RW> Only for those who are looking in the wrong places. You're not going 
RW> to get rich if you plan to work in a factory for 20 years and retire 
RW> with SS and a union pension plan.
RB> Okay, but SOMEONE has to work those jobs. See what I mean?
RB> Someone will always  have to be the janitor, or the
RB> McDonald's worker, or whatever - and another  thing, there
That's correct but these are the jobs for those who
have very little job skills, IOW entrance level jobs.
When I worked at a fast food restaurant about 75% of
the people there were working their first job.  They
worked there for a couple of months and then they left
for a better job.  Also 90+% of the evening workers
were high school kids who were just working for
spending money.  Even though they didn't think of it
they were learning things that would help them in the
future.
RB> will ALWAYS be someone who will be working that job, because
RB> there 
RB> will always be a lower class. So it doesn't really matter
Again you are correct.  By definition there will always
be someone below the average.  Even if the government
set the minimum wage to $20/hr there would be people
who were making more and the $20/hr folks would be in
the lower class.
One thing you don't seem to realize is some people are
more able than others.  I had a neighbor who is. .
.well lets just say he's at the lower end of the IQ
scale.  He is a janitor at a local factory and does a
very good job.  There is no way that he could do any
thing else at the plant because he just doesn't have
the mental ability.  The only way he gets his
janitorial job done correctly is by keeping everything
wrote down on index cards he keeps in his pocket.
There is no way that Tim will or could be a foreman or
manager at the plant.  Therefore there is no way he'll
ever make as much as a foreman or manager.
RB> that you think saving 
RB> your money is the answer, because the society YOU support
RB> creates poverty. 
No, the society I support creates wealth.  The money I
and my friends invest allows businesses to open and
offer more jobs which creates a demand for workers
which forces the standard of living up.
The society you support creates poverty because it says
that making money is bad and we all should share
equally.  This tells the people with the drive and
smarts it isn't worth the effort to work hard because
he isn't going to get anything out of it.
Why in the world would someone spend 20+ years in
school to become a doctor if he is going to make the
same amount of money as the guy who dropped out after
the 8th grade?  Why in the world would someone work 12-
18 hrs a day to harvest a crop of wheat when he isn't
going to get any more then the guy who lets half of his
crop rot in the field?
RW> When a company can pay a good (for them) wage in a foreign country, 
RW> pay for transporting the goods and still sell it cheeper and make a 
RW> profit than if they produce it in the US you have to know that the 
RB> This is nothing but western arrogance. If the Nike
RB> sweatshops in Vietnam are  filled with employees, it is not
RB> because they are getting a good wage, it is  because they
RB> finally have the chance to have SOME wage. Of course, in the
So if Nike wasn't there these people would be making
NOTHING right?  Therefore Nike is helping them by
allowing them to make money to feed themselves and
their families.  See even you can see the logic.
RB> noticed,  but most Third World countries HATE the United
RB> States, burning our flag and  robbing tourists. It is the
And so are some second and first world countries how
are we dragging them down?  I know people who hate
Canada and Canadians.  I think it has to do with
Canada's treatment of Quebec.  They have went to
rallies and the like but I don't think they have robbed
any tourist.  Now does the US hate Canada?
RB> U$A and its corporations that have supported Third  World
RB> dictatorships, Third World death squads, insurrections of 
RB> popularly-elected governments, etc. 
And we have supported people who were trying to over
through governments of dictators and death squads.  We
have spent American blood to make sure that other
countries had the freedom to elect socialist
governments.  Are we perfect?  No.  But just like when
police let a small criminal go so they can stop a
bigger criminal there are times where you have to look
at the larger good.
Do you think South Vietnam is better off today under
the communist than in the 60's under a semi-free
government?  Do you think Cambodia is better off
because the US "gave peace a chance" and didn't try to
stop the Khmer Rouge?  Do you think we should have
stayed out of Korea in the 50's?
                      Remember:  Freedom isn't Free!
--- timEd-B11
---------------