With good jobs going away, middle class downsizes

[dennisw]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/11/1...es-as-its.html

I think most folks are sympathetic with blue collars jobs going overseas. Not sure if most realize how many white collar jobs are leaving also. Globalization appears to be a popular movement, but for many Americans it will change their lives in a dramatic and negative way.

The mantra related to job losses is that the folks should retrain, adapt and overcome, but when large corporations ship these jobs overseas, it affects most Americans; not just those who are "down sized."

[Dusty]

If I were President, I'd do these to increase jobs:

- Keep the Bush tax cuts.
- Eliminate the Capital Gains tax.
- Give the Military a 10% pay bump.


Reagan turned the economy around in the early '80's by reducing spending and taxes after Carter nearly drove it in the ground. We could do something similar now.

Employers have money, they're just scared to let it loose because of the fiscal uncertainty brought about by four years of the antics of the current Congress.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Chip.B

It's popular to blame Obama but Bush is the one mostly responsible for this mess.

Enough with the one liners tonight. You one liners need to start putting some meat on your posts or you'll be sitting in the bleachers.

So explain what Bush did to cause this since the D's took over congress in 2006 and Obama has been Prsident just about two years now.

[Snaquebite]

Originally Posted by Chip.B

It's popular to blame Obama but Bush is the one mostly responsible for this mess.

Chip B you have a PM......I want to hear exactly how you support this statement.

[dennisw]

I think this problem is larger than any one person or politician. Instinctively, it seems it relates more to corporate profits or more to the today's culture . Is it wrong to not always go with the cheaper alternative? I think there are going to be lessons learned here. I would expand, but after three glasses of a good chardonnay, I'll probably be talking gibberish. At least more than normal.

[dennisw]

Originally Posted by Chip.B

1.We went into Iraq without any kind of preparation concerning dealing with the insurgency we dealt with there. It almost seemed like Bush did not expect many of the problems there that occurred.

2. What goals did he set for the war in Afghanistan? Were they ever made public? Alot of people ask me about this and I do not have a answer for them. Recently it has been made public that they will be responsible for their security in three years but Bush is no longer the president.

I'm not sure you are exactly on point. I think the insurgency did not really ramp up until after we had been in Iraq for some time. As far as Afghanistan, he and his crew had a pretty straight forward idea and it wasn't nation building . They wanted to send a message that if you mess with us or if you are closely related to someone who is messing with us, we're going to rock your world. I personally think the message was appropriate and SF delivered it special express!!

I believe it was the right message. You f@#4 with the USA and you do so at your own peril.

[rdret1]

This has been a situation decades in the making. As a nation, we have slowed our own industries. Our agricultural industry, once the envy of the world, has changed dramatically. At the turn of the 20th century, over 40% of Americans were employed by farms. Today, it is less than 1%. Our farms are producing more, but employ fewer people due to being run by corporations and advaced machinery. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib3/eib3.htm

The story is the same for the steel industry, with once proud steel towns seeing some of the highest unemployment in the nation. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Steel_industry,_history

We have given our industrial bases away to other countries. They produce products at cheaper prices which allow the corporations to make more money. Unions once served a purpose, protecting workers from intolerable work place conditions. Today, they only serve to raise production costs to the level that we price ourselves out of business.

With Congress giving up their responsibility of negotiating trade with foreign countries, corporations and lobbyists have been successful in getting trade agreements signed which eventually sent employment overseas. The best example being NAFTA. It was signed by Bush the Elder but passed into law under Clinton who hailed it as his greatest achievement.

We have been the authors of our own decline for a long time.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Chip.B

1.We went into Iraq without any kind of preparation concerning dealing with the insurgency we dealt with there. It almost seemed like Bush did not expect many of the problems there that occurred.

2. What goals did he set for the war in Afghanistan? Were they ever made public? Alot of people ask me about this and I do not have a answer for them. Recently it has been made public that they will be responsible for their security in three years but Bush is no longer the president.

3. China is not all Bush's doing. I believe alot of our issues with them started with Clinton selling them technology, however, there are some serious trade issues with them that need to be straightened out. How much poisoned pet food came over during his term? What about the led paint ordeal? It all happened during his time in office. Many of our jobs went overseas under his watch.

OK explain the relationship between the WoT and the Corporate Tax rate in the US.

What is the tax rate on corporations based in the US vs other countries?

At what rate is a European Company taxed by it's home company on profits earned in America? At what rate is an American Company taxed on profits earned in another country?

Is America by way of taxation and regulation friendly to business or is it anti business?

Would you like to earn more interest when you deposit money into your bank or do you love your bank so much you'll pay them to keep your money?

