CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

tank

EOG Dedicated
#41
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

Because the Chinese aren't over-regulating businesses and redistributing their profits for someone else's political benefit.
r.
No they just devalue their currency so everything stays cheap!!Who benefits from that??Yeah tell me that is not political!!
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#42
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

A better example of laissez-faire capitalism vs America's current Euro-style social democracy destroying our wealth and standard of living, would be Hong Kong and Singapore. Both are freer economically than America with an unemployment rate below 3%.

.
Funny but Hong Kong is just like China with only a few rich but many poor.Who benefits from this again?/

Despite being one of the world's richest economies, the Gini Coefficient indicates that the wealth gap continues to widen in Hong Kong. As of 2006 Hong Kong's measurement is at 53.3, which means the difference between the rich and poor is far greater than that of the mainland China.<sup id="cite_ref-14" class="reference">[15]</sup>
 
#43
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

All sounds nice but the truth is that they go to China for the slave labor!Plain and simple!
"slave labor" :doh1

Do you have empirical evidence which shows millions of chinamen being dragged to work everyday in shackles and handcuffs against their own will? :blink:

The old communist system gave China nothing but misery and poverty, whereas new Chinese "capitalism" is lifting millions and millions of their people out of poverty: FACT.

In 20 years, those people you call "slaves" in China will have a better standard of living than your union fat cats in America (at least what will be left of them).

Now if a corporation stays here they have to lower the wages they pay to compete with the slave wages of China.
There's that "slave wages" thing again...a phrase straight from all those SEIU workshops.

It is the race to the bottom that benefits only the corporations.
Uh huh, "communist" China is "racing to the bottom", whereas progressive America is racing everyone to the top...is that the argument you're making? How can you say union wages are unsustainable when the corporation that signs the contract agrees to it? Are they saying sure we will sign that contract even though we are going to lose money???Does not happen in the real world !![/QUOTE]

Yep.

Company 'agree' (please note the air quotes) to pay union wages...and then... those union jobs move overseas to more business-friendly environments.

 
#44
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

No they just devalue their currency so everything stays cheap!
I agree with you that China manipulates its currency, but that's not the real reason America is bleeding wealth, because China isn't the only country importing American jobs. India is another example, and they don't manipulate their currency.
 
#45
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

Funny but Hong Kong is just like China with only a few rich but many poor.Who benefits from this again?/

Despite being one of the world's richest economies, the Gini Coefficient indicates that the wealth gap continues to widen in Hong Kong. As of 2006 Hong Kong's measurement is at 53.3, which means the difference between the rich and poor is far greater than that of the mainland China.<sup id="cite_ref-14" class="reference">[15]</sup>
More evidence that modern progressivism is an ideology of hatred and envy.

Progressives simply do not understand the true concept of WEALTH because they strictly measure it in nominal and relative terms ("rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer!!"), versus in absolute terms (income and/or wealth too low to maintain life).

If the "poor" are buying Iphones and laptops and are morbidly obese from consuming too much fast food (expensive!), then the public needs to ignore these radical egalitarian demagogues and their so-called "progressive" think tanks bombarding us with statistics and headlines that "CEOs Earn 500 times the Avg Wage!!" and so on.

Progressives would have us believe "the poor" and "the rich" are constant groups, but they are not. Most flesh-and-blood humans move in and out of "classes" all the time. People at the top lose a lot, some lose everything. Bill Gates was once "poor" running Microsoft out of a garage. A free market economy allows people to move up and down the income ladder, as most people do throughout their lives.

This "income equality" obsession parroted by progressive demagogues is a myth and a deliberate elusive target which, but a great propaganda tool power-hungry politicians use to brainwash gullible economically-illiterate voters into signing over their sovereignty and wealth to the omnipotent socialist state, administered by moral monster eggheads like Cass Sunstein.

If tiny Hong Kong is indeed "one of the worlds richest economies", its because the government doesn't tell its citizens what kind of car to drive, what kind of light bulb to use, which kind of inefficient and overpriced energy should fuel their businesses, who is best equipped to handle their health care needs and what constitutes a "fair wage."

When will Americans remember that these radical progressives know fuck-all about running a business, never mind an entire economy? 2938u4ji23
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#46
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

"slave labor" :doh1

Do you have empirical evidence which shows millions of chinamen being dragged to work everyday in shackles and handcuffs against their own will? :blink:

The old communist system gave China nothing but misery and poverty, whereas new Chinese "capitalism" is lifting millions and millions of their people out of poverty: FACT.

In 20 years, those people you call "slaves" in China will have a better standard of living than your union fat cats in America (at least what will be left of them).



There's that "slave wages" thing again...a phrase straight from all those SEIU workshops.



Uh huh, "communist" China is "racing to the bottom", whereas progressive America is racing everyone to the top...is that the argument you're making? How can you say union wages are unsustainable when the corporation that signs the contract agrees to it? Are they saying sure we will sign that contract even though we are going to lose money???Does not happen in the real world !!
Yep.

Company 'agree' (please note the air quotes) to pay union wages...and then... those union jobs move overseas to more business-friendly environments.

[/QUOTE]
Of course not Joe!!Everyone wants to work for peanuts and have no rights what so ever .You live in fantasyland!!And quit using Heritage for false info for shit sakes.What next..a graph from right to work.com??For every union job that moves overseas , their are 2 non union jobs going with it!That is a fact!!
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#47
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

More evidence that modern progressivism is an ideology of hatred and envy.

Progressives simply do not understand the true concept of WEALTH because they strictly measure it in nominal and relative terms ("rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer!!"), versus in absolute terms (income and/or wealth too low to maintain life).

If the "poor" are buying Iphones and laptops and are morbidly obese from consuming too much fast food (expensive!), then the public needs to ignore these radical egalitarian demagogues and their so-called "progressive" think tanks bombarding us with statistics and headlines that "CEOs Earn 500 times the Avg Wage!!" and so on.

Progressives would have us believe "the poor" and "the rich" are constant groups, but they are not. Most flesh-and-blood humans move in and out of "classes" all the time. People at the top lose a lot, some lose everything. Bill Gates was once "poor" running Microsoft out of a garage. A free market economy allows people to move up and down the income ladder, as most people do throughout their lives.

This "income equality" obsession parroted by progressive demagogues is a myth and a deliberate elusive target which, but a great propaganda tool power-hungry politicians use to brainwash gullible economically-illiterate voters into signing over their sovereignty and wealth to the omnipotent socialist state, administered by moral monster eggheads like Cass Sunstein.

If tiny Hong Kong is indeed "one of the worlds richest economies", its because the government doesn't tell its citizens what kind of car to drive, what kind of light bulb to use, which kind of inefficient and overpriced energy should fuel their businesses, who is best equipped to handle their health care needs and what constitutes a "fair wage."

When will Americans remember that these radical progressives know fuck-all about running a business, never mind an entire economy? 2938u4ji23
Nothing but a Fascist rant here with no facts at all.You Fascist's think you know what you are talking about but it is just another hate filled rant!!
 
#48
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

brucefan, sorry for hijacking your thread. Haters gonna hate.

Progressives suck ass. 2938u4ji23

********************************************************

Ron Paul on the Miminum Wage

* Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose the H.R. 3846, a bill to raise the federally-mandated minimum wage. Raising living standards for all Americans is an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly.

* Economic principles dictate that when government imposes a minimum wage rate above the market wage rate, it creates a surplus `wedge' between the supply of labor and the demand for labor, leading to an increase in unemployment. Employers cannot simply begin paying more to workers whose marginal productivity does not meet or exceed the law-imposed wage. The only course of action available to the employer is to mechanize operations or employ a higher-skilled worker whose output meets or exceeds the `minimum wage.' This, of course, has the advantage of giving the skilled worker an additional (and government-enforced) advantage over the unskilled worker. For example, where formerly an employer had the option of hiring three unskilled workers at $5 per hour or one skilled worker at $16 per hour, a minimum wage of $6 suddenly leaves the employer only the choice of the skilled worker at an additional cost of $1 per hour. I would ask my colleagues, if the minimum wage is the means to prosperity, why stop at $6.65--why not $50, $75, or $100 per hour?

* Those who are denied employment opportunities as a result of the minimum wage are often young people at the lower end of the income scale who are seeking entry-level employment. Their inability to find an entry-level job will limit their employment prospects for years to come. Thus, raising the minimum wage actually lowers the employment and standard of living of the very people proponents of the minimum wage claim will benefit from government intervention in the economy!

* Furthermore, interfering in the voluntary transactions of employers and employees in the name of making things better for low wage earners violates citizens' rights of association and freedom of contract as if to say to citizens `you are incapable of making employment decisions for yourself in the marketplace.'

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2000/cr030900mw.htm
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#49
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

brucefan, sorry for hijacking your thread. Haters gonna hate.

Progressives suck ass. 2938u4ji23

********************************************************

Ron Paul on the Miminum Wage

* Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose the H.R. 3846, a bill to raise the federally-mandated minimum wage. Raising living standards for all Americans is an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly.

* Economic principles dictate that when government imposes a minimum wage rate above the market wage rate, it creates a surplus `wedge' between the supply of labor and the demand for labor, leading to an increase in unemployment. Employers cannot simply begin paying more to workers whose marginal productivity does not meet or exceed the law-imposed wage. The only course of action available to the employer is to mechanize operations or employ a higher-skilled worker whose output meets or exceeds the `minimum wage.' This, of course, has the advantage of giving the skilled worker an additional (and government-enforced) advantage over the unskilled worker. For example, where formerly an employer had the option of hiring three unskilled workers at $5 per hour or one skilled worker at $16 per hour, a minimum wage of $6 suddenly leaves the employer only the choice of the skilled worker at an additional cost of $1 per hour. I would ask my colleagues, if the minimum wage is the means to prosperity, why stop at $6.65--why not $50, $75, or $100 per hour?

* Those who are denied employment opportunities as a result of the minimum wage are often young people at the lower end of the income scale who are seeking entry-level employment. Their inability to find an entry-level job will limit their employment prospects for years to come. Thus, raising the minimum wage actually lowers the employment and standard of living of the very people proponents of the minimum wage claim will benefit from government intervention in the economy!

* Furthermore, interfering in the voluntary transactions of employers and employees in the name of making things better for low wage earners violates citizens' rights of association and freedom of contract as if to say to citizens `you are incapable of making employment decisions for yourself in the marketplace.'

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2000/cr030900mw.htm
Show me one company paying minimum wage that is going broke or has gone under because of the minimum wage they pay!1
Speaking of haters going to hate how long did it take you to turn it into one of your anti union rants??
 

brucefan

EOG Dedicated
#50
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

How you could support Ron Paul and not understand the stupidity of the minimum wage law , is beyond me

Sometimes I wonder about you Tank:+clueless


<HR style="COLOR: #d1d1e1" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><IFRAME src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/I_IMuxMXd3E" frameBorder=0 width=560 height=349 allowfullscreen></IFRAME>


By:
Peter Schiff


Friday, July 10, 2009


In a free market, demand is always a function of price: the higher the price, the lower the demand. What may surprise most politicians is that these rules apply equally to both prices and wages. When employers evaluate their labor and capital needs, cost is a primary factor. When the cost of hiring low-skilled workers moves higher, jobs are lost. Despite this, minimum wage hikes, like the one set to take effect later this month, are always seen as an act of governmental benevolence. Nothing could be further from the truth.

When confronted with a clogged drain, most of us will call several plumbers and hire the one who quotes us the lowest price. If all the quotes are too high, most of us will grab some Drano and a wrench, and have at it. Labor markets work the same way. Before bringing on another worker, an employer must be convinced that the added productivity will exceed the added cost (this includes not just wages, but all payroll taxes and other benefits.) So if an unskilled worker is capable of delivering only $6 per hour of increased productivity, such an individual is legally unemployable with a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.

Low-skilled workers must compete for employers? dollars with both skilled workers and capital. For example, if a skilled worker can do a job for $14 per hour that two unskilled workers can do for $6.50 per hour each, then it makes economic sense for the employer to go with the unskilled labor. Increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour and the unskilled workers are priced out of their jobs. This dynamic is precisely why labor unions are such big supporters of minimum wage laws. Even though none of their members earn the minimum wage, the law helps protect their members from having to compete with lower-skilled workers.

Employers also have the choice of whether to employ people or machines. For example, an employer can hire a receptionist or invest in an automated answering system. The next time you are screaming obscenities into the phone as you try to have a conversation with a computer, you know what to blame for your frustration.

There are numerous other examples of employers substituting capital for labor simply because the minimum wage has made low-skilled workers uncompetitive. For example, handcarts have replaced skycaps at airports. The main reason fast-food restaurants use paper plates and plastic utensils is to avoid having to hire dishwashers.

As a result, many low-skilled jobs that used to be the first rung on the employment ladder have been priced out of the market. Can you remember the last time an usher showed you to your seat in a dark movie theater? When was the last time someone other than the cashier not only bagged your groceries, but also loaded them into your car? By the way, it won?t be long before the cashiers themselves are priced out of the market, replaced by automated scanners, leaving you to bag your purchases with no help whatsoever.

The disappearance of these jobs has broader economic and societal consequences. First jobs are a means to improve skills so that low skilled workers can offer greater productivity to current or future employers. As their skills grow, so does their ability to earn higher wages. However, remove the bottom rung from the employment ladder and many never have a chance to climb it.

So the next time you are pumping your own gas in the rain, do not just think about the teenager who could have been pumping it for you, think about the auto mechanic he could have become ? had the minimum wage not denied him a job. Many auto mechanics used to learn their trade while working as pump jockeys. Between fill-ups, checking tire pressure, and washing windows, they would spend a lot of time helping ? and learning from ? the mechanics.

Because the minimum wage prevents so many young people (including a disproportionate number of minorities) from getting entry-level jobs, they never develop the skills necessary to command higher paying jobs. As a result, many turn to crime, while others subsist on government aid. Supporters of the minimum wage argue that it is impossible to support a family on the minimum wage. While that is true, it is completely irrelevant, as minimum wage jobs are not designed to support families. In fact, many people earning the minimum wage are themselves supported by their parents.

The way it is supposed to work is that people do not choose to start families until they can earn enough to support them. Lower wage jobs enable workers to eventually acquire the skills necessary to earn wages high enough to support a family. Does anyone really think a kid with a paper route should earn a wage high enough to support a family?

The only way to increase wages is to increase worker productivity. If wages could be raised simply by government mandate, we could set the minimum wage at $100 per hour and solve all problems. It should be clear that, at that level, most of the population would lose their jobs, and the remaining labor would be so expensive that prices for goods and services would skyrocket. That?s the exact burden the minimum wage places on our poor and low-skilled workers, and ultimately every American consumer.

Since our leaders cannot even grasp this simple economic concept, how can we expect them to deal with the more complicated problems that currently confront us?
Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity | Euro Pacific Capital
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#51
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

I will ask you the same question Bruce...how many companies have gone under because of paying minimum wage.These are unskilled workers who will never have a trade or skill .Are you going to try and tell me that if we do away with minimum wage that the cost of a Big Mac at McDonalds is going to go down and that extra profit is going to create more jobs??/Is their going to be a higher demand now for Big Macs????Hell no!!Maybe we should go back to the days of slavery or use China as a wage scale huh?/Do you honestly think that by doing away with minimum wage that more people are going to be hired??It is all about supply and demand and with less money in the economy I can guarantee you that their will not be a higher demand for anything as we are finding out now.

Schiff's anti union rant is pure bullshit.All union members have a skill and trade so to compare that to someone who does not is stupid.When we had a strong middle class and strong manufacturing sector companies would pay more or try to pay higher wages to attract good employees and they had to compete with union wages to do that.
Now Joe can come and spew more jealous and envious shit like ...union members are lazy, unskilled and over paid.Blah, blah, blah.
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#52
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

And how many fast food places have closed because of this line of shit??[/COLOR]
When confronted with a clogged drain, most of us will call several plumbers and hire the one who quotes us the lowest price. If all the quotes are too high, most of us will grab some Drano and a wrench, and have at it. Labor markets work the same way. Before bringing on another worker, an employer must be convinced that the added productivity will exceed the added cost (this includes not just wages, but all payroll taxes and other benefits.) So if an unskilled worker is capable of delivering only $6 per hour of increased productivity, such an individual is legally unemployable with a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
Most people with a brain would try the Drano first and then call a good plumber and pay what the market bears.Dipshit.

Low-skilled workers must compete for employers’ dollars with both skilled workers and capital. For example, if a skilled worker can do a job for $14 per hour that two unskilled workers can do for $6.50 per hour each, then it makes economic sense for the employer to go with the unskilled labor. Increase the minimum wage to $7.25 per hour and the unskilled workers are priced out of their jobs. This dynamic is precisely why labor unions are such big supporters of minimum wage laws. Even though none of their members earn the minimum wage, the law helps protect their members from having to compete with lower-skilled workers.
If the job demands skilled labor then it does not matter with the unskilled worker now does it.Seriously this strawman is just plain dumb.How are union workers with a skill or a trade competing with an unskilled worker??How dumb do you have to be to buy this stupid shit?
Employers also have the choice of whether to employ people or machines. For example, an employer can hire a receptionist or invest in an automated answering system. The next time you are screaming obscenities into the phone as you try to have a conversation with a computer, you know what to blame for your frustration.
Another strawman!!Technology will always win out.

There are numerous other examples of employers substituting capital for labor simply because the minimum wage has made low-skilled workers uncompetitive. For example, handcarts have replaced skycaps at airports. The main reason fast-food restaurants use paper plates and plastic utensils is to avoid having to hire dishwashers.
And cars have replaced horses too but hey to expose another stupid point by Peter....what about an automated dishwasher??See how easy that is Peter??:doh1

As a result, many low-skilled jobs that used to be the first rung on the employment ladder have been priced out of the market. Can you remember the last time an usher showed you to your seat in a dark movie theater? When was the last time someone other than the cashier not only bagged your groceries, but also loaded them into your car? By the way, it won’t be long before the cashiers themselves are priced out of the market, replaced by automated scanners, leaving you to bag your purchases with no help whatsoever.
Technology Peter!!Hey get back to the Fascist, corporate whoring and do not forget to say ''automated technology does not need to go to the restroom or need breaks either''''Oh and they can work 24/7 all the time too''

The disappearance of these jobs has broader economic and societal consequences. First jobs are a means to improve skills so that low skilled workers can offer greater productivity to current or future employers. As their skills grow, so does their ability to earn higher wages. However, remove the bottom rung from the employment ladder and many never have a chance to climb it.
It's called technology Peter.Has nothing to do with wages now does it??How is an unskilled worker going to climb the ladder in your fantasy world?What skill are they going to acquire to climb??

So the next time you are pumping your own gas in the rain, do not just think about the teenager who could have been pumping it for you, think about the auto mechanic he could have become – had the minimum wage not denied him a job. Many auto mechanics used to learn their trade while working as pump jockeys. Between fill-ups, checking tire pressure, and washing windows, they would spend a lot of time helping – and learning from – the mechanics.
:houraThis is just plain stupid!!How about the teenager go to mechanics school like all dealerships or shops require??You know they do have to get certified first to work right??How many gas stations have shops left to work on cars anyway??

Because the minimum wage prevents so many young people (including a disproportionate number of minorities) from getting entry-level jobs, they never develop the skills necessary to command higher paying jobs. As a result, many turn to crime, while others subsist on government aid. Supporters of the minimum wage argue that it is impossible to support a family on the minimum wage. While that is true, it is completely irrelevant, as minimum wage jobs are not designed to support families. In fact, many people earning the minimum wage are themselves supported by their parents.
If their is a demand for the job then you will fill it regardless and minimum wage does not even play into it!!Like he admited at the end....minimum wage jobs do not need a skill .
The way it is supposed to work is that people do not choose to start families until they can earn enough to support them. Lower wage jobs enable workers to eventually acquire the skills necessary to earn wages high enough to support a family. Does anyone really think a kid with a paper route should earn a wage high enough to support a family?
Huh??Apples to oranges again.No one is saying the paper boy should make a wage to support a family.What skills are you going to learn making minimum wage to acquire skills to move up??Fry cook to burger master??

The only way to increase wages is to increase worker productivity. If wages could be raised simply by government mandate, we could set the minimum wage at $100 per hour and solve all problems. It should be clear that, at that level, most of the population would lose their jobs, and the remaining labor would be so expensive that prices for goods and services would skyrocket. That’s the exact burden the minimum wage places on our poor and low-skilled workers, and ultimately every American consumer.
And we have heard this same argument for the last 40 years and every time it is raised we do not see any of this scare tactic crap come true now do we??

Since our leaders cannot even grasp this simple economic concept, how can we expect them to deal with the more complicated problems that currently confront us?
Minimum Wage, Maximum Stupidity | Euro Pacific Capital
Stupid ass corporate whore.Go scare the stupid sheep with your stupid shit!!
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#53
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

b******************************

Ron Paul on the Miminum Wage

* Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I oppose the H.R. 3846, a bill to raise the federally-mandated minimum wage. Raising living standards for all Americans is an admirable goal, however, to believe that Congress can raise the standard of living for working Americans by simply forcing employers to pay their employees a higher wage is equivalent to claiming that Congress can repeal gravity by passing a law saying humans shall have the ability to fly.

* Economic principles dictate that when government imposes a minimum wage rate above the market wage rate, it creates a surplus `wedge' between the supply of labor and the demand for labor, leading to an increase in unemployment. Employers cannot simply begin paying more to workers whose marginal productivity does not meet or exceed the law-imposed wage. The only course of action available to the employer is to mechanize operations or employ a higher-skilled worker whose output meets or exceeds the `minimum wage.' This, of course, has the advantage of giving the skilled worker an additional (and government-enforced) advantage over the unskilled worker. For example, where formerly an employer had the option of hiring three unskilled workers at $5 per hour or one skilled worker at $16 per hour, a minimum wage of $6 suddenly leaves the employer only the choice of the skilled worker at an additional cost of $1 per hour. I would ask my colleagues, if the minimum wage is the means to prosperity, why stop at $6.65--why not $50, $75, or $100 per hour?
Who determent's what the ''market wage rate '' is??Again using the strawman crap of hiring 3 unskilled workers for $6 or 1 skilled worker for $16 makes no sense.It is an unskilled minimum wage job!!!What skill is needed for minimum wage??
* Those who are denied employment opportunities as a result of the minimum wage are often young people at the lower end of the income scale who are seeking entry-level employment. Their inability to find an entry-level job will limit their employment prospects for years to come. Thus, raising the minimum wage actually lowers the employment and standard of living of the very people proponents of the minimum wage claim will benefit from government intervention in the economy!
How many minimum wage jobs go unfilled??These jobs have always had high school kids to fill most.Every year we hear how raising the minimum wage is going to hurt the business yet , 40 years later it is proven that it is not the case.

* Furthermore, interfering in the voluntary transactions of employers and employees in the name of making things better for low wage earners violates citizens' rights of association and freedom of contract as if to say to citizens `you are incapable of making employment decisions for yourself in the marketplace.'
Because business proved over time that they will not pay shit and would gladly go back to slavery if they could.
Sweat shops went out in the 1920's but business would love to see it come back and are trying like Hell to bring it back.

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2000/cr030900mw.htm
xx
 
#56
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

The number of made in the USA products progressives have priced out of existence is beyond frightening. How many people would pay $6 for a box matches? Very few, because there is virtually no demand at that price, so matches simply wouldn't exist anymore. Good thing other countries have picked up the slack allowing cheap goods to be produced and imported here, or store shelves would look like this:

 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#57
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

The number of made in the USA products progressives have priced out of existence is beyond frightening. How many people would pay $6 for a box matches? Very few, because there is virtually no demand at that price, so matches simply wouldn't exist anymore. Good thing other countries have picked up the slack allowing cheap goods to be produced and imported, or store shelves would look like this:

It's always the workers fault in the Fascist world!!I use to buy them for $1 a box but then they went to those disposable lighters things and ..golly the demand went down but don't let me stop you from a good strawman rant!!
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#58
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

. Good thing other countries have picked up the slack allowing cheap goods to be produced and imported here, or store shelves would look like this:

Sure let's pay that Chinaman .25 cents an hour to make em.If people need em then they will supply em right Joe??
 
#59
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

It's always the workers fault in the Fascist world!!I use to buy them for $1 a box but then they went to those disposable lighters things and ..golly the demand went down but don't let me stop you from a good strawman rant!!
Its not a 'strawman', its a fact. Matches was an example off the top of my head. Thanks to progressivism, every item with a "made in China" or "made in Taiwan" or "made in India" or "made in Hong Kong" label on it has been priced out of the US market. My Thinkpad laptops are now manufactured in China for crissake. If these products were manufactured in the United States with all the draconian taxes, regulations and Big Labor bullies wanting their "fair share", nobody would buy them because nobody could afford them. In addition, progressives are busy destroying America's purchasing power by flooding the market with greenbacks (since 2008, the USD has lost 50% of its value against gold!!) so it won't be long before people won't be able to afford anything no matter where its made.

 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#60
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

Its not a 'strawman', its a fact. Matches was an example off the top of my head. Thanks to progressivism, every item with a "made in China" or "made in Taiwan" or "made in India" or "made in Hong Kong" label on it has been priced out of the US market. My Thinkpad laptops are now manufactured in China for crissake. If these products were manufactured in the United States with all the draconian taxes, regulations and Big Labor bullies wanting their "fair share", nobody would buy them because nobody could afford them. In addition, progressives are busy destroying America's purchasing power by flooding the market with greenbacks (since 2008, the USD has lost 50% of its value against gold!!) so it won't be long before people won't be able to afford anything no matter where its made.
]
The only fact you have presented is that products that are cheap will be produced cheaply in China or India.Has nothing to do with this great country that you hate!!!But on the flip side what about those greedy corporations huh??


Deregulation: The Rubbermaid Experience


By Larry Wohlgemuth, on August 24th, 2010
All made in China, thanks to WalMart!

In 1985 I was working as an executive recruiter placing engineers and chemists in the rubber and plastics industries. I was asked by a manufacturer of household plastic goods, i.e. laundry baskets and food storage containers, to find them a manufacturing engineer. I asked him to identify any companies from which he would like to see candidates to target my search, and he only mentioned one; Rubbermaid. To this day I don’t know if the guy was jerking my chain or not, but it didn’t take long to realize I wouldn’t succeed in finding him an engineer from Rubbermaid.
It wasn’t that it was hard to get a hold of people there, because unlike most companies they didn’t screen headhunters calling to spirit away their talent. Their philosophy was if you want to go, well that’s okay with us. They’d gladly hand the phone from person to person, and each one in turn would politely tell me no, I’m not interested. It was that good of a place to work. Fifteen years later only a handful of corporate executives and administrative staff remained in the United States, with the production all being done in China. It begs the question, what happened to Rubbermaid?

