Author Topic: GM bringing back 1,350 workers  (Read 4055 times)

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: GM bringing back 1,350 workers
« Reply #75 on: August 20, 2009, 07:28:35 AM »
Please explain then how my statement is incorrect... Apparently your ability to comprehend math must be greater than mine. ::)

I read what the OP posted... That's all.

So yes, you're right... I didn't read the article. I read what was posted. If you're going to post a piece of an article, why not the entire thing?

How does that negate anything I've stated.

Oh right... It doesn't.

I'm  just trying to understand what you're saying. were you suggesting that wages always keep up with inflation?

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: GM bringing back 1,350 workers
« Reply #76 on: August 20, 2009, 04:49:50 PM »
I'm  just trying to understand what you're saying. were you suggesting that wages always keep up with inflation?

No... I don't have that as a fact.

I can however state confidently that in the past 15 years since I've been regularly employed that my wages have in fact kept up with inflation, if not surpassed the inflation curve.

Bindare_Dundat

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12227
  • KILL CENTRAL BANKS, BUY BITCOIN.
Re: GM bringing back 1,350 workers
« Reply #77 on: August 20, 2009, 06:03:03 PM »
No... I don't have that as a fact.

I can however state confidently that in the past 15 years since I've been regularly employed that my wages have in fact kept up with inflation, if not surpassed the inflation curve.

Thats great but the national average isn't. The year is a bit old but it is a trend that happens more often than not.

On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that hourly earnings of production workers - nonmanagement workers ranging from nurses and teachers to hamburger flippers and assembly-line workers - fell 1.1 percent in June, after accounting for inflation. The June drop, the steepest decline since the depths of recession in mid-1991, came after a 0.8 percent fall in real hourly earnings in May.

Coming on top of a 12-minute drop in the average workweek, the decline in the hourly rate last month cut deeply into workers' pay. In June, production workers took home $525.84 a week, on average. After accounting for inflation, this is about $8 less than they were pocketing last January, and is the lowest level of weekly pay since October 2001.



tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: GM bringing back 1,350 workers
« Reply #78 on: August 20, 2009, 10:17:46 PM »
Thats great but the national average isn't. The year is a bit old but it is a trend that happens more often than not.

On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that hourly earnings of production workers - nonmanagement workers ranging from nurses and teachers to hamburger flippers and assembly-line workers - fell 1.1 percent in June, after accounting for inflation. The June drop, the steepest decline since the depths of recession in mid-1991, came after a 0.8 percent fall in real hourly earnings in May.

Coming on top of a 12-minute drop in the average workweek, the decline in the hourly rate last month cut deeply into workers' pay. In June, production workers took home $525.84 a week, on average. After accounting for inflation, this is about $8 less than they were pocketing last January, and is the lowest level of weekly pay since October 2001.




So you're saying I'm lucky... Isn't that what the Republicans care about? Themselves? Why all of a sudden a worry about someone else?

Isn't that a Socialist idea?

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39496
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: GM bringing back 1,350 workers
« Reply #79 on: August 21, 2009, 05:02:23 AM »
So you're saying I'm lucky... Isn't that what the Republicans care about? Themselves? Why all of a sudden a worry about someone else?

Isn't that a Socialist idea?

no, what he is saying is that you are not typical of the average worker.