support this phenomenon of the free marketplace? Maybe that's why we have (and may need) "minimum wage" laws? Bill If a job is offered at a price, it is because the buyer (employer) values the work more than the money they pay for it. If the seller (you) accepts the job, then you value the money more highly than you do your time to do the work. Everyone wins. You may not be making as much as you would LIKE or THINK you should get, but that doesn't make you "worth" it. Again, this is true as long as no one is pointing a gun at your head. Relevant: http://jwh.fastmail.fm/essaysfolder....ays_market.htm |
#91
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). I don't see anything utopian about undermining peoples motivation. |
#92
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Larry Jaques wrote:
It'll hurt, with millions losing their jobs, but we need to shear off all the unnecessary governmental divisions NOW. Duplication is really rampant when as many as 30 agencies cover the same tasks. I don't even want to hear about deficits when they can be immediately reversed by cutting the minions who spend them. I want to see the US -debt- start going down and down in my lifetime, please! It would probably bother you to know that a school district in CA (I think) that borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars, on a long term load that they will not and cannot (as there are no prepay provisions) make the FIRST payment on until 20 years from now! They "snuck it by" the voters. -- All of us want to do well. But if we do not do good, too, then doing well will never be enough. -- Anna Quindlen |
#93
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Jack wrote:
It is patently clear that the Democrats (socialists) want open boarders so they can get someone to vote for them. They do everything possible to open our boarders to illegals, then do everything possible to promote voter fraud, and nothing to stop it. Doensn't it seems like there is adequate room for a 3rd party--we could call them the "Realists"? |
#94
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Tim Daneliuk wrote in
: You're missing the point. Unless force it brought to bear to MAKE you take a job, you're always "paid what you're worth" because you are "worth" what the market will bear. If a job is offered at a price, it is because the buyer (employer) values the work more than the money they pay for it. If the seller (you) accepts the job, then you value the money more highly than you do your time to do the work. Everyone wins. You may not be making as much as you would LIKE or THINK you should get, but that doesn't make you "worth" it. Again, this is true as long as no one is pointing a gun at your head. That is fine in a really free market. I was glad that my boss always valued my work and could convince his bosses of it (I was indeed convinced). On the other hand, I was taken into the office of the division head once and told that it was better to take a 30% cut now that portion of the grants had run out. I did, and within a year had managed to get another grant. I am not sure whether I could have insisted that my salary should remain the same, and that departmental funds should cover the shortfall (I heard that might have been the "law"). I was too afraid of not getting institutional support for my next grant application, which would have been it for my career. So a free market may exist for some professions. I am wondering how free the market is in actual fact. It isn't for many "trades" that limit to union members. Obviously for people in sales of high-faluting medical equipment there was a recent collapse as another poster indicated. The really good salaries in the pharmaceutical industry are likely also a thing of the past. We have had really big discussions, sometimes of varying degrees of politeness, whether teachers are paid as deserved, too little or grossly too much. Until there is at least a 5% surplus in each profession for an extended period of time, it is unlikely that a truly free market develops. The 5% figure is taken from what I heard was a healthy vacancy rate for rental housing - neither too much nor too little. Obviously for "protected" professions such as department heads at universities, unionized jobs and others, the extended period of time might be very long. Also, when companies pay their CEOs more than they pay in taxes, something is amiss, I think. Of course someone could make a case, perhaps ... -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#95
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
" wrote in
: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 16:19:30 +0000 (UTC), Larry Blanchard wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Again, why would I bust my butt to do a difficult (impossible for others, even) job when I can be the best Wallyworld greeter in the world without breaking a sweat? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). No, simply a dumb idea. Why do you want the government, or any third party, to get between an employer and employee (both assumed to be adults). Can't we just let employers and employees decide for themselves? ...or is that too much like freedom? I would like to reward effort and capabilities/knowledge. Not the tricks used to get up to a certain level. The Peter Principle has been observed .... Now do we keep giving Peter "merit" increases (ie increases over the change in cost of living)? -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#96
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
" wrote in
