12-12-2014 08:04 AM
350 ... 1011121314
tools
  1. palandri's Avatar
    To stop businesses from shipping jobs overseas is so simply, just cut them off from the U.S. marketplace.

    When Levi left the U.S. they should have banned the import of all Levi jeans. Don't even allow them to have a corporate headquarters here. Give them the boot and make sure the door hits them on the way out. It not isolationism, there are plenty of other companies that make jeans.
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 12:13 AM
  2. Mooncatt's Avatar
    To stop businesses from shipping jobs overseas is so simply, just cut them off from the U.S. marketplace.

    When Levi left the U.S. they should have banned the import of all Levi jeans. Don't even allow them to have a corporate headquarters here. Give them the boot and make sure the door hits them on the way out. It not isolationism, there are plenty of other companies that make jeans.
    So let's beat them with an even bigger stick than we already are instead of some carrots to make them WANT to stay in the U.S. Yeah, that'll make businesses want to flock to our shores.

    And to add insult to injury, I'm guessing existing imports are exempt under your plan and this would only affect companies that are specifically leaving the U.S.? I hope you realize how little sense that would make and the problems it'll cause. You'd either have to allow them to import, or ban all imports to be fair in that situation.
    09-02-2014 12:28 AM
  3. anon8126715's Avatar
    To stop businesses from shipping jobs overseas is so simply, just cut them off from the U.S. marketplace.

    When Levi left the U.S. they should have banned the import of all Levi jeans. Don't even allow them to have a corporate headquarters here. Give them the boot and make sure the door hits them on the way out. It not isolationism, there are plenty of other companies that make jeans.
    I remember a few years ago they had a commercial that was pro-American worker and a bit hypocritical since they didn't make their jeans here.
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 01:13 AM
  4. NoYankees44's Avatar
    3 things happened to cause the fall of the middle class: 1. Global shipping because Much cheaper 2. Other countries with cheaper labor became highly industrialized. 3. The value of our labor plummeted as a result of 1 and 2.

    The only way for us to rise again is by becoming better trained and educated. If you have a job that anyone else can be hired off the street and be trained to do in a week, you should expect no job security and little pay. We need to double down on automation and create the most skilled workers in the world to design, build, and maintain that automation.

    There is no future in forcing employers to pay workers more than the value of their job. The employer will only figure out how to make the workers more expendable. Just as employers have done so for the last 50 years. Making employees more valuable is the only way. Any other path leads to destruction.
    09-02-2014 06:29 AM
  5. NoYankees44's Avatar
    To stop businesses from shipping jobs overseas is so simply, just cut them off from the U.S. marketplace.

    When Levi left the U.S. they should have banned the import of all Levi jeans. Don't even allow them to have a corporate headquarters here. Give them the boot and make sure the door hits them on the way out. It not isolationism, there are plenty of other companies that make jeans.
    I really hope that you are being sarcastic...

    It is one thing to suggest higher import taxes, it is another entirety to suggest only companies that operate and manufacture in the US can sell there. It is quite frankly ridiculous...
    09-02-2014 06:31 AM
  6. palandri's Avatar
    I really hope that you are being sarcastic...

    It is one thing to suggest higher import taxes, it is another entirety to suggest only companies that operate and manufacture in the US can sell there. It is quite frankly ridiculous...
    No I am not being sarcastic and I am not saying only companies that operate and manufacture in the U.S. can sell here. If a company like Levi wants to close all their factories in the U.S. for cheaper labor overseas, then ban their product from the U.S. marketplace and make sure the door hits them on the way out.
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 11:00 AM
  7. NoYankees44's Avatar
    No I am not being sarcastic and I am not saying only companies that operate and manufacture in the U.S. can sell here. If a company like Levi wants to close all their factories in the U.S. for cheaper labor overseas, then ban their product from the U.S. marketplace and make sure the door hits them on the way out.
    So some bureaucrat somewhere looks at a list of arbitrary rules and determines if a company that once manufactured in the US if they are being "Unamerican" and then decides to ban or allow their imports? I am sure that wont be abused in any way. I am also sure it is great incentive for companies that want to bring manufacturing to the US not to.

    Ideas like this will do nothing other than force our economy to shrink. Eventually, companies would have no incentive to operate here at all.

    How about instead of enacting anti-competition legislation, we let consumers decide if they care where Levi operates. If consumers care than much, they will not buy Levi's and Levi will be forced to move back or not operate in the US. EXACT same cause an effect as your solution, but no corruptible government intervention. In fact, that is what we have now. And guess what, the American public apparently does not care, so the point is mute.
    09-02-2014 02:25 PM
  8. anon8126715's Avatar
    i'm not sure if it's naivety, or if it's willful lapping up of the koolaid, but some of you are missing one glaring fact when you talk about "globalization" and all this other nonsense. The FACT is that U.S. companies are seeing RECORD profits. Upper management is seeing obscenely high (and I would say "artificial") compensation while the majority of us aren't even seeing wages that keep up with inflation. Of course as I've stated before, the right wing does a masterful job with its programming and packaging of its brand. Some of you can dream that one day you'll be on top with more wealth than you know what to do with. The rest of us can live in reality and realize that the principles of what America stands for is slowly being devoured by our corporate masters and their greed.
    palandri and A895 like this.
    09-02-2014 02:44 PM
  9. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Reality? Ok, look at the realities of government regulation that has increased the cost of doing business exponentially. They sit back thinking they're doing good by writing more and more regulations, without considering the consequences. Time and again I see examples of that in my industry, which not only impacts wages, but also increases the cost to the end consumer, resulting in more inflation.

    See it's not just a wage issue. If there wasn't so much government interference in everything, prices wouldn't be increasing so fast and wages could better keep up with inflation.
    09-02-2014 03:10 PM
  10. A895's Avatar
    In agree with palandri, if a company wants to outsource labor, then don't let them continue to make record profits off our economy. Continuinally letting them get away with taking away jobs and still make boatloads of cash is like your friend is your boss and they just fired you and they still come around to see you to ask for money and you give it to them.

    The right fails to see that it isn't our laws that are anti business (in fact I would wager we are one of the most business friendly nations, look at how many startups and companies came out of the U.S. this year alone). It is the fact they want to pay as little as possible for labor and make a ton of cash. They can do that other places, but here people actually want to live an actual life with a job, and big business don't want that.

    We need to lock it down with big business and disallow them from selling here in the U.S. and we stop all this damn corporate lobbying. Businesses practically make laws nowadays. Imagine if an actual former CEO became president (hint: Romney).
    palandri likes this.
    09-02-2014 03:13 PM
  11. A895's Avatar
    Reality? Ok, look at the realities of government regulation that has increased the cost of doing business exponentially. They sit back thinking they're doing good by writing more and more regulations, without considering the consequences. Time and again I see examples of that in my industry, which not only impacts wages, but also increases the cost to the end consumer, resulting in more inflation.

    See it's not just a wage issue. If there wasn't so much government interference in everything, prices wouldn't be increasing so fast and wages could better keep up with inflation.
    Let's look at the industry itself before blaming the ol' "gubtment". What laws exactly are affecting the company so badly? Are they making less money because of the laws or are thy using laws as scapegoats so they can get out of paying workers their fair wage. And it is funny considering it affects wages here, but we talk about retail and food industry workers wanting more money, it gets brushed off as people living off the government want more money.
    palandri likes this.
    09-02-2014 04:08 PM
  12. anon8126715's Avatar
    Reality? Ok, look at the realities of government regulation that has increased the cost of doing business exponentially. They sit back thinking they're doing good by writing more and more regulations, without considering the consequences. Time and again I see examples of that in my industry, which not only impacts wages, but also increases the cost to the end consumer, resulting in more inflation.

    See it's not just a wage issue. If there wasn't so much government interference in everything, prices wouldn't be increasing so fast and wages could better keep up with inflation.
    Sure, lets loosen regulation because the trucking industry has such a spotless record of safety violations...lets see in my city alone in the past year, we've had several truck driving crashes where either the driver was asleep (driving more hours than they're supposed to, forging logs, etc), they've had blow outs (sure I guess they're keeping up with their maintenance), or just flat out negligence, but sure lets make it easier for the truck driver to do business without regard for ANYONE else's safety or well being. This is typical of the red koolaid drinkers' mentality, "To hell with everyone else, just let me get rich at the cost of everyone else's safety". You'll get no sympathy from me on your regulations, in fact, I think you need more and they need to be better enforced.
    palandri and A895 like this.
    09-02-2014 04:13 PM
  13. Mooncatt's Avatar
    The right fails to see that it isn't our laws that are anti business (in fact I would wager we are one of the most business friendly nations, look at how many startups and companies came out of the U.S. this year alone).
    That's because startups wouldn't see a benefit in going overseas to do so. That was a pretty naive look at how small businesses work. Also worth noting that the vast majority of them actually fail, and that's in part due to the large cost of entry due to governmental compliance.

