Brandishing is illegal in Oklahoma and i would guess anywhere for the simple reason that is is insanely dangerous.
If you pull a gun only as a deterrent, not meaning to use it, if your your opponent is armed he is going to shoot you, in self defense. And he will not have the delays in his pulling of the trigger.
The first thing they teach in the concealed carry class is; "Do not pull your gun unless you intend to kill someone". This is actually one of the scenarios that ALL CC classes discuss. You can tell an angry assailant that you will have to defend yourself if he persists but if he sees the gun, you should be squeezing the trigger to make it the last thing he ever sees. Then you will need an average of $50,000.00 to defend yourself in the legal aftermath.
Do yourself a favor, put the gun in the house, or sell it. Learn to let the other guys bad driving not affect you so much. Maybe he feels he has an emergency, let him go. Let him catch the cop.
Your idea of gun use scares the hell out of me, and I am a Lifetime NRA member.
1. I didn't move, and he chased me for 5 miles,
2. I elected to not let him join the exiting line of cars in front of me.
Are you equally rude in all that you do? If you are standing in front of a door do you refuse to let others pass because you were there first? If you are walking across a street do you stand there and block cars, because you have the right-of-way? If memory serves from traffic school, when merging the car which is ahead has the right-of-way. Plus bull-headedly forcing him to move forward or back simply adds to the congestion.
From what you say you are a rude driver, questionably legal, but definitely rude.
the courts generally look kindly towards geezers that have had to defend themselves against thugs
And that you will survive to make it to court. The accident may well kill you, geezers die easier than young ones. Also you are assuming that you are the only armed combatant. You may feel lucky that you don't live in Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado or any state that has a high number of armed citizens. As Robert Heinlein said "An armed society is a polite society." There are more polite drivers here in the middle than on the left coast. Possibly because that other guy may just be armed too.
In your two scenarios if you had simply allowed the other to pass or merge what would it have cost you? Even a whole minute? I doubt it. As it is you described two very scary situations. Both of which could have been avoided by a little common courtesy. at a cost of less than a minute of your life. You also put others at risk while you and your adversaries drove around the city paying more attention to your fear/anger than to the traffic.
Maybe your minutes are more important to you than mine are to me, but I would rather avoid the stress and make it home to see my grandkids, even if it is a couple of minutes later. I quit trying to teach others how to drive a long time ago.
Yes, I drive fast and hate road hogs but fighting while in the deadliest weapon ever invented (Cars) is not on my list of things to do.
I only take exception to the brand. Smith & Wesson do not seem able to make a good automatic weapon. They make good revolvers. Sell it and get yourself a Kimber, Colt, Springfield anything but a Smith. Stay away from the Walther, they are made by Smith now. I would say a.45 but that is a personal preference.
Don't go shooting at people from your car. Even if you are carrying frangible bullets you may miss. The bullet very well may kill someone else. If you must pull over for a confrontation and you feel the need for deadly force use your car. It will be easier to defend because people are used to hearing about traffic deaths due to cars. You can also claim it was an accident. (You were so scared you didn't realize it was in gear)
Use your gun to shoot targets, it's fun. But take it out of your car. Don't give guns a worse name by using it irresponsibly.
I did not say we were going 10 over. I said we were on a road where that was the normal speed. Fact is I did not say what speed the jerk was going you simply assumed it. If the jerk in question was holding up traffic he had to be doing less than the normal flow of traffic.
I would hate to be on the road with you too. You might dyslexically believe that you were going 65 in a 65 when you were actually going 56 and insistently staying in the fast lane while telling yourself that you were doing a favor to all by making that jerk behind you follow the law.
Either let the police do their job or go join them but don't use your car as a weapon to play vigilante traffic cop. It is not safe. There is another commenter here who even pointed out that he carries a gun, his car isn't deadly enough i guess. Or perhaps that way he can cover his flanks. Fear him, stay out of the fast lane.
Wouldn't it just be simpler to move into the right lane and let the speeder go past?
Sure you might have to slow down a bit to match the traffic in the slow lane but at least the "dangerous" driver gets further from you. But after he goes by you can move back into the fast lane and continue. If there are many cars trying to get past you then perhaps you were the problem not the other way around.
