Ed Schultz Blaming Republicans For Manufacturing Jobs Gone To China. What ??

[Teals_Of_Wonder]

And why does Obama feel we can succseed in making Solar Panels? can he really create 5 or 6 million new jobs making Solar Panels and Windmills? and who will buy the products with 10% unemployment and also with banks not loaning money anymore?

 

[Navy1960]

whats the point of high speed rail when small business have been shutting down since 2008? in other words,,,high speed rails to nowhere. and we don't have enough money to pay for them. someone needs to do the math of the costs,,,,PER MILE !!! and Obama thought 9 billion was enough to get the project started here in Florida !!! Derrr,,,doesn't O'Bozo know that Florida sits on Sink Holes/Soft Ground??...... I live here and have heard about plenty of homes and roads sinking into the sandy hells of Florida. I can just see a news story in 2020,,,,this just in,,,a 3 mile stretch of the Obama High Speed Rail is slowly sinking into the earth at a rate of two inches a year.......Geologists say there is nothing we can do about it,,,just watch 20 billion dollars go down the drain.

By creating this Midwest high-speed train system we can create over 103,000 jobs and also add $13.8 billion in economic activity,” Hulsey said.

The study’s numbers show total regional economic impact, not just Wisconsin. But, speaking after Hulsey, legislative representative of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen Paul Aired elaborated on the local effect of the high-speed rail project in the state.

Aired said if the project were to go through Wisconsin it would create an estimated 60,000 local jobs. The 10-year project would take 15,000 new jobs to construct the Wisconsin route, 13,000 of which would be created within the first three years.

Still, those jobs come with a cost. The study estimates the entire Midwest high-speed rail system would cost $83 billion — $58 million would be spent on every mile of track laid. The Madison-Milwaukee corridor, assuming the route chosen is a straight line between the two cities, would cost around $4.6 billion to lay track
The Badger Herald: Study: Midwest high-speed rail would create jobs, help economy

The job estimates are spread out over the four-county area along the 84-mile high-speed line, covering Hillsborough, Polk, Orange and Osceola counties. The 2009 application was based on a four-year construction period, beginning in 2011, and broke down the jobs created into three basic categories -- construction, engineering services and operations/maintenance. The estimate includes direct jobs -- those directly hired as a result of the project -- and indirect jobs, which FDOT said are jobs created to support the suppliers of the materials and equipment to the project.

FDOT concluded that the rail line would create a total of 48,800 direct and indirect jobs over the construction of the system and another 1,100 total jobs once the line is in operation. (FDOT predicted the line would start running in 2015.)

Now granted most of these jobs are jobs that are in the construction phase, none the less they are jobs that will contribute to the economy in all aspects. As far as I'm concerned if states such as Ohio and Fl. do not wish to build HSR and employ it's citizens then others will be more than happy to. I do find it interesting though that when it comes to funding for NASA, and other programs that the Fl. Gov. has no problems there. In short if these programs put Americans to work and keep this nation on a equal or better footing with the rest of the world , rather than saying why we CANT do these things we should be finding out ways to do them.

 

[MiddleClass]

If the Republicans caused millions of jobs to vanish in the rust belt, then I guess it was soley the republicans who allowed Fanny and Freddie to collapse being they are the ones who gave away homes to the poor, and it will be the republicans who will be responsible for the upcoming record cold winter as well.

Uh, ever heard of "Country Wide Sheesh.

 

[Navy1960]

Clinton's version of the bill came with provisions to help people displaced by it.

True enough but would you say that NAFTA has been a good thing for American Industry? Again, my post does not lay the blame just at Clinton's feet, a lot can said for those companies who's motivation is nothing but profit and yet dane to call themselves American. I submit that at some point a company has to recognize that the nation in which they do business and seek to take advantage of, i.e. it's transportation system, it's tax law's, it's banking system, etc. and yes even the blood of the citizens that keep it safe. does and should have some sense of obligation to that country in which it does business in. Laws that promote outsourcing no matter who the party is just gives thos companies in my mind who have no pride in this nation incentive to take advantage which they more often than not do, and these days are encouraged to do, by the people they pay which are those that are supposed to represent us.

Do I think it helped? Sure. Proof is in the pudding. Many jobs were created. The problem here is that there are many that think the economy is some stagnant construct. It's not. It's extremely fluid. What worked at one point, may need to be altered because it is simply not good any more. It looks as if to much work has been outsourced and that needs to be addressed. That may not be the case a year from now..

This study’s new model indicates that the reduction in net exports to Mexico has eliminated 227,663 U.S. job opportunities since 1993, and the reduction in net exports to Canada has eliminated 167,172 job opportunities in the same period. In total, NAFTA resulted in a net loss of 394,835 jobs in its first three years.

This study’s model also makes possible an analysis of the demographic composition of NAFTA’s impact on employment. The analysis finds that NAFTA has eliminated significant numbers of jobs for women and members of minority groups, as well as white males. Between 1993 and 1996, women lost 141,454 jobs to NAFTA, blacks lost 36,890 jobs, and Hispanics lost 22,520 jobs, numbers closely reflecting these groups’ shares in manufacturing industries. Moreover, a disproportionate number of the jobs eliminated by NAFTA were manufacturing jobs, which pay relatively high wages, further contributing to NAFTA’s detrimental effect on the distribution of income and wages of working Americans.

Impact on U.S. Jobs
U.S. net exports to Mexico and Canada have declined dramatically under NAFTA (Table 1). According to the most recent measurements, real exports to Mexico grew by 31% and to Canada by 24% between 1993 and 1996. Import growth was far more dramatic, however, at 87% from Mexico and 33% from Canada over the same period. In 1993, the year before the agreement took effect, the U.S. had a trade surplus of $635 million with Mexico (all figures in constant 1987 dollars). By 1996, this had fallen to a deficit of $18.8 billion. The already existing deficit with Canada grew even larger, from $16.7 billion to $29.5 billion during those three years.
NAFTA’s Casualties—Employment effects on men, women, and minorities (EPI Issue Brief #120) | Economic Policy Institute

While I am not a advocating here the total rethinking of NAFTA, what I am saying is that perhaps that even the best of intentions are often taken advantage of and that in the case of NAFTA, this was perhaps not what they intended.

 

[LeftofLeft]

You are an American manufacturer....irregardless of size.

- Your Corporate Taxes are higher here in the US vs. any other Country
- Government Regulation: As a manufacturer, you are subject to the Governments (Fed, State, and Local) environmental, legal, other regulations which add costs that your competitor who has set up shop in China, Russia, or India.
- Unlimited Liability: Your risk exposure to legal liability simply operating as a manufacturer in the US is higher than those operating in other countries.
- Unions: Depending on where the business is located in the US, it will be subjected to higher wage mandates.

Hig Corporate Taxes, Government Regluation, High Legal Costs, and Unions are hardly Republican platforms, Ed.

 

[Teals_Of_Wonder]

it would be worth it if we had a strong economy. thats the other factor. whats the point of high speed rail with such high unemployment. and also keep in mind the % of drivers who prefer the comfort of driving themselves to work. Does anyone really enjoy taking the new york subway surrounded by 100 strangers? that issue was also brought up during the speed-rail argument in Florida. they brought up the fact that most car owners would still rather drive to work over taking high-speed trains.

 

[Teals_Of_Wonder]

also, you also need to do the math of how much the rail system would take in. how long would it take before they show a profit?

 

[Navy1960]

also, you also need to do the math of how much the rail system would take in. how long would it take before they show a profit?

Teals, I don't look at it like that, I look at it like this, projects like HSR's , Dam's, Highway's, a space program, etc. These big projects not only employ tens of thousands of Americans, and at times millions, they also seperate us from a 2nd rate nation to a frist rate nation as well are a source of national pride. To me those sorts of things cannot be measured in terms of sheer profit and I have yet to meet anyone who has gone to the Hoover Dam and looked at it, and the first thing they said was " how much profit does it make", same thing for those who stood on Fl.s Space coast and watched as the Apollo Staturn V reached for the moon. Yes, the cost money but generally at least in the past our nation did not look at things like these and say to themselves " gee we cannot do this because it won't turn a profit", rather we sought ways to make it happen because of the can do spirit that made us who we are. That is what is missing here, and I would rather imagine that if you hired 30,000 of your fellow Ohioans for such a project and years later they pointed to this as something they built it would also be a source of Ohio pride. All this talk of what we can't do needs to be replaced with what we can do for a change if we EVER wish to compete again in this world.

 

[Sallow]

True enough but would you say that NAFTA has been a good thing for American Industry? Again, my post does not lay the blame just at Clinton's feet, a lot can said for those companies who's motivation is nothing but profit and yet dane to call themselves American. I submit that at some point a company has to recognize that the nation in which they do business and seek to take advantage of, i.e. it's transportation system, it's tax law's, it's banking system, etc. and yes even the blood of the citizens that keep it safe. does and should have some sense of obligation to that country in which it does business in. Laws that promote outsourcing no matter who the party is just gives thos companies in my mind who have no pride in this nation incentive to take advantage which they more often than not do, and these days are encouraged to do, by the people they pay which are those that are supposed to represent us.

Do I think it helped? Sure. Proof is in the pudding. Many jobs were created. The problem here is that there are many that think the economy is some stagnant construct. It's not. It's extremely fluid. What worked at one point, may need to be altered because it is simply not good any more. It looks as if to much work has been outsourced and that needs to be addressed. That may not be the case a year from now..

This study’s new model indicates that the reduction in net exports to Mexico has eliminated 227,663 U.S. job opportunities since 1993, and the reduction in net exports to Canada has eliminated 167,172 job opportunities in the same period. In total, NAFTA resulted in a net loss of 394,835 jobs in its first three years.

This study’s model also makes possible an analysis of the demographic composition of NAFTA’s impact on employment. The analysis finds that NAFTA has eliminated significant numbers of jobs for women and members of minority groups, as well as white males. Between 1993 and 1996, women lost 141,454 jobs to NAFTA, blacks lost 36,890 jobs, and Hispanics lost 22,520 jobs, numbers closely reflecting these groups’ shares in manufacturing industries. Moreover, a disproportionate number of the jobs eliminated by NAFTA were manufacturing jobs, which pay relatively high wages, further contributing to NAFTA’s detrimental effect on the distribution of income and wages of working Americans.

Impact on U.S. Jobs
U.S. net exports to Mexico and Canada have declined dramatically under NAFTA (Table 1). According to the most recent measurements, real exports to Mexico grew by 31% and to Canada by 24% between 1993 and 1996. Import growth was far more dramatic, however, at 87% from Mexico and 33% from Canada over the same period. In 1993, the year before the agreement took effect, the U.S. had a trade surplus of $635 million with Mexico (all figures in constant 1987 dollars). By 1996, this had fallen to a deficit of $18.8 billion. The already existing deficit with Canada grew even larger, from $16.7 billion to $29.5 billion during those three years.
NAFTA’s Casualties—Employment effects on men, women, and minorities (EPI Issue Brief #120) | Economic Policy Institute

While I am not a advocating here the total rethinking of NAFTA, what I am saying is that perhaps that even the best of intentions are often taken advantage of and that in the case of NAFTA, this was perhaps not what they intended.

Net overall was job growth and not the other way around.

At some point we need to get serious and realize that the economy is interconnected world wide. That means we can't keep doing these things that keep our tech and infrastructure stilted. Everyone else seems to be realizing this. I don't really understand the whole battle against green tech and building or re-building our bridges and roads. We need a high speed rail..and I mean really need it. The rest of the world is miles ahead of us in this capacity.

 

[Sallow]

it would be worth it if we had a strong economy. thats the other factor. whats the point of high speed rail with such high unemployment. and also keep in mind the % of drivers who prefer the comfort of driving themselves to work. Does anyone really enjoy taking the new york subway surrounded by 100 strangers? that issue was also brought up during the speed-rail argument in Florida. they brought up the fact that most car owners would still rather drive to work over taking high-speed trains.

New York subways are the fastest and quickest way to get to work. Around the world, people use high speed rail over driving themselved to work. And places with rail stops generally experience growth of some kind.

 

[GHook93]

I watched him ONCE, as he did the most dishonest and unprofessional interview of Herman Cain. Making outrageous attacks, brought up USELESS assertions and tried to assert words in Cain's mouth. The guy is worse than Overbite. I would never watch him again.

However, interestin he would leave out facts like:
(1) It was the Clinton Administration that removed the barriers to China and assisted China in getting into the WTO.
(2) Clinton signed into law NAFTA!
(3) Democrats are the ones that protect unruly, corrupt and job killing labor unions like a mother protects a baby!
(4) How many job killing regulations and red-tape do the Democrats force on business?
(5) How about have a 35% corporate taxes with loopholes that ENCOURAGE offshoring. Cain's 999 plan will reduce the cost and encourage ONSHORING!

MSLSD are practice revisionist journalism

 

[Listening]

And it was Bush that gave companies a "tax holiday" for "repatriating" profits made overseas. That caused something like 50,000 factories to close up shop here and open in India and China.

Links please.

 

[Navy1960]

Do I think it helped? Sure. Proof is in the pudding. Many jobs were created. The problem here is that there are many that think the economy is some stagnant construct. It's not. It's extremely fluid. What worked at one point, may need to be altered because it is simply not good any more. It looks as if to much work has been outsourced and that needs to be addressed. That may not be the case a year from now..

This study’s new model indicates that the reduction in net exports to Mexico has eliminated 227,663 U.S. job opportunities since 1993, and the reduction in net exports to Canada has eliminated 167,172 job opportunities in the same period. In total, NAFTA resulted in a net loss of 394,835 jobs in its first three years.

This study’s model also makes possible an analysis of the demographic composition of NAFTA’s impact on employment. The analysis finds that NAFTA has eliminated significant numbers of jobs for women and members of minority groups, as well as white males. Between 1993 and 1996, women lost 141,454 jobs to NAFTA, blacks lost 36,890 jobs, and Hispanics lost 22,520 jobs, numbers closely reflecting these groups’ shares in manufacturing industries. Moreover, a disproportionate number of the jobs eliminated by NAFTA were manufacturing jobs, which pay relatively high wages, further contributing to NAFTA’s detrimental effect on the distribution of income and wages of working Americans.

Impact on U.S. Jobs
U.S. net exports to Mexico and Canada have declined dramatically under NAFTA (Table 1). According to the most recent measurements, real exports to Mexico grew by 31% and to Canada by 24% between 1993 and 1996. Import growth was far more dramatic, however, at 87% from Mexico and 33% from Canada over the same period. In 1993, the year before the agreement took effect, the U.S. had a trade surplus of $635 million with Mexico (all figures in constant 1987 dollars). By 1996, this had fallen to a deficit of $18.8 billion. The already existing deficit with Canada grew even larger, from $16.7 billion to $29.5 billion during those three years.
NAFTA’s Casualties—Employment effects on men, women, and minorities (EPI Issue Brief #120) | Economic Policy Institute

While I am not a advocating here the total rethinking of NAFTA, what I am saying is that perhaps that even the best of intentions are often taken advantage of and that in the case of NAFTA, this was perhaps not what they intended.

Net overall was job growth and not the other way around.

At some point we need to get serious and realize that the economy is interconnected world wide. That means we can't keep doing these things that keep our tech and infrastructure stilted. Everyone else seems to be realizing this. I don't really understand the whole battle against green tech and building or re-building our bridges and roads. We need a high speed rail..and I mean really need it. The rest of the world is miles ahead of us in this capacity.

In no way would I ever consider to isolate ourselves from the world, rather, I am a STRONG supporter of "American Made" and think we should do everything we can to get our house in order in that regard. In fact, what I do think is when the American public start demanding American made then we might just see a change. I just recently read Steve Jobs book and he had an interesting conversation on the matter with the President. I took away from it that many like him want to come back here, and we as a nation should do what we can to make that happen.

 

[Listening]

We need a high speed rail..and I mean really need it. The rest of the world is miles ahead of us in this capacity.

So what ?

Why do we really need this ? Please provide your answer in the form of an economic model (spreadsheet) that shows how this contributes to the growth of the country in sustainable way.

Thanks for playing.

 

[Teals_Of_Wonder]

I would want to see unemployment decrease back to 5% before borrowing billions to build this thing, otherwise we build it on borrowed money with compiling interest. Money we dont have. Keep in mind, the national debt averages around $400,000 or more per house-hold. Thats insane!

 

[Listening]

In no way would I ever consider to isolate ourselves from the world, rather, I am a STRONG supporter of "American Made" and think we should do everything we can to get our house in order in that regard. In fact, what I do think is when the American public start demanding American made then we might just see a change. I just recently read Steve Jobs book and he had an interesting conversation on the matter with the President. I took away from it that many like him want to come back here, and we as a nation should do what we can to make that happen.

In one of my issues of the Economist, it talked about how the UAW agreed to a two tier wage system for new workers. The article indicated that new workers would be making HALF of what existing workers would make for the same job. HALF ??? Are you kidding me. That means someone is getting paid double what they should and guess who is paying for it....??? Anyone who buys their products. I resolved right there not to buy Ford, GM, or Chrysler again for a long long time. The article also talked about how half is just about what the workers in southern states (non-union plants) make. But the cost of living is lower and it is still a good job.

Seems the "market" has a way of correcting things.

The article indicated that one of the outfalls of this agreement is that GM would be bringing back some jobs that are currently done in Mexico. The wage cut is a bummer...but it is what the market can bare. The returning jobs are good news.

I wonder what Ed thinks about that ? He is always touting the unions and the working persons of the world. Workers are getting less (but they have jobs and apparently there will be more jobs). He probably feels like two-face from Batman.

 

[Navy1960]

http://www.usmayors.org/highspeedrail/documents/committee-presentation.pdf

On the High Speed Rail thing, here is a study on the economic impact done for the US Conference of Mayors.

http://www.usmayors.org/highspeedrail/documents/report.pdf

Its a good read, the one thing here Teals, when you add in my previous posting, is all this economic impact also is taxable. To me at least, its not a matter of how much it costs but rather how to structure it so that the revenue that generated on ALL aspects of it so that it pays down that debt you mentioned. The same can be said for just about every program in the Federal system, I will add however, this is NOT the primary reason you build these things though , as a pure profit motive.

 

[Navy1960]

In no way would I ever consider to isolate ourselves from the world, rather, I am a STRONG supporter of "American Made" and think we should do everything we can to get our house in order in that regard. In fact, what I do think is when the American public start demanding American made then we might just see a change. I just recently read Steve Jobs book and he had an interesting conversation on the matter with the President. I took away from it that many like him want to come back here, and we as a nation should do what we can to make that happen.

In one of my issues of the Economist, it talked about how the UAW agreed to a two tier wage system for new workers. The article indicated that new workers would be making HALF of what existing workers would make for the same job. HALF ??? Are you kidding me. That means someone is getting paid double what they should and guess who is paying for it....??? Anyone who buys their products. I resolved right there not to buy Ford, GM, or Chrysler again for a long long time. The article also talked about how half is just about what the workers in southern states (non-union plants) make. But the cost of living is lower and it is still a good job.

Seems the "market" has a way of correcting things.

The article indicated that one of the outfalls of this agreement is that GM would be bringing back some jobs that are currently done in Mexico. The wage cut is a bummer...but it is what the market can bare. The returning jobs are good news.

I wonder what Ed thinks about that ? He is always touting the unions and the working persons of the world. Workers are getting less (but they have jobs and apparently there will be more jobs). He probably feels like two-face from Batman.

Personally I could care less if the jobs are Union or non-Union as long as they are American. That said, there many instances of non-Union jobs that are outsourced as much as Union ones. If you want to see a good example of this take a look at West Point Stevens, they were a textile company who's plants were for the most part in the south until 2004 or so and mostly if not all non-union and are now outsourced to Pakistan among other places. The point is, I am all for making the environment such that American jobs be they Union or non-Union are available and more important that our manufacturing base is built back up in this nation.

 

[Listening]

http://www.usmayors.org/highspeedrail/documents/committee-presentation.pdf

On the High Speed Rail thing, here is a study on the economic impact done for the US Conference of Mayors.

http://www.usmayors.org/highspeedrail/documents/report.pdf

Its a good read, the one thing here Teals, when you add in my previous posting, is all this economic impact also is taxable. To me at least, its not a matter of how much it costs but rather how to structure it so that the revenue that generated on ALL aspects of it so that it pays down that debt you mentioned. The same can be said for just about every program in the Federal system, I will add however, this is NOT the primary reason you build these things though , as a pure profit motive.

But profit is the reason Siemen's names is on the presentation. I mean, c'mon.....

There isn't enough information in there about assumptions or anything else to give you any kind of idea if this is reasonable or not.

Here in Kansas City, they have been knocking light rail off the ballot on a regular basis. The main claim is that it just won't pay out.

 

[Listening]

The point is, I am all for making the environment such that American jobs be they Union or non-Union are available and more important that our manufacturing base is built back up in this nation.

I agree with you that I would like to see it solid.

But, you won't get it with the kinds of wages you used to. If people can live with that...great.

Next, you better get rid of the EPA and the ability of groups like Green Peace to stall the permitting process.

You'd have several new oil refinieries in the country if they could get throug the permitting process. We buy gas from refineries in Inida....where the EPA does not rule. They are not horrid. But we can't compete with them due to regulations. If we could either relax regulations or level the playing field....we'd see some movement. As long as there is a chance the government could screw it up (government does change it's mind)....you won't see it happening.