|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 13, 2023 19:54:43 GMT -8
A better term. Back in the 1990s, I had a conversation in the American Club with several females somewhat younger than myself. The subject was women in the workplace and what they contributed and earned. In short, they all observed that young females had to work much harder than young males due to the fact that their superiors were always concerned that the young women would have children. The worry was that all the hard work and training and planning which a company would invest in a woman would go down the tubes once she got pregnant. The ladies also opined if a female did take off time to have a child, she would have to work just that much harder to prove herself again. These women believed that they had a more difficult time getting hired, but even after getting a job they would have difficulty getting a promotion with its increased salary due to the possibility of pregancy and motherhood. I recall telling them that if their thoughts were correct, then I as a smart businessman would be going out of my way to hire smart, ambitious young women. They would be cheaper, harder working and more appreciative/loyal to me for hiring them. Considering the fact that most/all businesses have a reasonably high turnover of employees, I didn't see a huge difference between a female leaving me after 3 to 5 years, because she got pregnant, or a male leaving me because he got another offer. Therefore, it seemed to me it would be foolish not to hire females in this situation. I would be getting more for less. The girls all agreed with my reasoning. I should note that they all understood me when I pointed out that it is logical for a boss to consider the possibility of an employee getting pregnant after the company invested a lot of time and effort in training her. They didn't object to my point. The only reason I didn't see things the way many employers did was probably because I was a bit more cynical and would take advantages of circumstances which might help the business. I should say that I respected each of these women and thought they were all very clever. One of them, closer to my age, was married to the head of a large multi-national company's subsidiary in Singapore. He was probably 10-15 years older than she. I thought she was particularly intelligent and tough. Furthermore, she was a real stunner as regards looks. I can't recall what she did, but she had been in business. Sometime later we were again talking about something to do with men and women and as an aside she remarked that I was the most intelligent man she had ever met. I was flattered, but noted that I was only the most intelligent "man" she had met.  |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 13, 2023 20:50:37 GMT -8
All that you say makes me think what a pain-in-the-ass hiring women has become. There is going to be that never-ending search for the bogeyman of "disparate income." And the only way to prove that there is no sexism being committed against women is to favor them.
Thus look at who is attending college by percentages of sex. This is woven throughout our culture. Women are being favored at the expense of men.
Thus my point is, if I (some nobody with a small business) knows this, then those more ruthless and skilled in Big Business knows it too. And thus you can be very sure that it's not just squeamishness regarding environmental policies that is sending so much work to China and other countries. It's a great way to avoid the trap of feminism, blackism, homoism, Weirdoism, and especially the maleducation-produced Stupidism.
Why hire a bunch of whiners, ingrates, and trouble-makers if you can ship it to China and get better quality and prices in the bargain? This will never be added as one of the yuge costs we pay because of feminism. But I certainly recognize it as such.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 13, 2023 21:25:36 GMT -8
I forgot to give you this:  |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 14, 2023 9:58:48 GMT -8
While I am sure the various points you mention contributed to companies moving to China, I doubt that they were the main reasons. Having lived in Hongkong from 1985-1991, I saw two main motivating factors for the flight to China.
1. Everyone assumed that China was a huge, untapped new market which would be enormously profitable. The thought of selling chewing gum, toilet paper or Coke to such a market was dizzying to companies.
2. The average wage of a worker in China was something like US$1 per day. That was a number company accountants understood and wanted to make hay with.
I am not so sure about the quality of Chinese products. A friend who lives in Hongkong, and I, had this discussion last year. We both agreed that in the 1980s, one could buy household appliances and such which were made in Japan and these would last for years. Today, Chinese products have replaced many of the Japanese ones and the Chinese products do not tend to last as long as the Japanese.
It has been so long since TVs or such things were made in the USA that I don't know how to compare them with those of other nations. I will say that "white goods" i.e. washing machines, refrigerators and the like were made in the USA long after other goods were produced overseas. We only bought GE or Whirlpool for that reason. I suspect that things have changed in that area as well.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 14, 2023 11:39:59 GMT -8
Well, I'm sure cheaper labor in China has much to do with it. I wouldn't put the economic changes wrought by feminism as the primary cause by any means. But I think it's a contributing cause.
