Human Rights Violations

[Vanguard.45]

We all remember (I'd hope) the image from the Tiananmen Square student protests where the Chinese Military came in with the tanks and the one lone protester stood in the path of the tank to try and stop the advance of the tank. Quite a powerful image.

That image led me to think about how it applies to the modern day U.S..

Here, I see that tank more as a tank of policies attempting to roll over the working man. The tank could represent the combination of the following:

Corporate Welfare
Entitlement Programs for those who CAN work but WON'T
Open Borders
Outsourcing of Jobs
Job Cuts to Strengthen the "Bottom Line" and keep shareholders happy
Social Security (in its present configuration)
Taxation from all sides (income, sales, excise, property, luxury, sin, marriage, death, etc.)
Outrageous Government Spending


And the lone figure standing in front of this is the common, everyday working man, slowly getting run down with no voice and no way to really do anything about it. I mean, come on, DO YOU REALLY THINK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO GIVE YOU A CANDIDATE THAT IS TRULY GOING TO MAKE DRASTIC CHANGES IN THE SYSTEM?????

Plato said it 2,500 years ago in THE REPUBLIC. He said that in such corrupt situations, the poor have no POWER to make any changes and the powerful don't WANT things to change! Laying off workers who have been with a company for twenty years while the CEO and his buddies make MILLIONS IS a violation of basic human decency. In centuries past, GREED was considered one of the Seven Deadly Sins. Today, it is corporate policy.

Capitalism without basic morality, a sense of community, and a concern for your fellow man (from the CEO right on down to the janitor) turns into what we are seeing. And it is WRONG. And don't get me wrong, I AM A CAPITALIST, but I see what such a system left unchecked by morality can morph into- and it isn't pretty.

We speak out against HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS such as what we saw in China, but the tank is rolling over the working class right here at home.

Doesn't anyone else see a problem here?

Vanguard.45

 

[Lucky]

I'd suggest that 'outsourcing' of jobs is not a personal attack (though it ought to be). Suppose you were a company, and the government of the country you lived in decided to abuse you. You work, you employ other people, you invent produce and distribute, you are what makes rich countries rich. Eventually you'll just say 'screw it' and move everything you can move out of the country, to a place where they welcome you with open arms, and recognize that you are valuable.

I don't see why people are surpised that companies move to countries where taxes are lower, etc. And I applaud Ireland for proving to the world that all you need to do to 'stimulate' a developing economy, even in Europe, is to drop taxes and try to keep up with all the influx.

Corporate welfare, I wish they'd just call it graft. Logic dictates that the biggest companies, and the most profitable ones, will benefit the most from tax reductions. Flat tax, cut everyone and thing to the same lvel. They pay more, so they'd save more. There's no way to justify selective charity from gov't to certain businesses.


Morality, I don't think it's necessary for capitalism. You need to protect property rights, and not much else. If someone wants to invest in 'ethical' funds that's their choice, nothing more and nothing less. We're human, it's probably natural to feel compassion for the elderly and the young, though. But looking for help or compassion from co-worker or competitors is a bad idea, imo. It's not healthy for an economy either, as compassion is probably a code word for time, money, or effort, of which the 'disadvantaged' party will want to spend less, make more, and spend less (respectively),

"Don't be greedy." has less meaning when taught by an organization which wants, say 15%, of other people's money. Especially when people climb to the top of the organizations though exercise of many of those sins.


I'd suggest that business is business, and it is seperate from morality. Charity is charity, and should be done on spare time with spare money.

 

[ball3006]

Why do you think all the illegals....

are in such high demand as workers? The reason everyone seems to say is "no American will do that kind of work". Bull, the companies that hire illegals WON'T hire Americans because if they did, they would have to pay taxes, benefits, keep records, etc.......with illegals as employees, none of that has to be done and you pay them cheap wages to boot..........chris3

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

I AM A CAPITALIST

I may be being presumptious, but from the rest of your post, I would suggest that you believe in free enterprise. That is NOT the same thing as capitalism.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

the companies that hire illegals WON'T hire Americans because if they did, they would have to pay taxes, benefits, keep records, etc.......with illegals as employees, none of that has to be done and you pay them cheap wages to boot..

