Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kali-forn-ya Kats

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by sir shovelhands View Post
    Lol, because I said "Chinese" immigrants? Yeah, kind of hard to describe them otherwise...

    But it was you who felt it important to make the distinction that they were people "who fled their s-hole country". Why is that?

    Because the state of the country they came from is irrelevant, as it doesn't counter my point.

    The point: the transcontinental railroad was built in 6 years because we had labor that could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now.

    The fact that they were immigrants however, is important to my point. In those days you could pay immigrants less than citizens. The Chinese immigrants, for example, were paid up to 50% less than whites for the same work.



    That's not the definition of "the going rate"...

    "the going rate": the usual amount of money that people are paying for something.

    https://www.macmillandictionary.com/...the-going-rate

    The chinese were offered less than whites for the same work, which by definition, makes it less than the going rate.

    As for why they accepted those wages? It should be obvious: unskilled labor is just about the only choice for those who don't speak English, especially those who weren't white in the 1800's. So while the railroad didn't have a gun to their head, they knew exactly how few options they had.



    Strawman. Please quote me where I implied this.



    Did I say it wasn't voluntary? None of these arguments you're making have anything to do with my point.

    The transcontinental railroad was built in 6 years because we had labor that could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now.

    If you're going to rebut that, please do so.

    Never said otherwise.

    Strawman. I've made no attempt to litigate the past, however mightily you defend it against the strawmen you've built. I've only made this point (once again):
    the transcontinental railroad was built in 6 years because we had labor that could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now.
    I agree that the railroad was built in 6 years because we had labor that could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now. Guess what, people in the 1980's, 90's 00's and so on could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now. What is your point?

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Artos View Post
      Read 'Fly Boys' if you want to see how we used to get things done...we had fighter planes go from design to combat in months. Our bomber that ruled the sky was like less than 2 years & I think the original design test fuselage was made in three different locations & then buttoned up?? It was amazing the next gear we went into after Pearl Harbor. This was without email, fax or computers.

      Good article.
      Hoover damb too

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by LWC View Post
        I agree that the railroad was built in 6 years because we had labor that could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now. Guess what, people in the 1980's, 90's 00's and so on could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now.
        Had you bothered looking, you'd have found that the difference between average hours worked in the 80s/90s/00s/today varies by about 1 hour per week. So, they weren't really working harder back then.

        And you'd have also found that real (as in inflation adjusted) wages basically haven't moved since the 70's, meaning they weren't being paid less in the 80s/90s/00s.

        Originally posted by LWC View Post
        What is your point?
        My point should have been clear from my first post, but I'll re-type it one more time for you.

        Part of the OP's quote stated "does anyone believe that contemporary Americans could build another transcontinental railroad in six years?" And I responded as to why it wouldn't be possible today.

        It seems you're looking for something deeper. Sorry, there's nothing. No secret message, no hidden meaning.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by batmaninja View Post
          the transcontinental railroad was built in 6 years because we had labor that could be worked harder and for less money than is legally possible now.

          How many construction companies today do you think have illegal aliens on their payroll, making less than "the going rate"?
          Quite a lot. Was there a follow up question?

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by sir shovelhands View Post
            Had you bothered looking, you'd have found that the difference between average hours worked in the 80s/90s/00s/today varies by about 1 hour per week. So, they weren't really working harder back then.

            And you'd have also found that real (as in inflation adjusted) wages basically haven't moved since the 70's, meaning they weren't being paid less in the 80s/90s/00s.
            Had you bothered to read what you quoted, I said nothing about hours worked. I said the workers were worked harder. If you think people work harder today than they did 40 years ago, then we will just disagree.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by LWC View Post
              Had you bothered to read what you quoted, I said nothing about hours worked. I said the workers were worked harder. If you think people work harder today than they did 40 years ago, then we will just disagree.
              Way to move those goalposts to try and make the scale of work only based upon subjective intangibles. Why bother with quantifiable things like hours worked or productivity?

              Comment

              Working...
              X