Thanks for being an apologist. How big are your checks that you write to support what's going on?

 

Oh cut the crap, don't even try the BS that I benefit from work being done overseas, you lose credibility with such baseless/ignorant accusations, it was a legitimate question and you know it. You can't blame all of the world's problems on corporations, you have to realize some/much of the blame lie directly with all of us

Oh cut the crap, don't even try the BS that I benefit from work being done overseas, you lose credibility with such baseless/ignorant accusations, it was a legitimate question and you know it. You can't blame all of the world's problems on corporations, you have to realize some/much of the blame lie directly with all of us

 

Got to be honest here Bert, I've said this a 100 times. Many businesses left in the late 90's and early 00's because of NAFTA and Free Trade. It was strictly a business decision. When you can make a chair in SE Asia for $100 and it costs $300 in America, the corporate world will make that chair in SE Asia. Same with textiles.

 

The problem here is that a lot of American employment was based on those factory jobs that gave us the Middle Class. It required skills that did not have to have a higher education and many were content to live in their mill based home towns, making $14 or so an hour.

 

Those jobs are gone and won't be back in the same numbers in my lifetime. In the past this economy thrived when these kinds of jobs thrived. People had more money to buy commerce and incentive to spend. Now they don't and the wheels are coming off because this type of infrastructure has been lost in the scheme of recovery.

 

Just my take. I do agree with Jim that this is not a D or R thing. Both parties sold their soul to NAFTA and Free Trade, and while it worked in some parts quite well, it destroyed middle America IMO. :thumb:

Oh cut the crap, don't even try the BS that I benefit from work being done overseas, you lose credibility with such baseless/ignorant accusations, it was a legitimate question and you know it. You can't blame all of the world's problems on corporations, you have to realize some/much of the blame lie directly with all of us

33.1 percent of U.S. manufacturing jobs went poof in the decade of 2000-10.

So how does the cycle end? Corporate lobby and a huge chunk of the population voting for bigger government to keep their lifestyle status quo?

 

Good questions.

 

"How does the cycle end?"

 

Maybe when the current cycle final 'steadies out'. The current cycle has been the massive offshoring of white collar back-office roles. Business management consultants have been touting this approach for last few years. Accounts payable, accounts receivables, customer 'service' and other roles have been moved offshore aggressively. India has been the main benefactor. But India is mostly 'full' now. Now market forces are kicking in and guess what - salaries are rising, Indian workers are job jumping and the benefits of the initial wave are eroding. Did companies do this on their own? No. The hot-shots from the major consulting firms told them if they didn't they would go out of business - using scare tactics to sign the big companies to massive engagements to make this fundamental shift. So companies - even ones that felt loyalty to their employee base - put these plans in motion under the mantra - 'do this or die'.

 

Obviously this is mainly applies to the large multi-nationals. Unfortunately, this disconnected the executives from their loyalty to long time employees. They were told they had to make 'tough decisions' - code words for plan to layoff your expensive US employees for cheap offshore labor. Midrange and smaller companies are less likely to go this route but the problem is that this cost advantage gained by doing this made the old, large multi-nationals even more powerful and has dampened new business growth. It can be seen in the poor IPO market. There are far fewer new upstarts and new competitors as a result.

 

Thomas Friedman wrote the book 'The World is Flat' and its about the fact that there is global competition in the employment environment. Americans are now competing with up and rising countries like India and Brazil.

 

In a global competitive environment burdening worker cost with government mandates is a big negative. As implemented, AHCA definitely makes American workers less competitive. As do any other mandated costs that drive up labor costs - such as unemployment insurance, health insurance, etc. Even for companies who want to bring jobs back its hard to see it in the current environment.

Got to be honest here Bert, I've said this a 100 times. Many businesses left in the late 90's and early 00's because of NAFTA and Free Trade. It was strictly a business decision. When you can make a chair in SE Asia for $100 and it costs $300 in America, the corporate world will make that chair in SE Asia. Same with textiles.

 

The problem here is that a lot of American employment was based on those factory jobs that gave us the Middle Class. It required skills that did not have to have a higher education and many were content to live in their mill based home towns, making $14 or so an hour.

 

Those jobs are gone and won't be back in the same numbers in my lifetime. In the past this economy thrived when these kinds of jobs thrived. People had more money to buy commerce and incentive to spend. Now they don't and the wheels are coming off because this type of infrastructure has been lost in the scheme of recovery.

 

Just my take. I do agree with Jim that this is not a D or R thing. Both parties sold their soul to NAFTA and Free Trade, and while it worked in some parts quite well, it destroyed middle America IMO. :thumb:

 

I won't deny that. An economist once said, when the Berlin Wall fell a billion cheap workers from former communist countries suddenly became available. I just don't care for isolationism. We tried it after WWI and it only worked for a short period of time. I think the country as a whole sat back complaining rather than preparing for changes in the world economy. I asked one of my econ professors if NAFTA was good or bad for the US. His answer was it had some positives and negatives but it was inevitable either way, the US could not be the leader of the free world but not participate in the world economy. If a company makes something in the US with labor that costs 3 times as much as over seas, that labor has to have more value than the labor overseas or foreign firms will put that company out of business.

Oh stop. Do you really have that much to protect?

 

This country has gone down the toilet from a combination of corporate gifts and welfare gifts. Are you really gonna be the guy who sticks up for Mitch McConnell's efforts?

Actually I don't have anything to protect. As a matter of fact I would greatly benefit from manufacturing jobs being in the US. The point of my question was to further the conversation. I assume because the thread is primarily talking about recent increase in those not in the labor force your comment was directly related to Obama's time in office. So I was really interested in seeing the facts behind manufacturing jobs leaving the US for overseas since 2008. I just haven't personally seen that many jobs leaving in the recent years.

 

So either you are talking about the last 10-15 years, which you have a point and I agree with you, or you're just throwing out tired used up talking points with nothing of real substance to back it up.

So I was really interested in seeing the facts behind manufacturing jobs leaving the US for overseas since 2008. I just haven't personally seen that many jobs leaving in the recent years.

 

It does seem to be slowing down. I think it is primarily due to as wages demanded by employees in China, India, etc. have bee rising and it is no longer near the benefit to have wigets produced overseas as it used to be and then have to pay to ship it to the US. Exceptions will be if making items overseas makes them closer to raw materials which come from that area or if that product is sold in that area and would not be shipped back to the US. The interesting thing will be if overseas wages continue to rise, will production come back to the US?

You pretty much nailed it Bert. We import a ton of parts from China...they ain't as cheap ad they use to be. With weaker dollar, higher labor cost in China, and skyrocketing freight costs in another 10 years the Chinese will be complaining about the Vietnamese taking their jobs. As it is right now there isn't the huge advantage to move from the US to China as there once was.

With weaker dollar, higher labor cost in China, and skyrocketing freight costs in another 10 years the Chinese will be complaining about the Vietnamese taking their jobs. As it is right now there isn't the huge advantage to move from the US to China as there once was.

 

You are absolutely correct about the weaker dollar. While many people like a strong dollar because is can deter inflation and just as a pride thing, a strong dollar hurts local manufactures because goods overseas can be purchased cheap when the dollar is strong. With a weak dollar, it doesn't make as much sense to buy overseas and helps local producers. Same with Freight costs. It doesn't make sense to save money on the production of goods overseas if you just give those dollars saved to the freight company, might as well keep production at home where you can keep a closer eye on it. So, with a weaker dollar, higher wages overseas, and higher freight costs, I don't think we will necessarily see production coming back in huge quantities since such a large amount was invested in those overseas factories, I do think you will see companies not building new factories overseas, instead building them in the US or Mexico assuming the drug wars in Mexico calm down some day.

 

Interesting you bring up Vietnam. An article I read said after freeing up the Vietnamese ecomony from a Communist/Socialist system to a Capitalist system, the Vietnamese economy is one of the fastest. The fast demand for labor is pullig large portions of the Vietnamese population out of poverty. They are also appealing to Vietnamese who fled the country after the communist take over due to the strong need for educated workers. I think some of the Vietnamese in the US are a little hesitant to go back worried they may be viewed as traitors.