Sunday, April 02, 2006

"How 'bout we give you $140,000"...

Assembly Line

Last week the news came out that GM General Motors has offered up to 130,000 employees to “Buy” them out of their jobs for $140,000 each. Now the calculator on my desk will not calculate the total dollar amount of that buyout without giving me an “error” message on the screen, but I am sure one of you visitors will post the correct amount in a reply. The guys over at IBD (Investors Business Daily) did provide some other information as to how GM has gotten themselves into this situation. Great paper, you need to start getting this paper just for the facts that are not provided by many “Media outlets”.

It seems that GM has been losing a good amount of money over the years and in fact it is reported that they lost $10.6 Billion last year alone. Now this has been a long time coming and in fact GM has lost market share from 50% in the 1950’s to just barely 24% now. There have been many factors to this decline and it is interesting to look at them. Remember back during the 1970’s energy shortage and there was a mass move to smaller vehicles made in Japan and the likes for their MPG was much greater? GM and many of the U.S. Automakers responded somewhat but they still lost market share over the years. The problem is not totally the selection of vehicles they produced, it is the deals they made over the years with the Auto Worker’s unions. It is also estimated that GM is losing over $25 million dollars a day at it’s present rate. Now over the years GM made benefit deals with the union that are now coming due and pretty much puts the company in “Dire Straits”. Many of these deals were made for the “bills would be due later” and worry about it then. Well its time. GM is currently paying out almost $800 million a year to workers the company has laid off and this is almost at full pay and including full benefits for no work produced. GM is also operating under health care liabilities totaling almost $75 billion dollars and that does not include the pension plans.

Now Unions were needed in the past but there is a reason why the membership has dropped off to almost only 12% of the workforce now and most of those are government workers. Many companies have moved their operations to the southern U.S. where there are less unions and also out of the country to avoid unions altogether. GM once employed 520,000+ employees in the 1970’s and now just a fraction of that number. GM is not the only U.S. automaker with this problem, look at Ford, the company stock is now at $6 a share…

It is not always the evil top management people who takes the lion’s share of the profits. It appears everybody had their hands in the pot on this one…


Bubba said...

People often forget one big thing when they look at "Unions"......they are a business themselves now. Once upon a time they had their place but now they are just a business out to make money for themselves at the cost of the US worker and ultimately the consumer. Most of the protections for workers are law now and any companies that don't take good care of employees won't be around long.

zen said...

"any companies that don't take good care of employees won't be around long" mean like Wal*Mart?

SWAC Girl said...

Unions came into being at a time when the American worker needed someone to look after him. That time, however, has passed.

Now unions are greedy, corrupt, bloated has-beens with greedy, corrupt, bloated leadership.

My husband is a conservative Republican Teamster in a world where half his fellow truck drivers are Republicans ... but the unions continue to run with the Democrats and use union dues for Democrat causes thereby ignoring the conservative portion of their ranks.

To my way of thinking unions are simply socialist operations that want everyone treated equally in everything from benefits to salary. Because of that, too many union workers take advantage of the system and sluff off work leaving the bulk of what's to be done to the ones who have work ethics and work hard ... but are offered no incentives for their extra efforts because the unions treat everyone the same ... and the vicious circle continues.

RightsideVA said...

Fortunately, or maybe un-fortunately, I worked for Wal*Mart for 3-½ years as an Assistant manager and got to see many aspects of the company. I also got to see and know the 550 employees that worked in the SuperCenter and what I found was actually a good company but one that could not manage what it had let alone keep expanding the way it is…

I found that many employees did not participate in the company assisted health insurance for they did not Choose to spend income here but instead for electronics, toys, etc. Some employees spent a lot of their income on cigarettes, and other “habits” that were not beneficial to their health either. I was also truly amazed how many young females with sometimes up to two children they were trying to raise with no help from the fathers. The truth is that Wal*Mart employs many of those just entering the workforce for the first time or returning to the job market because of need for extra income or the health benefits.

