Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Mexican truckers finally to enter USA

Page 3 of 3 [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Previous topic | Next topic

Gedrene
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Jul 2011
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,725

21 Oct 2011, 4:59 am

ruveyn wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
The right wing believes that truckers must compete with cheaper Mexican labor.


That happens to be true. American truckers will not lower their wages voluntarily.

Most truckers are members of the criminal Teamsters Union.

ruveyn


Want to prove this?


You are right. About one third of the truck drivers are Teamster Union members. There are about 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. and 2/3 of them are not union, but independent truckers.

In any case they will not voluntarily settle for lower wages. They will do everything they can within the law (and perhaps outside the law) to keep Mexican truckers out of the U.S.

It is simple: Cheap labor vs expensive labor. Nothing new.

ruveyn

No. Tell me why the Teamsters are criminals.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

21 Oct 2011, 7:38 am

Gedrene wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Gedrene wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
androbot2084 wrote:
The right wing believes that truckers must compete with cheaper Mexican labor.


That happens to be true. American truckers will not lower their wages voluntarily.

Most truckers are members of the criminal Teamsters Union.

ruveyn


Want to prove this?


You are right. About one third of the truck drivers are Teamster Union members. There are about 3.5 million truck drivers in the U.S. and 2/3 of them are not union, but independent truckers.

In any case they will not voluntarily settle for lower wages. They will do everything they can within the law (and perhaps outside the law) to keep Mexican truckers out of the U.S.

It is simple: Cheap labor vs expensive labor. Nothing new.

ruveyn

No. Tell me why the Teamsters are criminals.



Jimmy Hoffa and Jimmy Hoffa Jr. and Dave Beck. All criminals. How many labor unions work in such a way that the president of the Union doesn't retire. Rather he is buried in concrete.

The Teamsers and the Mafia go back a long way together.

ruveyn



blauSamstag
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2011
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,026

21 Oct 2011, 9:15 am

Inuyasha wrote:

Nope, I'm saying when they get back to Mexico the amount of money they have left after the expenses (while poverty level in the US) would actually be middle class in Mexico because the US dollar is worth so much more.


You seem to be making an assumption about how well their employers will pay them.

But ok, whatever.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

21 Oct 2011, 11:44 am

Inuyasha wrote:
Nope, I'm saying when they get back to Mexico the amount of money they have left after the expenses (while poverty level in the US) would actually be middle class in Mexico because the US dollar is worth so much more.


That's entirely irrelevant. The proper measure is not relative currency value, but rather the standard of living on a PPP basis.

So, where do you stand on this, Inuyasha? If you are consistent with your avowed political stripe, then you should be at the front rank of the cheerleaders.


_________________
--James


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

21 Oct 2011, 11:50 am

pandabear wrote:
That is a good reason either for your state to go with No Fault Auto Insurance (like Michigan), or for you to get some Uninsured Motorist protection.


All states have uninsured motorist protection on policies. The problem is that states with "no fault" rules have insane costs for coverage as YOUR policy pays regardless of fault and that means no matter how good a driver you are, you still get treated as if you are a bad driver. I grew up in Florida which had/has "no fault" insurance laws. Auto insurance was insane.

visagrunt wrote:
But even if these assertions are true, then why did you agree to this element of the definition, in the first place? As the negotiating party who was holding all of the chips, one can be reasonably certain that there is no provision of NAFTA that was forced upon the United States.


Do some research into the history behind NAFTA. THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DID NOT WANT IT. The elites in government did. They negotiated the terms and I can assure you that the impact on the average citizen was NOT a primary concern.