Check This Nonsense Out

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Yep, Reagan was not perfect. Read the bill it’s a piece of shit as the man said.

Reagan should have been executed :slight_smile:

You still didn’t respond to whether or not you sympathized with all the workers at caterpillar, GM, or other companies that rely on cheap steel.

Or can you not see the connection?

I support American steel , as I support American industry[/quote]

So you think all those people at caterpillar should have their jobs outsourced so cat can use cheap steal? Interesting.

22

[quote]Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Yep, Reagan was not perfect. Read the bill it’s a piece of shit as the man said.

Reagan should have been executed :slight_smile:

You still didn’t respond to whether or not you sympathized with all the workers at caterpillar, GM, or other companies that rely on cheap steel.

Or can you not see the connection?

I support American steel , as I support American industry

So you think all those people at caterpillar should have their jobs outsourced so cat can use cheap steal? Interesting.[/quote]

That is not even close to what I said

23

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Yep, Reagan was not perfect. Read the bill it’s a piece of shit as the man said.

Reagan should have been executed :slight_smile:

You still didn’t respond to whether or not you sympathized with all the workers at caterpillar, GM, or other companies that rely on cheap steel.

Or can you not see the connection?

I support American steel , as I support American industry

So you think all those people at caterpillar should have their jobs outsourced so cat can use cheap steal? Interesting.

That is not even close to what I said
[/quote]

Oh. So you do support opening the country to steel imports. Gotcha.

24

[quote]Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
tom63 wrote:
Yep, Reagan was not perfect. Read the bill it’s a piece of shit as the man said.

Reagan should have been executed :slight_smile:

You still didn’t respond to whether or not you sympathized with all the workers at caterpillar, GM, or other companies that rely on cheap steel.

Or can you not see the connection?

I fail to see how, having an American steel industry equates to Caterpillar exporting jobs

I support American steel , as I support American industry

So you think all those people at caterpillar should have their jobs outsourced so cat can use cheap steal? Interesting.

That is not even close to what I said

Oh. So you do support opening the country to steel imports. Gotcha.
[/quote]

25

“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

26

[quote]Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.[/quote]

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

27

Brings a tear to my eye

28

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?
[/quote]

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones

29

[quote]Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones
[/quote]

give me some examples, I am all ears

I am suggesting subsidizing our health care so all American Industry is on a more level playing field with the rest of the industrialized world.

30

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones

give me some examples, I am all ears

I am suggesting subsidizing our health care so all American Industry is on a more level playing field with the rest of the industrialized world.
[/quote]

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147046115750.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

It’s not subsidizing the cost of healthcare if you’re putting a new tax on business or increase the cost of labor.

31

[quote]Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones

give me some examples, I am all ears

I am suggesting subsidizing our health care so all American Industry is on a more level playing field with the rest of the industrialized world.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147046115750.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

It’s not subsidizing the cost of healthcare if you’re putting a new tax on business or increase the cost of labor. [/quote]

I may misunderstand you, but I agree with the guy that did the video. If you agree with him, we agree.

I personally think Corporations ought to be Tax exempt. We should regulate them to make sure they are not sheltering income for individuals. We ought to take away Corporations rights to lobby. They are not people

32

It is long but well worth it

33

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones

give me some examples, I am all ears

I am suggesting subsidizing our health care so all American Industry is on a more level playing field with the rest of the industrialized world.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147046115750.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

It’s not subsidizing the cost of healthcare if you’re putting a new tax on business or increase the cost of labor.

I may misunderstand you, but I agree with the guy that did the video. If you agree with him, we agree.

I personally think Corporations ought to be Tax exempt. We should regulate them to make sure they are not sheltering income for individuals. We ought to take away Corporations rights to lobby. They are not people
[/quote]

If we regulate companies we have to be extremely careful of the unintended consequences.

For example: California passed a law excluding IT staff from being salaried, insisting the be paid hourly and with overtime. I know personally of a company that employed a couple hundred of IT folks in California. When this law came into effect they calculated it was going to cost them an extra couple million dollars. Consequently they sent half of the jobs Texas, and the other half to Chile. Obviously this wasn’t in the best interest of anyone living in CA.

This is why I look down on career politicians that have never had a real job. They don’t see the damage they do.

There’s plenty of stuff we could make in america, if we stop driving all our companies away.

34

[quote]Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones

give me some examples, I am all ears

I am suggesting subsidizing our health care so all American Industry is on a more level playing field with the rest of the industrialized world.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147046115750.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

It’s not subsidizing the cost of healthcare if you’re putting a new tax on business or increase the cost of labor.

I may misunderstand you, but I agree with the guy that did the video. If you agree with him, we agree.

I personally think Corporations ought to be Tax exempt. We should regulate them to make sure they are not sheltering income for individuals. We ought to take away Corporations rights to lobby. They are not people

If we regulate companies we have to be extremely careful of the unintended consequences.

For example: California passed a law excluding IT staff from being salaried, insisting the be paid hourly and with overtime. I know personally of a company that employed a couple hundred of IT folks in California. When this law came into effect they calculated it was going to cost them an extra couple million dollars. Consequently they sent half of the jobs Texas, and the other half to Chile. Obviously this wasn’t in the best interest of anyone living in CA.

This is why I look down on career politicians that have never had a real job. They don’t see the damage they do.

There’s plenty of stuff we could make in america, if we stop driving all our companies away.[/quote]

You speculate that they were not going to send those jobs to Chile and Texas any how. You may be right and they may have just said that to get back at the people that filed the suit.

I am still waiting for a list of things we could make, If you come up with something good you and I can go to work:)

35

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

It is long but well worth it[/quote]

Segments 1, 2 and 3 are generally what it is all about, fAUX news fans may be interested in segment 17

36

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Unaware wrote:
“Having” an american steel industry does not equate to losing caterpillar jobs.

Protecting the american steel industry from more efficient competition does equate to losing caterpillar jobs. And GM jobs.

Why would any rational company pay for artificially high steel when it could move aboard. Now you could argue that caterpillar likes hanging out here, so its willing to ride out the higher prices. But then who wants to buy an artificially expensive dump truck? Inevitably a company outside the US will offer more competitive products than caterpillar. If caterpillar is losing market share they will be shedding jobs too.

The only people who benefit from protectionist steel policies are steel workers and politicians in their district. It is to the detriment of any of the other 300 million Americans who might have some use for steal.

P.S. The U.S. still produces plenty of steel.

I see you are a student, how much more a ton was American steel compared to European steel?

Did the price of European steel factor in the price of Insurance or not because the Gov. paid for it as opposed to American steel paying for all employees and family. .

Did those foreign steel producers have to comply with the same ecological standards that American producers had to?

Have you ever been to the NOW Rust Belt?

So you’re upset Europe is using its tax euros to subsidize cheap steel for the rest of us?

This is even better, we get cheap steal thanks to some idiot in Paris which we can use to make something useful. It doesn’t make sense to try and out subsidize some other country. Lets use our competitive advantage to produce things we are good at making.

Edit: homophones

give me some examples, I am all ears

I am suggesting subsidizing our health care so all American Industry is on a more level playing field with the rest of the industrialized world.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_38/b4147046115750.htm?chan=magazine+channel_top+stories

It’s not subsidizing the cost of healthcare if you’re putting a new tax on business or increase the cost of labor.

I may misunderstand you, but I agree with the guy that did the video. If you agree with him, we agree.

I personally think Corporations ought to be Tax exempt. We should regulate them to make sure they are not sheltering income for individuals. We ought to take away Corporations rights to lobby. They are not people

If we regulate companies we have to be extremely careful of the unintended consequences.

For example: California passed a law excluding IT staff from being salaried, insisting the be paid hourly and with overtime. I know personally of a company that employed a couple hundred of IT folks in California. When this law came into effect they calculated it was going to cost them an extra couple million dollars. Consequently they sent half of the jobs Texas, and the other half to Chile. Obviously this wasn’t in the best interest of anyone living in CA.

This is why I look down on career politicians that have never had a real job. They don’t see the damage they do.

There’s plenty of stuff we could make in america, if we stop driving all our companies away.

You speculate that they were not going to send those jobs to Chile and Texas any how. You may be right and they may have just said that to get back at the people that filed the suit.

I am still waiting for a list of things we could make, If you come up with something good you and I can go to work:)[/quote]

Well I am on very personal terms with their financial director, and he didn’t mention them moving the jobs anyway.

There are a bunch of things we are good at/could be good at/used to be good at:

-Were pretty decent at producing pharmaceuticals
-We have a bunch of engineering companies
-Not bad at building airplanes (unless the union goes the way they are going)
-Were actually pretty good at building cars. Look at all the new toyota plants in the U.S. If we had let GM go bankrupt it could have been formed into a viable company
-We’ve got tons of natural resources we could access

We have the land, the infrastructure, the resources, we have the skilled labour,we have the management skills. The US would be an amazing place to run a factory, if we didn’t kill it all with over regulation.

37

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
pittbulll wrote:

It is long but well worth it

Segments 1, 2 and 3 are generally what it is all about, fAUX news fans may be interested in segment 17

[/quote]

I watched 17. Wasn’t impressed with what fox did, but it just seemed like they were trying to avoid having monsanto sue them.