As management, I can’t tell you how many times I was stopped and asked why if Wal*Mart can do Billions in sales they can’t keep all of the registers open? Sometimes I was able to explain to the person that yes walmart makes billions but that is gross sales, not profit. Unfortunately this is where I lost many people for obviously they were not “Home Skooled”. If I could get them past that I would explain the low profit margin a SuperCenter runs on and if all 31 registers were open 24hrs a day where would that money come from or the expense be passed on to. Many people who curse Walmart also shop walmart. They want the low prices and are willing to sacrifice to get them.

Many things have changed from when Sam Walton was in the picture. The company is just getting to big to run itself properly anymore and is a very large target of the “Left”. It continues to be attacked for it’s “Mega” profile and how the workers suffer. Yet New stores usually get thousands of applications prior to opening in a new town. Walmart employs over 1.3 million in the United States. Where would these people work if not there and how many of them would work? People from the “Left” love to attack it but how many know that Hillary Clinton sat on the board of directors for many years?

SWAC Girl is right. Unions continue to take dues but invest them in candidates that many of the workers do not support. Unions are not voted in by the workers who are “Suffering” while working for Walmart. Bubba is right. Business is business and the free market is what works best in most cases. Zen is right when he points out the faults of large corporations. Me? I just like keeping the debates going and sitting back to watch…

zen said...

On an old topic: Here's a new article that points out how the "flypaper theory" is unglued.

zen said...

Rightside: Interesting perspective coming from former managment at WalMart...have you seen this film?

RightsideVA said...


Have not seen that movie yet and in fact first time I have heard of that one. There have been many and a endorsement by Rob Reiner tells me something of what it will be like.

I stayed with Walmart for they showed there was great opportunity but it was not also due to your hard work. Unfortunately with all the lawsuits they try to avoid it is very hard to move up even with hard work and dedication. I saw too many people moved up to meet the % needed in a category...

Bubba said...

After 10 years in the unionized grocery business including a strech running striking stores during the Grocery strike in CA, I can firmly say that the unions are hurting the employee as much as they are helping. They just need to go!

Walmart takes decent care of their people, but the press just looks at all the "poor" looking for a free ride and gives them a bad name. What Walmart does to competition is another mater entirely. It's called capitalism. If you don't like it....move to Cuba or go to Mexico Or just go away. And take a few illegals with you as luggage porters. HA!

RightsideVA said...

Are you saying "pack-em up and head for say, France"? there the unemployment rate is over 26% and they are rioting in the streets because they do not want the employers to be able to get rid of the slackers for the good of the business, the patrons, the economy, the hard workers, etc...

How dare you suggest these people stand up and be responsible for themselves!!!

Anonymous said...

Rightside isn't that a little radical [ be responsible for thy actions]

RightsideVA said...

Anonymous 9:23,

It is amazing that these people are rioting over there for they feel the work weeks are to long and yet there get 4-weeks vacation right off the bat!!!

Why work hard or strive to improve if you have a deal like that? Maybe thats why their economy is so poor and growth is so slow...

SWAC Girl said...

Anonymous, give me a break!

We have enough rules and regulations on the books to run any corporation out of business in this country. If not for the companies I have worked for, I would not have been able to make a living.

zen said...

Speaking of making a living...I'm just curious how you all feel...
Should someone who works a 40 hour work week be able to make a living? (pay rent, buy food, medical, transportation, child care?, clothing)

Also back to Wal*Mart. Personally I do not agree with many of their business practices. The way they treat employees, the way they decimate local businesses, thier environmental record, their contribution to the massive and growing trade deficit, their contribution to foreign sweatshop and labor practices, etc...anyway these are my personal feelings and so I chose not to shop there. I do not give them my support or my money, and haven't for well over a year now. This is not always the easiest living in a rural, small community, but I make the sacrifice to live by the ethics and morals I believe in.
Will that bring WM down? No. But At least I can live by my principles and with a clear conscience.
Perhaps it is not just WM, but capitalism. Perhaps they are not 'evil' but just good at navigating a system that is tainted by corruption. The fact of the matter is that consumers need protections, workers need protections, and regulations, otherwise people cheat, exploit and take advantage of others with only profit being prized.

my 2¢

SWAC Girl said...

Zen said:

"Perhaps it is not just WM, but capitalism. ... The fact of the matter is that consumers need protections, workers need protections, and regulations, otherwise people cheat, exploit and take advantage of others with only profit being prized."

ONLY profit being the prize? So companies pour money into start-up, development, expansion, workers' pay and benefits, community involvement ... and you say ONLY profit is prized? You're way off-base.

So would you rather have communism? That way everyone is protected "equally," everyone is treated "equally," and we're all one big happy family, right?

There is no such thing as everyone being treated equally and being happy ... it just doesn't happen like that. You destroy the work ethic and entrepreneurial spirit. Just look south to Cuba....

I used to think of Wal-Mart as shutting down local businesses. But when liberals started attacking them I felt compelled to point out their good points. I have driven the backroads of Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee -- places where in the past there was only a local convenience store so people drove miles to a big city for a larger selection of items at a lower price. Wal-Mart, however, took a chance where other "big box" stores wouldn't and built in those rural areas. Not only did they offer a better selection of goods close to home but they offered employment and they gave back to the community.

It's not just Wal-Mart; it's all businesses. I am really getting tired of the "poor me" attitude of people who think of them as evil corporations. Sure ... some Mom-and-Pop businesses haven't survived the big box stores ... but the ice man also doesn't walk the streets with his horse-and-wagon filling ice-boxes anymore. Times change and we need to change with them.

Sam Walton was a self-starter who built his empire from scratch. Typical because that's the way most corporations begin ... and, once successful, someone starts criticizing and attacking.

Zen, are you self-employed? I doubt it because you wouldn't have these thoughts. Are you employed by a big corporation? If so, you could turn a critical eye on your company and find problems ... but no company is perfect.

The fact is corporations employ millions of workers, they treat us very well, they give us health and welfare benefits ... they take a chance on us and we, in turn, are responsible for giving them a good day's work. They are not out "to get us" nor are they out to get the community or the environment.

Pessimisim has become the trademark of liberals.

If you think companies are so bad in America, try the rest of the world. Look at their track records and, while you're checking, they will probably tell you to take a hike because they could care less!

Mexicans and others by the thousands are flooding our country. Obviously THEY see something good that Zen doesn't. Perhaps trading places would be an option?

In America we have it made. I refuse to give in to those who criticize without seeing the good. Blame it on my Irish roots ... but I was raised an optimist by hard-working parents who stressed what a wonderful country we live in and the endless opportunities available not only to our citizens but to immigrants worldwide who dream of moving to America.

My two-cents' worth.

zen said...

SWAC girl, why must every discussion make you feel threatened and offended? We are merely airing out opinions, so there is no need for your "love it or leave it -based attacks." Since you address me so pointedly I'll educate you a bit, as you haven't a clue.

For your information, I am not self-employed, nor do I work for a large corporation. My mother was an immigrant, became a citizen, still loves her mother country, worked as a shipyard welder to raise two children by herself without government assistance. So spare me your lecture about seeing what opportunities America can hold for those that work hard.
Yet after a long life of hard grueling work has she anything (assets) to show for it? No. But I guess that's her fault huh because she didn't work hard enough and wants some sort of handout huh? She wants to take something from you so that she's "equal" or better off? Hell no, she is proud and I am too. So you can get off your high-horse that you have everyone else figured out based on your narrow worldviews.

I guess you choose not to address my question as to if you think someone that works 40 hours a week should be able to make a living.

You said, "So companies pour money into start-up, development, expansion, workers' pay and benefits, community involvement ... and you say ONLY profit is prized? You're way off-base."
You're right they open new stores out of the kidness and generousity of their hearts. Wal*Mart would never demand special treatment and huge tax breaks to come and share their goodness to small communities.

You said, "I used to think of Wal-Mart as shutting down local businesses. But when liberals started attacking them I felt compelled to point out their good points."
So you just gave up what you thought based on partisanship? You got in line, against your own beliefs, to defend an entity and focus on the 'good news." Where have I heard that one before?
"Times change and we need to change with them." How conservative of you. How principled. I guess you need to pick and choose where to apply that philosophy, or check with the Party heads to figure out what cause you are for or against this week.
What about our national debt? Our trade deficit? Surely an independent, thinking conservative would take issue with the monthly record-breaking trade deficit that WalMart encourages. How about you?
Is not selling off of America, stock in America, backing of our currency to those evil commie Chinese, and those darn brown Saudis, not an issue of national security?

I recommend the WalMart movie to you as well. I'm not saying it is the bases for all of my opinions, nor that it should be yours, or that it will change your life and show you the light. Not saying that at all. But just as I listen occassionally to Hannity and Limbaugh, I at least want to be informed of the charges leveled against me.

We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not to our own facts.

SWAC Girl said...

Well, Zen, I obviously touched a nerve.

You wrote, "Yet after a long life of hard grueling work has she [your mother] anything (assets) to show for it? No. But I guess that's her fault huh because she didn't work hard enough and wants some sort of handout huh?"

So you blame all of society for that? OK, with that kind of reasoning let's check out a few things.

My grandfather grew up in southwest Virginia in a cabin on a mountaintop, tried to farm rocky slopes, moved his growing family (10 children - my mom's the youngest) to Richmond during the Depression to get a job at - horror of horrors - Dupont. His children got jobs at Phillip Morris and Dupont and other corporations around the Richmond area. My grandfather poured everything he made into living so it sounds as if he and your mother were in the same boat. I don't blame YOU or anyone else for that, nor did he.

Some people catch a break and make it big. Others do not. I learned a long time ago that life is not fair. There are no guarantees. However, you can look at obstacles as character builders or you can let them defeat you.

My dad was the oldest of five children growing up in Amelia County, VA, during the Depression. His father left home to go work in Richmond and send money to the family. My dad quit school after 8th grade and went to work to help support his younger siblings. He worked hard all his life, he served in the Navy during WW II, and he raised three daughters. He died of cancer at the age of 51.

I don't think THAT'S fair but that's life.

My mother graduated high school and started working in Richmond as a secretary and worked her way up to the first woman salesman in the Richmond Sales & Marketing Club. My sisters and I were "latchkey kids" before the term had been invented. As the oldest I took care of my them while my parents worked.

While I sympathize that your mom hasn't any assets, she is by no means alone in that situation. But we cannot sit around and be jealous and bitter of the ones who make it nor can we expect them to take care of us.

Partisanship to stand up for Wal-Mart? Nope. Just tired of hearing the libs tear down a corporation without allowing for the good they have done. "Equal opportunity" criticism is what I'd like to see.

May I recommend some reading? "Let Freedom Ring" by Sean Hannity, "What Every American Should Know About the Rest of the World" by M.L. Rossi, and "What Color is a Conservative?" by J.C. Watts.

RightsideVA said...

And here I was just posting the amount of money we are talking when the GM Buyout topic came up....

Good discussion and strong points on both sides.

Zen Said:
"Since you address me so pointedly I'll educate you a bit, as you haven't a clue." A little strong but we all have different views and standing behind them, just keep it clean... Zen also says his mother was an imigrant and worked hard in the shipyards to support her family. Does she have anything to show for it or want a handout? "Hell no, she is proud and I am too. So you can get off your high-horse that you have everyone else figured out based on your narrow worldviews."

