Originally Posted by ATCsaidDoWhat

The argument sounds like the ones from the southern lawmakers who wanted to kill the auto industry because of "expensive labor agreements." They conveniently forgot to tell everyone that their pockets were lined with automaker dollars for the tax writeoff's to set up shop in Southern, traditionally non union states. So those plants have no "legacy costs," because they are fairly new, with workforces that get rotated out the back door when they have been there too long and their pay has gone up, or have work related injuries that cost them in terms of disability. In 20 years or less their costs will be as high as the northern, union plants. And they'll look to move somewhere else, greasing more lawmakers palms.

What we're seeing here is what the Japanese electronics industry figured out years ago. When it got too expensive to pay their workers, they set up plants in Malaysia, the Phillipines, and elsewhere. They now rotate the production on an as needed basis, to the plant with the cheapest labor cost.

Your argument is the classic, "I got mine, pull up the ladder." As long as everyone else takes it in the shorts so you can get it cheap, what do you care? Like shopping at WalMart...they buy at discounted rates, requiring producers to cut wages, sell cheap with employees that don't get any benefits and are told to go onto government run, taxpayer funded health care, and they rake in the dough.

Sound familiar? Try this. $99 dollar seats coast to coast for Ma and Pa Kettle to take the whole gang to Disney twice a year. The airline fills seats, but can't make a profit.

So who gives up concessions to keep their jobs?

Boeing is trying to do the same thing.

I wonder if they got offered a chance to hike the Appalachian Trail with the guv' as part of the deal???