Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

News coming on the NAFTA Rail road along the super-corridor.
KCS company news ^ | Aug 30, 2007

Posted on 09/03/2007 10:54:47 PM PDT by Exton1

Check this out later this week, to hear about the NAFTA railroad.

For Immediate release:
For additional information contact:

August 30, 2007
William Galligan - 816-983-1551


KCS' Arthur L. Shoener to Address Morgan Keegan 2007 Equity Conference

 

/ /

Kansas City, Mo., August 30, 2007 - Kansas City Southern (KCS) (NYSE: KSU) president and chief operating officer, Arthur L. Shoener, will address the Morgan Keegan 2007 Equity Conference at approximately 12:15 p.m. Central Time on Thursday, September 6, 2007. Note the updated time.

Interested investors not attending the conference may listen to the presentation via a simultaneous webcast on KCS' website at www.kcsouthern.com. A link to the replay will be available for 7 days following the event. Presentation materials will also be available on the website.

Headquartered in Kansas City, Mo., KCS is a transportation holding company that has railroad investments in the U.S., Mexico and Panama. Its primary U.S. holding includes The Kansas City Southern Railway Company, serving the central and south central U.S. Its international holdings include Kansas City Southern de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., serving northeastern and central Mexico and the port cities of Lázaro Cárdenas, Tampico and Veracruz, and a 50 percent interest in Panama Canal Railway Company, providing ocean-to-ocean freight and passenger service along the Panama Canal. KCS' North American rail holdings and strategic alliances are primary components of a NAFTA Railway system, linking the commercial and industrial centers of the U.S., Canada and Mexico.



TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cuespookymusic; invasion; jobs; nafta; superhighway; votejohnedwards2008
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-112 next last
To: mysterio
I think they should be able to locate in Mexico or China if they want to, but they should pay tariffs to export the goods made with slave labor and no pollution controls back to America.

You think we should be able to import goods made with slave labor? I disagree.

As far as pollution, you should ask the citizens if they prefer the pollution or the jobs.

We do it right here in America when we don't let them hire illegal immigrant slave labor.

I think illegals should be sent back, but I thought we were talking about workers in other countries?

Exactly. That's why I think we should encourage manufacturers to stay in America.

Excellent, as long as were making American goods cheaper instead of making foreign goods more expensive.

51 posted on 09/04/2007 10:21:21 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

I showed that you have no source proving that American manufacturing production has fallen since NAFTA. But proving you wrong is easy.


52 posted on 09/04/2007 10:23:05 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
“The Republican candidate better pull his head out long enough to put the brakes on this, or the party will have a hard time getting 20% of the vote.”

Then I wouldn’t suggest anyone support the candidates who are members of the Council on Foreign Relations.

CFR is a pro-globalism organization that supports policy to that end.

Candidates or possible future candidates who are members of the CFR or have made presentations before the CFR:
Democrat CFR Candidates:
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Chris Dodd
Bill Richardson
Republican CFR Candidates:
Mitt Romney
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Fred Thompson
Newt Gingrich

Do your research folks.....if you want more of the same, vote for either of these candidates.

The CFR is NOT the average American Joe’s friend.

53 posted on 09/04/2007 10:24:02 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

toad, all you’ve posted are your opinions.

And, you know what they say about opinions (especially yours).


54 posted on 09/04/2007 10:24:16 AM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777; Calpernia; Borax Queen
Then I wouldn’t suggest anyone support the candidates who are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. CFR is a pro-globalism organization that supports policy to that end.

bttt!

55 posted on 09/04/2007 10:25:40 AM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
all you’ve posted are your opinions.

It is my opinion that you have no source to back up your assertion.

56 posted on 09/04/2007 10:27:12 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot

Did you take your disinformation lessons from Baghdad Bob?

You need more; at least he was funny.


57 posted on 09/04/2007 10:28:12 AM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

I’m not a big CFR fan myself. It is amazing though how many are actually members. It’s rather difficult to find a candidate near the top who isn’t.


58 posted on 09/04/2007 10:28:33 AM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

I’m sorry that I pointed out your error.


59 posted on 09/04/2007 10:37:39 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; expat_panama
Sorry, Americans know that manufacturing jobs have gone south of the border and on to China.

You'd probably be surprised to learn that China has "lost" five times more manufacturing jobs than we have. Some people like to blame these losses on bogeymen like NAFTA. More knowledgeable people understand that automation and the resulting increases in productivity are responsible for those job losses.

We produce more today with less people which is why manufacturing wages continue to increase in the US.

It's pretty difficult to increase wages without increasing productivity.

I'll be you and your friends at EPI lament the fact that we don't have half our population working in agriculture any longer. No doubt the Luddites back then shared the same feelings you have today. Thankfully, most people are paying attention to the facts rather than your feelings.

60 posted on 09/04/2007 10:37:51 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Mase

be = bet


61 posted on 09/04/2007 10:39:33 AM PDT by Mase (Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
You think we should be able to import goods made with slave labor? I disagree.

The labor in Mexico is slave labor. They are paid a wage so low that it is actually better for them to risk their lives to come across the border and work as slaves here.

So you think we shouldn't be able to import Mexican goods? I wouldn't go that far, but I wouldn't mind making it a whole lot less profitable for corporations to utilize slave labor south of the border.

As far as pollution, you should ask the citizens if they prefer the pollution or the jobs.

Well, they must not like it too much. They are voting with their feet.

I think illegals should be sent back, but I thought we were talking about workers in other countries?

We are. But the illegals wouldn't be here in the first place if the jobs down there weren't so horrible.

Excellent, as long as were making American goods cheaper instead of making foreign goods more expensive.

Do you support the government banning imports of goods made in sweatshops?
62 posted on 09/04/2007 10:49:43 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
The labor in Mexico is slave labor. They are paid a wage so low that it is actually better for them to risk their lives to come across the border and work as slaves here.

Oh, they're paid slaves. It all makes sense now. I guess they'll be paid more if we put more restrictions on corporations hiring in Mexico?

So you think we shouldn't be able to import Mexican goods?

I have no problem with importing Mexican goods.

Well, they must not like it too much. They are voting with their feet.

What will they do when we cut off that option?

Do you support the government banning imports of goods made in sweatshops?

What's your definition of sweatshops? Where are they located?

63 posted on 09/04/2007 10:57:41 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Oh, they're paid slaves.

Yes.

It all makes sense now.

That's a relief. It sure took you long enough.

I guess they'll be paid more if we put more restrictions on corporations hiring in Mexico?

Hopefully.
64 posted on 09/04/2007 11:05:15 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
What will they do when we cut off that option?

They will have a left wing revolution and we will have Venezuela as a southern neighbor. Is that what you want?

What's your definition of sweatshops? Where are they located?

Most are in the third world. They subject workers to extremely low pay, long hours, unsafe working conditions, and many employ children.

Do you support banning imports that come from known sweatshop regions until the region improves its working conditions?
65 posted on 09/04/2007 11:11:59 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo

You forgot the list........

Candidates or possible future candidates who are members of the CFR or have made presentations before the CFR:

Democrat CFR Candidates:
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Chris Dodd
Bill Richardson
Republican CFR Candidates:
Mitt Romney
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Fred Thompson
Newt Gingrich


66 posted on 09/04/2007 11:12:10 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
They will have a left wing revolution and we will have Venezuela as a southern neighbor. Is that what you want?

We have to allow the invasion, or things will get worse?

They subject workers to extremely low pay, long hours, unsafe working conditions, and many employ children.

Why would people suffer these conditions for themselves, or their children?

67 posted on 09/04/2007 11:18:19 AM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: papasmurf

There are people here on FReepers that for some ungodly reason don’t want to see any public decent about NAFTA the SPP, The Trans Texas Corridor....and these people troll every thread on the subject.

I wonder if their IP addresses would lead to a government office????


68 posted on 09/04/2007 11:52:06 AM PDT by Halgr (Once a Marine, always a Marine - Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
We have to allow the invasion, or things will get worse?

No, we have to insist that our corporations there pay fairly and provide working conditions similar to our own in the US or a revolution will occur down there and we will have a communist neighbor.

Why would people suffer these conditions for themselves, or their children?

Because they are used to extreme poverty and they have the hope of going to America to be better paid slaves there.
69 posted on 09/04/2007 12:02:36 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
No, we have to insist that our corporations there pay fairly and provide working conditions similar to our own in the US

Is it okay if they pay workers in Mexico less than they pay workers in the US?

Because they are used to extreme poverty

And because they'd rather work for little than not work and starve?

and they have the hope of going to America to be better paid slaves there.

Sweat shop workers in Asia have the hope of coming here? And that's why they work in poor conditions now?

70 posted on 09/04/2007 12:08:11 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: blackie

Thanks, blackie.
Hugs!


71 posted on 09/04/2007 12:14:36 PM PDT by AuntB (" It takes more than walking across the border to be an American." Duncan Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Is it okay if they pay workers in Mexico less than they pay workers in the US?

Do you mean "a. pay them less" or "b. pay them five dollars a day?"

If (a), yes. If (b), no.

And because they'd rather work for little than not work and starve?

No, they would rather revolt if forced to work hard for extreme poverty with no hope of escaping. Do you disagree with me on this point? If you do, you should study a history book.

Sweat shop workers in Asia have the hope of coming here? And that's why they work in poor conditions now?

No, they are suffering under dictatorial governments. Eventually they too will revolt.

Now answer my question. Do you support importing goods that were made in sweatshop regions?
72 posted on 09/04/2007 12:15:51 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Do you mean "a. pay them less" or "b. pay them five dollars a day?"

I haven't seen info on current wages in Mexico. Is it $5 a day?

No, they would rather revolt if forced to work hard for extreme poverty with no hope of escaping. Do you disagree with me on this point?

I agree that working is better than starving.

No, they are suffering under dictatorial governments.

Sweat shops are only in dictatorial countries?

Eventually they too will revolt.

That would be terrible. Why would it be terrible again?

Do you support importing goods that were made in sweatshop regions?

Too broad. Be more specific.

73 posted on 09/04/2007 12:19:47 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
I haven't seen info on current wages in Mexico. Is it $5 a day?

I have seen figures between $1.50 and $2.00 per hour. No benefits. China is 25 cents an hour.

I agree that working is better than starving.

And you refuse to acknowledge that your text book market theories are going to lead to communist revolution in Mexico. I figured as much.

Are you going to discuss this or are you going to play obtuse semantic hopscotch until I tire of the game?
74 posted on 09/04/2007 12:42:24 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
I have seen figures between $1.50 and $2.00 per hour. No benefits.

Well, if someone offered $5 a day, it sounds like they'd get few if any takers.

And you refuse to acknowledge that your text book market theories are going to lead to communist revolution in Mexico.

Employing more Mexicans in Mexico is more likely to lead to revolution than employing fewer Mexicans in Mexico?

Are you going to discuss this or are you going to play obtuse semantic hopscotch until I tire of the game?

Sorry if I have trouble translating your babbling into English. Maybe if you were more precise I'd be able to understand what you're saying?

75 posted on 09/04/2007 12:46:20 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Well, if someone offered $5 a day, it sounds like they'd get few if any takers.

In the rural regions, the wage is lower. So what do you think about paying workers $2 an hour with no benefits in bad working conditions? Do you consider that humane?

Employing more Mexicans in Mexico is more likely to lead to revolution than employing fewer Mexicans in Mexico?

Employing Mexicans for poverty wages and removing the hope of escape will lead to communist revolution. And we can't absorb the majority of their peasant population. So assuming those who agree with you stay in charge, Mexico will certainly go the route of the rest of central America.

Sorry if I have trouble translating your babbling into English. Maybe if you were more precise I'd be able to understand what you're saying?

You understand perfectly well what I'm saying. You are reluctant to answer the question. But that is an answer as well.
76 posted on 09/04/2007 12:58:15 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
In the rural regions, the wage is lower. So what do you think about paying workers $2 an hour with no benefits in bad working conditions?

If the prevailing wage is $1 an hour, I think most people would take a job for $2 an hour. If the prevailing wage was $3 an hour, most people would not.

Do you consider that humane?

More humane than starvation. Do you agree?

So assuming those who agree with you stay in charge, Mexico will certainly go the route of the rest of central America.

Who is in charge that agrees with me?

You are reluctant to answer the question. But that is an answer as well.

