How about an Amendment to NAFTA

roadhouse158

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
122
Reaction score
30
Points
16
Location
North Carolina
I am so sick of seeing companies laying off American workers to move to another Country. Why will our politician buddies not add a clause in this "agreement" that states if a company closes it's doors in America to relocate; Then we impose stronger tarrifs, and higher taxes. This would maybe take their hunger for more profits away. America sure seems to be the BIG TIME looser in this. I guess Ross Perot was the only one that understood this. Democratic president, and a Republican Congress passed this nonsense. Fix it!
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
I am so sick of seeing companies laying off American workers to move to another Country. Why will our politician buddies not add a clause in this "agreement" that states if a company closes it's doors in America to relocate; Then we impose stronger tarrifs, and higher taxes. This would maybe take their hunger for more profits away. America sure seems to be the BIG TIME looser in this. I guess Ross Perot was the only one that understood this. Democratic president, and a Republican Congress passed this nonsense. Fix it!

I agree that companies shouldn't be outsourcing or going offshore. But I think NAFTA is less of a problem than this Congress giving tax breaks to companies which do exactly those things.
 

manu1959

Left Coast Isolationist
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
13,761
Reaction score
1,651
Points
48
Location
california
what should these companies do about the spiraling cost of labor?
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,493
Reaction score
16,384
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
what should these companies do about the spiraling cost of labor?
Those companies did not reduce the price of good when their manufacturing costs were reduced. I suppose the specific company would have to be taken into consideration, but all were profitable prior to going offshore and outsourcing. Their profits are greater now.

To be fair, I can't say I really feel badly for these corporations whose CEO's earn hundreds of times the salary of their workers when they used to, reasonably, earn approximately 40 times the average worker. And, honestly, I don't really care what the companies do because if they can't operate profitably then the jobs would be lost anyway. I'm all for profit, but not windfall profits on the backs of our workers.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
I am so sick of seeing companies laying off American workers to move to another Country. Why will our politician buddies not add a clause in this "agreement" that states if a company closes it's doors in America to relocate; Then we impose stronger tarrifs, and higher taxes. This would maybe take their hunger for more profits away. America sure seems to be the BIG TIME looser in this. I guess Ross Perot was the only one that understood this. Democratic president, and a Republican Congress passed this nonsense. Fix it!
Ever hear the phrase "we are our or you are your own worst enemy"?

Go ahead put tariffs on em, tax the shit outta em. The product WILL reflect that cost. They won't pay, YOU the comsumer WILL. You'll still buy it.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
Those companies did not reduce the price of good when their manufacturing costs were reduced. I suppose the specific company would have to be taken into consideration, but all were profitable prior to going offshore and outsourcing. Their profits are greater now.

To be fair, I can't say I really feel badly for these corporations whose CEO's earn hundreds of times the salary of their workers when they used to, reasonably, earn approximately 40 times the average worker. And, honestly, I don't really care what the companies do because if they can't operate profitably then the jobs would be lost anyway. I'm all for profit, but not windfall profits on the backs of our workers.
IMO the major reason many Companies leave is not labor cost, but because of the convoluted tax structure.

We need the "Fair Tax" NOW!
 
OP
roadhouse158

roadhouse158

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
122
Reaction score
30
Points
16
Location
North Carolina
Congress gives tax breaks to try and keep them here. And what are you talking about Mr. P? Greed is the one of the BIGGEST problems in this country. That's not an opening for you Democrats on here to say something about Republicans. Just as many Democrats are the CEO's of these companies moving. If they had no benifit from moving out of the country they wouldn't do it in the first place. They would stay here making only 10 million a year, instead of 200 million a year....I mean who can't live off 10 million a year....Not in a lifetime....But a year.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
Congress gives tax breaks to try and keep them here. And what are you talking about Mr. P? Greed is the one of the BIGGEST problems in this country. That's not an opening for you Democrats on here to say something about Republicans. Just as many Democrats are the CEO's of these companies moving. If they had no benifit from moving out of the country they wouldn't do it in the first place. They would stay here making only 10 million a year, instead of 200 million a year....I mean who can't live off 10 million a year....Not in a lifetime....But a year.
There ya go, what more is the to say?
 
