User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:28:41 AM EST
[#1]
Quoted: The best choice is obvious... just stay within the State and non-union. Can you imagine the number of homeless and meth-heads the Unions would hire (at minimum wage) to protest those jobs?   |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:29:00 AM EST
[#2]
Quoted:
And we still can't get Norinco ammo and AK's. Norinco fucked the pooch. They attempted to smuggle 2k select fire weapons into the US and were happy to sell (agents posing as buyers) anti tank weapons, anti-aircraft rockets, etc. The scum were told that the weapons were intended for drug gangs. Norinco earned their import ban. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:29:15 AM EST
[#3]
Quoted: The best choice is obvious... just stay within the State and non-union. Probably damn near impossible in that part of CA. In fact, I'm sure that there were stipulations on using Prevailing Wages in state/US. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:29:30 AM EST
[#4]
Quoted: Quoted: More places you haters won't be able to drive In New York City alone, Chinese companies have won contracts to help renovate the subway system, refurbish the Alexander Hamilton Bridge over the Harlem River and build a new Metro-North train platform near Yankee Stadium. As with the Bay Bridge, American union labor would carry out most of the work done on United States soil. Even after saving $400 million the Bay Bridge is way over priced. The new Bay Bridge, expected to open to traffic in 2013, will replace a structure that has never been quite the same since the 1989 Bay Area earthquake. At $7.2 billion, it will be one of the most expensive structures ever built. But California officials estimate that they will save at least $400 million by having so much of the work done in China. Don't worry. The tolls will pay for it....in 29 years. Presuming there is no interest on the $7.2B, and there is no maintenance needed, and payroll expenses. Let's see. Approx. 270k vehicles per day cross the Bay Bridge. Half that (one direction pays tolls) would be 135k. Toll varies at either $4 or $6 dollars, depending on time of day, with the commute hours being $6. Let's figure 75% of the traffic runs during the commute. So here is what we have: 101,250 x $6 = $607,500.00 33,750 x $4 = $135,000.00 So we have an average daily intake of $742,500 in tolls. Yearly would be $271,012,500.00. Yes, that's a quarter of a billion dollars a year in tolls, for one Bay Area bridge. There are 7 bridges, not counting the Golden Gate, that cross the bay. Granted, most of them only about 25% to 50% of the traffic the Bay Bridge does, but that is still a very substantial amount of money. For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year. Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:35:45 AM EST
[#5]
If they build it here, they are forced by federal law to pay union wages, they have no choice in the matter, by building it in China they can avoid about half the cost, they will still have to pay union labor to assemble it on site, but they will still save a lot of money. Blame the unions, if California didn't have to pay union wage they would have built it here.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:38:36 AM EST
[#6]
Meh...I don't care. Good for them if they could finally save a few bucks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:41:16 AM EST
[#7]
Quoted: For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year.
Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. Absolutely. It's a cash cow unlike BART which is a net loser every year. But they keep building more "mass transit" instead of building more roads, bridges, parking garages, dams, etc. that actually pay the bills. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:43:24 AM EST
[#8]
Quoted: Quoted: For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year. Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. Absolutely. It's a cash cow unlike BART which is a net loser every year. But they keep building more "mass transit" instead of building more roads, bridges, parking garages, dams, etc. that actually pay the bills. Over the next 10 years, BART is adding three new stations from Fremont to San Jose. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:44:24 AM EST
[#9]
Quoted:
Quoted: For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year.
Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. Absolutely. It's a cash cow unlike BART which is a net loser every year. But they keep building more "mass transit" instead of building more roads, bridges, parking garages, dams, etc. that actually pay the bills. Vaca didn't take into account all the people employed by the bridges. And all those people make big big wages. Labor costs to run the bridge are huge. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:47:15 AM EST
[#10]
Quoted: Quoted: For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year. Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. Absolutely. It's a cash cow unlike BART which is a net loser every year. But they keep building more "mass transit" instead of building more roads, bridges, parking garages, dams, etc. that actually pay the bills. Properly built and maintained roads aren't nearly the ticket to multitudes of uninformed poor people's votes as extra bus stops and over-priced, under-ridden train stations are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 11:47:52 AM EST
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year. Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. Absolutely. It's a cash cow unlike BART which is a net loser every year. But they keep building more "mass transit" instead of building more roads, bridges, parking garages, dams, etc. that actually pay the bills. Vaca didn't take into account all the people employed by the bridges. And all those people make big big wages. Labor costs to run the bridge are huge. I didn't say it was profit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:16:03 PM EST
[#12]
WTF?
