The economy is doing well but......

[jarthur31]

for how long?

 

Seriously, why is this administration and legislature giving big corporations all these tax breaks only to show their appreciation by getting out of town like Speedy Gonzalez? This doesn't make sense. Out-sourcing is killing this country and nobody seems to give a damn except Lou Dobbs.

 

I think it's very un-patriotic to spit on the American people in such a way as to take away their jobs. It's time we started to boycott companies who hire foreigners more than the domestic workforce.

 

Let's hope things change.

[Prognastic]

Its always a "but" when the other party is in control.

 

I'm sure none of you were saying "but" when the dot com bubble was flying high.

[jarthur31]

I voted for Bush twice and I'm not a Rep/Dem so there goes your theory!!!

[Joey Balls]

for how long? 

 

Seriously, why is this administration and legislature giving big corporations all these tax breaks only to show their appreciation by getting out of town like Speedy Gonzalez?  This doesn't make sense.  Out-sourcing is killing this country and nobody seems to give a damn except Lou Dobbs. 

 

I think it's very un-patriotic to spit on the American people in such a way as to take away their jobs.  It's time we started to boycott companies who hire foreigners more than the domestic workforce. 

 

Let's hope things change.

829039[/snapback]

 

 

 

Well...Jack Davis cared.

 

 

...but then a funny thing happened in Buffalo on Friday the Thirteenth....and the rest just writes itself, reconfirming the belief of many that God is a Republican.

[jjamie12]

for how long?  

 

Seriously, why is this administration and legislature giving big corporations all these tax breaks only to show their appreciation by getting out of town like Speedy Gonzalez?   This doesn't make sense.   Out-sourcing is killing this country and nobody seems to give a damn except Lou Dobbs. 

 

I think it's very un-patriotic to spit on the American people in such a way as to take away their jobs.  It's time we started to boycott companies who hire foreigners more than the domestic workforce. 

 

Let's hope things change.

829039[/snapback]

The reality is that, in the long run, outsourcing makes us all better off. Unfortunately, there will be a few people who don't have any marketable skills other than 'laborer'. The government should assist them with education and/or training to be a productive member of the new economy.

 

Face it, folks, we live in a global economy, and lower consumer prices across the board helps all Americans.

[JimBob2232]

When?

Perhaps once Democrats raise the Minimum wage 40 Percent, thus increasing the payroll of many small businesses by 40 percent.

 

When?

Perhaps after Democrats repeal the Bush tax cuts causing you and I (and small business owners) to pay more in taxes.

 

 

And the combination of the two...deadly. Small Businesses lost yesterday.

[PastaJoe]

The reality is that, in the long run, outsourcing makes us all better off.  Unfortunately, there will be a few people who don't have any marketable skills other than 'laborer'.  The government should assist them with education and/or training to be a productive member of the new economy. 

 

Face it, folks, we live in a global economy, and lower consumer prices across the board helps all Americans.

830326[/snapback]

 

How long is the long run, the next generation? Increased health and energy costs eat up any benefit from lower prices for other consumer goods. Telling people that they should get retrained or educated isn't easy for the 50 year old person who can't afford to not work to go to school, and can't get another job that pays a similar wage to the old job because they don't have the experience or education to get hired for that job. So they end up taking a lower wage service job, often working nights and weekends so they lose family time (so much for family values). And if they do go to school to retrain, after graduating they have to compete for entry level jobs in their new field with people half their age who employers will view as having less baggage and not use as many health benefits.

 

There's no direct correlation anymore between stock values and prosperity for American workers; the stock price usually goes up when they move their jobs from the U.S. to lower-cost countries. People out of work often end up having to sell what few stocks they had, and dip into their retirement accounts to keep up with their house payments, assuming a company like Enron didn't already drain them dry.

[Cripes]

When?

Perhaps once Democrats raise the Minimum wage 40 Percent, thus increasing the payroll of many small businesses by 40 percent.

 

When?

Perhaps after Democrats repeal the Bush tax cuts causing you and I (and small business owners) to pay more in taxes.

And the combination of the two...deadly.  Small Businesses lost yesterday.

830328[/snapback]

 

The minimum wage issue is political theater, not an actual small business concern. In a Gallup poll for Wells Fargo poll last March, 86 percent of small businesses said the minimum wage issue had no impact on their bottom line or their hiring practices.

[Buftex]

When?

Perhaps once Democrats raise the Minimum wage 40 Percent, thus increasing the payroll of many small businesses by 40 percent.

 

When?

Perhaps after Democrats repeal the Bush tax cuts causing you and I (and small business owners) to pay more in taxes.

And the combination of the two...deadly.  Small Businesses lost yesterday.

830328[/snapback]

 

 

Flightsuit! Ding ding, gotta go my "hotpocket" is done...

 

What a bunch of crap!

[mike1011]

The minimum wage issue is political theater, not an actual small business concern. In a Gallup poll for Wells Fargo poll last March, 86 percent of small businesses said the minimum wage issue had no impact on their bottom line or their hiring practices.

830404[/snapback]

 

And the 14% of businesses it will affect?

 

How about the fact that most ma and pa shops are under the table and now there will be more and more small companies paying under the table to avoid paying taxes on their employees?

 

It will affect a lot more than 14% of business. Small businesses as a class are about 2-30 employees. Now it won't affect business that are 15-30 employees, but it will affect business from 2-14. That includes small diners, restaurants, ma and pa stores (hardware, antique, etc.) and the list goes on.

 

People are clueless because most people work a job and have never owned a business, and if they did own one it's in the past tense. It's going to affect me, that's for sure. It won't put me out of business, but it will force me to outsource my work to large corporations for things like marketing instead of giving to the local community. I can see raising it 10%, but certainly not 40%.

[Alaska Darin]

Flightsuit!  Ding ding, gotta go my "hotpocket" is done...

 

What a bunch of crap!

830419[/snapback]

Wanna bet?

[jjamie12]

How long is the long run, the next generation?

Actually, we're already seeing it with lower prices for consumer goods, which puts real money into the pockets of real people everyday (or, rather, takes less money out).

Increased health and energy costs eat up any benefit from lower prices for other consumer goods.

And how much more alarming would those increases in health and energy costs be if we had to pay EVEN HIGHER prices for everyday things, like shirts and shoes and whatever else?

Telling people that they should get retrained or educated isn't easy for the 50 year old person who can't afford to not work to go to school, and can't get another job that pays a similar wage to the old job because they don't have the experience or education to get hired for that job.  So they end up taking a lower wage service job, often working nights and weekends so they lose family time (so much for family values).  And if they do go to school to retrain, after graduating they have to compete for entry level jobs in their new field with people half their age who employers will view as having less baggage and not use as many health benefits.

That certainly sucks for the percentage of the population that this happens to, no question about it. However, for the greater good of ALL people in the US, the best way to distribute those gains made from globalisation is to try and re-train those who lost their jobs due to globalisation so that they can be productive members of the new economy. You're absolutely right, it isn't going to be smooth sailing for every single person in the US. However, the economy (and thus, the people) will be much better off. We need to ensure continuing economic growth for everyone, not protectionist policies that help only a few, and harm the many.

 

There's no direct correlation anymore between stock values and prosperity for American workers; the stock price usually goes up when they move their jobs from the U.S. to lower-cost countries.  People out of work often end up having to sell what few stocks they had, and dip into their retirement accounts to keep up with their house payments, assuming a company like Enron didn't already drain them dry. 

830346[/snapback]

I guess the part that I am not seeing is why I should subsidize people's housing choices? If you can't afford your home, sell it. You're not out here saying that everyone should be employed, right? You're not calling for the government to ensure zero unemployment, right? So what makes manufacturing special? Further, you're obfuscating the point with your reference to Enron. The people who brought you Enron got their day in court, and justice (sort of) was done. Enron wasn't outsourcing manufacturing jobs, though. Enron has nothing to do with this conversation. That line goes into a 'Business Bad' thread.

 

Look, we live in a capitalist society. If you think that everyone should be guaranteed a job, go ahead and vote for Socialists or Communists, and that's fine, I respect your opinion about those things. However, you aren't making a case for Socialism, you're making a case for protecting a class of people in the US, at the expense of the greater good. Not a good (or rational) case to make, in my opinion.

[PastaJoe]

Look, we live in a capitalist society.  If you think that everyone should be guaranteed a job, go ahead and vote for Socialists or Communists, and that's fine, I respect your opinion about those things.  However, you aren't making a case for Socialism, you're making a case for protecting a class of people in the US, at the expense of the greater good.  Not a good (or rational) case to make, in my opinion.

830812[/snapback]

 

I see the middle class eroding in the U.S., in large part because of the shift of manufacturing overseas. Some are doing better in this economy, but most are doing worse. I don't expect the gov't to guarantee jobs, but do everything they can to create a fair playing field with other countries, even if that means tariffs. They also should place a higher tax on companies that move jobs overseas, and avoid taxes by incorporating in countries like Jamaica and putting a dummy headquarters in another country. We import more than we export. The global economy hasn't been a net benefit for the middle class workers, including myself whose job was outsourced to China two years ago.

 

I thank you for a civil discourse.

[JimBob2232]

Flightsuit!  Ding ding, gotta go my "hotpocket" is done...

 

What a bunch of crap!

830419[/snapback]

 

 

Come at me with a factual retort and some real data to back up your claim that my post was a bunch of crap....Please.

[jjamie12]

I see the middle class eroding in the U.S., in large part because of the shift of manufacturing overseas.  Some are doing better in this economy, but most are doing worse.

What do you mean by 'eroding'? I'm not really sure how to respond, but all I can say is that I think it would be a hard case to make that the average American was better off in 1970 (say) than they are today. We live longer, we live better... all of us.

I don't expect the gov't to guarantee jobs, but do everything they can to create a fair playing field with other countries, even if that means tariffs.

This NECESSARILY means higher prices. Does that hurt or help all Americans? I also think that employess whose jobs are outsourced should be given some sort of training in order to help them try and find another job that is fits in more with the 'new economy' That is an important piece of the puzzle, because there is no doubt that it hurts some people. Those people that are hurt by it should get something out of it. It would be in our national interest for that 'something' to be a more well-educated workforce. Then, those people can reap the benefits, as well.

They also should place a higher tax on companies that move jobs overseas,...

You want to tax companies for running their business in the best possible way? You understand what this would do to value of American companies, right? You know, the companies that you and I and everyone else have as part of our mutual funds or 401K or IRA's right?

The global economy hasn't been a net benefit for the middle class workers,

I don't know how you can say this. Everything that I have read leads me to the understanding that we are, as a whole, better off because of globalisation. Americans enjoy lower costs. I assume that you know about all of the costs that would be borne by all Americans (mostly middle class, though, because a greater % of our paychecks will be going to consumer goods than an upper class person) as outlined above, I guess I just can't figure out why you think it is going to be better, given the things that you've proposed above???

including myself whose job was outsourced to China two years ago. 

Now I see... That is tough, I am sorry that this has happened to you, I'm sure it doesn't seem fair, and your position on this issue makes a lot more sense to me now. Unfortunately, it really still is a matter of making things worse for everyone by trying to help out a few. It is too bad that you are one of 'the few', but I really feel that it is important that the US economy and US worker continue to change, adapt, and grow with the times. If we don't, it will lead to much bigger economic problems.

 

For what it's worth, my father is in a similar situation, but his job has been spared (fortunately for us) so far. He works in a factory in Olean, NY, that has been cutting jobs for years now, and employing more and more workers in China. We have this same conversation quite a bit. I'm not sure if he buys the whole globalisation argument, either, but he DOES buy a lot of stuff for cheap because of it.

[JimBob2232]

Outsourcing DOES hurt our economy. Jobs are going overseas, people are unemployed and not paying taxes. Welfare rolls increase.

 

But the solution is NOT to force companies to stay here via tarrifs.

 

What we need to ask ourseleves is why, with america being one of the largest consumer of commercial goods in the world, would a company choose to start making their product on the opposite side of the world and leave america? Think about what they gain and lose

1) Distribution Network

2) Trained Employees

3) Gain Added Shipping Expense

4) Need to train new employees

5) Need to maintain product Quality

 

This is a big struggle for a company. So if they do it, there HAS to be a reason. And the reason is that the United States cannot compete with many developing nations on a tax basis. Its simply much cheaper for a company to manufacture cars in china and ship them to the united states than it is to manufacture them here. It has to be. Its the only logical conclusion.

 

Why is the cost of bussiness higher in the US?

Well, for starters, the minimum wage is comparatively very high in the US. So any company who employs alot of minimum wage earners, its a no brainer to look elsewhere.

Secondly, corporate taxes are higher in the US.

 

The solution to the problem is not to force comanies to stay here, but to give them reasons to. LOWER the minimum wage, LOWER corporate taxes.

[GG]

The solution to the problem is not to force comanies to stay here, but to give them reasons to.  LOWER the minimum wage, LOWER corporate taxes.

831547[/snapback]

 

And how will lowering the minimum wage raise the standard of living for the middle class?

 

The bigger question is whether the long-term effect on our economy decline of US-based manufacturing is as bad as Lou Dobbs makes it sound. So far, US has done well over a 30+ year decline in manfucaturing things domestically.

[JimBob2232]

And how will lowering the minimum wage raise the standard of living for the middle class?

 

831631[/snapback]

 

First off, I dont think people making the minimum wage are considered middle class. But beyond that, the mere fact that a reduction in the minimum wage will allow companies to hire MORE people and increase productivity, or provide an incentive to keep their companies in the united states vice packing up and moving overseas is a big step in the right direction.

[Alaska Darin]

First off, I dont think people making the minimum wage are considered middle class.  But beyond that, the mere fact that a reduction in the minimum wage will allow companies to hire MORE people and increase productivity, or provide an incentive to keep their companies in the united states vice packing up and moving overseas is a big step in the right direction.

831851[/snapback]

No offense, but there are few minimum wage jobs that have much to do with productivity.

[Johnny Coli]

No offense, but there are few minimum wage jobs that have much to do with productivity.

832061[/snapback]

Let's throw more unskilled employees at a problem and pay them even less. Where have I seen that business model before....hmmm...oh, yeah. Slavery and sweatshops. Let's turn back the clock to the 1890's.