Posted on 05/26/2003 3:51:30 PM PDT by Lessismore
I hope you can now see how and why I consider yours to be a faulty argument. If not, please correct me or say why.
I didnt make the argument. In fact the statement above about "I am sick of Americans thinking that they are intitled to employment without competition" is not something I believe I said in my post or anywhere on this thread. So unless you went into the archives and found something I said in the past, please correct the record. I didnt say it.
This issue is troubling me more and more. Generally I favor Globalism and the right of corporation to spend its money on resources the way it prefers. However, I'm beginning to see that belief has consequences and we as a country need to figure out what we are going to do with huge chunks of people in their 40's and 50's who due to low wages in Asia are now faced with oblivion unless they reinvent themselves.
Don't make that mistake. Do what you love, the compensation will follow.
It also fosters an intolerance of BS and an appreciation of logic. Unfortunately, it also produces asocial, libertine geeks.
Anyway, I'm an illustrator now, but I'm glad that I took classes in Fluid Mechanics rather than Modern Art.
I've got my eye on a small Catholic college in NH that charges everyone $10k/year. The cost of a college tuition is wildly inflated beyond its meager value. The college industry is the biggest scam going.
Of course they were. Companies train their workers in skills they need to do the job, why shouldn't the military. Then their is the little detail that part of the job is getting shot at with (more or less) high tech kamikazie robots.
That said, I've always thought the Navy aviation community puts entirely too much emphasis on the process of landing. Sure they have a much more difficult problem with that than when they land on a nice huge fixed runway, but in the end it's a technical detail. Sort of like the IT function at a manufacturing company. Bombs on target and enemy aircraft shot down is the bottom line for military aviation. Well and cargo delievered where it's needed.
Getting out at 20+ means that Pukin Dog wasn't willing to compete for the leadership slots. Nothing wrong with that, I'm not much into "management" myself.
There essentially are no airline slots right now, except at the likes of Southwest. Judging by the way they slam those 737s onto the runway, I think they must hire lots of ex Navy pilots. (That's a joke son!)
You are not paying attention. Companies are not training anyone (american, that is) anymore. Even skilled professionals with previous experience who require no training can't get jobs for half of their previous pay.
It is an issue that has really always been part of the world. In the thirties, farmers were severely affected by drought. In the fifties and sixties, auto workers were affected by the import of foreign cars. In the mid 18th century, sheep and flax farmers were devastated by the increased growth and the improvements in the area of cotton harvesting.
The issue is much larger than *offshoring*. Should technological improvements be halted so that jobs can be protected? Where would the world be today if cotton poduction had been controlled? (Scratching themselves to death at their computer terminals, LOL).
It is not the place of the government to solve the problem of layed-off workers. The country provides 39 weeks of unemployment and most people know when a layoff is coming.
It is the job of parents to teach their children that there are no guarantees in life and that they must be adaptible and they must be experienced in basic survival.
No, but it often has a really hard time keeping them. A problem the Navy has with more than just pilots. The pilots are the most expensive to train though, so as a taxpayer you want to balance the cost of retention over the cost to train new pilots. That said the retention problem is mostly not a matter of pay, but rather what would be called "working conditions" in other lines of work. That in turn is because the government is trying to do more with less people, less ships, and less airplanes. Democrats want to spend the money elsewhere, like buying votes, and Republicans don't want to spend the money at all. Until the bear is at the door that is.
Straight out of the Marxist handbook..... Where is it that you think the "Rich" companies make their money from? It ain't from hiring cheaper labor, it's from the American consumer. You think the big wigs at GMC want to lower our standard of living so we will all buy Cavaliers?
When you understand how the economy works, you no longer fall for the Union line that there is only so much money out there, and therefor, for the rich to have more, someone has to make less.....
There is a reason why young people are such a sought-after market demographics--they're ignorant and lack foresight!
For some, it pays off. But the house always wins.
You can't put it any better or more succinctly than that.
Another thing to keep an eye on is the University of Phoenix phenomenon. It may blow the top off of this criminal enterprise:
Frank Moretti of Columbia University refers to the changes as the "third great paradigmatic shift in learning history." Roger Schank of Northwestern says that "universities are, in many ways, fraudulent."...The University of Phoenix is the world's largest virtual university, and it's sending shock waves through the ivory towers. Discover why...
You don't know what's more pathetic? I'll tell you what's more pathetic, it's the companies and corporations that no longer have one shred of allegiance, or patriotism to America or it's people. It's a sell out of American's and our economy. These companies could care less about Americans.
They are literally spitting in the faces of the American people, the people that made these companies great.
Look, I won't deny that from a MICROeconomic standpoint of a worker, who's job is exported, it sux. But it is better for the overall economy in the long run. Progress hurts sometimes. Does that mean we should stagnate for the sake of comfort?
However, I care not for any "authority."
Yet, you advocate government controls that limit business practices to your ideal model.
If, then, there is no "authority" deciding how these controls should be put in place, whom do you propose should be the designer of your "Keep American Jobs for Americans" system?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.