Raleigh CF bike recall

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Michael Press of Possum Lodge wrote:
>>> In article
>>> <[email protected]>
>>> ,
>>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Aug 11, 11:28 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>> In practice, though there are all sorts of dirty tricks
>>>>>>> in the history of labor representation battles, in the
>>>>>>> past few decades the vast majority of pressure has been
>>>>>>> from employers on employees at or before the election
>>>>>>> stage (including closing plants that vote for unions).
>>>>>>> So pretending that this is some vast conspiracy to coerce
>>>>>>> lots of people into unions is just noise....
>>>>>> Hey, if people do not like working in an unionized work place, they
>>>>>> are free to quit and find another job. The FREE MARKET will provide
>>>>>> non-union jobs if there is a demand for them, right?
>>>>> The point is that a workplace workforce should be able to vote yay or nay
>>>>> without peer- much less goon-pressure.
>>>> I'm glad to hear you agree that we need tough
>>>> enforcement of the right to organize without
>>>> coercion from either employer or organizer. Let's
>>>> get together and write our Congressmen demanding
>>>> the NLRB wake up and start enforcing penalties
>>>> that mean something.
>>>>
>>>> Solidarity forever,
>>> Or until somebody stabs somebody else in the back.
>>>
>>> Unions are great in theory. A brotherhood of workers.
>>> What we get is two masters. Typically when the company
>>> arrays itself against the workers we get the prisoner's
>>> dilemma. Some workers will always betray other workers.
>>>
>>> Best is that the brotherhood remain leaderless,
>>> anonymous, and shut-the-hell-up.
>> What about a co-operative system where the workers (and not a state
>> bureaucracy) owned the businesses? Therefore, their profits would depend
>> on their efforts, and they would earn a fair share of the profit from
>> their labor?
>
> Is this serious, irony, or troll bait?
> The song is over one-hundred-fifty years old.

If you have to ask, you obviously don't understand.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

DI (who?) anonymously snipes:
> "Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Oh please. There are plenty of people who get high wage jobs handed to
>> them through nepotism and favoritism.
>
> You sound like you've been passed over a few times, but judging from what
> you post on this list, I think there's a reason you were passed over for
> better jobs, it's a personality thing.

Obviously clueless.

>>> Now, those jobs go to illegals, and the middle class kids expect to be
>>> coddled by their parents until they enter the white collar work force.
>>> People don't know how to work anymore.-- Jay Beattie.
>> Yeah, and the minimum wage jobs used to pay twice what they do now.
>
> Nonsense.

Your inflation calculator broken?

>> I hope you don't have permanent injuries from these jobs, as so many do.
>
> Getting your hands dirty is not a permanent injury, you shouldn't fear it so
> much.

If you consider having trouble sleeping due to pain to be "getting ones
hands dirty", you truly are beyond the pale.

BTW, it has been over 2 hours and 58 minutes since I last got my hands
dirty at work.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

DI WHO? wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>>>> .
>>>>> How stupid are you? Do you understand the concept of inflation and
>>>>> actual purchasing power?
>>>> Not stupid enough to be a Dem.
>>> That really says it all. Pride in factual ignorance as long as you
>>> don't have to change your political views. It's the very definition
>>> of reactionary.
>> Heh. You misspelt "stupidity"
>>
>> E.P.
>>
>
> Where?

WHOOOOOOOOOSH!

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Jay Beattie wrote:
>>> There are grade school educated longshoremen making close to $300K
>>> a year in LA (with pay guarantees and OT). Compare that to a family
>>> practice physician with 10-12 years of post HS education and
>>> student loans making $140K.
>> So what makes a physician intrinsically more valuable than a
>> longshoreman who has been working longer in his career? Tradition?
>> Conventional wisdom? Bad handwriting?
>
> LOL. If you want to know who's important in the world, imagine the
> consequences of life without them. Imagine life without professional
> athletes. Now imagine live without garbage haulers. Generally speaking
> income and actual importance of one's job tend to be inversely
> correlated. If you want to make a lot of money, get a job that is
> intrinsically useless. ;-)...

Funny that the right talks "family values" so much, but they think being
a parent is nearly worthless (hence the abolishment of AFDC) [1].

[1] Yes, I know this was under Bill Clinton, which simply goes to prove
that his administration was right-wing except of the issues of sexual
morality, where it was mainstream liberal.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Michael Press wrote:
> In article
> <[email protected]>,
> Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> There aren't any unions for doctors or lawyers, AFAIK. I vaguely recall
>> that it may actually be illegal for doctors to unionize. The American
>> Medical Association fills some of the role of a union but does not do
>> collective bargaining.
>
> They set the rates and buy congress-critters.

