|
On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me.
So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships).
|
United States5162 Posts
On October 09 2011 07:27 Logo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me. So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships).
I'd say it has more to do with the cost of living in an undeveloped/developing nation. Even if they did have labor unions and such, their costs would still be way lower in the US because the necessities are cheaper and many of the luxury goods we like in the US aren't available.
|
Silvio Berlusconi, Italian prime minister, said: "I do not understand why people say there is a problem to find a job. You can go to Germany or another country and find a job there."
When a nice lady asked him similar question about job, he answered: "You are quite pretty, find a rich man do not bother with job"
Politics are always ready to help jobless with a good advice 
|
On October 09 2011 07:34 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 07:27 Logo wrote:On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me. So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships). I'd say it has more to do with the cost of living in an undeveloped/developing nation. Even if they did have labor unions and such, their costs would still be way lower in the US because the necessities are cheaper and many of the luxury goods we like in the US aren't available.
Except the cost and taxes of importing it should be increased to the point where it dosn`t happen.
We might live in a "global economy but humanity is not united. There are different rules for different countries. So tax their import appropritely.
|
On October 09 2011 08:17 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 07:34 Myles wrote:On October 09 2011 07:27 Logo wrote:On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me. So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships). I'd say it has more to do with the cost of living in an undeveloped/developing nation. Even if they did have labor unions and such, their costs would still be way lower in the US because the necessities are cheaper and many of the luxury goods we like in the US aren't available. Except the cost and taxes of importing it should be increased to the point where it dosn`t happen. We might live in a "global economy but humanity is not united. There are different rules for different countries. So tax their import appropritely.
So, it's better in your world for poor people in third world countries to die of starvation rather than do some menial labor to buy the bare essentials to support themselves ? Because by taxing imports from these countries, you are making their lives even harder than they are. How caring of you. But I guess that's better for you in your plush living conditions. Now who is being greedy ?
|
On October 09 2011 08:39 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 08:17 Madkipz wrote:On October 09 2011 07:34 Myles wrote:On October 09 2011 07:27 Logo wrote:On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me. So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships). I'd say it has more to do with the cost of living in an undeveloped/developing nation. Even if they did have labor unions and such, their costs would still be way lower in the US because the necessities are cheaper and many of the luxury goods we like in the US aren't available. Except the cost and taxes of importing it should be increased to the point where it dosn`t happen. We might live in a "global economy but humanity is not united. There are different rules for different countries. So tax their import appropritely. So, it's better in your world for poor people in third world countries to die of starvation rather than do some menial labor to buy the bare essentials to support themselves ? Because by taxing imports from these countries, you are making their lives even harder than they are. How caring of you. But I guess that's better for you in your plush living conditions. Now who is being greedy ?
Yeah that's pretty much why I don't balk at outsourcing, but do think it is an issue.
Why is it an issue to me? Because I'm worried that it won't ever even out or settle into a situation where people are all getting fair pay and good living conditions. Instead I worry the outsourcing will slosh around and get cheap labor without ever staying long enough in one place for the population there to benefit by long term increases in standard of living.
|
On October 09 2011 08:39 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 08:17 Madkipz wrote:On October 09 2011 07:34 Myles wrote:On October 09 2011 07:27 Logo wrote:On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me. So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships). I'd say it has more to do with the cost of living in an undeveloped/developing nation. Even if they did have labor unions and such, their costs would still be way lower in the US because the necessities are cheaper and many of the luxury goods we like in the US aren't available. Except the cost and taxes of importing it should be increased to the point where it dosn`t happen. We might live in a "global economy but humanity is not united. There are different rules for different countries. So tax their import appropritely. So, it's better in your world for poor people in third world countries to die of starvation rather than do some menial labor to buy the bare essentials to support themselves ? Because by taxing imports from these countries, you are making their lives even harder than they are. How caring of you. But I guess that's better for you in your plush living conditions. Now who is being greedy ?
I suppose you love foreign aid to afrika aswell?
These communities wont ever develop unless we LET THEM GO. The ultimate act of selfish arrogance is believing others are incapable of saving themselves.
China has tied huge amounts of money into US DEBT rather than in their own infastructure and quality of life.
Why? because eventually this system has to end but nopony want`s to let it go yet.
|
On October 09 2011 09:00 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 08:39 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 08:17 Madkipz wrote:On October 09 2011 07:34 Myles wrote:On October 09 2011 07:27 Logo wrote:On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:On October 09 2011 07:07 GeyzeR wrote:
Once in trimester I fill in a report for my company, that shows what I did to help the company fire an American and take an Indian instead. Actually it is called "to make process simple and cost effective". We can hire 4 unskilled Indians in place of 1 skilled American. So I have to rebuild the process in the way that it requires few skilled and many unskilled workers. I guess about 50% already replaced in the company. I can see potential to cut another 25%.
Sorry my American colleagues, but you are too expensive. You know that profit come first and it's free global market.
I must say however that quality has dropped and reaction times increased. And it is a bad strategy long term. But who cares, we need to make money now.
Frankly, I am surprised why many Americans protect the system that takes their jobs, outsourcing. For me personally it does not matter because I will have a job in any system. But are you brainwashed or something? Not brainwashed at all. We live in a global economy now. That's not up for debate. It's a fact of life. If my job can be done by someone living in a shack on the other side of the world, then I need to rethink my career choice. Because my employer will eventually go out of business as his competitors can get my job done much more cheaply and provide their product or service cheaper than my employer. So, I'm out of a job either way. This is why putting in regulations and requiring American employers to do things and jump through hoops that foreign competitors do not have to deal with, results in these American jobs being lost to employers who don't have to deal with those government regulations. If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times. If that is what the market wants, instead of cheap, then you will have success and employers making cheap products will go out of business. We're not "protecting the system that takes our jobs", we're acknowledging the reality of the world economy we live in. It has nothing to do with "the system", although a system imposing additional government regulations certainly expedites the process, for sure, but that is what Obama and the liberals support, not me. So are we just supposed to wait until all other countries in the world revolutionize and catch up to the living standards and population density of US/Most of EU? I'm not against globalization and I tend to not mind outsourcing as much as many, but the fact of the matter is the jobs are going to places because those places have less organized work forces and lack the 100+ years laborers have spent in the US (and EU) fighting for fair working conditions and reasonable pay (or have had their efforts wiped out by war/other hardships). I'd say it has more to do with the cost of living in an undeveloped/developing nation. Even if they did have labor unions and such, their costs would still be way lower in the US because the necessities are cheaper and many of the luxury goods we like in the US aren't available. Except the cost and taxes of importing it should be increased to the point where it dosn`t happen. We might live in a "global economy but humanity is not united. There are different rules for different countries. So tax their import appropritely. So, it's better in your world for poor people in third world countries to die of starvation rather than do some menial labor to buy the bare essentials to support themselves ? Because by taxing imports from these countries, you are making their lives even harder than they are. How caring of you. But I guess that's better for you in your plush living conditions. Now who is being greedy ? I suppose you love foreign aid to afrika aswell?
I don't mind foreign aid to Africa as long as it's being used as intended, and not being gobbled up by corruption.
These communities wont ever develop unless we LET THEM GO. The ultimate act of selfish arrogance is believing others are incapable of saving themselves.
So... let the downtrodden go. Wow, not greedy at all. Keeping your wealth to yourself much ? I'm sure they will appreciate our "words of encouragement" instead of giving them fucking food and water. I'm sorry, no more food for Africa, we feel we're being too arrogant, when really the only solution is to figure it out for yourself. How fucking stupid this is, arguing with liberals.
China has tied huge amounts of money into US DEBT rather than in their own infastructure.
Why? because then prices at made in china will go up and we stop buying.
I need a translation here. Maybe I'm dull, but I have no idea what point you are making or trying to make here. Last time I checked, China was building their infrastructure like crazy. Apparently they have money left over for additional investment, which they use to purchase U.S. Securities, but then that also has strategic importance, as well. If China ever wants to exert influence they can because all they have to do is not re-purchase our debt and we have real difficulty funding our government without them. They are also manipulating their currency, in addition.
|
On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:then I need to rethink my career choice.
There are jobs that still profitable to have in US, but the percentage is relatively low and the competition is high. Not everybody can rethink their career choice. Some people are just mediocre at everything. I would not offer a job to some of my friends, even if they are very nice people.
If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times.
I know that it should be like this in theory, but there is a reason why my company has moved from good quality and reaction times (that made its reputation in the past) to the current situation. It enjoys almost monopoly on the market, it is very difficult to enter, and even if somebody does, our prices are lower, because we pay Indian wages for our employees.
I guess the unemployment will only raise in US and EU. The jobs must move to India, China, Malaysia etc because it increases the profit. And the profit is the most important thing in capitalism - the economic system that even the poor love in US.
|
I don't mind foreign aid to Africa as long as it's being used as intended, and not being gobbled up by corruption. You deliberately keep their prices low and fuck their economy. Paving the road to evil with your good intentions.
So... let the downtrodden go. Wow, not greedy at all. Keeping your wealth to yourself much ? I'm sure they will appreciate our "words of encouragement" instead of giving them fucking food and water. I'm sorry, no more food for Africa, we feel we're being too arrogant, when really the only solution is to figure it out for yourself. How fucking stupid this is, arguing with liberals.
They are downtrodden because we are abusing them with economic superiority. Fisting them into shitty long therm deals. Lending savages money, feeding them for free and then keeping their sons hostage. This is your empire and legacy and you help fuel it.
Third world contries leashed to us in a perpatual state of import and export. Were we fuck their attempts at agriculture with free wellfare food and attempts at rising above their station are met with sour tones. Just check their chocolate industry. You think these African farmer`s would charge that little for their products because they want to?
China ever wants to exert influence they can
They can`t because once Chinese money are worth more than USD then guess what happens to their livelyhoods? Their entire export,import system?
Guess what happens to the chinese industry?
|
On October 09 2011 09:19 GeyzeR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2011 07:21 Kaitlin wrote:then I need to rethink my career choice. There are jobs that still profitable to have in US, but the percentage is relatively low and the competition is high. Not everybody can rethink their career choice. Some people are just mediocre at everything. I would not offer a job to some of my friends, even if they are very nice people.
To say "not everybody can rethink their career choice" is a bullshit cop-out. If someone pursued an education path that doesn't enhance their ability to perform some job, then they fucked up and wasted their money, if they were hoping to be more employable after college. If you want "personal development" go to the library, not some private $40,000 / year college. Jobs are out there. People have inflated opinions of their self-worth and aren't willing to do them. Being "nice people" has nothing to do with qualifications for a job, well, for the most part. Are they hard-working, honest, reliable, and modest ? Those are the types of qualities employers look for in employees. A nice person who is unreliable isn't going to get hired.
Show nested quote +
If your quality has dropped, and reaction times increased, then anyone can jump in the market providing a product that focuses on quality and short reaction times.
I know that it should be like this in theory, but there is a reason why my company has moved from good quality and reaction times (that made its reputation in the past) to the current situation. It enjoys almost monopoly on the market, it is very difficult to enter, and even if somebody does, our prices are lower, because we pay Indian wages for our employees.
No, it IS like that, in real life. The reason your company has gone for cheaper is because that is what the customers preferred over the other things, such as high quality and reaction times. There are people out there who prefer "green" type technologies over profits, and thus mutual funds who focus only on these types of investments were created. There was a market, and thus that demand was filled. It's not some "theory" that doesn't exist IRL.
I guess the unemployment will only raise in US and EU. The jobs must move to India, China, Malaysia etc because it increases the profit. And the profit is the most important thing in capitalism - the economic system that even the poor love in US.
Profit is just a measure of how efficiently a job can get done. It's not inherently evil or bad.
|
On October 09 2011 09:24 Madkipz wrote:Show nested quote +I don't mind foreign aid to Africa as long as it's being used as intended, and not being gobbled up by corruption. You deliberately keep their prices low and fuck their economy. Paving the road to evil with your good intentions. Show nested quote +
So... let the downtrodden go. Wow, not greedy at all. Keeping your wealth to yourself much ? I'm sure they will appreciate our "words of encouragement" instead of giving them fucking food and water. I'm sorry, no more food for Africa, we feel we're being too arrogant, when really the only solution is to figure it out for yourself. How fucking stupid this is, arguing with liberals.
They are downtrodden because we are abusing them with economic superiority. Fisting them into shitty long therm deals. Lending savages money, feeding them for free and then keeping their sons hostage. This is your empire and legacy and you help fuel it. Third world contries leashed to us in a perpatual state of import and export. Were we fuck their attempts at agriculture with free wellfare food and attempts at rising above their station are met with sour tones. Just check their chocolate industry. You think these African farmer`s would charge that little for their products because they want to? They can`t because once Chinese money are worth more than USD then guess what happens to their livelyhoods? Their entire export,import system? Guess what happens to the chinese industry?
How do we fuck with their attempts at agriculture when they live in a fucking desert ?
|
On October 09 2011 09:31 Kaitlin wrote:
Are they hard-working, honest, reliable, and modest ? Those are the types of qualities employers look for in employees.
Not exactly. The most important quality is willingness to work for a very low salary .
Does not matter how hard-working you are, you cannot beat an Indian in this. You must be really special so I agree to pay you American salary. And some people cannot be special no matter what collage they choose.
So you have to choose a carrier that cannot be outsourced. But there is not enough job for everybody there. The competition is high.
No, it IS like that, in real life. The reason your company has gone for cheaper is because that is what the customers preferred over the other things, such as high quality and reaction times. There are people out there who prefer "green" type technologies over profits, and thus mutual funds who focus only on these types of investments were created. There was a market, and thus that demand was filled. It's not some "theory" that doesn't exist IRL.
The reason your company has gone for cheaper is not because it is what the customers want. The company was bought by private equity, and it wants to convert it's good reputation into money. They lower the expenses, so the profit rise, the company price rise too, and just before they start to lose too many clients they sell the company.
Sometimes the best way to make most money in a short period of time is to destroy the company. Watch "Wall Street" for example.
Profit is just a measure of how efficiently a job can get done. It's not inherently evil or bad.
I agree. Many jobs can get done more efficiently outside of US, that's why the US jobs market must shrink and many of you remain without job. As I said in the beginning, you are not efficient enough to offer you a job, I offer it to an Indian instead.
|
On October 09 2011 09:34 Kaitlin wrote:
How do we fuck with their attempts at agriculture when they live in a fucking desert ?
Africa is not a desert.
We need some countries to be poor. So we can pay less for labor and resources.
|
No, it IS like that, in real life. The reason your company has gone for cheaper is because that is what the customers preferred over the other things, such as high quality and reaction times.
Lol no. There is a minimum for how shitty things can get before people don`t want the product anymore and there are rules, restrictions and licensing issues with hiring underqualified personnel.
Should be a form of agency that deals with malpractice or approval stamp agencies worth a damn that you have to go trough for the majority of your clients.
How do we fuck with their attempts at agriculture when they live in a fucking desert ?
Africa is not a desert.
http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/agriculture_in_africa_value_added_out_of_gdp
|
Wall Street, perpetual wars on "terror", the president's attempt to ban guns, extreme safety searches, bad economy, middle class dying out, mandatory implanted microchips, socialist policies, it's all connected.
Three Letters: NWO.
The Solution: Revolution.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On October 09 2011 10:08 hoganftw wrote:
The Solution: Revolution.
I guess it is too late.
The so called "NWO" side is too strong, too powerful. They have everything: army, police, media, politics, law.
There is not enough people for revolution. Most americans do not understand what OWS is about and what they want.
I predict that all this OWS movement finishes with big nothing.
|
On October 09 2011 10:19 GeyzeR wrote:I guess it is too late. The so called "NWO" side is too strong, too powerful. They have everything: army, police, media, politics, law. There is not enough people for revolution. Most americans do not understand what OWS is about and what they want. I predict that all this OWS movement finishes with big nothing.
Protests always do more than nothing, they bring the issues to the surface for a lot of people. The problem is our American media twisting the message. Half my family thinks its about lazy unemployed wanting free handouts.
|
http://www.politickerny.com/2011/10/07/peter-king-disapproves-of-occupy-wall-street/
Long Island Republican Congressman Peter King blasted the Occupy Wall Street protesters as anti-American today on a right-wing talk show.
“The fact is these people are anarchists. They have no idea what they’re doing out there,” King told host Laura Ingraham. “They have no sense of purpose other than a basically anti-American tone and anti-capitalist. It’s a ragtag mob basically.”
Criticism from GOPers on the marches has been growing louder and more frequent. Earlier today, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor–who is coming to New York City this weekend– called the protesters “a growing mob.”
King called on Americans to condemn the marches.
“We have to be careful not to allow this to get any legitimacy,” he said, adding “I’m taking this seriously in that I’m old enough to remember what happened in the 1960s when the left-wing took to the streets and somehow the media glorified them and it ended up shaping policy. We can’t allow that to happen.”
Disgusting. Apparently democracy is un-american.
|
We need some countries to be poor. So we can pay less for labor and resources.
Resources are not cheaper in poorer countries. The price is set globally.
The same is happening to labor, more slowly of course. This is because of evil globalization, naturally.
Protests always do more than nothing, they bring the issues to the surface for a lot of people. The problem is our American media twisting the message. Half my family thinks its about lazy unemployed wanting free handouts.
Well that's what it is. "People before profit" actually does mean something, you know. It isn't just a "social justice" slogan.
Madkipz is half right about aid to Africa; too much of it is poorly targeted and does more damage to local economies than it helps to develop them. But most of the problem is political corruption or anarchy; those aren't reasons to stop aid, but rather to work harder to ensure it gets where it needs to go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
