Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by mandym, Mar 20, 2012.
I heard on the am news about the dividend payout. Not a word about those off-shore holdings. Wonder why?
Here's part of the answer, based on a comment on the article.
Comment by: Common Sense Voter. http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-v...ng-foreign-cash-back-to-the-us-blames-tax-law
Yes, the "smart" companies who can afford high priced financial advisors have parked their money overseas. Small and even some mid-sized companies can't afford same and are biting the bullet, until they fold up and close their doors.
A number of years ago, I worked for Burlington Industries. At that time it was the largest menswear textile manufacturing operation in the world. At the time, it had 55,000 employees and had operations in 7 countries. Headquarters was located in NC. I watched that company fall apart. Over 700 people were laid off when they closed the 2 plants closest to me. Transferred operations to other countries. Family members on both sides of our family lost their jobs. Last I heard, B.I. filed for bankrupcy.
Within commuting distance of me, a major cosmetics company, heavy earth moving equipment, industrial valves & hydrolics, furniture manufacturer, woven filter fabrics, manufacturer of plastic bottles & containers, cotton mills, gear manufacturer, sewing plants, and more are gone. In many cases, even the buildings have been bulldozed. Just empty weed filled parcels of land with for sale signs on them. Thousands upon thousands of jobs are gone.
What may be even worse, the infrastructure is gone. Even the railroad spur to an aluminum tubing company is gone. It's now a walking path.
What's the incentive to rebuild and bring the jobs back to the US?
Even the big bucks being given to "green" companies, isn't bringing back the jobs. Read the labels. Made where?
There will be when taxes are lowered and regulations are greatly reduced...
>What's the incentive to rebuild and bring the jobs back to the US? .
There will be when the unions are destroyed and median wage is $10/hour.
Maybe, when wages are what an employer is willng to pay and a worker agrees to accept.
If I can only afford to pay $2 per hour and still have food on my table, you should have the right to accept or reject what I can afford to pay to put food on yours.
If I'm hungry enough, I'll work for a scrap of bread. How many are feeding at the public trough because small business cannot pay union rates and/or minimum wage and the business survive?
I have work right here on our place that needs to be done. We're not physically able to do it ourselves anymore. Yet, I can't hire the seasonal workers on the farm next door, during their free time. Their contract rate is higher than minimum wage. Neither of us has the option to come to a private agreement that is acceptable to both of us. If I can pay $5 an hour for someone to dig postholes and that person agrees, why should both of us lose?
> How many are feeding at the public trough because small business cannot pay union rates and/or minimum wage and the business survive?
I suspect very, very few.
What should one do to feed the kids when the options become dumpster diving, begging, and stealing?
I suspect very many based on the unemployment rate. That's people who are still active within the unemployment reporting system. Many more have drawn their maximum benefits and still don't have a job. The requests for help from our church is increasing, as the total unemployed (but seeking work) is much higher than the "reported" figures.
A neighbor brings in seasonal farm workers to harvest his crops. During lulls in the harvest cycle, they don't work. Thus, they don't get paid. I have work here that needs to be done. We're old folks, living on a fixed income, who can't do the physical labor ourselves anymore. We cannot afford to pay the hourly rate (higher than minimum wage, BTW) demanded by their contract.
Nor can I make an offer at a lower rate to anyone of them who would be willing to work for that rate. The end result is that when they are not actively working in my neighbors fields, they earn zero dollars per hour, regardless of what they are willing to earn, if allowed.
Before government laws and union rules became the "norm" it was simply making an offer to pay x amount and a worker agreeing to work for that amount. It is WRONG that I can't offer $5 an hour for help with yard work and a person agreeing to work for that rate cannot accept the offer.
FWIW, when I entered the workforce, my pay was $3.75 per hour. Later increased to $4.00. It put food on the table for us. Today, $5.00 per hour will put beans and rice on the table for someone who's hungry. Yet, according to the "rules and regulations" I can't offer it to keep someone from having to dive into dumpsters, begging, or stealing, if they are willing to work.
What do the scriptures say about people who don't work? Wonder how the Lord looks upon those who won't let willing people work to put bread on their tables?
>FWIW, when I entered the workforce, my pay was $3.75 per hour.
Either you are young or you were working for your father.
In Washington State the minimum wage is around $9 but white people are still to good to do field work - especially on the Republican side of the mountains.
When I worked, in the fields with a hoe, my rate of pay from my father was what I put in my mouth at the supper table. It was the clothes on my back and the covers on my bed.
Interesting that you think I'm young. This OLDTIMER's first paycheck was written 46 years ago. My first job was at a sewing factory, doing reports on yardage used for each production run. Everyday when I returned from lunch break, I had to wipe the lint off the paperwork on my desk.
You had to play the race card again.
In the 1950's, when my father needed help to harvest his crops, all he had to do was put out the word to the community. On the designated day to start harvest, PEOPLE showed up to do the work. Race wasn't an issue. Young, old, white, black, people needing to put food on their tables worked together to earn their pay. Their pay was whatever the going rate, at the time, in our community. Parents of young children didn't separate them according to color. The rule was the older ones watched the younger ones, while parents worked.
Fast forward to the late 70's when my father had to quit farming due to health issues. By that time, it was almost impossible to find help to harvest his crops. Even though he kept up with the going rate for field work. Even though he also provided lunch and refreshments twice a day. Some who promised to work, wouldn't show up, even when he'd pick them up from their homes. Some who promised to work for the season wouldn't show up the second day. Or show up drunk from yesterday's pay. He had one that he caught deliberately damaging the crop he was being paid to harvest.
The final year he farmed, my brothers and I used our vacation time from our jobs so he'd have enough help for the harvest. White and Black people were too good to do field work by then. Especially if the government would give them a handout to sit in the shade and watch others work for them.
And, before you label my father a "rich landowner" taking advantage of po folks. My father was a sharecropper, who barely made ends meet. Many of the people who were too good for field work lived in a far better lifestyle. Our home was a "sharecropper shack" with a johnny house out back. I have worn clothing that Mama made from feed sacks. I have eaten fatback and beans because that was all my parents could put on the table.
These old eyes have seen, first hand, what "entitlement", government rules, and union demands have done to both black and whites in this country by both Democrats and Republicans over the last 50+ years.