Like I had mentioned reading earlier. Apparently at some point Apple had tried to build a factory in America for making their products. But (and the specifics were vague) they couldn't make this go. The implication, as I remember it, was it was nearly impossible to assemble a qualified and productive workforce. Labor costs are a factor. But I think the reality of the relative unemployability of the American worker is being swept under the carpet in these discussions.
Certainly all I've ever heard from every business owner I've talked to is how hard it is to get people to show up for work regularly. Most workers are geared toward extracting the maximum amount of benefits. It's just the Slobocracy come to full realization.
So I do think these reasons – the difficulty of obtaining and managing the average Snowflake worker – has contributing greatly to the flow of jobs overseas. Apple was ready and willing to pay higher wages. But they just couldn't make a factory work in America using American labor.
What I do also know, and you may have mentioned this, is that there is a deep manufacturing infrastructure now in China. If you need some specialty nut, bolts, screw, or glue sourced, you'll find it there in a highly timely manner. Or if you need something made from scratch, they make it easy to do there. That apparently is not the case at all in the United States where it is a nightmare apparently to innovate regarding manufacturing.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 14, 2023 13:12:31 GMT -8
Back in the late 1970s or early 1980s, Apple had some sort of light manufacturing line down the street from my parents' home. I believe it was on Marsh Lane in Carrollton. As I recall, it was there only a few years. Shortly thereafter, Apple moved a part of its manufacturing to Ireland, both for reasons of wages and taxes.
I believe we have had this discussion before, but I believe American businesses and politicians have given up on about 30% of American workers. No doubt these workers are a product of a rotten education system and the general moral rot spreading throughout our country. But instead of seriously trying to stop the rot and thereby help the whole country, the elites import cheap third-world workers and build manufacturing facilities overseas.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 14, 2023 14:01:39 GMT -8
And that speaks to my point which generally is: No one wants to be the new President of Argentina and begin to shovel out the Augean Stables.
If you are a low, mid-range, or top-level executive in a company, are you going to take on feminism, the Progressive indoctrination centers (aka "public schools"), socialism, Democrat victim ideology, etc.? All of that is always in the background in terms of "stopping the rot and helping the whole country." It is precisely why good workers are hard to come by.
What they rationally do (although it might not be the most moral thing) is take the path of least resistance. There's no way any one company, no matter how large, can fix all the things that Progressivism, socialism, and Big Government have broken. So, yeah, I would outsource my stuff to India or China in a heartbeat. What is the alternative?
When even the politicians can't or won't try to fix things, what chance has Mid-Level Manager Joe?
|
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Dec 14, 2023 17:37:09 GMT -8
Certainly all I've ever heard from every business owner I've talked to is how hard it is to get people to show up for work regularly. Over the years in various business I have hired and fired at least 1000 people, male and female. Managers, directors, and line staff. In the ten years before I retired I gave the same new employee lecture to everyone. I said, "this is a pretty good job and we pay a fair wage. I want you to understand that it is important you show up for work, or call ASAP if sick. We have a liberial sick leave policy but if it is abused, it is cause for immediat termination. A no call/no show is cause for immediate termination. The job you are being hired to do belongs to the company and not you. If you can't or won't accept that just leave now and save everyone money and time." Every year it was necessary to demonstrate that policy to someone who thought they were "owed" a job. One semester when I took over a unit that had been badly run. If an employee did not show for work on Monday I checked the booking photos at the police jail. I fired three in one day. By far the most common was people who just didn't come to work. Seldom a call, or notice just a kiss off and gone. One of the advantages of a right to work state is everyone is an "at will" employee. Note employee not Marxist "worker" |
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Dec 14, 2023 17:43:34 GMT -8
President of Argentina and begin to shovel out the Augean Stables. Same reason no one wants to POTUS. The crap in the Augean Stables is going to take more then diverting a river to clean up. Argentina has a long history of corruption and the US is just catching up to their level. They had Peron and Evita and we had Bill and Hillary. The similarities are striking. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 15, 2023 18:12:02 GMT -8
I finally watched the entirety of that 2-1/2 hour anti-feminist Rachel Wilson video. I really struggle with the erudite reasonableness of Rachel. In my mind while watching this, I'm hurling "fucktards" and "c-words" at the screen. But in her chirpy, upbeat manner, Rachel stabs feminism in the heart without so much as a word that rhymes with runt.
