mnealtx 0 #126 August 19, 2008 QuoteIt benefits Home Depot because day laborers + materials = one stop shopping for yard work, and that increases their business. Disagree - customers are going to go to Home Depot to get their supplies regardless of whether or not there's day laborers there. QuoteIt also benefits them because if you get a day laborer to help you load, that's one less employee Home Depot has to have helping you. Disagree - HD isn't going to fire the stock boy over it - just as they don't fire the stock boy with Joe and John buy materials and load up themselves.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #127 August 19, 2008 Ah, so you're in full agreement with me. Glad to hear it. OK, next thread. This soup bone's all boiled out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #128 August 19, 2008 QuoteAh, so you're in full agreement with me. Glad to hear it. OK, next thread. This soup bone's all boiled out. Full agreement? Hardly.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #129 August 19, 2008 >Disagree - customers are going to go to Home Depot to get their >supplies regardless of whether or not there's day laborers there. People go specifically to stores that have day laborers. I know several people who have gone to the Chula Vista Home Depot specifically because they can get someone to plant the bushes they just bought. >HD isn't going to fire the stock boy over it . . . No one said anything about "firing the stock boy." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #130 August 20, 2008 Quote>Disagree - customers are going to go to Home Depot to get their >supplies regardless of whether or not there's day laborers there. People go specifically to stores that have day laborers. I know several people who have gone to the Chula Vista Home Depot specifically because they can get someone to plant the bushes they just bought. Ok - so you know people that have. Another poll could probably find people that went to other HD's just so they didn't have to 'run the gauntlet'. Quote>HD isn't going to fire the stock boy over it . . . No one said anything about "firing the stock boy." No, that's true - but the stock boy is going to get paid whether he's stocking shelves or helping customers load supplies, so your point is moot.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #131 August 20, 2008 QuoteHD isn't going to fire the stock boy You're confusing this with "humping the cabana boy." Sick fuck. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #132 August 20, 2008 > but the stock boy is going to get paid whether he's stocking shelves or >helping customers load supplies. Correct. And if he's stocking shelves, and someone else is helping the customer load supplies - that's one less employee they need. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #133 August 20, 2008 Quote Quote HD isn't going to fire the stock boy You're confusing this with "humping the cabana boy." Sick fuck. Smartass!!!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #134 August 20, 2008 Quote> but the stock boy is going to get paid whether he's stocking shelves or >helping customers load supplies. Correct. And if he's stocking shelves, and someone else is helping the customer load supplies - that's one less employee they need. And that other guy that's "not needed" will be stocking shelves in HIS section or helping customers in the store.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #135 August 20, 2008 >And that other guy that's "not needed" will be stocking shelves in HIS >section or helping customers in the store. Nope. They won't be hiring the other guy; he's not needed. You only need so many people to run a store, and reducing the need for employees saves them money. Case in point. Most Home Depots now have automated checkout lanes, where one cashier watches over four checkout kiosks. They did that to save money, and you can bet that the three "replaced" cashiers are not stocking shelves or helping customers. If they couldn't replace them with the machines, they wouldn't have spent the $80K per checkout kiosk. That's true whether the labor is replaced by a checkout kiosk or a day laborer, and is basic business common sense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #136 August 20, 2008 QuoteWe are letting this country go to the highest bidder. That's capitalism at work.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #137 August 20, 2008 Quotewhether the labor is replaced by a checkout kiosk or a day laborer, and is basic business common sense. It's a secondary / tertiary responsibility, not a primary one - unless Home Depot has started hiring people JUST to help customers load purchases. They aren't going to fire a stocker because there's someone out in the parking lot helping customers load any more than they would if Joe and Jane Sixpack loaded their own supplies.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #138 August 20, 2008 >It's a secondary / tertiary responsibility, not a primary one. Correct. It is still a responsibility, a task that employees take on. As with any such responsibility, the management of the store must ensure a workforce adequate to deal with such responsibilities. Surely you have managed people enough to realize this. >They aren't going to fire a stocker because there's someone out in the >parking lot helping customers load any more than they would if Joe and >Jane Sixpack loaded their own supplies. Once again, NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT FIRING A STOCKER. Enough with the strawmen already. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #139 August 20, 2008 QuoteOnce again, NO ONE SAID ANYTHING ABOUT FIRING A STOCKER. Enough with the strawmen already. Bill - it's YOUR strawman - you're the one that keeps saying that they won't need as many employees - I'm disagreeing.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #140 August 20, 2008 >Bill - it's YOUR strawman No, I never claimed anyone would have to be fired. Every business sets their workforce by what their needs for labor are, and generally this is done without firing anyone. Again, I am sure you have managed people enough to understand both why this is and how it is accomplished. Indeed, I am pretty sure you understand the issue pretty well and are now just arguing for the sake of arguing - so have a good night. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #141 August 20, 2008 While I see your point as you have *now*, explained it, your post only said 'they wouldn't need as many people'. Not being able to read your mind, I took your words at face value and that was the point I argued against.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #142 August 20, 2008 If Americans refused to hire illegals, illegals would have no incentive to be there in the first place. Lay the blame where it's due.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #144 August 20, 2008 QuoteLay the blame where it's due. Pretty simple - Blame the employers for hiring illegally against the law. Blame the illegals for breaking residency laws. 2 things, 2 places for blame - for every illegal arrested for working without legal approval, there should be a mirrored action against the employer. But I don't see taking justice on one party only (either way). (Your argument is no better than "if the illegals wouldn't take those jobs, then the employers wouldn't have opportunity to hire them.....") ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #145 August 20, 2008 QuoteBINGO Nope, it's not the gambling industry. Guess again. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #146 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteWe are letting this country go to the highest bidder. That's capitalism at work. I don't know about you but, I call it Bull-Shit! Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #147 August 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteWe are letting this country go to the highest bidder. That's capitalism at work. I don't know about you but, I call it Bull-Shit! Chuck Do you deny that it's happening? Check how much US debt is held by China, EU nations, etc. Walk through WalMart and see how much "Made in the USA" stuff you can find. Foreign owners of US Treasury Securities (April 2008) Nation billions of dollars Japan 592.2 China, Mainland 502 United Kingdom 251.4 Oil Exporters 153.9 Brazil 149.5 Carib Bnkng Cntrs 115.4 Luxembourg 84.8 Hong Kong 63.1 Russia 60.2 Norway 45.3 Germany 44 Taiwan 42.6 Switzerland 42.5 Korea 40.5 Mexico 38 Singapore 33.3 Turkey 31.1 Thailand 27.9 Canada 24 Ireland 18.5 Netherlands 15.5 Sweden 13.1 Egypt 12.7 Belgium 12.5 Poland 12.5 Italy 10.6 India 10.5 All Other 154.2 Grand Total 2601.8... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #148 August 21, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWe are letting this country go to the highest bidder. That's capitalism at work. I don't know about you but, I call it Bull-Shit! Chuck Do you deny that it's happening? Check how much US debt is held by China, EU nations, etc. Walk through WalMart and see how much "Made in the USA" stuff you can find. Foreign owners of US Treasury Securities (April 2008) Nation billions of dollars Japan 592.2 China, Mainland 502 United Kingdom 251.4 Oil Exporters 153.9 Brazil 149.5 Carib Bnkng Cntrs 115.4 Luxembourg 84.8 Hong Kong 63.1 Russia 60.2 Norway 45.3 Germany 44 Taiwan 42.6 Switzerland 42.5 Korea 40.5 Mexico 38 Singapore 33.3 Turkey 31.1 Thailand 27.9 Canada 24 Ireland 18.5 Netherlands 15.5 Sweden 13.1 Egypt 12.7 Belgium 12.5 Poland 12.5 Italy 10.6 India 10.5 All Other 154.2 Grand Total 2601.8 No, I am not denying it! What I am talking about is 'the selling of America'! Foreign interests are buying-up our ranch lands, our wine country and our farm lands. Not to mention 'big businesses' and anything else they can buy that is this country. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #149 August 21, 2008 QuoteWhat I am talking about is 'the selling of America'! Foreign interests are buying-up our ranch lands, our wine country and our farm lands. Not to mention 'big businesses' and anything else they can buy that is this country. That's been happening for DECADES....doesn't make it right, just pointing out the fact.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #150 August 21, 2008 QuoteQuoteWhat I am talking about is 'the selling of America'! Foreign interests are buying-up our ranch lands, our wine country and our farm lands. Not to mention 'big businesses' and anything else they can buy that is this country. That's been happening for DECADES....doesn't make it right, just pointing out the fact. Oh yeah! I first heard of it in the early 70's. I guess, when someone flashes the big bucks, someone else is going to give in. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