: So you're saying that *NONE* of the children in that school get an education? I'd say it's time to close it down. Here they have a thing called "charter schools". Perhaps it's time for a rich Northern state like New Jersey to learn from the poor South. This is the poor North we are talking about. Where the state has taken some jurisdiction over some school districts. In Paterson they are called academies. This is what Paterson did, as I understand it. They closed the school. Then they open the "academies" (maybe next to a "regular" school) and select from the fired teachers (I believe just about all were RIF'ed) who will be rehired and get which kind of kids for which subject. Of course all in the same old building, with new signs, probably also more administrators. My SIL did well, some other teachers not so. He seems appreciated by the alumni who took his lessons to heart. I am confident he teaches math, manners and demeanor equally well; he is the kind of guy who can wear a T-shirt declaiming "Sarcasm, just another service we offer". -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#97
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. Have you not ever experienced that in your career? That has been the norm in my career, but I've never worked in a union shop where the opposite prevails. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Don't understand why you just applied a contradictory principle. Surely there will be differentiators - there always are. Stick with your original thought. Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). No - it is the way that the commercial world works in many areas of employment. -- -Mike- |
#98
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
" wrote in
: On 16 Aug 2012 15:25:11 GMT, Han wrote: snip I moved to the US because upon finishing my masters in Holland I got offered a job as a technician in a Harvard lab, with the promise from my Dutch professor (Laurens van Deenen) that if my work was good enough there, I would get a (Dutch) PhD. Why couldn't you get the same opportunity in Holland? I was not offered that opportunity in Holland. Maybe I wasn't good enough, maybe my buddy and I were the only ones who could get "tricked" into going to Boston. My alternative was compulsory military service (in 1969, there was a draft in Holland). I got a J-1 visa, later converted to a green card by reason of me being indispensable for the lab's work. My wife got an interview with a highly regarded professor at the Mass General Hospital for a technician's job, so we could live in Cambridge, Mass, not the cheapest place on earth. I took the chance because it seemed the way to start a career. I was unemployed for a 3 months (long story), but found a job in New York that I stayed with for 34 years. So yes, I did "fail" at some point, but was lucky/capable enough to get going again. So, one thing led to another, and as many, but not all in similar positions, I stayed in the US, not too far from where my grandchildren live. My son-in-law and daughter-in-law think we might the right choice, did and do the right things. Now I got pertussis and have to overcome that cough ... I don't need your life's story. OTOH, I don't understand how you can come here because the opportunities are better and turn around and want everything that crushed the opportunities where you're from. It was an opportunity that I couldn't refuse, as I felt it. I am relating my ideas and feelings, because they are different from some of the feelings and ideas others here have, and because it is always good to discuss those and perhaps open minds to different ways of doing things. No judgement to better or worse, just different. And yes, while Holland is doing very well in the EU today and there are many opportunities there, at the few times I could have made a switch from here to there, the opportunities weren't there. So it was better to try in a country of 300 million than in a country of 15 million. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#99
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Bill wrote:
Larry Blanchard wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). I don't see anything utopian about undermining peoples motivation. Undermining their motivation? How do you see that Bill? Pay for performance - that is motivation. -- -Mike- |
#100
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Tim Daneliuk wrote in newsunvf9-ipe2.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com: On 08/16/2012 10:25 AM, Han wrote: SNIP as well as the (lack of) culture among the kids. That IS the problem in a nutshell and it's systemic across all the demographics. This was interesting: http://culturewrench.com/?p=10 Tim Daneliuk, that is interesting. I'll have to really read it (like so many things) to comment. I just glanced at it. Is it that we are too isolated in our homes, too little interacting and too self-centered that the idea of "it takes a village to educate a kid" doesn't apply anymore? Civility and respect is what should be taught together with math. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#102
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 08/16/2012 01:54 PM, Bill wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote: On 08/16/2012 09:56 AM, Han wrote: SNIP Opinions versus facts. What I say are my opinions. I think I was paid what I was worth at most if not all points in my career. I know that others in similar positions and with similar capabilities were paid less and others more, but that is besides the point. My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. You're missing the point. Unless force it brought to bear to MAKE you take a job, you're always "paid what you're worth" because you are "worth" what the market will bear. So if there are way more people than jobs. Then a person's worth may be close to negligible That's right. This is called the law of supply and demand. All min wage laws do is distort economic feedback and prevent new jobs from being created. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk |
#103
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 08/16/2012 02:35 PM, Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in : You're missing the point. Unless force it brought to bear to MAKE you take a job, you're always "paid what you're worth" because you are "worth" what the market will bear. If a job is offered at a price, it is because the buyer (employer) values the work more than the money they pay for it. If the seller (you) accepts the job, then you value the money more highly than you do your time to do the work. Everyone wins. You may not be making as much as you would LIKE or THINK you should get, but that doesn't make you "worth" it. Again, this is true as long as no one is pointing a gun at your head. That is fine in a really free market. I was glad that my boss always valued my work and could convince his bosses of it (I was indeed convinced). On the other hand, I was taken into the office of the division head once and told that it was better to take a 30% cut now that portion of the grants had run out. I did, and within a year had managed to get another grant. I am not sure whether I could have insisted that my salary should remain the same, and that departmental funds should cover the shortfall (I heard that might have been the "law"). I was too afraid of not getting institutional support for my next grant application, which would have been it for my career. So a free market may exist for some professions. I am wondering how free the market is in actual fact. It isn't for many "trades" that limit to union members. Obviously for people in sales of high-faluting medical equipment there was a recent collapse as another poster indicated. The really good salaries in the pharmaceutical industry are likely also a thing of the past. We have had really big discussions, sometimes of varying degrees of politeness, whether teachers are paid as deserved, too little or grossly too much. Until there is at least a 5% surplus in each profession for an extended period of time, it is unlikely that a truly free market develops. The 5% figure is taken from what I heard was a healthy vacancy rate for rental housing - neither too much nor too little. Obviously for "protected" professions such as department heads at universities, unionized jobs and others, the extended period of time might be very long. Also, when companies pay their CEOs more than they pay in taxes, something is amiss, I think. Of course someone could make a case, perhaps ... You are not describing a free market. You are describing a fantasy world in which people get paid what they want irrespective of market conditions. Why should employees have preferential treatment over employers. What makes the rights of sellers superior to that of buyers? You cannot make the moral case for this ... ever. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk |
#104
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Just Wondering wrote in
: On 8/16/2012 9:32 AM, Han wrote: Larry Jaques wrote in : If people hadn't been living so _far_ above their means in the first place, the reduction wouldn't hurt nearly as bad and wouldn't cause many of them to lose their homes, etc. Yes, and yes. They believed what were essentially slick second hand car salesmen, both with their extravagant homes and mortgages. Any reasonably intelligent person should be able to figure out for himself if he can afford a purchase. Operative word is "should". Never had the experience of a salesperson selling you more than you went in for?? Be really honest. Maybe he explained the benefits of this or that option that you hadn't thought of really well, and you did decide to go for it. Not that you couldn't have done without, but it seemed like a good idea. Like Ed Pawloski's (sorry if I misspell) new car with built-in NAV gadget. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#105
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Larry Jaques wrote:
If people hadn't been living so _far_ above their means in the first place, the reduction wouldn't hurt nearly as bad and wouldn't cause many of them to lose their homes, etc. Bull**** and this is where your arrogance really ****es me off Larry. We have never lived above our means, paid our mortgage off early, sent 4 kids through college, contributed to our community and our church - all of our lives. Guess what - unemployment hit me. I don't mind doing whatever I have to do to earn a buck but your bull**** above is nothing more than your pride and arrogance speaking. That is just too damned insulting not to respond to. Maybe you never had anything, so going backwards wasn't a big step. More of America is represented by people like me than the Mcmansion types that are over their heads in debt and those people are hurting from this economy. The unemployment rate is hurting a lot of people who are very willing to work and are accustomed to doing so. The internet is full of people like you who just spout bull**** because you think way too much of yourself. -- -Mike- |
#106
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:6c00g9-n1i2.ln1
@ozzie.tundraware.com: You are not describing a free market. You are describing a fantasy world in which people get paid what they want irrespective of market conditions. Why should employees have preferential treatment over employers. What makes the rights of sellers superior to that of buyers? You cannot make the moral case for this ... ever. I wasn't describing a free market, and I certainly don't call it moral. Sometimes the real world isn't that moral. And remember, institutions and corporations are run by people. And in some instances there is no morally correct accounting done. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#107
