Obama Planning Amnisty By Executive Order??

[gchs_uk9]

Wasn't the Stimulus packages supposed to fix that? Both Bush and Obama failed on that.

 

This isn't just for you RTS, but everyone: My father and I were talking last weekend and I told him I wasn't sure the unemployment rate would ever be very low again. I just don't see how there will be enough jobs to go around. First, so many have left the country. Second, so much of life is technological today that there isn't as much call for human work as there used to be. We've been trained to believe that numbers like 10% unemployment are bad, but is it possible that we will have to shift that opinion to think 10% is good and 20% is bad?

[SSC]

Are there people that thought Obama wasn't going to do this? He has to find a way to win in 2012.

[rockmom]

My thoughts exactly. The growth of the welfare monies has much more to do with the high unemployment and terrible economy IMO.

 

I had the same line of thinking when the extension wasn't granted. I'm trying to understand where the savings will come in by not granting the extension. Isn't it reasonable to think that at least a significant number of those who were drawing unemployment will now qualify for at least some aid via food stamps, medical cards, etc?

[Run To State]

This isn't just for you RTS, but everyone: My father and I were talking last weekend and I told him I wasn't sure the unemployment rate would ever be very low again. I just don't see how there will be enough jobs to go around. First, so many have left the country. Second, so much of life is technological today that there isn't as much call for human work as there used to be. We've been trained to believe that numbers like 10% unemployment are bad, but is it possible that we will have to shift that opinion to think 10% is good and 20% is bad?

That's a good question. To be honest I'm not really sure how to answer it though. Technology is without a doubt a big reason for less jobs but, unless I'm mistaken, we insource more than we outsource. I'll have to see if I can find info that might shed some light on your question.

[Hatz]

That's a good question. To be honest I'm not really sure how to answer it though. Technology is without a doubt a big reason for less jobs but, unless I'm mistaken, we insource more than we outsource. I'll have to see if I can find info that might shed some light on your question.

 

I don't think that's true in manufacturing or at least we outsource a WHOLE lot more than we used to.

[mcpapa]

This isn't just for you RTS, but everyone: My father and I were talking last weekend and I told him I wasn't sure the unemployment rate would ever be very low again. I just don't see how there will be enough jobs to go around. First, so many have left the country. Second, so much of life is technological today that there isn't as much call for human work as there used to be. We've been trained to believe that numbers like 10% unemployment are bad, but is it possible that we will have to shift that opinion to think 10% is good and 20% is bad?

 

Food for thought, that's for sure.

[mcpapa]

You might actually get a little better debate if you left off the play on Obama's name. Is that really neccessary?

 

Interestingly enough, that sort of thing is prohibited in the sports forums. No Pebbles or Pussycats (Trinity and St. X), no Puke (Duke), etc., etc., etc.

 

However, the general feeling is that P&R is where the big boys and girls come to play, so a bit more rope is given. The irony here is that the play on Obama's name is so juvenile.

 

While we may not agree 100% on political issues (understatement of the year?), I think it's safe to say that we do value well-reasoned, mature debate.:thumb:

[Run To State]

I don't think that's true in manufacturing or at least we outsource a WHOLE lot more than we used to.

I'll go along with the manufacturing, but a big part of jobs lost there is also do to technology advances such as automation. Also, this country hasn't been very tax friendly with companies and that's another reason jobs get sent to other countries.

[Hatz]

I'll go along with the manufacturing, but a big part of jobs lost there is also do to technology advances such as automation. Also, this country hasn't been very tax friendly with companies and that's another reason jobs get sent to other countries.

 

Hey, we had all the state of the art automation you could want when the textiles and furnitures left.

 

The reality is that these products could be mass produced (same way) for cheaper labor costs elsewhere with the NAFTA and the Free Trade Act opening those doors. So the businesses did what they felt they had to do, moved off shore. The workers who had done these jobs for 2 or more generations were left here. And to quote Bruce Springsteen: "and those jobs ain't coming back."

[Run To State]

Hey, we had all the state of the art automation you could want when the textiles and furnitures left.

 

The reality is that these products could be mass produced (same way) for cheaper labor costs elsewhere with the NAFTA and the Free Trade Act opening those doors. So the businesses did what they felt they had to do, moved off shore. The workers who had done these jobs for 2 or more generations were left here. And to quote Bruce Springsteen: "and those jobs ain't coming back."

Gotcha, but what's news about any of that? Like I said, the government isn't and hasn't done any favors for businesses with taxes. What does the current administration offer to keep companies from moving it's operations overseas or across the border? Same question for many state governments. If we're going to compete with other countries we have to make it attractive to stay or bring foreign business here. I don't see that happening.

[cammando]

A simple lowering of the capitol gains taxes would be a good start... And monies to the treasury would INCREASE... Obama answers and check out what he says about spending.. LOL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8 Pay as you go... Yeah right...

[Hatz]

Gotcha, but what's news about any of that? Like I said, the government isn't and hasn't done any favors for businesses with taxes. What does the current administration offer to keep companies from moving it's operations overseas or across the border? Same question for many state governments. If we're going to compete with other countries we have to make it attractive to stay or bring foreign business here. I don't see that happening.

 

We aren't in disagreement RTS. My original posts about this dealt with the discussion that as more and more manufacturing jobs are lost, the greater the strain on the Social/Welfare net. I think that is every bit as large of an issue as illegal residents being employed. One without the other could be handled but both circumstances coupled together is going to cause tremendous strain.

[mcpapa]

Gotcha, but what's news about any of that? Like I said, the government isn't and hasn't done any favors for businesses with taxes. What does the current administration offer to keep companies from moving it's operations overseas or across the border? Same question for many state governments. If we're going to compete with other countries we have to make it attractive to stay or bring foreign business here. I don't see that happening.

 

A serious question. In the human services business from which I recently retired, personnel costs (salary and fringes) were roughly 75% of total expenses. I assume that figure is lower in manufacturing. But if operations can be moved to a country where personnel costs are reduced by say 75%, can "favors for businesses with taxes" even begin to approach closing that kind of gap?

[Hatz]

A serious question. In the human services business from which I recently retired, personnel costs (salary and fringes) were roughly 75% of total expenses. I assume that figure is lower in manufacturing. But if operations can be moved to a country where personnel costs are reduced by say 75%, can "favors for businesses with taxes" even begin to approach closing that kind of gap?

 

It's a good question to ask. I have a good friend in management for a major furniture producer. They recently shut down their next to last domestic manufacturing plant. All but one small plant is now in China and Asia. The reason is that the materials, labor and living standard are so much lower that they can produce a simple chair for under $100 there that would cost $300 or more here. (BTW, that includes getting the piece here)

[Clyde]

In regards to the issue of jobs going oversees who is to blame for that? Do we blame the chair maker who can make it for under $100 over there vs $300 here?