Hatz Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 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? I'm not looking to blame the chairmakers on either side of the globe. The reality is that to a furniture maker in China, they can live on $6 an hour or less versus the furniture maker in Martinsville, VA who would starve on such an income. What US leaders have not figured on is the numbrer of displaced workers whose skills are no longer needed in a job market and whose age (some are 50 or over) keeps them from being retrained for a 10 year employment window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acemona Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 Is this not a natural by-product of bowing at the feet of Capitalism? If the search is a drive to the bottom line, people become simple commodities. The furniture maker could still make a profit by building the chair here but makes a bigger profit by buidling the chir there. I don't fault the mfg. because that is the paradigm. How do we shift the paradigm to say it is okay to make less money while helping the AMERICAN economy? You want people to be patriotic, then why not business owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcpapa Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 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) Well, I've always thought the argument that jobs have moved out of the country due to tax treatment, as opposed to labor costs, was stupendously sophomoric at best, desperately disingenuous at worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHSDad Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 Weren't we talking about amnesty for illegals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastbreak Posted June 28, 2010 Share Posted June 28, 2010 Well, I've always thought the argument that jobs have moved out of the country due to tax treatment, as opposed to labor costs, was stupendously sophomoric at best, desperately disingenuous at worst. The whole issue is that in light of the overwhelming disparity between labor costs, property, construction costs, etc. for U.S. workers and factories versus their foreign counterparts. The U.S. already has strikes against it for retaining certain types of industry. When one considers the taxes generated by individual incomes of every U.S. worker, along with state and local wage, income and other indirect revenue streams, plus spending for houses, cars and groceries, etc. it makes sense to not hammer corporations with punitive taxes on top of an already unlevel playing field... which like it or not merely add one more layer of motivation to move production outside of the U.S. You don't have to like it or agree with it, but the bottom line is the bottom line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run To State Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Well, I've always thought the argument that jobs have moved out of the country due to tax treatment, as opposed to labor costs, was stupendously sophomoric at best, desperately disingenuous at worst.Ask Ohio if they agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cammando Posted July 1, 2010 Author Share Posted July 1, 2010 Ready for "The Dream" act??? http://blog.heritage.org/2010/07/01/obama%E2%80%99s-immigration-speech-showcases-plans-for-amnesty/ Who would have thought it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcpapa Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 The whole issue is that in light of the overwhelming disparity between labor costs, property, construction costs, etc. for U.S. workers and factories versus their foreign counterparts. The U.S. already has strikes against it for retaining certain types of industry. When one considers the taxes generated by individual incomes of every U.S. worker, along with state and local wage, income and other indirect revenue streams, plus spending for houses, cars and groceries, etc. it makes sense to not hammer corporations with punitive taxes on top of an already unlevel playing field... which like it or not merely add one more layer of motivation to move production outside of the U.S. You don't have to like it or agree with it, but the bottom line is the bottom line. I don't disagree with much of what you've said. But that one more layer is on top of a great big thick slab of "cost of production". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fastbreak Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I don't disagree with much of what you've said. But that one more layer is on top of a great big thick slab of "cost of production". So whether that "one more layer on top" is a straw, a bundle of straws or a whole bale of straws makes no difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cammando Posted July 15, 2010 Author Share Posted July 15, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100715/ap_on_re_us/us_immigration_states Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEXT Posted July 30, 2010 Share Posted July 30, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_immigration_skirting_congress Looks like we are heading that way......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cammando Posted July 30, 2010 Author Share Posted July 30, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_immigration_skirting_congress Looks like we are heading that way......... And once again the Obama administration sinks to a new low.... I guess he wants to establish a new minority in the U.S. Criminals.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100715/ap_on_re_us/us_immigration_states http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100730/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_immigration_skirting_congress Looks like we are heading that way......... And once again the Obama administration sinks to a new low.... I guess he wants to establish a new minority in the U.S. Criminals.. How do we define "amnesty?" What does it look like in your view? The memo advises against complete amnesty and says that selected groups could be protected. One of those groups mentioned in the memo is comprised of high school graduates who were raised in the U.S. who will be going to college and/or the military. While this will burst your bubble, the "Dream Act" legislation that defines these groups and offers protection is a joint piece of legislation between both sides of the aisle. When you're looking for something to validate your predefined notions its always easy to find. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cammando Posted July 31, 2010 Author Share Posted July 31, 2010 Just not as easily fooled as some folks.... Can you imagine the rush at the border if ANY kind amnesty for illegals is allowed?? And explain how the measure will "foster economic growth" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acemona Posted July 31, 2010 Share Posted July 31, 2010 The "Dream Act" was around long before Obama. I was familiar with kids in TruBlu's school that should have seen the benefits of the dream act as far back as 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts