The jobs are leaving! The jobs are leaving!

[AvgGuyIA]

It is absurd to have PUBLIC SECTOR UNION JOBS. Who are they being protected from; an evil capitalist boss who's trying to horde all the profits for himself?

 

[Cuyo]

So you can start a thread with a little civility, good.

I oppose the concept of political parties, but the topic is important.

I have an honest question for everyone here in both parties; Where are we on isolationism? How do you guys feel about bringing jobs back, either through tarriffs on imports, or on making laws to prohibit outsourcing, both, or any other means?

The word Isolationism is a misnomer, that refers to shutting out the entire world when I don't believe that is the desired goal in the question.

When you have a disfunctional political system that is mainly concerned with getting itself re-elected its dangerous to talk about it making laws about business and industry as it trends towards populism and away from making hard decisions that would needed for real firm change.

However there are things that can be done, to end 'outsourcing' but they should be done in a draconian fasion, such as companies that outsource PC help for example, should be taxed 100%. That would end it right there. Basically you would be saying 'if you use anyone but Americans, you won't be making a dime.'

Tariffs and trade barriers are something else, to change any of that the USA would have to leave the WTO which we ceeded part of our soverenty too, and who control what they think are 'fair' trade and protections and tariffs.

The labor pool is flooded, which has forced real wages into the toilet and put the clamp on the middle class. So many people are desperate for work that they'll take far less than someone in their position would make otherwise, and companies are happy to oblige paying them far less.

Thoughts?

The pool is flooded because the USA has very little true industry anymore, outside of food and weapons we make very little else.

Read post #16...
I'm glad you made it, and I appreciate your civility thus far as well.

 

[jillian]

yep...we should compete for jobs with mexico and pay our workers the same wages.

well, that will solve the problem of illegal immigration anyway.

the idea that unions shouldn't exist is pretty silly.

State union workers are retiring at 50 and drawing 90% of their final year's pay - including all the bonuses and overtime hours paid.

I knew somebody would get it. We simply cannot afford that.

so we should pay social security and medicare for people?

or should those people stay in the work force and younger people not get jobs.

and what you're suggesting is a fallacy anyway.

the far greater problem is CEO's leaving with golden parachutes.

it's disgusting when corporations pay hundreds of milions of dollars to people who failed at managing the company and then tell the people who work their butts off that there is no money to pay for healthcare.

CEO's and other management used to earn something like 6 times what workers earned, on average. now it's something like 25 times.

you want corporations to save money? fix healthcare and cut welfare for rich people.

 

[potter 58]

yea yea whislte - like big corps didn't do that , look at big steel, they dumped them on the gov for about 50 cents on the dollar

BTW why are those pension plans failing, they were negotiated and signed by someone , the unions just give them to themselves

 

[Baruch Menachem]

But where are you on tariffs/eliminating outsourcing? It's starting to sound like a lot of you are in favor of bringing jobs back by removing restrictions that would allow wages to go even lower (or "Become more competitive"). I'm wondering how we feel about ending the competition with 3rd world countries, where they're so desperate for money they'll work for pennies a day.

Perhaps if we ended this "Race to the bottom," unions would be un-necessary? thoughts?

Business should be free to create jobs where it is most cost effective for them to do so. If that is outside our borders, so be it.

But you understand, this is harming us, it's funneling money out of our economy to other countries. This is THE huge cause for unemployment and underemployment in this country; Not the unions, not Obama, not the liberals-- The jobs are just plain gone... The booming industrial areas of the 60s and 70s are now abandoned warehouses and ghettos as a result. What used to be economic hot-spots are now depressed areas populated by people who are burdens of the State, because they can't find work.

I think "We the People" decide what companies who make their money here can and can't do. Would you stand by your convictions if your source of income - Whatever it is - Was outsourced?

A job matches with a skill and a price. Most of the outsourcing is because US schools are turning out kids with limited skills that aren't worth the minimum wage.

I personally don't like dealing with the Bombay phone centers, but something must be done right in Indian schools that they can turn out thousands of kids competent in a foreign language. Well, almost competent.

Companies are private actors. It is not consonant with the ideas of liberty for the government to order private parties to march to its tune.

Economic freedom is the key to economic prosperity. Government orders are tyrannical and usually wind up impoverishing a society.

 

[Cuyo]

A job matches with a skill and a price. Most of the outsourcing is because US schools are turning out kids with limited skills that aren't worth the minimum wage.

I personally don't like dealing with the Bombay phone centers, but something must be done right in Indian schools that they can turn out thousands of kids competent in a foreign language. Well, almost competent.

Companies are private actors. It is not consonant with the ideas of liberty for the government to order private parties to march to its tune.

Economic freedom is the key to economic prosperity. Government orders are tyrannical and usually wind up impoverishing a society.