This is crazy in so many different ways. Remind me to never drive across that bridge. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:24:10 PM EST
[#13]
Quoted: is there anything from china they hadn't fucked up? Bai Ling |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:25:49 PM EST
[#14]
The "editorial" was all over the lot.
Let's shine some light on the situation. 1. It doesn't matter if bridge components are made overseas or in the US IF THE QUALITY CONTROL IS THERE. The failures in the Boston tunnels were attributable to lack of quality controls. The tunnels were designed and built here. Similarly, the overhaul of a new Navy ship after just one year (made in the good ole USA) because of excessive corrosion was a result of a failure of quality control. Where is your crappy computer assembled? Red China or Taiwan. Even Apple is made in China. What differentiates an Apple Computer from a HP computer - quality control and service! What? You have two different people using cheap Chinese labor and there is a difference in quality control? Unbelieveable, right? Of course not. The implementation of quality controls or the lack of them is a choice by management and the consumer. 2. You live in a country of contracts mandating union wage scale for certain governmental projects, work rules, minimum wages, environmental regulations on the manufacture of components and the list goes on. The rules don't exist in China or aren't enforced. Are there rules that could have been changed so that the bridge components were made in the US? Probably. Would the changes in administrative regulations and legislative requirements have tremendously impacted the environment or the US wage earners? Maybe not. However, if you aren't going to change the rules here, then don't complain. So, when was the last time you delibarately voted for a political candidate who promised a critical review of administrative regulations instead of prattling on about "it's for the environment", "it's for a living wage", or "it's for the children". |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:29:49 PM EST
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, when you are paying someone less than $1/hour for labor what do you expect. The guy in the article is earning $84/week for working 112 hours. I find it interesting that while CEO's keep turning to China Inc for cheap labor they are not volunteering to take personal cuts in their own compensation package. It's about time that CEO's have their pay cut too. After all we can replace them with a Chinese CEO for about $100,000 a year and save the company several million dollars a year. I bet they are just as good too. How many anti-union Arfcommers are lining up for jobs witch pay under $1.00/hour? And the liberal comes out in you. That "greedy" CEO is running a company. If she/he isn't successful - they don't last long. Besides - the CEO of Exxon, Rex W. Tillerson, gets paid $1.87 million. Think that is a lot? That's just 0.005-pct of the revenue ($363.96B) of the company. Was GE's CEO Jack Welsh worth the money? Look at what he did for that company over his career there. Besides, didn't Allan Mulally volunteer to work for $1? The CEO's make too much argument won't (shouldn't) get you far on a forum that believes in open markets and capitalism. FYI. You fail in that you are not including the total comp cost which tends to be FAR higher. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:36:58 PM EST
[#16]
More reasons to be concerned:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-03-03-radioactive-steel_N.htm http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/43577 I'll modify the OPs quote: This is how unions work to destroy American manufacturing (and now infrastructure), and fuck China. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:50:09 PM EST
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, when you are paying someone less than $1/hour for labor what do you expect. The guy in the article is earning $84/week for working 112 hours. I find it interesting that while CEO's keep turning to China Inc for cheap labor they are not volunteering to take personal cuts in their own compensation package. It's about time that CEO's have their pay cut too. After all we can replace them with a Chinese CEO for about $100,000 a year and save the company several million dollars a year. I bet they are just as good too. How many anti-union Arfcommers are lining up for jobs witch pay under $1.00/hour? And the liberal comes out in you. That "greedy" CEO is running a company. If she/he isn't successful - they don't last long. Besides - the CEO of Exxon, Rex W. Tillerson, gets paid $1.87 million. Think that is a lot? That's just 0.005-pct of the revenue ($363.96B) of the company. Was GE's CEO Jack Welsh worth the money? Look at what he did for that company over his career there. Besides, didn't Allan Mulally volunteer to work for $1? The CEO's make too much argument won't (shouldn't) get you far on a forum that believes in open markets and capitalism. FYI. You fail in that you are not including the total comp cost which tends to be FAR higher. Let's say that the total compensation for the CEO is 10x his salary. That's still only 0.05pct of the total revenue of Exxon. My point remains the same - their pay (and overall compensation) is a small percentage of the revenue of the company, overall. If you believe otherwise, you don't understand percentages. Furthermore - if you don't like it, start your own company, grow it to the level of one of the large corporations, and be CEO. I'm sure you wouldn't like it much if I wanted to limit your pay to $6.00/hr, because that is what I think you are worth vs. what the market thinks you are worth. I'll see your fail, and return to you. ETA: Your point might be valid if the CEO's compensation was 10-pct, 20-pct, or 50-pct the total revenue, but it isn't. CEO's get paid exactly what they are worth, just as you do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:54:45 PM EST
[#18]
So is it really a bad thing that a broke ass state like Cali saved that much money?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:56:55 PM EST
[#19]
To be honest this country is so in debt anything it can do to save $ is fine by me so long as the product is quality. If we werent getting boned by unions and greedy ass people we probbably wouldnt have to use foreighn producst at HALF the cost. Be angry at the system and the .gov not china for providing a product at half the cost.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:57:28 PM EST
[#20]
Quoted:
So is it really a bad thing that a broke ass state like Cali saved that much money? Apparently to some in this thread. Capitalism threads usually bring out the trolls, DU account holders, and liberals who don't understand (insert here). |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:57:44 PM EST
[#21]
Inevitable consequence of market inefficiency resulting from economic collusion. The more unions tighten their grip, the more jobs will slip through their fingers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 12:58:35 PM EST
[#22]
Quoted: Wait wait, someone, and I can't remember who for the life of me, talked about all these "shovel ready" infrastructure projects that "would save the us labor market"..... Oh snap. I bet someone just put you on a watch list somewhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 3:54:31 PM EST
[#23]
I'm sure
 that the politicians that fought for and voted for the Made in China Bridge had already factored in the costs (not only the dollar costs).
Right.
Aloha, Mark |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:09:29 PM EST
[#24]
Quoted:
Quoted:
So is it really a bad thing that a broke ass state like Cali saved that much money? Apparently to some in this thread. Capitalism threads usually bring out the trolls, DU account holders, and liberals who don't understand (insert here). I wouldn't call this a capitalism thread. I would call it what happens when people who claim to hate government waste choose to advocate it to prop up a misguided protectionist belief system. It is the adult version of a bi-curious teen watching a porno flick. Does he look at the dick, or the pussy? One of life's imponderables.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:15:23 PM EST
[#25]
Quoted:
If you want to bet your ass on Chinese steel ok, I will not. You already do, every day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:17:20 PM EST
[#26]
Quoted:
Quoted:
The best choice is obvious... just stay within the State and non-union. Can't do it. All government work MUST use union labor. That's why this is being built in China. Out of country = outside the rule book. And have to pay "prevailing wage" which is about 40-50% higher than a normal job. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:20:24 PM EST
[#27]
Quoted:
The "editorial" was all over the lot. 
Oh please stop with the rational discussion and facts you're killing me! |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:23:22 PM EST
[#28]
Quoted:
By actually going to Oakland on it? You're in more danger after making the crossing than the possibility of being on it when it does collapse.
Quoted:
Dude, it's like you are reading my mind...............A cheap Chinese made, double deck bridge, in an earthquake prone heavily populated area? What could possibly go wrong? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:52:17 PM EST
[#29]
They will spent 400 million taking the lead paint off of it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 6:54:32 PM EST
[#30]
Really now? You guys are bashing unions in the dumbest way I've ever witnessed in GD. You all know DAMN well that union or non-union ALL US labor is more expensive than Chinese labor. I don't care for public sector unions, but in the case of private sector unions vs private sector non-union employees, the cost is going to be quite similar and more so, its all going to cost an arm and a leg more than Chinese labor.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is just making an ass out of them self. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 7:02:46 PM EST
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
By actually going to Oakland on it? You're in more danger after making the crossing than the possibility of being on it when it does collapse.
Quoted:
Dude, it's like you are reading my mind...............A cheap Chinese made, double deck bridge, in an earthquake prone heavily populated area? What could possibly go wrong? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile That's an interesting point. Roving flash mobs of wilding Yoots may be waiting for the unwary and unlucky travelers. Well,not for me, because I will never be on it at any point in time. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 7:07:39 PM EST
[#32]
Quoted:
How much will San Francisco's Chinese bridge really cost? Posted By Clyde Prestowitz http://www.foreignpolicy.com/images/091022_meta_block.gif Monday, June 27, 2011 - 6:09 PM http://prestowitz.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/27/cheap_is_expensive Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger strongly...backed the Chinese project on the basis of an estimated $400 million saving tothe state. The $400 million estimatedsaving is largely a result of cheap Chinese labor. ETA: Am I in before the "capitalism, how does it work" or "Fuck China" crowd on this one?
Guess they didn't calculate the rebates coming back from all the taxes the Americans that would'a/could'a built the bridge would've paid, not to mention all the sales taxes Uncle Sug would've gotten back as the American worker spent every nickle California paid for the bridge ... Oh well, that would have been about somebody else's budget.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 8:25:21 PM EST
[#33]
Quoted:
They will spent 400 million taking the lead paint off of it. Actually, the Chinese are going to scrap the old section too, saving the fortune it would cost to comply with EPA regs if we did it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 8:33:18 PM EST
[#34]
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you want to bet your ass on Chinese steel ok, I will not. You already do, every day. I know several guy who have worked with foreign steel from places like China and they have nothing good to say about the quality and they aren't building bridges that my ass ride across. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 8:57:57 PM EST
[#35]
The article mentions one of the workers earning $12 a day. You can only imagine what the higher dollar jobs pay.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/28/2011 8:59:11 PM EST
[#36]
On the one hand it appears that the unions have priced themselve out of competitiveness. On the other, Fuck China.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 1:09:28 AM EST
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If you want to bet your ass on Chinese steel ok, I will not. You already do, every day. I know several guy who have worked with foreign steel from places like China and they have nothing good to say about the quality and they aren't building bridges that my ass ride across. Who said they are using Chinese steel? The savings come from Chinese labor. The Chinese even buy US steel for major structural projects. (I have no idea WHO is supplying the steel, but does anyone?) When you need the best steel at the tightest tolerances, you buy US steel. When you just need some steel, you go elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 1:22:03 AM EST
[#38]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, when you are paying someone less than $1/hour for labor what do you expect. The guy in the article is earning $84/week for working 112 hours. I find it interesting that while CEO's keep turning to China Inc for cheap labor they are not volunteering to take personal cuts in their own compensation package. It's about time that CEO's have their pay cut too. After all we can replace them with a Chinese CEO for about $100,000 a year and save the company several million dollars a year. I bet they are just as good too. How many anti-union Arfcommers are lining up for jobs witch pay under $1.00/hour? And the liberal comes out in you. That "greedy" CEO is running a company. If she/he isn't successful - they don't last long. Besides - the CEO of Exxon, Rex W. Tillerson, gets paid $1.87 million. Think that is a lot? That's just 0.005-pct of the revenue ($363.96B) of the company. Was GE's CEO Jack Welsh worth the money? Look at what he did for that company over his career there. Besides, didn't Allan Mulally volunteer to work for $1? The CEO's make too much argument won't (shouldn't) get you far on a forum that believes in open markets and capitalism. FYI. You fail in that you are not including the total comp cost which tends to be FAR higher. Let's say that the total compensation for the CEO is 10x his salary. That's still only 0.05pct of the total revenue of Exxon. My point remains the same - their pay (and overall compensation) is a small percentage of the revenue of the company, overall. If you believe otherwise, you don't understand percentages. Furthermore - if you don't like it, start your own company, grow it to the level of one of the large corporations, and be CEO. I'm sure you wouldn't like it much if I wanted to limit your pay to $6.00/hr, because that is what I think you are worth vs. what the market thinks you are worth. I'll see your fail, and return to you. ETA: Your point might be valid if the CEO's compensation was 10-pct, 20-pct, or 50-pct the total revenue, but it isn't. CEO's get paid exactly what they are worth, just as you do. What I was merely stating is that total compensation needs to be stated because it tends to be far different then his salary. Quite frankly, I don't have an issue with what they make as long as they do a good job. My issue is when they suck, do horrible business decisions, get caught with their fingers in the candy jar, and runs the company into the ground [remember, were not taking about the person who OWNs the business, were talking about the person hired to run it], then walks off with a golden parachute. Yeah yeah, it's in the contract, problem is, everyone is on each others boards and OKs them when it's really not in the best interest of the companies and that is what board members are supposed to do, look to the companies/shareholders interests. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 1:31:40 AM EST
[#39]
They started working on the first half (Oakland to the island) back in 2006.... between December and June that had not finished the one last bit of bridge. It's fucking pathetic and the Unions did it to themselves.
that said, there is no fucking way I am crossing a Bay Bridge that was made in China... I'll either go the long way to SFO or figure something else out. I dont have to worry about going to San Fransisco because I hate that fucked up city anyhow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:02:39 AM EST
[#40]
Quoted:
The article mentions one of the workers earning $12 a day. You can only imagine what the higher dollar jobs pay. I'm not sure what the term is for it but I know some how $12 a day here and $12 a day there are two totally different amounts when it comes to living expenses. It sounds horrible and all, and I doubt it's GREAT money in any shape or form, but it's not even close to us trying to live on $12 a day.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:04:38 AM EST
[#41]
Quoted:
A cheap Chinese made, double deck bridge, in an earthquake prone heavily populated area? What could possibly go wrong? Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Tag for the lulz Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:14:56 AM EST
[#42]
Quoted: How much will San Francisco's Chinese bridge really cost? http://prestowitz.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/27/cheap_is_expensive Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger strongly...backed the Chinese project on the basis of an estimated $400 million saving tothe state. The $400 million estimatedsaving is largely a result of cheap Chinese labor. ETA: Am I in before the "capitalism, how does it work" or "Fuck China" crowd on this one? The Chinese were an important part of California's history in the 1800s, and don't forget about the workers on the railroad that were from China. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:17:53 AM EST
[#43]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: More places you haters won't be able to drive In New York City alone, Chinese companies have won contracts to help renovate the subway system, refurbish the Alexander Hamilton Bridge over the Harlem River and build a new Metro-North train platform near Yankee Stadium. As with the Bay Bridge, American union labor would carry out most of the work done on United States soil. Even after saving $400 million the Bay Bridge is way over priced. The new Bay Bridge, expected to open to traffic in 2013, will replace a structure that has never been quite the same since the 1989 Bay Area earthquake. At $7.2 billion, it will be one of the most expensive structures ever built. But California officials estimate that they will save at least $400 million by having so much of the work done in China. Don't worry. The tolls will pay for it....in 29 years. Presuming there is no interest on the $7.2B, and there is no maintenance needed, and payroll expenses. The tolls will never pay for it. They promised that for the PA Turnpike back in 1940, and work always magically appeared that kept the tols in effect. We had two Governors who came this >< close to getting it paid off and ending tolls (Thornburgh & Ridge), then the Democrats loaded it up with more projects for their cronies, and it is back to debt service. Sounds like the Mass Pike... And the Golden Gate bridge in SF And just about every other project where the state is involved and jobs are invented to pay off political favors in the form of 6 figure salaries.Shit like 2nd special assistant to the deputy director of community relations.No show jobs that entitle somebody to a lifetime of benefits and are usually given to someone who already has a pension coming from some other state job.. Fucking double dipping at taxpayer expense,it will never stop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:20:31 AM EST
[#44]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: More places you haters won't be able to drive In New York City alone, Chinese companies have won contracts to help renovate the subway system, refurbish the Alexander Hamilton Bridge over the Harlem River and build a new Metro-North train platform near Yankee Stadium. As with the Bay Bridge, American union labor would carry out most of the work done on United States soil. Even after saving $400 million the Bay Bridge is way over priced. The new Bay Bridge, expected to open to traffic in 2013, will replace a structure that has never been quite the same since the 1989 Bay Area earthquake. At $7.2 billion, it will be one of the most expensive structures ever built. But California officials estimate that they will save at least $400 million by having so much of the work done in China. Don't worry. The tolls will pay for it....in 29 years. Presuming there is no interest on the $7.2B, and there is no maintenance needed, and payroll expenses. Let's see. Approx. 270k vehicles per day cross the Bay Bridge. Half that (one direction pays tolls) would be 135k. Toll varies at either $4 or $6 dollars, depending on time of day, with the commute hours being $6. Let's figure 75% of the traffic runs during the commute. So here is what we have: 101,250 x $6 = $607,500.00 33,750 x $4 = $135,000.00 So we have an average daily intake of $742,500 in tolls. Yearly would be $271,012,500.00. Yes, that's a quarter of a billion dollars a year in tolls, for one Bay Area bridge. There are 7 bridges, not counting the Golden Gate, that cross the bay. Granted, most of them only about 25% to 50% of the traffic the Bay Bridge does, but that is still a very substantial amount of money. For the sake of argument, let's say all the bridges combined bring in a half billion in tolls a year. Hell, I forget where I was going with this now, but that is a hell of a lot of money. Holy shit,when I left in 2000..I think the toll was $2.00.. I was up in your area last week..damn Vacaville has grown in the area around the outlet shops.. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:23:37 AM EST
