Pelosi: Either be a Union Plant or be shut down

Post Reply New Topic

I think it's more the general attitude of the south, and because of this more lax approach, the majority of large corporations have opened up shop with middle-class supporting jobs. I would laugh if Mercedes decided to open a manufacturing plant in California or Washington or the state of New York. I don't think it's a good thing but It aint going to happen.

the general attitude of the left in the US is to have labor everywhere, motivated in part by the power it then provides them in election season but more-so by the worker rights and making a fairer more equal system. They would go as far as to equate the US to chinese living standards and calling us the new china because of deregulation and lax labor laws in the south, and how all these big corporations such as VW and BMW are taking advantage of it over places like Washington and California but we are loosing our quality of life for accepting their employment. If they can go as far as equating companies who bring 100,000's of jobs to America directly related to manufacturing, and perhaps a million more or so total from all the OEM's, supplier deliverers, retailer/dealerships, and every industry dependent on them to China for the sake of forcing unionizing

The worse part is that BMW and Honda and VW payout between 30 to 50 bucks an hour(wage & benefits combined). So these jobs that provide decent pay are held hostage by ideology. The non-union plants save 6 dollars an hour on every worker, which can translate into billions in savings. California is clearly scaring business away, and the south is the only part of the country helping to make us a leading export nation and bringing back manufacturing from abroad, as demonstrated by Ford and other companies.

You can't suck and blow, Inuyasha. If the main point of the thread is to take down Pelosi (which is perfectly fair) then your reaction to my first post was, at best, disingenuous.



And there we have the Inuyasha modus operandi in a nutshell. Cull the supporting fact, ignore the substantive material and then present it with a claim to scholarship. In other words, "confirmation bias."



That is a perfectly acceptable point of view. I have no objection to you being a shrill partisan. But I do object when you attempt to make that shrill partisanship appear neutral--or worse, when you engage in specious argument to ignore, gloss over or deny comparable conduct from your fellow travellers.

Ever wonder if Pelosi only says this stuff to troll conservatives?

It looks like someone has been watching Fox News again.

http://nation.foxnews.com/nancy-pelosi/ ... -factories

Here is the correct spin: http://mediamatters.org/research/201110310007

I would say your first post was either ill-informed or disingenious.



Actually it's more of I understand how the private sector works a lot better than you do, it comes from actually having a private sector job where if I wasn't doing my job I would be fired.

If the store I worked at wasn't doing well, it would likely end up being closed down, visagrunt.

Because of that knowledge, I can say with certainty that what that paper was saying was a bunch of BS and spin.






Except I'm not the one being a shrill partisan, if you looked at your entire argument, you would realize your statements wouldn't even pass the smell test.

As someone whom actually has some experience in the private sector, I can tell you that your statements are utterly ridiculous.

If Boeing isn't making a profit they end up having to shut down, it is economics 101.

Really? That's your reply? Were you sticking your tongue out and saying, "Nyah, Nyah!" while you typed it?



While I am a public servant now, that is not the only job that appears on my resumé. I will put my private sector experience up against yours any day of the week. I have experience in professional, management and corporate governance positions in addition to my current work in government. So let's just put that stupid pissing contest aside, because it proves nothing.

At the a more substantive level, though, I note that unless you are privy to the management information from Boeing you are not in a position to say anything with certainty.

However, I do agree with your implication that the Seattle Times has an editorial interest in promoting the economic interests of the State of Washington. To that extent, their article should properly be read with a critical eye. My argument, to the extent that I am propounding one in this thread, is that you seem only to bother exercising criticism when reporting and opinion diverges from your biases and prejudices. You seem content to repeat verbatim words of others that align with your views, wilfully blind to the fact that they are just as much BS and spin as those that oppose your views.



I confess that I am at a bit of a loss here. What is my, "entire argument?" I have made one post pointing out that there is an alternative point of view. In hindsight, I would probably choose different words than, "substandard work force," because that is rather more inflammatory than I meant to be. But beyond that, I have been contenct to leave it to others to reach their own conclusions.

Furthermore, my only political observation is that all politicians, of any party, engage in tailoring their messages. There is nothing in the least partisan about that observation, since I am quite prepared to level the accusation of spin at all parties.

So what (other than an intemperate turn of phrase) doesn't pass the smell test?



Anyone who has actually taken Financial Accounting will be able to tell you that profit is not the only measure of success in a cost/responsibility centre. While long term profitability of the entire enterprise is, of course, critical, the marginal profitability of a single centre can be mitigated by numerous other management factors. Since a large component of the SC plant operations are the manufacture of parts for use internal to the company, the issue of profitability is artificial, because of the vertical supply chain arrangement. It also bears noting that Boeing bought the plant from Vought in 2008 in order to get a larger degree of control over its supply chain problems with the 787 program. Given the circumstances of the 787 program, it's somewhat naïve to suppose that Boeing's motivation was the profitability of this facility.

The question here is not whether or not Boeing will keep the SC plant open--it needs 787 fuselage sections, and it dares not delay deliveries any further (that's an example of one of those factors that goes beyond a cost centre's profitability). The question is where Boeing will open a second line. Problems with the supply chain in general, and the North Charleston facility are well documented (check the Wall Street Journal if you prefer it as a source to the Seattle Times.)

You keep repeating messages that are intended for an audience with a 7 second attention span. Try a little critical thinking for a change, you might surprise yourself.

That still doesn't give you a mandate to lie.


So not only do you say that two wrongs make a right, but I am sure that there is some clear evidence that you simply cannot even take legitimate criticism of the Republican party. People might be critical of Republicans for the right reasons.

A just so fallacy. Simple insults. Doesn't back up his claims. The truth of the matter is that this sentence is highly ironic coming out of Inuyasha's mind.


Uses his job's dynamics to basically claim that he is right. Essentially it's a reverse ad hominem.


Smarmy unwarranted self-importance as demonstrated by the sarcastic emoticon. Is then followed by a just so fallacy. He says visagrunt is wrong because it is.


Reuses the Ad hominem argument, saying that his job means he has experience and thus he is correct. A slide in to argumentum ad verecundiam (argument from authority). Hasn't actually explained why he is right and why visagrunt is wrong. He just says that it's 'absurd' and 'spin'. Not good enough.


Visagrunt never disputed that. Insinuation from his tone that visagrunt did. Frustrating self-righteousness.

Maybe if you had provided an actual argument that wasn't a bunch of spin, I wouldn't have said what I said.



Corporate governance doesn't sound like a private sector position. The fact I already suspected you were a government employee doesn't speak very highly of your experience in the private sector either.



One doesn't have to be privy to that information, to recognize that there is a lot of spin.



I'm glad you can admit that the article needs to be taken with a grain of salt. There is more to it than simple partisan views, my CGT degree was manufacturing graphics as well as Product Data Management. The argument Seattle Times is making is obviously BS because we're talking about a brand new factory in South Carolina, if it wasn't a brand new factory, NLRB would look even more idiotic with their ruling and so blatently in the tank for the Unions, congress would already have defunded NLRB because not even Democrats could have defended NLRB's blatent corruption.



It is a brand new plant that has been open only a few months, no matter how good the workers are and/or management at that plant, there are going to be supply chain issues until they get all the logistics worked out.



I know the difference between retail and manufacturing, thank you kindly. In the case of manufacturing you have to look at the business overall.

Anyways, the location was selected in 2009 if I remember correctly was selected in 2009.



If you're going to claim you have a Wall Street Journal source, I seriously suggest you post it.

I however found another piece of information, that completely destroys your entire argument.

Boeing, the world’s largest aerospace manufacturer, made a bold move Friday, defying the National Labor Relations Board, when it opened a new $750 million assembly plant in South Carolina.

The NLRB is fighting Boeing’s decision to open the second plant for 787 Dreamliner construction in North Charleston, S.C., instead of in Washington state, where the other final assembly plant is located.

The agency argues Boeing is retaliating against workers in Washington state to punish them for past strikes by building the plant in a right-to-work state, where unions are not as prominent.

But Boeing says it will keep the original Washington state plant open and continue to send the majority of its 787 Dreamliner business there. In fact, the company has added more than 2,000 jobs there since the 2009 decision to open a second production plant elsewhere.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -carolina/

They opened the plant on June 10, 2011; this key fact kinda takes a wrecking ball to your entire argument.



If you're going to make blanket accusations, you better be prepared to back it up. I've already established that the plant has been open a little less than 5 months. In that time they kicked out the Union already.

Pelosi is saying the plant should be shut down (essentially because it is non-union), so my title is accurate and truthful. I've further pointed out that Washington Times is being disingenious due to when the plant first opened its doors.

So looks to me that the fact are on my side, not yours.



I've read their criticisms, and quite frankly the overwhelming majority of the criticisms I've seen on this thread are left-wing talking points straight out of the Democrat playbook. Did you ever stop and consider where you got your political opinions from in the first place?

With Democrats running things in big cities did anything really improve for minorities? Answer is no, it did not. Democrats stopped their attacks on African Americans after they realized they could use them as a voting base. Many Democrats arguably want the status quo of African Americans being poor and blaming white people and Republicans for keeping them down (I'm not saying all Democrats are this way).

I grew up in a conservative school district, in Indiana, we had one African American at my elementary and middle school, and nobody treated him as inferior. He was popular, got good grades, did well in sports. Nobody cared what color his skin was.

Yet supposedly if you are to believe the mainstream media, because I'm a conservative and against Obama's socialist policies, if they are to believed, I'm a racist. However, as many people here (if they have a shred of objectivity in them) know perfectly well, that I'm not a racist.

Corporate governance doesn't sound like a private sector position?!? If you hadn't done so before, that statement certainly betrays your ignorance. Corporate governance is the primary function of directors. It is what boards of directors are supposed to spend their time doing.

As for your suspicions about my employment, it doesn't take a genius to click on my profile. The words "public servant" are written there in large, friendly letters.



There is a difference between recognition and certainty. You are perfectly entitled to express your opinion about editorial bias, but you are not entitled to make pronouncements ex cathedra.



To be fair, that's a half truth. Boeing's SC operations are the former operations of Vaughn that were bought out by Boeing in 2008. Boeing has expanded that facility through the addition of a new assembly facility. The supply chain problems were not with new operations the problems were with the fuselage operation that is part of the supply chain for the 787 project.



By all means: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124696971307105465.html



I am still left puzzling about what you think my argument is.

Oh you are most certainly lying here.

You know perfectly well that the decertification vote took place in 2009, before the decision was made about the location for the second assembly location.

The factory that is being targetted for shutdown opened its doors in 2011 though, the fact they expanded to a new location in South Carolina, does not mean the Union gets to have people in unions there by default.

Also you're arguing about a different factory from the one I'm arguing about, which could explain the disconnect.

Since the factory that decertified the Union in 2009 was also in South Carolina, by default the new factory is also not a Union plant.

The factory being targetted by Pelosi, is the new factory. So it looks like we're talking about two different factories.

From such mistakes greater mistakes are made.

I apologize for saying that you were lying, and will happily edit my post if you wish.

No need to edit the posts, I apologize for accusing you as well.

It looks like what we were both being accurate, just we were talking about two different factories, which clears up what you were saying and why it is truthful, and why what I am saying is also truthful.

Republicans want to bring back the supersonic airplane.

I am all over that. Concorde was cool!

(And if you can get the burn:RPK ratio down, theoretically a supersonic transport can be more efficient)