Since the average CEO makes anywhere from 20 to 1,000 times what a teacher makes, what kind of organized crime do you call that?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Corporate.
Without the little guy, these scum wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I think they should make what they are worth. If them not doing their job is costing the US $3billion a day, I say they're worth a bit more than they're getting paid.
And yes, public servants should be making what these sports stars and CEOs make, and the big guy should be making $40,000 a year. Imagine a world where the dead-end job is being a CEO, and teachers live in $15million houses.
Ritualized theft. It's OK to do in America, but not other capitalist countries found in Europe and the Far East.
Then again it's OK for citizens to go without health care in America, but not in most other capitalist countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wonder... why is it when it comes to attacking those who bring home the 'big bucks' it's always the CEO's who get all the blame and once in a blue moon the sports stars but you never hear libs complain about fellow libs in Hollywood who cash in huge year after year after year.
What ya say we take all but 100k of THEIR earnings and give it back to the people (like me) who are forced (by policies they support) to fork over half (or dern near) of what I earn working 8 hours + another 3 for the commute each and every day. Only good thing (I guess) is between work and the commute I'm too effing tired to spend what little I have left.
Sorry but I gotta call it from the seats I'm sitting in...
Oh and as for health care... maybe some of our folks with 'socialized healthcare' can chime in on how great it really is...
Here is a quote from someone (found on usenet) that lives (err lived) just to the north of the US.
"I am originally from Toronto, and am now living in the U.S. What I am saving in income taxes alone more than pays for my health insurance. And unlike in Canada, I don't go on a six month waiting list for heart surgery if I need it. In Toronto there is a waiting list for a lot of medical procedures. You can get it for free if you wait (and maybe drop dead while waiting). Or you can go to Buffalo or Detroit and pay cash and get it immediately."
<strong>If them not doing their job is costing the US $3billion a day, I say they're worth a bit more than they're getting paid.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, so I worked on Spider Man, MIB ][ and Stuart Little 2 - that earned Sony Pictures over $1 Billion.
So by that rational I definitely deserve a raise!
My ultimate point is that, no matter what they're paid, they have little right to hold us hostage for their selfish interest. And by the way, who cares what they're paid! That's not the issue!
I wonder... why is it when it comes to attacking those who bring home the 'big bucks' it's always the CEO's who get all the blame and once in a blue moon the sports stars but you never hear libs complain about fellow libs in Hollywood who cash in huge year after year after year.<hr></blockquote>
Difference is that sports stars and actors don't make their money on the backs of the poor. I'll be the first to attack hollywood executives, and I've done my share of criticizing the excessive income of actors and jocks, er, sports stars. But nobody ever lost a home because some actor is overpaid.
[quote]What ya say we take all but 100k of THEIR earnings and give it back to the people (like me) who are forced (by policies they support) to fork over half (or dern near) of what I earn working 8 hours + another 3 for the commute each and every day. Only good thing (I guess) is between work and the commute I'm too effing tired to spend what little I have left.<hr></blockquote>
If you're paying half your gross income in taxes then you're making a hell of a lot of money. Besides the obvious explanation of progressive vs. regressive taxation, which I assume you understand, I don't see why those who benefit most from our economic system shouldn't be asked to give the most back to it.
[quote]Oh and as for health care... maybe some of our folks with 'socialized healthcare' can chime in on how great it really is...<hr></blockquote>
Maybe someone without health care can chime in about how great it would be to HAVE health care?
As for the problems with Canada's health care system, I don't see why we would have to adopt Canada's health care system if we decided that health care is a right rather than a privilege. There are countless solutions to socialized health care. Oh, and that quote about Canada's health care should be considered an anecdotal, minority opinion.
As always, right wingers whining about taxes sound like spoiled children who don't know how great they have it. They enjoy a society with the highest standards of public health, an extensive infrastructure, and an astronomically high standard of living, yet from their nice houses and cars they bitch and moan like stuck pigs about having to pay to live in such a society.
IMO, if you don't like paying American taxes, then get the fsck outta here and live somewhere with lower taxes. Don't let the door smack ya on the ass, and don't come whining when you get worms from eating the meat and the sh!ts from drinking the water.
My ultimate point is that, no matter what they're paid, they have little right to hold us hostage for their selfish interest. And by the way, who cares what they're paid! That's not the issue!
The bigger picture is what matters.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree. If these longshoremen were being mistreated, then I'd support the strike, but it's a bit hard to feel compassion towards someone making 80k a year. Not as bad as striking jocks, but damn near it.