[#45]
Quoted:
Holy shit,when I left in 2000..I think the toll was $2.00.. I was up in your area last week..damn Vacaville has grown in the area around the outlet shops.. Vallejo bridge was 5$ for autos, and the bay bridge, IIRC was 5 or 6. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:33:29 AM EST
[#46]
Quoted: Quoted: Holy shit,when I left in 2000..I think the toll was $2.00.. I was up in your area last week..damn Vacaville has grown in the area around the outlet shops.. Vallejo bridge was 5$ for autos, and the bay bridge, IIRC was 5 or 6. Are you sure about the BB ? I used the San Mateo bridge going to work,but I don't remember the Bay Bridge being that expensive,I used it going to Sacramento and Tahoe just about every weekend..The GG was always the most expensive in tolls. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:35:34 AM EST
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Holy shit,when I left in 2000..I think the toll was $2.00.. I was up in your area last week..damn Vacaville has grown in the area around the outlet shops.. Vallejo bridge was 5$ for autos, and the bay bridge, IIRC was 5 or 6. Are you sure about the BB ? I used the San Mateo bridge going to work,but I don't remember the Bay Bridge being that expensive,I used it going to Sacramento and Tahoe just about every weekend..The GG was always the most expensive in tolls. pretty sure, was there in the early part of the month. now the carpool lane is that auto toll thingee only and you still get charged, though I think it's 4$ for carpool. ETA: what's GG up to? It's been a good 6 years since I have crossed it. ETAA: I'm a Richmondite born and bread 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:39:57 AM EST
[#48]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Holy shit,when I left in 2000..I think the toll was $2.00.. I was up in your area last week..damn Vacaville has grown in the area around the outlet shops.. Vallejo bridge was 5$ for autos, and the bay bridge, IIRC was 5 or 6. Are you sure about the BB ? I used the San Mateo bridge going to work,but I don't remember the Bay Bridge being that expensive,I used it going to Sacramento and Tahoe just about every weekend..The GG was always the most expensive in tolls. pretty sure, was there in the early part of the month. now the carpool lane is that auto toll thingee only and you still get charged, though I think it's 4$ for carpool. ETA: what's GG up to? It's been a good 6 years since I have crossed it. ETAA: I'm a Richmondite born and bread The GG was $6.00 I think,we had a fast pass thing...Still,$6.00 for traveling on what has to be the most dangerous bridge in the US with no center divider is lunacy. I was referring to how much the tolls were in 2000 on the Bay Bridge.. I swear it was around $2.00,but I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:52:13 AM EST
[#49]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Holy shit,when I left in 2000..I think the toll was $2.00.. I was up in your area last week..damn Vacaville has grown in the area around the outlet shops.. Vallejo bridge was 5$ for autos, and the bay bridge, IIRC was 5 or 6. Are you sure about the BB ? I used the San Mateo bridge going to work,but I don't remember the Bay Bridge being that expensive,I used it going to Sacramento and Tahoe just about every weekend..The GG was always the most expensive in tolls. pretty sure, was there in the early part of the month. now the carpool lane is that auto toll thingee only and you still get charged, though I think it's 4$ for carpool. ETA: what's GG up to? It's been a good 6 years since I have crossed it. ETAA: I'm a Richmondite born and bread The GG was $6.00 I think,we had a fast pass thing...Still,$6.00 for traveling on what has to be the most dangerous bridge in the US with no center divider is lunacy. I was referring to how much the tolls were in 2000 on the Bay Bridge.. I swear it was around $2.00,but I could be wrong. ah, 2000... yeah 2$ sounds right, Vallejo was the same, and the San Rafael is free right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/29/2011 2:56:07 AM EST
[#50]
Quoted:
Well, when you are paying someone less than $1/hour for labor what do you expect. The guy in the article is earning $84/week for working 112 hours. I find it interesting that while CEO's keep turning to China Inc for cheap labor they are not volunteering to take personal cuts in their own compensation package. It's about time that CEO's have their pay cut too. After all we can replace them with a Chinese CEO for about $100,000 a year and save the company several million dollars a year. I bet they are just as good too. How many anti-union Arfcommers are lining up for jobs witch pay under $1.00/hour? Hey there Mr. Class Warfare! I bet you think that a Captain of a ship should get the same pay as the busboy in the dining room, too! Those Captains are just GREEDY motherfuckers. The busboy is just struggling to get by!! How is it FAIR that a Captain of the ship that the poor busboy is on makes more money??? The busboy clears the dishes and if no one did that, then HOW WOULD ANYONE EAT??? Even the Captain would starve without the busboy!! My HEAVENS!!! It's not like the Captain had to work harder, learn more and have more responsibility to the entire ship then the busboy..... Fucking shit. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
