We lost the last Class War..

[Si modo]

The idea that America has lost manufacturing capacity and no longer makes things, as opposed to losing manufacturing jobs, is another myth.

U.S. Manufacturing: Output vs. Jobs Since 1975 | Mercatus

U.S. manufacturing output has doubled since 1975. All anecdotal evidence concerning the Japanese stealing our electronics dominance etc. shouldn't obscure that fact. We are making more things than ever, we're just doing it with fewer people. Just as we grow more food than ever, but with fewer farm workers. It's called increased productivity, increased efficiency. There's nothing wrong with that per se.

Yeah, our GDP just rocks!

Rank Country GDP - real growth rate (%)
1 Qatar 16.3
2 Paraguay 15.3
3 Singapore 14.5
4 Taiwan 10.8
5 India 10.4
6 China 10.3
7 Turkmenistan 9.2
8 Sri Lanka 9.1
9 Congo, Republic of the 9.1
10 Zimbabwe 9
11 Peru 8.8
12 Botswana 8.6
13 Uruguay 8.5
14 Uzbekistan 8.5
15 Nigeria 8.4
16 Turkey 8.2
17 Afghanistan 8.2
18 Ethiopia 8
19 Maldives 8
20 Yemen 8
21 Thailand 7.8
22 Dominican Republic 7.8
23 Laos 7.7
24 Belarus 7.6
25 Zambia 7.6
26 Panama 7.5
27 Brazil 7.5
28 Argentina 7.5
29 Lebanon 7.5
30 Niger 7.5
31 Philippines 7.3
32 Malaysia 7.2
33 Congo, Democratic Republic of the 7.2
34 Mozambique 7
35 Kazakhstan 7
36 Papua New Guinea 7
37 West Bank 7
38 Moldova 6.9
39 Hong Kong 6.8
40 Vietnam 6.8
41 Bhutan 6.7
42 Malawi 6.6
43 Tanzania 6.5
44 Tajikistan 6.5
45 Rwanda 6.5
46 Georgia 6.4
47 Niue 6.2
48 Seychelles 6.2
49 East Timor 6.1
50 Mongolia 6.1
51 Korea, South 6.1
52 Indonesia 6.1
53 Gibraltar 6
54 Cambodia 6
55 Bangladesh 6
56 Burkina Faso 5.8
57 Ghana 5.7
58 Gambia, The 5.7
59 Gabon 5.7
60 Solomon Islands 5.6
61 Mexico 5.5
62 Sweden 5.5
63 Palau 5.5
64 Cape Verde 5.4
65 Chile 5.3
66 Burma 5.3
67 Isle of Man 5.2
68 Uganda 5.2
69 Sudan 5.1
70 Liberia 5.1
71 Chad 5.1
72 Egypt 5.1
73 Azerbaijan 5
74 Kenya 5
75 Sierra Leone 5
76 Turks and Caicos Islands 4.9
77 Pakistan 4.8
78 Mauritania 4.7
79 Israel 4.6
80 Bermuda 4.6
81 Nepal 4.6
82 Nicaragua 4.5
83 Sao Tome and Principe 4.5
84 Djibouti 4.5
85 Mali 4.5
86 Namibia 4.4
87 Suriname 4.4
88 Colombia 4.3
89 Costa Rica 4.2
90 Bolivia 4.2
91 Oman 4.2
92 Libya 4.2
93 Senegal 4.2
94 Ukraine 4.2
95 Bahrain 4.1
96 Brunei 4.1
97 Slovakia 4
98 Kosovo 4
99 Mauritius 4
100 Russia 4
101 Japan 3.9
102 Burundi 3.9
103 Andorra 3.8
104 Poland 3.8
105 Saudi Arabia 3.7
106 Tunisia 3.7
107 Malta 3.7
108 Guyana 3.6
109 Germany 3.5
110 Albania 3.5
111 Curacao 3.5
112 Guinea-Bissau 3.5
113 Togo 3.4
114 Luxembourg 3.4
115 Algeria 3.3
116 Central African Republic 3.3
117 Ecuador 3.2
118 Morocco 3.2
119 United Arab Emirates 3.2
120 Syria 3.2
121 Jordan 3.1
122 Estonia 3.1
123 Finland 3.1
124 Canada 3.1
125 American Samoa 3
126 Cameroon 3
127 Guernsey 3
128 Honduras 2.8
129 United States 2.8
130 South Africa 2.8
131 French Polynesia 2.7
132 Australia 2.7
133 Armenia 2.6
134 Guatemala 2.6
135 Cote d'Ivoire 2.6
136 Somalia 2.6
137 Switzerland 2.6
138 Benin 2.5
139 Aruba 2.4
140 Lesotho 2.4
141 Czech Republic 2.3
142 Eritrea 2.2
143 Vanuatu 2.2
144 Comoros 2.1
145 Denmark 2.1
146 Austria 2
147 Belgium 2
148 Belize 2
149 Kuwait 2
150 Virgin Islands 2
151 Swaziland 2
152 Guinea 1.9
153 Kiribati 1.8
154 Liechtenstein 1.8
155 Serbia 1.8
156 Netherlands 1.7
157 Sint Maarten 1.6
158 Angola 1.6
159 Cuba 1.5
160 France 1.5
161 New Zealand 1.5
162 Portugal 1.4
163 United Kingdom 1.3
164 Lithuania 1.3
165 Italy 1.3
166 Hungary 1.2
167 Slovenia 1.2
168 Montenegro 1.1
169 Cayman Islands 1.1
170 Cocos (Keeling) Islands 1
171 Dominica 1
172 Macau 1
173 Iran 1
174 Iraq 0.8
175 Bosnia and Herzegovina 0.8
176 Saint Lucia 0.8
177 El Salvador 0.7
178 Macedonia 0.7
179 Faroe Islands 0.5
180 Bahamas, The 0.5
181 Norway 0.4
182 Tonga 0.3
183 Micronesia, Federated States of 0.3
184 Bulgaria 0.2
185 Tuvalu 0.2
186 Fiji 0.1
187 Cook Islands 0.1
188 Trinidad and Tobago 0
189 Samoa 0
190 Spain -0.1
191 Marshall Islands -0.3
192 Latvia -0.3
193 Barbados -0.5
194 British Virgin Islands -0.6
195 Equatorial Guinea -0.8
196 Korea, North -0.9
197 Montserrat -1
198 Ireland -1
199 Jamaica -1.1
200 Romania -1.3
201 Kyrgyzstan -1.4
202 Croatia -1.4
203 Grenada -1.4
204 Saint Kitts and Nevis -1.5
205 Venezuela -1.9
206 Greenland -2
207 Madagascar -2
208 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines -2.3
209 Iceland -3.5
210 Antigua and Barbuda -4.1
211 Greece -4.5
212 Haiti -5.1
213 Puerto Rico -5.8
214 Anguilla -8.5
215 San Marino -13

