You are a ******* moron (again, no surprise). Here is the "real" definition of supply side economics:
God but you're dense.
Supply-side economics is a school of macroeconomic thought that argues that economic growth can be most effectively created by lowering barriers for people to produce (supply) goods and services,
Well holy ****, how about that? In short, supply gives rise to demand...
such as lowering income tax and capital gains tax rates, and by allowing greater flexibility by reducing regulation.
According to supply-side economics, consumers will then benefit from a greater supply of goods and services at lower prices. Typical policy recommendations of supply-side economists are lower marginal tax rates and less regulation.[1][/B]
Regarding the how to achieve greater supply.
So now, that we have that out of the way.. Are you saying there is no demand for an iPhone in the USA? Hmmm.. Those are made overseas, are they not?
Seriously, were you dropped on your head as a child?
In schools of economic thought, two distinct philosophies have emerged. The first is that which is based on Jean Baptiste Say, the classical philosophy. Austrian, Chicago, and Supply Side are all founded in the classical philosophy. The second philosophy is based on Otto Von Bismark, loosely. Marxist, Keynesian, and Fascist economics all resolve to a centrally planed economic model from the Fabians. Keynes is the most notable of the Fabian based economists, and most of the central planners roughly follow Keynes now.
When Arthur Laffer popularized the term "supply side" he was simply expounding upon his Chicago (Freidman) school foundation. He used the term to distinguish from the Keynesian focus of aggregate demand.
Designed here, consumed here (DEMAND), and built in Foxconn, Shenzhen.. Supply Side + China (cheap labor) = Double edged sword.
Again, you don't have a hint of a clue regarding economics. Offshoring has zilch to do with "supply side." Notice how Obama gave Keynesian stimulus money to concerns that turned around and used that money to offshore. Notice how Dear Leader's own "Jobs Czar," Jeffery Immelt, offshored a whole division to China right after getting his "Obamabucks" out of the peoples pockets.
{Obama's stimulus included over $8.5 billion in grants for wind farms that flowed overseas, despite Congressional criticism from both sides of the aisle. In total, over half of the money went to either foreign developers or foreign wind turbine manufacturers, creating thousands of jobs overseas with money that was supposed to create jobs within the United States. Even worse, hundreds of millions of dollars went to wind farms that began construction before the stimulus was passed. The end result of all this spending: the wind energy industry lost 10,000 jobs last year.}
Obamanomics Outsourced - GOP.com
Obama Jobs Council Packed With Outsourcing Companies
Considering your inability to understand the fundamental supply side meaning, you are in no place to judge the use of any words..
Son, you have at best a Jr. High level education, and spew shit from the hate sites that you have no grasp of.
I was just listing labor and the ACA as some examples...
Do you perhaps mean the PPACA? You forget (actually probably never knew) that the coverage provisions don't even kick in until 2014. And Obama fascist care will most dramatically hurt small business, which obviously can't offshore.
All of the other stuff aside (LOL), you are truly showing your ass here. You know NOTHING, if you honestly think that that (quoted) is the truth.
You're not my ass, you're just an ass. (though you have been pwned.)
I work in the most heavily exported industry, I can tell you that what is heavy (weight) stays here ONLY in small volume settings.
Again, labor savings virtually NEVER make up for shipping costs. So the reasons for offshoring have little to do with labor.
High volume (heavy or not) production almost ALWAYS benefits from overseas production, see, there is a big factor that you do not know about (aside from cheap labor). China courts all electronic manufacturing business in the USA, if they want the business in China they will offer the business a HUGE incentive (trained labor, free manufacturing space, you NAME IT) to move production over to China. We lost 3 of our biggest customers to this, they were pumping out 100,000 LED light bulbs a week at an amazing profit right here in the USA, China sent "officials" over here and offered them a deal they could not refuse..
ROFL
The "deal they could not refuse" was an escape from predatory EPA regulatory costs. The USA has banished electronic manufacturing. The use of lead and arsenic in PCB and IC fabrication created a cash cow for the federal government who sucked the lifeblood out. Labor had zilch to do with it. China would not engage in the level of extortion the U.S. government engages in.
Virtually interest free financing on equipment and dedicated floor space if it was moved to China. Guess where they went?
That isn't the motivator, EPA regulation is - driven by the left.
Aside from that, back to the point, we have companies that just ship their high labor assemblies overseas and cut labor here, final assembly was done in the states.. But it was basically built overseas.
Sure, makes perfect sense since shipping cost was only 400% of labor savings...
(There's a reason you work the docks, and not in management.....)
So, yeah, labor cost is driver, amongst other things...
Right, if I can save $1 per part on labor, and it only costs me $4 for shipping, I'll jump at the chance....