It is good she does not want anything from anybody else. That is the whole point about working hard to improve yourself or take responsibilty for your actions. Your mother got her reward for she supported Zen and doing it on her own. Just like me working the long hours I have for what I have, it's not much in material sense but it is mine. When living in Florida Keys after Hurricane Georges and no work due to no tourism I could have gotten a check from the Govtand they were handing them out, but I chose not to and ate alot of rice & beans to get by. I did not want the $$$ from the govt. I knew I could make it work if I tried and my reward was not the large credit card bill that took some time to pay off, but my reward was that I did it on my own... If it was like New Orleans and they were handing out $3,000 debit cards in the Keys? Nope. would not have taken one... How about you? If people after working long hard time to get by be "given" something because they have little material things to show in the end? Would\will you take it? I don't know if your mother is still with us, but ask her. I would like to hear the answer....

The comments on Walmart are interesting for if they are so evil why are they so popular? Economist say Walmart has kept inflation lower since they are there. Trade defecit? Yes. China is growing and we buy a whole lot from them. Is that bad? Is it stealing jobs from Americans? Yes in some sense for the jobs cant fill a demand here at the prices they demand. "Why low prices are so popular"... Sam Walton had started a program before he died that identified American made products and supported them. When I worked for Walmart that program is gone & I could find little on it. I would love to see an American Flag, just the Republican in me, on each price label for American made products so I could choose that one. Where do you think the sales would be? I know they will still be with the lower import product for people talk a good game just few practice it....

"Is not selling off of America, stock in America, backing of our currency to those evil commie Chinese, and those darn brown Saudis, not an issue of national security?" Do we limit this someway? Do we tax the imports to make it more fair but raise prices to those shopping? It's not the evil corporations that is the problem, it's our society. We have a strong economy, great growth rate and people are making money but savings rate is lowest ever. Who is at fault there? Is this due to the corporations offereing low prices or the choices made by the public???

zen said... that we have our whole family history straight...I realize, after re-reading my response that I did have a strong reaction to your comments. I shall attempt to temper them in the future.

I am not at all saying that because anyone works hard that later in life they deserve more. But at the same time isn't the country stronger because of the hard work and dedication that people like our families contributed? I beleive it is.
I also think that we are currently in a new globalism that is too focused on profits and controlled by those with the most money and power. Look at oil companies for instance, or perhaps how lobbyists have infiltrated access to government. Whereas these powerbrokers and those huge corporations have more authority, a more 'listened to' voice, and overwhelmingly more influence over policies, laws and regulations than the citizenry. This is where a normal inequity and social stratification is amplified, creating an unfair advantage for those with money to thrive on the backs of those without. This is where pollution controls are given to the corporations who have a vested interest, where labor polices are legislated by the corporations.
Look at the credit card bill...written by the credit card companies. Look at the Medicare bill...written by the pharmaceutical companies. Energy policy...the energy/oil companies. Is it any wonder that each year we have more and more poor and uninsured?

One cannot deny that we have become a consumer culture that values material over sustained, wise growth and consideration for the poorest among us.
To answer your question...If my home, job, community and life had just been wiped out in an instant and someone offered me $3000, I would probably take it in a heartbeat. I would have the survival and welfare of my family to consider and it would be a welcomed leg up to help get me going. I see no shame in that at all.
I would not feel comfortable accepting something I didn't feel I deserved. But at the same time I have worked hard and contributed, and payed my taxes and certain programs exist for a reason. People need and often deserve the help that government can provide. Of course I have a problem with people that take advantage of the system. Who doesn't? But I also do not assume that the majority of people on assitance are so out of laziness or because they want to be. This is a shining example of where I have optimism, and some (SWAC) show their pessimism, I have faith that people are generally good and willing to work hard—American and otherwise.

Why is Wal*Mart so popular? I think you nailed it...low prices. If it is indeed these low prices that make WM so appealing, then does it not say something about the economic conditions of the the majority of people that shop there? Let alone work there.
If WM comes in town and wipes out a lot of the local busniesses, what choice do people have for employment? Very little. That's not an admirable business practice, though it might be completely capitalistic.
Henry Ford had the philosophy that people that make his automobiles should earn enough to buy and own one too. Wal*Mart takes the opposite approach. They will pay people so poorly that they are forced to shop there too.