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote: Larry Blanchard wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). I don't see anything utopian about undermining peoples motivation. Undermining their motivation? How do you see that Bill? Pay for performance - that is motivation. I agree with paying for performance--though measuring performance can get really complex very fast. I thought he wanted to reward a "good" engineer, a "good" clerk and a "good" dogcather with the same pay. Larry B. does say, "Maybe all top performers should be paid the same". Paying them all the same would, for some IMO, undermine the motivation to be an engineer or physician: "I like to work with animals, I think I'll work for animal control so I don't have to go to school for 8 years to be a veteranarian". |
#108
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 8/16/2012 1:11 PM, Bill wrote:
Doensn't it seems like there is adequate room for a 3rd party--we could call them the "Realists"? According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States, the USA already has at least these 37 political parties: Republican Party Democrat Party Libertarian Party Green Party Constitution Party America First Party American Party American Populist Party American Third Position Party Americans Elect Party America's Party Christian Liberty Party Citizens Party of the United States Communist Party of the United States of America Freedom Socialist Party Independence Party of America Independent American Party Jefferson Republican Party Justice Party Labor Party Modern Whig Party National Socialist Movement Objectivist Party Party for Socialism and Liberation Peace and Freedom Party Prohibition Party Raza Unida Party Reform Party of the United States of America Socialist Action Party Socialist Alternative Party Socialist Equality Party Socialist Party USA Socialist Workers Party United States Pacifist Party United States Pirate Party Unity Party of America Workers World Party If you want to form a 38th party and call it the "Realists Party", nobody's stopping you. |
#109
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Mike Marlow wrote:
Larry Jaques wrote: If people hadn't been living so _far_ above their means in the first place, the reduction wouldn't hurt nearly as bad and wouldn't cause many of them to lose their homes, etc. Bull**** and this is where your arrogance really ****es me off Larry. We have never lived above our means, paid our mortgage off early, sent 4 kids through college, contributed to our community and our church - all of our lives. Guess what - unemployment hit me. I don't mind doing whatever I have to do to earn a buck but your bull**** above is nothing more than your pride and arrogance speaking. That is just too damned insulting not to respond to. Maybe you never had anything, so going backwards wasn't a big step. More of America is represented by people like me than the Mcmansion types that are over their heads in debt and those people are hurting from this economy. The unemployment rate is hurting a lot of people who are very willing to work and are accustomed to doing so. The internet is full of people like you who just spout bull**** because you think way too much of yourself. He is not talking about you Mike. There seem to be plenty of people who choose to live their lives "in the red". Funny, when things get tougher they still take expensive vacations, buy expensive toys, etc. The unemployment and shift in the standard of living is the result of a leveling-out (rebalancing) of the standard of living between the 3rd world countries, who now have many of our old jobs, and ours. It started in the 80s (a friend gave me a sort of blow-by-blow account as it happened, from his perspective as a Ford employee). Unfortunately I don't think we've experienced all of the pain yet. |
#110
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Just Wondering wrote:
On 8/16/2012 1:11 PM, Bill wrote: Doensn't it seems like there is adequate room for a 3rd party--we could call them the "Realists"? According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._United_States, the USA already has at least these 37 political parties: Republican Party Democrat Party Libertarian Party Green Party Constitution Party America First Party American Party American Populist Party American Third Position Party Americans Elect Party America's Party Christian Liberty Party Citizens Party of the United States Communist Party of the United States of America Freedom Socialist Party Independence Party of America Independent American Party Jefferson Republican Party Justice Party Labor Party Modern Whig Party National Socialist Movement Objectivist Party Party for Socialism and Liberation Peace and Freedom Party Prohibition Party Raza Unida Party Reform Party of the United States of America Socialist Action Party Socialist Alternative Party Socialist Equality Party Socialist Party USA Socialist Workers Party United States Pacifist Party United States Pirate Party Unity Party of America Workers World Party If you want to form a 38th party and call it the "Realists Party", nobody's stopping you. I knew there were really more than two, but I did not know there were 37! I think that the main two parties love it when folks go off and sub-divide (rendering the main two parties more powerful). Without some change, things could get uglier. |
#111
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 08/16/2012 03:29 PM, Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:6c00g9-n1i2.ln1 @ozzie.tundraware.com: You are not describing a free market. You are describing a fantasy world in which people get paid what they want irrespective of market conditions. Why should employees have preferential treatment over employers. What makes the rights of sellers superior to that of buyers? You cannot make the moral case for this ... ever. I wasn't describing a free market, and I certainly don't call it moral. Sometimes the real world isn't that moral. And remember, institutions and corporations are run by people. And in some instances there is no morally correct accounting done. That's true, but what you're proposing adds to the pillaging and thieving. Min wage laws and their many variant cousins effectively use force to constrain the buyer while giving the seller a benefit they have not earned. You're solution is thus effectively to increase evil, not decrease it. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ |
#112
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 08/16/2012 03:01 PM, Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in newsunvf9-ipe2.ln1 @ozzie.tundraware.com: On 08/16/2012 10:25 AM, Han wrote: SNIP as well as the (lack of) culture among the kids. That IS the problem in a nutshell and it's systemic across all the demographics. This was interesting: http://culturewrench.com/?p=10 Tim Daneliuk, that is interesting. I'll have to really read it (like so many things) to comment. I just glanced at it. Is it that we are too isolated in our homes, too little interacting and too self-centered that the idea of "it takes a village to educate a kid" doesn't apply anymore? Civility and respect is what should be taught together with math. It never took a village. This is political jabbering by the repugnant "we want to run your life" crowd. Civility and respect are taught by *parents*, not a village. But parents that have children at 15 or are too busy with their upper middle class lives to pay any attention to them at all are not teaching their children much of anything other than resentment. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ |
#113
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Han wrote:
You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. It''s income inequality that has made this the most powerful engine of economic development in the world. Who would try harder for the same money? Who would take a risk? Three things go into making a successful company: capital, labor, and, usually, raw materials. In most businesses, labor is not only the greatest cost, but it is sometimes the easiest to control. A prudent businessman pays his labor force the minimum each is willing to take. In many cases, if he pays them more, they'll simply spend it on drugs or buy a motorcycle and adios. |
#114
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Han wrote:
Also, when companies pay their CEOs more than they pay in taxes, something is amiss, I think. Of course someone could make a case, perhaps ... Absolutely! Companies that pay their CEOs more than they pay in taxes should be commended! The tax code exists for two reasons: To collect revenue and Promote social goals. Companies that paid no taxes took advantage of the law's promotion of social goals via legal exemptions, deductions, and the like. To the degree that the company activated these social goals (solar power, hiring numbskulls, etc.), they should be praised for their effort! One way to acknowledge this kind of company's contribution to the public weal is to reward it's CEO for finding and implementing these social targets. As an example, General Electric paid NO taxes on revenues of, what, $32 billion? The CEO not only gets a pretty nice compensation, but he becomes a best-buddy of the president. GE is probably an exemplar of the quest for social justice. Think of the children! |
#115
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 8/16/2012 3:31 PM, Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote: Bill wrote: Larry Blanchard wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). I don't see anything utopian about undermining peoples motivation. Undermining their motivation? How do you see that Bill? Pay for performance - that is motivation. I agree with paying for performance--though measuring performance can get really complex very fast. I thought he wanted to reward a "good" engineer, a "good" clerk and a "good" dogcather with the same pay. Larry B. does say, "Maybe all top performers should be paid the same". Paying them all the same would, for some IMO, undermine the motivation to be an engineer or physician: "I like to work with animals, I think I'll work for animal control so I don't have to go to school for 8 years to be a veteranarian". Plus, different activities have different values. A good engineer might put 1,000 hours into a project that returns $1, $10 or even $100 million to his employer as a return on its investment in his time. It would not be out of line to pay such a worker $200,000 a year. No matter how good a tomato picker might be, it's highly likely that his labors will return $1,000 an hour to the farmer who hires him. |
#116
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Jack wrote:
That's true only because illegals would not be around to take the jobs. I could sell cars cheap if I could pay illegals $4.00 an hour to build them. Robots build cars today. At considerably less than $4/hr. In the case of agriculture, the difference is not between $5/hr and $7.25 (if you insist agricultural workers come under the minimum wage). The difference is between $5/hr and nothing! At some point in the wage scale, it is cheaper to do away with much of the manual labor and emply a (admittedly expensive) machine. Obviously there are harvesters for wheat and corn, but I've seen harvesters for nuts, tomatoes, and oranges. I've seen a machine that automatically washes, bags, and boxes lettuce. In this instance, stoop workers cut the lettuce and pitch it into the machine, which is covering 10-12 rows at a time, with the laborers following along behind. This lettuce gizmo has to have cut the work, and the amount of labor, required by 80%. |
#117
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Tim Daneliuk wrote in
: On 08/16/2012 03:29 PM, Han wrote: Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:6c00g9-n1i2.ln1 @ozzie.tundraware.com: You are not describing a free market. You are describing a fantasy world in which people get paid what they want irrespective of market conditions. Why should employees have preferential treatment over employers. What makes the rights of sellers superior to that of buyers? You cannot make the moral case for this ... ever. I wasn't describing a free market, and I certainly don't call it moral. Sometimes the real world isn't that moral. And remember, institutions and corporations are run by people. And in some instances there is no morally correct accounting done. That's true, but what you're proposing adds to the pillaging and thieving. Min wage laws and their many variant cousins effectively use force to constrain the buyer while giving the seller a benefit they have not earned. You're solution is thus effectively to increase evil, not decrease it. We disagree, I think. Minimum wage is not pillaging and thieving but protecting people from abuse by exploiters. We have a military to protect the country. We all pay for it, huge amounts at that. But you'd leave the little man to fight for himself, without the protection of a minimum wage? I think that is icky, with all due respect for your opinion. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#118
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
"HeyBub" wrote in
: Han wrote: You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. It''s income inequality that has made this the most powerful engine of economic development in the world. Who would try harder for the same money? Who would take a risk? Three things go into making a successful company: capital, labor, and, usually, raw materials. In most businesses, labor is not only the greatest cost, but it is sometimes the easiest to control. A prudent businessman pays his labor force the minimum each is willing to take. In many cases, if he pays them more, they'll simply spend it on drugs or buy a motorcycle and adios. Eventually, even the riobber barons didn't get away with all of it. -- Best regards Han email address is invalid |
#119
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
On 08/16/2012 06:57 PM, Han wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote in : On 08/16/2012 03:29 PM, Han wrote: Tim Daneliuk wrote in news:6c00g9-n1i2.ln1 @ozzie.tundraware.com: You are not describing a free market. You are describing a fantasy world in which people get paid what they want irrespective of market conditions. Why should employees have preferential treatment over employers. What makes the rights of sellers superior to that of buyers? You cannot make the moral case for this ... ever. I wasn't describing a free market, and I certainly don't call it moral. Sometimes the real world isn't that moral. And remember, institutions and corporations are run by people. And in some instances there is no morally correct accounting done. That's true, but what you're proposing adds to the pillaging and thieving. Min wage laws and their many variant cousins effectively use force to constrain the buyer while giving the seller a benefit they have not earned. You're solution is thus effectively to increase evil, not decrease it. We disagree, I think. Minimum wage is not pillaging and thieving but protecting people from abuse by exploiters. We have a military to protect the country. We all pay for it, huge amounts at that. But you'd leave the little man to fight for himself, without the protection of a minimum wage? I think that is icky, with all due respect for your opinion. 2/3 of American business is small/medium sized. Minimum wage laws FORCE the small business owner to pay above market rates for jobs. So what do they do? Hire no one and stress their existing staff more. Notice the 14+% effective unemployment rate at the moment. Part of this is directly attributable to travesties like min wage laws. Minimum wage is not pillaging and thieving but protecting people from abuse by exploiters. This is absurd. No one makes you work for someone but somehow, it's OK to make someone hire you. It's unfair and it is evil. I think that is icky, with all due respect for your opinion. I think screwing people that take all the risk is icky. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ |
#120
Posted to rec.woodworking
|
|||
|
|||
More On The Gibson Guitar Fine For Wood Use
Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote: Bill wrote: Larry Blanchard wrote: On Thu, 16 Aug 2012 14:56:44 +0000, Han wrote: My point is that many people in lower positions, tomato pickers, clerks, whatever, are paid insufficient wages, and yes paying them more would make everything more expensive. You may or may not agree, but my opinion is that more income equality would benefit our society. I've occasionally wondered if it wouldn't be more equitable to pay workers based on how well they do a job, not on what the job is. There are people who excel in their jobs, whether that be clerks, engineers, physicians, or dogcatchers. All those jobs are essential. Maybe the top performers should all be paid the same? Yeah, I know - it's a utopian fantasy :-). I don't see anything utopian about undermining peoples motivation. Undermining their motivation? How do you see that Bill? Pay for performance - that is motivation. I agree with paying for performance--though measuring performance can get really complex very fast. I thought he wanted to reward a "good" engineer, a "good" clerk and a "good" dogcather with the same pay. Larry B. does say, "Maybe all top performers should be paid the same". Paying them all the same would, for some IMO, undermine the motivation to be an engineer or physician: "I like to work with animals, I think I'll work for animal control so I don't have to go to school for 8 years to be a veteranarian". Ok - I misunderstood your comments prior. -- -Mike- |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Gibson Guitar to pay big fine related to wood... | Woodworking | |||
raid on Gibson Guitar | Woodworking | |||
Wood guitar pickguard | Woodworking | |||
Wood knobs for guitar | Woodturning | |||
Gibson Guitar Company - Discovery Channel | Woodworking |