If we send the illegals back and seal the border with there be a revolution in Mexico? Maybe. Would it be worse than it is now? Maybe. It might also get better.

Should we allow millions of illegals in to prevent a revolution, or at least a major change in their system? I don't think so.

77 posted on 09/04/2007 1:04:48 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
If the prevailing wage is $1 an hour, I think most people would take a job for $2 an hour. If the prevailing wage was $3 an hour, most people would not.

They don't have a choice. It's either accept the slave wage, starve, or sneak into America to work illegally. They WILL eventually choose revolt, however, and it will be left wing.

More humane than starvation. Do you agree?

No. There is no excuse for using slave labor.

Who is in charge that agrees with me?

Bush, and Clinton before him.

If we send the illegals back and seal the border with there be a revolution in Mexico? Maybe. Would it be worse than it is now? Maybe. It might also get better.

Is Cuba "better?" Is Venezuela "better?"

Should we allow millions of illegals in to prevent a revolution, or at least a major change in their system? I don't think so.

No. We should pay a humane wage at our factories in Mexico like you, Bill Clinton, and the rest of the NAFTA proponents predicted would happen.
78 posted on 09/04/2007 1:19:18 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
They don't have a choice. It's either accept the slave wage, starve, or sneak into America to work illegally.

That looks like 3 choices. Slaves don't get to make choices.

No. There is no excuse for using slave labor.

Slaves don't earn wages.

Bush, and Clinton before him.

Bush and Clinton wanted to close the border and send the illegals back? When was that?

Is Cuba "better?" Is Venezuela "better?"

We should allow illegals to invade because Cuba is bad? Maybe we'd install a puppet regime?

We should pay a humane wage at our factories in Mexico like you, Bill Clinton, and the rest of the NAFTA proponents predicted would happen.

Wages are lower than they were before NAFTA?

79 posted on 09/04/2007 1:24:52 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo
the RNC gets NO MORE OF MY MONEY.

I've been returning their requests for over a year now, postage due, with a note saying- Build The Wall, Enforce The Law!.....I no longer get requests

80 posted on 09/04/2007 1:32:39 PM PDT by litehaus (A memory tooooo long)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AmericanInTokyo

I’m with you. I used to think Buchanan was a nutbar, but I don’t think so any more. I still don’t agree with some of the things Pat Buchanan says, but, as time passes, it’s obvious that he was right — and I was wrong — about a great many things.

My wife (the smart one), voted for him, of course.

The RNC is a tool of the same Powers That Be that run the Democrat Party. Voting is like trying to choose between two prison rapists — slow or fast, you’re going to get it in the end no matter what.


81 posted on 09/04/2007 1:33:15 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Halgr
public decent about NAFTA

dissent

82 posted on 09/04/2007 1:38:50 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo; Mase
"Overall decline"     "...this economy sucks..."

If you ever feel a need to drop the graph from the Economist, you can always get the whole story going back 70 years from other sources online (BLS data link).

What you said was true, that manufacturing employment is down almost 20% since the Clinton days.  Just the same, total jobs in goods production (construction, mining, etc.) is off only 5%, and both are about equal to their long term averages.

Production is at an all time high like Mase was saying in post 60, thanks to all those $70,000/year engineers (Companies Scramble to Hire Engineers).

83 posted on 09/04/2007 2:35:10 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan; Halgr
"...public decent about NAFTA..."          "dissent"

I thought it made more sense as "decent".

84 posted on 09/04/2007 2:39:19 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: AuntB

I’m here to serve!

{{HUGS}}


85 posted on 09/04/2007 3:00:04 PM PDT by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
That looks like 3 choices. Slaves don't get to make choices.

Sure they do. They can stay and work so they can eat, run away, or overthrow their master. And those are the same choices the Mexican workers have.

Slaves don't earn wages.

They get room and board for their work. Most Mexican workers can just afford room and board on their salaries, so it's the same thing. And Chinese workers are actually housed at the factories.

We should allow illegals to invade because Cuba is bad? Maybe we'd install a puppet regime?

Lie. That's not what I said, and you are well aware of that. I don't support illegal immigration. Your policy is going to result in a communist revolution in Mexico.

Wages are lower than they were before NAFTA?

