Hey Kp! That turned out to be great timing, I arrived in time to be vote number 10!

My mother told me a story, when she was about 20, circa 1960, her and her sister would have to walk home from work past a building site and all the lads would whistle and cat call etc. So they mentioned this at home and my grandmother had a word with the foreman.

Next day, as they walked past the site, 40 or 50 guys were all positioned on the scaffolding waiting to sing "I'll tell my ma, when I go home....". My mam said they had a hard time keeping a straight face until they were out of sight!

I always think of that story when I hear that song

Tags for this video have been changed from 'beatbox, parking violation, wind up, hidden camera' to 'beatbox, parking violation, wind up, hidden camera, beardyman, darren foreman' - edited by xxovercastxx

>> ^volumptuous:
>> ^Grimm:
This is why people are confusing the two.
Employees are NOT getting paid $70 an hour.


I know this. My brother (read above) is being paid $29/hr as a foreman.
The $70/hr claim is one giant lie, no matter what you factor into that. I am writing up a post to sifttalk with loads and loads of information, and I will post it later tonight.


Just because your brother doesn't get paid $70 an hour does not mean the company isn't spending $70 an hour per employee on all wages and all benefits.

There is money spent on employees that are currently working. There is money spent on employees that are no longer working. It's deceiving to say they only pay $29 an hour and ignore what their costs in benefits are and to ignore what their costs in employees who no longer work there.

Why would you need to combine the two and then divide it by just the employees that are still there? Because they are the only ones producing income for the company. So on average each employee needs to produce $70 an hour just to cover all of the costs of wages and benefits for employees past and present.

That's not necessarily a good thing or a bad thing....it just is what it is and is something that needs to be looked at when a company is bleeding by the billions.

>> ^Grimm:
This is why people are confusing the two.
Employees are NOT getting paid $70 an hour.



I know this. My brother (read above) is being paid $29/hr as a foreman.

The $70/hr claim is one giant lie, no matter what you factor into that. I am writing up a post to sifttalk with loads and loads of information, and I will post it later tonight.

>> ^Grimm:
But the bottom line is when you factor in wages and benefits these companies are spending $70 an hour per working employee

But that is simply not true. Your math is all wrong.

A lot of that money is spent on current retirees benefits and wages, as well as their spouses. They are not a "working employee", they are retired. That money is factored in to the average.

ps: I talked with my brother last night who's a foreman at Ford (for nine years). He makes $29/hr, has two children, one with MS, and a wife who works at Target as a cashier. Yeah, their life is all limousines and champagne...uggh.

^ 1st - you're off by $10. The average is $28/hr, including the "highly skilled" non-manual-labor, technical jobs.

So, even $28 is wrong.

My brother is a foreman at Ford, for nine years now, and he would laugh in your face if you told him he made $79k per year!

Get. Fucking. Real.

Go ask someone who works at one of these factories how much they make. They don't live in shitty tract-homes in crappy parts of town because they want to.

>> ^swampgirl:
>> ^ShakyJake:
Well, obviously. He did throw the train in reverse after that, for a second try.

No he didn't, he put the train "In Emergency". Which is what he was supposed to do. I'm sure he stopped to make sure the boy wasn't injured. Everything the engineer does is recorded for his road foreman to pour over later if there's a problem.


Wow... did that one sail over your head or what? * whoosh *

>> ^ShakyJake:
Well, obviously. He did throw the train in reverse after that, for a second try.


No he didn't, he put the train "In Emergency". Which is what he was supposed to do. I'm sure he stopped to make sure the boy wasn't injured. Everything the engineer does is recorded for his road foreman to pour over later if there's a problem.

While you do a good job pointing out some perceived flaws, am curious to find out what you would do to reverse this trend? I think alot of what you mention is actually sociological and natural in our society. What you are pushing for is as DjSunKid said an extremist stance of feminism.

While there are women who strive to be the leaders in their profession and achieve something for themselves, there is a large segment of the female population that is quite alright with fitting in the stereotype of being female, of dressing up, of being sexy, of being chased, screeching when they see a mouse and looking for a big strong man. There is a entire industry centered around this. This is a standard that has been psychologically upheld by society as a whole, and women themselves. Something I see alot in the society where I live, the Arab world, very few girls try hard here because why should they? They are going to marry a Arabian Istallion and have kids and shop in Gucci and Versace. They are perfectly happy in that role.

I think some of that is social, some of it is psychological from media exposure, the barbie dolls, the princess stories and so on that build up a psychological outlook that some connect with and accept as their own and some reject.

For example look at someone like Ayn Rand.

I talked to a lot of medical students, some of them were female, most of them were heading to OBYGN and pediatrics, both deal with kids and children. They choose to do so. You will hardly find many women in the role of surgeon for example. Is this discrimination?

Back in University I had a chance to befriend a woman in her 50s who was doing adult education, she looked and acted alot like a man. Probing her previous profession she told me she was a construction foreman. She explained that for co workers and clients to take her seriously she had to adopt a hard exterior, or else no one would have obeyed her as a boss or took her seriously managerially. But she had no quams about this, she said certain businesses require male standpoint, not to mean the sex but the qualities, hard, aggressive and stubborn.

Look at how Hillary Clinton tried to meld her campaign, did it pay for her to play on her female side? did it pay for her to become more manly? Then look at someone like Margaret Thatcher. She was asexual as far as am concerned in her politics.

The equality of sexes has been reached, and there has been large progress since the 1800s and the suffrage movement. Women have the right to vote, work, enter politics, and professional occupations. There is still inequality when it comes to pay scale but I believe this is balancing out now in the world economy because administration and business is gender neutral most of the time. Results are far more important.

But does it mean the higher echelons of power are male dominated? Not at all. Germany, Bangladesh, US and many other nations have females who reached high levels of power. There is an abundance of strong female role models.

With regards to the comments on this website, this is the internet the demographic of this website is in the 18-25 range most are students, many are lonely introverted types. Most are male, some are here before or after being to a porn site. This goes a long way to describe the "Omfg shes hot" type of comments.

With regards to cinema and the like, its business. Its marketing and demographics, one shouldn't read too much into it.

The problem Hollywood has with creating female heroes is that they work on base levels so they push a hard women, which is psychologically constructed in such a way as being Bitchy. This is frankly because people in Hollywood think on those levels, they never deal in complicated characters. They need standardized themes, of conflict, and love and very often a strange sex scene where you didn't expect one.

Take the example of Lara Croft that was made into two films. The video game portrayed her as a smart intelligent royal who did tomb raids. Instead of vividly exploring this, by way of Batman orgins where she say fell into a cave and explored and developed into a tom boy and found a ancient dagger or something, they instead went simply with telling the audience that she is that way because her daddy was like that. Because Hollywood producers are idiots and they are desperately trying to connect and hit that 15-20 year demographic that needs to see a tit.

Alternative title: Red Foreman takes out the trash.

Brad Dourif was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for this role. He lost to George Burns, which, if you're going to lose, you should lose to a legend.

Dourif went on to become a successful character actor, appearing in Foreman's Ragtime, David Lynch's Dune and Blue Velvet, Mississippi Burning, the Lord of the Rings trilogy, HBO's Deadwood, and he's also the voice of Chucky, the doll from all the Child's Play films.

Haven't I seen Tom Foreman as a cast member on Saturday Night Live?

In Afghanistan the local labor that Halliburton employs only gets paid between 2 dollars(for doing unskilled labor - like clearing mines) to up to ten dollars if the Afghan could speak English and serve as foreman for the crew. This led to an overabundance of "hodgie" laborers running around and most of the KBR crew just serving as babysitters. It wouldn't surprise me if their fleecing of Afghanistan wasn't more efficient. I didn't, however, see any of the major fraud and abuse highlighted in this clip. Although, they did serve steak and lobster on Fridays in the chow hall.

/seriously - not that I was complaining at the time, but ya, they did.

exactly my thoughts, Crosswords

... finally a chance for George Foreman to show that old one-two technique and he just sits there like a lump.

so basically, there's people who have the wrong idea about bugs, damp, maintenance etc.

there's 100 year old strawbale houses still standing.

heat insulation is phenomenal, i built one on a very cold day and as soon as the walls were up our body heat was enough to keep us warm inside, without a roof!

sound insulation is phenomenal, they built a single bale width wall around the generator and filmed a tv program 10 meters away.

a properly built plastered straw bale wall is a 2 hour firewall. there's not much air in there to fuel the fire if the bales are compressed. a straw bale house in the uk burnt down recently and the only thing left standing was the straw bale wall. that is not "very flammable".

the problem in the UK is getting a standard certified so that you can get a mortgage, and convincing local corrupt planners that you are not insane.

http://www.strawbale-building.co.uk/index.php?page=faq

it's not like there are zero drawbacks with bricks and mortar.

one of the things i liked best about building that straw house was that a whole big team of unqualified people can learn the skills in about five minutes under an experienced foreman. then you all get together and have fun building, instead of just calling a big ass truck to come and pour tons of concrete into the ground.

also don't forget the fact that if you build your own natural home, it's BEAUTIFUL to live in, these things are really damn nice compared to identikit "american dream" new houses.