I Wear Pants wrote:I hear a lot more of the call to use/sell American made products from the right.

I'm not surprised...

alwaysafan wrote: And to go off of this. No one is saying all companies are perfect. I happen to think WalMart is a depressing place to shop, however THAT IS WHY I DONT GO THERE. That is my right. Their right is to provide a business. Obviously a lot of people do like wal mart. Why would I try to shut it down just because I don't like the company that much?

Sort of off topic but I agree with your assessment of Walmart. I don't like shopping there because it seems, I don't know, hostile. Like I'm competing for the right to purchase my groceries, get a spot in the checkout lane, be the first to tell the greeter who wants to see my receipt "fuck off".

Lately I've been shopping at Giant Eagle because there usually aren't that many people there that I'm tripping over their kids in the bread aisle. And I can check myself out with a minimum wait. I find the deli is better there too.

believer wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:I hear a lot more of the call to use/sell American made products from the right.

I'm not surprised...

Please explain, I'm stupid.

alwaysafan wrote:

Get over yourself -- corporations do not owe you, me, or anyone a damned thing. Not a job, not a paycheck, not even a good product.

Exactly..... That is why they are shoving it up your ass and mine....in the outsourcing of American labor. And it's not just blue collar...it now encompasses white collar jobs. In fact, it will soon encompass professional jobs.

Why should I hire your college educated ass at 25 clams an hour, when I can have the same work completed at a buck and a quarter per hour from a graduate at Budapest U?

You gonna be OK with that?

The endangered species white collar work:

All accounting
Paralegal
IT

All outsourced.

So go ahead and tell me, what's your solution to the continual migration of private industry in this country? Keep the status quo? Is that it? You're fine with private sector unemployment reaching 25%-35%? Under your scenario, we can remain on the present path. That path includes doubling of the national debt every 6 years or so in order to keep the masses employed, or expand the welfare state in feeding milions of Americans...also on the country credit card.

As I said before, American corporations do not have a patriotic red cell in their blood. They would much rather move the wealth from America overseas...where they can legally circumvent labor rights that our legislature has had in place for over 70 straight years.

I'll "get over myself" when America wakes up to the ongoing shitcanning of our economic way of life.

I Wear Pants wrote:

alwaysafan wrote: And to go off of this. No one is saying all companies are perfect. I happen to think WalMart is a depressing place to shop, however THAT IS WHY I DONT GO THERE. That is my right. Their right is to provide a business. Obviously a lot of people do like wal mart. Why would I try to shut it down just because I don't like the company that much?

Sort of off topic but I agree with your assessment of Walmart. I don't like shopping there because it seems, I don't know, hostile. Like I'm competing for the right to purchase my groceries, get a spot in the checkout lane, be the first to tell the greeter who wants to see my receipt "fuck off".

Lately I've been shopping at Giant Eagle because there usually aren't that many people there that I'm tripping over their kids in the bread aisle. And I can check myself out with a minimum wait. I find the deli is better there too.

believer wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:I hear a lot more of the call to use/sell American made products from the right.

I'm not surprised...

Please explain, I'm stupid.

For the most part, the right prefer foreign products to American made products. Corporate interests dictate this.

Writerbuckeye wrote:

alwaysafan wrote:

believer wrote:

alwaysafan wrote:Artificial advantage? Give me a break. The only thing that is artificial is trying to levy trade barriers, tax incentives, and other goodies to try and get companies to do something they otherwise would not (i.e. stay in the US).

You are clueless on the subject, sir. I would suggest that you read a book or 2 on the subject at hand. It has nothing to do with American supposed high corporate tax rates. In fact, the corporate rate in pretty much in tune with European countries....and most countries around the world. We have a progressive rate ranging between a paltry 15% to the high end spectrum at 39%. If you would do some research, it would hit you smack in the face that dirt labor costs, lack of safety laws, systems devoid of any respect to water and air polution, no WC beneftrs, nor UC benefits, nor FICA costs in places in Southeast Asia. You think Adam Smith would approve his capitalistic model in such fashion?

Easy answer: you aren't a liberal.

Being a liberal has absolutely nothing to do with it. There are plenty of people on the right that agree 100% with what I say.

Footwedge wrote:

Writerbuckeye wrote:

alwaysafan wrote:

believer wrote:

alwaysafan wrote:Artificial advantage? Give me a break. The only thing that is artificial is trying to levy trade barriers, tax incentives, and other goodies to try and get companies to do something they otherwise would not (i.e. stay in the US).

You are clueless on the subject, sir. I would suggest that you read a book or 2 on the subject at hand. It has nothing to do with American supposed high corporate tax rates. In fact, the corporate rate in pretty much in tune with European countries....and most countries around the world. We have a progressive rate ranging between a paltry 15% to the high end spectrum at 39%. If you would do some research, it would hit you smack in the face that dirt labor costs, lack of safety laws, systems devoid of any respect to water and air polution, no WC beneftrs, nor UC benefits, nor FICA costs in places in Southeast Asia. You think Adam Smith would approve his capitalistic model in such fashion?

Easy answer: you aren't a liberal.

Being a liberal has absolutely nothing to do with it. There are plenty of people on the right that agree 100% with what I say.

Reading is FUNDAMENTAL.

My comment goes directly to this quote from AAF and the bolded text in particular: "And to go off of this. No one is saying all companies are perfect. I happen to think WalMart is a depressing place to shop, however THAT IS WHY I DONT GO THERE. That is my right. Their right is to provide a business. Obviously a lot of people do like wal mart. Why would I try to shut it down just because I don't like the company that much?"

It has nothing to do with you per se.

We could clean up some of the red tape regulations and lower the taxes some to make it more attractive, but that isn't going to change the facts that it is still cheaper for companies to go to other countries where they can pollute without regard and use indentured labor of some of these authoritarian countries. It's also a patriotic issue. Could you imagine us dismantling part of our industrial base and sending it to the Soviet Union during the Cold War? Basically what we're doing with communist China.

Footwedge wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:

alwaysafan wrote: And to go off of this. No one is saying all companies are perfect. I happen to think WalMart is a depressing place to shop, however THAT IS WHY I DONT GO THERE. That is my right. Their right is to provide a business. Obviously a lot of people do like wal mart. Why would I try to shut it down just because I don't like the company that much?

Sort of off topic but I agree with your assessment of Walmart. I don't like shopping there because it seems, I don't know, hostile. Like I'm competing for the right to purchase my groceries, get a spot in the checkout lane, be the first to tell the greeter who wants to see my receipt "fuck off".

Lately I've been shopping at Giant Eagle because there usually aren't that many people there that I'm tripping over their kids in the bread aisle. And I can check myself out with a minimum wait. I find the deli is better there too.

believer wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote:I hear a lot more of the call to use/sell American made products from the right.

I'm not surprised...

Please explain, I'm stupid.

For the most part, the right prefer foreign products to American made products. Corporate interests dictate this.

I'm still confused. Of the people I know (clearly statistically relevant) with "Buy American" bumper stickers and things of that nature, 100% of them are right minded individuals.

I'm still confused. Of the people I know (clearly statistically relevant) with "Buy American" bumper stickers and things of that nature, 100% of them are right minded individuals.

I completely disagree. One example is my brother who is a walking "right wing" talking point head. He's been buying Hondas and Toyotas since the 70's.

Couldn't give 2 shits about Americans and their jobs.

He's about ready to retire and as such, the outsourcing of his line of work [engineering] will happen, but not until he hangs up his spikes.

Nothing is an absolute....but most people on the right are pro free trade/anti fair trade... and as such...are pro foreign made junk.

Footwedge wrote:Nothing is an absolute....but most people on the right are pro free trade/anti fair trade... and as such...are pro foreign made junk.

I'm pro-free market capitalism regardless of where the product is made.

Regarding foreign made "junk" there's plenty of American made junk around as well. Unfortunately it's probably more so. The American automobile industry is the classic example.

If the foreign made junk is of equal quality to the American made junk and the price is roughly equal, I opt for the domestic brand. But if the foreign made junk is of equal quality to the American made junk but the price is significantly cheaper...well let's just say the choice is a no brainer.

What about all the companies that make products in other countries that wouldn't even exist if they made their product in the USA?

My company is a good example. We employ about 70 people here in the USA, but our product is made in China. If we had to make our product here, it would cost too much and there would be no company at all. -70 jobs.

WebFire wrote:What about all the companies that make products in other countries that wouldn't even exist if they made their product in the USA?

My company is a good example. We employ about 70 people here in the USA, but our product is made in China. If we had to make our product here, it would cost too much and there would be no company at all. -70 jobs.

Hostile American labor + Federal over-regulation = Chinese made

Sad but true.

WebFire wrote: What about all the companies that make products in other countries that wouldn't even exist if they made their product in the USA?

My company is a good example. We employ about 70 people here in the USA, but our product is made in China. If we had to make our product here, it would cost too much and there would be no company at all. -70 jobs.

You wouldn't lose your job if China abided by human rights rules. They wouldn't have an unfair udvantage. Would products cost more? Sure they would. Is that a price worth paying to keep the private sector here working? Absolutely.

In a given period of time, the Chinese/American 'business relationship" will end. And it won't be at all pretty.

A really good book that I recommend to anyone...The War for Wealth written by German Gabor Steingart. He is neither a liberal nor a conservative...but he posts the realities on how the West is getting royally screwed by the emerging east's unfair playing field.

Read the 27 reviews...and if interested, then buy the book...

http://www.amazon.com/War-Wealth-Story-Globalization-Broken/dp/0071545964

believer wrote:

WebFire wrote:What about all the companies that make products in other countries that wouldn't even exist if they made their product in the USA?

My company is a good example. We employ about 70 people here in the USA, but our product is made in China. If we had to make our product here, it would cost too much and there would be no company at all. -70 jobs.

Hostile American labor + Federal over-regulation = Chinese made

Sad but true.

Wrong and wrong.

believer wrote:

Footwedge wrote:Nothing is an absolute....but most people on the right are pro free trade/anti fair trade... and as such...are pro foreign made junk.

I'm pro-free market capitalism regardless of where the product is made.

Regarding foreign made "junk" there's plenty of American made junk around as well. Unfortunately it's probably more so. The American automobile industry is the classic example.

If the foreign made junk is of equal quality to the American made junk and the price is roughly equal, I opt for the domestic brand. But if the foreign made junk is of equal quality to the American made junk but the price is significantly cheaper...well let's just say the choice is a no brainer.

There is very little American made "junk" in this country anymore. Target, Wall Mart...doesn't matter. 99% of that "junk" is made by the Chinese, Malaysians, Vietnamese and even Cambodia.

I'll put you in the column of wnting cheaper prices....in trade for deficit sapending in creating "non productive government jobs".

Because of globalization, the federal government has to double the national debt every 5 to 6 years, in order to keep the masses employed.

The third option, would be letting about 1/4th of Americans starve to death. That's not very politically popular.

Footwedge wrote:Wrong and wrong.

Despite the uneven playing field and unfair advantage the Chinese enjoy (and I agree with you wholeheartedly on this point BTW), it's equally WRONG to be in denial that often times we are now and have been our own worst enemy.

The Chi-coms know that their economic "success" is dependent upon American consumerism. This is precisely why they've been so willing up to now to prop up the Feds by buying U.S. treasuries. It's an indirect subsidy. Instead of the uneven playing field tilting to cheap Chinese labor, they subsidize the American government to keep Americans running to Wal-Mart to buy cheap Chinese goods.

But the Chi-coms are beginning to understand that this cannot go on forever.

Despite their "human rights abuses" I have a hunch that things aren't always going to be so rosy on the domestic front for the Chinese. Their people are temporarily somewhat pacified by a growing economy, but that growing economy coupled with a growing awareness (due to globalization) on the part of the Chinese people of those human rights abuses will eventually come home to roost.

This will become particularly acute when the Chi-coms stop subsidizing the U.S. government thus further crippling a sour American economy.

What goes around comes around.

In the meantime, we've made our own bed and now we lie in it...to use a couple worn out but very true clichés.

What is a Chi-com?

^^^A Chi-com is an Am-com of oriental descent. You should know this.

cbus4life wrote: What is a Chi-com?

Chinese Communist

I tend to draw distinctions between personal preferences and national policies on these types of issues. If I'm choosing between two products, a fair consideration in my mind in where the money ends up. If I feel like paying extra to support an idea (e.g., the Starbucks experience, or American workers, or whatever), I can do that, even if I "lose" money on it. On an individual level, it makes perfect sense to consider the consequences of your purchases and factor that in. (As an aside, I tend to consider the consequence of my purchase on mankind in general, not solely on Americans. Though YMMV, I'm appalled by people who take the attitude that it's fine for Africans to starve as long as Americans have the ability to compile more crap).

On a national level, it's a little tougher to implement protectionist policies. We know that these are terribly inefficient and result in the long-term decline of (1) standard of living and (2) global competitiveness. For a number of reasons (mostly a result of geography), American winemakers can't compete effectively with French or German winemakers. Now, we have a few options. We could tax all Americans to pay a subsidy to our winemakers who are not able to compete with the rest of the world. This keeps our winemakers in business, but it diverts capital from highest/best uses and hampers the rest of the economy. This prevents us from competing with the rest of the world in areas where we truly excel, but in which we are now starved of capital to support unproductive uses. Alternatively, we can remove the subsidies, remove the trade barriers, do the things we specialize in, increase our technological advantage there to reap higher rewards, and then buy the lower-cost/higher-quality French wine. As you can see, both sides end up winning by doing the things they do best.

Free trade sucks if you want to grow premium wine in the US (or if you want to keep a tropical jungle in the arctic tundra, or if you want to grow bamboo for energy in Maine, or many other sort of inefficient industries), but it's good for everyone else. Again, this is subject to the caveat that if an individual wants to support these businesses, that's a-okay with me (and something I personally do).

That said, there are a handful of limited situations for which it is wise to retain national capabilities, even if at a loss. I'm thinking, in particular, of defense-related industries, which are a necessary evil and economic drain. It's generally okay with me to subsidize these necessaries.

^^^

Though YMMV, I appalled by people who take the attitude that it's fine for Africans to starve as long as Americans have the ability to compile more crap).

While it's a tragedy that some Africans may be starving, I drives me to the point of insanity when we're supposed to feel guilty for enjoying the benefits of being American. I'm sorry but that idea is largely BULLSHIT.

I know of no one in my meager sphere of influence who thinks it's OK for Africans to starve as long as we can hang a 72 inch LCD TV on the family room wall.

Conversely, I know A LOT of Americans with generous hearts and minds who also enjoy the luxuries our relatively stable economic and political systems allow.

Be appalled all you want and call me naive for being blind to American responsibility for the unstable African political scene, I simply refuse to allow the bleeding hearts to lay on the unnecessary guilt trips.

believer wrote: While it's a tragedy that some Africans may be starving, I drives me to the point of insanity when we're supposed to feel guilty for enjoying the benefits of being American. I'm sorry but that idea is largely BULLSHIT.

I know of no one in my meager sphere of influence who thinks it's OK for Africans to starve as long as we can hang a 72 inch LCD TV on the family room wall.

Conversely, I know A LOT of Americans with generous hearts and minds who also enjoy the luxuries our relatively stable economic and political systems allow.

I for one refuse to allow the bleeding hearts to lay on the guilt trips.

I'm not suggesting that we should feel guilty for having stuff, nor am I attempting to lay on a guilt trip. I'm simply noting that a bit of global perspective is probably helpful when evaluating our situation. We lead the richest and most luxurious lives the earth has ever known. Even the American poor today lead better lives than the wealthiest a few hundred years ago.

fan_from_texas wrote:I'm not suggesting that we should feel guilty for having stuff, nor am I attempting to lay on a guilt trip. I'm simply noting that a bit of global perspective is probably helpful when evaluating our situation. We lead the richest and most luxurious lives the earth has ever known. Even the American poor today lead better lives than the wealthiest a few hundred years ago.

Agreed

Ok, fair enough, that is what i figured, just had never seen anyone use "chi-com" before. Thanks.

It can't be fixed without scrapping our whole system. Tariffs only punish us with higher prices. The solution is to be more competitive, but that is pretty much impossible with the way he have decimated our currency. Wages are so inflated that we can't be competitive without severe reform.