OP
roadhouse158

roadhouse158

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
122
Reaction score
30
Points
16
Location
North Carolina
I agree. Should be a no brainer. Stop giving them a finicial incentive to leave. Sorry if you have to pay more to an American worker. You'll still manage a good life.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
I agree. Should be a no brainer. Stop giving them a finicial incentive to leave. Sorry if you have to pay more to an American worker. You'll still manage a good life.
Assuming you own your house, if you could move 10 miles into a better house for less money, would you? Hell yes you would, it’s a no brainer. So why shouldn’t a company operate that way. There’s no difference really. They have no obligation to you, just as you have none to the folks in business around the home you will sell.

It's all about the free market and the $$$$..Tis the way it is. Be it individual of company.
 
OP
roadhouse158

roadhouse158

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
122
Reaction score
30
Points
16
Location
North Carolina
Yes I do own a house, and two cars, and also 5 cats. Do I always do things for money..Nope...I love my job. Been offered $3.40 more an hour at another facility 3 miles down the road doing the same thing. BUT..I love the people I work with, the stability of the company, and the quality of our work. It's called pride. If all you care about is money then your useless. You know actual people are losing their jobs so these CEO's and such can just "say" they are making a bigger profit. They never actually see this money. They can't spend that much money. Their doing it for their family??? Where will their grandkids live? If this keeps happening, this country will fall apart. Ever heard of Rome????Rome fell when it became fascinated with MONEY, SPORTS, and SEX....Sounds a lot like America. I can't believe you would actually defend these pricks. They have no realization of what a human being is. All that matters is money to them. Compasion is a human trait. If you have no compasion, your not human. I know, I know...It won't happen to America. OK. The Berlin Wall was never going to fall either.
 

onedomino

SCE to AUX
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
478
Points
98
I am so sick of seeing companies laying off American workers to move to another Country. Why will our politician buddies not add a clause in this "agreement" that states if a company closes it's doors in America to relocate; Then we impose stronger tarrifs, and higher taxes.
That would lead to economic disaster. Welcome to the brave new world of "Globalization." The cruel truth is that in many instances large American corporations that depend on global trade to survive would go bankrupt if they were forced to base their production entirely on the pay scales that are common for factory workers in America. Yeah, it is depressing, but there it is. Why do you think that Caterpillar makes constructions machinery for the Asian market (and elsewhere) in China? Because if such machinery was made in Peoria, then it would not sell because it would be too high priced to be competitive. America's only hope to maintain its standard of living in a "globalized" economic environment is to boost productivity with continuous innovation. You must choose to be the wolf or the prey.
 

Mr. P

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
11,329
Reaction score
622
Points
48
Location
South of the Mason Dixon
That would lead to economic disaster. Welcome to the brave new world of "Globalization." The cruel truth is that in many instances large American corporations that depend on global trade to survive would go bankrupt if they were forced to base their production entirely on the pay scales that are common for factory workers in America. Yeah, it is depressing, but there it is. Why do you think that Caterpillar makes constructions machinery for the Asian market (and elsewhere) in China? Because if such machinery was made in Peoria, then it would not sell because it would be too high priced to be competitive. America's only hope to maintain its standard of living in a "globalized" economic environment is to boost productivity with continuous innovation. You must choose to be the wolf or the prey.
Add quality and we got a deal!
 
OP
roadhouse158

roadhouse158

Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
122
Reaction score
30
Points
16
Location
North Carolina
I understand Globalization. I mean that we should tax only the companys' that leave America. Not the products or companies that actually come from other Countrys'.They are more than welcome to open up factories overseas to sale to other countries. I think that American products will still be the biggest sellers. If people have jobs, their not scared to buy something that cost more. Same reason tax breaks help the economy, is the same reason that people not losing their jobs will help the economy. More money spent at home. I mean hey..America needs to look out for itself first.
 

onedomino

SCE to AUX
Joined
Sep 14, 2004
Messages
2,677
Reaction score
478
Points
98
I understand Globalization. I mean that we should tax only the companys' that leave America. Not the products or companies that actually come from other Countrys'.They are more than welcome to open up factories overseas to sale to other countries.
The situation is very complex and your post is interesting to me, especially since I was just reading an article a few days ago about the effects of Globalization on the American worker. The article used the construction equipment industry for examples. (cannot find the link at the moment) I share the feeling of frustration when seemingly ungrateful companies move their production facilities overseas. The fact is, however, Caterpillar manufacturers in China not just for the Asian market but also the American market. The very low wages in China make the products more competitive in the market wherever they are sold. We cannot insulate ourselves from the effects of globalization with tariffs that block products from US companies that are made overseas. If we do that, artificially high prices will reduce consumption and capital improvement leading to recession and maybe even simultaneous inflation, called “stagflation” back in the 60s and 70s. We are between a rock and a hard place. "Innovate or die" is not that much of an exaggeration. If America is going to continue to lead the world economy then we must be the high quality (thx Mr. P), low cost supplier. If we are not, then someone else will be. Now there is a category of company (and so far not many companies are in this category) that have cynically reincorporated in other countries after closing their American corporate headquarters. Ingersoll-Rand (another multi-billion dollar construction equipment manufacturer), for example, cancelled (or let expire) its incorporated status in New Jersey which of course made it a US company. It then reincorporated in Bermuda (where it has a PO Box) so it could avoid paying any US corporate taxes while it paid a much reduced rate in Bermuda. I would not mind seeing very high tariffs imposed on a company like that, not as an economic measure, but as punishment.
 

BaronVonBigmeat

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
1,185
Reaction score
163
Points
48
Those companies did not reduce the price of good when their manufacturing costs were reduced.
Some companies did. A lot of stuff I see in Walmart and Home Depot is either cheaper or higher quality for the same price.

Normally though, we would expect prices to go down more than they did however. Under a sane money system, prices actually go down over time. That's what raises the standard of living. Companies improve productivity, find cheaper ways to make things, streamline their business, etc. and pass the savings on to customers. Not because they're generous, but because of competition.

What happened, starting around 1996, was that the Federal Reserve goosed the money supply. Make a list of things which have stayed the same price or fallen: it's mostly consumables, manufactured goods, electronics and so forth. Now make a list of things which have gone up in price: health care, education, etc. Group 1 is things which can easily be outsourced overseas; Group 2 is things which cannot.

What's happened is, monetary inflation has neutralized falling prices. The Fed no doubt pats itself on the back for keeping "core" prices more or less in check during the last 10 years; but in fact prices should have dropped dramatically. We should see shoes at $10 a pair instead of $50, HDTV's for $300 instead of $1000, etc. (I made those numbers up, I don't know what the actual numbers would be of course, I'm just making a point).

The Fed furthered their blundering by viewing price deflation as a bad thing. They are deflation-phobic because in their minds, deflation is linked with recessions and depressions. But there are two types of deflation, good and bad, and falling prices due to free trade/productivity improvements are not bad! There was even a deflation scare in the late 90's (even supply-siders like Jude Waninski fell for it) because of cheaper imports. Naturally the Fed responded by creating money out of thin air, to save us from the horrors of $10 dollar Nikes.

You can look at a chart of M3 money supply and see it take off like a rocket right around Greenspan's "irrational exhuberance" speech. Gosh Mr. Greenspan, I can't figure it out either. You open up the money spigots and it sets off a speculative bubble (the dot-com boom)? Of course this benefited people with stocks, but ordinary people have to deal with layoffs and higher priced "non-outsourceable" goods, without seeing the benefits of dramatically cheaper consumer goods. They also re-inflated after 9/11 with a vengeance, this time setting off a housing bubble. Great for speculators and developers; not so great for the average family trying to buy a house without an ARM mortgage.



Ever heard of Rome????Rome fell when it became fascinated with MONEY, SPORTS, and SEX....
Rome is a good analogy for the US now, I'll agree with that. They overextended their empire, their government grew wildly out of control, spending far too much on lavish public works, taxes went sky high, and worst of all, their government inflated their currency to near worthlessness. In only a few decades they diluted the silver content of their coins from 90% down to barely 1%.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top