As others have said this is more than one man or administration. It is a slow grinding down of American Production because of anti business taxation and regulation.

And a tariff is protectionism and an imbedded tax on Americans who buy the item - money that goes straight to the government.

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Chip.B

1.We went into Iraq without any kind of preparation concerning dealing with the insurgency we dealt with there. It almost seemed like Bush did not expect many of the problems there that occurred.

2. What goals did he set for the war in Afghanistan? Were they ever made public? Alot of people ask me about this and I do not have a answer for them. Recently it has been made public that they will be responsible for their security in three years but Bush is no longer the president.

3. China is not all Bush's doing. I believe alot of our issues with them started with Clinton selling them technology, however, there are some serious trade issues with them that need to be straightened out. How much poisoned pet food came over during his term? What about the led paint ordeal? It all happened during his time in office. Many of our jobs went overseas under his watch.

Wow!

Looks like you drank the Kool-Aid. I don't think you have actually read the Iraq and Afghanistan plans or examined the planning in detail, have you? Did you get these points from the evening news, or a newspaper?

What do you think the EPA is doing to manufacturing in the country, along with unions and new regulations?

Bush had a Repub Congress for six years. The Dims have had it for almost four now. Look at what they have passed or tried to pass since they took charge. Very anti-business and anti-jobs. Those jobs are never coming back.

Clinton gave the Chinese MFN status, IIRC, and let the camel's nose under the tent.

TR

[rdret1]

[QUOTE=Broadsword2004;356990]

I think they are still the envy of the world, but farming has grown far more efficient. If 40% of Americans were still employed in farming, we would have a much lower standard of living because we would lack the ability to grow enough food unless having a massive portion of the population farming. This would mean no one to do all the other jobs plus it would mean much less efficiency at agriculture.

I agree to a point. Though farms have become more efficient, the actual number of farms and of farming acreage, have declined significantly. Where I disagree is your statement about no one to do the other jobs. What other jobs? There are plenty of jobs available on farms, there are not many people who want to do them. How many people do you know that will work for minimum wage chopping cotton, picking lettuce or fruit, etc.? The jobs are there, the willing workforce is not.

I believe that's just because cheaper steel can be had from other countries, but this helps American manufacturing. Steel tariffs that protect American steel, do so at the expense of other jobs in the economy.

How has union interference effected the price of American steel? Which steel is of higher quality? China keeps the price of their steel low through massive government subsidies and no interference of anti-pollution laws, unlike our own. http://66.39.14.41/new/20070601.pdf

I think NAFTA was a very good thing and hasn't led to America's decline at all. Remember, America still manufactures more than any other nation in the world. China is right on our heals and may eventually surpass us, but American manufacturing is more productive today than ever and has continued growing larger over the years, it's just it's like farming, manufacturing employment has declined, and as a percentage of the economy, manufacturing makes up a smaller percent, but that is due to the growth of the knowledge and services sector of the economy.

NAFTA caused the loss of over 800,000 American jobs, approximately 80% of which were from the manufacturing industries. http://useconomy.about.com/od/tradep...A_Problems.htm

Liberalization of trade allows all individuals and businesses to engage in contracts with one another, which creates wealth and jobs. America is fifty states, all of which do free trade with one another. I mean we don't worry about New York businesses "shipping jobs off to Texas" for example. This forms the national economy. The businesses and individuals in these states also engage in trade with other businesses and individuals throughout the world.

States trading amongst themselves still maintains our domestic economy. The money originates and stays within our borders. "Shipping jobs off to Texas" keeps the jobs in the United States. It is much easier for someone to follow a job to Texas than to Mexico or India. It is apples and oranges.

One of the hallmarks of the European Union is to form a liberal area of trade within Europe, so the EU nations can trade with one another easier.

We see where the EU is today. The stronger member nations are taxing their own citizens to prop up weaker member nations like Greece.

Also technologies crucial to the national security should not be sold to other nations, like the advanced computer technologies sold to the Chinese under Clinton.

Agreed 100%

[Paslode]

Originally Posted by Chip.B

3. China is not all Bush's doing. I believe alot of our issues with them started with Clinton selling them technology, however, there are some serious trade issues with them that need to be straightened out. How much poisoned pet food came over during his term? What about the led paint ordeal? It all happened during his time in office. Many of our jobs went overseas under his watch.

You might say China started with Nixon, and jobs have been heading overseas for decades. I believe the number of jobs and infrastructure lost under Bushes term pales in comparison to the jobs lost in the 1970-80's.

rdret1 note on the steel industry is s good example. When 51% produced domestically qualified as Made in the USA things started heading out outside our borders. Then add that companies received Tax Incentives and Subsidies for Foreign Investment aka move your production offshore. And offshore sometimes entails floating factories, manned by slave labor 'just' outside US Territorial Waters that produce unmarked pipe and fittings that get/got stamped Made in USA.