What's funny (and credit to him, of course, for interviewing her) is watching the guy interviewer peg the namby-pamby meter at times. He (like many guys) seems to be living in fear of saying something controversial or forceful...all in the context of both of them talking about how guys have been feminized. Physician heal thyself, and all that. It's actually funny to see him squirm and "Don't-get-me-wrong" around saying anything that would trigger a feminist.
It's certainly not worth your time watching all that. And you might wonder why I would. Well, I wanted to see what someone who had done a lot of research thought about feminism. She says zero that contradicts what I've been saying, although Rachel fills in some nice details, many of which I wasn't aware of.
So when I hurl a c-word at the feminists, just know it's shorthand for everything Rachel said in that 2-1/2 hour interview.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 16, 2023 10:17:42 GMT -8
Did she have any sensible and realistic suggestions as to how to roll back feminism?
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 16, 2023 16:53:07 GMT -8
Yes. She wants to get the message out to women that they've been sold a bill of goods and, especially, that's it's completely okay to want to raise children yourself instead of sending them off to strangers in some daycare mill. She makes the point (in her own case) that raising children isn't the end of a woman's career. As she is doing, after the childrem are raised you have several productive decades to do what you want. In her case, it's picking up this anti-feminist cause and writing books.
Nothing she says (apart from some interesting details here and there) are news to us. She says much the same thing in her own words, particularly that women have been mind-fucked by feminism to the point that simply choosing the option to be a mother makes a lot of women uncomfortable because it's been so demonized. And if they took that route, they would feel socially isolated.
I would say that the more that women hear from Rachel, the more they will realize that, indeed, they have been mind-fucked and that's it's more than okay to (wait for it) be a normal woman.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 17, 2023 15:17:53 GMT -8
Like I said, nothing in that Rachel Wilson interview contradicted anything I've said, even if she didn't go as far as I said in terms of solutions or in laying of blame.
But she says three outstanding things...things I've only heard from my own lips or those of family or friends:
1) The idea that women will run the world better than men is preposterous. Women are some of the most nasty, cruel, and petty creatures that exist (a rough paraphrasing). My additional take (she seems to concur to some degree) is that it is ludicrous to judge the actions of men without putting it in context of what women (wives) want or expect of their men. They damn well expect protection, to to blame men for all wars is ludicrous. Women share the blame. And as we see with the ugly women of Hamas and their supporters, they are more than happy for their men to be wolves if they can also enjoy the material gains.
2) Women can't help but fall for the date-rape drug called the Democrat Party. My words. Her words, more or less, are that women have a hard time seeing through bamboozlers. I couldn't agree more.
3) Women are plotters and naggers by trade. My younger brother brought this point to me years ago. Rachel's version is that women will tend to throw shit at men just to see if they will jump through the hoops. They do this either consciously or unconsciously. But they have more respect for the men who don't jump through their hoops and less for those who automatically do. You can see how confused men can get when they play exclusively by the rules of feminists. Even feminists will dislike them if they play by their rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Dec 17, 2023 18:17:00 GMT -8
Maybe this is the reason so many females fall for the "thuggish" type who treats them badly.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Dec 17, 2023 18:53:16 GMT -8
That seems reasonable. Another maxim is that women love the "bad boy." I think a lot of this is instinctive. Surely the "bad boy" is going to be better at protecting them and getting ahead in the world. Or so goes the theory.
And although some women ostensibly go with the low-testosterone soy-boy, reports are that they are not happy with them. I doubt these guys are particularly happy either. And I would imagine that they're a bit confused.
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 3, 2024 16:53:31 GMT -8
I thought Brad would appreciate this video. This entitled, stupid bitch would likely get her ass shot off if she tried this in Texas. Trespassing and theft. No big deal |
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 5, 2024 17:03:21 GMT -8
An example of how stupid modern college-educated American women can be. College is the experience She is twenty-four years old and apparently believes she should be getting offers for jobs paying $100,000-200,000 p.a. |
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 5, 2024 20:03:08 GMT -8
Somebody with a supposed marketing degree...ranting in some chintzy social-media video about how she can't get a job. That's irony. If she was good at marketing, this would not be her avenue for advancement. Something tells me that DEI is the only thing that can get her a job because I doubt that her interviewers are impressed.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 12,239
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Apr 11, 2024 18:39:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Apr 11, 2024 19:13:13 GMT -8
I have re-posted these pieces from ST once or twice since I wrote the original articles. I think they increasingly bear repeating.
We don’t need no stinkin’ marriage
by Kung Fu Zu 6/26/14
I agree that we should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it is a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. . . . Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there, because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change, and again, I don’t think it should exist.
So says Maria Alexandrovna Gessen, commonly known as Masha Gessen, born in Russia, but a dual citizen of both Russia and the United States. In 2012, she was appointed director of the Russian service of Radio Liberty, an institution similar tothe old Radio Free Europe, which is financed by the U.S. government. Thank you President Obama.
Conservatives owe Masha a vote of thanks as she is one of the few progressive barbarians who speak honestly about their desire to destroy marriage. Most would rather continue lying about their intentions.
Only a progressive lunatic intellectual or Libertarian anarchist could favor the demise of marriage. A rational person only has to use common sense to know that the breakdown of the family contributes to the breakdown of society. But if there are doubters who require “scientific” data to be convinced of this fact, I refer them to the fact that child abuse is higher in families where the biological father and mother do not live together and poverty is higher in “families” where the biological father and mother do not live together. There are numerous other social indicators which confirm children do better within a family consisting of the biological mother and father.
But of course, these are small matters when compared to an adult’s whims. Self expression and gratification are the be and end all of an ever growing number of people so, get used to it!
__________________________________________________
We don’t need no stinkin’ marriage Part II
by Kung Fu Zu 6/28/14
In case anyone believes the lunacy spouted by Masha Gessen regarding the destruction of marriage is something new, I think the following two paragraphs, taken from Wikipedia, will be enlightening:
Kollontai's views on the role of marriage and the family under Communism were arguably more influential on today's society than her advocacy of "free love." Kollontai believed that, like the state, the family unit would wither away once the second stage of communism became a reality. She viewed marriage and traditional families as legacies of the oppressive, property-rights-based, egoist past. Under Communism, both men and women would work for, and be supported by, society, not their families. Similarly, their children would be wards of, and reared
basically by society.
Kollontai admonished men and women to discard their nostalgia for traditional family life. "The worker-mother must learn not to differentiate between yours and mine; she must remember that there are only our children, the children of Russia’s communist workers." However, she also praised maternal attachment: "Communist society will take upon itself all the duties involved in the education of the child, but the joys of parenthood will not be taken away from those who are capable of appreciating them."
Alexandra Kollontia was a woman born into a wealthy family during the early 1870’s. Her father was a Cossack General. She was given an excellent education and consorted with the Russian “intelligentsia” of the time. (Never forget the word “intelligentsia” was first used by Russian intellectuals to describe themselves as opposed to the rest of society.) Alexandra joined the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party before it split into the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks. She decided to cast her lot with Lenin and the Bolsheviks. Once the Bolsheviks came to power, Kollontia set up a “Women’s Bureau” and later served as the Soviet ambassador to several countries.
Kollontai was an archetypical intellectual radical of her time and her desire to destroy the family was not a new idea even then. As Kollontai makes perfectly clear, the Left’s goal is for the State to be our parent. Procreation will simply become a political duty to the all powerful state. Children will belong to society not their parents. I find this idea particularly disturbing as we all know that if a child is everybody’s, it is effectively nobody’s.
It should be clear to anyone with a bit of common sense or an ounce of honesty that the destruction of our traditional society is the real goal behind such madness as same sex marriage. No doubt, there are some Candides aka Libertarians who have bought the specious “equality” argument and who have not considered the ramifications of homosexual marriage. But thinking people should be under no such illusions. The abomination of homosexual marriage has been nurtured and guided by progressive Vandals with a clear intent of killing our culture and making slaves of us all. __________________________________________________
It is a shame that Kollontai was not smothered in her crib.
Note how quickly our society has degenerated since the imposition of queer marriage. Now the perverts, deviants, malcontents, self-loathing humanity haters have brought us to the point of many accepting the mental illness called transgenderism. This should not surprise anyone who has been paying attention.
I am more convinced than ever that Marxists, communists, progressives.... whatever you want to call them are virtually all sociopaths, psychopaths, paranoids, sadists or megalomaniacs. Perhaps some mixture of these pathologies. They have the urge to control everyone else. Their publicly espoused goals of making the world better for humanity are nothing but a ruse for the simple minded. They just want to lord over and control everyone, plus leech off of the labor of others.
I warned of this over ten years back. I know how Cassandra must have felt.
|
|