GDP - real growth rate - Country Comparison

Our #1 export is debt.

 

[Utilitarian]

If you understand comparative advantage, then it makes sense to improve the education of your workforce.

We can't really blame China for taking our jobs. That naturally occurs because of the market.

What an industrialized society is supposed to do is educate its workforce to fill better jobs that can't be as easily outsourced. Most of our peers have done a better job of this, which is why we struggle more with outsourcing than most of them.

That's part of it, yes, but our failure to do so is part of the bigger picture in which we have acted to further the narrow interests of the very rich rather than the general interests of the American people.

"Educating the work force" mainly means at the higher-education level nowadays. If we were serious about doing this, we would provide a college education at fully public expense, the way France does for example. There would be no such thing as a student loan, and no one who could not go to college for financial reasons. No one would have to work in order to pay college tuition, only for spending money etc., and so could devote more time to study.

But to do this would require higher taxes on rich people, and would detract from what the purpose of the economy has been since the Reagan era: to help the rich become as rich as possible, screw everyone else.

Pretty much... And if we move more towards the market approach for education, then it's just going to allow more of our workforce to be underskilled compared to our peers.

Granted, we also need to orient our education system more towards technical skills, math, science, and engineering.

Liberal arts are fine as electives and minors, but we don't need that many graduates in that area.

 

[Dragon]

Yeah, our GDP just rocks!

You really seem to have problems with reading comprehension today, Si modo. I was talking about manufacturing output, not GDP. If you want to talk about GDP, go ahead, but presenting that as a response to me when I was talking about something completely different is kind of confusing.

By the way, a country that is in the process of industrializing will always have a deceptively-high rate of growth in GDP. I'm pretty sure the highest rate of GDP growth of any country in history was that of the Soviet Union in the 1930s, when Stalin was engaged in his crash program of factory building.

What you want to do is to compare the U.S. per capita GDP growth not to developing countries but to other mature economies, such as the EU, Canada, Australia, or Japan. But I'll leave it to you to do that if you want to.

 

[Si modo]

Yeah, our GDP just rocks!

You really seem to have problems with reading comprehension today, Si modo. I was talking about manufacturing output, not GDP. If you want to talk about GDP, go ahead, but presenting that as a response to me when I was talking about something completely different is kind of confusing.

By the way, a country that is in the process of industrializing will always have a deceptively-high rate of growth in GDP. I'm pretty sure the highest rate of GDP growth of any country in history was that of the Soviet Union in the 1930s, when Stalin was engaged in his crash program of factory building.

What you want to do is to compare the U.S. per capita GDP growth not to developing countries but to other mature economies, such as the EU, Canada, Australia, or Japan. But I'll leave it to you to do that if you want to.

I've also looked at per capita. It sucks compared to what we were, well the rate of increase sucks to what it was.

This is globalization.

 

[Dragon]

I've also looked at per capita. It sucks compared to what we were, well the rate of increase sucks to what it was.

This is true.

This is globalization.

This is not. Globalization is not new. We have had a global economy for at least a century. That's why the collapse of the U.S. economy in 1929 brought down the rest of the industrialized world.

If you look at the pattern of growth in per capita GDP, you will find that it averaged about 2.15% in the U.S. from 1900 to 1940, around 4.4% from 1940 to 1980, and something just over 2% again from 1980 to the present. In other words, that middle period beat either the earlier or later periods by more than two to one.

Now, you could argue that the later period showed more globalization than the middle period, but can you really say that about the earlier one as well?

No. The cause is not globalization. It's a shift in government policies to favor the accumulation of private fortunes, rather than the broad prosperity of most of the people.

 

[Si modo]

I've also looked at per capita. It sucks compared to what we were, well the rate of increase sucks to what it was.

This is true.

This is globalization.

This is not. Globalization is not new. We have had a global economy for at least a century. That's why the collapse of the U.S. economy in 1929 brought down the rest of the industrialized world.

If you look at the pattern of growth in per capita GDP, you will find that it averaged about 2.15% in the U.S. from 1900 to 1940, around 4.4% from 1940 to 1980, and something just over 2% again from 1980 to the present. In other words, that middle period beat either the earlier or later periods by more than two to one.

Now, you could argue that the later period showed more globalization than the middle period, but can you really say that about the earlier one as well?

No. The cause is not globalization. It's a shift in government policies to favor the accumulation of private fortunes, rather than the broad prosperity of most of the people.

Yes, we've had it for some time now. But now, it affects individuals and they are feeling it.

The jobs situation is simple supply and demand only now, the supply and demand is the world.

So, we try to fight the flow or accept reality and make the best of it. It's time to use intelligence, not violence.

That's what markets do.

 

[flacaltenn]

The idea that America has lost manufacturing capacity and no longer makes things, as opposed to losing manufacturing jobs, is another myth.

U.S. Manufacturing: Output vs. Jobs Since 1975 | Mercatus

U.S. manufacturing output has doubled since 1975. All anecdotal evidence concerning the Japanese stealing our electronics dominance etc. shouldn't obscure that fact. We are making more things than ever, we're just doing it with fewer people. Just as we grow more food than ever, but with fewer farm workers. It's called increased productivity, increased efficiency. There's nothing wrong with that per se.

The fact that Japan ate our Consumer Electronics is NOT anectdotal.. Even in the 80's it started to be a national security issue when DOD couldn't find monitors and displays made in the USA. We funded their initial manufacturing thinking that we would always be the brains of the operation. And less than a decade later -- they didn't need our brains either. There is no American Consumer Electronics manufacturing LEFT to measure.. That's a fact. (Unless you fudge as in the next paragraph)..

As for Manufacturing output doubling with associated job loss -- it's largely because of phoney assumptions made by the Fed Reserve (source of figures in your link). They count NON-DOMESTIC content as tho it doesn't exist. So that a car ASSEMBLED in the US is counted as manufacturing output even if 40% of the components are made in Mexico or offshore. But Yeah -- automation and "efficiency" are part of it. Neither of which are really things to fear. (See agriculture employment figures for instance over 60 years).

In fact, in the REMAINING US electronics biz -- these idiots count COMPUTERS and entire subsystems made offshore in the output of our medical systems. I know that from experience in the field. Outsourcing has DECIMATED our domestic supply chain. Where you used to be able to buy connectors, capacitors, and types of piece parts made by AMERICAN workers, that content is now foreign sourced -- yet the final product is counted as AMERICAN output. Don't rely on that garbage.