The AMA also disrupts the free market by artificially limiting the
supply of physicians.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

DI (who?) anonymously snipes:
> ...Just curious how much electricity is imported from the
> rag-heads?

None.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

Ed Pirrero wrote:
> On Aug 12, 9:11 pm, "Bill Sornson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> A Muzi wrote:
>>>> RonSonic <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> It's a China problem. If you contract to buy a thing and find that
>>>>> the product has been made with inadequate or dangerous materials it
>>>>> is the supplier's fault.
>>> Ed Pirrero wrote:
>>>> That was one of the reasons, when I was in the market for a Ti
>>>> hardtail MTB, I did not go to Habanero.
>>>> There were other, smaller, reasons as well. But the very fact that
>>>> the frames were made in the PRC scared the hell out of me. I
>>>> wouldn't build a Habanero frame up to a bike if it were given to me.
>>>> Worse, just try and go China-free in your shopping. Almost
>>>> impossible.
>>>> P.S. Found a nice, used Marin Ti frame for less than a new Habanero
>>>> frame. And made in Taiwan, by people who actually care about
>>>> bicycles, rather than merely money.
>>> I can't say anything about motivation in PRC - maybe Mark tosses out
>>> frames which do not meet inspection standards - but we've sold
>>> Habaneros for a good long while with _not one single quality issue_.
>>> Habaneros arrive dependably dead straight and, unusual today, threaded
>>> and faced properly. That's more than most Ti frames can claim. We're
>>> doing quite a few BB re-cuts on new Ti frames purchased elsewhere this
>>> year. Not so on Habaneros. So save your $100 at purchase. We'll take
>>> that to get you outboard-BB working.
>> What Ed didn't have the honesty to say was that he black-listed Mark's
>> frames due to his (Mark's) politics. Says more about him (Eddie Pea) than
>> it does Mark.
>
> Uh, Bill? I made my call long before I knew Mark's politics in depth.

You will never convince certain people on rec.bicycles.tech of that, and
they will call you a liar if you state otherwise.

> But it was part of my decision-making - the rabid spewing, not the
> flavor. If some left-winger did the same thing, it would also color
> my purchasing decisions.

I question anyone who appear to back a party rather than an ideology.
Similarly, those who can not find ANY fault with a particular politician.

> So before you shove your foot any further in your mouth, at least have
> the decency to get your facts straight. (I won't hold my breath for
> that to happen...)

Good plan.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[[email protected]]

On Aug 13, 7:17 am, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There aren't any unions for doctors or lawyers, AFAIK. I vaguely recall
> that it may actually be illegal for doctors to unionize. The American
> Medical Association fills some of the role of a union but does not do
> collective bargaining.

There are doctors that are unionized. This has presumably
increased with the rise of HMOs and hospital comglomerates,
since there are more centralized employers of doctors (and more
healthcare executives dedicated to reducing doctors' job
satisfaction to a level traditionally associated with hourly
employees.
I'm not taking a pot shot at all HMO/hospital execs, but there are
some that really seem egregious.) See for ex,
http://www.aafp.org/fpm/990100fm/21.html

Legal Aid lawyers in New York are unionized. Again this only
happens when there's a large central employer, which is even
rarer for lawyers than doctors. Also, it is often easier to
organize at a governmental or quasi-governmental entity.
Another example of white-collar unions is that professors
and/or graduate teaching assistants at some universities
are organized (again, more so at state universities).

In general, the US law is that employees in non-supervisory
roles may organize. Thus, if an institution's professors or
doctors are trying to unionize, the institution's administration
will argue that they play a large role in the management and
direction of the institution and should be declared supervisors
(like middle-managers). This is generally the only time that
an institution's administration will argue that its employees
are vital deciders of policy, but hey, it's the thought that counts.

Ben

 

[Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:03:13 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> No one works for the minimum wage, except a few part time jobs. You
>> Dems have taken care of that with many welfare programs, earned income
>> credit, free cell phones, food stamps, child care cash, housing assistance,
>> free gas for cars, etc, etc.
>
> Rant on please. Rant on.
>
> I'd love you to use your full name too. Not that anyone here will
> bother you offline, but rather to signify pride in your beliefs.

I always wonder why some right-wingers are so shy when it comes to
standing behind their beliefs? It is not like they would get persecuted
for voicing them (unless they believe the Commies in the Black UN
Helicopters [TM] are coming to take over any day).

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition"

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

 

[[email protected]]

On Aug 13, 8:11 pm, Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Michael Press <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Tim McNamara <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > There aren't any unions for doctors or lawyers, AFAIK. I vaguely
> > > recall that it may actually be illegal for doctors to unionize.
> > > The American Medical Association fills some of the role of a union
> > > but does not do collective bargaining.
>
> > They set the rates and buy congress-critters.
>
> They don't actually set the rates, if by that you mean the cost of
> health care services. There are two countervailing forces: the setting
> of a "cash price" for services which is done by beancounters, and the
> setting of the maximum price insurance companies will pay which is set
> by other beancounters. Doctors have the choice of accepting the
> reimbursement rate as set by the insurance company or declining to be a
> provider. If you don't have health care, you pay the full cash rate
> which can be twice as high as what insurance companies pay (or you
> default on the bill and everybody else picks up the tab sooner or
> later).
>
> The AMA certainly does spend a lot of money lobbying Congress(es) at the
> federal and state level. The AMA acts like a guild rather than a union.

Dear Tim,

A rather powerful guild:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0025-7079(196410%2F12)2%3A4%3C244%3ATAMAAT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-D

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

 

[Jay Beattie]

On Aug 13, 6:30 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:20:52 -0700, Jay Beattie
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Aug 13, 12:26 pm, Andrew Price <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:16:34 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
>
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >is the longshoreman thing common? Are they making $300K year on
> >> >$30+/hour?
>
> >> I doubt it, as there aren't enough hours in a year for them to reach
> >> $300K at $30 per hour, even working round the clock, 7 days a week...
>
> >Seehttp://tinyurl.com/2phjlz Several walking bosses were approaching
> >$400K. You don't understand wage guarantees. Read the CBA, and it
> >will become clear how a longshoreman can "work" eight hours in one
> >hour. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> I guess I'll have to look through the 20+ pages of charts to see if it
> answers the question I asked - is that longshoreman thing common?

The info is on document page 63. Longshore employment is dwindling in
most ports, and it is hard in many ports to rack up the hours
necessary to move up from being a "casual" longshoreman to a
registered longshoreman. Once you are a registered A man, then the
work is more regular and lucrative. Note the average wages in So Cal
-- well over $100K for an A man. Clerks make even more, and the work
is lighter.-- Jay Beattie.

 

[Ed Pirrero]

On Aug 13, 7:03 pm, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in messagenews:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:48:09 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>news:[email protected]...
> >>> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:54:31 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>.
> >>> How stupid are you? Do you understand the concept of inflation and
> >>> actual purchasing power?
>
> >>Not stupid enough to be a Dem.
>
> > That really says it all. Pride in factual ignorance as long as you
> > don't have to change your political views. It's the very definition
> > of reactionary.
> > --
> > JT
>
> Did you ever think I just may think it's not the Federal Government's job to
> tell a business how much they should or should not pay a person for doing a
> job?

Exactly. Nor how old you have to be before you can not be chained to
the machinery any longer, nor how long a work week should be, nor how
safe or unsafe a workplace may be - nor should the feds regulate in
any way how a business may dispose of waste, label a product, or any
other such thing that might interfere with maximizing return to
shareholders.

After all, if someone gets hurt, or is an indentured servant to a
company, they can always move to Canada, right?

Why is where you draw the line at regulation any more valid than where
Tom or Tim draws the line?

E.P.

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:22:52 -0700, Jay Beattie
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Aug 13, 6:30 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:20:52 -0700, Jay Beattie
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >On Aug 13, 12:26 pm, Andrew Price <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:16:34 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
>>
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >is the longshoreman thing common? Are they making $300K year on
>> >> >$30+/hour?
>>
>> >> I doubt it, as there aren't enough hours in a year for them to reach
>> >> $300K at $30 per hour, even working round the clock, 7 days a week...
>>
>> >Seehttp://tinyurl.com/2phjlz Several walking bosses were approaching
>> >$400K. You don't understand wage guarantees. Read the CBA, and it
>> >will become clear how a longshoreman can "work" eight hours in one
>> >hour. -- Jay Beattie.
>>
>> I guess I'll have to look through the 20+ pages of charts to see if it
>> answers the question I asked - is that longshoreman thing common?
>
>The info is on document page 63

Ten people making $300K or more/year? That's it? And it took asking
twice to get that out of you.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[DI]

"Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Aug 13, 7:03 pm, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> messagenews:[email protected]...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:48:09 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >>"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>news:[email protected]...
>> >>> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:54:31 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>.
>> >>> How stupid are you? Do you understand the concept of inflation and
>> >>> actual purchasing power?
>>
>> >>Not stupid enough to be a Dem.
>>
>> > That really says it all. Pride in factual ignorance as long as you
>> > don't have to change your political views. It's the very definition
>> > of reactionary.
>> > --
>> > JT
>>
>> Did you ever think I just may think it's not the Federal Government's job
>> to
>> tell a business how much they should or should not pay a person for doing
>> a
>> job?
>
> Exactly. Nor how old you have to be before you can not be chained to
> the machinery any longer, nor how long a work week should be, nor how
> safe or unsafe a workplace may be - nor should the feds regulate in
> any way how a business may dispose of waste, label a product, or any
> other such thing that might interfere with maximizing return to
> shareholders.
>
> After all, if someone gets hurt, or is an indentured servant to a
> company, they can always move to Canada, right?
>
> Why is where you draw the line at regulation any more valid than where
> Tom or Tim draws the line?
>
> E.P.
>
Because the Federal Bureaucrats are the most inefficient group of bungling
morons in existence, regulation should be done at a local level where
citizens would have more control over it.

 

[Ed Pirrero]

On Aug 14, 4:39 am, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > On Aug 13, 7:03 pm, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> "John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in
> >> messagenews:[email protected]...
>
> >> > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 19:48:09 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >>"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> >>news:[email protected]...
> >> >>> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:54:31 -0500, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >>.
> >> >>> How stupid are you? Do you understand the concept of inflation and
> >> >>> actual purchasing power?
>
> >> >>Not stupid enough to be a Dem.
>
> >> > That really says it all. Pride in factual ignorance as long as you
> >> > don't have to change your political views. It's the very definition
> >> > of reactionary.
> >> > --
> >> > JT
>
> >> Did you ever think I just may think it's not the Federal Government's job
> >> to
> >> tell a business how much they should or should not pay a person for doing
> >> a
> >> job?
>
> > Exactly. Nor how old you have to be before you can not be chained to
> > the machinery any longer, nor how long a work week should be, nor how
> > safe or unsafe a workplace may be - nor should the feds regulate in
> > any way how a business may dispose of waste, label a product, or any
> > other such thing that might interfere with maximizing return to
> > shareholders.
>
> > After all, if someone gets hurt, or is an indentured servant to a
> > company, they can always move to Canada, right?
>
> > Why is where you draw the line at regulation any more valid than where
> > Tom or Tim draws the line?
>
> > E.P.
>
> Because the Federal Bureaucrats are the most inefficient group of bungling
> morons in existence, regulation should be done at a local level where
> citizens would have more control over it.

Especially in the South, where those pesky black folks are overrunning
the place, and now those damn hispanics.

Yeah, local regulation works for some stuff, but not all. Your
sweeping over-generalization of the state of (in)ability of the feds
only makes you look like a fool. Or, more of a fool.

E.P.

 

[Ed Pirrero]

On Aug 13, 7:37 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Tim McNamara wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Jay Beattie wrote:
> >>> There are grade school educated longshoremen making close to $300K
> >>> a year in LA (with pay guarantees and OT). Compare that to a family
> >>> practice physician with 10-12 years of post HS education and
> >>> student loans making $140K.
> >> So what makes a physician intrinsically more valuable than a
> >> longshoreman who has been working longer in his career? Tradition?
> >> Conventional wisdom? Bad handwriting?
>
> > LOL. If you want to know who's important in the world, imagine the
> > consequences of life without them. Imagine life without professional
> > athletes. Now imagine live without garbage haulers. Generally speaking
> > income and actual importance of one's job tend to be inversely
> > correlated. If you want to make a lot of money, get a job that is
> > intrinsically useless. ;-)...
>
> Funny that the right talks "family values" so much, but they think being
> a parent is nearly worthless (hence the abolishment of AFDC) [1].
>
> [1] Yes, I know this was under Bill Clinton, which simply goes to prove
> that his administration was right-wing except of the issues of sexual
> morality, where it was mainstream liberal.

Have you forgotten the sexual peccedilloes of some of the GOP folks in
D.C.? And the famousness of Gingrich and Guiliani for their serial
marriages?

Please. The "family values" thing is pure canard and propaganda.
Only an idiot would fall for that rhetoric.

E.P.

 

[Jay Beattie]

On Aug 14, 4:24 am, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 20:22:52 -0700, Jay Beattie
>
>
>
>
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Aug 13, 6:30 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <[email protected]>
> >wrote:
> >> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 18:20:52 -0700, Jay Beattie
>
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >On Aug 13, 12:26 pm, Andrew Price <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:16:34 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
>
> >> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> >is the longshoreman thing common? Are they making $300K year on
> >> >> >$30+/hour?
>
> >> >> I doubt it, as there aren't enough hours in a year for them to reach
> >> >> $300K at $30 per hour, even working round the clock, 7 days a week...
>
> >> >Seehttp://tinyurl.com/2phjlzSeveral walking bosses were approaching
> >> >$400K. You don't understand wage guarantees. Read the CBA, and it
> >> >will become clear how a longshoreman can "work" eight hours in one
> >> >hour. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> >> I guess I'll have to look through the 20+ pages of charts to see if it
> >> answers the question I asked - is that longshoreman thing common?
>
> >The info is on document page 63
>
> Ten people making $300K or more/year? That's it? And it took asking
> twice to get that out of you.

Is everything a conspiracy to you JT? I never said everybody and
their brother was making nearly $300K. I said there were some people
who were -- and that was based on my knowledge of particular workers
in Long Beach and without the help of the PMA info that I cited. That
info shows I was right -- and that info only refers to west coast
ports and not NJ, NY and many other huge ports in the east or on the
Gulf. You also ignore the dozens of people making well over $200K and
nearly $300K (my original statement was "close to" $300K). You only
focus on the "over $300K" -- and some "close to" $400K. You also
ignore the overall pay scale for bosses and the AVERAGE pay of $210K.
That is for doing work that is less hard than being a construction
superintendent. Clerks make an average of $163K for doing work that
could be handled by a highschooler. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[Jay Beattie]

On Aug 13, 6:49 pm, "Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Jay Beattie wrote:
> > On Aug 13, 12:26 pm, Andrew Price <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:16:34 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
>
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> is the longshoreman thing common? Are they making $300K year on
> >>> $30+/hour?
> >> I doubt it, as there aren't enough hours in a year for them to reach
> >> $300K at $30 per hour, even working round the clock, 7 days a week...
>
> > Seehttp://tinyurl.com/2phjlz Several walking bosses were approaching
> > $400K. You don't understand wage guarantees. Read the CBA, and it
> > will become clear how a longshoreman can "work" eight hours in one
> > hour. -- Jay Beattie.
>
> So it is not just lawyers that overcharge for their time?
>
> Many of us do the opposite (including some bicycle mechanics who
> undercharge for their labor).

Do you work for free? I do. I am expected to. I even do free work
for bicycle causes. See e.g. Bicycle Transp. Alliance, Inc. v. City of
Portland, By and Through 133 Or.App. 422, 891 P.2d 692, BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE v. DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND
DEVELOPMENT, LUBA Nos. 92-213(Remanded), 92-214, and 92-215.

Also, my rate is low, and it is set by the market. It is not set
through extortion and the fear of walk out, shut down, slow down, etc.
It is not set by the government or in combination with other firms. If
a client does not like my rate or work, they go elsewhere. If I lie on
my bills, I lose my client and my ticket to practice.

If I don't bill and collect, I don't eat. Try running your own
business some time. You will then understand what it means to be an
employer. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[DI]

"Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Yeah, local regulation works for some stuff, but not all. Your
> sweeping over-generalization of the state of (in)ability of the feds
> only makes you look like a fool. Or, more of a fool.
>
> E.P.
>

State of inability of the feds? Want to buy a FEMA trailer? It comes with
a free bag of 2-year old ice that's been across the country a few times in a
truck. Of course you will have to pay a gas guzzler tax on the tow
vehicle, just don't tow it over a bridge on the interstate. Maybe you
could take it to the border and fill it with illegals, if caught you can
claim discrimination & testify against the border guards and will be given a
free no questions asked pass across the border. Yes Sir, the Feds do thing
right.

 

[Ed Pirrero]

On Aug 14, 11:33 am, "DI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Ed Pirrero" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > Yeah, local regulation works for some stuff, but not all. Your
> > sweeping over-generalization of the state of (in)ability of the feds
> > only makes you look like a fool. Or, more of a fool.
>
> > E.P.
>
> State of inability of the feds? Want to buy a FEMA trailer? It comes with
> a free bag of 2-year old ice that's been across the country a few times in a
> truck. Of course you will have to pay a gas guzzler tax on the tow
> vehicle, just don't tow it over a bridge on the interstate. Maybe you
> could take it to the border and fill it with illegals, if caught you can
> claim discrimination & testify against the border guards and will be given a
> free no questions asked pass across the border. Yes Sir, the Feds do thing
> right.

Like people in general, they goof.

Unfortunately, folks like yourself expect them to be perfect, for
free.

Or, alternatively, regulate *the other guy*, but not me.

And sometimes, really stupid people can hold both opinions at the same
time.

Hmmm....

E.P.