You are forgetting one IMPORTANT thing..J&J use the mark for business and have an agreement with ARC that ARC uses it for NON-profit activities. ARC has recently SOLD licenses for use of the mark to OTHER BUSINESSES that compete with J&J. ARC did not have the legal right to sell the mark for use by businesses, especially those that compete with J&J.
Try cardio immediately when you wake up in the morning prior to eating. You body has natrually depleted its stores of glycogens while you slept and you have produced growth hormones while you slept. Becuase of a lack of glycogens, your body will pull from its easiest source next (fat). This occurs usually at the 20-30 minute mark of cardio at about 60% of max HR.
After working out, then eat a small balanced meal to give your body the ability to keep burning fuel....As a male (especially at your size), do not eat less than 1500 calories a day (you may need more to begin-google for a calc on line for this). You need to eat several small meals a day which will help keep your metabolism up in the high ranges....thereby burning more calories in your everyday activities.
Lift weight for muscle building later in the day (and a 30 minute nap prior to lifting will give you a source of growth hormones for building the muscle).
These tips were given to me by our former base exercise physiologist (who also holds several power lifting world records!)
BMI is not an indicator, but waist measurment is. For males, a waist measurement (regardless of body fat measurement percentage) of greater than 40" is a negative indicator.
Most military members fall into the "obese" category if you go by their BMI.
Actually, Osama and Al Qaida were formed during the soviet invasion of Afghanistan as part of the Islamic concept of mutual protection between Muslims. As the soviets were the enemy of the US at the time, we funded and supported materially those grups opposing the USSR forces. This included Al Qaida and by extension, Osama as its leader.
My sources are not the news media but the US government agencies involved during that period.
One thing is not noted: How many of those are non-nationals of that country brought in as workers?
I noticed that in all those countries (and I have been to all the ones listed) have a large number of foreign nationals as workers. These are mainly men, with a small percentage of women as nannies, housekeepers, etc. This would skew the numbers dramatically.
No, it wouldn't. How many of our military pilots could repair their plane or avoid crashing? We have enough crashes of commercial and military planes weekly to show that even the most experienced pilot can crash or have an accident than causes the plane to crash. Or outside forces....or equipment failure....or???
+1 on the obscure geekified reference though. Can't expect thos kinda people to fly well.
Actually, the argument used by Wesley Snipes (and others recently convicted) is that they do not have income.
Schiff is the leader of this group...(http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/cm-taxpr .htm). One of the arguments they use is that wages are exchanges of property rather than taxable income.
Obviously, it fails to actually win in court but that is the argument.
And, the wealthy can avoid income taxes. If your source of money is from dividends, you don't pay income tax on them, you pay capital gains taxes (which is a lower rate!).
"Thus, the traditional requirement of, you know, being a legal resident of this country, has been waived"
I call BS on this. When I was a child, SSN were not issued until you were older....and my grandfather opened an account for me. No SSN required.
BoA has branches around the world. Many people can be in the US legally and need to open an account but not need a SSN (tourist ot Vegas wins big...wants to open account to be able to deposit the big check...).
Businesses do not have SSNs.
And so on. And remember...pre-Social security administration, no-one had SSNs at all. Very few people had photo identification either. Banks still existed. So it appears your "traditional" is nothing of the sort.
In many states they also tax your car annually. Sometimes twice! In Colorado, you pay property tax on your car then have to pay the registration on it. In Europe, the car is registered once, and the annual tax is based as you said. The fact we call it "registration" versus "tax" here in the US doesn't mean it is not the same principle in action.
Pretty much all administrations change the appointed positions when they take office. No issue if that had been the case. It is changing people MID-term that raised the questions....especially as these particular attorneys were fired because they were pursuing cases against Republicans for violating laws. And note, this administration has not exactly been noted for firing anyone no matter how useless they are (Katrina, Iraq, etc), so to fire COMPETENT lawyers who were actually doing their jobs raises the concerns that politics is rampant in the DoJ.
Umm.....I just got back from my deployment in Jan. I was all over the Middle East as part fo my job (only a handful of us for the whole of CENTAF). I am one of those troops you speak of.
There is no war. War is a legal term, with a defined enemy, defined conditions for a win/loss, recognizable leadership structure for the enemy, etc. War has to be decalred against a nation-stare War can olny be declared by Congress.
Congress did not declare war on any nation. There is no defined conditions for winning or losing (or even a "screw you, I am going home!" situation).
The war on terror is like the "war on drugs". A war on a concept can never end or be won.