    I can also point to a host of EPA (and to a lesser extent, CARB ) regulations that have cost me a total of about two weeks worth of wages in a few months, not counting the losses to my company, thanks to their mandating of emission controls that are unreliable and that no one can seem to fix. Btw, after 4 repair visits, that one particular emissions problem still isn't fixed and I've just learned to deal with it. There's also now class action lawsuits popping up against engine manufacturers for selling "defective" engines (because of said regulations and being unable to properly research). Just think of how much money is lost due to lost productivity, repair costs, and now to litigate these cases in court; then think about all the better uses that money could have went too. Right now I'm on a federally mandated 30 min break because the government thinks they know better than me when I need rest. I dub it the "milk and cookie" break because it feels like I'm back in kindergarten. That's just one small segment of our economy. Tell me again how we're so business friendly?


    ...and we stop all this damn corporate lobbying. Businesses practically make laws nowadays. Imagine if an actual former CEO became president (hint: Romney).
    I can agree with you on the corporate lobbying, just probably for different reasons. As for having a former CEO running the country, at least we'd have someone in the White House that knows how to make a budget. I wouldn't vote for someone for that reason alone, but we do need more people in government that are willing to say no to new/additional spending. It doesn't matter if you think we should spend more or not, the fact is our government debt is increasing uncontrollably. At some point, the math will make the choice for us. If we keep going this route, it'll get to where we can't even pay the interest on existing loans and then we're basically sunk.

    Then again, our government is a reflection of the people. Most people see credit and debt as good things and are more than willing to run right up to their credit limit and then open another charge card. So when we send people to Washington D.C., the biggest voices from the people are "give me more!" Those people don't care about the true cost of their demands and get upset when you try to explain the negative consequences. They just want their special favors and don't care what it costs or how to pay for it. It's not just big business wanting something from government. A million here, a billion there. Pretty soon, we're talking about real money.
    09-02-2014 04:56 PM
  14. NoYankees44's Avatar
    i'm not sure if it's naivety, or if it's willful lapping up of the koolaid, but some of you are missing one glaring fact when you talk about "globalization" and all this other nonsense. The FACT is that U.S. companies are seeing RECORD profits. Upper management is seeing obscenely high (and I would say "artificial") compensation while the majority of us aren't even seeing wages that keep up with inflation. Of course as I've stated before, the right wing does a masterful job with its programming and packaging of its brand. Some of you can dream that one day you'll be on top with more wealth than you know what to do with. The rest of us can live in reality and realize that the principles of what America stands for is slowly being devoured by our corporate masters and their greed.
    The only purpose of a business is to produce profit, and owners pay their CEO's whatever they want. Dont like it? Buy the business and change it. There is not much else to say about it.

    The only way to increase wages across the board is to increase the value of the services provided for those wages. Inflation and other gradual increases aside, you cannot expect for the same service be more valuable for no reason. I am sorry but if you make career shooting bolts or any other medial task that anyone else can do, you have no reason to expect anything in terms on compensation, because someone in China or Mexico will do the same job for a fraction of the cost. The only benefit the company has with you is the cost of the few hours of training and the proximity to an invested location.

    People must become become better educated and more skilled if they want to demand higher wages. Those that collectively bargain usually do so because they bring nothing to the table to individually bargain with. So they must band together and force employers to pay above market value for their labor. Then the employer looks elsewhere for labor that falls in line with the market value.
    09-02-2014 05:10 PM
  15. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Let's look at the industry itself before blaming the ol' "gubtment". What laws exactly are affecting the company so badly? Are they making less money because of the laws or are thy using laws as scapegoats so they can get out of paying workers their fair wage. And it is funny considering it affects wages here, but we talk about retail and food industry workers wanting more money, it gets brushed off as people living off the government want more money.
    I touched on that in my last post, but i didn't see this one until after. I'll elaborate, going back to the trucking industry simply because I know it better than others.

    In the early 2000's, truck engines were relatively durable and easy to fix when something did go wrong. Then the EPA stepped in and first came EGR systems like on cars. The designer eventually said that was about the worst thing you could do to a diesel, but it at least meat the new regs. On top of that, the EPA bumped the compliance date ahead by a year, cutting off the time they had to develop the technology. Even after that date, there were two more tiers of regulations already on the horizon.

    The engine manufacturers couldn't perfect EGR before having to move on to exhaust particulate filters, and then exhaust fluid (yes, that's a real thing now). Each new technology has had growing problems that they can't iron out before being required to move on to the next round of emission regulations. The stats even bear this out showing a loss of reliability year after year. That's added a good $50k or more to the cost of new trucks in just over a decade.

    Now look at repair costs. Before all this, you could completely blow a motor and replace it for $10-15k. That was the most catastrophic thing you could do short of totaling it in an accident. Now? I've seen repair bills over $40k just to ATTEMPT to repair an emissions issue. We're not even talking about the guts of the engine, just the bolt ons for EPA requirements. Some bills have ran over $100k in extreme cases, and one well documented case of $600k when including lost productivity and other related expenses in just two years time.

    So some shops developed excellent ways to remove the emission garbage, giving people dependable engines again and also better fuel economy. So now the EPA is cracking down on them for doing so. There's reports that dealers and shops are now legally required to hold such a truck hostage until the owner pays to have everything put back the way it was.

    So yes, owners of newer trucks are making way less money because of this kind of crap from the government.
    09-02-2014 05:11 PM
  16. A895's Avatar
    That's because startups wouldn't see a benefit in going overseas to do so. That was a pretty naive look at how small businesses work. Also worth noting that the vast majority of them actually fail, and that's in part due to the large cost of entry due to governmental compliance.
    Is that a fact or is this just the old government is at fault line? There are some like Ouya who genuinely made a bad product. Then there are some like Airnb who actually have a good thing going. I even met the dad of the CEO of Airnb, he was super proud of his son, from what he told me.

    I can also point to a host of EPA (and to a lesser extent, CARB) regulations that have cost me a total of about two weeks worth of wages in a few months, not counting the losses to my company, thanks to their mandating of emission controls that are unreliable and that no one can seem to fix. Btw, after 4 repair visits, that one particular emissions problem still isn't fixed and I've just learned to deal with it. There's also now class action lawsuits popping up against engine manufacturers for selling "defective" engines (because of said regulations and being unable to properly research). Just think of how much money is lost due to lost productivity, repair costs, and now to litigate these cases in court; then think about all the better uses that money could have went too. Right now I'm on a federally mandated 30 min break because the government thinks they know better than me when I need rest. I dub it the "milk and cookie" break because it feels like I'm back in kindergarten. That's just one small segment of our economy. Tell me again how we're so business friendly?
    You sound like you are just nitpicking, lol



    I can agree with you on the corporate lobbying, just probably for different reasons. As for having a former CEO running the country, at least we'd have someone in the White House that knows how to make a budget. I wouldn't vote for someone for that reason alone, but we do need more people in government that are willing to say no to new/additional spending. It doesn't matter if you think we should spend more or not, the fact is our government debt is increasing uncontrollably. At some point, the math will make the choice for us. If we keep going this route, it'll get to where we can't even pay the interest on existing loans and then we're basically sunk.
    The thing is debt is what keeps our country moving. The government had the best credit rating for a while until the recession hit. But even still we mange to pay people and run our country, it is the natter of how much debt is acceptable to have and that is what the issue is.

    Then again, our government is a reflection of the people. Most people see credit and debt as good things and are more than willing to run right up to their credit limit and then open another charge card. So when we send people to Washington D.C., the biggest voices from the people are "give me more!" Those people don't care about the true cost of their demands and get upset when you try to explain the negative consequences. They just want their special favors and don't care what it costs or how to pay for it. It's not just big business wanting something from government. A million here, a billion there. Pretty soon, we're talking about real money.
    For me personally I will have debt when I graduate college because of student loams, but as far as credit debt and other debts? I have none, no credit card for me. But I am different like that.
    09-02-2014 05:20 PM
  17. A895's Avatar
    I touched on that in my last post, but i didn't see this one until after. I'll elaborate, going back to the trucking industry simply because I know it better than others.

    In the early 2000's, truck engines were relatively durable and easy to fix when something did go wrong. Then the EPA stepped in and first came EGR systems like on cars. The designer eventually said that was about the worst thing you could do to a diesel, but it at least meat the new regs. On top of that, the EPA bumped the compliance date ahead by a year, cutting off the time they had to develop the technology. Even after that date, there were two more tiers of regulations already on the horizon.

    The engine manufacturers couldn't perfect EGR before having to move on to exhaust particulate filters, and then exhaust fluid (yes, that's a real thing now). Each new technology has had growing problems that they can't iron out before being required to move on to the next round of emission regulations. The stats even bear this out showing a loss of reliability year after year. That's added a good $50k or more to the cost of new trucks in just over a decade.

    Now look at repair costs. Before all this, you could completely blow a motor and replace it for $10-15k. That was the most catastrophic thing you could do short of totaling it in an accident. Now? I've seen repair bills over $40k just to ATTEMPT to repair an emissions issue. We're not even talking about the guts of the engine, just the bolt ons for EPA requirements. Some bills have ran over $100k in extreme cases, and one well documented case of $600k when including lost productivity and other related expenses in just two years time.

    So some shops developed excellent ways to remove the emission garbage, giving people dependable engines again and also better fuel economy. So now the EPA is cracking down on them for doing so. There's reports that dealers and shops are now legally required to hold such a truck hostage until the owner pays to have everything put back the way it was.

    So yes, owners of newer trucks are making way less money because of this kind of crap from the government.
    Sounds like you just have beef with the EPA.
    09-02-2014 05:23 PM
  18. anon8126715's Avatar
    That's because startups wouldn't see a benefit in going overseas to do so. That was a pretty naive look at how small businesses work. Also worth noting that the vast majority of them actually fail, and that's in part due to the large cost of entry due to governmental compliance.

    I can also point to a host of EPA (and to a lesser extent, CARB) regulations that have cost me a total of about two weeks worth of wages in a few months, not counting the losses to my company, thanks to their mandating of emission controls that are unreliable and that no one can seem to fix. Btw, after 4 repair visits, that one particular emissions problem still isn't fixed and I've just learned to deal with it. There's also now class action lawsuits popping up against engine manufacturers for selling "defective" engines (because of said regulations and being unable to properly research). Just think of how much money is lost due to lost productivity, repair costs, and now to litigate these cases in court; then think about all the better uses that money could have went too. Right now I'm on a federally mandated 30 min break because the government thinks they know better than me when I need rest. I dub it the "milk and cookie" break because it feels like I'm back in kindergarten. That's just one small segment of our economy. Tell me again how we're so business friendly?



    I can agree with you on the corporate lobbying, just probably for different reasons. As for having a former CEO running the country, at least we'd have someone in the White House that knows how to make a budget. I wouldn't vote for someone for that reason alone, but we do need more people in government that are willing to say no to new/additional spending. It doesn't matter if you think we should spend more or not, the fact is our government debt is increasing uncontrollably. At some point, the math will make the choice for us. If we keep going this route, it'll get to where we can't even pay the interest on existing loans and then we're basically sunk.

    Then again, our government is a reflection of the people. Most people see credit and debt as good things and are more than willing to run right up to their credit limit and then open another charge card. So when we send people to Washington D.C., the biggest voices from the people are "give me more!" Those people don't care about the true cost of their demands and get upset when you try to explain the negative consequences. They just want their special favors and don't care what it costs or how to pay for it. It's not just big business wanting something from government. A million here, a billion there. Pretty soon, we're talking about real money.
    So what you're saying is to hell with our environment because it's costing you money? Exactly why I have no sympathy for the imposed regulations of big business.
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 05:23 PM
  19. NoYankees44's Avatar
    So what you're saying is to hell with our environment because it's costing you money? Exactly why I have no sympathy for the imposed regulations of big business.
    Regardless of how you feel about the environmental impact, these regulations will increase the cost of operation which will be transferred on to consumers and employees.
    09-02-2014 05:35 PM
  20. palandri's Avatar
    Regardless of how you feel about the environmental impact, these regulations will increase the cost of operation which will be transferred on to consumers and employees.
    What do you want, an extra dollar in your pocket and an early death? or would you rather spend that dollar and live in a cleaner environment?
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 06:14 PM
  21. anon8126715's Avatar
    The only purpose of a business is to produce profit, and owners pay their CEO's whatever they want. Dont like it? Buy the business and change it. There is not much else to say about it.

    The only way to increase wages across the board is to increase the value of the services provided for those wages. Inflation and other gradual increases aside, you cannot expect for the same service be more valuable for no reason. I am sorry but if you make career shooting bolts or any other medial task that anyone else can do, you have no reason to expect anything in terms on compensation, because someone in China or Mexico will do the same job for a fraction of the cost. The only benefit the company has with you is the cost of the few hours of training and the proximity to an invested location.

