Greg the proof is when u see a truck from mexico hauling freight in our country. That is freight we could be hauling. That is lost revenue for somebody. If they hauling it we cant. We need to create jobs. There is a job shortage. We have more people graduating college and high school every year. These people need jobs.
That's already happening - thats the problem with the argument people are trying to make.
It doesn't matter, simply because (using Leo's reasoning) US citizens are already losing freight to those nasty foreigners who come here and take jobs away from Americans.
The Mexicans are only one small part of a large picture and it seems that there is enough freight for everyone because if there wasn't, then way is there this constant drone about a driver's shortage starting again?
From a driver's point of view, I can't see the real concern.
BUT from a carrier's point of view, it is devastating because the carrier will now have another carrier to compete with. They may not like to adjust their margins or even consider that some of their dedicated work may not be theirs in the future.
AND from the Teamster's point of view, they can't organize those truckers across the border for a number of legal reasons, which makes it a loss in revenue, not a loss to their members. THIS is what people just seem to refuse to understand.
The problem with jobs isn't about a few thousand truckers getting their work here who live over there, but real jobs that don't depend on an inconsistent market - truckers seem to be the first line in the economic defense (so to speak) and the work they get is directly tied to what people buy. SO if we have another downturn in the economy, I don't think that the Mexican trucker will have the advantage because there won't be a lot of freight to move.
BUT I digress ...
The problem is we don't have the manufacture base any more, we have some but not enough to sustain us and that is because we want cheap stuff as a nation. Much of this is blamed by the unions because the company has taken their work somewhere else due to the high cost of labor, while other factors involved the tax system in this country. SO if we really want jobs, we can't change the consumer's attitude but we can change the tax system.
Now with that said, one last thing - regardless where the truck and driver comes from, they have to deal with the same margins - the cost of running that truck on the road hence the rates can't drop any farther than what they are at now which is frikn' cheap. From maintenance to fuel to insurance - it seems to me that it all pretty much the same thing whether it is from Canada or Mexico or the great country they call California, the amounts may be a little different but they are within 10% of each other. Oh and by the way, if anyone wants to really b*tch about the rates, don't work for companies that give anything less than a $1 a mile for vans and $1.75 a mile for straight trucks otherwise you are causing the same job loses.
cclooper,
The job loss thing is funny, how many jobs are lost because the wages are so high the companies can't afford to use the workers?
How about GM and Chrysler, where the UAW was paid off but people still lost their jobs?
TO many in this country the teamsters are an Un-American union, they are demanding things that are not part of any protection of any American worker.
If they actually supported things like tax reform, like less business regulations and other things that spur job growth, then many more would go to the side of the union but when they are concern about Egypt and overpaid public sector workers, the average person doesn't give a crap about the union.
BUT if anyone is going to talk about jobs going overseas and are for open borders and legalizing people who invaded our country, they are no good at all for either the country or any worker they represent - from their blog, 09/02
"Two years ago, the Teamsters Union pledged its support for fairer immigration policies, sought to help millions of immigrants win union representation and supported amnesty for workers committed to the U.S.
“These proposals will take us beyond amnesty,” Hoffa said.
THAT POSITION HAS NOT CHANGED
You got to ask yourself if a person who has invaded our country so "committed to the US" then why did they invade the country instead of following the laws?
If anyone is living in lala land it is anyone who supports a union that supports this form of immigration that takes jobs away from any hard working American. Why should someone who invaded our country, steal a Social Security number and got a job have a union try to fight for them to stay here?
Isn't an American who is born and raised here good enough?
Not to them and this is because they don't want people to be independent but to be dependent on them.
You do know the game they are playing with those who have invaded?
Of course you do if you defend them like that.
You do know that they have a whole legal group who will help someone who invaded our country with their legal and immigration issues?
IT IS ABOUT MEMBERSHIP AND THE MONEY THAT COMES FROM IT, NOT PROTECTION OF THE COUNTRY OR THE WORKERS.
I am asking the proof of the repeated statements about wages, safety and other things that everyone repeats. NOT one person here has brought proof of that because they refused to counter my statements. IT isn't a future issue, that's the problem with a lot of people because it is already happening and already been enough proof that it can be presented here and other places.
I didn't talk to one driver, I talked to several and I wasn't afraid to ask questions to find answers which I did - have you?
By the way I have nothing against any person who has invaded this country, I want them to do it legally for their own protection.
