AtomicCEO Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 explain to me the reason that nearly every foreign automaker is building plants in the south... Because Americans know better, land is cheap, and state governments are giving tax breaks to move there? Try building a factory outside NYC. Go ahead. Sorry... that land is worth something because people actually want to live there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 I will not get into another arguement about unions , especially w/ someone that has the reasoning power of a dumb rock! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 explain to me the reason that nearly every foreign automaker is building plants in the south....because the workers down there are non-union!!!! glad to see u suporting our mexican brothers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 (edited) glad to see u suporting our mexican brothers when i say the south, i mean the southern us you dimwit! and to atomics response, im was refering to the detroit area. ive recently moved here and the hard line unions are simply scaring away the jobs that they claim to defend. Toyota, along with other foreign automakers, has been criticized for trying to avoid unions by putting plants in the South where right-to-work laws make it more difficult to unionize Edited June 17, 2006 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 I will not get into another arguement about unions , especially w/ someone that has the reasoning power of a dumb rock! thats ok....i wont argue with someone that cant spell argument correctly in the first place!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 thats ok....i wont argue with someone that cant spell argument correctly in the first place!! arguement is an alternative spelling to argument look it up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 arguement is an alternative spelling to argument look it up The word you've entered isn't in the dictionary. Click on a spelling suggestion below or try again using the search box to the right. Suggestions for arguement: 1. argument 2. arguments 3. argumenta 4. argumentum 5. argumentive 6. arrogant 7. aragonite 8. ergometer 9. emigrant 10. arrestment ok teach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 ok teach This is the guy who didn't think "stupider" was a word until we linked to a dictionary. Maybe spelling isn't your strong suit. Neither is arguing. What are you good at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 This is the guy who didn't think "stupider" was a word until we linked to a dictionary. Maybe spelling isn't your strong suit. Neither is arguing. What are you good at? N o entry found for arguement. Did you mean argument? Suggestions: argument argumenta augment arguments Eggement agreement accruement Argumental argent argument's arguments' argumentum argumenta's youre another bright one!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 N youre another bright one!!! Is that from the same site that told you stupider wasn't a word? How about your missing apostrophe in you're? Maybe you should stick to the argument at hand... which, you're clueless in. Tell us again how only the union members had pensions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 (edited) Is that from the same site that told you stupider wasn't a word? How about your missing apostrophe in you're? Maybe you should stick to the argument at hand... which, you're clueless in. Tell us again how only the union members had pensions? show me where i mentioned anything about pensions numnuts.....i just said unions suck, thats it. i guess websters dictionary is a bad place to look up words Edited June 17, 2006 by dmarc117 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 thats ok....i wont argue with someone that cant spell argument correctly in the first place!! Good comeback sparky. Show that to your keeper and maybe he'll buy you an ice cream cone. FYI......the Google spell check does NOT see it as a misspelled word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 I can't make up my mind which of these new TRs is stupider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocknrobn26 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 I can't make up my mind which of these new TRs is stupider. TR's?????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 TR's?????????? Typical Republicans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 My nuts sure are numb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoJoTheWebToedBoy Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 (edited) What the heck, I haven't been insulted in a while. In this day and age, Unions are a major drain on the system and most companies can't afford them. I started in the working world (post dinos, barely) working in a steel mill and joined Steelworkers Union and saw first hand the corruption and waste. A few years back I watched a Union (Mining) shutdown a Mine that was paying very good wages in a small New Mexico Town just to prove they could. And then bragged about it. They didn't care less that the 200 or so people they put out of work had no here else to go except a call center and Walmart. All they cared about was the show of power and a rep that they could bring to the next Mine. Most Unions don't give for their members if they are getting in the way of their agenda. Unions were needed back in the day, and they actually cared about their members. But these days, they are just a drain. As for the bankruptcy. Gee, it's too bad that the average American can't declare and absolve themselves of their finanical burdens like these Corporations that are dumping their debits on those same average Americans. These clowns made a promise and they should be made to keep them. Take it from the CEO and Board of Directors pay. They are just as big of a drain on the company that the unions are, maybe even more. And what do they really contribute to the bottom line, for the most part, not much. Edited June 18, 2006 by JoJoTheWebToedBoy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 These clowns made a promise and they should be made to keep them. Take it from the CEO and Board of Directors pay. They are just as big of a drain on the company that the unions are, maybe even more. And what do they really contribute to the bottom line, for the most part, not much. I was starting to get pissed off at the start of your post, but this is the dang truth. Unions vs. corporation is a pointless fight that will end in the destruction of the company. But... without the unions, it would just be the higher ups sucking out all the profits at the expense of the workers. If anything... that is the value of unions... the balance they can provide. Like in your example, it can be stupid. I don't doubt that at all. It isn't perfect, but it's the best system they've come up with so far for workers to fight back, which is necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 This is welfare for corporations. I agree, we should just do away with Delta, and screw the people who had pensions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 I'm glad my taxes are now paying previously guaranteed pensions so unprofitable companies can continue doing crappy business instead of innovating. That's the American way. I agree, our tax dollars shouldn't be guaranteeing pensions for anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 Because Americans know better, land is cheap, and state governments are giving tax breaks to move there? Try building a factory outside NYC. Go ahead. Sorry... that land is worth something because people actually want to live there. I'm just guessing, but isn't land in the Dakotas, Wyoming, and Alaska cheaper than that in Tennesse? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 I can't make up my mind which of these new TRs is stupider. They match up well with Randull and Bushwacked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 I agree, our tax dollars shouldn't be guaranteeing pensions for anyone. So, let me get this straight. You advocate that all the people that were promised pensions as part of the agreement to work for the company for years on end should be ratted on by that same company. You further advocate that the government should offer no assistance to these people. In the meantime, you're cool with the company execs that were notionally in charge of the company keeping all their bennies and continuing to draw seven figure salaries and all the usual corrupt stock options, blah blah. Did you work for Enron, Perch? If not, you probably should have because you are so far detached from the reality of life for real people, you're a caricature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 (edited) So, let me get this straight. You advocate that all the people that were promised pensions as part of the agreement to work for the company for years on end should be ratted on by that same company. You further advocate that the government should offer no assistance to these people. In the meantime, you're cool with the company execs that were notionally in charge of the company keeping all their bennies and continuing to draw seven figure salaries and all the usual corrupt stock options, blah blah. Did you work for Enron, Perch? If not, you probably should have because you are so far detached from the reality of life for real people, you're a caricature. I was just agreeing with one of your liberal brotheren, that our tax dollars shouldn't be paying for pensions. Edited June 18, 2006 by Perchoutofwater Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted June 18, 2006 Share Posted June 18, 2006 (edited) I'm just guessing, but isn't land in the Dakotas, Wyoming, and Alaska cheaper than that in Tennesse? I bet you're right but there isn't quite the available workforce in the high desert plains and former Russian wasteland for some reason. I haven't quite figured out why, but I'll discuss it with Randall. After we figure it out I'll send you and Zeke a PM. Edited June 18, 2006 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.