Laid of on H1-B and not paid in a while
Apr 30th 2001, 3:44 am
#76
Guest
Posts: n/a
You forget something, man. Productivity is measured easily when we're talking widgets
per hour. It ain't as easy to measure in lines of code per person or any of the other
infamous metrics...
In the manufacturing land, we're talking the equivalent of 3 to 1 maybe,
i.e. an American worker for 3 non-Americans, given the different degrees of
automation, experience, and investments in plants. (Check employment levels in
plants south and north of the border for enlightenment).
In software, there ain't such a difference. One can be just as productive with a
laptop on the banks of the Ganges river as he will be in dotcom land in Palo Alto....
st
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Sorry, Carlos, but NO American can compete with someone making $2,000 a year. Are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > you too stupid to realize that the cost of living in the US is actually higher[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > than the cost of living in the third world?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
per hour. It ain't as easy to measure in lines of code per person or any of the other
infamous metrics...
In the manufacturing land, we're talking the equivalent of 3 to 1 maybe,
i.e. an American worker for 3 non-Americans, given the different degrees of
automation, experience, and investments in plants. (Check employment levels in
plants south and north of the border for enlightenment).
In software, there ain't such a difference. One can be just as productive with a
laptop on the banks of the Ganges river as he will be in dotcom land in Palo Alto....
st
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Sorry, Carlos, but NO American can compete with someone making $2,000 a year. Are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > you too stupid to realize that the cost of living in the US is actually higher[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > than the cost of living in the third world?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Apr 30th 2001, 4:12 am
#77
Guest
Posts: n/a
>
>
>
>
>
>
of
>
levels
>
>
>
True, it can be more like 10 to 1.
>
>
>
>
>
of
>
levels
>
>
>
True, it can be more like 10 to 1.
Apr 30th 2001, 4:14 am
#78
Guest
Posts: n/a
Carlos, I have a degree in Business Econ so I know more on the subject than you. The
worker in the third world would only have to have more than 2% of the productivity of
the American worker.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 01:42:39 GMT, Carlos Antunes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Sorry, Carlos, but NO American can compete with someone making $2,000 a year. Are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> you too stupid to realize that the cost of living in the US is actually higher[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> than the cost of living in the third world?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
worker in the third world would only have to have more than 2% of the productivity of
the American worker.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 01:42:39 GMT, Carlos Antunes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Sorry, Carlos, but NO American can compete with someone making $2,000 a year. Are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> you too stupid to realize that the cost of living in the US is actually higher[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> than the cost of living in the third world?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Apr 30th 2001, 4:16 am
#79
Guest
Posts: n/a
If programmers in India are able to code as much and as well for $2k as programmers
in the US for, let's say, $80k, I am all for it. In the long run it means a cheaper
product for consumers and this is a good thing.
st1960 wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
--
"I swear by my life and by my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of
another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."
-- John Galt, hero of Atlas Shrugged
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...76/andresworld
in the US for, let's say, $80k, I am all for it. In the long run it means a cheaper
product for consumers and this is a good thing.
st1960 wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
--
"I swear by my life and by my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of
another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."
-- John Galt, hero of Atlas Shrugged
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...76/andresworld
Apr 30th 2001, 4:31 am
#80
Guest
Posts: n/a
And everybody knows that salaries are the only cost a business has, right?
So much for your degree in "Business Econ"...
Dan wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
--
"I swear by my life and by my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of
another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."
-- John Galt, hero of Atlas Shrugged
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...76/andresworld
So much for your degree in "Business Econ"...
Dan wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
--
"I swear by my life and by my love of it - that I will never live for the sake of
another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."
-- John Galt, hero of Atlas Shrugged
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...76/andresworld
Apr 30th 2001, 4:51 am
#81
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cheaper products for the consumers??? What planet are you on Carlos? Did Nike ever
lower their prices when they went third world? What a fool you are.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 04:16:59 GMT, Carlos Antunes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> In software, there ain't such a difference. One can be just as productive with a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> laptop on the banks of the Ganges river as he will be in dotcom land in Palo[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Alto....[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
lower their prices when they went third world? What a fool you are.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 04:16:59 GMT, Carlos Antunes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> In software, there ain't such a difference. One can be just as productive with a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> laptop on the banks of the Ganges river as he will be in dotcom land in Palo[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Alto....[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Apr 30th 2001, 4:52 am
#82
Guest
Posts: n/a
You make no valid points or even sense for that matter. Please learn that
economic theory is not always factored into real life business decisions. Again,
you are an idiot.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 04:31:10 GMT, Carlos Antunes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Carlos, I have a degree in Business Econ so I know more on the subject than you.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> The worker in the third world would only have to have more than 2% of the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> productivity of the American worker.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
economic theory is not always factored into real life business decisions. Again,
you are an idiot.
On Mon, 30 Apr 2001 04:31:10 GMT, Carlos Antunes <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> Carlos, I have a degree in Business Econ so I know more on the subject than you.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> The worker in the third world would only have to have more than 2% of the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> productivity of the American worker.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>>[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Apr 30th 2001, 7:27 am
#83
Guest
Posts: n/a
Jay wrote:
>
...
[usenetquote2]> > Rubbish. Economies are created, they do not come and go as the weather. They are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > a reflection on how we work, and how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
No, I don't "belive" in recessions. I know they can occur. They occur as a direct
result of bad economic descisions made at some level or other. Like radio stocks and
the 1929 crash and the following depression.
...
[usenetquote2]> > All of these are related to how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
Who cares? The world? If we know what may cause one, we are better equipped to
avoid one.
...
>
>
I couldn'd find man hour numbers but from 1989 to 1998 mean income was up 2.6%. In
fact, all tables I could find of the historical data showed an increase in real
income, so...
[usenetquote2]> > That is to be expected. The current US financial growth has not only helped the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > majority of US citizens, it has also helped the world. Less people die of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > starvation etc today than in any previously recorded time.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
You do. The more poverty in the world, the more unrest, the more unrest the more
trouble and greater risk for war. The more ware the higher the oil prices, the higher
the oil- prices, the lower your real income. In addition, unrest and lack of
resources are lead reasons for legal and illegal immigration. If everybody is happy
where they are, they would not emmigrate. So, you care, even though you are ignorant
enough to think you don't.
[usenetquote2]> > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > No the US is in unsustainable and eventually destructive population growth. Its[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > basically a population/economic Ponzi scheme and eventually the shit is going[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > to hit the fan.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why? What elements would make the stuff hit the fan?[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
The US should without any real problems be able to sustain, and prosper, with a MUCH
larger population than it has today. In fact, the main reason for US prosperity is
immigration. It has created a huge domestic market, which is a must for international
dominance of the kind the US enjoys today.
...
[usenetquote2]> > > Since I was born, CA population has more than doubled. For my parents its more[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > like a factor of 6. This is clearly unsustainable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why is this unsustainable, and what indicators do you have that point to a future[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > expansion as we have seen so far?[/usenetquote2]
>
>
Clearly, and it will not. There are not enough people going to be born in the world
in our future to allow for that. The max number of people we will probably see is
about 11 billion people or so. With minor modifications, California should be able to
sustan a large portion of that if needed, but it will not be needed. People will stop
moving here long before that becomes a problem.
>
>
Future projections showing doubling forever? Hardly.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
...
[usenetquote2]> > Rubbish. Economies are created, they do not come and go as the weather. They are[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > a reflection on how we work, and how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
No, I don't "belive" in recessions. I know they can occur. They occur as a direct
result of bad economic descisions made at some level or other. Like radio stocks and
the 1929 crash and the following depression.
...
[usenetquote2]> > All of these are related to how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
Who cares? The world? If we know what may cause one, we are better equipped to
avoid one.
...
>
>
I couldn'd find man hour numbers but from 1989 to 1998 mean income was up 2.6%. In
fact, all tables I could find of the historical data showed an increase in real
income, so...
[usenetquote2]> > That is to be expected. The current US financial growth has not only helped the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > majority of US citizens, it has also helped the world. Less people die of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > starvation etc today than in any previously recorded time.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
You do. The more poverty in the world, the more unrest, the more unrest the more
trouble and greater risk for war. The more ware the higher the oil prices, the higher
the oil- prices, the lower your real income. In addition, unrest and lack of
resources are lead reasons for legal and illegal immigration. If everybody is happy
where they are, they would not emmigrate. So, you care, even though you are ignorant
enough to think you don't.
[usenetquote2]> > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > No the US is in unsustainable and eventually destructive population growth. Its[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > basically a population/economic Ponzi scheme and eventually the shit is going[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > to hit the fan.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why? What elements would make the stuff hit the fan?[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
The US should without any real problems be able to sustain, and prosper, with a MUCH
larger population than it has today. In fact, the main reason for US prosperity is
immigration. It has created a huge domestic market, which is a must for international
dominance of the kind the US enjoys today.
...
[usenetquote2]> > > Since I was born, CA population has more than doubled. For my parents its more[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > like a factor of 6. This is clearly unsustainable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why is this unsustainable, and what indicators do you have that point to a future[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > expansion as we have seen so far?[/usenetquote2]
>
>
Clearly, and it will not. There are not enough people going to be born in the world
in our future to allow for that. The max number of people we will probably see is
about 11 billion people or so. With minor modifications, California should be able to
sustan a large portion of that if needed, but it will not be needed. People will stop
moving here long before that becomes a problem.
>
>
Future projections showing doubling forever? Hardly.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
Apr 30th 2001, 8:55 am
#84
Guest
Posts: n/a
Terje A. Bergesen" wrote:
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > "Terje A. Bergesen" wrote:[/usenetquote2]
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > > Rubbish. Economies are created, they do not come and go as the weather. They[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > are a reflection on how we work, and how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > You don't believe in recessions?[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > > All of these are related to how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who cares what the exact reasons are for a recession (I can't predict the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > future), eventually they happen.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > Show me data that the US median salary per family member man hour has climbed in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > inflation indexed dollars.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
I hope you mean "median" not "mean", "mean" includes Bill Gates and other asshole's
dough in its calculation.
Lets see: "between 1973 and 1998, real hourly wages fell for the bottom 60 percent of
the entire US workforce. ... MIT economist Lestor Thurow has provided some valuable
new perspective on this point. Not since, 1929, he wrote, has real wages fallen for
most U.S. workers at the same time that output per worker was rising." Race To the
Bottom, Alan Tonelson, pg. 23.
>
[usenetquote2]> > > That is to be expected. The current US financial growth has not only helped the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > majority of US citizens, it has also helped the world. Less people die of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > starvation etc today than in any previously recorded time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who cares.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
No I like unrest. The US needs ALOT more of it.
The solution to the immigration problem is simple (and supported by nearly 80%
of American Citizens), stop extreme immigration (like every other nation on this
planet). If the rest of the world wants to **** themselves into wretched
poverty, so be it.
[usenetquote2]> > > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > No the US is in unsustainable and eventually destructive population growth.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > Its basically a population/economic Ponzi scheme and eventually the shit is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > going to hit the fan.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Why? What elements would make the stuff hit the fan?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Short Term: Recession. Long Term: Population getting too huge, quality of life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > tanking even further.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
Why would do we want to butt**** ourselves. We already have too many people in this
shithole state already.
>
I don't give a ratsass about "prosperity" if it means that the US is butt****ed by 1
billion clowns. I see that the US is already starting to unravel as a nation and may
be the next Kosovo.
>
>
The dumbass world needs to get together and kick this corrupt nation's ass. So....
>
[usenetquote2]> > > > Since I was born, CA population has more than doubled. For my parents its[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > more like a factor of 6. This is clearly unsustainable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Why is this unsustainable, and what indicators do you have that point to a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > future expansion as we have seen so far?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Population in CA cannot double indefinitely.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
Says who? The forces of starvation and war?
>
>
>
Its already a problem. Why would they stop moving here? Because by that time the
state is totally ****ed-up? Thats hardly comforting. Because their own countries are
now little utopias? Sorry, I'll believe it when I see it.
[usenetquote2]> > You sure do a lot of talking out of your ass, read the newspapers, its official[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > population projections.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
No, but doubling for a while is bad enough. The projections are for large increases
and that is very disturbing.
Fjord Boy, you really have a lot of nerve telling Americans citizens how to run their
country. Why don't you try your "population theories" on your own nation. Surely
Norway could support a few billion people. Why don't you make it your life's work?
>
>
>
>
>
--
Killfiled Trolls/Idiots: Jacobson, Goldman, Antunes.
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > "Terje A. Bergesen" wrote:[/usenetquote2]
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > > Rubbish. Economies are created, they do not come and go as the weather. They[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > are a reflection on how we work, and how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > You don't believe in recessions?[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > > All of these are related to how we do business.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who cares what the exact reasons are for a recession (I can't predict the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > future), eventually they happen.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> > Show me data that the US median salary per family member man hour has climbed in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > inflation indexed dollars.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
I hope you mean "median" not "mean", "mean" includes Bill Gates and other asshole's
dough in its calculation.
Lets see: "between 1973 and 1998, real hourly wages fell for the bottom 60 percent of
the entire US workforce. ... MIT economist Lestor Thurow has provided some valuable
new perspective on this point. Not since, 1929, he wrote, has real wages fallen for
most U.S. workers at the same time that output per worker was rising." Race To the
Bottom, Alan Tonelson, pg. 23.
>
[usenetquote2]> > > That is to be expected. The current US financial growth has not only helped the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > majority of US citizens, it has also helped the world. Less people die of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > starvation etc today than in any previously recorded time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who cares.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
No I like unrest. The US needs ALOT more of it.
The solution to the immigration problem is simple (and supported by nearly 80%
of American Citizens), stop extreme immigration (like every other nation on this
planet). If the rest of the world wants to **** themselves into wretched
poverty, so be it.
[usenetquote2]> > > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > No the US is in unsustainable and eventually destructive population growth.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > Its basically a population/economic Ponzi scheme and eventually the shit is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > going to hit the fan.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Why? What elements would make the stuff hit the fan?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Short Term: Recession. Long Term: Population getting too huge, quality of life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > tanking even further.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
Why would do we want to butt**** ourselves. We already have too many people in this
shithole state already.
>
I don't give a ratsass about "prosperity" if it means that the US is butt****ed by 1
billion clowns. I see that the US is already starting to unravel as a nation and may
be the next Kosovo.
>
>
The dumbass world needs to get together and kick this corrupt nation's ass. So....
>
[usenetquote2]> > > > Since I was born, CA population has more than doubled. For my parents its[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > > more like a factor of 6. This is clearly unsustainable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Why is this unsustainable, and what indicators do you have that point to a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > future expansion as we have seen so far?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Population in CA cannot double indefinitely.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
Says who? The forces of starvation and war?
>
>
>
Its already a problem. Why would they stop moving here? Because by that time the
state is totally ****ed-up? Thats hardly comforting. Because their own countries are
now little utopias? Sorry, I'll believe it when I see it.
[usenetquote2]> > You sure do a lot of talking out of your ass, read the newspapers, its official[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > population projections.[/usenetquote2]
>
>
No, but doubling for a while is bad enough. The projections are for large increases
and that is very disturbing.
Fjord Boy, you really have a lot of nerve telling Americans citizens how to run their
country. Why don't you try your "population theories" on your own nation. Surely
Norway could support a few billion people. Why don't you make it your life's work?
>
>
>
>
>
--
Killfiled Trolls/Idiots: Jacobson, Goldman, Antunes.
Apr 30th 2001, 2:51 pm
#85
Guest
Posts: n/a
Wow, When you people get that far from the original post could you please put OT or
Off-topic in the subject? I'd also like to make one more appeal, please do not resort
to name calling, it weakens your argument, it does not strengthen it. there were some
interesting things brought up during this thread, but I think they all went way off
what the topic was. A consultant is not getting paid for his work. The particular
consultant was being paid as a W-2. He had questions that dealt with his pay, his
legal work status, and his options. He received some good advice early, to which I
would only add that he should be prepared to head back to India, because the DOL will
help him with the wages, but it is beyond their purview to aid him in securing more
employment (because he is an H1). If you wish to discuss Libertarianism, or the
philosophy of Ayn Rand or Global Economics, or make scatological references to each
other, please go to a more appropriate forum. misc.immigration.usa and
alt.computer.consultants have their own purposes. While it is one thing to have these
things mentioned as part of an on topic response, to have them become the focus of
the thread while utterly and completely ignoring the original topic is silly.
By the way, welcome to ACC Carlos, I hope your skin is thick, sounds like you're
going to be public enemy #2...
--
Laurence C. Fitzgerald Bear Claw Software and Consulting
Off-topic in the subject? I'd also like to make one more appeal, please do not resort
to name calling, it weakens your argument, it does not strengthen it. there were some
interesting things brought up during this thread, but I think they all went way off
what the topic was. A consultant is not getting paid for his work. The particular
consultant was being paid as a W-2. He had questions that dealt with his pay, his
legal work status, and his options. He received some good advice early, to which I
would only add that he should be prepared to head back to India, because the DOL will
help him with the wages, but it is beyond their purview to aid him in securing more
employment (because he is an H1). If you wish to discuss Libertarianism, or the
philosophy of Ayn Rand or Global Economics, or make scatological references to each
other, please go to a more appropriate forum. misc.immigration.usa and
alt.computer.consultants have their own purposes. While it is one thing to have these
things mentioned as part of an on topic response, to have them become the focus of
the thread while utterly and completely ignoring the original topic is silly.
By the way, welcome to ACC Carlos, I hope your skin is thick, sounds like you're
going to be public enemy #2...
--
Laurence C. Fitzgerald Bear Claw Software and Consulting
Apr 30th 2001, 4:37 pm
#86
Guest
Posts: n/a
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > It is unethical to fire Americans and replace them with lower quality foreign[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > workers thus delivering a lower quality product to their mostly AMERICAN[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > customers.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
Our government sets the rules. We, the working public, needs to change the rules.
What makes you think you are entitled to control their capital?
They are profiting on our soil, so we have the right to set the rules that they
must play by.
>
I see no need to take that right away from them. Our government should be working
to eliminate worker gluts so that companies can't replace workers with cheap
foreign imports.
Again, it's their money. The market, in America and
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why doesn't every American company fire each and every American worker and either[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > send those jobs to India or import them as replacements?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
We as citizens have a right to demand our government to stop this worker
exploitation.
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > It is unethical to fire Americans and replace them with lower quality foreign[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > workers thus delivering a lower quality product to their mostly AMERICAN[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > customers.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
Our government sets the rules. We, the working public, needs to change the rules.
What makes you think you are entitled to control their capital?
They are profiting on our soil, so we have the right to set the rules that they
must play by.
>
I see no need to take that right away from them. Our government should be working
to eliminate worker gluts so that companies can't replace workers with cheap
foreign imports.
Again, it's their money. The market, in America and
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why doesn't every American company fire each and every American worker and either[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > send those jobs to India or import them as replacements?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
We as citizens have a right to demand our government to stop this worker
exploitation.
Apr 30th 2001, 4:38 pm
#87
Guest
Posts: n/a
>
>
>
>
>
Atunes and Jacobson don't care about ethics so your argument is falling on deaf ears.
>
>
>
>
Atunes and Jacobson don't care about ethics so your argument is falling on deaf ears.
Apr 30th 2001, 4:40 pm
#88
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's unethical to replace American workers with cheap foreign labor. Since companies
will never do the ethical things if it costs them profit, we, the public, must
change the rules to penalize them for this type of behavior. Business in the US will
never do the correct thing, they will always take the low road if they can make more
profit to do so.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Sure they can do what they want. They have every right to do this. It's a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > capitalistic society. My point was that it is unethical to fire American workers[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > and replace them with lower quality foreignors and still charge the same prices[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to unsuspecting consumers.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
will never do the ethical things if it costs them profit, we, the public, must
change the rules to penalize them for this type of behavior. Business in the US will
never do the correct thing, they will always take the low road if they can make more
profit to do so.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Sure they can do what they want. They have every right to do this. It's a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > capitalistic society. My point was that it is unethical to fire American workers[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > and replace them with lower quality foreignors and still charge the same prices[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to unsuspecting consumers.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
>
>
Apr 30th 2001, 4:41 pm
#89
Guest
Posts: n/a
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Cisco is an American firm who made their success off their American workers.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
Fine, then let's ban all Cisco products from the US. Let's use our government to
confiscate all their assets. If they feel no allegiance to this country, then we have
no use for them on our soil.
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Cisco is an American firm who made their success off their American workers.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
Fine, then let's ban all Cisco products from the US. Let's use our government to
confiscate all their assets. If they feel no allegiance to this country, then we have
no use for them on our soil.
Apr 30th 2001, 4:46 pm
#90
Guest
Posts: n/a
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Then you won't mind as we the U.S. citizens we remove the "Cisco" THREAT, from[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the shores of the USA.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
It's our country and we have a right to demand that companies behave in a socially
responsible matter. Cisco, Microsoft, Nike, etc. are criminals and need to punished
for their bad behavior.
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > When a company turn's cannibalistic against those who created it, then it needs[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to be eliminated. Or, at the very least reduced to a mere shell of a company.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > A tremendous amount of Cisco sales are based on good will, and NOT price[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > performance. That "good will" problem can be rectified.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
People bought the cotton picked by our slaves. We, as a country, decided that slavery
wasn't appropriate even if the cotton was cheap. It's a pity there are sheep like you
that only view the world in terms of profit.
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Then you won't mind as we the U.S. citizens we remove the "Cisco" THREAT, from[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the shores of the USA.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
It's our country and we have a right to demand that companies behave in a socially
responsible matter. Cisco, Microsoft, Nike, etc. are criminals and need to punished
for their bad behavior.
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > When a company turn's cannibalistic against those who created it, then it needs[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to be eliminated. Or, at the very least reduced to a mere shell of a company.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > A tremendous amount of Cisco sales are based on good will, and NOT price[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > performance. That "good will" problem can be rectified.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
>
>
>
>
People bought the cotton picked by our slaves. We, as a country, decided that slavery
wasn't appropriate even if the cotton was cheap. It's a pity there are sheep like you
that only view the world in terms of profit.