Business week lists the current salary of an assembly line worker in Mexico to be $1.47 an hour. If that's a stunning climb, I'd be surprised. Do you think they're rushing across the border because they are being paid well? Did the NAFTA proponents predict that Mexican wages would reach the princely level of $1.47 an hour in just ten short years? No. They promised more than that.
86 posted on 09/04/2007 3:20:21 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
They can stay and work so they can eat, run away, or overthrow their master. And those are the same choices the Mexican workers have.

If they were slaves, Mexico would build a wall to keep them in. You need to stop being so sloppy with your language. Not everyone in a 3rd world country is a slave, just because they make less than you. Or because they make less than you feel they should make.

I don't support illegal immigration.

Neither do I.

Your policy is going to result in a communist revolution in Mexico.

Which policy? The one where I want to build a wall and send back the illegals? Or the one where I prefer Mexicans had jobs instead of starving? And if there was a Communist revolution in Mexico, would it reduce the flow of illegals? Would it stop the 30 families who run the country from stealing Mexico's wealth? Would it really make things worse?

Business week lists the current salary of an assembly line worker in Mexico to be $1.47 an hour. If that's a stunning climb, I'd be surprised.

Considering their exports to the US went from $40 billion in 1993 to $198 billion last year, I'd be shocked if it wasn't an improvement. And reducing their exports to the US sure isn't going to improve their wages.

Do you think they're rushing across the border because they are being paid well?

They're rushing across the border because their country sucks and because we refuse to build a wall. If they can't send their poor here, they'll at least have an incentive to try to fix their system, before they get a revolution.

Did the NAFTA proponents predict that Mexican wages would reach the princely level of $1.47 an hour in just ten short years?

I keep hearing about the failed predictions of the NAFTA proponents, but didn't trade expand? What about the failed predictions of the NAFTA opponents? Sucking sound? LOL!

Perhaps you should build a factory in Mexico and pay them a "humane" wage. You'd have your pick of workers and would surely make millions.

87 posted on 09/04/2007 4:52:55 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
They are rushing across the border because the jobs that are there are absolute crap. The jobs are absolute crap because they pay an extreme poverty wage with no benefits. The results are an increase in the profitability of our corporations in the world market and the absorbing of Mexico's entire peasant class into the US.

We are not going to agree on this topic. You are eager to stump for corporations that ship US jobs to Mexico and I am eager to prevent a communist revolution down there similar to Cuba and Venezuela because of the horrible working conditions.

We agree on the need to stop illegal immigration.

Have a good night.
88 posted on 09/04/2007 5:37:49 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
The jobs are absolute crap because they pay an extreme poverty wage with no benefits.

It's hard to make the big bucks when your productivity is low and you have no skills.

The results are an increase in the profitability of our corporations in the world market

Wouldn't want to do that, eh comrade?

You are eager to stump for corporations that ship US jobs to Mexico and I am eager to prevent a communist revolution down there similar to Cuba and Venezuela because of the horrible working conditions.

Eliminate every low paying job created by an American company in Mexico. Revolution more or less likely?

89 posted on 09/04/2007 5:42:25 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
It's hard to make the big bucks when your productivity is low and you have no skills.

Doesn't look that way to me.


Eliminate every low paying job created by an American company in Mexico. Revolution more or less likely?

Pay workers a better wage so they don't flood the US mainland. Revolution more or less likely?


90 posted on 09/04/2007 6:09:01 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
What is the chart supposed to show? You have a link to the source?

Pay workers a better wage so they don't flood the US mainland.

I already told you that you should do that. So no answer? LOL!

91 posted on 09/04/2007 6:12:37 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
What is the chart supposed to show? You have a link to the source?

Chart shows productivity in automobile manufacturing. Link

I already told you that you should do that. So no answer? LOL!

Yes, I'm aware of your fallback strategy. Don't like the price of gas? Build a refinery, ha ha ha.
92 posted on 09/04/2007 6:30:18 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Wow! Calpacifico agrees, Mexican wages are "stable!"


93 posted on 09/04/2007 6:41:02 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Many are masons as well.


94 posted on 09/04/2007 6:43:58 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777

...and Bilderbergers...


95 posted on 09/04/2007 6:49:47 PM PDT by DoughtyOne ((Victory will never be achieved while defining Conservatism downward, and forsaking its heritage.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

Bump your Bilderberger and raise you a Tri-lateralist.


96 posted on 09/04/2007 6:50:52 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
It's hard to make the big bucks when your productivity is low and you have no skills.

Doesn't look that way to me.

What is the chart supposed to show? You have a link to the source?

Chart shows productivity in automobile manufacturing.

Despite these glowing assessments, labour productivity in assembly as measured in hours per vehicle (HPV) in Mexican assembly plants typically lags the productivity seen in U.S. and Canadian plants, as we have previously noted in Section 2. Although auto workers in Canada and Mexico work a similar number of hours, the hours spent per vehicle are considerably higher in Mexico (on average 74% higher for the Big Three plants in 1999) such that 45% fewer vehicles were produced per worker in Mexico in 1999

I love it when you prove my point. Thanks.

97 posted on 09/04/2007 6:58:55 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
For most of these plants, however, the differences are relatively slight, particularly given the large labour cost differential between Mexico and Canada (and the U.S.). Among the newer or recently remodelled assembly plants with lines of annual capacities of over 100,000 units (DCX Toluca, DCX Saltillo, GM Silao, GM Ramos Arizpe, and Ford Hermosillo) only at DCX Toluca were HPV more than 50% greater than at the most comparable U.S. or Canadian plants. Moreover, the DCX Toluca plant was producing a much wider variety of products than its U.S. counterpart as well as undergoing a major model changeover in 1999, which explains a large part of the difference with U.S. facilities. Similar, although less dramatic, differences in product mix also explain a portion of the differences in HPV between the larger Mexican facilities and their U.S. counterparts. Nonetheless, most of the difference is probably due to the deliberate use of more labour intensive methods of production to take advantage of lower Mexican labour costs. For example, in the bodyshop of its Silao plant, GM is reported to be using only 80 robots, and then only for tasks that are mandated by quality or safety concerns, while its factory in Janesville, Wisconsin uses 600 robots.110 With such low labour costs, it is to be expected that OEMs operating in Mexico will choose to use greater labour per vehicle than in higher labour cost environments, such as Canada and the U.S.

They don't use as many robots in Mexico. Those employees are working hard. Probably harder than you have to work as you type all day and shill for slave labor.
98 posted on 09/04/2007 7:07:58 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
In practice, however, these observed aggregate productivity differences are of little economic significance.

Yes, you can use more, cheap, low productivity labor for the same cost. Like I said before, thanks for proving my point.

Nonetheless, most of the difference is probably due to the deliberate use of more labour intensive methods of production to take advantage of lower Mexican labour costs.

I wonder if the lower labor costs are related to their lower productivity? I'm glad they hire more workers than they need, to prevent the revolution.

Your original point was about sweatshop workers. These auto workers are pretty far from sweatshop workers, don't you think? Or should we not buy cars from Mexico, because it's a "sweatshop region"?

Those employees are working hard.

Harder than you work typing your economic ignorance.

99 posted on 09/04/2007 7:18:32 PM PDT by Toddsterpatriot (Ignorance of the laws of economics is no excuse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: Toddsterpatriot
Yes, you can use more, cheap, low productivity labor for the same cost. Like I said before, thanks for proving my point.

Because they aren't given the same equipment as American workers doing the same job are, as I already pointed out.

I wonder if the lower labor costs are related to their lower productivity?

Go back and reread the part you ignored on purpose.

Your original point was about sweatshop workers. These auto workers are pretty far from sweatshop workers, don't you think?

No. They are sweatshop workers. They are working hard with no robotic equipment for $1.47 and hour with no benefits.

Or should we not buy cars from Mexico, because it's a "sweatshop region"?

No, we should tariff them like crazy until they stop running sweatshops.

Harder than you work typing your economic ignorance.

Let's try the Toddsterpatriot debate method! I bet you'd feel much differently if you worked in one of those Mexican sweatshop car plants. Why don't you go try it for a month, come back, and tell us what you find. Make sure and tell your coworkers how lazy, unskilled, and unproductive they are. I expect you to produce at least as many cars per day as an American worker with American equipment.
100 posted on 09/04/2007 7:48:03 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-112 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson