goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: kstatefreak42 on July 31, 2012, 12:11:38 PM
-
http://pro.stansberryresearch.com/1202ENDOFAMR/PPSIN705/
Thank you previous generations. Thank you. So much. Our future is so bleak.
"The demand for dollars from the rest of the world has been of inestimable benefit to the US Economy. It quite simply allows Americans to consume more than they produce and save less than they invest; in other words, to live beyond our means."- Barrons's
"Indeed, it is unlikely that ammericans themselves will escape the inflationary consequences of current fed policy...the fed is financing a vast and rising federal deficit, following a practice that has been a surefire prescription for domestic inflation from the time immemorial."- George Melloan
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nulkOnkZf3k&feature=g-u-u
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nulkOnkZf3k&feature=g-u-u
do we have a poster who both supports the "end the fed" bullshit and has an economics degree?
-
maybe someone that studied austrian economics... but a degree doesn't mean you know what the eff you're talking about.
-
maybe someone that studied austrian economics... but a degree doesn't mean you know what the eff you're talking about.
having an econ degree ensures that a person understands how the US federal reserve works. they couldn't pass if they didn't.
i don't know a lot about austrian economics. i do know that it doesn't have any empirical data. would it not be INSANE for a country to abandon the system that has played a role in making it the richest nation in the world for one that is completely unproven?
-
maybe someone that studied austrian economics... but a degree doesn't mean you know what the eff you're talking about.
having an econ degree ensures that a person understands how the US federal reserve works. they couldn't pass if they didn't.
i don't know a lot about austrian economics. i do know that it doesn't have any empirical data. would it not be INSANE for a country to abandon the system that has played a role in making it the richest nation in the world for one that is completely unproven?
The Austrian economists were the only ones that predicted the financial crisis. Look up Ron Paul and Peter Schiff videos from 2007 and before. They clownsuited everyone.
Also, the Fed gives illusion of wealth. Suggesting were the richest nation in the world because of the Fed is false.
-
http://pro.stansberryresearch.com/1202ENDOFAMR/PPSIN705/
Thank you previous generations. Thank you. So much. Our future is so bleak.
"The demand for dollars from the rest of the world has been of inestimable benefit to the US Economy. It quite simply allows Americans to consume more than they produce and save less than they invest; in other words, to live beyond our means."- Barrons's
"Indeed, it is unlikely that ammericans themselves will escape the inflationary consequences of current fed policy...the fed is financing a vast and rising federal deficit, following a practice that has been a surefire prescription for domestic inflation from the time immemorial."- George Melloan
Tried to watch, he talked so goddam much and so uselessly I had to close.
-
if he spent a lot of money on that video he isn't very good w/ money.
-
doom porn.
-
maybe someone that studied austrian economics... but a degree doesn't mean you know what the eff you're talking about.
having an econ degree ensures that a person understands how the US federal reserve works. they couldn't pass if they didn't.
i don't know a lot about Austrian economics. i do know that it doesn't have any empirical data. would it not be INSANE for a country to abandon the system that has played a role in making it the richest nation in the world for one that is completely unproven?
If we were really the wealthiest in the world, we would have the cheapest products in the world. Instead, nearly every other country can survive on pennies compared to our economy. All the federal reserve has really done is maintain inflation to keep our buying power the same over the last couple hundred years. I think what you meant is we're the largest producers and consumers in the world – not the wealthiest.
-
maybe someone that studied austrian economics... but a degree doesn't mean you know what the eff you're talking about.
having an econ degree ensures that a person understands how the US federal reserve works. they couldn't pass if they didn't.
i don't know a lot about Austrian economics. i do know that it doesn't have any empirical data. would it not be INSANE for a country to abandon the system that has played a role in making it the richest nation in the world for one that is completely unproven?
Instead, nearly every other country can survive on pennies compared to our economy.
This isn't really true, and almost all countries that actually do have goods and services that are cheaper than ours have very few citizens that can afford those goods and services, even at the cheaper rate.
-
Didnt watch the main video but scrolled though some of the website, it looks like something my dad would make. No tabs, no headlines, no links, just a straight line of text broken up by some graphs.
This is what it looked like
PANIC
askljas
asdfasdf
asdfasdfasdf
asdfasdfas
asdfasdf
GOLD
aasdfasdfas
asdfa
asdfasdfa
asdfasdf
SILVER
asdfas
asdfasdf
asdf
DOLLAR COLLAPSE
asdfas
asdfasdf
asdfasdf
asdfasdf
asdfasdfasd
asdfasdf
asdfasdf
WHAT TO DO
asdfasa
asdfasdf
asdfasdfas
asdfasdfasd
asdfasdfasd
asdfasdfas
BUT THE REAL SECRET
asdfasdf
asdfasdf
asdfasdfasdfa
asdfasdfasdfas
asdfasdfasdfasdf
asdfasdfasdf
asasdfasdfasd
asdfasdasd
SUBSCRIBE TO MY NEWSLETTER AND YE SHALL BE SAVED
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
-
material costs + no one makes the same car for 30 years
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
Part of it can be tied to enhanced safety features and other technology being incorporated into today's vehicles. You can purchase a much, much nicer vehicle today for $30,000 than you could in 1980 for $6,000. The $6,000 vehicle in 1980 is probably more comparable to a $15,000 vehicle today. Also, part of it can be tied to the fact that the supply and demand of vehicles in the United States really has not changed much since 1980. Regardless of the cost of manufacturing vehicles, the average American still needs to own one, and does.
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
Part of it can be tied to enhanced safety features and other technology being incorporated into today's vehicles. You can purchase a much, much nicer vehicle today for $30,000 than you could in 1980 for $6,000. The $6,000 vehicle in 1980 is probably more comparable to a $15,000 vehicle today. Also, part of it can be tied to the fact that the supply and demand of vehicles in the United States really has not changed much since 1980. Regardless of the cost of manufacturing vehicles, the average American still needs to own one, and does.
So advances in technology don't make all of this new technology any cheaper either? How then are executives taking in unprecedented bonuses and why is the middle class shrinking?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
What's this magical technological advancement that has reduced labor cost by 30 percent with no other costs whatsoever?
-
"naturally after time" that's an important part there. Not to mention many organizations just become lean - even without technology replacing workers. A lot of streamlining has taken place in the industrial sector over the last 50 years.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
Part of it can be tied to enhanced safety features and other technology being incorporated into today's vehicles. You can purchase a much, much nicer vehicle today for $30,000 than you could in 1980 for $6,000. The $6,000 vehicle in 1980 is probably more comparable to a $15,000 vehicle today. Also, part of it can be tied to the fact that the supply and demand of vehicles in the United States really has not changed much since 1980. Regardless of the cost of manufacturing vehicles, the average American still needs to own one, and does.
So advances in technology don't make all of this new technology any cheaper either? How then are executives taking in unprecedented bonuses and why is the middle class shrinking?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
How can all of this new technology be cheaper than when it was nonexistant?
-
I also think you're seriously under estimating how expensive labor is. Pensions/wages/benefits - roi can be a year on a million dollar tool if it eleminates 10-12 jobs. Anything after that year is coins in your pocket.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
You mean back of the napkin hypotheticals can't debunk the lies and expose the greed of an entire industry?
-
The middle class is shrinking because we have an abundance of Americans who simply are not smart or educated enough to get a good job that doesn't require a lot of work and they don't want to put in the work necessary to earn a decent living.
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
Part of it can be tied to enhanced safety features and other technology being incorporated into today's vehicles. You can purchase a much, much nicer vehicle today for $30,000 than you could in 1980 for $6,000. The $6,000 vehicle in 1980 is probably more comparable to a $15,000 vehicle today. Also, part of it can be tied to the fact that the supply and demand of vehicles in the United States really has not changed much since 1980. Regardless of the cost of manufacturing vehicles, the average American still needs to own one, and does.
So advances in technology don't make all of this new technology any cheaper either? How then are executives taking in unprecedented bonuses and why is the middle class shrinking?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
How can all of this new technology be cheaper than when it was nonexistant?
keep in mind I'm not just talking about cars - that was an example. I'm really just searching for some explanation of high executive pay and a vanishing middle class.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
Honest question, not trolling, can someone help me understand this?
say it takes ten guys to build a car and the manufacturer has set their profit margins so that after all of the materials & labor, they can sell their car for $10,000. Due to technological advancements, you lay off 3 of those guys, so naturally after time, the car becomes cheaper to produce – yet they’re still selling the car for $10,000 in 1980 dollars. Naturally – the price of vehicles should come down – as there is only 7 guys than can actually afford the car now – so supply & demand should resolve this; and we’ve reduced cost – so unless the profit margins are still being driven up, the cost of the product should come down, correct? Has it? How do you account for a car being $6,000 in 1980 now being $30,000 in 2012 - that can't all be inflation - Are unprecedented executive profits causing this?
Part of it can be tied to enhanced safety features and other technology being incorporated into today's vehicles. You can purchase a much, much nicer vehicle today for $30,000 than you could in 1980 for $6,000. The $6,000 vehicle in 1980 is probably more comparable to a $15,000 vehicle today. Also, part of it can be tied to the fact that the supply and demand of vehicles in the United States really has not changed much since 1980. Regardless of the cost of manufacturing vehicles, the average American still needs to own one, and does.
So advances in technology don't make all of this new technology any cheaper either? How then are executives taking in unprecedented bonuses and why is the middle class shrinking?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
How can all of this new technology be cheaper than when it was nonexistant?
keep in mind I'm not just talking about cars - that was an example. I'm really just searching for some explanation of high executive pay and a vanishing middle class.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
Who knows why executives are payed so much, really?
-
The middle class is shrinking because we have an abundance of Americans who simply are not smart or educated enough to get a good job that doesn't require a lot of work and they don't want to put in the work necessary to earn a decent living.
So this is all a welfare problem? It has nothing to do with newly minted $$ hitting the top first - deteriorating purchasing power of the dollar - and the new cheap money takin too long to hit the consumers on the bottom?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
The middle class is shrinking because we have an abundance of Americans who simply are not smart or educated enough to get a good job that doesn't require a lot of work and they don't want to put in the work necessary to earn a decent living.
So this is all a welfare problem? It has nothing to do with newly minted $$ hitting the top first - deteriorating purchasing power of the dollar - and the new cheap money takin too long to hit the consumers on the bottom?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I don't think it's a welfare problem so much as an education problem. Yesterday's factory workers are today's Wal-Mart cashiers, and the pay just isn't comparable.
-
The middle class is shrinking because we have an abundance of Americans who simply are not smart or educated enough to get a good job that doesn't require a lot of work and they don't want to put in the work necessary to earn a decent living.
So this is all a welfare problem? It has nothing to do with newly minted $$ hitting the top first - deteriorating purchasing power of the dollar - and the new cheap money takin too long to hit the consumers on the bottom?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I don't think it's a welfare problem so much as an education problem. Yesterday's factory workers are today's Wal-Mart cashiers, and the pay just isn't comparable.
But you understand that by the laws of supply and demand, someone has to be your consumer. Are you really suggesting that an entire decade of college graduates are entering the workforce through unemployment lines - and they're not capable or smart enough to even be factory workers? Furthermore, do you know any factory workers? It doesn't take much qualification. Suggesting that it's all a lack of work force and has nothing to do with intentional debasement of our currency seems naive. If its a problem with stimulating consumers to spend, why didn't qe1 and qe2 have an impact?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
The middle class is shrinking because we have an abundance of Americans who simply are not smart or educated enough to get a good job that doesn't require a lot of work and they don't want to put in the work necessary to earn a decent living.
So this is all a welfare problem? It has nothing to do with newly minted $$ hitting the top first - deteriorating purchasing power of the dollar - and the new cheap money takin too long to hit the consumers on the bottom?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I don't think it's a welfare problem so much as an education problem. Yesterday's factory workers are today's Wal-Mart cashiers, and the pay just isn't comparable.
But you understand that by the laws of supply and demand, someone has to be your consumer. Are you really suggesting that an entire decade of college graduates are entering the workforce through unemployment lines - and they're not capable or smart enough to even be factory workers? Furthermore, do you know any factory workers? It doesn't take much qualification. Suggesting that it's all a lack of work force and has nothing to do with intentional debasement of our currency seems naive. If its a problem with stimulating consumers to spend, why didn't qe1 and qe2 have an impact?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
they did have an impact.
-
They had a temporary impact - but the very nature of print $$ inevitably drives an economy into recession. A couple of execs making off with a couple golden handshakes is not the impact I was suggesting. I'm talking about a thriving economy.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
-
The middle class is shrinking because we have an abundance of Americans who simply are not smart or educated enough to get a good job that doesn't require a lot of work and they don't want to put in the work necessary to earn a decent living.
So this is all a welfare problem? It has nothing to do with newly minted $$ hitting the top first - deteriorating purchasing power of the dollar - and the new cheap money takin too long to hit the consumers on the bottom?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
I don't think it's a welfare problem so much as an education problem. Yesterday's factory workers are today's Wal-Mart cashiers, and the pay just isn't comparable.
But you understand that by the laws of supply and demand, someone has to be your consumer. Are you really suggesting that an entire decade of college graduates are entering the workforce through unemployment lines - and they're not capable or smart enough to even be factory workers? Furthermore, do you know any factory workers? It doesn't take much qualification. Suggesting that it's all a lack of work force and has nothing to do with intentional debasement of our currency seems naive. If its a problem with stimulating consumers to spend, why didn't qe1 and qe2 have an impact?
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
They are smart enough to be factory workers, but there are far fewer factory jobs than there used to be. These people should be pushed to a technical school so learn a trade like welding or bricklaying, but they are either too unmotivated or too uninformed to realize that these are good jobs in high demand.
-
this thread is trying to morph into a rand novel, only less boring
-
this thread is trying to morph into a rand novel, only less boring
IIRC, there wasn't much of a middle class in Atlas Shrugged
Sent from my GT-S5830M using Tapatalk 2
-
They had a temporary impact - but the very nature of print $$ inevitably drives an economy into recession. A couple of execs making off with a couple golden handshakes is not the impact I was suggesting. I'm talking about a thriving economy.
Sent from my iPhone using DealWithItBitches.
You do realize the effects of qe and qe2 will last for years to come right? There are lots of tools that can be used to fight inflation. Printing money and distributing it widely is the ONLY thing to combat deflation. And deflation is exponentially worse than inflation between 15-25 percent.
The real problem with qe and qe2 is that it hasn't been spread widely enough. It has basically made money incredibly cheap for people who were already doing OK.
-
http://pro.stansberryresearch.com/1202ENDOFAMR/PPSIN705/
Thank you previous generations. Thank you. So much. Our future is so bleak.
"The demand for dollars from the rest of the world has been of inestimable benefit to the US Economy. It quite simply allows Americans to consume more than they produce and save less than they invest; in other words, to live beyond our means."- Barrons's
"Indeed, it is unlikely that ammericans themselves will escape the inflationary consequences of current fed policy...the fed is financing a vast and rising federal deficit, following a practice that has been a surefire prescription for domestic inflation from the time immemorial."- George Melloan
Tried to watch, he talked so goddam much and so uselessly I had to close.
yeah i didnt even listen the whole way through. haha
-
I read an article the other day about how there's 600K unfilled factory type jobs in the United States. The primary crux of the article is that there's not enough people in the workforce (ex: machinists) to fill the jobs. Factory owners were talking about how many of the "younger" folks didn't consider working in a factory cool or good enough for them. I am sure some of the jobs didn't pay that well, but they mainly talked about the many factory jobs that paid $20 plus dollars an hour once apprenticeship periods were over.
Same is true of over-the-road trucking, although the pay is about equal for even shittier conditions.
-
I read an article the other day about how there's 600K unfilled factory type jobs in the United States. The primary crux of the article is that there's not enough people in the workforce (ex: machinists) to fill the jobs. Factory owners were talking about how many of the "younger" folks didn't consider working in a factory cool or good enough for them. I am sure some of the jobs didn't pay that well, but they mainly talked about the many factory jobs that paid $20 plus dollars an hour once apprenticeship periods were over.
Same is true of over-the-road trucking, although the pay is about equal for even shittier conditions.
The point is that there are many jobs that would place people firmly in the middle class, but people are choosing lower class jobs instead. I don't really think this is a problem because we can fill those jobs with immigrant labor and move on, but I'm sure a lot of you guys disagree with that.
-
Does $20/hour make you firmly middle class any more?
-
I would think $40k/yr would get you into the middle class. Maybe lower middle, but still middle.
-
Who the hell chooses to work at walmart over a factory job with benefits?
-
Does $20/hour make you firmly middle class any more?
It does in the midwest.
-
Who the hell chooses to work at walmart over a factory job with benefits?
Lots of people, apparently.
-
Who the hell chooses to work at walmart over a factory job with benefits?
Lots of people, apparently.
where are you getting this info? I think there are a lot of factors at play. First, I imagine a $20/hr manufacturing job requires quite a bit of skill, or you're working in a nasty job like a foundry or something. I would work for a hypothetical $10/hr in Wal-Mart over a hypothetical $20/hr in a foundry.
-
Who the hell chooses to work at walmart over a factory job with benefits?
Lots of people, apparently.
where are you getting this info? I think there are a lot of factors at play. First, I imagine a $20/hr manufacturing job requires quite a bit of skill, or you're working in a nasty job like a foundry or something. I would work for a hypothetical $10/hr in Wal-Mart over a hypothetical $20/hr in a foundry.
I'm assuming most of the factory jobs are pretty hard and nasty. Why wouldn't people be working them, otherwise? I'm not going to feel sorry for somebody who decides not to go work that job and ends up making less, though.
-
This isn't the 1930's where work conditions are unbearable. I know tons of factory guys that walked in with nothing but a high-school diploma and making $15 an hour to start and after 2 years or so up around $20/hour. Alternatively, I know people begging to get a job in as some factory worker, because they're sick of working at bank of america - those jobs just are not there.
-
Who the hell chooses to work at walmart over a factory job with benefits?
Lots of people, apparently.
where are you getting this info? I think there are a lot of factors at play. First, I imagine a $20/hr manufacturing job requires quite a bit of skill, or you're working in a nasty job like a foundry or something. I would work for a hypothetical $10/hr in Wal-Mart over a hypothetical $20/hr in a foundry.
I'm assuming most of the factory jobs are pretty hard and nasty. Why wouldn't people be working them, otherwise? I'm not going to feel sorry for somebody who decides not to go work that job and ends up making less, though.
there are huge variations in hardness and nastyness. I didn't know this was about feeling sorry for people.
-
Who the hell chooses to work at walmart over a factory job with benefits?
Lots of people, apparently.
where are you getting this info? I think there are a lot of factors at play. First, I imagine a $20/hr manufacturing job requires quite a bit of skill, or you're working in a nasty job like a foundry or something. I would work for a hypothetical $10/hr in Wal-Mart over a hypothetical $20/hr in a foundry.
I'm assuming most of the factory jobs are pretty hard and nasty. Why wouldn't people be working them, otherwise? I'm not going to feel sorry for somebody who decides not to go work that job and ends up making less, though.
there are huge variations in hardness and nastyness. I didn't know this was about feeling sorry for people.
Yes, I wasn't saying that all factory jobs were hard or nasty. I just think it's a valid assumption that $20 per hour jobs that don't require skilled labor and go unfilled must either be very hard or nasty.
-
If this guy thinks the dollar is dead, why is he asking for $49
-
I read an article the other day about how there's 600K unfilled factory type jobs in the United States. The primary crux of the article is that there's not enough people in the workforce (ex: machinists) to fill the jobs. Factory owners were talking about how many of the "younger" folks didn't consider working in a factory cool or good enough for them. I am sure some of the jobs didn't pay that well, but they mainly talked about the many factory jobs that paid $20 plus dollars an hour once apprenticeship periods were over.
they outsourced skilled factory jobs to other countries, and now complain they can't find workers when their aging skilled labor is retiring. there aren't skilled replacements because they haven't been hiring and training younger workers in quantities to replace the aging labor. hard to find a good tanner or blacksmith anymore too. many universities don't even offer blacksmithery degrees. rough ridin' lazy americans.
if they really wanted workers, they could hire unskilled labor and train it. they don't want to, they want to bitch to the hack media until someone else agrees to fund the cost of worker training.
-
Were f*cked