As for all the tainted products like Chinese toys, drywall, milk, pet food etc.....The EPA and USDA only care when they (The Government and their lobby) can make a buck off it and either drive business to foreign countries -or- into the corporate consolidation scheme.

For example the EPA mandates that to work on houses built prior to 1978 you need to spend $350 to get lead certified, and the EPA will fine little ole me $35k for not following their rules.......but it is apparently just fine if China ships toys with lead on them and WalMart (and other chains) peddles them to your kids to naw on. And then there is the unlicensed Pickup Truck Contractor, the EPA doesn't know he exists and they don't care.....they only pick on the companies that try and do things on the up & up.


Aside from the Unions influence, part of the reason the steel/iron industries left our shore was in large part due to EPA Regulations and mandated clean up (the EPA Super Fund). So we shipped our 'toxic' industries off to China or 'just' across the border from Brownsville, Texas.

The USDA (as does Immigration) turns a blind eye to Don Tyson, but hammers the small farmer. Joe the Small Farmer sells some bad chicken, the number and area affected will be microscopic. Don Tyson ships bad chicken, it has the potential to reach many states and tens of thousands.

Incandescent light bulbs are being taken out of production for more energy efficient fluorescent 'Mercury' filled light bulbs made in China......when did Mercury become Green Friendly and EPA compliant?


It is all madness.

[GratefulCitizen]

The problem is one of perception.
People don't feel like they're doing well economically unless they are moving up relative to everyone else.

Think about that.
It's not possible for everyone to be "above average" in their income or wealth.

How big is the average home today? In 1950? In 1970? In 1990?
How many hours is the average work-year today? In 1950? In 1970? In 1990?
How many cars does the average household have? In 1950? In 1970? In 1990?
What is the national obesity rate? In 1950? In 1970? In 1990?
We have excess consumer electronics, food, and conveniences galore.

The rest of the world just happens to be catching up with us.
The fact that the rest of the world is becoming richer does not make anyone in this nation poorer.

We should celebrate the fact that so many of our fellow human beings are enjoying ever-increasing standards of living.
There are several types of envy, among them are envy of those who have more than you do, and envy of those who may soon have as much as you do.

In the not-so-distant future, their will be a several billion people in Asia clamoring for goods...which are made in the USA.
They will soon have disrectionary income and want to spend it.

A happy thought of the day:
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...&postcount=264

[trvlr]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Wow!

Bush had a Repub Congress for six years. The --> Dims <-- have had it for almost four now.

TR

Expert partisan subconscious mental conditioning. Must remain mentally neutral

I agree that this problem is a child of hundreds of different political fathers. Republicans, Democrats etc.

However, when we don't buy domestic that has a huge affect on businesses.

One line of reasoning I don't understand is "big business wants to hire us, they're just scared of taxes." I could understand small businesses feeling that way, but globalization has led to a lower bottom line for big business. Since the majority of them are in business SOLELY for profit, what do they care if they have to pay (random number alert) 6% more per worker due to taxes rather than the (random number alert) 4% it was before.

Does anyone know if jobs from overseas returned at a higher rate during President Bush's time? I know they haven't with the current President, and President Clinton had an international fire sale. Did President Bush's policies bring jobs back? If it didn't then should we repeat the same tactics now?

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by trvlr

Does anyone know if jobs from overseas returned at a higher rate during President Bush's time? I know they haven't with the current President, and President Clinton had an international fire sale. Did President Bush's policies bring jobs back? If it didn't then should we repeat the same tactics now?

The long-term effective tools the government has to promote domestic job growth are deregulation and tax breaks in the industries where job growth is desired.
(Subsidies/tariffs are nothing more than a tax on everyone else.)
Even those tools have their limits.

On a long-term basis, government can't create jobs, they can only remove obstacles and foster a business-friendly environment.
Government isn't the solution, government is the problem.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by trvlr

............ Since the majority of them are in business SOLELY for profit, what do they care if they have to pay (random number alert) 6% more per worker due to taxes rather than the (random number alert) 4% it was before............

What do they care about 2%?

How much should a pair of $15 Dollar pants cost? If I'm just buying a pair of knockabout cargo pants for hiking or working in the yard?

Let's see Target at $15, Cabella's at $29.99 plus shipping or Sears at $32.

When you put your item on a shelf it has to sell before you can make a profit.

You have to balance quality vs price. Sink too much quality into a product and nobody will buy it.

Taxes come off the top - Companies do not pay taxes - the cost is passed on to the consumer in the price of the product or made up for in fired/layed off workers.