I agree. If these longshoremen were being mistreated, then I'd support the strike, but it's a bit hard to feel compassion towards someone making 80k a year. Not as bad as striking jocks, but damn near it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
2 points
1) What the heck does any of this have to do with Future Hardware???
2) The management of the West Coast ports locked out the Longshoremen. They did not strike. Management claimed they were deliberately slowing their work to protest lack of progess in contract talks (whether or not that is actually true I have no idea), so they simply shut down the ports and refused to let the longshoremen work.
The Longshoremen's basic complaint is not about money. My understanding of the situation is that the port authorities want to introduce bar codes and scanners for the containerized cargo (which longshoremen agree is a good idea in and of itself), but use nonunion people to do it. Union sees this as a deliberate attempt to weaken/break the Union, so they're understandably upset about it. Not that I'm particularly fond of the longshoremen, but IMO it's the management that are acting like pricks in this instance.
For those of you who feel that Dock Workers are overpaid; you should pay less attention to the media and go directly to the source:
[quote]The employers' federation in this dispute, the Pacific Maritime Association, posts contracts on their web site. For longshoremen and clerks with two years of experience, the top hourly pay is $27.68. That translates to $55,360 annually. For 'walking bosses' and foremen (who are in the union), the hourly is $36.50, or $73,000 annually. For watchmen, it's $20.12, or $40,240.<hr></blockquote>
The press numbers reported appear to be from:
[quote]The PMA in its 2001 annual report states the average coast income for longshoremen was $80,088, and those working over 2000 hours had an income of $106k. To get to $106k, they drop the bottom 50% of longshoremen and the bottom 18% of clerks to come up with the $106,000. They were cute about it for awhile, including an asterix with the qualifier, for those who work 2000 hours or more or "fulltime".<hr></blockquote>
Note that 1600 hours a year is "fulltime" and only 70% of dockworkers have fulltime employment.
Comments
<strong>
Since the average CEO makes anywhere from 20 to 1,000 times what a teacher makes, what kind of organized crime do you call that?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Corporate.
Without the little guy, these scum wouldn't have a leg to stand on. I think they should make what they are worth. If them not doing their job is costing the US $3billion a day, I say they're worth a bit more than they're getting paid.
And yes, public servants should be making what these sports stars and CEOs make, and the big guy should be making $40,000 a year. Imagine a world where the dead-end job is being a CEO, and teachers live in $15million houses.
Since the average CEO makes anywhere from 20 to 1,000 times what a teacher makes, what kind of organized crime do you call that?
<hr></blockquote>
Ritualized theft. It's OK to do in America, but not other capitalist countries found in Europe and the Far East.
Then again it's OK for citizens to go without health care in America, but not in most other capitalist countries.
<strong>
Ritualized theft. It's OK to do in America, but not other capitalist countries found in Europe and the Far East.
Then again it's OK for citizens to go without health care in America, but not in most other capitalist countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yea, what he said.
<strong>
Ritualized theft. It's OK to do in America, but not other capitalist countries found in Europe and the Far East.
Then again it's OK for citizens to go without health care in America, but not in most other capitalist countries.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I wonder... why is it when it comes to attacking those who bring home the 'big bucks' it's always the CEO's who get all the blame and once in a blue moon the sports stars but you never hear libs complain about fellow libs in Hollywood who cash in huge year after year after year.
What ya say we take all but 100k of THEIR earnings and give it back to the people (like me) who are forced (by policies they support) to fork over half (or dern near) of what I earn working 8 hours + another 3 for the commute each and every day. Only good thing (I guess) is between work and the commute I'm too effing tired to spend what little I have left.
Sorry but I gotta call it from the seats I'm sitting in...
Oh and as for health care... maybe some of our folks with 'socialized healthcare' can chime in on how great it really is...
Here is a quote from someone (found on usenet) that lives (err lived) just to the north of the US.
"I am originally from Toronto, and am now living in the U.S. What I am saving in income taxes alone more than pays for my health insurance. And unlike in Canada, I don't go on a six month waiting list for heart surgery if I need it. In Toronto there is a waiting list for a lot of medical procedures. You can get it for free if you wait (and maybe drop dead while waiting). Or you can go to Buffalo or Detroit and pay cash and get it immediately."
Dave
[ 10-10-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
<strong>If them not doing their job is costing the US $3billion a day, I say they're worth a bit more than they're getting paid.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OK, so I worked on Spider Man, MIB ][ and Stuart Little 2 - that earned Sony Pictures over $1 Billion.
So by that rational I definitely deserve a raise!
My ultimate point is that, no matter what they're paid, they have little right to hold us hostage for their selfish interest. And by the way, who cares what they're paid! That's not the issue!
The bigger picture is what matters.
I wonder... why is it when it comes to attacking those who bring home the 'big bucks' it's always the CEO's who get all the blame and once in a blue moon the sports stars but you never hear libs complain about fellow libs in Hollywood who cash in huge year after year after year.<hr></blockquote>
Difference is that sports stars and actors don't make their money on the backs of the poor. I'll be the first to attack hollywood executives, and I've done my share of criticizing the excessive income of actors and jocks, er, sports stars. But nobody ever lost a home because some actor is overpaid.
[quote]What ya say we take all but 100k of THEIR earnings and give it back to the people (like me) who are forced (by policies they support) to fork over half (or dern near) of what I earn working 8 hours + another 3 for the commute each and every day. Only good thing (I guess) is between work and the commute I'm too effing tired to spend what little I have left.<hr></blockquote>
If you're paying half your gross income in taxes then you're making a hell of a lot of money. Besides the obvious explanation of progressive vs. regressive taxation, which I assume you understand, I don't see why those who benefit most from our economic system shouldn't be asked to give the most back to it.
[quote]Oh and as for health care... maybe some of our folks with 'socialized healthcare' can chime in on how great it really is...<hr></blockquote>
Maybe someone without health care can chime in about how great it would be to HAVE health care?
As for the problems with Canada's health care system, I don't see why we would have to adopt Canada's health care system if we decided that health care is a right rather than a privilege. There are countless solutions to socialized health care. Oh, and that quote about Canada's health care should be considered an anecdotal, minority opinion.
As always, right wingers whining about taxes sound like spoiled children who don't know how great they have it. They enjoy a society with the highest standards of public health, an extensive infrastructure, and an astronomically high standard of living, yet from their nice houses and cars they bitch and moan like stuck pigs about having to pay to live in such a society.
IMO, if you don't like paying American taxes, then get the fsck outta here and live somewhere with lower taxes. Don't let the door smack ya on the ass, and don't come whining when you get worms from eating the meat and the sh!ts from drinking the water.
[ 10-11-2002: Message edited by: Junkyard Dawg ]</p>
<strong>
My ultimate point is that, no matter what they're paid, they have little right to hold us hostage for their selfish interest. And by the way, who cares what they're paid! That's not the issue!
The bigger picture is what matters.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree. If these longshoremen were being mistreated, then I'd support the strike, but it's a bit hard to feel compassion towards someone making 80k a year. Not as bad as striking jocks, but damn near it.
<strong>
I agree. If these longshoremen were being mistreated, then I'd support the strike, but it's a bit hard to feel compassion towards someone making 80k a year. Not as bad as striking jocks, but damn near it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
2 points
1) What the heck does any of this have to do with Future Hardware???
2) The management of the West Coast ports locked out the Longshoremen. They did not strike. Management claimed they were deliberately slowing their work to protest lack of progess in contract talks (whether or not that is actually true I have no idea), so they simply shut down the ports and refused to let the longshoremen work.
The Longshoremen's basic complaint is not about money. My understanding of the situation is that the port authorities want to introduce bar codes and scanners for the containerized cargo (which longshoremen agree is a good idea in and of itself), but use nonunion people to do it. Union sees this as a deliberate attempt to weaken/break the Union, so they're understandably upset about it. Not that I'm particularly fond of the longshoremen, but IMO it's the management that are acting like pricks in this instance.
Terry
[quote]The employers' federation in this dispute, the Pacific Maritime Association, posts contracts on their web site. For longshoremen and clerks with two years of experience, the top hourly pay is $27.68. That translates to $55,360 annually. For 'walking bosses' and foremen (who are in the union), the hourly is $36.50, or $73,000 annually. For watchmen, it's $20.12, or $40,240.<hr></blockquote>
The press numbers reported appear to be from:
[quote]The PMA in its 2001 annual report states the average coast income for longshoremen was $80,088, and those working over 2000 hours had an income of $106k. To get to $106k, they drop the bottom 50% of longshoremen and the bottom 18% of clerks to come up with the $106,000. They were cute about it for awhile, including an asterix with the qualifier, for those who work 2000 hours or more or "fulltime".<hr></blockquote>
Note that 1600 hours a year is "fulltime" and only 70% of dockworkers have fulltime employment.
We now return you to baseless rumors from MOSR.