The point I was trying to get to in this thread is ---- Was it ever "FAIR" for the US to control 30% of the world's wealth when we only have 5% of the population? And why wouldn't leftists be CHEERING the healthy redistribution of global wealth that is occurring.. Largely with our VOLUNTARY help. Isn't that what they want for THIS COUNTRY? The same "social justice" that they wanted for the 3rd world..

 

[flacaltenn]

If you understand comparative advantage, then it makes sense to improve the education of your workforce.

We can't really blame China for taking our jobs. That naturally occurs because of the market.

What an industrialized society is supposed to do is educate its workforce to fill better jobs that can't be as easily outsourced. Most of our peers have done a better job of this, which is why we struggle more with outsourcing than most of them.

That's part of it, yes, but our failure to do so is part of the bigger picture in which we have acted to further the narrow interests of the very rich rather than the general interests of the American people.

"Educating the work force" mainly means at the higher-education level nowadays. If we were serious about doing this, we would provide a college education at fully public expense, the way France does for example. There would be no such thing as a student loan, and no one who could not go to college for financial reasons. No one would have to work in order to pay college tuition, only for spending money etc., and so could devote more time to study.

But to do this would require higher taxes on rich people, and would detract from what the purpose of the economy has been since the Reagan era: to help the rich become as rich as possible, screw everyone else.

Pretty much... And if we move more towards the market approach for education, then it's just going to allow more of our workforce to be underskilled compared to our peers.

Granted, we also need to orient our education system more towards technical skills, math, science, and engineering.

Liberal arts are fine as electives and minors, but we don't need that many graduates in that area.

Educating the workforce is MUCH MORE than a young 20 something getting a degree. We need to promote the skill sets of trade and vocational jobs as well. To get to where Utilitarian suggests, we might have to look at college as a "distributed degree" that looks more like lifetime learning. Getting credit for picking up skills as they become required. This is NOT a money issue. It's a product delivery problem for education. We need to chastize parents for forcing kids into prestigious undergrad schools so they can brag about it. And worry more about SAVING some money for actual JOB TRAINING.

There are jobs NOW in the science, tech, engineering and math (STEM) fields. We are not producing ENOUGH American kids to fill them. But I don't expect that EVERYONE will need a 4 or 6 yr degree to get a job in the NEW high tech industries. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to BUILD OR TEST a rocket engine -- does it?? Doesn't take a PHd to write a script for a manufacturing robot either... If you can design a website -- you could learn to babysit robots..

 

[Dragon]

The fact that Japan ate our Consumer Electronics is NOT anectdotal.

Of course it is. An anecdote isn't necessarily untrue, it's just one small datum and should not be taken as indicative of larger reality without a great deal of supporting evidence.

As for Manufacturing output doubling with associated job loss -- it's largely because of phoney assumptions made by the Fed Reserve (source of figures in your link).
They count NON-DOMESTIC content as tho it doesn't exist. So that a car ASSEMBLED in the US is counted as manufacturing output even if 40% of the components are made in Mexico or offshore.

There's nothing wrong with that. It's called "value added": take the value of the final product and subtract from this the value of the parts unless the parts were also manufactured domestically.

Now, if you want to say that we no longer manufacture much (outside the defense industries) without partial input from other countries, that's true. Do you consider it a problem?

But Yeah -- automation and "efficiency" are part of it. Neither of which are really things to fear. (See agriculture employment figures for instance over 60 years).

Quite, I agree. The myth that "outsourcing destroyed our good jobs" is if anything more prevalent on the left than on the right, but it is IMO attacking the wrong culprit.

The point I was trying to get to in this thread is ---- Was it ever "FAIR" for the US to control 30% of the world's wealth when we only have 5% of the population? And why wouldn't leftists be CHEERING the healthy redistribution of global wealth that is occurring.

LOL I understood what you were saying, dude. The problem is that it is based on a false premise. We haven't seen declining standards of living because the third world is developing, we've seen declining standards of living because an increasing share of national wealth is going to a very few greedy Americans. In fact, while the growth in per capita GDP has indeed slowed since 1980, it has not stopped, and we have more wealth per capita in this country today (or, well, we did as of 2007 anyway) than at any time in the past. The only problem lies in how that wealth is divided up.

 

[flacaltenn]

The fact that Japan ate our Consumer Electronics is NOT anectdotal.

Of course it is. An anecdote isn't necessarily untrue, it's just one small datum and should not be taken as indicative of larger reality without a great deal of supporting evidence.



There's nothing wrong with that. It's called "value added": take the value of the final product and subtract from this the value of the parts unless the parts were also manufactured domestically.

Now, if you want to say that we no longer manufacture much (outside the defense industries) without partial input from other countries, that's true. Do you consider it a problem?



Quite, I agree. The myth that "outsourcing destroyed our good jobs" is if anything more prevalent on the left than on the right, but it is IMO attacking the wrong culprit.

The point I was trying to get to in this thread is ---- Was it ever "FAIR" for the US to control 30% of the world's wealth when we only have 5% of the population? And why wouldn't leftists be CHEERING the healthy redistribution of global wealth that is occurring.

LOL I understood what you were saying, dude. The problem is that it is based on a false premise. We haven't seen declining standards of living because the third world is developing, we've seen declining standards of living because an increasing share of national wealth is going to a very few greedy Americans. In fact, while the growth in per capita GDP has indeed slowed since 1980, it has not stopped, and we have more wealth per capita in this country today (or, well, we did as of 2007 anyway) than at any time in the past. The only problem lies in how that wealth is divided up.

The problem is that BLStatistics and the FED are using a measure of 50% domestic content or LESS to count manufacturing output. For instance Apple makes virtually NOTHING in this country but is still considered a "manufacturer" for bean counting purposes. I've been in Apple headquarters in Cupertino and it's filled with nerds and MBAs. So if you're whining about who stole the jobs (foreigners), and where the capital went to build NEW INNOVATIVE industries (China) , you've got no basis to assume that GLOBAL redistribution of wealth and jobs was NOT the primary culprit.

And moreover the SOLUTION is not to promote a class war, but to guide America into a position where NEW industries and jobs can be more easily created. That means fixing the FALLING percentages of black inner city youth that are choosing the STEM sector jobs and education. That means restructuring what a "degree" is and how one earns one. That means providing CLEAR and workable public policy on energy, taxes, and regulation.

DID CHINA INCREASE THEIR GDP AND STANDARD OF LIVING BY STEALING FROM THEIR RICH??? Nope... Did it TRICKLE UP? Nope... Is the wealth gap exploding in China?? YEP... Do they CARE? Nope.....

Those GREEDY americans you are blaming are the top 10%.. When you expand to that meaningful level -- you ARE including the MBAs and Engineers and Scientists that are LEFT in our measure of manufacturing output. Care to attack THEM as well for being positioned to survived in a Global economy??? You got no solution there.

NBA salaries have tripled since the 70s and those greedy bastards are on a work stoppage. Think redistributing their salary/parachutes is gonna stimulate Basketball..

Go picket the NBA players Union eh???

 

[Dragon]

Look, here's the bottom line.

We have declining standards of living in this country, and declining real wages. That's been true for about three decades.

You say that this is attributable to a transfer of wealth from the U.S. and other advanced nations to the developing world, that they have prospered at our expense. I say, contrariwise, that we see this problem because a small, powerful elite is hogging an ever-increasing share of the wealth we produce, leaving less and less for the rest of us.

Here's a simple way to test which of those ideas is true. Take a look at per capita GDP in 1980 compared to 2007 (before the Great Recession hit). If your hypothesis is correct, we should see the 2007 figure for per capita GDP be LOWER than it was in 1980. Declining per capita GDP over the years would then explain declining living standards and lower wages, and is what we should expect to see if our wealth really is being redistributed overseas to poor countries.

Trouble is, we don't see that. Per capita GDP in 2007 was about 1.8 times as high as in 1980; that's based on average annual growth of approximately 2.2%. So there ISN'T less wealth to go around, there's more.

Our problem is not that we have less to go around because it's being bled away to China or for any other reason. We don't, we have more. But it's being distributed in a very lopsided fashion, with a huge share of it going to a few privileged people at the top.

What has happened internally in China or any other country is irrelevant. That is what has happened here.

 

[flacaltenn]

Look, here's the bottom line.

We have declining standards of living in this country, and declining real wages. That's been true for about three decades.

You say that this is attributable to a transfer of wealth from the U.S. and other advanced nations to the developing world, that they have prospered at our expense. I say, contrariwise, that we see this problem because a small, powerful elite is hogging an ever-increasing share of the wealth we produce, leaving less and less for the rest of us.

Here's a simple way to test which of those ideas is true. Take a look at per capita GDP in 1980 compared to 2007 (before the Great Recession hit). If your hypothesis is correct, we should see the 2007 figure for per capita GDP be LOWER than it was in 1980. Declining per capita GDP over the years would then explain declining living standards and lower wages, and is what we should expect to see if our wealth really is being redistributed overseas to poor countries.

