What happened to the jobs?

[editec]

Cheap overseas labor is what happened to the jobs.

We could outlaw unions, cut corporate taxes to zero, and eliminate every regulation on the books and that would do nothing to change the fact that foreigners will work for a fraction of their American counterparts.

What about infrastructure? We need to get going with manual labor but costs are sky high. The thing companies were hoping for was affordable healthcare which adds to the cost of their product but Repubs put the kibosh on that.

There is a lot that can be looked at but not with all of the infighting in congress.

"Cheap Labor" overseas is a mentally lazy explaination: Plenty of "cheap labor" jobs exist in the USA. Ask a Mexican.

You have been somewhat misinformed.

Even the illegals working in the USA are making more money than most workers in China, sport.

The median factory workers pay is $300 a month in China.

www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/.../08wages.html

The reason people don't work, is simply because they don't need to because government subsidizes unemployment: Show me an industrialised nation where there are higher subsidies for being unemployed, and I'll show you a country where unemployment is high.

Sheer coporate apologist nonsense.

 

[Samson]

What about infrastructure? We need to get going with manual labor but costs are sky high. The thing companies were hoping for was affordable healthcare which adds to the cost of their product but Repubs put the kibosh on that.

There is a lot that can be looked at but not with all of the infighting in congress.

You have been somewhat misinformed.

Even the illegals working in the USA are making more money than most workers in China, sport.

The median factory workers pay is $300 a month in China.

www.nytimes.com/2010/06/08/.../08wages.html

The reason people don't work, is simply because they don't need to because government subsidizes unemployment: Show me an industrialised nation where there are higher subsidies for being unemployed, and I'll show you a country where unemployment is high.

Sheer coporate apologist nonsense.

I suppose the fact that Chinese factory workers make less than Illegals in the USA means Mexicans should be illegally immigrating to China.....

but it still doesn't explain why there is unemployment among US citizens when there are jobs being offered in the USA...

As far as dismissing government subsidized unemployment as "corporate apologist nonsense," your inability to rise to any challenge to find any industrialised nation with highly subsidised unemployment, and LOWER unemployment, speaks volumes.

Its easy to parrot anything is "Corporate Apologist Nonsense;" But try proving it?

Nah.

 

[expat_panama]

...The reason people don't work, is simply because they don't need to because government subsidizes unemployment...

Even the Obama wonks are saying this now. About a week ago one was saying on TV that cutting unemployment beniftis would help by forcing people to make "the hard choices of whether to relocate" etc.

 

[Wiseacre]

...The reason people don't work, is simply because they don't need to because government subsidizes unemployment...

Even the Obama wonks are saying this now. About a week ago one was saying on TV that cutting unemployment beniftis would help by forcing people to make "the hard choices of whether to relocate" etc.

Bet that guy got fired by now. It ain't the party line.

 

[MaggieMae]

The question asked in the OP was how can jobs be brought back to America? The answer is not that simple, a lot of factors are involved. For one, we've gotta be more pro-business, the current policies and practices are not conducive to starting new businesses or expanding existing ones. Taxes, regulations, energy, labor, we aren't making it easier or more profitable to start a company here vs elsewhere. And that's pretty stupid IMHO.

For a long time now we've had leadership problems in Washington, and we have also ceded too much power there instead of localizing more of it to the states, cities, and counties. There's little or no cooperation or compromise until the last minute or even after, and the country suffers as a result. If we could get to the point where the major political parties could actually work together on the important issues of the day, I think that would be a major obstacle rmoved in terms of economic growth and job creaion. Why? Less uncertainty. We've got big problems that are getting worse, until we show we can address them in a responsible way, I think we're just going to slog along with little improvement in employment.

The good news is, the rest of the world is beginning to catch up to us as we are ratcheting back. Many developing countries are experiencing growing inflation, which means their wages and income are growing as ours are scaling back somewhat. Shipping costs will also rise, which means foreign products won't be as cheap here as they are now. IOW, I think manufacturing will begin to grow more in this country as we become more competitive. But we've gotta be smart about it, holding down our own costs.

As long as business and industry shrink from taking risks, the economy will continue to slide further. They literally had it made for the last decade with tax cuts and relaxed regulations, but where were they then? How many small businesses immediately went belly up when their credit froze? Why were they trying to make it on credit alone in the first place? What were they doing with their profits? I notice you list everything to remain open for business has gone up but you left out health care for employees, which employers have seen steadily rise for decades by private insurers. Many of them dropped health benefits completely; wages have been stagnant. Nope, it's time for private enterprises to study their own internal problems and stop blaming all their woes on the government.

 

[MaggieMae]

actually housing crisis was caused by Fed and Fanny Freddie. If you disagree please say why or admit that as a liberal you can't. Thanks

I agree that F&F jumped into the subprime business and had the same problems with derivatives and packaging that private mortgage companies did, but they were NOT the sole cause, nor did they initiate what became a downward spiral.

Get Me ReWrite! | The Big Picture
.

And on the CRAs:
CRA Thought Experiment | The Big Picture

When the big banks began chasing subprime, it was due to the profit motive, not any mandate from the President (a Republican) or the the Congress (Republican controlled) or the GSEs they oversaw.

horsehockey.

91 James A. Johnson becomes Fannie Mae's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. The $10 billion "Opening Doors to Affordable Housing" initiative is launched. In September, Fannie Mae promotes Lawrence M. Small to President and Chief Operating Officer.
1992 Fannie Mae becomes, for the first time, the largest issuer and guarantor of MBS, surpassing Ginnie Mae and Freddie Mac.
1993 Fannie Mae succeeds the "Opening Doors" goal of producing $10 billion in purchases for low- and moderate-income and other special housing needs by July, more than 16 months ahead of time.
1994 In an expansion of the "Opening Doors" campaign, the Trillion Dollar Commitment is launched, pledging $1 trillion in targeted housing finance that will serve 10 million low- to moderate-income families.
1996 Fannie Mae celebrates its 10th consecutive year of record earnings. Fannie Mae contributes $350 million in stock to the Fannie Mae Foundation to expand its consumer outreach efforts.
1998 James A. Johnson, Fannie Mae's Chairman and CEO, announces his intention to retire. Franklin D. Raines joins Fannie Mae as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer - Designate. In April, Fannie Mae announces the national availability of Flexible 97, a new mortgage product designed to expand home ownership through a low three percent down-payment requirement. On September 30, Fannie Mae celebrates its 30th anniversary as a private, shareholder-owned company. The corporation achieves record business volumes in purchases, commitments, MBS issued, profits, and families served. Fannie Mae reaches $1 Trillion mark in mortgage books of business outstanding.

I don't need a history lesson, and Barry Ritholtz is no fan of F&F (read the link!!!). If you think they were the primary culprits of the economic meltdown caused by the housing crash, then you should contact him. Somewhere in that link, he repeats his offer of (I think) $100,000 to anyone who can prove him wrong. You should also read the book "Bailout Nation." And no, it isn't a "liberal-leaning" analysis at all. He takes everyone to task for not paying enough attention to what was going on behind the scenes.

 

[MaggieMae]

You forgot the Fed. Not even a liberal can say with a straight face that the Fed didn't print up all the money used to buy and bid up the prices of all those houses.

Add Fanny Freddie to the Fed and you have a 100% liberal caused recession.

Do you know what "the fed" is, why it was established and when?

Lender of last resort - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Federal_Reserve_System

 

[MaggieMae]

further, right here, it all started going south-

1976 For the first time, Fannie Mae purchases more conventional loans than FHA and VA loans.

1982 Fannie Mae funds one of every seven home mortgages made in the U.S.

1983 Fannie Mae begins purchasing conventional multifamily housing loans.

this is why we are here now as F& F has what % of the mortgage biz? The whirligig never stopped. The private mortgage market is at a stand still.

Oh and in the 90's capitalization limits required were taken lower so as to drop the creditworthiness required for a mortgage to be considered "sub-prime".

So? Back then, there was no "free down payment," and an income-to-mortgage ratio that they all followed. That went out the window in 2004. Back then, every banker (government sponsored VA, FHA or F&F) and privately run knew the value of each of their loans. By 2008, nobody knew. Nobody.

 

[Wiseacre]

The question asked in the OP was how can jobs be brought back to America? The answer is not that simple, a lot of factors are involved. For one, we've gotta be more pro-business, the current policies and practices are not conducive to starting new businesses or expanding existing ones. Taxes, regulations, energy, labor, we aren't making it easier or more profitable to start a company here vs elsewhere. And that's pretty stupid IMHO.

For a long time now we've had leadership problems in Washington, and we have also ceded too much power there instead of localizing more of it to the states, cities, and counties. There's little or no cooperation or compromise until the last minute or even after, and the country suffers as a result. If we could get to the point where the major political parties could actually work together on the important issues of the day, I think that would be a major obstacle rmoved in terms of economic growth and job creaion. Why? Less uncertainty. We've got big problems that are getting worse, until we show we can address them in a responsible way, I think we're just going to slog along with little improvement in employment.

The good news is, the rest of the world is beginning to catch up to us as we are ratcheting back. Many developing countries are experiencing growing inflation, which means their wages and income are growing as ours are scaling back somewhat. Shipping costs will also rise, which means foreign products won't be as cheap here as they are now. IOW, I think manufacturing will begin to grow more in this country as we become more competitive. But we've gotta be smart about it, holding down our own costs.

As long as business and industry shrink from taking risks, the economy will continue to slide further. They literally had it made for the last decade with tax cuts and relaxed regulations, but where were they then? How many small businesses immediately went belly up when their credit froze? Why were they trying to make it on credit alone in the first place? What were they doing with their profits? I notice you list everything to remain open for business has gone up but you left out health care for employees, which employers have seen steadily rise for decades by private insurers. Many of them dropped health benefits completely; wages have been stagnant. Nope, it's time for private enterprises to study their own internal problems and stop blaming all their woes on the government.

Healthcare insurance is a significant issue for employers, no doubt about it. Yeah, it's another expense that is unknown right now and perhaps holding up economic growth a little bit. From what I've read recently, a sizeable number of companies are going to drop the HC coverages and just pay the penalty if it gets too expensive. Which apparently it is.

We're going to have to resolve these issues on way or another, but you gotta understand it comes down to Return on Investment. A startup business isn't going to get many angel investors if the profit margin isn't high enough. Investors will put their money elsewhere, maybe even offshore. Or into tax sheltered accounts or hide it somewhere, who knows how.

 

[Brutus]

Cheap overseas labor is what happened to the jobs.

We could outlaw unions, cut corporate taxes to zero, and eliminate every regulation on the books and that would do nothing to change the fact that foreigners will work for a fraction of their American counterparts.

they have always worked for a fraction but America still manufactures 20% of world output just about like always. But, every job here is always on the fence as to whether it should stay or go. To this point most have stayed. Still, it would far safer to eliminate corporate taxes, filthy labour unions, and many regulations, to maintain our position for generations to come . This is common conservative common sense that a liberal will not have the ability to understand. Therein lies our problem, it is liberalism , not Chinese labor

 

[Jessica Blume]

Nafta.

 

[editec]

Cheap overseas labor is what happened to the jobs.

We could outlaw unions, cut corporate taxes to zero, and eliminate every regulation on the books and that would do nothing to change the fact that foreigners will work for a fraction of their American counterparts.

they have always worked for a fraction but America still manufactures 20% of world output just about like always. But, every job here is always on the fence as to whether it should stay or go. To this point most have stayed. Still, it would far safer to eliminate corporate taxes, filthy labour unions, and many regulations, to maintain our position for generations to come . This is common conservative common sense that a liberal will not have the ability to understand. Therein lies our problem, it is liberalism , not Chinese labor

People currently living in the American economy cannot work for the $300 a month that the average Chinese workers makes.

We could eliminate corporate every tax, every labor law, and every environmental regulation, too and the migration of industry from the USA to places like China would continue as long as we ALLOW third world nations to sell into this market.

 

[expat_panama]

Nafta.

Before NAFTA 121,464,000 people were working. When Obama was elected there were 144,068,000 employed workers. Now it's 139,779,000.

Aw, numbers are hard, blaming Bush and NAFTA's easy.

 

[editec]

Nafta.

Before NAFTA 121,464,000 people were working. When Obama was elected there were 144,068,000 employed workers. Now it's 139,779,000.

Aw, numbers are hard, blaming Bush and NAFTA's easy.

There's acute fluxuations in the economy, (like stemming form the Bankster's meltdown) and there's systemic trends in it (like the trend toward importing goods rather than making them here)

Sometimes the acute changes in the market and the system trends BOTH lead the economy in the same direction....like now for example,

What? This is too complex for you to understand?

Apparently it is.

 

[Samson]

Cheap overseas labor is what happened to the jobs.

We could outlaw unions, cut corporate taxes to zero, and eliminate every regulation on the books and that would do nothing to change the fact that foreigners will work for a fraction of their American counterparts.

they have always worked for a fraction but America still manufactures 20% of world output just about like always. But, every job here is always on the fence as to whether it should stay or go. To this point most have stayed. Still, it would far safer to eliminate corporate taxes, filthy labour unions, and many regulations, to maintain our position for generations to come . This is common conservative common sense that a liberal will not have the ability to understand. Therein lies our problem, it is liberalism , not Chinese labor

People currently living in the American economy cannot work for the $300 a month that the average Chinese workers makes.

We could eliminate corporate every tax, every labor law, and every environmental regulation, too and the migration of industry from the USA to places like China would continue as long as we ALLOW third world nations to sell into this market.

What a little fantacy world you live in.

"We ALLOW third world nations to sell into this market," because retards like you would be the first to complian about the inflationary effects of increased costs for domestically produced goods that foolhardy protectionism promotes.

Gawd forbid the unemployed learn a new fucking skill, or get their CDL's and drive a truck; but with 99 weeks of unemployment, WHY SHOULD THEY?

 

[Samson]

Nafta.

Deep Thoughts, there, Jessica.

Thanks for Playing

 

[expat_panama]

Before NAFTA 121,464,000 people were working. When Obama was elected there were 144,068,000 employed workers. Now it's 139,779,000....

Sometimes the acute changes in the market and the system trends BOTH lead the economy in the same direction....like now for example, What? This is too complex for you to understand?...

Oh, us voters understand perfectly, which is why we're not voting for your stupid import tax hikes.

 

[RonPaulRules]

We cannot reverse this trend but we can slow it down. The corporate tax rate is too high. It's encouraging businesses to leave the country. Further there are too many tax loopholes in corporate taxes that reward companies for sending jobs overseas. We need to eliminate these loopholes and cut corporate taxes in half, however we can't do that without major spending cuts or raising personal income tax. A bill that would cut corporate taxes, provide some spending cuttings and restructure corporate taxes would go along way toward bring jobs back to America.

How much are most companies paying in taxes now??? Most dont pay any. Why isnt the economy booming

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why is this even a question?

Socialism sucks and has failed every place its been tried, no matter how large the scale.

American Socialism need to be consigned to the garbage dump of history and we can have real 6% annual growth

 

[william the wie]

We cannot reverse this trend but we can slow it down. The corporate tax rate is too high. It's encouraging businesses to leave the country. Further there are too many tax loopholes in corporate taxes that reward companies for sending jobs overseas. We need to eliminate these loopholes and cut corporate taxes in half, however we can't do that without major spending cuts or raising personal income tax. A bill that would cut corporate taxes, provide some spending cuttings and restructure corporate taxes would go along way toward bring jobs back to America.

How much are most companies paying in taxes now??? Most dont pay any. Why isnt the economy booming

Current tax laws encourage companies to recognize earnings outside US jurisdiction, all that takes is some accounting magic and not very much of that.