Be courteous, get over, lower your stress and the speeder's, both of you will live longer, now you have done a good deed.
Oh, yea, sorry about the Ford Van. That 351 Midland is one of the main reasons that I will never have another Ford product. My 78 F-250 4x4 was pure unadulterated JUNK. The best mileage I ever got with it was about 12 mpg. When it ran. But It got about 30mpg when I pushed it, which i think i did for nearly 1/4 of it's miles.:)
I hear Ford has made it more comfortable to push their vehicles these days...
I will have to try the AC off. I'm a wussy these Oklahoma temps and high humidity, I have been running the AC. maybe I can stretch that a bit more. My Jeep I was only able to get it to about 18mpg, but then the limits are 65-70 and driving 55 where the slowest is going 70 is just a bit dangerous and I don't want to be where the wreck happens. Much less the cause.
True on the comparison but I have been behind the guy who slowly passes cars while there is no traffic ahead of him for miles.
This because he is going 10 mph slower than the normal flow of traffic which is well above the limit. He may feel within his rights but he is still an inconsiderate jerk.He is using his car to force people to go a speed he feels is acceptable. Should a speeder do the same thing he would push you up to speed.
Once again a comparison problem so we are left with the guy who won't allow others to pass is inconsiderate. Not against the law but it does cause road rage. And road rage does cause accidents. Do you want to force the raging driver to be near you when he T.A's?
So now you are an armed traffic vigilante. Wow, cool.
Think about this, cars kill WAY more people than guns. If someone uses their car to kill your road-hog inconsiderate ass. They will at worst get a ticket, since you won't be there to say "He was tailgating me and showing me his F word finger" No one will know that it was deliberate.
You pack your little Smith (Piece of crap if it isn't a revolver) I will simply point my 3000+ lb weapon at ya.
Quit being a jerk, get out of the way let that person behind you go past. then he can wreck where you are not.
What kind of car? I am impressed that they under rated it that much.
I manage to maintain about the rated highway mileage in all of my vehicles when on the highway. I am actually one of those who stays in the right lane. I drive about 90mi/day it can help more for me than most. Plus it avoids much of the anger at the jerk who insists in staying in th fast lane and not keeping up with the traffic ahead.
Actually he was going from 5 to 10 mph under the speed limit.
He was not overtaking the vehicle in the slow lane. He was simply impeding the flow of traffic. There were at least 5 -6 other cars in the lane behind me. That is a against the law, yet is rarely enforced.
Flashing lights and following closely is not reckless.
He was using his car as a weapon to force me to go a speed he felt was acceptable. Which you seem to find acceptable, as to most americans. But you would probably take exception to someone pushing you should they think you should go faster. Is it only the contact you take exception to?
Not all of us live in metropolitan areas where an ambulance can get to you rapidly. Calling an ambulance when you live in rural America only delays assistance.
True it was not life threatening. You tell your kid that you don't want to get him to the hospital any faster when he is hurting. Just don't block the FAST lane while you torture your kid.
Oh come on! If he hadn't been tailgating then the bullet I fired would not have hit him.
You are saying that that is a valid defense?
Deliberately slamming your brakes to cause someone to hit you is no different. Other than you are using the most dangerous weapon in the world as opposed to a gun.
When in the right lane I am fully in agreement the left lane is for passing "get the hell off my ass".
But. Avoid the brake temptation. getting rear-ended at 50+MPH is not an easy thing to handle if you do not maintain a straight line. Think of car racing a slight tap on the rear can sent the guy in front off of the track. This is true on a highway too.
Once again the life you save by using a turn out or the emergency lane may well be your own.
Hmmm, since surviving war is facilitated by intelligence then perhaps peace is the predecessor of stupidity.
but then the stupid want to start wars (See G.W. Bush) which will assist selection of intell...
You won't save enough to bother with. That is like driving out of your way to sace $0.05 per gallon. If you buy 20 gal that would be a whole dollar! Oops can't even get a Starbucks for that.
You can save that money if you wish but I choose to get where i am going slightly sooner. I'm going to wear out this car no matter what.