Having worked in the commercial training industry and haveing bid on many contracts, let me expand on this.

In bidding on a contract, we use something called the "loaded labor rate" or "burden rate." This is the employee's salary, plus his benefits package, plus his share of all the overhead and similar expenses -- plus 5% profit.

In my line of work, the Loaded Labor Rate averages about 100% -- which means I have to double the employee's salary to make a profit. Or, for each dollar I get from the customer, $0.50 goes to the employee, $0.45 goes to benefits and expenses, and $0.05 goes to the company.

You can see right away, if you do something to change the employee's compensation (raise the wage, increase the benefits, raise taxes) suddenly the company loses money. And you can't lose money forever (or even for a short period.) So the employee gets laid off.

Well-meaning laws, like minimum wage and Social Security and so on, have made it impossible to employ a lot of people. So three things have happened in this country:

1. Some jobs are simply gone forever. A good example would be gas station attendents. They don't bring in enough to make a profit.

2. Some jobs go overseas -- here in the Ozarks, there are lots of empty shirt factories. You can't pay the semi-skilled workers what the law requires and make a profit.

3. A vast labor black market has been created. Literally millions of illegal aliens are flooding the US and working "under the table."

Economics is like shooting -- guns develop according to the rules of the game. The same is true with jobs. You have a rule that gives ported barrels and extended sights an advantage, people will shoot guns with ported barrels and extended sights -- no matter whether they're practical for other purposes or not.

When we make rules, we should bear that in mind.

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

We could make "rules" that any company wanting to sell its products in the US has to adhere to the same labor and environmental standards as domestic companies. Heck, we could even decide that industry is a desirable thing to have in the country and slap a big fat tariff on certain strategic industries. We had them for most of our history, and free enterprise did just fine, in fact better than it's doing since NAFTA, GATT, and WTO.

 

[TallPine]

Well, back when I was young and strong and stupid and trying to build up a business with my own hard work, one of my goals was to treat everyone who worked for me (either directly or indirectly) decently and fairly, and create an enterprise that benefited more than just myself. My theory was that if it wasn't a beneficial exchange for both parties then you couldn't sustain that source long term. Unfortunately, for various reasons (many having to do with govt regulations) it didn't work out. Some hills just turn out to be too steep to climb.

I wish that all "businessmen" would see it that way, but you can't enforce such ethics by law. OTOH, I'm not sure but what our govt attempts to regulate business have actually made it more cut-throat and self-serving.

 

[DRZinn]

My theory was that if it wasn't a beneficial exchange for both parties then you couldn't sustain that source long term...I wish that all "businessmen" would see it that way,

All businessmen DO see it that way. They know that if it's not in their customer's best interest to deal with them, he'll take his business elsewhere.

 

[Kim]

I think that everyone who has never made a payroll or payed overhead should be forced to do so. Instead of mock trials of a President for War Crimes our children should see how business works. Take them to a grocery store and let them see all the money coming in and think WOW then show them the money going out and let them figure the NET and watch the tears flow. Let them see all the paper work, regulations ,work shops you have to do because the Government tells you to do so. That would be a much better education and this country would be better off becaue of it. But NO lets teach our children to PROTEST. As far as morals we live in the post modern world of relativism. No one knows what moral means anymore. With the growth of the Welfare state churches do not do social work. If they do they help sign people up with every social program the government provides. The school counselor does the same. The hospitals do the same. People just have to ask WHERE DO I SIGN UP. Can we at least teach out children about compound interest and saving?

 

[DRZinn]

Can we at least teach out children about compound interest and saving?

I've long thought there should be a class called "Personal Economics."

