Re: Bait and Switch by Barbara Ehrenreich



On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:


Straydog wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:


Straydog wrote:

On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:


Straydog wrote:

(see quoted material below)

I seem to recall seeing/reading these questions somewhere (else) but can't
put my finger on it. From all I hear about and read, the laid off white
collar worker is going to be in progressively deeper trouble in the
future and particularly if they are over 40 and even more so if they are
over 50. Its going to be harder to "transition" to anything and the
"requirements" for an interview and job offer will get more restrictive
(just an extrapolation of the present trends). The cry of "we can't find
people" from employers will not include the footnote that defines lockout
characteristics or what to do about it. Around my neighborhood, the people

if anyway the concerned person is unemployed, why can't he accept min
wage for the rest of his life

In a lot of cases, that is exactly what happens. I know many.

if an american is going to work for the least possible wage for his
productivity/qualification without expecting a periodic raise -why will
the employer hire an illegal or even worse sponsor a work permit
holder? Do you see any financial benefit to the employer in that
situation???

I want to know why you are constantly focused only on "financial benefit
to the employer" and you have constantly ignored all of the human rights
issues I have brought up over the last year. You even don't even, yet,
recognize _law_ as a construction by society for fairness.

and keep out the illegal/

The illegals are hired for even less money, and they take it.

work permit
holder?

These guys are legal, what can I do? Nothing but complain.

Is there something that entitles one to a decent wage or a
periodic raise?

If you like _your_ shitty society where 25% of all the people (the Dalits)
are just kicked into the sewer along with the other ***, then you can say
what you just said.

the shitty society I live in -is composed of humans as normal and as
qualified as people in the US. So what makes our country shitty and
yours prosperous?

Why should you care? You have been here and didn't like it, so you went
back home and now I presume you are happy, again. I have no problem with
anyone who comes and stays (as long as it is by legal means) or anyone who
comes and prefers to go back home.

but you said below you do not have the power to close all visas -else
you would have.

You didn't answer my question, above.

Being that _our_ society actually tries to spread the wealth just a little
bit, spread the political power just a little bit, I can understand why
people would not give up the little bit that they have. Of course, in the
Indian mindset such as yours, I guess your line of thinking is that people
farther down the pecking order should just roll over and die when bad
things happen.


Your guess is just a guess based on a theory of convenience and devoid
of evidence.

Nah, based on the "evidence" you have been presenting here for the last
year. You just want all Americans who lose their jobs to just roll over
and die. Just like Dalits. Or just become an "American Dalit" so they can

No -I want them to offer to work for min wage rarher than lose their
jobs.

Why do you think you can tell them how they should work?

be kicked around by those who are not.

I am saying it is market forces that decide wages, not a
bill of rights.

And, I told you we have a Bill of Rights. And, a minimum wage law.


I am talking of a sumptous salary -not minimum wage. If every american
(esp in IT) agreed to work for min wage, offshoring will lose its
steam. Is something holding them back from agreeing to work for min
wage and retain their jobs?

Why do you want everyone but the rich to work at minimum wage?

There is nothing that ENTITLES one to a sumptous
salary.

All the high caste Indians think so, and all the executives think so.

and where will they money to pay them come from? their own imagination?
The investor decides how much to pay -not the employee.

Why do you think the rich can say "I want to make tons of money and I'm going to get it and let other people make less than before"

You need to bring value to the table for the employer to hire
you -and if you don't , he doesn't OWE you a job.

Why do the employers (the executives) give themselves big paychecks?
Because they think they OWE themselves that money.


It doesn't mean that workers should roll over and die -but it means
they should strive to price their services competitively rather than
expect employers to hire parasites to fulfill their social obligations.

All this says, is that most people should eventually end up working for
rich people for free. No!

Another bait-and-switch. I am saying americans should work for min wage
or something more than that by way of which your services are priced
competitively -not work for free.

No. And, its not bait-and-switch.

Will you ever get to answering me why
good-for-nothings whose only qualification is US citizenship deserve 6
figure salaries? I guess the answer (about as reasonable as it can ever
get coming from you) is that the CEO who is equally incompetent makes a
7-figure salary.

Ah,....progress. So, now that you have your answer, now tell me why the executive can get away with it (as far as you are concerned) but its OK for YOU to expect underlings to work continuously for less and less money every day.

Employers just look for manpower that provides more
value for money -and if you are unemployed coz you are ambitious -that
is something for which you shouldn't be blaming others. [I am talking
of jobs in your own country, where exchange rate doesn't matter].

I'm glad we have a generally much higher standard of living than you have
in your country, and I don't care if you don't care about your Dalits but
I think even their situation needs to improve. I believe in human rights,
you don't.


I know you are glad and aspire for an even better living std (the
american way) - but then how did you end up with a higher std of living
without being more productive or without having the resources to
sustain your living std?

Our whold society worked together.

yeah -Im sure but for outsourcing to India and H1Bs and illegals from
mexico -you would have all been sitting in paradise by now.

Back in the 1950s-1960s we were. After the 70s, our poor people got poorer. And, a lot of well off people got poorer, too.

If the fountain of wealth to provide all good things in life does
exist in the US, why doesn't the US govt pay off all of its debt
instead of paying interest over it aka servicing its debt?

That is a banking question with an answer like the one I told you about
the fact that banks make much more money than our printing presses. And,
you can read the bank books yourself. I know you don't know this, but I
do.

Cmon -Im saying there is nothing in terms of natural resources or
productivity to finance your splurge and it is not a banking question.
Its about printing fake money at the US mint to empower americans to
splurge till the bluff is called.

Here is your "Kamal at the Bargaining Table"

Boss: "Hey, Kamal, this guy came to me yesterday, says he will work for 50 cents less an hour than you"

Kamal: "Honorable Boss, I will work for one dollar less"

next day

Boss: "Hey, Kamal, that guy will work for 2 dollars less"

Kamal: "Honorable, Vernerable Boss, I will work for 3 dollars less"

next day

Boss: "Hey, Kamal, that guy will work for one penny per hour"

Kamal: "Honorable, Venerable, Praiseworthy Boss, I will work for one Rupee per hour"

etc, etc.


regards
-kamal


.

Loading