Originally Posted By: Roadkingnc
Every state should have that law.
+1000
Every state should have that law.
+1000
"Not available in Minnesota."
- Thread starter Rick in PA
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Roadkingnc
Every state should have that law.
+/X a trillion!!!!!!
Every state should have that law.
+/X a trillion!!!!!!
Originally Posted By: crinkles
I find the law quite nutty, especially for being made in 2007.
but that's just me. Didn't know you could legislate patriotism.
You can legislate nationalism and people will cheer it on under the auspices of patriotism and not know the difference.
I find the law quite nutty, especially for being made in 2007.
You can legislate nationalism and people will cheer it on under the auspices of patriotism and not know the difference.
I know that 'economic patriotism' is a dirty term for many of the Gadsden Flag flailers on here, but I for one think that it is very much NEEDED in this ship EVERTHING overseas/outsourcing, globalist economy we are in right now.
Originally Posted By: crinkles
I find the law quite nutty, especially for being made in 2007.
but that's just me. Didn't know you could legislate patriotism.
Indeed. It's rather strange and depressing that people purport to be patriotic Americans....by supporting laws that reduce the people's freedom and economic choices.
What (used to) make America special was freedom. That is unfortunately less and less true, on a daily basis.
I find the law quite nutty, especially for being made in 2007.
Indeed. It's rather strange and depressing that people purport to be patriotic Americans....by supporting laws that reduce the people's freedom and economic choices.
What (used to) make America special was freedom. That is unfortunately less and less true, on a daily basis.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Yeah, I know that your children working under a running cotton gin is what made the country great,
I suppose you have something to back that up?
Originally Posted By: Shannow
but (allegedly) Henry Ford realised that if his employees couldn't afford his cars, there was a problem.
Everybody "else" is always underqualified and overpaid.
People are paid for productivity. If Ford wanted to pay his employees more than their productivity warranted, then Ford motor company would soon be out of business and then where would the employees be?
This in fact shows that the increased wages (actually bonuses) were all about productivity and how higher wages actually cut costs:
http://www.charleswrightmuseum.net/living_history/pdfs/1914_1.pdf
Yeah, I know that your children working under a running cotton gin is what made the country great,
I suppose you have something to back that up?
Originally Posted By: Shannow
but (allegedly) Henry Ford realised that if his employees couldn't afford his cars, there was a problem.
Everybody "else" is always underqualified and overpaid.
People are paid for productivity. If Ford wanted to pay his employees more than their productivity warranted, then Ford motor company would soon be out of business and then where would the employees be?
This in fact shows that the increased wages (actually bonuses) were all about productivity and how higher wages actually cut costs:
http://www.charleswrightmuseum.net/living_history/pdfs/1914_1.pdf
Originally Posted By: Tempest
People are paid for productivity. If Ford wanted to pay his employees more than their productivity warranted, then Ford motor company would soon be out of business and then where would the employees be?
This in fact shows that the increased wages (actually bonuses) were all about productivity and how higher wages actually cut costs:
http://www.charleswrightmuseum.net/living_history/pdfs/1914_1.pdf
No, people are paid for how much leverage they have.
If you are working in an industry that has only one employer, or if you are a customer of a product in a monopoly, you will be paid low or pay high due to no alternative.
Intel CPU selling for $300 and cost the same as their $100 CPU is an example.
Long shoreman making more money than the UPS truck driver, or Safeway employee making more than Walmart doing the same work, is another result of leverage rather than productivity.
People are paid for productivity. If Ford wanted to pay his employees more than their productivity warranted, then Ford motor company would soon be out of business and then where would the employees be?
This in fact shows that the increased wages (actually bonuses) were all about productivity and how higher wages actually cut costs:
http://www.charleswrightmuseum.net/living_history/pdfs/1914_1.pdf
No, people are paid for how much leverage they have.
If you are working in an industry that has only one employer, or if you are a customer of a product in a monopoly, you will be paid low or pay high due to no alternative.
Intel CPU selling for $300 and cost the same as their $100 CPU is an example.
Long shoreman making more money than the UPS truck driver, or Safeway employee making more than Walmart doing the same work, is another result of leverage rather than productivity.
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
No, people are paid for how much leverage they have.
If you are working in an industry that has only one employer, or if you are a customer of a product in a monopoly, you will be paid low or pay high due to no alternative.
Intel CPU selling for $300 and cost the same as their $100 CPU is an example.
Long shoreman making more money than the UPS truck driver, or Safeway employee making more than Walmart doing the same work, is another result of leverage rather than productivity.
What you say is largely true, as labor is not exempt from supply / demand. However, regardless of the leverage that employees might have over any given employer, they do not have leverage over the employer's customers. If labor rates go too high, and these additional costs are not accepted by customers, the company will go out of business.
Just ask GM and Hostess.
No, people are paid for how much leverage they have.
If you are working in an industry that has only one employer, or if you are a customer of a product in a monopoly, you will be paid low or pay high due to no alternative.
Intel CPU selling for $300 and cost the same as their $100 CPU is an example.
Long shoreman making more money than the UPS truck driver, or Safeway employee making more than Walmart doing the same work, is another result of leverage rather than productivity.
What you say is largely true, as labor is not exempt from supply / demand. However, regardless of the leverage that employees might have over any given employer, they do not have leverage over the employer's customers. If labor rates go too high, and these additional costs are not accepted by customers, the company will go out of business.
Just ask GM and Hostess.
Instead of legislation around country of origin.I think there she should be legislation on flag etiquette people do not follow it. lazy people leave their flags out at night or flying in the rain.also I know some places have tattered flag flying away complete disrespect to the flag.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
On one hand, I get the "if there's one got dangit thing 'Murica makes anymore it's the got dangit flag" sentiment. I wouldn't bother flying a flag made in China. I don't know if it warrants a law though.
Does flag production really mean anything when nearly all of our textile industry went overseas in a matter of a few years? Entire towns and communities were forced to seek work elsewhere, like Harbor Freight, Wal-Mart, and every other store BITOGers love to hate.
Feel good 'Murica laws might feel good, but at the end of the day they probably don't help anything.
What people don't understand is that low value-added products like textiles made in America don't help Americans anymore. Those jobs have had their wages suppressed by a ready supply of immigrant labor, legal and otherwise. A majority of people working in low skilled domestic manufacturing are not American.
On one hand, I get the "if there's one got dangit thing 'Murica makes anymore it's the got dangit flag" sentiment. I wouldn't bother flying a flag made in China. I don't know if it warrants a law though.
Does flag production really mean anything when nearly all of our textile industry went overseas in a matter of a few years? Entire towns and communities were forced to seek work elsewhere, like Harbor Freight, Wal-Mart, and every other store BITOGers love to hate.
Feel good 'Murica laws might feel good, but at the end of the day they probably don't help anything.
What people don't understand is that low value-added products like textiles made in America don't help Americans anymore. Those jobs have had their wages suppressed by a ready supply of immigrant labor, legal and otherwise. A majority of people working in low skilled domestic manufacturing are not American.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked