JOBS; via The U.S. Government!!!

Mr. Shaman

Senior Member
May 4, 2010
23,892
822
48
....'cause our professional-managers sure-as-Hell aren't GETTIN' THE JOB DONE!!!!

:mad:

"Recently an acquaintance at the next table in a Palo Alto (Calif.) restaurant introduced me to his companions, three young venture capitalists from China. They explained, with visible excitement, that they were touring promising companies in Silicon Valley. I've lived in the Valley a long time, and usually when I see how the region has become such a draw for global investments, I feel a little proud.

Not this time. I left the restaurant unsettled. Something did not add up. Bay Area unemployment is even higher than the 9.7 percent national average. Clearly, the great Silicon Valley innovation machine hasn't been creating many jobs of late—unless you're counting Asia, where American tech companies have been adding jobs like mad for years.

Our fundamental economic beliefs, which we have elevated from a conviction based on observation to an unquestioned truism, is that the free market is the best of all economic systems—the freer the better. Our generation has seen the decisive victory of free-market principles over planned economies. So we stick with this belief, largely oblivious to emerging evidence that while free markets beat planned economies, there may be room for a modification that is even better.

Such evidence stares at us from the performance of several Asian countries in the past few decades. These countries seem to understand that job creation must be the No. 1 objective of state economic policy. The government plays a strategic role in setting the priorities and arraying the forces and organization necessary to achieve this goal. The rapid development of the Asian economies provides numerous illustrations. In a thorough study of the industrial development of East Asia, Robert Wade of the London School of Economics found that these economies turned in precedent-shattering economic performances over the '70s and '80s in large part because of the effective involvement of the government in targeting the growth of manufacturing industries.

How do we turn such Asian experience into intelligent action here and now? Long term, we need a job-centric economic theory—and job-centric political leadership—to guide our plans and actions. In the meantime, consider some basic thoughts from a onetime factory guy:...."

**

Andrew%2BGrove.jpg


Andy Grove, senior adviser to Intel, was the company's chief executive officer or chairman from 1987 until 2005.​
 
Yeah, gov't planning worked really well for the Soviet Union, East Germany, and Japan.
Every one of them was hailed as an economic miracle. Eventually the realities of economics and the inefficiencies inherent in a state-run system caught up with them.
You fail.
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.

As time passed, wages and health-care costs rose in the U.S. China opened up. American companies discovered that they could have their manufacturing and even their engineering done more cheaply overseas. When they did so, margins improved. Management was happy, and so were stockholders. Growth continued, even more profitably. But the job machine began sputtering.
The 10X Factor

Today, manufacturing employment in the U.S. computer industry is about 166,000, lower than it was before the first PC, the MITS Altair 2800, was assembled in 1975 (figure-B). Meanwhile, a very effective computer manufacturing industry has emerged in Asia, employing about 1.5 million workers—factory employees, engineers, and managers
.

You could say, as many do, that shipping jobs overseas is no big deal because the high-value work—and much of the profits—remain in the U.S. That may well be so. But what kind of a society are we going to have if it consists of highly paid people doing high-value-added work—and masses of unemployed?

Silicon Valley company sells equipment used to manufacture photo-active films. They ship close to 10 times more machines to China than to manufacturers in the U.S., and this gap is growing (figure-D). Not surprisingly, U.S. employment in the making of photovoltaic films and panels is perhaps 10,000—just a few percent of estimated worldwide employment.

I believe the answer has to do with a general undervaluing of manufacturing—the idea that as long as "knowledge work" stays in the U.S., it doesn't matter what happens to factory jobs. It's not just newspaper commentators who spread this idea. Consider this passage by Princeton University economist Alan S. Blinder: "The TV manufacturing industry really started here, and at one point employed many workers. But as TV sets became 'just a commodity,' their production moved offshore to locations with much lower wages. And nowadays the number of television sets manufactured in the U.S. is zero. A failure? No, a success."
I disagree. Not only did we lose an untold number of jobs, we broke the chain of experience that is so important in technological evolution. As happened with batteries, abandoning today's "commodity" manufacturing can lock you out of tomorrow's emerging industry.

The first task is to rebuild our industrial commons. We should develop a system of financial incentives: Levy an extra tax on the product of offshored labor. (If the result is a trade war, treat it like other wars—fight to win.) Keep that money separate. Deposit it in the coffers of what we might call the Scaling Bank of the U.S. and make these sums available to companies that will scale their American operations. Such a system would be a daily reminder that while pursuing our company goals, all of us in business have a responsibility to maintain the industrial base on which we depend and the society whose adaptability—and stability—we may have taken for granted.
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.

]

I dont know what "capital invests offshore" means.
Capital follows the highest return. Currently,because of U.S. policies that punish success that highest return is in other countries, specifially Asian ones. As long as the Left wants to punish the very people who create business and wealth, calling them vultures, or speculators, or whatever, then you won't have any wealth creation.
Why anyone thinks this is complicated is beyond me.
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.

]

I dont know what "capital invests offshore" means.


That's fairly obvious.


Capital follows the highest return.

Yes it does, as it should...within the law. Nothing wrong with that.

Currently,because of U.S. policies that punish success that highest return is in other countries, specifially Asian ones.

Not exactly. Capital is chasing the lowest worker costs.

Right now that advantage is mostly found in the third world.


As long as the Left wants to punish the very people who create business and wealth, calling them vultures, or speculators, or whatever, then you won't have any wealth creation.

So you're calling the founding fathers and their first 150 years of American economic policies that of the "Left" and vultures and speculators, are you?

That's an interesting interpretation of that long established American trade policy.


Why anyone thinks this is complicated is beyond me.

Simple minds often feel that way about complex subjects, Lad.

Usually, when it comes to these issues, I find those simpltons don't really know much either about economics OR American history.
 
Yeah, gov't planning worked really well for the Soviet Union, East Germany, and Japan.
Every one of them was hailed as an economic miracle. Eventually the realities of economics and the inefficiencies inherent in a state-run system caught up with them.
You fail.
Yeah....those government/business-partnerships are sooooooooooooooooo dangerous!!

:rolleyes:

I think I'll take a successful-CEOs word (for what WORKS), over some frustrated-Teabagger's opinion.​
 
Last edited:
Hey, Mr. Shaman, maybe we should look to the Democrat Party's latest US Senate candidate for real, fresh ideas for economic recovery:

US Senate Hopeful In SC Wants An Action Figure - CBS News

Yep. The Democratic US Senate candidate wants to start making action figures of himself in Army and Air Force uniforms to boost the economy.

I don't know whats more shocking. A US Senate candidate who thinks making action figures of himself will fix the economy, or the fact that left wingers are dumb enough to vote for him.
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.
....Not-to-mention greedy, self-centered, amateurish business-managers, who're only concerned about their OWN short-term plans!!!!

:mad:
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.
....Not-to-mention greedy, self-centered, amateurish business-managers, who're only concerned about their OWN short-term plans!!!!

:mad:

US Senate Hopeful In SC Wants An Action Figure - CBS News

Question: Which person had the idea of creating action figures of himself as a way to fix the economy?

A) The Democratic US Senate candidate in SC
B) A greedy, self-centered, amateurish business manager
C) A 4th grader in Hawaii
D) The dog from the show Full House
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.

]

I dont know what "capital invests offshore" means.
Capital follows the highest return. Currently,because of U.S. policies that punish success.....
BZZZZZZT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I should have cut-you-off, back at I dont know what "capital invests offshore" means.

When you start blowin' that policies that punish success-Teabagger-rhetoric, it's all-too-obvious you have NO BACKGROUND in manufacturing-concerns/processes.

It's all THEORY, to you. You 'Baggers need to recognize your limitations....no-matter WHAT positive-reinforcement Porky Limbaugh shovels your way. HIS forte is sittin'-around on his fat-ass....bullshittin' everyone (to cover for HIS inability to do anything, productive).

:rolleyes:
 
Hey, Mr. Shaman, maybe we should look to the Democrat Party's latest US Senate candidate for real, fresh ideas for economic recovery:

US Senate Hopeful In SC Wants An Action Figure - CBS News

Yep. The Democratic US Senate candidate wants to start making action figures of himself in Army and Air Force uniforms to boost the economy.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I saw that, last-nite.....another loony-tune from S.C.!!!!!!!

That dude needs some serious help....like.....medication!!

"South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum

:clap2:
 
Last edited:
Hey, Mr. Shaman, maybe we should look to the Democrat Party's latest US Senate candidate for real, fresh ideas for economic recovery:

US Senate Hopeful In SC Wants An Action Figure - CBS News

Yep. The Democratic US Senate candidate wants to start making action figures of himself in Army and Air Force uniforms to boost the economy.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I saw that, last-nite.....another loony-tune from S.C.!!!!!!!

That dude needs some serious help....like.....medication!!

I have the same opinion of trolls who can't post in less than 2 colors.
 
Hey, Mr. Shaman, maybe we should look to the Democrat Party's latest US Senate candidate for real, fresh ideas for economic recovery:

US Senate Hopeful In SC Wants An Action Figure - CBS News

Yep. The Democratic US Senate candidate wants to start making action figures of himself in Army and Air Force uniforms to boost the economy.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I saw that, last-nite.....another loony-tune from S.C.!!!!!!!

That dude needs some serious help....like.....medication!!

I have the same opinion of trolls who can't post in less than 2 colors.

When someone asks, I'll let you know.....

:rolleyes:
 
Hey, Mr. Shaman, maybe we should look to the Democrat Party's latest US Senate candidate for real, fresh ideas for economic recovery:

US Senate Hopeful In SC Wants An Action Figure - CBS News

Yep. The Democratic US Senate candidate wants to start making action figures of himself in Army and Air Force uniforms to boost the economy.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I saw that, last-nite.....another loony-tune from S.C.!!!!!!!

That dude needs some serious help....like.....medication!!

"South Carolina is too small for a republic and too large for an insane asylum

:clap2:

You know what, I'm gonna applaud you for that one.

You're the first left wing guy who has responded to that story without blaming Republicans, Bush, Cheney, etc.

Yeah, that guy is looney and needs help probably. And yes, he's not the first South Carolinian to fit that category.

But as a SC resident, let me assure you guys, most folks here are in fact normal. It's just that somehow our looneys end up winning elections.
 
The guy makes good sense to me.

Our nation is innovative, and then the moment those tecnological innovations are ready to go online on a grand scale, capital invests offshore.

Naturally that leads to this nation becoming a place where wages drop over the long run.

And folks?

Today we are seeing the net effect of a LONG RUN of that mistaken policy.

]




That's fairly obvious.




Yes it does, as it should...within the law. Nothing wrong with that.



Not exactly. Capital is chasing the lowest worker costs.

Right now that advantage is mostly found in the third world.




So you're calling the founding fathers and their first 150 years of American economic policies that of the "Left" and vultures and speculators, are you?

That's an interesting interpretation of that long established American trade policy.


Why anyone thinks this is complicated is beyond me.

Simple minds often feel that way about complex subjects, Lad.

Usually, when it comes to these issues, I find those simpltons don't really know much either about economics OR American history.

1) That is stupid. Capital does not chase lowest labor costs. If it did, everyone would be investing in Gabon. Capital seeks the highest return. Highest return frequently (but not always) is found in places with the lowest unit labor cost. Note the term unit labor cost.

2) The Founding Fathers understood what creating wealth was about. While they used terms like speculators etc they did so as politicians. They certainly did not attempt to take people's profits, capital, and business ownership from them, unlike the present administration.

3) You find simpletons don't know much because you're one of them. Your understanding of the situation is simply wrong. Everything after that is pretty much irrelevant.
 
That's fairly obvious.




Yes it does, as it should...within the law. Nothing wrong with that.



Not exactly. Capital is chasing the lowest worker costs.

Right now that advantage is mostly found in the third world.




So you're calling the founding fathers and their first 150 years of American economic policies that of the "Left" and vultures and speculators, are you?

That's an interesting interpretation of that long established American trade policy.




Simple minds often feel that way about complex subjects, Lad.

Usually, when it comes to these issues, I find those simpltons don't really know much either about economics OR American history.

2) The Founding Fathers understood what creating wealth was about. While they used terms like speculators etc they did so as politicians. They certainly did not attempt to take people's profits, capital, and business ownership from them, unlike the present administration.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight........ :rolleyes:

"I hope we shall... crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." - THOMAS JEFFERSON
 
Last edited:
"As time passed, wages and health-care costs rose in the U.S." -- Andy Grove.

So labor unions and the government distorted US Health care system are part of the problem. Thanks, Andy
 
Andy Grove is a smart guy but somehow totally missed how labor union, government regulation and bureaucracy and our absurd tax policy have made it far less appealing to start businesses in the USA.

DUH!

Oh, let's not forget the EnviroMarxists who want to shut off our power grid?

Why WOULD anyone spend $1billion building a new plant if they could be shut down because the water for the cooling tower is home to some obscure fish that needs to be protected?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top