Originally posted by Lokrian
That's one example of a union abuse. It's not proof that all unions are driving large businesses of the type I specifically described into the dirt.
Look at the topic that originally started this thread.

Originally posted by Lokrian

Texas is a "right to work" state so it's not something I have a lot of experience with, but as I mentioned, Southwest has a union of its own and it seems to be working fine. I have seen first hand the negative effect union busting has on labor though.
Do you know anyone who has ever needed money and tried to work while the union was on strike? Do you know what kind of abuse they go through because they are so poor and so intent on providing for their families that they work in spite of the union's demands? If you live in any small, rural town, you know things happen like houses getting graffitied or torched or threatening phone calls are made. That, to me, is an extreme negative.

Originally posted by Lokrian

[SNIP]..., then we would not have had the business abuses of the past. I don't see any evidence that anything has happened to make them obsolete. I don't see any support for your assertion here.
I highlighted what I felt were the key words here. Business abuses of the past. Unions were NECESSARY when they were formed. Child labor was still in high demand though MANY companies wished for it to be stopped. They simply couldn't be the first to stop because that would put them out of business. Working conditions WERE poor. People were losing limbs and getting fired with no hopes of ever getting another physical labor job. This simply does not happen anymore in the U.S. Now, unions are fighting for things such as more benefits or increased wages. UNIONS should not be the ones to determine this. More benefits or increased wages are NOT life-threatening situations nor are they inhumane. Can you not entertain the possibility that unions could now be HURTING things more than they're helping? Unions now make a lot of money in dues. Once money is involved, there is a desire to keep that organization alive.

Originally posted by Lokrian

Here again I have the advantage of having been to a few other countries. Not India or China, mind you, or really any places that apply directly to the export of jobs abroad, but places like Greece, Turkey, Egypt and so forth. There's no great up swell of support for America because of the positive effects we are supposedly having on the world economy in general.
Have you ever lived in a third world country? Do you have relatives fighting to survive in a third world country? Are you immersed in another culture enough to understand how the people think and feel?

When the first American factory came to my country of birth, the drop in people working for housing and clothing in rich people's houses increased dramatically, forcing rich people to actually give them wages and compete for servants. Before the factories came, these women would work for clothes and a place to live, which often involved sexual favors to the big man in the house. (You've never seen true income disaparity until you've lived in a third world country. There is no middle class. It's the rich or the poor. Thankfully, things have gotten much better in Thailand in the past 30 years.)

Please keep in mind, though, that the factories that have been introduced in Thailand are not just US factories. The Japanese have SEVERAL car parts manufacturing plants in Thailand. Several western European countries also have factories in Thailand. The point is that these first world nations have had massive impact on the country's poor. There is much more of a middle class there than there was in the 40s and 50s. People are able to work hard and make more money. They also have more choices. (I won't get into prostitution in Thailand. That would take its own thread.)

Originally posted by Lokrian

Also I have repeatedly explained to you the first hand experience I had with the Mexicans I worked with. There are also repeated attempts by various media outlets to try to let people know that not everyone thinks America's way of running things is as benevolent as you seem to be implying.
No country's way of running anything is ever perfect, yet the Mexicans KEEP trying to get to the US. Since we live in a rural community and I grew up in a rural community and speak rudimentary Spanish, I, too, worked with a LOT of immigrants, especially taking them to doctors and being there to translate. Invaribly, when two immigrants meet in the US, we always get around to saying, "Why did you come here?" Almost always, the answer, at least with the Mexicans, was "to find work and make money for my family." One family came for the chance their children would get a better education than where they were. I have yet to meet anyone who says they came "because of a corrupt government". Sorry, they are thinking about their families and their situation, not their government. While a corrupt government MAY be behind the reasons they are leaving, people who are desperate don't always stop to analyze and think that's the reason. The reason we are able to look at the politics of it all is that Americans live well. We have plenty of free time to be thinking about stuff like that.

Originally posted by Lokrian

I just see no evidence that there is this mass of overjoyed third world workers cheering American job creation where they are still left with a low living standard. Maybe if you offered some evidence of how the living standards are increasing or something.
It's not a matter of joy, and it's not only Americans that are putting these jobs in Southeast Asia. This is a matter of changing the world and giving other people a chance that Americans/First World nations have already had and thrown away or moved beyond. This is a matter of choices where people in these third world nations can now CHOOSE to not work for just the clothes on their back and a roof over their heads. They can now work for WAGES. They can also work 100 hours a week for wages if that's what they want to do. Why is this important? Because once they've saved enough, it provides them with more opportunities to rise out of poverty.

Originally posted by Lokrian

No argument here. I just am pointing out that taking advantage of people, even if you are taking less advantage of them than others, is still not benevolent.
You cannot go into a country and begin paying them the same wages. First of all, it's not exactly smart business. Second of all, if you want to cause a serious rise in class warfare, that's how you would do it. There is ALWAYS a limited number of jobs, even if 100 Western countries opened 100 factories in the east. Not everyone can have a factory job even if it is desired. Minimum wage in Thailand is approximately $800 a year, or a little less than $.40 an hour. [Called to verify these numbers and made corrections.] This is what the government demands of all employers. While we think, "Holy crap! How can anyone live off that?" we need to remember that the cost of living in a first world nation is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH higher than the cost of living in a third world nation. For example, I really can't think of a meal that can be bought in the US for less than $2, and that's if you're being really stingy and buying chicken on sale to cook yourself. In Thailand, you can easily feed yourself for a day for $1. When we were there, we had a banquet for 30 that was filled with seafood of all kinds, and that cost $100. I am no economist, so I don't know for sure what would happen if you introduced a limited number of jobs that was paying $4 an hour for unskilled labor in Thailand.

Originally posted by Lokrian

No one is moving themselves to the hospitable third world. They are buying things from people who are running labor camps there, basically. And no, I never read the author in question.
There are tons of people moving back to the third world all the time. They come to the US, making their living, and then move back to the old country in their old age. It really isn't the shithole it's made out to be.

China is not some piece of shit country where no one is happy because everyone is in a labor camp. Neither is Thailand. Neither is India (though India has TONS of problems beyond just poverty). All of these countries have cities that offer as much as any major western city. Tons of Westerners are living in these countries now. Some consider it simpler, and others just love the culture and charm.

Originally posted by Lokrian

This has to be at least the third time you have ignored that without the U.S. market these third world sweat shops would have no one to sell to, since their own populace is incapable of buying the things that they're making.
This assumes that the people in the third world WANT the things they're making. First of all, the first world factories are enabling citizens of that country to create their own factories that produce products that people DO buy in the country. They also export a great deal to Europe and North America. Yes, prices get really marked up in the Western World, but the Westerners also get charged more than the locals do for the product.

Last but not least, it is up to the LOCALS to demand a change in work conditions or pay wages, not some yahoos across the ocean who don't know a damn thing about the country or the people within the country. Contrary to popular belief in the Western world, third world people are neither stupid or incapable of higher levels of thought. Don't think that locals appreciate it when these people come over and get their jobs taken shut down. They just end up in the shitty jobs they were trying to escape when they came to work in the factory.

The people who do need our helps are the people who are truly enslaved and the children who are forced into child labor. Not every factory job that's not in a Western country is a sweat shop, nor are the people who work there abused. There are, though, plenty of cocoa farms and sugar farms that are actually using slave labor as well as child slave labor. THOSE are the people who need help because they truly are being abused.

Originally posted by Lokrian

The fact that you interpret that fully 50% of people are dirt poor as them being horrible people who are being "carried" by others leaves me wondering where else to go from here. Fully 50% of all humans are more or less worthless? Nothing about how we have our economic model organized has anything to do with that at all?
I don't recall anyone saying that people below the poverty line are worthless, unless that is your opinion. However, I am totally boggled by the fact that you believe that people are ENTITLED to things they didn't earn or aren't even trying to earn. In school, they are striving to teach people that you are rewarded by working hard. Do you think giving away things that aren't earned still teaches that message?

Originally posted by Lokrian

Or a Mexican working for less than minimum wage, or a black man stuck in an inner city without the means to get a job anywhere else, or a working mother trying to find a way to both work and raise her kids, or just anyone who may not be that bright.
Tell me why ANY of those situations are inherently better than an Asian couple who worked 3 jobs when they came to America and didn't have heat in the middle of winter in BOSTON because they couldn't afford it but managed to work their way up to being upper middle class over a period of 30 years. Does being poor make you somehow a 'better person' and more deserving of a hand out than millions of Asians in the US who have scratched and clawed their way up to middle class or upper class? What's the lesson there? Don't work hard or try to make a better life for yourself because then you are just a shitty, wealthy person who doesn't give a shit about poor people because you want to keep more your hard-earned money for your family. Yes, let's teach everyone to underachieve.

Originally posted by Lokrian

I tell you, your opinion of people just in general is shocking to me. Do you know any working poor people? They're not THAT lazy and stupid.
I honestly don't believe that any opinions posted here are that different. Your lack of caring for the people who work and bust ass but fail (but who aren't "poor" when they started) is no different than the opinion that people should work for what they have.

People aren't all lazy and stupid, but there are a lot of people who ARE horribly lazy. You can't live in a rural area without seeing that. You can't walk into a Social Security office without running into that. We shouldn't be teaching people to wait around for a handout and income redistribution. We need to empower people with the ability to go out and get more for themselves with their own two hands. That, however, requires commitment that can't be solved by throwing a few dollars in their direction and giving yourself a pat on the back. Teaching people to change their way of life and thinking and educating them on how to work in order to become more prosperous takes tons of time and tons of commitment. Why don't we do it? Because it's easier to just blame "rich people" and throw a few dollars at the poor. That's sure to make their life "better".