I find it incredibly hard to believe that lets say a t-shirt can possibly be produced for $3. But let's say that's what it sells for. Where does that inequity land? Is it that the WalMart health plan is typically Medicaid? A government program. So in essence we tax payers are already paying for the healthcare of many Wal*Mart employees. Lovely.

And I'll ask you think that someone should be able to make a living if they work 40 hours a week?

RightsideVA said...

Gotta go to work so quick question\comment:

"And I'll ask you think that someone should be able to make a living if they work 40 hours a week?"

If everybody works a 40 week should they get the same compensation? If we did that where is the incentive to improve yourself? Should all drive the same car of get the same check? If that is the case why go to scholl to learn more and improve ourselves? should those who take training, choose not to have kids before 20 or when they can afford them, or those who work harder jobs be compensated better? How about those who went to college and sacraficed to improve themselves and make themselves more "Valuable", should they be paid less so those who sat on the porch get more so to be more fair???

Gotta go to work now and try to improve myself....

Later folks !!!

zen said...

That's not what I asked...
I wasn't asking if you thought everyone should "get the same compensation."
Of course those that have more skills will get better jobs and thus be better compensated that those that are not.

What I'm asking is simply...
Do you think if someone works 40 hours a week they should be able to survive, make a living, pay rent, buy food, care for a child or 2, afford medicine and healthcare? No frills, no vacations, no luxuries—merely make a living.

SWAC Girl said...

Zen, glad you liked the family history. I was making a point that I'm not from an affluent family but one that has had to work hard to earn what we've gotten.

It's too easy to pull the "poor me" attitude when what we need is personal resposibility.

You asked several times, "Do you think if someone works 40 hours a week they should be able to survive, make a living, pay rent, buy food, care for a child or 2, afford medicine and healthcare? No frills, no vacations, no luxuries—merely make a living."

I think Rightside answered your question ... but it wasn't the answer you wanted to hear.

No one is GUARANTEED anything while working a 40-hour week. What you can afford -- childcare, etc. -- is entirely up to your earning capability.

I started in the work place straight out of high school at an entry-level position that paid benefits (I made sure of that because I couldn't afford them otherwise). I held off having children because we couldn't afford them, paid rent for a year and pinched pennies, then bought a small fixer-upper house, took no vacations, etc. Didn't make enough money, couldn't afford, waited until we were older and COULD afford those things.

You sound as if you want unions to regulate living which is the way this entire conversation began. Unions, in my opinion, are similar to socialism in the premise that everyone is treated equally ... and there is no such thing.

A high school dropout is not going to make the same in a week that a computer programmer is going to earn. Therefore, the high school dropout will not be able to afford as much as the computer programmer. Period. Earn more, afford more.

Now, back outdoors to work in the yard....

zen said...

No RightSide answered his own question. In fact RS reframed it as such, "If everybody works a 40 week should they get the same compensation?"
Which is very different from what my question.

You got a bit closer, but still oversimplified and missed the point. The point being that there are those in this country that just in order to survive cannot make it on minimum wage.
Sure if life was perfect one could plan out how their life will unfold. And it sounds as though you were fortunate enough to plan as best you could and sacrifice and gain a leg up. But what about those who may follow the same itenerary and were not as successful? You imply that it was somehow a lack of fortitude or work ethic. Which may be some cases, but not all. So why penalize all?

I suppose we just disagree with equal opportunity actually existing. The fact is that the cost of living has sharply increased, while the minimum wage hasn't. Once a 40 hour week may have been enough to manage, but now it isn't. Although some people still work as hard as they ever did the real value of a dollar is not what it used to be.

It is not simply a question of "personal responsibility." If it were then we wouldn't have a problem with immigration would we? Some wouldn't blame the media, the democrats or liberals for every problem under the stars—if there were such a thing as "personal responisbility." But that's a whole other can of worms.

Since government is responsible for driving market forces that create the economic conditions in which we live by giving the preferential treatment to huge companies that I mentioned earlier, then government is culpable and must ensure that someone who works 40 hours a week can at least make a living wage. This opportunity must exist first before the arguement becomes about what personal lifestyle choices an individual makes.

SWAC Girl said...

Zen, let me see if I've got this correct: You think everyone should right-off-the-bat make enough money (be guaranteed) to cover all life expenses no matter their background, education, earning capability -- just guaranteed, perod?

You are still way off-base but we are going to have to agree to disagree because we are planets apart in our thinking and we are now spinning our wheels.

You have bought into the "government owes me" attitude ("preferential treatment to huge companies ... government is culpable and must ensure ... 40 hours a week can ... make a living wage"). The government owes you nothing. You must earn what you get.

If immigrants to this country had had that attitude there would be no U.S.A. Government did not take care of them. If there were circumstances where someone needed help it was taken care of by churches, families, and friends who looked out for folks ... and still do. Where is your pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps attitude? This is America! Anything is possible!

Rightside answered your question and so did I but, as I said before, it's not the answer you wanted to hear.

Glad to see your job allows you time to post comments throughout the day to this blog. Thank your boss! And, now, I must get back to my yard work.

zen said...

No, you don't have it correct. I do not believe that people should be guaranteed a base salary. But I do think that it should be possible for someone to live in this country without government assistance programs if they work 40 hours a week. Working 40 hours a week should be enough to earn a living in this country. It's not a giveaway if someone is working.

Bubba (on regular coffee) said...

Hey I found 2 cents in my couch...

and I'll answer the question. YES! People should be able to live on 40 hours a week. BUT, how we live is a matter of personal choice. A person who works a low end job can live on 40 hours a week as long as he/she lives within those means. Personaly I work 50-60 hours a week and live pretty good considering my age group, but there are people who work for me at 40 hours a week that are trying to live at a level that they cannot support because they choose to do that. They have new cars, cell phones, party on the weekends, buy things freely and use credit to support their spending habit. Notice what is missing? House Payment, retirement contribution, savings.... they will be in dire straits if they have to add those things because they have developed the habits of a well established person before they are well established. Should the minimum wage go up?....most likely. BUT how many companies are actually paying minimum wage? I don't have the numbers but I'll bet someone does and from trying to hire people in the Virginia area I can pretty much tell you nobody is getting paid $5.15 to flip burgers unless they are 15 or 16 years old. You find the minimum wage most of the time in low end labor jobs like construction workers, and many of those people are being paid CASH thus taxes are not coming out....and they get by. So.... (here is where I really tick off people) want to help out the 40 hour worker...then PASS THE FAIR TAX!!! everybody gets the full amount of their check and the people who spend on taxed items pay the govmt taxes. Illegals pay taxes with their ill gotten gains, criminals pay taxes buying more bling bling, the economy gets supercharged, the old tax deduction mentality withers and dies, the sun shines, the birds chirp,......ok got on a roll there... any way their are better ways to fix a problem than throwing money at it. All Hail Neal Boortz. Amen.

SWAC Girl said...

Bubba -- Thank goodness you found that 2 cents in your pocket to share some of your common sense. You said what I couldn't seem to articulate. Pass the coffee!

RightsideVA said...

I think Bubba hit the other half that I did not get to or knew how to say. Half the issue is that you have to improve yourself to make your self more valuable to an employer. You must have something to offer somebody to be wort the extra pay and benefits. The other half is what you do with that which you earn. It reminds me of all the dept managers at Walmart who would go into the management program and upon completion get a nice bump in pay. I saw many that went out and bought new vehicle. New cell phones that they could download just about anything on, new clothes, watches, etc. PDA's everywhere to play games on etc... Then I would see them get transfered to a new store and cry about trying to get rent money for apartments when they got there, many failed and who's fault was that? Walmarts?

Bubba, This Neal Boortz guy, is he part of the Librarian party that I have heard of???

Bubba said...


good one! You should check out the fair tax book he co-authored. It is comming out in paper back with additional info. But like anything else if we did pass it the politicos would butcher it to play to their power base.

You mean that at a major corporation after they spend a few thousand dollars training you they want you to step up? They give you a raise? huh? promotion? relocation? must be some ploy to get the achievers out of communities so they can increase the concentration or poor, helpless, defensless, uneducated workers (errr customers). How dare Wal-Mart a Haliburton subsidiary? must be a plot somewhere. LOL

RightsideVA said...


Good little debate but let's get back to something. GM is looking to buy out workers at $140,000 each just to get them off the payroll and to make it possible just for the company to survive...

How much of the cost of my Chevy Pick-up went to paying some guy who is presently "laid off" from GM but yet is still getting 90% pay and full benefits without producing anyhting? Should I have paid thousands less instead of supporting this "Bloated" union institution?

Should we just increase the pay of all Wal*Mart workers to $30,000+ a year just to make it easier on them and "Fair" no matter what they produce? Let's do that but I fear the prices in the store may go up and what will that do for business> What will that do to the consumer and what they can afford???

Bubba said...

Maybe GM could get an exception from the govmt to hire illegal aliens. That would be great. A new Chevy Blazer would cost like $12,00 if it was built by illegal labor. and the best thing is that once the unions got into the pockets of the aliens all of them would pack up and head home to tell all their buddies how screwed up organized labor is in the US.

bubba said...

Unions.....Here we go! I was gonna make a comment about how many labor unions were in the marches yesterday trolling for dues payers. but then when checking my news sites I found this from Neal Boortz's site:

Unions were heavily involved in yesterday's demonstrations. They're looking for something that will bring them more members. Members = power. Jamie Contreras is a spokesman for the Service Employees International Union. Contreras said: "The immigrant sleeping giant is now wide awake. People are paying very close attention to the attacks that are happening, both in the Senate and in the House. We're fed up. We're tired. We're here to show our strength in numbers." Now .. did you hear that "people are paying close attention to the attacks that are happening ... " line? What's he talking about? He's talking about people, both in our Congress and in the general population who are asking that our laws be enforced and our borders controlled. These words, according to Contreras, are "attacks."

That about sums it up. The INS should audit union rosters like they can audit company records. Every union card should have a
I-9 form attached to it. If they are gonna be a union member they should at least be legal to work in the USA.

The other thing we should do....for a Illegal to become legal should require a 2 year conscription to the Military. They want to be a citizen then they should have to fight for the US and appreciate what we have. The education they would get will make them a more productive citizens too.

We should kick them all out, but that ain't gonna happen. We need to send a clear message:
No free ride Paco. Get a Job. Learn English. Pay your taxes. Be an asset not an anchor.

RightsideVA said...

I saw that in the news and the Democrats are also already teaching them to be "victims" and to side with them. I also heard the speech buy Ted Kennedy where he was claiming to be their best buddie....

Bubba said...

Yeah, I'm about sick of hearing people compare this to the protests over civil rights and the draft. Didn't see anyone burning their green cards.....they earned those. These people are just as bad as the poor. Give me citizen ship, give me welfare checks, give me education. All about taking the easy road and the Dems are paving the path with gold leaf. If we give them amnesty then every single one of the 11+ million people should be required to build 1 foot of a 20 foot tall double fence on the border. That would build the fence pretty quick.

It really just gripes my ass that we can kick the japanese all the way across the pacific ocean, Run all the germans out of Europe, keep north and south Korea from mixing and we can't even keep a bunch of people from walking right into our country.

The republicans should make the border the issue for the mid-terms. The dems are showing their true colors over this. It should be like shooting fish in a barrel. We might be sympathetic to the illegals but americans want a secure border. Lets get one!