 

[ReadyontheRight]

DO YOU REALLY THINK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO GIVE YOU A CANDIDATE THAT IS TRULY GOING TO MAKE DRASTIC CHANGES IN THE SYSTEM?????

Why do you expect the President to be the one to make changes to "the system" (whatever that is)?

 

[RealGun]

And the lone figure standing in front of this is the common, everyday working man,

Socialist drivel written by antiestablishment adolescents! There is always a rationale why it is someones job to take care of us. The union mentality simply priced itself out of the market, and quality became unacceptable. Free trade, especially with China, and lack of attention to illegal immigration from Mexico will not change without accepting dramatic inflation, which is bad for everyone. Our problem is glutonous consumption. If the status quo needs to be protected, then glutony will continue.

All anyone really cares about is who is calling on the cell phone and who is dating Jennifer Anniston. Those who cry oppression have a 42" TV and a $400 purse.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

We could make "rules" that any company wanting to sell its products in the US has to adhere to the same labor and environmental standards as domestic companies. Heck, we could even decide that industry is a desirable thing to have in the country and slap a big fat tariff on certain strategic industries. We had them for most of our history, and free enterprise did just fine, in fact better than it's doing since NAFTA, GATT, and WTO.

This is dead wrong.

The US used tariffs to favor one part of the nation (the industrial states of the Northeast) at the expense of the rest of the nation. There was no net gain from those tariffs. In fact, the country as a whole suffered and it was one of the root causes of the Civil War.

Tariffs were a major contributer to every depression and panic we've had -- the Smoot-Hawley Tariff virtually made the Great Depression permanent.

The economy soared after NAFTA -- and is well ahead of where it was in the 1980s.

 

[TallPine]

All businessmen DO see it that way. They know that if it's not in their customer's best interest to deal with them, he'll take his business elsewhere.

It doesn't seem to always work that way on the supply side (employees and contractors, etc)

 

[Vern Humphrey]

It doesn't seem to always work that way on the supply side (employees and contractors, etc)

Everyone wants to get paid. If you PO your customer or employer, you don't get paid.

 

[DRZinn]

It doesn't seem to always work that way on the supply side (employees and contractors, etc)

It may not seem to work that way, but it does. Treat your employees badly and see how long they stay.

 

[Kim]

Human Rights----------Socialist drivil from the lips of the Progressive(Socialist) Caucus in congress. Human Rights include a right to a house, a car or mass transportation ,to work, food,health care, and they will throw in dignity. Sounds like the USSR. "Little pink houses all in a row" or lets stack everyone up like LBJ did with his "GREAT SOCIETY" how did that socialist neighborhood work out? Just "IMAGINE" .

 

[Vern Humphrey]

There are two things that drive American jobs overseas:

1. High taxes and mandatory benefits.

2. Our poorly educated workforce.

Note how Number 1 is a direct result of the progressive agenda. And as for Number 2 -- if the government owns the means of production (the schools), hires the teachers, and sets the curriculum, is that not communism?

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

There are two things that drive American jobs overseas:

1. High taxes and mandatory benefits.

... Note how Number 1 is a direct result of the progressive agenda.

<Deleted stupid, late-night gratuitous remark.>

How much difference could taxes make if your competitor is able to work for a couple of dollars a day? You could cut taxes to zero and have no effect on the equation. And what do we get for our tax dollars? Well, in theory at least, we should get an infastructure (roads, bridges, railroads, etc) that allows commerce to happen, police and military forces to protect us so that we can generate commerce, that worthless system of education to train the workforce to be competitive. I'll be the first to say that our governments, both parties, but all very conservative on the global scale, have squandered a lot of that on stupid pork-barrel boondoggles and wasteful unnecessary wars, but blame the fact that <someone> has to pay his taxes is a bit incredible.

And as far as "mandatory benefits" is concerned, our biggest competitors (China and Europe) have UNIVERSAL SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH CARE. That's part of the secret of their success, the companies aren't going broke with the high insurance costs. So much for our "progressive agenda".

