posted on January 27, 2004 07:16:08 PM new
The exodus of jobs from the US is sad but we'll learn to live with it. The Electrolux company that made refrigerators in Wester Michigan just moved all the work to Mexico for example.
They were offered hundreds of millions in tax breaks and a free new plant but it was not enough. Not that they were not making a profit but they can make more money making the stuff in Mexico.
About a quarter of the town where the plant was will be unemployed.
No stopping it and I don't think we should.
Just one small change I'd make.
If the work has to go to Mexico the management should too. The executives who live here should not be able to send the jobs off across the border if they don't go along to manage them.
How hard can that be to express in a bill before Congress?
Seems like a small thing to ask if they are so fond of Mexico and Mexicans - do it right.
Why should burden their company by staying here where it is sooo expensive to operate? If they move down there I'm sure they can get along on a smaller salary and feed more profit to the shareholders. After all that is the only consideration right? So if the workers do their part the big wheels can sacrifice too.
Take your own sweet little butt along with the jobs. And don't let the door bump your bootie on the way South.
posted on January 27, 2004 07:22:00 PM new
or how about if we replace company management with mexican wetback and we get to keep our job.
there are plenty of wetback to choose from,we dont have to pay for relocation.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on January 27, 2004 08:15:27 PM new
So long as the business of America is business, and not keeping Americans meaningfully (let alone gainfully) employed, the exodus of American companies to foreign shores will continue.
Rather than export the CEOs along with the jobs, Congress ought to stop making it feasible (financially) for these companies to leave. But for our bizarre corporate tax structure and "incentive programs", there's no way on earth that it is really more cost-effective -- in travel time alone, not to mention fuel usage, portage, trucking, etc. -- to have a two-dollar toy freighted over here all the way from China, or to have an "American" refrigerator assembled in Mexico.
We kid ourselves every time we go into Wal-Mart and find a pair of jeans for under ten bucks and think "What a steal!" The one doing the stealing is Wal-Mart, because the money we "save" there is taken out of our hides down the road, in higher taxes. "Somebody" really does wind up paying -- and dearly, too -- the actual cost of having 'inexpensive' items brought half way around the world; that "somebody" just doesn't happen to be the company importing them, nor the one that left America to hire cheap labor and/or pollute without the EPA looking over its shoulder...
Stopwhining, your use of the term "wetback" is offensive.
posted on January 28, 2004 04:17:22 AM new
If they take the three year amnesty as 'foreign workers" (boy that sounds like Germany) will they be called damp backs?
posted on January 28, 2004 06:12:36 AM new
i dont find the word wetback offensive,no more offensive than welfare mothers or children born out of wedblock.it is a way to describe a situation or an entity.
if all the supermarkets just label every piece of meat as animal protein so someone would not find liver,kidney,brain,tripe,egg,chuck offensive,
would you prefer that??
or how about the way we describe women-sex bomb,sex toy,diva,dowager,etc
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on January 28, 2004 06:48:19 AM new
i see how some people find some words offensive,it is not the word itself,it is the intention.
like a spear is a spear,but if it is used in killing some one,then it is bad.
look around ,how many diva or hunk have you seen lately?i see mostly overweight men and women,been eating too much and exercising too little these days
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
posted on January 28, 2004 07:16:58 AM new
I wonder about the intention of calling a Mexican a wetback. Maybe it's used to disparage or identify illegal immigrants.
posted on January 28, 2004 07:55:03 AM new
i used the word wetback to fit the context of this thread.
corporate management decides to move jobs to mexico to assemble refrigerator,so why cant we use the workers who are here already to replace corporate management?
kind of like if my neighbor walking his poodle let it #*!@ on my lawn,i would just have to find a great dane and let it #*!@ on his lawn.
you may replace great dane with any of your favorite dog.
-sig file -------the lobster in the boiling pot of water who tries to prevent the others from climbing out.
you see,the bigger the dog,the bigger the turd.
[ edited by stopwhining on Jan 28, 2004 07:55 AM ]