We do have combat zones and deaths. However, "war" is not needed to have those.
Whiel I do not know the specifics of Mass. Law, I do know a little about Federal Government spending. Typically the government does NOT have to choose the cheapest solution offered. They are required to select the best VALUE solution. If it is not the cheapest, then you must be able to justify the reason why you selected the solution you did.
How is saying (for peacefully protesting) anything violating their rights? If I walk around with a sign saying Slashdotters are evil MS loving, Walmart shopping Nazis, the most that could happen is someone may ask me "What are Slasshdotters?" I have not deprived anyone of their rights. If I shut down/. , then I have interfered with free speech.
The same with protesting in front of a church. I can protest, but not prevent people from entering. If I make them uncomfortable or angry, then that is their issue, and nothing requires me by law to ensure you do not become uncomfortable or hear things you do not like.
Don't know about bypass surgery being done there...can see joint replacements, etc. My father had a bypass (quintuple it turned out after they opened him up) and they would not let him travel until after the surgery. I think I agreed that it woudl be as you said ("or are tightly controlled (think transplants) that people would have to travel outside the US to get ahead of lists.") Tightly controlled includes joint replacements, and other non-life threatening but sometimes necessary surgery. I gave transplants as the most obvious example.
Agree that if they keep up the standards (and meet western standards- the US or Western Europe's) then they may end up being a shining light. And I can see service being better than in the US. Especially comparing the average American in the service industry to other nations (travelled a bit in my time), I have generally found customer service to be better almost ANYWHERE than in the US. Here it seems as if you are bothering the person, there the person seems to really want to help.
"It was explicitly said that they had been inspected to US accredidation standards"
But no mention on whether they actually were accredited? I can build a car to US safety standards, but until it is inspected by and recieves that all important certification, it is still not allowed to be sold in the US to be driven on public roads.
And being new, there are no long term stats to say how infection rates really are. may look good initially, but after 10 years, will they still be better than an equivalent hospital in the west (US and Western Europe)?
And if "Fast" is the one dropped, then the services provided are likely to be things that are voluntary (plastic surgery) or are tightly controlled (think transplants) that people would have to travel outside the US to get ahead of lists.
Not really outsourcing then.....if you need a doctor NOW, then a hospital in another country does you no good. The telemedicine, however, would fit in the realm of outsourcing (or simply finding a source to fill your need due to a lack of qualified people in the US for those specialties like radiology).
We have always had outsourcing of medical care. Abortions were obtained by the wealthy overseas (usually Europe) when it was illegal in the US. Surgery (especially extensive plastic surgery) is done in places like Thailand, and has been for years. The issue is how much risk are you willing to live with? Infection rates tend to be higher in those countries, but your money goes a little further..so you may be able to afford better care. But do you know if they meet US health stanards? Are they inspected and certified by a US health accredidation org? Most of the articles I found that mentioned it spoke more of things like specialists reviewing radiology exams (ie you get the MRI/Xray here in the US, they are looked at in India by telecommuting or record transcription work. Not something I would worry too much about. The transcription work could be a concern, but the decreasing number of medical practioners in the US would almost require some outsourcing.
And I could always save on my labour costs but I was willing to pay for quality and that is not cheap. You just have to decide which 2 of the 3 you want: Fast, Cheap, Good.
Why not Minot, Huh? I feel for you. But I can tell you that in 98, your pay was not bad as an A1C. Try 86-87 in southern CA. Granted, I lived in Apple Valley, in a decent house, but had several house-mates to be able to afford to move out of the dorm (we rented a 5 bedroom place). Went to Guam in 88, and again, lived off base (after a while in the dorms)...and had house mates once again.
As far as companies moving to the US...they do have cheaper options closer by. Eastern Europe is a lot cheaper than Germany, and has a high umemployment rate that woudl jump on jobs...and very lax governmental evironmental laws. Even Japan has locales that are cheaper than the US closer to home. Makes control easier....India is not too far away from Japan, so if we outsource there, makes sense it would be cheap for Japan to do the same. And human costs are always only a tiny part of the overall cost of business. (I was a prime contractor part time when stationed in TX for home theatre installs. My labour costs were less than 25% of my overall budget. The bulk of my costs were equipment and supplies. I made a comfortable profit...which was used to finance my addiction to electronics....had a killer stereo system...by providing the value-added aspect of being the expert who put all the right pieces together to create a "Whole" greater than the sum of the parts.)
Stay warm, fellow Airman! I'll try to send some Los Angeles sunshine your way!
The US industry needs to go higher tech and fight for its place at the top of the innovation ladder..
Well...I was an young E-5 back in 1995...over a decade ago. Now looking at retiring early next year. The pay now is a lot better than it was. And BAH now is supposed ot cover 100% of costs, not the 75% earlier in my career.
As for unions...in the early days (and even today....I have to deal with unions as part of my military job!) helped protect workers from abuse by the management. Using cancer causing chemicals....pre-union: Too bad. post-union: here is your PPE.
The outsourced jobs are not solely to do with lower wages. Overall costs are lower...and no unions, now governmental oversite, etc. Even Haliburton has now become a foreign company moving its HQ to Dubai for the tax advantages. (Another rant!) If it were only wages, then you would have a point. But wages are usually the public reason, but in reality, low on the reasons for the move. Less restrictive government and evironmental controls plays a big part.
If you look, you will see foreign companies move to the US to manufacture items (for example, Mercedes, BMW, and Honda). The tax breaks and benefits outweighed staying at home for them.
As for your house....I bet you aren't in CA or DC. And, depending on the local, you can live very well as an E5, or just get by. I have been stationed in CA 3 times now (Victorville 86-87, Monterey 2000-01, and now LA 2005-present). Each time it was more expensive than the previous location I was at (Rantoul, Ill; Alamogordo, NM; Denver, CO), but as you know...we go where we are sent.
So...are you a PO2, SGT, or SSgt type E5? Just wondering if I need to go to smaller words.... I keed....I keed....
Building a reserve inplies an excess to income beyond your expenses. I had a house in one local becuase I was stationed there. While it was rented, the rental market was soft and therefore the rent covered the mortgage and realty agency costs (the house was in Florida, I was in NM....hard to manage from afar). The agency was useless and while I terminated the contract with cause (their failure to collect the rent and notify me of issues violated the contract we had), I was still left with financial hole at the end.
I was a young E-5 at the time. Just promoted a short while prior to that. The lower grades do not get paid much. Having medical coverage helps, but at the time, our family members had a co-pay every time they saw a doctor off-base....and they could not see a doctor on-base (catch-22 situation). Every move in the military costs the member money. Especially if they have a family. While much of it is reimbursed, you still have out of pocket expenses (think deposits....while waiting for your deposits from your previous assignment to catch up to you....if they ever do! Again, hard to fight for from across the country or overseas...especially if it is a smallish amount). Many junior enlisted troops with families qualify for all sorts of government programs such as food stamps and WIC. Not a lot of reserves in those situations. I pulled out by negotiating with my creditors and pointing out to the hard cases that my choices were to negotiate with them to be ableot pay them off or declaring bankruptcy-this was before the changes to the laws- and they get nothing! I would keep my house (it was registered as my primary residence in my state of residency and I could afford the mortgage with all the other debt erased), the car (need to get to work), and walk away with more in my pocket. in fact, financially, I went the wrong way as I would have been more solvent by doing the latter. They realized that ONE creditor not working with me would cause ALL of them to not get paid. I guess they must talk to each other as the really hard cases suddenly agreed to payment schedules and lower interest rates. THAT was my only saving grace. They work with me or I pass on my bills to all you other people via higher interest rates.
As far as minumum wage increasing unemployment and inflation....well, you may want to do some more research. Belief is not enough reason to deprive other people. (isn't that what the religious nuts want to do? Require all of us to follwo their beliefs?) An increase in wages can stimulate spending (bringing down inflation...increasing profits, allowing expansion) by giving people enough money to spend. Even Henry Ford realized that unless workers could afford a Model T, he would not sell very many. His workers were paid a rate that would allow them to be able to afford a car.
Your idea for a Fereral Jobs Program would simply pass the cost to tax payers directly with little incentive for private companies to provide a living wage. And, may cause them to sue the Federal Government for unfair competion, as the government could use that labor for whatever it liked (within the law). A lving wage law would require businesses to ensure they are efficient and profitable...and history has shown that you can raise the min wage and businesses raise their prices a penny and press on. Little impact to the business, little impact to the consumer, big impact to those on the lower income levels.
PS....I appreciate your responses and thoughts..without the flames. I prefer to engage in lively debate with intelligent people, even if I may disagre with them. I always come away with a little more knowledge no matter what.
I think your solution is too simplistic: "If they can't afford where they live, they should move!" First, you are ignoring the fact moving costs money. Even if you have a car (and many poor do not), gas is not cheap. Any money earned goes towards living day to day. Fast food does pay more than minimum wage here (I know one local chain pays in excess of $10/hour to its employees, and they always appear happy). But even then....how do you move when you can't afford to move? You already have eliminated everything excess from your life but work, and only have enough to keep your family alive and housed...where is the money going to come to move? This does not even consider the cost to set up in the new location! Deposits, etc. I have moved enough time, and while Uncle Sam reimburses most of it, I stil pay some out of pocket expenses each time. Luckily, I can afford it. Some junior ranking troops have to worry if they will get sent to a high cost of living locale becuase they have children. And for those living day-to-day, working 2 or 3 jobs...when can they go to school? If they could afford to? While YOUR experience may be bad choices, you may want to realize that OTHER people's bad choices can impact YOUR ability to earn. Look at the number of people who lost jobs at Worldcom, Enron, etc. They made no bad choice, worked hard, thought they were safe....then discovered the bosses were corrupt and suddenly they were broke....through no bad choice or decision of their own doing.
And while fiscal responsibility is always recommended....lose your job (see Enron), have a family member get sick or injured, need medicine (that is not covered by medicare, etc) and you can quickly get into major debt. Hell, my wife had some issues and hid her long distance calling from me for a while (I was deployed a lot at the time) that when it got bad and she fianlly told me, we had bills of $600-700/month (her payment plan to the phone company), on top of our day to day bills....my paycheck was not that much and she was going to school. Add in a tenant in the house we owned in Florida bailing out without notice (a second mortgage to pay) and suddenly we were in major debt.
Granted, we sold the house (at a slight loss due to all the damage the tenant left), and my wife had finished school so had begun work....but we were able to crawl out from our debt in a reasonbale period of time. I am glad that I have good medical coverage being in the military....as my wife was diagnosed with a condition that requires a lot of expensive meds. I have blown a disk in my back and need surgery. I will have no cost and I will get full paychecks while on convalescent leave. But if I were not, I would have to consider simply living with no feeling in my legs and hope that I can keep working.
Sometimes the solution is not cut and dried. And while a national increase in the minimum wage may not be needed, I would prefer to see federal legislation requiring a minimum Living wage for each local. That way the rate would vary based on the area, but you could get by on the minimum if need be....perhaps even being able to take classes to imporve your skill set and so eventually get a better job.
Depends on the business. Some only expect students (high-school) or stay at home parents whose kids just started at school and so are now bored, and the extra cash gives them some play money...or perhaps money for the kids' college fund. Or they are in the Hollywood industry between gigs which may a hell of a lot more, but the only job which lets you go to auditions and interviews is one which pays less per hour.....because YOU are not an investment to them as you will leave for periods of time for your "real" career.
And if you are a person who just a a streak of bad luck/choices, then you are in tough position. Take the job and starve...not take the job, live on welfare and still be bad off, but now get demonized by the right wing. In 20+ years of military service, I have lived in 8 states, Guam, and Korea. This does not count my time as a military brat and the places I lived at as a child. I have seen wildly differing cost of living throughout the US. A wage that would barely be survivable in Los Angeles would make you upper middle class in southern New Mexico.
I think the show "30 Days" showed that living on minimum wage is a constant cycle of simply keeping your head above water, deciding which bill is more important this month (is power going to be cut off if I don't pay.....or is eating more important?) Especially for a person with a family....especially if they are young (diapers, formula, etc). It is real easy to go over the income threshhold to NOT get benefits from the state...and it only takes that penny extra to cost you serious help. And while WIC and other programs help, they don't cover the total cost of a young child's needs, but the loss of those programs can send a person into a death spiral of debt.
1st: Which nation are we at war with? ie. With whom could we accept a surrender from?
2nd. If there is no clear answer to the above questions, how do we decide when the "war" is over?
3rd. If there is no clearly defined, attainable end to the said "war" then, you, the common person is as likely to eventually be treated as an enemy.
Please note: I say this a 21 year (and counting) veteran of the US armed forces.
4th. Wars can only be declared against a specific, identifiable enemy. These are usually nation states. Occasionally alliances of nation states. There are none in this "Global War on Terrorism" to deal with. Therefore this "war" will be as effective as the "War on Drugs". (of course, looking at the latter title, it could almost be applied to the one on terrorism....as in "This is a war. This is a war on drugs."
Slashdot Mirror
You are forgetting one IMPORTANT thing..J&J use the mark for business and have an agreement with ARC that ARC uses it for NON-profit activities. ARC has recently SOLD licenses for use of the mark to OTHER BUSINESSES that compete with J&J. ARC did not have the legal right to sell the mark for use by businesses, especially those that compete with J&J.
Try cardio immediately when you wake up in the morning prior to eating. You body has natrually depleted its stores of glycogens while you slept and you have produced growth hormones while you slept. Becuase of a lack of glycogens, your body will pull from its easiest source next (fat). This occurs usually at the 20-30 minute mark of cardio at about 60% of max HR.
After working out, then eat a small balanced meal to give your body the ability to keep burning fuel....As a male (especially at your size), do not eat less than 1500 calories a day (you may need more to begin-google for a calc on line for this). You need to eat several small meals a day which will help keep your metabolism up in the high ranges....thereby burning more calories in your everyday activities.
Lift weight for muscle building later in the day (and a 30 minute nap prior to lifting will give you a source of growth hormones for building the muscle).
These tips were given to me by our former base exercise physiologist (who also holds several power lifting world records!)
BMI is not an indicator, but waist measurment is. For males, a waist measurement (regardless of body fat measurement percentage) of greater than 40" is a negative indicator.
Most military members fall into the "obese" category if you go by their BMI.
Actually, Osama and Al Qaida were formed during the soviet invasion of Afghanistan as part of the Islamic concept of mutual protection between Muslims. As the soviets were the enemy of the US at the time, we funded and supported materially those grups opposing the USSR forces. This included Al Qaida and by extension, Osama as its leader.
My sources are not the news media but the US government agencies involved during that period.
One thing is not noted: How many of those are non-nationals of that country brought in as workers?
I noticed that in all those countries (and I have been to all the ones listed) have a large number of foreign nationals as workers. These are mainly men, with a small percentage of women as nannies, housekeepers, etc. This would skew the numbers dramatically.
No, it wouldn't. How many of our military pilots could repair their plane or avoid crashing? We have enough crashes of commercial and military planes weekly to show that even the most experienced pilot can crash or have an accident than causes the plane to crash. Or outside forces....or equipment failure....or???
+1 on the obscure geekified reference though. Can't expect thos kinda people to fly well.
Actually, the argument used by Wesley Snipes (and others recently convicted) is that they do not have income.
r .htm). One of the arguments they use is that wages are exchanges of property rather than taxable income.
Schiff is the leader of this group...(http://www.quatloos.com/taxscams/cm-taxp
Obviously, it fails to actually win in court but that is the argument.
And, the wealthy can avoid income taxes. If your source of money is from dividends, you don't pay income tax on them, you pay capital gains taxes (which is a lower rate!).
"Thus, the traditional requirement of, you know, being a legal resident of this country, has been waived"
I call BS on this. When I was a child, SSN were not issued until you were older....and my grandfather opened an account for me. No SSN required.
BoA has branches around the world. Many people can be in the US legally and need to open an account but not need a SSN (tourist ot Vegas wins big...wants to open account to be able to deposit the big check...).
Businesses do not have SSNs.
And so on. And remember...pre-Social security administration, no-one had SSNs at all. Very few people had photo identification either. Banks still existed. So it appears your "traditional" is nothing of the sort.
English vernacular.
"...and Bob's your uncle." = "there you have it."
"uni"= abbreviation for university.
Really? You may want to tell that to all the people convicted who used that argument in court. Ask Wesley Snipes how that argument is going for him..
In many states they also tax your car annually. Sometimes twice! In Colorado, you pay property tax on your car then have to pay the registration on it. In Europe, the car is registered once, and the annual tax is based as you said. The fact we call it "registration" versus "tax" here in the US doesn't mean it is not the same principle in action.
Pretty much all administrations change the appointed positions when they take office. No issue if that had been the case. It is changing people MID-term that raised the questions....especially as these particular attorneys were fired because they were pursuing cases against Republicans for violating laws. And note, this administration has not exactly been noted for firing anyone no matter how useless they are (Katrina, Iraq, etc), so to fire COMPETENT lawyers who were actually doing their jobs raises the concerns that politics is rampant in the DoJ.
Hmmmmmm.....
Umm.....I just got back from my deployment in Jan. I was all over the Middle East as part fo my job (only a handful of us for the whole of CENTAF). I am one of those troops you speak of.
There is no war. War is a legal term, with a defined enemy, defined conditions for a win/loss, recognizable leadership structure for the enemy, etc. War has to be decalred against a nation-stare War can olny be declared by Congress.
Congress did not declare war on any nation. There is no defined conditions for winning or losing (or even a "screw you, I am going home!" situation).
The war on terror is like the "war on drugs". A war on a concept can never end or be won.
We do have combat zones and deaths. However, "war" is not needed to have those.
Whiel I do not know the specifics of Mass. Law, I do know a little about Federal Government spending. Typically the government does NOT have to choose the cheapest solution offered. They are required to select the best VALUE solution. If it is not the cheapest, then you must be able to justify the reason why you selected the solution you did.
How is saying (for peacefully protesting) anything violating their rights? If I walk around with a sign saying Slashdotters are evil MS loving, Walmart shopping Nazis, the most that could happen is someone may ask me "What are Slasshdotters?" I have not deprived anyone of their rights. If I shut down /. , then I have interfered with free speech.
The same with protesting in front of a church. I can protest, but not prevent people from entering. If I make them uncomfortable or angry, then that is their issue, and nothing requires me by law to ensure you do not become uncomfortable or hear things you do not like.
And Anne Rice writes in her books about actual places, etc. Does not make her books any less fiction though.
Don't know about bypass surgery being done there...can see joint replacements, etc. My father had a bypass (quintuple it turned out after they opened him up) and they would not let him travel until after the surgery. I think I agreed that it woudl be as you said ("or are tightly controlled (think transplants) that people would have to travel outside the US to get ahead of lists.") Tightly controlled includes joint replacements, and other non-life threatening but sometimes necessary surgery. I gave transplants as the most obvious example.
Agree that if they keep up the standards (and meet western standards- the US or Western Europe's) then they may end up being a shining light. And I can see service being better than in the US. Especially comparing the average American in the service industry to other nations (travelled a bit in my time), I have generally found customer service to be better almost ANYWHERE than in the US. Here it seems as if you are bothering the person, there the person seems to really want to help.
"It was explicitly said that they had been inspected to US accredidation standards"
But no mention on whether they actually were accredited? I can build a car to US safety standards, but until it is inspected by and recieves that all important certification, it is still not allowed to be sold in the US to be driven on public roads.
And being new, there are no long term stats to say how infection rates really are. may look good initially, but after 10 years, will they still be better than an equivalent hospital in the west (US and Western Europe)?
And if "Fast" is the one dropped, then the services provided are likely to be things that are voluntary (plastic surgery) or are tightly controlled (think transplants) that people would have to travel outside the US to get ahead of lists.
Not really outsourcing then.....if you need a doctor NOW, then a hospital in another country does you no good. The telemedicine, however, would fit in the realm of outsourcing (or simply finding a source to fill your need due to a lack of qualified people in the US for those specialties like radiology).
We have always had outsourcing of medical care. Abortions were obtained by the wealthy overseas (usually Europe) when it was illegal in the US. Surgery (especially extensive plastic surgery) is done in places like Thailand, and has been for years. The issue is how much risk are you willing to live with? Infection rates tend to be higher in those countries, but your money goes a little further..so you may be able to afford better care. But do you know if they meet US health stanards? Are they inspected and certified by a US health accredidation org? Most of the articles I found that mentioned it spoke more of things like specialists reviewing radiology exams (ie you get the MRI/Xray here in the US, they are looked at in India by telecommuting or record transcription work. Not something I would worry too much about. The transcription work could be a concern, but the decreasing number of medical practioners in the US would almost require some outsourcing.
And I could always save on my labour costs but I was willing to pay for quality and that is not cheap. You just have to decide which 2 of the 3 you want: Fast, Cheap, Good.
Why not Minot, Huh? I feel for you. But I can tell you that in 98, your pay was not bad as an A1C. Try 86-87 in southern CA. Granted, I lived in Apple Valley, in a decent house, but had several house-mates to be able to afford to move out of the dorm (we rented a 5 bedroom place). Went to Guam in 88, and again, lived off base (after a while in the dorms)...and had house mates once again.
As far as companies moving to the US...they do have cheaper options closer by. Eastern Europe is a lot cheaper than Germany, and has a high umemployment rate that woudl jump on jobs...and very lax governmental evironmental laws. Even Japan has locales that are cheaper than the US closer to home. Makes control easier....India is not too far away from Japan, so if we outsource there, makes sense it would be cheap for Japan to do the same. And human costs are always only a tiny part of the overall cost of business. (I was a prime contractor part time when stationed in TX for home theatre installs. My labour costs were less than 25% of my overall budget. The bulk of my costs were equipment and supplies. I made a comfortable profit...which was used to finance my addiction to electronics....had a killer stereo system...by providing the value-added aspect of being the expert who put all the right pieces together to create a "Whole" greater than the sum of the parts.)
Stay warm, fellow Airman! I'll try to send some Los Angeles sunshine your way!
The US industry needs to go higher tech and fight for its place at the top of the innovation ladder..
Well...I was an young E-5 back in 1995...over a decade ago. Now looking at retiring early next year. The pay now is a lot better than it was. And BAH now is supposed ot cover 100% of costs, not the 75% earlier in my career.
As for unions...in the early days (and even today....I have to deal with unions as part of my military job!) helped protect workers from abuse by the management. Using cancer causing chemicals....pre-union: Too bad. post-union: here is your PPE.
The outsourced jobs are not solely to do with lower wages. Overall costs are lower...and no unions, now governmental oversite, etc. Even Haliburton has now become a foreign company moving its HQ to Dubai for the tax advantages. (Another rant!) If it were only wages, then you would have a point. But wages are usually the public reason, but in reality, low on the reasons for the move. Less restrictive government and evironmental controls plays a big part.
If you look, you will see foreign companies move to the US to manufacture items (for example, Mercedes, BMW, and Honda). The tax breaks and benefits outweighed staying at home for them.
As for your house....I bet you aren't in CA or DC. And, depending on the local, you can live very well as an E5, or just get by. I have been stationed in CA 3 times now (Victorville 86-87, Monterey 2000-01, and now LA 2005-present). Each time it was more expensive than the previous location I was at (Rantoul, Ill; Alamogordo, NM; Denver, CO), but as you know...we go where we are sent.
So...are you a PO2, SGT, or SSgt type E5? Just wondering if I need to go to smaller words.... I keed....I keed....
Building a reserve inplies an excess to income beyond your expenses. I had a house in one local becuase I was stationed there. While it was rented, the rental market was soft and therefore the rent covered the mortgage and realty agency costs (the house was in Florida, I was in NM....hard to manage from afar). The agency was useless and while I terminated the contract with cause (their failure to collect the rent and notify me of issues violated the contract we had), I was still left with financial hole at the end.
I was a young E-5 at the time. Just promoted a short while prior to that. The lower grades do not get paid much. Having medical coverage helps, but at the time, our family members had a co-pay every time they saw a doctor off-base....and they could not see a doctor on-base (catch-22 situation). Every move in the military costs the member money. Especially if they have a family. While much of it is reimbursed, you still have out of pocket expenses (think deposits....while waiting for your deposits from your previous assignment to catch up to you....if they ever do! Again, hard to fight for from across the country or overseas...especially if it is a smallish amount). Many junior enlisted troops with families qualify for all sorts of government programs such as food stamps and WIC. Not a lot of reserves in those situations. I pulled out by negotiating with my creditors and pointing out to the hard cases that my choices were to negotiate with them to be ableot pay them off or declaring bankruptcy-this was before the changes to the laws- and they get nothing! I would keep my house (it was registered as my primary residence in my state of residency and I could afford the mortgage with all the other debt erased), the car (need to get to work), and walk away with more in my pocket. in fact, financially, I went the wrong way as I would have been more solvent by doing the latter. They realized that ONE creditor not working with me would cause ALL of them to not get paid. I guess they must talk to each other as the really hard cases suddenly agreed to payment schedules and lower interest rates. THAT was my only saving grace. They work with me or I pass on my bills to all you other people via higher interest rates.
As far as minumum wage increasing unemployment and inflation....well, you may want to do some more research. Belief is not enough reason to deprive other people. (isn't that what the religious nuts want to do? Require all of us to follwo their beliefs?) An increase in wages can stimulate spending (bringing down inflation...increasing profits, allowing expansion) by giving people enough money to spend. Even Henry Ford realized that unless workers could afford a Model T, he would not sell very many. His workers were paid a rate that would allow them to be able to afford a car.
Your idea for a Fereral Jobs Program would simply pass the cost to tax payers directly with little incentive for private companies to provide a living wage. And, may cause them to sue the Federal Government for unfair competion, as the government could use that labor for whatever it liked (within the law). A lving wage law would require businesses to ensure they are efficient and profitable...and history has shown that you can raise the min wage and businesses raise their prices a penny and press on. Little impact to the business, little impact to the consumer, big impact to those on the lower income levels.
PS....I appreciate your responses and thoughts..without the flames. I prefer to engage in lively debate with intelligent people, even if I may disagre with them. I always come away with a little more knowledge no matter what.