Or are you of the mind that it is your job to force me to save a couple bucks and go the speed you like? Would you like it if I took my truck and pushed you up to the speed I want you to go?
My mother in law, a Californian gave me a funny statistic on the savings of driving at 55MPH, which she assured me was accurate because she heard it in the TV. "It saves $0.43 per gallon". Cool. I have heard that in some Central American nation gas is still $0.17 per gallon so driving at 55 will pay $0.26 per gallon there!
Bottom Line: Get out of the way, Let the speeder go past the life you save could well be your own.
If you had the time to tab the prekes you could have also been considerate of the guy who wanted to go faster. What do you care if he wants to court a ticket? He will get it not you you should cheer him along and facilitate his desire to troll for the cops.
It is the "Fast lane" not the "I am going fast enough lane", or the "I'm going the speed limit lane". "Slower Traffic Keep Right" That is an unenforced law in many states, Colorado is trying to begin enforcing it but I know of no others. Note that is does not say Slower than the speed limit" "Nor does it say Slower than you".
You never know why that other car is trying to go faster. There was a time I had my step son in the car with a broken arm, I got stuck behind a traffic vigilante who was keeping pace with a heavy truck on a two lane divided highway which had no shoulder. Had I had a gun with me I would have shot at him when he started flipping me off and tapping his brakes. He didn't like my flashing the lights and tailgating. Perhaps I should have used the car as a weapon it is actually easier to get out of trouble than using a gun would have been. But then I didn't want to take the risk of compounding my sons pain. In stead there is a jerk who I wish nothing but ill for somewhere in central Oklahoma.
If the inconsiderate traffic vigilantes were make into an enforcement campaign then road rage would drop.
I said raising minimum wage increases the cost of all products (stuff) Not labor. When the government forces my boss to pay the bottom tier of labor more money, I do not get a raise. I effectively get a cut. My buying power goes down.
In the mid 1960's I worked for McDonalds. I was paid the minimum of $1.35/hr. Since a burger at that time was $0.19 that comes out to about 7.1 burgers per hour. Today, if memory serves, minimum is $5.40 and a regular burger is about 0.99. That comes out to 5.4 purgers per hour. I admit I am not sure of the current price since I do not eat there more than once or twice a year.
So my simplified scenario does line up with the reality of the last about 40 years. It simply does not fit into your desired world view.
The hope of liberals as they force an increase is that the difference will be made up from the paychecks or bank accounts of the rich owners or top management. The reality is that the product pricess are increased to cover the increase in the costs. Thus the increase is paid by the consumer. Business does not pay for anything. Consumers pay for everything. A business that buys parts for their product does not consume, they are resellers.
- TANSTAAFL : There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch -R.A.H.
Yup. Those are the people who benefit from a higher minimum wage.
How do they benefit? Lets look at a simplified business model: If I owned a chain of burger joints (100). The sandwich makings and overhead cost me $0.20/sandwich, I average say 1000 per hour of sales(cost:$200). I have One cook and one window person at each store they each make $5.00/hr (cost:$1000/hr) for a total of $1200/hr or $1.20 per burger.
Now the dear people decide to help the down-trodden and force me to pay my help $10/hr, So that they can have more money to spend.
Now my labor went to $2000/hr or per 100 burgers making the cost of each burger jump to $2.20.
At $5 per hour my employees were getting about 4.1 burgers per hour. At $10 they are getting 4.5 burgers per hour.
BUT, That $0.20 raw material cost did not include the increase in cost due to the meat processing plant increase nor the increase in price from the bakery. (among all of the other increases due to a bump at the bottom)
I'll bet that with real world numbers it is a net loss specially after you consider that if all of the "grunts" get a raise, the stock holders will want to see an increase in profits.
Bottom line, Increase the minimum wage increases inflation and frustration in life and the number of dollars you have to pay for EVERYTHING.
But at least they aren't forced, and often don't follow the government line.
But speaking ill of an advertiser or potential advertiser or advertiser partner, will get you called on the carpet, if not fired and black-balled. The dollar carries a much heavier hand, than government in the west. Oops that's right the Government is also controlled in the same manner.
(thinking critically) in China is not valued
Don't fall for that. They are just as capable of any western skill. They are just as intelligent as any of us. They have the same capabilities and they currently look to be happier than we are. (Counting the number of smiling faces while walking down the street in Dongguan).
When manufacturing went overseas in the late 80's all of us Engineers thought "Sucks to be a slightly skilled worker, but THEY can't design these high tech pieces of equipment (HDD's)" Now most of the engineering is done "Over there", with the exception of the initial design. So now the survivors are saying "Sucks to be a production Engineer or any of the production support staff." Wonder what job those third world people will turn out to be good at next? The Engineers at
SAE certainly were not sub-par on critical thinking.
To me it appears that what Asia is not good at copying, yet, is the western demand for higher pay for less work.
Whereas most Chinese tend to have the same opinion about events, be it protests against the torch, riots in Tibet, or tariffs in Europe.
Funny, most Americans seem to have the same, opposed, opinion.
Does the protest only count as freedom if it is against their government?
With respect to which news services have more or less freedom to report a less yellow form of news, I can't say since I don't speak or read Chinese. In that which I can understand: I do see the twisting of events by first hand experience of an event, then watching or reading the news accounts after the fact. There are times where it is nearly impossible to reconcile the two. In fact most times it is hard to recognize the real events from the sensationalized version in the media. It is hard to sell; "Discarded Coke can found in local river" As opposed to; "Racial tensions flair as bio-toxic waste is dumped into historically suppressed South side water course".
Question all of that which you do not see for yourself.
That which you do see yourself, question your own perception. Ask any cop, eye witnesses suck.
Ya think that maybe the cost of living follows the minimum wage, rather than the other way around?
I have heard the argument that you cant make it on minimum wage, Duuh, it is minimum get with it and make yourself more valuable. Those folks in Mexico or China are willing to. If a store owner is forced to pay the floor sweeper more, he has to charge more for his product. The floor sweeper will never be able to own a house, 55" TV, an F150, and a Blackberry... So do the tax payers have some responsibility to supply those desires? Write a law that says that someone else has to pay more. Why not simply write a law that says that everyone gets a minimum stipend of lets say $10/hr just for being an American? There is a real minimum wage. We can take that money from Taxes. Of course we will have to raise taxes.
Manufacturing jobs ranged from minimum for unskilled labor. As the skill levels increased the pay also did. As it does in China today and Singapore and Malaysia in the 80's and 90's. Unions also helped to drive away jobs. But then unions are quite similar to legislated minimum wages.
Deluded, only with the narrow definition you applied.
Slashdot Mirror
Brandishing is illegal in Oklahoma and i would guess anywhere for the simple reason that is is insanely dangerous.
If you pull a gun only as a deterrent, not meaning to use it, if your your opponent is armed he is going to shoot you, in self defense. And he will not have the delays in his pulling of the trigger.
The first thing they teach in the concealed carry class is; "Do not pull your gun unless you intend to kill someone". This is actually one of the scenarios that ALL CC classes discuss. You can tell an angry assailant that you will have to defend yourself if he persists but if he sees the gun, you should be squeezing the trigger to make it the last thing he ever sees. Then you will need an average of $50,000.00 to defend yourself in the legal aftermath.
Do yourself a favor, put the gun in the house, or sell it. Learn to let the other guys bad driving not affect you so much. Maybe he feels he has an emergency, let him go. Let him catch the cop.
Your idea of gun use scares the hell out of me, and I am a Lifetime NRA member.
From what you say you are a rude driver, questionably legal, but definitely rude.
And that you will survive to make it to court. The accident may well kill you, geezers die easier than young ones. Also you are assuming that you are the only armed combatant. You may feel lucky that you don't live in Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado or any state that has a high number of armed citizens. As Robert Heinlein said "An armed society is a polite society." There are more polite drivers here in the middle than on the left coast. Possibly because that other guy may just be armed too.
In your two scenarios if you had simply allowed the other to pass or merge what would it have cost you? Even a whole minute? I doubt it. As it is you described two very scary situations. Both of which could have been avoided by a little common courtesy. at a cost of less than a minute of your life. You also put others at risk while you and your adversaries drove around the city paying more attention to your fear/anger than to the traffic.
Maybe your minutes are more important to you than mine are to me, but I would rather avoid the stress and make it home to see my grandkids, even if it is a couple of minutes later. I quit trying to teach others how to drive a long time ago.
Yes, I drive fast and hate road hogs but fighting while in the deadliest weapon ever invented (Cars) is not on my list of things to do.
I only take exception to the brand. Smith & Wesson do not seem able to make a good automatic weapon. They make good revolvers. Sell it and get yourself a Kimber, Colt, Springfield anything but a Smith. Stay away from the Walther, they are made by Smith now. I would say a .45 but that is a personal preference.
Don't go shooting at people from your car. Even if you are carrying frangible bullets you may miss. The bullet very well may kill someone else. If you must pull over for a confrontation and you feel the need for deadly force use your car. It will be easier to defend because people are used to hearing about traffic deaths due to cars. You can also claim it was an accident. (You were so scared you didn't realize it was in gear)
Use your gun to shoot targets, it's fun. But take it out of your car. Don't give guns a worse name by using it irresponsibly.
That is not correct. Slower traffic keep right is a law too. And there is impeding the flow of traffic.
I did not say we were going 10 over. I said we were on a road where that was the normal speed. Fact is I did not say what speed the jerk was going you simply assumed it. If the jerk in question was holding up traffic he had to be doing less than the normal flow of traffic.
I would hate to be on the road with you too. You might dyslexically believe that you were going 65 in a 65 when you were actually going 56 and insistently staying in the fast lane while telling yourself that you were doing a favor to all by making that jerk behind you follow the law.
Either let the police do their job or go join them but don't use your car as a weapon to play vigilante traffic cop. It is not safe. There is another commenter here who even pointed out that he carries a gun, his car isn't deadly enough i guess. Or perhaps that way he can cover his flanks. Fear him, stay out of the fast lane.
Wouldn't it just be simpler to move into the right lane and let the speeder go past?
Sure you might have to slow down a bit to match the traffic in the slow lane but at least the "dangerous" driver gets further from you. But after he goes by you can move back into the fast lane and continue. If there are many cars trying to get past you then perhaps you were the problem not the other way around.
Be courteous, get over, lower your stress and the speeder's, both of you will live longer, now you have done a good deed.
Oh, yea, sorry about the Ford Van. That 351 Midland is one of the main reasons that I will never have another Ford product. My 78 F-250 4x4 was pure unadulterated JUNK. The best mileage I ever got with it was about 12 mpg. When it ran. But It got about 30mpg when I pushed it, which i think i did for nearly 1/4 of it's miles. :)
I hear Ford has made it more comfortable to push their vehicles these days...
I will have to try the AC off. I'm a wussy these Oklahoma temps and high humidity, I have been running the AC. maybe I can stretch that a bit more. My Jeep I was only able to get it to about 18mpg, but then the limits are 65-70 and driving 55 where the slowest is going 70 is just a bit dangerous and I don't want to be where the wreck happens. Much less the cause.
True on the comparison but I have been behind the guy who slowly passes cars while there is no traffic ahead of him for miles. This because he is going 10 mph slower than the normal flow of traffic which is well above the limit. He may feel within his rights but he is still an inconsiderate jerk.He is using his car to force people to go a speed he feels is acceptable. Should a speeder do the same thing he would push you up to speed.
Once again a comparison problem so we are left with the guy who won't allow others to pass is inconsiderate. Not against the law but it does cause road rage. And road rage does cause accidents. Do you want to force the raging driver to be near you when he T.A's?
So now you are an armed traffic vigilante. Wow, cool.
Think about this, cars kill WAY more people than guns. If someone uses their car to kill your road-hog inconsiderate ass. They will at worst get a ticket, since you won't be there to say "He was tailgating me and showing me his F word finger" No one will know that it was deliberate.
You pack your little Smith (Piece of crap if it isn't a revolver) I will simply point my 3000+ lb weapon at ya.
Quit being a jerk, get out of the way let that person behind you go past. then he can wreck where you are not.
What kind of car? I am impressed that they under rated it that much.
I manage to maintain about the rated highway mileage in all of my vehicles when on the highway. I am actually one of those who stays in the right lane. I drive about 90mi/day it can help more for me than most. Plus it avoids much of the anger at the jerk who insists in staying in th fast lane and not keeping up with the traffic ahead.
Actually he was going from 5 to 10 mph under the speed limit. He was not overtaking the vehicle in the slow lane. He was simply impeding the flow of traffic. There were at least 5 -6 other cars in the lane behind me. That is a against the law, yet is rarely enforced.
Flashing lights and following closely is not reckless.
He was using his car as a weapon to force me to go a speed he felt was acceptable. Which you seem to find acceptable, as to most americans. But you would probably take exception to someone pushing you should they think you should go faster. Is it only the contact you take exception to?
Not all of us live in metropolitan areas where an ambulance can get to you rapidly. Calling an ambulance when you live in rural America only delays assistance.
True it was not life threatening. You tell your kid that you don't want to get him to the hospital any faster when he is hurting. Just don't block the FAST lane while you torture your kid.
Oh come on! If he hadn't been tailgating then the bullet I fired would not have hit him.
You are saying that that is a valid defense?
Deliberately slamming your brakes to cause someone to hit you is no different. Other than you are using the most dangerous weapon in the world as opposed to a gun.
When in the right lane I am fully in agreement the left lane is for passing "get the hell off my ass".
But. Avoid the brake temptation. getting rear-ended at 50+MPH is not an easy thing to handle if you do not maintain a straight line. Think of car racing a slight tap on the rear can sent the guy in front off of the track. This is true on a highway too.
Once again the life you save by using a turn out or the emergency lane may well be your own.
Hmmm, since surviving war is facilitated by intelligence then perhaps peace is the predecessor of stupidity. but then the stupid want to start wars (See G.W. Bush) which will assist selection of intell...
I'm dizzy...
You won't save enough to bother with. That is like driving out of your way to sace $0.05 per gallon. If you buy 20 gal that would be a whole dollar! Oops can't even get a Starbucks for that.
You can save that money if you wish but I choose to get where i am going slightly sooner. I'm going to wear out this car no matter what.
Or are you of the mind that it is your job to force me to save a couple bucks and go the speed you like? Would you like it if I took my truck and pushed you up to the speed I want you to go?
My mother in law, a Californian gave me a funny statistic on the savings of driving at 55MPH, which she assured me was accurate because she heard it in the TV. "It saves $0.43 per gallon". Cool. I have heard that in some Central American nation gas is still $0.17 per gallon so driving at 55 will pay $0.26 per gallon there!
Bottom Line: Get out of the way, Let the speeder go past the life you save could well be your own.
And I reread it. Obviously not very well.
If you had the time to tab the prekes you could have also been considerate of the guy who wanted to go faster. What do you care if he wants to court a ticket? He will get it not you you should cheer him along and facilitate his desire to troll for the cops.
It is the "Fast lane" not the "I am going fast enough lane", or the "I'm going the speed limit lane". "Slower Traffic Keep Right" That is an unenforced law in many states, Colorado is trying to begin enforcing it but I know of no others. Note that is does not say Slower than the speed limit" "Nor does it say Slower than you".
You never know why that other car is trying to go faster. There was a time I had my step son in the car with a broken arm, I got stuck behind a traffic vigilante who was keeping pace with a heavy truck on a two lane divided highway which had no shoulder. Had I had a gun with me I would have shot at him when he started flipping me off and tapping his brakes. He didn't like my flashing the lights and tailgating. Perhaps I should have used the car as a weapon it is actually easier to get out of trouble than using a gun would have been. But then I didn't want to take the risk of compounding my sons pain. In stead there is a jerk who I wish nothing but ill for somewhere in central Oklahoma.
If the inconsiderate traffic vigilantes were make into an enforcement campaign then road rage would drop.