For over a decade Rubbermaid was ranked as one of the top 10 companies in the United States for which to work. A conscious decision had been made by ownership, management and labor to create a working environment that was profitable for everyone, and they had achieved their goal. Light years ahead of the curve when it came to wages, working conditions and benefits, they even vested their 401(k) plans in three years. They reasoned if someone didn’t like working there they didn’t want them to hang around waiting for their 401(k) to vest, just take your money and leave. Nobody ever wanted to leave.
It was during this same time that Rubbermaid’s fate was being sealed, unbeknownst to its corporate executives and employees. Up until this time there was antitrust legislation in effect that restricted the percentage of a company’s production that could be sold to any single customer, protecting smaller companies, their investors and employees from predators. It required the company to keep a diverse customer list to protect investors, and it protected employees from greed on the part of corporate executives costing them their livelihoods. While this might seem like an extreme amount of governmental interference into the functioning of private corporations, small and medium-size companies abounded and flourished in this environment. The problem was, Ronald Reagan liked BIG companies.
As the antitrust regulations were repealed companies were allowed to sell larger and larger portions of their inventory to single customers. Rubbermaid’s products became increasingly attractive to a company called Wal-Mart, and Rubbermaid’s workforce swelled to over 3000 employees trying to keep up with the demand. It appeared that all this handwringing about protecting investors and employees had been for naught, as everybody flourished in this deal. It was just another case of the government sticking its nose where it didn’t belong, or least that’s what it seemed, because the story doesn’t end here.
Soon over half of Rubbermaid’s production was going to Wal-Mart, then 60%, 70%, and finally over 80% of all the goods manufactured, and all the time Wal-Mart was pressuring Rubbermaid for ever lower prices. Finally Rubbermaid relented, and signed a contract promising to sell goods at a price below what any sane businessman would approve, but they had no choice. Wal-Mart was threatening to discontinue carrying their products, and losing 80% of their sales would bankrupt the company. Then the shit really hit the fan.
Rubbermaid was notified by their suppliers of a significant increase in the cost of resins, the main raw material used in manufacturing their products. With this cost increase they would be unable to make a profit based on the agreement with Wal-Mart, so they contacted Wal-Mart executives in an attempt to pass along some of the price increase. Does anybody here really need to be told what Wal-Mart’s response was? However Wal-Mart did have an idea of how Rubbermaid could stay profitable.
It turns out this wasn’t the first time Wal-Mart had pulled this play out of their playbook, and a representative from Wal-Mart loaded a team of Rubbermaid executives onto a plane and flew them to China to show them where their new production facilities would be. They weren’t given a choice; it was either move to China or face bankruptcy. The executives did what they had to do.
So because this piece of antitrust legislation was repealed, 3000 plant workers, chemists, engineers, administrative assistants, supervisors, operations managers, shipping managers and a whole slew of other people lost their jobs. Millions of dollars of tax revenue were lost in the United States from what had perennially been one of its finest employers. I’ve never seen it anywhere that Wal-Mart engineered the increased costs of resins in order to set these events in motion, but it does make you wonder.
So the next time you hear some deluded Libertarian or Republican telling you about free-market forces it might be appropriate to clue them in on the story of Rubbermaid, and remind them why it is that legislation existed. Or maybe not, because they’re probably not bright enough to understand what you are telling them. THIS, however, is how antitrust legislation protected you from the barons of greed.
 
#61
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

Tank, you're a hypocrite because 90% of the crap in your house isn't a product of US labor, let alone union labor.

You know why?

Because NOBODY, not even a holier-than-thou union thug like you, can afford the true cost of progressivism. Nobody can afford to pay $6 for a pack of matches or $2000 for an ipod.

Without "slave labor", your lifestyle would pretty much be like Hussein's used to be, living in a mud hut back in Kenya.

Bud then progressives believe industrialization is evil (causing global climate change, dontchaknow) so their plan of destroying our standard of living is going right according to plan.
 

tank

EOG Dedicated
#62
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

Tank, you're a hypocrite because 90% of the crap in your house wasn't manufactured by US labor, let alone union labor.

You know why?

Because NOBODY, not even a holier-than-thou union thug like you, can afford the true cost of progressivism. Nobody can afford to pay $6 for a pack of matches and $1000 for an ipod.

Bud then progressives believe industrialization is evil (causing global climate change, dontchaknow) so their plan of destroying our standard of living is going right according to plan.
And Fascist whores like you keep preaching the corporate line while I show you how corporations like Wal Mart have destroyed America with the race to the bottom.It is obvious you hate America and love it when corporations go to China and pay slave wages and then are dumb enough to wonder why we have a revenue problem here with unemployment over 9%.You are dumb enough to try and blame 10% of the workforce and in your hate of America never think about the 90% of the other workers who are getting screwed over in the process.
Why do you give a shit about anyone's standard of living unless it is for a fellow Fascist piece of shit like you.You love it when jobs are shipped over to China and now you want to cry about someones standard of living???????Get f###ed!!!!
 
#63
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

And Fascist whores like you keep preaching the corporate line while I show you how corporations like Wal Mart have destroyed America with the race to the bottom.It is obvious you hate America and love it when corporations go to China and pay slave wages and then are dumb enough to wonder why we have a revenue problem here with unemployment over 9%.You are dumb enough to try and blame 10% of the workforce and in your hate of America never think about the 90% of the other workers who are getting screwed over in the process.
Why do you give a shit about anyone's standard of living unless it is for a fellow Fascist piece of shit like you.You love it when jobs are shipped over to China and now you want to cry about someones standard of living???????Get f###ed!!!!
 
#67
Re: CPAC Straw Poll winner Ron Paul

Mark, how is the unemployment rate in your hometown of residence - Toronto CN?

And who will you be voting for as a Canadian voter to help improve the labor situation in your country which is not the USA?
 
Top