Well, you're always gonna have people that aren't that bright. You can put them in a factory doing mindless work for $16 an hour, contributing to the economy, or you can ship the job overseas and that person can collect unemployment. Can I fairly say that we need to strike a balance?

 

[California Girl]

State union workers are retiring at 50 and drawing 90% of their final year's pay - including all the bonuses and overtime hours paid.

I knew somebody would get it. We simply cannot afford that.

so we should pay social security and medicare for people?

or should those people stay in the work force and younger people not get jobs.

and what you're suggesting is a fallacy anyway.

the far greater problem is CEO's leaving with golden parachutes.

it's disgusting when corporations pay hundreds of milions of dollars to people who failed at managing the company and then tell the people who work their butts off that there is no money to pay for healthcare.

CEO's and other management used to earn something like 6 times what workers earned, on average. now it's something like 25 times.

you want corporations to save money? fix healthcare and cut welfare for rich people.

Jillian, go do the math and come back and tell me that 90% final salaries for public sector retirees at 50 is affordable.

These are two separate issues, and we need to treat them as such. Two wrongs do not equal a right. That is basic math. It's liberal lala-land to pretend that 'fixing' healthcare will solve all our problems. It will not. And anyone who thinks that the 2000 page piece of shit that was the 'plan' was actually going to fix anything was a fool.

 

[Cuyo]

CEO's and other management used to earn something like 6 times what workers earned, on average. now it's something like 25 times.

you want corporations to save money? fix healthcare and cut welfare for rich people.

Jillian, it was around 24 times as much in 1965. Now it's nearly 300 times as much.

 

[jillian]

CEO's and other management used to earn something like 6 times what workers earned, on average. now it's something like 25 times.

you want corporations to save money? fix healthcare and cut welfare for rich people.

Jillian, it was around 24 times as much in 1965. Now it's nearly 300 times as much.

I'd think it depends on the corporation. But it might be.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

A job matches with a skill and a price. Most of the outsourcing is because US schools are turning out kids with limited skills that aren't worth the minimum wage.

I personally don't like dealing with the Bombay phone centers, but something must be done right in Indian schools that they can turn out thousands of kids competent in a foreign language. Well, almost competent.

Companies are private actors. It is not consonant with the ideas of liberty for the government to order private parties to march to its tune.

Economic freedom is the key to economic prosperity. Government orders are tyrannical and usually wind up impoverishing a society.

Well, you're always gonna have people that aren't that bright. You can put them in a factory doing mindless work for $16 an hour, contributing to the economy, or you can ship the job overseas and that person can collect unemployment. Can I fairly say that we need to strike a balance?

A job can only pay $16 per hour if it is worth that much to have it done. No one ships a job overseas. People try and find folks that match the work they need done.

 

[jillian]

Jillian, go do the math and come back and tell me that 90% final salaries for public sector retirees at 50 is affordable.

These are two separate issues, and we need to treat them as such. Two wrongs do not equal a right. That is basic math. It's liberal lala-land to pretend that 'fixing' healthcare will solve all our problems. It will not. And anyone who thinks that the 2000 page piece of shit that was the 'plan' was actually going to fix anything was a fool.

In 10 years we will be paying 50% of every dollar in our GDP for health care. Before we screw over our workers, I'd suggest reforming health care.

 

[Cuyo]

A job can only pay $16 per hour if it is worth that much to have it done. No one ships a job overseas. People try and find folks that match the work they need done.

C'mon, don't brush me off here. When there's a guy in Bangledesh that will do the job for $0.25 an hour, what does that do to the "Value" of the job? The question is, should we allow American corporations to find the cheapest labor they can, no matter what the cost to our economy? Is there a line in the sand to be drawn... Anywhere?

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Jillian, go do the math and come back and tell me that 90% final salaries for public sector retirees at 50 is affordable.

These are two separate issues, and we need to treat them as such. Two wrongs do not equal a right. That is basic math. It's liberal lala-land to pretend that 'fixing' healthcare will solve all our problems. It will not. And anyone who thinks that the 2000 page piece of shit that was the 'plan' was actually going to fix anything was a fool.

In 10 years we will be paying 50% of every dollar in our GDP for health care. Before we screw over our workers, I'd suggest reforming health care.

Ceteris Paribas never happens in the real world. Something will break long before then.

I think you are right that something needs fixing, but the policy on offer is the worst kind of wrong answer that will make the problem lot worse, rather than any better.

Most of the health care cost issue is not actually related to the cost of care. It is the cost of wierd mandates (for things like chiropractic, naturopathy, slacker insurance, out of line coverage) paperwork (When I was a lad the doctor came to your house (At least until 1965) and billed you right there and you paid him, or he sent you a bill. Nowdays, you go to a doctors office and there is one doctor and 5 staff to handle all the paperwork. Adjusted for inflation, the co pay you need to pay now is more than the doctor's entire bill back in 1965) CYA tests that really don't do much for getting healthy but save the doctor the heartache of a malpractice suit, and of course the cost of malpractice insurance. Most of which is driven not by actual harm caused by doctors, but by predatory lawyers like Senator Edwards who have managed to separate causation from damages, and just the fact that healthcare has lots more going for it than it used to. Now we have ultrasound and MRI and all kinds of neat, but expensive, toys. It has to get paid for somehow.

I do think we should find ways to reduce paperwork fix torts so there is a connection between causation and damages and the amount paid out, reduce the need for CYA tests by doctors, end weird mandates, all that kind of thing will do more for US healthcare than 57 new government agencies all competing for the marginal tax dollar could.

And fixing the tax code wouldn't hurt either. Even for my really basic tax situation, it takes a huge pile of paper and about two hours at a computer to do the taxes. For a small business, the BS requirements of the tax code means he has to hire legions of accountants, rather than other staff to do the actual productive work of his enterprise.

 

[Mr Natural]

Prosperity Through Lower Wages.​

Now there's a campaign slogan the repubs should latch onto.

 

[Toronado3800]

Jillian, go do the math and come back and tell me that 90% final salaries for public sector retirees at 50 is affordable.

These are two separate issues, and we need to treat them as such. Two wrongs do not equal a right. That is basic math. It's liberal lala-land to pretend that 'fixing' healthcare will solve all our problems. It will not. And anyone who thinks that the 2000 page piece of shit that was the 'plan' was actually going to fix anything was a fool.

In 10 years we will be paying 50% of every dollar in our GDP for health care. Before we screw over our workers, I'd suggest reforming health care.

Ceteris Paribas never happens in the real world. Something will break long before then.

I think you are right that something needs fixing, but the policy on offer is the worst kind of wrong answer that will make the problem lot worse, rather than any better.

Most of the health care cost issue is not actually related to the cost of care. It is the cost of wierd mandates (for things like chiropractic, naturopathy, slacker insurance, out of line coverage) paperwork (When I was a lad the doctor came to your house (At least until 1965) and billed you right there and you paid him, or he sent you a bill. Nowdays, you go to a doctors office and there is one doctor and 5 staff to handle all the paperwork. Adjusted for inflation, the co pay you need to pay now is more than the doctor's entire bill back in 1965) CYA tests that really don't do much for getting healthy but save the doctor the heartache of a malpractice suit, and of course the cost of malpractice insurance. Most of which is driven not by actual harm caused by doctors, but by predatory lawyers like Senator Edwards who have managed to separate causation from damages, and just the fact that healthcare has lots more going for it than it used to. Now we have ultrasound and MRI and all kinds of neat, but expensive, toys. It has to get paid for somehow.

I do think we should find ways to reduce paperwork fix torts so there is a connection between causation and damages and the amount paid out, reduce the need for CYA tests by doctors, end weird mandates, all that kind of thing will do more for US healthcare than 57 new government agencies all competing for the marginal tax dollar could.

And fixing the tax code wouldn't hurt either. Even for my really basic tax situation, it takes a huge pile of paper and about two hours at a computer to do the taxes. For a small business, the BS requirements of the tax code means he has to hire legions of accountants, rather than other staff to do the actual productive work of his enterprise.

Computers and internet data-bases can go some way to streamlining this system. I know at my work though the less time we spend on paperwork the more mistakes slip through the cracks.

The problem with the cost of medical care is it is a continually growing technology. Something like the "ultimate" industry for capitalist. How much are you willing to pay to extend your life by 6 months, 6 weeks, 6 days? Capitalist desires like these (& I don't wanna die either!) drive research into new technology greater than the capitalist desire to save money drives folks to make existing expensive treatments cheaper.

***************
In this post WWII world we are now fighting on a level economic playing field with the likes of Mexico, Panama, China, Burma, India, wherever. Transportation costs and communication delays no longer matter as much thanks to technology.

Good? I can get a ten dollar pair of jeans from Walmart.

Bad? No jobs to be had making jeans if I expect to be paid more than the fella selling them to Walmart.

So to remain competitive w/o a third world working class we must become more efficient.

Although it wouldn't hurt to occasionally slap a tariff on companies which do things we don't agree with. Use folks under the age of 16, here's a 80% tariff on your good as it enters the country. Don't meet U.S. EPA standards from a decade ago, here's your tariff.

In the same way the liberal folks of California who elect Republican Governors drug the rest of the U.S. into modern auto emissions standards America drags the rest of the world into automotive standards.

Perhaps we can at least have that much a positive effect on the world.

 

[jillian]

Jillian, go do the math and come back and tell me that 90% final salaries for public sector retirees at 50 is affordable.

These are two separate issues, and we need to treat them as such. Two wrongs do not equal a right. That is basic math. It's liberal lala-land to pretend that 'fixing' healthcare will solve all our problems. It will not. And anyone who thinks that the 2000 page piece of shit that was the 'plan' was actually going to fix anything was a fool.

In 10 years we will be paying 50% of every dollar in our GDP for health care. Before we screw over our workers, I'd suggest reforming health care.

Ceteris Paribas never happens in the real world. Something will break long before then.

I think you are right that something needs fixing, but the policy on offer is the worst kind of wrong answer that will make the problem lot worse, rather than any better.

Most of the health care cost issue is not actually related to the cost of care. It is the cost of wierd mandates (for things like chiropractic, naturopathy, slacker insurance, out of line coverage) paperwork (When I was a lad the doctor came to your house (At least until 1965) and billed you right there and you paid him, or he sent you a bill. Nowdays, you go to a doctors office and there is one doctor and 5 staff to handle all the paperwork. Adjusted for inflation, the co pay you need to pay now is more than the doctor's entire bill back in 1965) CYA tests that really don't do much for getting healthy but save the doctor the heartache of a malpractice suit, and of course the cost of malpractice insurance. Most of which is driven not by actual harm caused by doctors, but by predatory lawyers like Senator Edwards who have managed to separate causation from damages, and just the fact that healthcare has lots more going for it than it used to. Now we have ultrasound and MRI and all kinds of neat, but expensive, toys. It has to get paid for somehow.

I do think we should find ways to reduce paperwork fix torts so there is a connection between causation and damages and the amount paid out, reduce the need for CYA tests by doctors, end weird mandates, all that kind of thing will do more for US healthcare than 57 new government agencies all competing for the marginal tax dollar could.

And fixing the tax code wouldn't hurt either. Even for my really basic tax situation, it takes a huge pile of paper and about two hours at a computer to do the taxes. For a small business, the BS requirements of the tax code means he has to hire legions of accountants, rather than other staff to do the actual productive work of his enterprise.

no offense, but the second someone says "tort reform" to me, my eyes glaze over because it's a bogus strawman. torts have zip, zilch nada to do with our health care problems... neither does the tax code. paperwork doesn't make people unable to afford health care.

and you're not spending on an accountant what would otherwise go to a health care professional.

 

[Mr Natural]

Break the stranglehold of Unions. And get government off the backs of small business.

yep...we should compete for jobs with mexico and pay our workers the same wages.

well, that will solve the problem of illegal immigration anyway.

the idea that unions shouldn't exist is pretty silly.

But think of how much better off America would be if us workers would just work for less money.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Well, I understand that is your ox, so you feel protective about it.

For the actual doctor, that is a killer expense. About 100k per year. And for the patient it is a bunch of silly tests that have to be done, not for his benefit, but to his cost.

As for the paperwork, they now provide tons of work for people just to take care of an issue that didn't exist. And how much of it is there for any real reason connected with health?

As for the mandates, I wind up paying through the nose for dozens of things that are of no use to me, never would be any use to me, just because some state legislator with his hand out insists that if I have coverage, his hobby horse is included? All this is part of my insurance bill, which means it is coming directly from me.

Taking care of things that are costs and making sure they are less of a problem would be better than telling costs to go down by government rule. Which works as well as when King Canute told the tide to go out. Natural forces don't listen well.

 

[Cuyo]

A job can only pay $16 per hour if it is worth that much to have it done. No one ships a job overseas. People try and find folks that match the work they need done.

C'mon, don't brush me off here. When there's a guy in Bangledesh that will do the job for $0.25 an hour, what does that do to the "Value" of the job? The question is, should we allow American corporations to find the cheapest labor they can, no matter what the cost to our economy? Is there a line in the sand to be drawn... Anywhere?

Where you at Baruch?

 

[Conspiracist]

But where are you on tariffs/eliminating outsourcing? It's starting to sound like a lot of you are in favor of bringing jobs back by removing restrictions that would allow wages to go even lower (or "Become more competitive"). I'm wondering how we feel about ending the competition with 3rd world countries, where they're so desperate for money they'll work for pennies a day.

Perhaps if we ended this "Race to the bottom," unions would be un-necessary? thoughts?

Business should be free to create jobs where it is most cost effective for them to do so. If that is outside our borders, so be it.

and i think people should be paid a living wage for a fair day's work. and i think corporations who send jobs elsewhere should be penalized.

i also think NAFTA was a mistake.

I never considered NAFTA a big mistake because I felt it would help the economies of our neighbors. Our problems really came when we became forced to compete with truly slave labor from overseas, (China). The global economy is what we have to put to rest until others treat labor as we do and are on equal playing fields with us.

I think if it werte just NAFTA that was enacted, we would be seeing a better, more stable Mexico right now.