I think your solution is too simplistic: "If they can't afford where they live, they should move!" First, you are ignoring the fact moving costs money. Even if you have a car (and many poor do not), gas is not cheap. Any money earned goes towards living day to day. Fast food does pay more than minimum wage here (I know one local chain pays in excess of $10/hour to its employees, and they always appear happy). But even then....how do you move when you can't afford to move? You already have eliminated everything excess from your life but work, and only have enough to keep your family alive and housed...where is the money going to come to move? This does not even consider the cost to set up in the new location! Deposits, etc. I have moved enough time, and while Uncle Sam reimburses most of it, I stil pay some out of pocket expenses each time. Luckily, I can afford it. Some junior ranking troops have to worry if they will get sent to a high cost of living locale becuase they have children. And for those living day-to-day, working 2 or 3 jobs...when can they go to school? If they could afford to? While YOUR experience may be bad choices, you may want to realize that OTHER people's bad choices can impact YOUR ability to earn. Look at the number of people who lost jobs at Worldcom, Enron, etc. They made no bad choice, worked hard, thought they were safe....then discovered the bosses were corrupt and suddenly they were broke....through no bad choice or decision of their own doing.
And while fiscal responsibility is always recommended....lose your job (see Enron), have a family member get sick or injured, need medicine (that is not covered by medicare, etc) and you can quickly get into major debt. Hell, my wife had some issues and hid her long distance calling from me for a while (I was deployed a lot at the time) that when it got bad and she fianlly told me, we had bills of $600-700/month (her payment plan to the phone company), on top of our day to day bills....my paycheck was not that much and she was going to school. Add in a tenant in the house we owned in Florida bailing out without notice (a second mortgage to pay) and suddenly we were in major debt.
Granted, we sold the house (at a slight loss due to all the damage the tenant left), and my wife had finished school so had begun work....but we were able to crawl out from our debt in a reasonbale period of time. I am glad that I have good medical coverage being in the military....as my wife was diagnosed with a condition that requires a lot of expensive meds. I have blown a disk in my back and need surgery. I will have no cost and I will get full paychecks while on convalescent leave. But if I were not, I would have to consider simply living with no feeling in my legs and hope that I can keep working.
Sometimes the solution is not cut and dried. And while a national increase in the minimum wage may not be needed, I would prefer to see federal legislation requiring a minimum Living wage for each local. That way the rate would vary based on the area, but you could get by on the minimum if need be....perhaps even being able to take classes to imporve your skill set and so eventually get a better job.
Depends on the business. Some only expect students (high-school) or stay at home parents whose kids just started at school and so are now bored, and the extra cash gives them some play money...or perhaps money for the kids' college fund. Or they are in the Hollywood industry between gigs which may a hell of a lot more, but the only job which lets you go to auditions and interviews is one which pays less per hour.....because YOU are not an investment to them as you will leave for periods of time for your "real" career.
And if you are a person who just a a streak of bad luck/choices, then you are in tough position. Take the job and starve...not take the job, live on welfare and still be bad off, but now get demonized by the right wing. In 20+ years of military service, I have lived in 8 states, Guam, and Korea. This does not count my time as a military brat and the places I lived at as a child. I have seen wildly differing cost of living throughout the US. A wage that would barely be survivable in Los Angeles would make you upper middle class in southern New Mexico.
I think the show "30 Days" showed that living on minimum wage is a constant cycle of simply keeping your head above water, deciding which bill is more important this month (is power going to be cut off if I don't pay.....or is eating more important?) Especially for a person with a family....especially if they are young (diapers, formula, etc). It is real easy to go over the income threshhold to NOT get benefits from the state...and it only takes that penny extra to cost you serious help. And while WIC and other programs help, they don't cover the total cost of a young child's needs, but the loss of those programs can send a person into a death spiral of debt.
1st: Which nation are we at war with? ie. With whom could we accept a surrender from?
2nd. If there is no clear answer to the above questions, how do we decide when the "war" is over?
3rd. If there is no clearly defined, attainable end to the said "war" then, you, the common person is as likely to eventually be treated as an enemy.
Please note: I say this a 21 year (and counting) veteran of the US armed forces.
4th. Wars can only be declared against a specific, identifiable enemy. These are usually nation states. Occasionally alliances of nation states. There are none in this "Global War on Terrorism" to deal with. Therefore this "war" will be as effective as the "War on Drugs". (of course, looking at the latter title, it could almost be applied to the one on terrorism....as in "This is a war. This is a war on drugs."