CDZ To reshore or not to reshore...It's purely a business decision

[xband]

For the love of the mentally challenged..... hey moron... name one job that is provided by a impoverished homeless beggar.... when you do, I'll agree Trickle Down is a failure.

your random straw man and poor metaphors aside, trickle is a failure, we dont need every idiot to beleive in a fact, for it to be true, if that were the case we would still believe the world was 10,000 year old

Until then, every single job that exists in this world today, is provided by a rich person. Even the independent auto mechanic.... what cars would he work on with rich people making cars? What tools would he use to fix the car, without rich people making tools? What parts would get have to replace broken parts, without rich people making parts?

governments employ plenty of people

Trickle down is how the world works. Only the most ignorant of fools doesn't know this.

this statement shows your ignorance, your not even sure what trickle down economics is are you? your just being defensive, and antagonistic.....its okay moron

Trickle-down economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well you missed the point. If you take away those tax breaks... they'll just move the money somewhere else. People are not going to pay taxes that are too high.

let them leave

There is nothing you can do to change this. You know how much money the government collected in the 1950s? About 17% of GDP. Today we collect 18% of GDP. But the tax rate was up near 90% in the 1950s.

the rich payed 90% in the 150's not everyone did, and guess what? they were still rich

You can make whatever law you want, and the rich are simply going to move the wealth, somewhere else. France put in place a wealth tax. What happened? The wealthy literally closed up companies, and left the country. They opened up new companies outside France.

let them leave

You want to blame me... ok....

people who make these arguments, yes.

let's pretend I'm not here, and you are King of the country. You can eliminate all the tax deductions, and charge whatever rate you want. Now all the wealthy have left, and you still have no tax money, but now you have even less jobs, and more poverty. You are not going to get the wealthy to pay the taxes you want, whether you have the deductions or not. Not happening.

They dont have magic powers let them leave we will replace them. They are a burden not an asset, disloyal and unpatriotic burdens at that.

Venezuela tried this, and over a million people have left Venezuela. The country is in object poverty now. Food shortages, and rampant crime, and no jobs. But at least they got rid of the tax deductions. That worked like a charm didn't it?

thats a false equivalence of ridiculous standards there are plenty of capitalist countries with no taxes like somalia, but the "invisible hand of the market" hasn't helped them out has it?

No, it's a fact. Up until 2015, Germany never had a minimum wage. It's fact. Just like Trickle down is how the economy works, is a fact.

they had a minimum wage it just wasn't organized the same way as in the US. Thats not the same as not having a minimum wage whatsoever.

Anything else you to abolish? Is it it just the minimum wage or do we need to abolish all forms of human progress of the past 200 years for your little fantasy to work? Can women still vote?

let them leave

They will. And you will be starving, and broke, and without a job, and without products to buy, and without electricity. Look at Venezuela.

governments employ plenty of people

Yeah..... I'm sorry.... which one of those 'plenty of people' would have a job without the rich?

View attachment 91827

So the top 25% of wage earners pay 85% of all taxes. That's the CEOs. To reach the top 25%, you need an income of $150K. The Median CEO wage, is $160K. So without all those CEOs you hate so much, 85% of the tax income into government would disappear. That means all those "plenty of people" wouldn't be so "plenty" anymore.

Oh, and by the way.... those computers and buildings, and cars, and tools and supplies that government uses.... which of those were not made by rich people? None? Could make it hard to do those government jobs without paper.... or computers... or light bulbs.... eh?

your random straw man and poor metaphors aside, trickle is a failure, we dont need every idiot to beleive in a fact, for it to be true, if that were the case we would still believe the world was 10,000 year old

It's not a metaphor. It's a fact. Where are the jobs, not provided by the rich? Where are the jobs provided by the poor? Where does your paycheck come from? The rich. I work for a rich guy. Everyone I know works for a rich guy. Haven't met a single person who didn't.

Trickle down is how the world works. You go to Egypt? The people who have jobs, work for rich people. France? Same. UK? Same. Germany? Same. Russia? Same. China? Same. It's how the whole freaking world works.

the rich payed 90% in the 150's not everyone did, and guess what? they were still rich

...and the poor were still poor. You missed the point though. The point was, the government is collecting more revenue today.... than it did in the 1950s. Why? Because the rich moved their wealth to avoid the taxes in the 1950s.

They didn't pay 90% in the 1950s. Now at this point, you can either let the facts inform your opinion... are ignore the opinion, and lump yourself with the people who believe the Earth is flat.

They dont have magic powers let them leave we will replace them. They are a burden not an asset, disloyal and unpatriotic burdens at that.

First, Russia tried that. Stalin infamously had all the wealthy business owners killed. The result was a collapse of the economy. You can't just "replace them". When Cuba's government socialized the sugar industry, the business owners fled to the US, and opened shop here. The sugar industry in Cuba fell drastically. You can't just "replace" them. It's never worked before, and it never will in the future. Facts contradict your claim.

Further, then why is Venezuela in ruins? They made all the rich leave. Without that burden, why isn't life better?

Why is France in an economic Emergency? The rich were all leaving, why isn't France better off?

Do you not work? Without your employer, you would be better off? How?

thats a false equivalence of ridiculous standards there are plenty of capitalist countries with no taxes like somalia, but the "invisible hand of the market" hasn't helped them out has it?

Huh? Somalia was not by any measure a 'capitalist' based country, for the majority of its existence. After independence in 1960, there was a brief period of growth and investment, that ended abruptly in 1969, when the country was taken over by socialists. Between 1969, and 1991, the country was run into the ground by anti-wealth, anti-capitalist, anti-investment pro-socialist policies that destroyed what little the country had.

And you want to claim that Venezuela has less in common with the US, than Somalia? Are you on pot right now?

If anything, consider America between 1776 and 1909, where there was no income tax or corporate tax. By every possible measure, the increase in the standard of living was greater in the 1800s, than the 1900s.

America itself proves the 'invisible hand of the market" helped.

they had a minimum wage it just wasn't organized the same way as in the US. Thats not the same as not having a minimum wage whatsoever.

Well you are wrong. You have the right to be wrong, but don't think lying to me is going to convince me of anything. False claim. Lying isn't an argument.

Give every legal adult American citizen in the US $10,000 tax free with the provision that one year later you have to say what you did with the windfall. When the data flows in have statisticians unravel the demographics showing winners and losers.

 

[Andylusion]

For the love of the mentally challenged..... hey moron... name one job that is provided by a impoverished homeless beggar.... when you do, I'll agree Trickle Down is a failure.

your random straw man and poor metaphors aside, trickle is a failure, we dont need every idiot to beleive in a fact, for it to be true, if that were the case we would still believe the world was 10,000 year old

Until then, every single job that exists in this world today, is provided by a rich person. Even the independent auto mechanic.... what cars would he work on with rich people making cars? What tools would he use to fix the car, without rich people making tools? What parts would get have to replace broken parts, without rich people making parts?

governments employ plenty of people

Trickle down is how the world works. Only the most ignorant of fools doesn't know this.

this statement shows your ignorance, your not even sure what trickle down economics is are you? your just being defensive, and antagonistic.....its okay moron

Trickle-down economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well you missed the point. If you take away those tax breaks... they'll just move the money somewhere else. People are not going to pay taxes that are too high.

let them leave

There is nothing you can do to change this. You know how much money the government collected in the 1950s? About 17% of GDP. Today we collect 18% of GDP. But the tax rate was up near 90% in the 1950s.

the rich payed 90% in the 150's not everyone did, and guess what? they were still rich

You can make whatever law you want, and the rich are simply going to move the wealth, somewhere else. France put in place a wealth tax. What happened? The wealthy literally closed up companies, and left the country. They opened up new companies outside France.

let them leave

You want to blame me... ok....

people who make these arguments, yes.

let's pretend I'm not here, and you are King of the country. You can eliminate all the tax deductions, and charge whatever rate you want. Now all the wealthy have left, and you still have no tax money, but now you have even less jobs, and more poverty. You are not going to get the wealthy to pay the taxes you want, whether you have the deductions or not. Not happening.

They dont have magic powers let them leave we will replace them. They are a burden not an asset, disloyal and unpatriotic burdens at that.

Venezuela tried this, and over a million people have left Venezuela. The country is in object poverty now. Food shortages, and rampant crime, and no jobs. But at least they got rid of the tax deductions. That worked like a charm didn't it?

thats a false equivalence of ridiculous standards there are plenty of capitalist countries with no taxes like somalia, but the "invisible hand of the market" hasn't helped them out has it?

No, it's a fact. Up until 2015, Germany never had a minimum wage. It's fact. Just like Trickle down is how the economy works, is a fact.

they had a minimum wage it just wasn't organized the same way as in the US. Thats not the same as not having a minimum wage whatsoever.

Anything else you to abolish? Is it it just the minimum wage or do we need to abolish all forms of human progress of the past 200 years for your little fantasy to work? Can women still vote?

let them leave

They will. And you will be starving, and broke, and without a job, and without products to buy, and without electricity. Look at Venezuela.

governments employ plenty of people

Yeah..... I'm sorry.... which one of those 'plenty of people' would have a job without the rich?

View attachment 91827

So the top 25% of wage earners pay 85% of all taxes. That's the CEOs. To reach the top 25%, you need an income of $150K. The Median CEO wage, is $160K. So without all those CEOs you hate so much, 85% of the tax income into government would disappear. That means all those "plenty of people" wouldn't be so "plenty" anymore.

Oh, and by the way.... those computers and buildings, and cars, and tools and supplies that government uses.... which of those were not made by rich people? None? Could make it hard to do those government jobs without paper.... or computers... or light bulbs.... eh?

your random straw man and poor metaphors aside, trickle is a failure, we dont need every idiot to beleive in a fact, for it to be true, if that were the case we would still believe the world was 10,000 year old

It's not a metaphor. It's a fact. Where are the jobs, not provided by the rich? Where are the jobs provided by the poor? Where does your paycheck come from? The rich. I work for a rich guy. Everyone I know works for a rich guy. Haven't met a single person who didn't.

Trickle down is how the world works. You go to Egypt? The people who have jobs, work for rich people. France? Same. UK? Same. Germany? Same. Russia? Same. China? Same. It's how the whole freaking world works.

the rich payed 90% in the 150's not everyone did, and guess what? they were still rich

...and the poor were still poor. You missed the point though. The point was, the government is collecting more revenue today.... than it did in the 1950s. Why? Because the rich moved their wealth to avoid the taxes in the 1950s.

They didn't pay 90% in the 1950s. Now at this point, you can either let the facts inform your opinion... are ignore the opinion, and lump yourself with the people who believe the Earth is flat.

They dont have magic powers let them leave we will replace them. They are a burden not an asset, disloyal and unpatriotic burdens at that.

First, Russia tried that. Stalin infamously had all the wealthy business owners killed. The result was a collapse of the economy. You can't just "replace them". When Cuba's government socialized the sugar industry, the business owners fled to the US, and opened shop here. The sugar industry in Cuba fell drastically. You can't just "replace" them. It's never worked before, and it never will in the future. Facts contradict your claim.

Further, then why is Venezuela in ruins? They made all the rich leave. Without that burden, why isn't life better?

Why is France in an economic Emergency? The rich were all leaving, why isn't France better off?

Do you not work? Without your employer, you would be better off? How?

thats a false equivalence of ridiculous standards there are plenty of capitalist countries with no taxes like somalia, but the "invisible hand of the market" hasn't helped them out has it?

Huh? Somalia was not by any measure a 'capitalist' based country, for the majority of its existence. After independence in 1960, there was a brief period of growth and investment, that ended abruptly in 1969, when the country was taken over by socialists. Between 1969, and 1991, the country was run into the ground by anti-wealth, anti-capitalist, anti-investment pro-socialist policies that destroyed what little the country had.

And you want to claim that Venezuela has less in common with the US, than Somalia? Are you on pot right now?

If anything, consider America between 1776 and 1909, where there was no income tax or corporate tax. By every possible measure, the increase in the standard of living was greater in the 1800s, than the 1900s.

America itself proves the 'invisible hand of the market" helped.

they had a minimum wage it just wasn't organized the same way as in the US. Thats not the same as not having a minimum wage whatsoever.

Well you are wrong. You have the right to be wrong, but don't think lying to me is going to convince me of anything. False claim. Lying isn't an argument.

Give every legal adult American citizen in the US $10,000 tax free with the provision that one year later you have to say what you did with the windfall. When the data flows in have statisticians unravel the demographics showing winners and losers.

For what purpose?

We already know who will be the winners, and who will be the losers. The people who invest generally will win, and the people who consume, will generally lose.

The reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they invest and grow wealth.

The reason poor people are poor, is because they consume their money, and end up poor.

A simple example would be the lady in Canada who won $10 Million back in 2000 or so. Big house, sports cars, big vacations. She had $10 Million dollars, and blew it all. By 2015, she had no car, lived in a rental, and had to catch the bus to work. After winning $10 Million. She consumed it all.

Now compare that to Steve Jobs. In 1985, he was kicked out of his company, with no job and no friends after the melt down, but with stock in Apple Computer worth $10 Million dollars.

Did he buy a bunch of sports cars, and a mansion? Flashy vacations at expensive hotels?

No, he spent the money on what? Do you know? He bought a small computer special effects company, known as Lucasfilm, for $5 Million, and then sank another $5 Million into growing the company in company we know as Pixar. In 2006 Steve sold Pixar to Disney for $7.4 Billion.

This is who would win, and who would lose. The people who invest smart, would win. The people who consumed, would lose.

No need to run any tests, or hire union government workers to sift the data.

 

[xband]

For the love of the mentally challenged..... hey moron... name one job that is provided by a impoverished homeless beggar.... when you do, I'll agree Trickle Down is a failure.

your random straw man and poor metaphors aside, trickle is a failure, we dont need every idiot to beleive in a fact, for it to be true, if that were the case we would still believe the world was 10,000 year old

Until then, every single job that exists in this world today, is provided by a rich person. Even the independent auto mechanic.... what cars would he work on with rich people making cars? What tools would he use to fix the car, without rich people making tools? What parts would get have to replace broken parts, without rich people making parts?

governments employ plenty of people

Trickle down is how the world works. Only the most ignorant of fools doesn't know this.

this statement shows your ignorance, your not even sure what trickle down economics is are you? your just being defensive, and antagonistic.....its okay moron

Trickle-down economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well you missed the point. If you take away those tax breaks... they'll just move the money somewhere else. People are not going to pay taxes that are too high.

let them leave

There is nothing you can do to change this. You know how much money the government collected in the 1950s? About 17% of GDP. Today we collect 18% of GDP. But the tax rate was up near 90% in the 1950s.

the rich payed 90% in the 150's not everyone did, and guess what? they were still rich

You can make whatever law you want, and the rich are simply going to move the wealth, somewhere else. France put in place a wealth tax. What happened? The wealthy literally closed up companies, and left the country. They opened up new companies outside France.

let them leave

You want to blame me... ok....

people who make these arguments, yes.

let's pretend I'm not here, and you are King of the country. You can eliminate all the tax deductions, and charge whatever rate you want. Now all the wealthy have left, and you still have no tax money, but now you have even less jobs, and more poverty. You are not going to get the wealthy to pay the taxes you want, whether you have the deductions or not. Not happening.

They dont have magic powers let them leave we will replace them. They are a burden not an asset, disloyal and unpatriotic burdens at that.

Venezuela tried this, and over a million people have left Venezuela. The country is in object poverty now. Food shortages, and rampant crime, and no jobs. But at least they got rid of the tax deductions. That worked like a charm didn't it?

thats a false equivalence of ridiculous standards there are plenty of capitalist countries with no taxes like somalia, but the "invisible hand of the market" hasn't helped them out has it?

No, it's a fact. Up until 2015, Germany never had a minimum wage. It's fact. Just like Trickle down is how the economy works, is a fact.

they had a minimum wage it just wasn't organized the same way as in the US. Thats not the same as not having a minimum wage whatsoever.

Anything else you to abolish? Is it it just the minimum wage or do we need to abolish all forms of human progress of the past 200 years for your little fantasy to work? Can women still vote?

let them leave

They will. And you will be starving, and broke, and without a job, and without products to buy, and without electricity. Look at Venezuela.

governments employ plenty of people

Yeah..... I'm sorry.... which one of those 'plenty of people' would have a job without the rich?

View attachment 91827

So the top 25% of wage earners pay 85% of all taxes. That's the CEOs. To reach the top 25%, you need an income of $150K. The Median CEO wage, is $160K. So without all those CEOs you hate so much, 85% of the tax income into government would disappear. That means all those "plenty of people" wouldn't be so "plenty" anymore.

Oh, and by the way.... those computers and buildings, and cars, and tools and supplies that government uses.... which of those were not made by rich people? None? Could make it hard to do those government jobs without paper.... or computers... or light bulbs.... eh?

your random straw man and poor metaphors aside, trickle is a failure, we dont need every idiot to beleive in a fact, for it to be true, if that were the case we would still believe the world was 10,000 year old

It's not a metaphor. It's a fact. Where are the jobs, not provided by the rich? Where are the jobs provided by the poor? Where does your paycheck come from? The rich. I work for a rich guy. Everyone I know works for a rich guy. Haven't met a single person who didn't.

Trickle down is how the world works. You go to Egypt? The people who have jobs, work for rich people. France? Same. UK? Same. Germany? Same. Russia? Same. China? Same. It's how the whole freaking world works.

the rich payed 90% in the 150's not everyone did, and guess what? they were still rich

...and the poor were still poor. You missed the point though. The point was, the government is collecting more revenue today.... than it did in the 1950s. Why? Because the rich moved their wealth to avoid the taxes in the 1950s.

They didn't pay 90% in the 1950s. Now at this point, you can either let the facts inform your opinion... are ignore the opinion, and lump yourself with the people who believe the Earth is flat.

They dont have magic powers let them leave we will replace them. They are a burden not an asset, disloyal and unpatriotic burdens at that.

First, Russia tried that. Stalin infamously had all the wealthy business owners killed. The result was a collapse of the economy. You can't just "replace them". When Cuba's government socialized the sugar industry, the business owners fled to the US, and opened shop here. The sugar industry in Cuba fell drastically. You can't just "replace" them. It's never worked before, and it never will in the future. Facts contradict your claim.

Further, then why is Venezuela in ruins? They made all the rich leave. Without that burden, why isn't life better?

Why is France in an economic Emergency? The rich were all leaving, why isn't France better off?

Do you not work? Without your employer, you would be better off? How?

thats a false equivalence of ridiculous standards there are plenty of capitalist countries with no taxes like somalia, but the "invisible hand of the market" hasn't helped them out has it?

Huh? Somalia was not by any measure a 'capitalist' based country, for the majority of its existence. After independence in 1960, there was a brief period of growth and investment, that ended abruptly in 1969, when the country was taken over by socialists. Between 1969, and 1991, the country was run into the ground by anti-wealth, anti-capitalist, anti-investment pro-socialist policies that destroyed what little the country had.

And you want to claim that Venezuela has less in common with the US, than Somalia? Are you on pot right now?

If anything, consider America between 1776 and 1909, where there was no income tax or corporate tax. By every possible measure, the increase in the standard of living was greater in the 1800s, than the 1900s.

America itself proves the 'invisible hand of the market" helped.

they had a minimum wage it just wasn't organized the same way as in the US. Thats not the same as not having a minimum wage whatsoever.

Well you are wrong. You have the right to be wrong, but don't think lying to me is going to convince me of anything. False claim. Lying isn't an argument.

Give every legal adult American citizen in the US $10,000 tax free with the provision that one year later you have to say what you did with the windfall. When the data flows in have statisticians unravel the demographics showing winners and losers.

For what purpose?

We already know who will be the winners, and who will be the losers. The people who invest generally will win, and the people who consume, will generally lose.

The reason wealthy people are wealthy, is because they invest and grow wealth.

The reason poor people are poor, is because they consume their money, and end up poor.

A simple example would be the lady in Canada who won $10 Million back in 2000 or so. Big house, sports cars, big vacations. She had $10 Million dollars, and blew it all. By 2015, she had no car, lived in a rental, and had to catch the bus to work. After winning $10 Million. She consumed it all.

Now compare that to Steve Jobs. In 1985, he was kicked out of his company, with no job and no friends after the melt down, but with stock in Apple Computer worth $10 Million dollars.

Did he buy a bunch of sports cars, and a mansion? Flashy vacations at expensive hotels?

No, he spent the money on what? Do you know? He bought a small computer special effects company, known as Lucasfilm, for $5 Million, and then sank another $5 Million into growing the company in company we know as Pixar. In 2006 Steve sold Pixar to Disney for $7.4 Billion.

This is who would win, and who would lose. The people who invest smart, would win. The people who consumed, would lose.

No need to run any tests, or hire union government workers to sift the data.

Kind of a psychology experiment to double blind the intelligence bell curve hypothesis.

 

[Wyatt earp]

nice charts but even if these companies were to "reshore", there jobs would be mostly AUTOMATED, cutting taxes and regulations to compete with people willing to work for 50 cent a day is an over simplified scapegoat, legalizing slavery, or child labor will also "bring back jobs" but they're not reasonable solutions. A corporation is not a charity, if they want to leave and go somewhere else let them. If they're jobs are so important let the government handle it. Rather than licking the shit encrusted bootheels of the wealthy class and lining their pockets with tax payer funds so they provide a service we can do ourselves.

Got a link for 50 cents a day? You didn't bother to read the OP did you?


.

 

[xband]

nice charts but even if these companies were to "reshore", there jobs would be mostly AUTOMATED, cutting taxes and regulations to compete with people willing to work for 50 cent a day is an over simplified scapegoat, legalizing slavery, or child labor will also "bring back jobs" but they're not reasonable solutions. A corporation is not a charity, if they want to leave and go somewhere else let them. If they're jobs are so important let the government handle it. Rather than licking the shit encrusted bootheels of the wealthy class and lining their pockets with tax payer funds so they provide a service we can do ourselves.

Got a link for 50 cents a day? You didn't bother to read the OP did you?


.

It cost one nickel to buy a tankard of ale back in the day before I was born. With a fifty cent piece I could buy ten tankards of ale and free eats.

 

[anotherlife]

Re-shoring is a bad idea. If it is allowed, then every 2nd shareholder reporting quarter will send your job from Bangladesh to America, then from America to Bangladesh. You may like a half year vacation every year, but the Pakis will not accept it.

 

[xband]

Re-shoring is a bad idea. If it is allowed, then every 2nd shareholder reporting quarter will send your job from Bangladesh to America, then from America to Bangladesh. You may like a half year vacation every year, but the Pakis will not accept it.

If you are unhappy with your wage let your feet do the walking. Ronald Reagan

 

[anotherlife]

Re-shoring is a bad idea. If it is allowed, then every 2nd shareholder reporting quarter will send your job from Bangladesh to America, then from America to Bangladesh. You may like a half year vacation every year, but the Pakis will not accept it.

If you are unhappy with your wage let your feet do the walking. Ronald Reagan

Keyword: prevailing wage. This also sheds light onto Reagan's lies.

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

Now which do you think I bought? $300... or $160?

Who in their right mind is going to make that expensive choice? "Yes, I like being poor! I'll buy the exact same product, for double the cost!"

If you budget your money correctly, a quarter, a dollar or two hundred dollars is essentially the same, in our modern-day catered society. All you need to do is make a single sacrifice here or there, and it will add up the same, come payday. One roll of bills, thanks to your generous boss, is just about as thick as another.

I have been poor my entire life. My mom raised me on welfare. I am no WORSE for the wear. I really am grateful for everything I have in my home, be it ever so humble.

You probably did not search hard enough for the correct part. My sister worked at BAP, when I was sixteen, and I know it is possible to find cheaper parts wherever they come from. Most parts for cars and domestic appliances ARE MADE IN AMERICA.

We still have the know how, Detroit!

No matter how hard they try to export it.

 

[320 Years of History]

Got a link for 50 cents a day? You didn't bother to read the OP did you?
.

My gut sense, given what seems to be what s/he has written, is that PurpleOwl agrees thematically with Deloitte's findings and the ideas I expressed in the OP, but I'm not sure. It appears to me as well that s/he didn't actually read the OP, but rather just looked at the pictures and maybe read a few words "here and there."

 

[PurpleOwl]

Got a link for 50 cents a day? You didn't bother to read the OP did you?
.

My gut sense, given what seems to be what s/he has written, is that PurpleOwl agrees thematically with Deloitte's findings and the ideas I expressed in the OP, but I'm not sure. It appears to me as well that s/he didn't actually read the OP, but rather just looked at the pictures and maybe read a few words "here and there."

Absolutely not I disagree completely with everything you said, I find your arguments pedantic, uninformed, and you seem to be desperate to twist what little facts you know to suit your already exiting theories. Since there is no debating a person like you and I doubt I could learn anything from you, and you dont seem to want to learn anyhing from me that doesn't help you confirm your own pre-existing theory, I gave you the last word, thats all

 

[Andylusion]

Re-shoring is a bad idea. If it is allowed, then every 2nd shareholder reporting quarter will send your job from Bangladesh to America, then from America to Bangladesh. You may like a half year vacation every year, but the Pakis will not accept it.

If you are unhappy with your wage let your feet do the walking. Ronald Reagan

Keyword: prevailing wage. This also sheds light onto Reagan's lies.

I was working at a place, where I was a contractor. I discovered that when you considered all my expenses, I was earning less than minimum wage. When you considered that I worked 12 hour shifts, six days a week, I was earning less than I would at Wendy's.

Sure enough, at the end of the year, I had a taxable income of just $12,000.

Three things to conclude from this. One, you can live on very little. This idea that people earning minimum wage can't make it.... yeah they can. A living wage, depends on how frugally you choose to live. I lived on $12,000 a year, and actually paid off some old debt while doing it.

Was it fun? Was it easy? Was it something I enjoyed and wanted to keep doing? Of course not.

Which leads to number two: There is no such thing as slave wages. I simply quit the job, and found a better higher paying job. People choose to stay where they are at, and complain. Shut up! Get off your butt, and get a better job.

I'm not suggesting other people do anything, that I myself have not done.

Which leads to the third conclusion.... some people like that wage.

Before I left that job, I was really confused by all the people they had working there. So I set about asking the other contractors what their deal was.

Oddly, nearly all of them liked the job. Lots of freedom. No supervisor. Flexible shifts. Tons of travel. They were perfectly happy with the wage. Some of them had been doing this for years.

So all this combined means... Reagan was right. If YOU don't like YOUR wage, shut up, and walk to another job.

 

[Andylusion]

Now which do you think I bought? $300... or $160?

Who in their right mind is going to make that expensive choice? "Yes, I like being poor! I'll buy the exact same product, for double the cost!"

If you budget your money correctly, a quarter, a dollar or two hundred dollars is essentially the same, in our modern-day catered society. All you need to do is make a single sacrifice here or there, and it will add up the same, come payday. One roll of bills, thanks to your generous boss, is just about as thick as another.

I have been poor my entire life. My mom raised me on welfare. I am no WORSE for the wear. I really am grateful for everything I have in my home, be it ever so humble.

You probably did not search hard enough for the correct part. My sister worked at BAP, when I was sixteen, and I know it is possible to find cheaper parts wherever they come from. Most parts for cars and domestic appliances ARE MADE IN AMERICA.

We still have the know how, Detroit!

No matter how hard they try to export it.

Detroit is a disaster. I have no idea what you are talking about there.

However your argument isn't invalid. It is true, and I didn't suggest otherwise, that US manufacturing is massive. Last year was another record year in US manufacturing.

But nonetheless, I did search very thoroughly for the correct HVAC part. And for clothing too.

The price difference between the imported, and the domestic, was very large.

I agree with most of your comments about budgeting, and using the money wisely. That is exactly why I bought the same quality part, at a fraction of the price.... but it was imported.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Got a link for 50 cents a day? You didn't bother to read the OP did you?
.

My gut sense, given what seems to be what s/he has written, is that PurpleOwl agrees thematically with Deloitte's findings and the ideas I expressed in the OP, but I'm not sure. It appears to me as well that s/he didn't actually read the OP, but rather just looked at the pictures and maybe read a few words "here and there."

I know what she meant, but she has to understand Chinese wages has increased tremendously just look At how many cars they have now compared to the 1970s

Just like Japan wages sky rocketed..

The other country's like Vietnam will follow them unless technology stops low cost labor.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Re-shoring is a bad idea. If it is allowed, then every 2nd shareholder reporting quarter will send your job from Bangladesh to America, then from America to Bangladesh. You may like a half year vacation every year, but the Pakis will not accept it.

If you are unhappy with your wage let your feet do the walking. Ronald Reagan

Keyword: prevailing wage. This also sheds light onto Reagan's lies.

I was working at a place, where I was a contractor. I discovered that when you considered all my expenses, I was earning less than minimum wage. When you considered that I worked 12 hour shifts, six days a week, I was earning less than I would at Wendy's.

Sure enough, at the end of the year, I had a taxable income of just $12,000.

Three things to conclude from this. One, you can live on very little. This idea that people earning minimum wage can't make it.... yeah they can. A living wage, depends on how frugally you choose to live. I lived on $12,000 a year, and actually paid off some old debt while doing it.

Was it fun? Was it easy? Was it something I enjoyed and wanted to keep doing? Of course not.

Which leads to number two: There is no such thing as slave wages. I simply quit the job, and found a better higher paying job. People choose to stay where they are at, and complain. Shut up! Get off your butt, and get a better job.

I'm not suggesting other people do anything, that I myself have not done.

Which leads to the third conclusion.... some people like that wage.

Before I left that job, I was really confused by all the people they had working there. So I set about asking the other contractors what their deal was.

Oddly, nearly all of them liked the job. Lots of freedom. No supervisor. Flexible shifts. Tons of travel. They were perfectly happy with the wage. Some of them had been doing this for years.

So all this combined means... Reagan was right. If YOU don't like YOUR wage, shut up, and walk to another job.

was working at a place, where I was a contractor. I discovered that when you considered all my expenses, I was earning less than minimum wage. When you considered that I worked 12 hour shifts, six days a week, I was earning less than I would at Wendy's.

What where you a taxi cab driver? I did that for 2 months one of my "in between jobs" during the recession back around 2010...

After I added it all up ( paying $3.00 bucks a gallon on obama gas, $75 a day in cab rental) I was making like $1.60 an hour

On 60 hour week's.

Don't get me wrong it was one of the most funniest rush of a job I had...but the wages..

 

[Andylusion]

Re-shoring is a bad idea. If it is allowed, then every 2nd shareholder reporting quarter will send your job from Bangladesh to America, then from America to Bangladesh. You may like a half year vacation every year, but the Pakis will not accept it.

If you are unhappy with your wage let your feet do the walking. Ronald Reagan

Keyword: prevailing wage. This also sheds light onto Reagan's lies.

I was working at a place, where I was a contractor. I discovered that when you considered all my expenses, I was earning less than minimum wage. When you considered that I worked 12 hour shifts, six days a week, I was earning less than I would at Wendy's.

Sure enough, at the end of the year, I had a taxable income of just $12,000.

Three things to conclude from this. One, you can live on very little. This idea that people earning minimum wage can't make it.... yeah they can. A living wage, depends on how frugally you choose to live. I lived on $12,000 a year, and actually paid off some old debt while doing it.

Was it fun? Was it easy? Was it something I enjoyed and wanted to keep doing? Of course not.

Which leads to number two: There is no such thing as slave wages. I simply quit the job, and found a better higher paying job. People choose to stay where they are at, and complain. Shut up! Get off your butt, and get a better job.

I'm not suggesting other people do anything, that I myself have not done.

Which leads to the third conclusion.... some people like that wage.

Before I left that job, I was really confused by all the people they had working there. So I set about asking the other contractors what their deal was.

Oddly, nearly all of them liked the job. Lots of freedom. No supervisor. Flexible shifts. Tons of travel. They were perfectly happy with the wage. Some of them had been doing this for years.

So all this combined means... Reagan was right. If YOU don't like YOUR wage, shut up, and walk to another job.

was working at a place, where I was a contractor. I discovered that when you considered all my expenses, I was earning less than minimum wage. When you considered that I worked 12 hour shifts, six days a week, I was earning less than I would at Wendy's.

What where you a taxi cab driver? I did that for 2 months one of my "in between jobs" during the recession back around 2010...

After I added it all up ( paying $3.00 bucks a gallon on obama gas, $75 a day in cab rental) I was making like $1.60 an hour

On 60 hour week's.

Don't get me wrong it was one of the most funniest rush of a job I had...but the wages..

Delivery driver. Same deal though. The checks look huge, but then at the end of the month it's magically all gone. It's when you sit down with a calculator, that you end up wondering if people who love the job, are insane.

 

[320 Years of History]

I know what she meant

I thought I knew what she meant too. I did not. The incoherence of his/her posts is so great that it's fully misleading to those of us who read them and apply the standard conventions of English grammar and syntax.

Absolutely not I disagree completely with everything you said

 

[320 Years of History]

If you budget your money correctly, a quarter, a dollar or two hundred dollars is essentially the same, in our modern-day catered society.

If one budgets one's money correctly "a quarter, a dollar or two hundred dollars is essentially the same" if and only if one earns enough in the first place for sage spending restraints to make it possible for those sums be "essentially the same."

 

[Andylusion]

If you budget your money correctly, a quarter, a dollar or two hundred dollars is essentially the same, in our modern-day catered society.

If one budgets one's money correctly "a quarter, a dollar or two hundred dollars is essentially the same" if and only if one earns enough in the first place for sage spending restraints to make it possible for those sums be "essentially the same."

No, that's not true. Or at least, the way I am reading it, it isn't true.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I know what she meant

I thought I knew what she meant too. I did not. The incoherence of his/her posts is so great that it's fully misleading to those of us who read them and apply the standard conventions of English grammar and syntax.

Absolutely not I disagree completely with everything you said

Give up the grammar/ spelling police stuff, if you can't be in a room of say Portuguese or Russians in your trade and figure out what they are saying your not smart enough.

To earn a pay check.