    People must become become better educated and more skilled if they want to demand higher wages. Those that collectively bargain usually do so because they bring nothing to the table to individually bargain with. So they must band together and force employers to pay above market value for their labor. Then the employer looks elsewhere for labor that falls in line with the market value.
    I know a bunch of people that "shot bolts" for 40+ years. After the industry spits them out via retirement, they're lucky if they can still walk out on their own without the need for any medical procedure. If you told any of these people to their face that they shouldn't expect anything and/or that they're overpaid, you'd be lucky if you didn't need medical attention shortly thereafter.

    Let me ask you and Mooncatt a question, are professional athletes overpaid? If you answer yes, then your previous stance is a load of bull. Because they are being paid for their MARKET VALUE. While I don't compare them to some Tom, ****, and Harry out on the job market, it's a good example of how those in power (owners) will manipulate wages. Despite the fact that their respective leagues make BILLIONS of dollars, they put in place a salary cap. The players know how much they're worth because their counterparts have their salaries made available and their performance is easily tracked. Because of all this, it's easier for a player to command good salaries. In order to combat that form of "Free capitalism", the owners have put in a cap to prevent these players from making the money that their demand has generated. So, if you are all for lower wages in the name of "Capitalism" then you should also be against salary caps. Although I'm willing to bet that you, like a lot of people believe that professional athletes are overpaid.
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 07:51 PM
  22. rews's Avatar
    To stop businesses from shipping jobs overseas is so simply, just cut them off from the U.S. marketplace.

    When Levi left the U.S. they should have banned the import of all Levi jeans. Don't even allow them to have a corporate headquarters here. Give them the boot and make sure the door hits them on the way out. It not isolationism, there are plenty of other companies that make jeans.
    You realize that if this actually became a regularly enforced policy how much that would end up costing to enforce in today's order online market for every single product category? You'd end up having to massively increase the size and scope and infrastructure of border enforcement agencies, postal services, etc etc.

    Not to mention the employees of those agencies. If I was a customs officer and you told me I have to screen for banned company merchandise on TOP of drugs, illegal immigration, prohibited items, etc I'd be like "yeah... you're not paying me nearly enough to care if this guy has a pair of Levi's buddy. Take it up with my union".
    09-02-2014 08:07 PM
  23. anon8126715's Avatar
    You realize that if this actually became a regularly enforced policy how much that would end up costing to enforce in today's order online market for every single product category? You'd end up having to massively increase the size and scope and infrastructure of border enforcement agencies, postal services, etc etc.

    Not to mention the employees of those agencies. If I was a customs officer and you told me I have to screen for banned company merchandise on TOP of drugs, illegal immigration, prohibited items, etc I'd be like "yeah... you're not paying me nearly enough to care if this guy has a pair of Levi's buddy. Take it up with my union".
    They do that now actually, especially some of the trade that comes in from some countries.
    A895 likes this.
    09-02-2014 08:11 PM
  24. rews's Avatar
    They do that now actually, especially some of the trade that comes in from some countries.
    Not to the massive scale his suggestion would entail. He's talking about outright banning products for all the big companies who are tax sheltering off shore, of which there are tons doing so
    09-02-2014 08:13 PM
  25. NoYankees44's Avatar
    What do you want, an extra dollar in your pocket and an early death? or would you rather spend that dollar and live in a cleaner environment?
    Just pointing out that someone to pay for all this environmental regulation. 99 times out of a hundred it is the little guy that is burdened. There is a balance to be struck, but I have never heard an environmental proponent say anything about balance...
    09-02-2014 08:22 PM
350 ... 1011121314

Similar Threads

  1. How do I transfer pix from my Mac to this thing?
    By thebignewt in forum Verizon HTC One
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 01-22-2014, 11:16 AM
  2. How to relock the boot loader and unroot the galaxy nexus.
    By Ridgerunner20 in forum Verizon Galaxy Nexus Rooting, ROM's, and Hack's
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-21-2014, 05:25 AM
  3. Possibly Switching from Verizon to T-Mobile
    By wodehousefan1 in forum General Help and How To
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-20-2014, 01:58 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-18-2014, 02:33 PM
  5. Galaxy Note 3 "Unable to connect to proxy server"
    By Jelly Belly in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 3
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-17-2014, 03:00 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD