You know, it's true that a little knowledge goes a long way. No wonder the No Child Left Behind is such a piece of crap.
There is a little ditty that anyone can learn in any Econ 101 class - and it goes a little something like this:
Business tends to the lowest overhead costs possible to increase profit. (Duh!) Labor is part of your overhead - and the largest part of it. So, business will tend to go where labor is cheapest. Cheaper labor puts downward pressure on wages, and Bush understands this problem so well, "I know how hard it is to put food on your family."
Why am I talking about this? Because this was sent to me by a friend, and as I read it my head almost blew off my neck.
This one is from Texas Inmates Not Entitled to Minimum Wage.
I know that you're probably thinking, "So, what?" Well as I read down the story it reminded me of my old Econ 101 class. Did you know that a lot of inmates do work for you that you never realized was happening? (I'm sure you probably did - but just amuse me for a second.)
There are inmates that do a lot of work like that - but, of course you'd never know it. American Airlines, Boeing, Compaq, Dell, Eddie Bauer, Hewlett-Packard, Honeywell, IBM, JC Penny... These are just a few companies that use prison labor.
Think about it.
These are jobs that are taken out of the everyday workforce and given to prison labor.
"Okay, and...?"
Well, the wages that prisoners are paid is below minimum wage.
"And...?"
Companies go to places where they cut costs putting downward pressure on wages.
Do you see what I mean? These huge corporations are screwing you out of a job. Actually, let me clarify that. It's not that these guys in prison shouldn't be working - but the corporations and the state corectional facilities are working together to build a better America by actually performing a type of slave labor. That's a harsh term... But it seems right.
They work for less than minimum wage - a type of slave wages, you could say - and for others outside of the prison system to keep their jobs they have to win the race to the bottom.
"Blah...blah...blah... Get on with the news story, Alex."
I'm quoting from the article here:
Douglas R. Loving contended his job as a drying machine operator qualified him for protection under the Fair Labor Standards Act -- meaning he should get the minimum wage of $5.15 an hour -- because the act didn't exempt prisoners.
Sounds like a fair agument to me. But the article goes on:
The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed. It upheld a lower court decision's to throw out Loving's lawsuit as frivolous, writing that prisoners are not employees and not entitled to minimum wages.
''Compelling an inmate to work without pay does not violate the Constitution," a three-judge panel of the court said. "The failure of a state specifically to sentence an inmate to hard labor does not change this rule.''
Hold it little buck-a-roo! That doesn't escape the fact that in some strange way I find it as a type of "slave labor."
Let me emphasize the first part of that last snippet from the article for you:
"Compelling an inmate to work without pay does not violate the Constitution," a three-judge panel of the court said. (emphasis mine)
That, to me, sounds like slave labor.
And here's the kicker. This is where the court really threw me for a loop:
The court panel noted in its decision Friday that it had ruled in similar cases where inmates working outside jails for private firms technically were employees but inmates working inside prisons for private firms were not. (emphasis mine)
They're BOTH inmates and employees of the company whether they're inside the damned walls or not! What kind of reasoning is that?!? "Technically"? Say what?
Ah! But now I understand.... Could it also be that as they pointed out in this short article, over and again, that Douglas R. Loving is in jail on a 20-year sentence for aggravated sexual assault of a child?
Maybe we should blame all our economic woes on Douglas R. Loving...?
-- Good night, and good blah, blah...