2. Our poorly educated workforce.

And as for Number 2 -- if the government owns the means of production (the schools), hires the teachers, and sets the curriculum, is that not communism?

Then explain why we have a trillion dollar trade deficit with a bunch of COMMUNISTS.

--Edited to be a bit more High Road. --

 

[Lucky]

I'm not convinced that China is a utopia, per se. As I see it there is the urban class, wealthier, but their lives are controlled much more by the gov't. Then there are the rural class, poorer, but more free. They haven't really been obeying the single-child policy, for instance (iirc) because there are so many people over such a large area. So if the gov't can't even enforce all it's laws, what are the chances that it's going to be providing top-notch health care? And even in the big-brother type cities of China, I'm pretty sure that all men are not equal. Money just might talk your way ahead of other people in line-ups, and party-position might talk even louder than money.

(money for treatment isn't wrong, unless it's in a system where it's not supposed to happen. And triage should be on a pillar.)

Or maybe China is just a paradise and I'm in denial.

 

[LAK]

Lucky

Suppose you were a company, and the government of the country you lived in decided to abuse you. You work, you employ other people, you invent produce and distribute, you are what makes rich countries rich. Eventually you'll just say 'screw it' and move everything you can move out of the country, to a place where they welcome you with open arms, and recognize that you are valuable

That is not quite what happened. The Legislature and the Executive office have colluded with these people to allow this to happen.

If RCA, GE, Ford, Dodge, Boeing and Douglas had announced in, say 1959, that they were going to just pack up and move their plants to Brazil - they would not have been able to do it. Period. The legal framework that has allowed US corporations to do so now has been carefully planned and pushed by non-governmental organizations and their change agents with a particular longterm agenda. While their elected and appointed government cronies have enacted the necessary legislation and treaties to allow it to happen.
-------------------------------------------

http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org

 

[RealGun]

Not that any of this is on topic, but if there is to be a list of reasons for jobs going out of the US, add EPA regulations. We export our pollution yet still enjoy the products. Among those on my own radar are furniture and musical instruments, which are finished with nitrocellulose lacquer. Overspray can be filtered, but the environmentalists were so aggressive, that entire industries were pressured out of business before they could adapt, technically, physically, and financially. They were also forced to move away from heavily populated areas, never mind that most were urban based near a workforce.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

How much difference could taxes make if your competitor is able to work for a couple of dollars a day? You could cut taxes to zero and have no effect on the equation.

I suspect you're not old enough to remember when everything was made in the USA. In those days we didn't have things like high taxes, minimum wages, and mandatory benefits.

We didn't get into this situation in one day -- we got into it like a frog in hot water -- by degrees.

We priced ourselves out of the markets -- for semi-skilled jobs.

And as far as "mandatory benefits" is concerned, our biggest competitors (China and Europe) have UNIVERSAL SINGLE-PAYER HEALTH CARE. That's part of the secret of their success, the companies aren't going broke with the high insurance costs. So much for our "progressive agenda".

And if you think health care in China is better than here (or even remotely comparable), then next time you need medical treatment, try China.

2. Our poorly educated workforce.

And as for Number 2 -- if the government owns the means of production (the schools), hires the teachers, and sets the curriculum, is that not communism?

Then explain why we have a trillion dollar trade deficit with a bunch of COMMUNISTS.

Because they have the market cornered in semi-skilled labor, of course!!

If we are to win the world competition in the future, we will be forced to do things other countries can't do -- and that requires a highly-educated workforce.

 

[RealGun]

we will be forced to do things other countries can't do

That would only leave homeland security. We already outsource lots of brain work.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

[Quote = Vern Humphrey]
we will be forced to do things other countries can't do [/quote]

That would only leave homeland security. We already outsource lots of brain work.

That's exactly right.

The danger is not in shipping shirt factories and similar semi-skilled jobs overseas -- we don't want Americans to have to compete with Chinese peasants. The danger is in shipping the high-tech jobs overseas, because there aren't enough Americans who can do them.