- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
- Messages
- 28,134
- Reaction score
- 15,023
- Location
- Canada's Capital
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
You just touched on another reason why so many manufacturers are looking to places like China and Mexico. They used to be able to get away with all sorts of stuff here in the states but those days are long gone. Regulations regarding industrial waste processing and discharge are incredibly strict and staying in compliance with the multiple agencies that regulate and monitor this activity costs a fortune. Another in a long line of unintended consequences.
Yea!!! We passed laws which dramatically reduced pollution!!!
Boo!!! It costs so much to stay in compliance that it isn't worth producing anything here anymore.
Pick your poison.
The sad thing is we could be, most of the items machined in Canada and the U.S. are still some of the best quality found globally, but because of inflated wages it's impossible to make complex refined goods with parts from our countries exclusively. I look at the things that fail most on vehicles(I'm a gear head) and they usually have Made in China or Made in Mexico on them, the standards in those countries are suspect as well as the training but they are cheap. I'm not saying all worker protections need to be reigned in, but there has to be some give on the labor side.Again, I don't disagree with you here. Right or wrong, we are no longer an industrial/manufacturing-heavy society.
Nation's biggest movie theater chain cuts workweek, blaming ObamaCare | Fox News
consequences unintended, it may be
but certainly not unforeseen
I don't think it has anything to do with the healthcare act and everything to do with the continual decline in movie-going.
It's expensive as hell - overall, it's a poorly managed concept if they think that never changing is going to keep bringing in the business.
That's even more reason to have more part timers. If the artificial standard for benefits is set to 30 hours with full time being 40 for everything else then it makes sense to limit employee benefits/hours. It's not optimal for anyone but in the long run overhead comes out in the plus column. If there are less sales there is less of a profit margin, but if you bring prices up then there are even less sales so it's a catch 22 and I can see why more companies are limiting hours. It doesn't do anything but hurt the employee's wallets but I don't see many other choices.I don't think it has anything to do with the healthcare act and everything to do with the continual decline in movie-going.
It's expensive as hell - overall, it's a poorly managed concept if they think that never changing is going to keep bringing in the business.
Those adjustments were made long ago.
which adjustments?
I don't think it has anything to do with the healthcare act and everything to do with the continual decline in movie-going.
The sad thing is we could be, most of the items machined in Canada and the U.S. are still some of the best quality found globally, but because of inflated wages it's impossible to make complex refined goods with parts from our countries exclusively. I look at the things that fail most on vehicles(I'm a gear head) and they usually have Made in China or Made in Mexico on them, the standards in those countries are suspect as well as the training but they are cheap. I'm not saying all worker protections need to be reigned in, but there has to be some give on the labor side.
I don't care what executives make, I'd actually like to be one someday. As long as employees are reasonably safe and get a decent return on their labor I consider it balance, what I have a problem with is a guy turning a screw all day every day making 40/hr. or threats of shutdowns when he doesn't get 45/hr. and these are wages which send jobs overseas, it's the labor abuses that need to end.As long as there's a proper balance, then yeah, of course I agree. What I don't want to see, though, are executives and CEO making 1000% more than the workers and getting bonuses left, right, and center.
Is this really true? It seems like there are several films every year that gross $1 billion+, and tons of others that gross half a billion. From the money that films are pulling in these days, it doesn't seem like movie going is in decline. I could be wrong, and I'm not arguing with you, just stating my observation.
As costs are shifted to businesses cuts will be made.
The more and more I learn about healthcare and healthcare administration the less and less I support UHC or more government involvement in the process.
I've been telling you guy for years that government is the problem, and not the solution. Their intervention in the health insurance industry as far back as the 70's, is one of the reasons health care costs have skyrocketed. They placed mandates, and took away market competition, which are contrary to cost containment and quality.
I think there is some crooked aspects to private insurance, but the more and more I actually deal with Medicare and Medicaid firsthand and the more and more I learn about regulations the less I want government involved or want a UHC/single payer government system or getting anywhere close to making medical decisions for myself.
I'm starting to consider allowing national or at least regional competition of insurance plans as well as tax breaks or more deductions for re self paying for their insurance.
In other words, I know that people will glom on to any excuse that works.
So, preserving the company by making sure profits aren't dropping in order to keep investors happy is just an excuse?
I don't care what executives make, I'd actually like to be one someday. As long as employees are reasonably safe and get a decent return on their labor I consider it balance, what I have a problem with is a guy turning a screw all day every day making 40/hr. or threats of shutdowns when he doesn't get 45/hr. and these are wages which send jobs overseas, it's the labor abuses that need to end.
I believe in contracts and market factors. Anyone can turn a wrench to a degree, not everyone has the management skills to run a company, the rarity of the skill set determines your ceiling. I don't want an artificial wage set whether it's a maximum or an "industry standard" such as a union wage. If an executive is running a company I have stock in towards the ground, yes, I will be beyond pissed that he is making that kind of money, but likewise if a union is setting wages that are crushing competitiveness and I'm losing on my portfolio, I'm equally pissed.Stuns me that you don't give a rat's ass about what executives make, but you have strong feelings towards the average joe's wage. Why is that?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?