I said raising minimum wage increases the cost of all products (stuff) Not labor. When the government forces my boss to pay the bottom tier of labor more money, I do not get a raise. I effectively get a cut. My buying power goes down.
In the mid 1960's I worked for McDonalds. I was paid the minimum of $1.35/hr. Since a burger at that time was $0.19 that comes out to about 7.1 burgers per hour. Today, if memory serves, minimum is $5.40 and a regular burger is about 0.99. That comes out to 5.4 purgers per hour. I admit I am not sure of the current price since I do not eat there more than once or twice a year.
So my simplified scenario does line up with the reality of the last about 40 years. It simply does not fit into your desired world view.
The hope of liberals as they force an increase is that the difference will be made up from the paychecks or bank accounts of the rich owners or top management. The reality is that the product pricess are increased to cover the increase in the costs. Thus the increase is paid by the consumer. Business does not pay for anything. Consumers pay for everything. A business that buys parts for their product does not consume, they are resellers.
- TANSTAAFL : There Aint No Such Thing As A Free Lunch -R.A.H.
Now the dear people decide to help the down-trodden and force me to pay my help $10/hr, So that they can have more money to spend.
Now my labor went to $2000/hr or per 100 burgers making the cost of each burger jump to $2.20.
At $5 per hour my employees were getting about 4.1 burgers per hour. At $10 they are getting 4.5 burgers per hour. BUT, That $0.20 raw material cost did not include the increase in cost due to the meat processing plant increase nor the increase in price from the bakery. (among all of the other increases due to a bump at the bottom)
I'll bet that with real world numbers it is a net loss specially after you consider that if all of the "grunts" get a raise, the stock holders will want to see an increase in profits.
Bottom line, Increase the minimum wage increases inflation and frustration in life and the number of dollars you have to pay for EVERYTHING.
When manufacturing went overseas in the late 80's all of us Engineers thought "Sucks to be a slightly skilled worker, but THEY can't design these high tech pieces of equipment (HDD's)" Now most of the engineering is done "Over there", with the exception of the initial design. So now the survivors are saying "Sucks to be a production Engineer or any of the production support staff." Wonder what job those third world people will turn out to be good at next? The Engineers at SAE certainly were not sub-par on critical thinking.
To me it appears that what Asia is not good at copying, yet, is the western demand for higher pay for less work.
Funny, most Americans seem to have the same, opposed, opinion.
Does the protest only count as freedom if it is against their government?
With respect to which news services have more or less freedom to report a less yellow form of news, I can't say since I don't speak or read Chinese. In that which I can understand: I do see the twisting of events by first hand experience of an event, then watching or reading the news accounts after the fact. There are times where it is nearly impossible to reconcile the two. In fact most times it is hard to recognize the real events from the sensationalized version in the media. It is hard to sell; "Discarded Coke can found in local river" As opposed to; "Racial tensions flair as bio-toxic waste is dumped into historically suppressed South side water course".
Question all of that which you do not see for yourself.
That which you do see yourself, question your own perception. Ask any cop, eye witnesses suck.
I did not praise Chinese media.
I dissed western media and the belief that the media is unbiased.
Critical thinking! There are agendas on both sides.
Ya think that maybe the cost of living follows the minimum wage, rather than the other way around?
I have heard the argument that you cant make it on minimum wage, Duuh, it is minimum get with it and make yourself more valuable. Those folks in Mexico or China are willing to. If a store owner is forced to pay the floor sweeper more, he has to charge more for his product. The floor sweeper will never be able to own a house, 55" TV, an F150, and a Blackberry... So do the tax payers have some responsibility to supply those desires? Write a law that says that someone else has to pay more. Why not simply write a law that says that everyone gets a minimum stipend of lets say $10/hr just for being an American? There is a real minimum wage. We can take that money from Taxes. Of course we will have to raise taxes.
Manufacturing jobs ranged from minimum for unskilled labor. As the skill levels increased the pay also did. As it does in China today and Singapore and Malaysia in the 80's and 90's. Unions also helped to drive away jobs. But then unions are quite similar to legislated minimum wages.
Deluded, only with the narrow definition you applied.
Kent State.
I simply am saying that Their government is not that much different. Neither is our media.