Trouble is, we don't see that. Per capita GDP in 2007 was about 1.8 times as high as in 1980; that's based on average annual growth of approximately 2.2%. So there ISN'T less wealth to go around, there's more.

Our problem is not that we have less to go around because it's being bled away to China or for any other reason. We don't, we have more. But it's being distributed in a very lopsided fashion, with a huge share of it going to a few privileged people at the top.

What has happened internally in China or any other country is irrelevant. That is what has happened here.

It's a swing --- and a miss... Let me help you make the math argument. Why in the WORLD would you use per capita GDP when you're entire BEEF is that Some Capitas are getting the belongings of the other Capitas??? That's rubbish. Rich people don't eat GDP. GDP counts crap like Govt employment.

Use median incomes in several brackets --- and see what you find.. Don't even need to go back further than 1990 when the flight of jobs and capital to Asia really took off..

 

[flacaltenn]

Lemme take that back a step.. It was sloppy.

You COULD use GDP to claim that American WEALTH has increased. But theoretically you could HUGE GDP without making a profit (see WWII for example). Thus "the pie" doesn't neccessarily increase with GDP. The more effective measure would be profit on goods and services. There's no doubt that this has increased because profit has gone up because of efficiency and because of lower cost of (foreign) labor. This is the leftist squeal about "the rich" pocketing the profits of outsourcing jobs. In a sense -- this is real. Except that it has resulted in decreased cost of goods and increased consumer leverage -- so it's complicated.

But who else has "pocketed the profits of outsourcing jobs" ??? Why it would be the billions of Chinese who HAVE SEEN an increasing pie because of the generosity of (largely) American/Japanese investors. One of the greatest examples we have of "the rich" actually creating a larger pie..

The disparity in income and wealth is largely because of displaced opportunity. What was SUPPOSED to happen in globalization was that America was gonna adopt a pro-innovation, high tech, "we solve the hard problems" approach to business. And instead we struggled with International nation building, multi-country bombing campaigns, mismanaged entitlement programs, a more intrusive bureaucratic hurdle to new ventures, large scale consolidation thru mergers and acquisitions, petty political feuds, stagnant education levels. and a myriad of other distractions.

The fact that LESS OF AMERICA is prepared to compete in the 21st Century economy is the reason for the growing wealth and income disparity. No amount of wealth redistribution is gonna help a High School dropout in the 21st Century. That and realities like 6 mill new illegals driving down the income figures for the bottom quintile.

Here's MY bottom line. The rich are getting richer because EXISTING corporations and businesses are getting bigger. This applies to the CEO of Caterpillar and the starting line-up for the NBA. The problem is that our rate of creation of NEW competitive, innovative businesses has slowed to a crawl.. Look at new entries on the DJ index in the past 10 years. When you don't INNOVATE, wealth gaps WILL increase as the big guys gobble up everything in sight. Almost ALL GOVT regulation FAVORS the giants. Not JUST BECAUSE OF campaign cash, but because mom/pop can't afford a team of compliance officers, Walmart can. Figure out how to get capital to flow into NEW unique to the world businesses, and you will narrow the wealth gap.

We better cut the class war crap and start talking about TRUELY preparing the next generation now. Before China, Japan and Malaysia declare us to be irrelevent..

 

[Katzndogz]

While unions had a place at one time, they have long outlived their usefulness.

When GM spent more on legacy benefits than material to build cars the unions started their downfall. Toyota cars are built in the USA, with non union labor, they build better cars than GM does and cost less to buy. The reason is unions. Union manufacturing is going to cost more and be poor quality. The Union protects Union jobs, the employee doesn't care how the product turns out. He's going to be paid and keep his job anyway.

Unions have outlived their usefulness long ago.

 

[flacaltenn]

While unions had a place at one time, they have long outlived their usefulness.

When GM spent more on legacy benefits than material to build cars the unions started their downfall. Toyota cars are built in the USA, with non union labor, they build better cars than GM does and cost less to buy. The reason is unions. Union manufacturing is going to cost more and be poor quality. The Union protects Union jobs, the employee doesn't care how the product turns out. He's going to be paid and keep his job anyway.

Unions have outlived their usefulness long ago.

They COULD be useful again -- if they checked the calendar and discovered which century they are in.. But they treat their membership as robots who turn in the same exact performance every day for their entire careers. That's not humane and it's not what a job is today.. A Medieval Guild and Apprentice system would be far more natural in these times.