Free Trade

[Madman]

Well Mad, it would be a cool negotiation to say the least! I agree with your comments re: US politics too and don't kid yourself, it is happening here too. Politicians are more concerned with getting into and staying in power than actually doing their fricken job. Except for Layton, every politician I've ever seen or heard has promised the world to get elected, they backs down on the majority of their campaign promises.....

I know what you mean about "job security" but the problem is, a lot of city/government job security isn't due to merit.....I worked for a major Canadian Retailer at their home office and was working my way up the ranks...17 yrs.....and got phased out....at that point I swore I would always have a back up plan and NEVER care more for the company/career than myself. One thing I took notice of while working there: 4% increases, talks of cut backs, tightening the belt while you read about the public disclosure of the big wigs getting million dollar signing bonus', company cars, etc etc while the rest of us are brown bagging it because we can no longer afford to pay $5.00 for our lunch.....

I know someone corrected me on this but up here, 99% of the country's growth and wealth goes to the top 30% of the population (in the US 99.7% of the growth/wealth goes to the top .01% of the population).....I don't care about people making millions or a decent living, but pass some of that good fortune down the pipe FFS.

The biggest problem is: that top .01% is busy taking care of themselves and saying "fuck everyone else, let THEM eat my scraps"....well, know who else had that attitude? A chick named Marie Antoinette and she lost her head because of it......

I mean, take Bill Gates for example. I applaud him and his wife for vowing to give away his fortune before he dies but dude, instead of helping east indians have more babies, help your OWN fricken countrymen FFS. The reason you're so fricken rich is partly due to the Feds giving you billions in tax breaks...put that back into the economy! Fuck, instead of charging $100 for your POS O/S, take a hit, only make 50% profit on it and sell it for $49......

And don't even get me started on the wall street CEOs who used public money to give themselves bonus'......they should be either a) shot b) locked up or c) have all their assets seized.....no ifs ands or buts about it. That is not only wrong on so many levels, but what makes it even MORE wrong is the feds doing nothing about it....

Excellent post T, I completely agree with what you stated here.

You've pretty much nailed the big problem with one simple statement T: "....

the whole system is out of whack and I fear that it's going to break at some point. Probably not in my lifetime, but trust me: it's going to happen."

This type of thinking is what has driven the greediest of the greedy. It may not break down until after they are gone and they don't give a shit then. The BEST part of capitalism is what Henry Ford did years ago. He hired more people so that those people could afford to buy more cars so that he had to make more cars and have to hire more people. Capitalism isn't the green eyed monster that many people portray, however the "greed is good" philosophy can only work in the short term. That type of thinking only serves the SHYSTER.

Curiously, and I say this with the greatest respect, the most astute business people I have met were Jewish. Their outlook wasn't ever to make a fast killing and hope that everything stays OK. They plan for family wealth for GENERATIONS. And while they are at it, why not let everyone eat a little bit too.

The Greek example right now is showing that unless planning for the future includes thinking about who is going to pick up the check (and I don't mean planning for Germany to pick it up) then there is going to be a shit storm.

I'm anticipating seeing a shitstorm hit both India and China in the next 25 or 30 years. What do you think will happen when 1.4 billion poor Chinese look around at the rest and say "Where is my Ferrari and Rolls Royce?" ​

Excellent post as well SH, I totally agree with you too.

 

[tboy]

Good points SH.....reminds me of the co-founder of Canadian Tire's philosophy: Run a business and contribute to society by offerring decent products, at a decent price, make a decent profit and share that profit with the employees. I mean hell, he used to take the SUBWAY into the office and he owned the whole fricken building and everything in it......

The company was run that way up until they starting bringing in US presidents, vice presidents etc. Now it's not that different than any other company....

The "greed is good" motto is horseshit. Greed isn't good, a desire to make a decent living IS good. It gives people the incentive to contribute to society. All greed does is make people do whatever it takes to get as much of the pies as they can, and damn the consequences.

For eg: I've had poor clients and had wealthy clients. Know who I have trouble collecting from? You guessed it: the wealthy ones. The poor ones know the value of my work, how hard I worked for them and appreciated it. The wealthy ones only wanted to rip me off because that is how they make their money: by ripping off someone else.

I got into it with this ex ex gf of mine who married a real estate investor. At one point she was living in her car and now she's in a fancy house. I asked her what her husband did and she said "he buys power of sale houses and resells them" Oh, so he makes his money off other people's misfortunes? She went ballistic but no matter what, that's what he did and the ONLY reason she's where she is.

I said to her: instead of making a quick buck on a power of sale, wouldn't it be better and more profitable to lend the person the money to keep them in the house? He made what, $80K on the sale but if he leant the person the money via a mortgage, over the course of the mortgage he'd make 5 times that AND help someone? Oh god no, can't do that......(sound like the issues hitting the US real estate market?)

That's where greed got the US banking system and yet, were they allowed to fail? Nope.....the public missed a big oppurtunity to tip the scales back in their favour and we do too actually. Banks recording record profits while people struggle to pay their mortgages. How do you think a bank would fare if all or even half its customers decided to withdraw all their money at the same time?

How do you think Bell would fare if 50% of their customers didn't pay their bills for 3 months?

How do you think Hydro one would fare if their customers didn't pay their bills for 3 months?

 

[Jesus Quintana]

Last comment for me - I'm glad you agree with me T.

Have you ever seen a real gambler at work? In one of those smoke filled back rooms with guys sitting behind stacks of money?
The new guy quite often gets screwed. But they won't screw him for his whole stack. If they do that then the guy simply bows out of any future game.
If they leave him just a little bit hurt then he comes back again and again and in the long run they screw him out of his whole stack 10 times over, over a span of months if not years.
I watch that show Dragon's Den every now and again and to me the biggest douche in the world is Kevin O'leary. Every time someone brings a product up it seems he says "Why not get it made in China?" Short term thinking.
By the way look up his "funds" and you'll see that they under-perform across the board. What a brilliant money manager. But I'm sure that he makes money off of all of it.

 

[Madman]

I think both T and Short would make very good union reps, what do you say boys?:biggrin:

 

[tboy]

oh, I dunno, only if they were militant.....

OH if I was younger.......

 

[Jesus Quintana]

Was both a Teamster and a member of the USWA. Both organisations are full of douchebags and I'd rather see them fall apart.

 

[Madman]

Was both a Teamster and a member of the USWA. Both organisations are full of douchebags and I'd rather see them fall apart.

Did you feel they didn't look after your needs as an individual or do you feel the members as a whole were let down?

I'm always curious when a former union member has such a high degree of animosity towards his former union. I will understand if you rather not answer my question.

 

[a 1 player]

Despite what many think, I am neither for nor against unions, sometimes they have their place, sometimes not. I used to think that they supported their workers and fought for them, but in the case of this one union I was dealing with, (at the time I was management), the chairperson told me flat out I could fire whoever I wanted so long as I paid 2 years worth of union dues. I don't know if that is the norm or not, but it made me see a different side of it.

 

[Dan]

Despite what many think, I am neither for nor against unions, sometimes they have their place, sometimes not. I used to think that they supported their workers and fought for them, but in the case of this one union I was dealing with, (at the time I was management), the chairperson told me flat out I could fire whoever I wanted so long as I paid 2 years worth of union dues. I don't know if that is the norm or not, but it made me see a different side of it.

A1, was his name Jimmy Hoffa, we all know what happened to him?

 

[Jesus Quintana]

Did you feel they didn't look after your needs as an individual or do you feel the members as a whole were let down?
I'm always curious when a former union member has such a high degree of animosity towards his former union. I will understand if you rather not answer my question.

Any system that values seniority above actual ability or performance is wrong. Both of those unions proved to me that being a long term employee who fucks the dog can get further ahead than someone who works hard and intelligently.
And I've been called a "company man" more times than I can swallow.
I knew a guy who worked at "The Motors" before they went Union. Immediately upon Unionization the relationship between workers and management went sour. In particular this fellow fondly remembered "Roast beef dinner" for employees on every Friday and: "could you imagine after we went union those fuckers stopped Friday dinners!"
Now the only reason that a union seems to exist is to perpetuate the union, not to help the membership.
Oh yah.... I once pissed on Buzz Hargrove's shoes in a public washroom. (True story)

 

[tboy]

Was both a Teamster and a member of the USWA. Both organisations are full of douchebags and I'd rather see them fall apart.

That's the problem with most organizations and our society as a whole. We are rife with people who are, as you say, douchebags and will lie, cheat, steal, and fuck over someone else in order to get ahead. Long gone are the days when companies would honor their committment to their employees and employees are rewarded for dedication and hard work.

I'm not saying everyone is like this, but so many now are and they are the ones who are rewarded....(I'm referring to the douchbags).

As player said: there are/were times when unions were needed to protect the workers. Without unions we'd still have dangerous working conditions and employee abuses (I think eventually the various governments would step in and insure employment standards but that wouldn't have happened as quickly as the unions forced companies to do). However, with that being said, I think the time of unions is long past. As stated, when they become misguided and IMO corrupt by rewarding length of service over quality of work, they have lost any amount of respect.

See, my main issue with unions is, like many people, they only see short term gains over long term goals. Many people think it is better to get $25.00 per hour for 3 yrs instead of $15.00 for 30 yrs (with col increases of course). That's what has happened to our manufacturing base. I'm postive that we could be making all that crap from the dollar store for the same price, if menial labour rates were inline with the skill required.

I got back to the movie wall street (for eg). Where Gecko could make more money breaking up the airline instead of keeping it running. That is THE biggest problem with our society and will eventually be its downfall. Those will millions/billions will wake up one day and realize that when you're hungry, you can't eat your bank book and that lambo in your driveway? Won't protect you from the pissed off common man when he comes to collect his due....

 

[Insertion]

Seniority has always been the corner stone of any union. It was designed to protect the employees who have built up benefits, sick time, holidays and higher pay from being outed by a youngster making less money with less benefits.

The theory is good because we see this happening in non unionised sectors all the time, the downside is that sometimes the lazy and unmotivated are protected.

I am not unionised and go through a review process every year to negotiate my own pay increase. I wouldn't have it any other way for myself. I'd hate to be told I have to make the same as Bob when I know I can do twice as much.

 

[tboy]

"I know I can do twice as much". I think you mean, you DO twice as much......

I have no problem with people with seniority getting better pay or promotions, as long as their length of employment isn't the only reason they are getting the benefits.

For eg: Joe Blow has been with the company 5 yrs. He has learned all the processes, who to go to, what all facets of the job entails, and does it well. Pete Meat gets hired and within 6 mons gets promoted to supervisor because his uncle is the boss's golfing buddy. WRONG.

 

[Melonballs2]

For eg: Joe Blow has been with the company 5 yrs. He has learned all the processes, who to go to, what all facets of the job entails, and does it well. Pete Meat gets hired and within 6 mons gets promoted to supervisor because his uncle is the boss's golfing buddy. WRONG.

This is the worse situation that happens at work places and union shop or not it happens at management levels and I agree it's wrong!!

 

[Barbara]

If you're smart, ambitious and resourceful there are plenty of jobs available. A union is only going to place an the employer and their employees into an antagonist position. Corporations do focus on profits but at the same time tasks have to be done that requires hiring people. If someone is the best they can be it makes it tough for an employer to eliminate their positions although I know it's been done for the sake of making more money, I'm not blind but a union is going to necessariely help the situation especially in the private sector. A good example of this is the York Region Transit strike, the union is getting crushed in this case because the government has the option of hiring a different contractor.

 

[Madman]

Seniority has always been the corner stone of any union. It was designed to protect the employees who have built up benefits, sick time, holidays and higher pay from being outed by a youngster making less money with less benefits.

You are absolutely correct Insertion. Seniority is an important right for any union member and it is for protection, absolutely.

If you're smart, ambitious and resourceful there are plenty of jobs available. A union is only going to place an the employer and their employees into an antagonist position. Corporations do focus on profits but at the same time tasks have to be done that requires hiring people. If someone is the best they can be it makes it tough for an employer to eliminate their positions although I know it's been done for the sake of making more money, I'm not blind but a union is going to necessariely help the situation especially in the private sector. A good example of this is the York Region Transit strike, the union is getting crushed in this case because the government has the option of hiring a different contractor.

My guess based on your post is that you are a manager or higher. Ask 100 Posties, TTC employees, city workers, auto workers ect......I bet over 75% will say they enjoy being card carrying members! :wink:

 

[Robintheboywonder]

Did anyone watch Obama's address to the people? I love his minumum 30% income tax comments for anyone making over a million and his tax cuts only for responsible corporations that hire people not export jobs!

I was listening to the 640 and 1010 today and the host's were all trying hard to discredit Obama because of course his centre to left being a democrat.

 

[tboy]

Shit, I wanted to watch that....Obama has been saying all along that he wants to fairly tax the rich and the corporations because they aren't pulling their fair share and of course the speaker...(bailor?) doesn't want anything to do with THAT...gawd, fair tax for the rich? take money out of THEIR pockets? (asshole should be shot shit and pissed upon).

I have also found out recently that congressmen can vote on bills that specifically effect their portfolios. In other words: a bill is coming up to grant huge tax breaks to waste processing companies. Congressmen can go out and buy x number of shares in those companies knowing that he'll vote yes to the tax breaks thereby making those shares he bought, worth x times as much. So for the rest of the population, that's insider trading but for politicians, that's business as usual? FUUUCK

As for the nepitism example I gave. I realize that being the owner of a company gives you certain rights. But, like in most corporations, there should be laws in place preventing it from happening. I know crappy tire has rules that state a spouse or family member cannot work in the same dept as another. So if you happen to meet someone at work, get into a relationship with them, one of you has to change jobs or leave. I mean, if an owner's son or daughter is qualified to do the job they are hired for, fine...but I have worked for companies where the son(s) only qualification is their last name and have yet to hear of any situation that wasn't like that......

(there has also been talk about limitations on how much you can leave a son or daughter via inheritance which is something I also fully support. ie: Warren Buffet can't leave his kids his billions, just millions).

 

[Guido]

(there has also been talk about limitations on how much you can leave a son or daughter via inheritance which is something I also fully support. ie: Warren Buffet can't leave his kids his billions, just millions).

I agree with most of what you said except for your last statement.

I'm sorry but I work hard and save to leave my kids well off and I would never want the state telling me what to do with my will. That would really be a slap in the face to hard working people.

I do agree with taxing the rich and that is if one is making more than a million dollars. Anyone taking home 700K clear can live very comfortably but FFS people here making over 125K get taxed at 50%, that's a bloody joke!!

 

[tboy]

Guido: I don't think you fall into the top .01% that the discussion involved. I mean if you're able to leave your kids $3 billion each, wtf are you doing here?

The comment you made about working hard is the key. The issue is that if you leave your kids millions or billions, I have yet to hear of one (or many) who actually appreciate what they've got, and use it properly.

For eg: there was one knob at "the other board" who spoke like he'd accomplished so much. Dig a little deeper and find out: mom and dad paid for his university, mom and dad give him an allowance, he lives with mom and dad, mom and dad gave him money to invest, etc etc. He got all uppity when I said: so in other words, you haven't accomplished a damn thing? I went on to say: you want to impress me? Give away everything you have, keep $500 and THEN come back and talk to me about what you've accomplished......

See, I have no problem with parents giving their kids a start. It's when they not only are given a start, but keep them in that .01% club undeservingly I might add....

A perfect example is that story in the paper in Vancouver a few months ago where the TEENS were caught racing their lambos etc through rush hour traffic....really? You're a teenager who is driving a $500K car? WTF is wrong with parents! IMO this is no different than a parent giving their 10 yr old 24's of beer.......