Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs."

Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

popeye1250 -> Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 12:10:58 PM)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071013/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush Now we "know" that Bush is full of shit! He's saying the same things that Clinton said about Nafta 13 years ago! Where's all the "high-paying manufacturing jobs" that Clinton promised us if "Nafta" were passed? It's been THIRTEEN YEARS now and NOTHING! I'll be on the phone to my congressman and senators to tell them to vote "NO" on this crap. Oh, and there's "re-training" too! People will be trained to get jobs for $12 an hour when they transfer the $40 an hour jobs they have now to Peru and Columbia! How bad is it when our own government is fucking us up the ass? Call your congressmen and senators and tell them to vote NO on any new "trade" Bills.

pahunkboy -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 12:40:07 PM)
what job? there isnt any left- well not many like as in a fair days wage.

popeye1250 -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 12:51:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy what job? there isnt any left- well not many like as in a fair days wage. PaHunk, true. The government (OUR government) has been out and out LIEING to us about this! I've been on a "No Buying" mode for the last 3-4 years. I only buy made in the USA or I simply don't buy. One good benefit though, my savings account just passed the $11,000 mark from all that "no buying." I'd rather have 11 grand in the bank than a house full of cheap, plastic, imported, junk that I'd just have to take to the recycling center. I'm a Citizen, not a "consumer."

pahunkboy -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 12:54:03 PM)
nafta should be revoked

popeye1250 -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 12:59:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy nafta should be revoked PaHunk, boy, is that ever an undertatement! It's been an absolute DIASTER any way you look at it! Only a very small group of people got extremely wealthy off of it.

SugarMyChurro -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 1:00:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 People will be trained to get jobs for $12 an hour when they transfer the $40 an hour jobs they have now to Peru and Columbia! A related problem is being retrained for a job that can be offshored - which is any job that doesn't require someone's physical presence in this country to be performed. What it means at minimum is that while a worker is bargaining for a better wage over time the companies can always just offshore the position for a more competitive salary elsewhere. And those jobs can be almost anything - legal research, insurance desk jobs, accounting, etc. I figure even middle manager positions could be offshored or eliminated. Without protectionism of some kind no one in this country can compete with the lower economic needs of someone in Asia, South America, or Africa. They can live far better for less "over there" than you can here for what little they are still willing to pay you. Offshoring has its share of problems, but nothing that cannot be overcome by a CEO's insistence on profits.

pahunkboy -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 1:01:16 PM)
how do they figure the same line will work every time? some of us DO have memories - we are not exclusely 20 yrs old.

popeye1250 -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 3:10:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SugarMyChurro quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 People will be trained to get jobs for $12 an hour when they transfer the $40 an hour jobs they have now to Peru and Columbia! A related problem is being retrained for a job that can be offshored - which is any job that doesn't require someone's physical presence in this country to be performed. What it means at minimum is that while a worker is bargaining for a better wage over time the companies can always just offshore the position for a more competitive salary elsewhere. And those jobs can be almost anything - legal research, insurance desk jobs, accounting, etc. I figure even middle manager positions could be offshored or eliminated. Without protectionism of some kind no one in this country can compete with the lower economic needs of someone in Asia, South America, or Africa. They can live far better for less "over there" than you can here for what little they are still willing to pay you. Offshoring has its share of problems, but nothing that cannot be overcome by a CEO's insistence on profits. Churro, true, a lot of people didn't seem to have a "problem" with all this "free-trade" crap until they noticed that their jobs too were in jeopardy. And, you'd think that those companies would want plenty of $40 an hour jobs in this country as people would be able to buy their cheap imported junk. At $12 per hour you wouldn't be very far above subsistance. No matter which way you look at it this just isn't going to end nicely. I didn't realise that our govt had to amend it's (our) policies just so some businesses could make more money. I wonder if our government would be so kind as to do that for The People? That's why I've been in a "No-Buy" mode for all these years. Hopefully that'll catch on!

Zensee -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 3:54:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy nafta should be revoked The US made out way better than Canada did on the deal. We lost on lumber, steel, cattle, you name it. Even our sovereignty got sold off by the Conservatives. I don't get what south of 49 has to bitch about. Your high paying jobs went to Asia, not Canuckistan. Z.

Level -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 3:59:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy nafta should be revoked The US made out way better than Canada did on the deal. We lost on lumber, steel, cattle, you name it. Even our sovereignty got sold off by the Conservatives. I don't get what south of 49 has to bitch about. Your high paying jobs went to Asia, not Canuckistan. Z. If the jobs "went" at all, that's why there's bitching.

philosophy -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:02:44 PM)
....but was Asia part of the NAFTA agreement? If not then NAFTA isn't the problem, maybe there needs to be a revamp of the regulations concerning corporations..........

Zensee -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:06:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy maybe there needs to be a revamp of the regulations concerning corporations.......... You must be a 'terrist' ! Z.

Level -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:06:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....but was Asia part of the NAFTA agreement? If not then NAFTA isn't the problem, maybe there needs to be a revamp of the regulations concerning corporations.......... Yeah, I guess that's what Z meant, I was just thinking of free-trade agreements in general and outsourcing. It's been a long day lol.

philosophy -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:08:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zensee quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy maybe there needs to be a revamp of the regulations concerning corporations.......... You must be a 'terrist' ! Z. ....well i do think that terriers are quite nice dogs. Is that what you meant? [:D]

philosophy -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:10:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....but was Asia part of the NAFTA agreement? If not then NAFTA isn't the problem, maybe there needs to be a revamp of the regulations concerning corporations.......... Yeah, I guess that's what Z meant, I was just thinking of free-trade agreements in general and outsourcing. It's been a long day lol. .......well, either free trade is a good thing or it isn't. Thing is, free trade creates winners and losers, and over time a particular country can be both. It's a question of whether a country is prepared to take the rough with the smooth. It's immoral to accept the benefits of free trade without accepting the penalties.........

Zensee -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:22:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: Level quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....but was Asia part of the NAFTA agreement? If not then NAFTA isn't the problem, maybe there needs to be a revamp of the regulations concerning corporations.......... Yeah, I guess that's what Z meant, I was just thinking of free-trade agreements in general and outsourcing. It's been a long day lol. .......well, either free trade is a good thing or it isn't. Thing is, free trade creates winners and losers, and over time a particular country can be both. It's a question of whether a country is prepared to take the rough with the smooth. It's immoral to accept the benefits of free trade without accepting the penalties......... Free trade should reduce prices by increasing markets and competition. Several problems with that though. Even within one country different regions have advantages and disadvantages in different industries (resources, transportation, regulation...). Deciding when there is an unfair practice is the crux and merely accusing trade partners of subsidies is a handy way to harass other countries. The Canadian lumber industry was ruined by the USA with a baseless claim of unfair subsidies. The devil is in the details. Z.

kdsub -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 4:32:23 PM)
I am no economist…. I have no idea of the intricacies of world business and free enterprise or NAFTA…BUT damn when I call about my credit card in St. Louis ...or have a problem with my computer and need tech support …or need to check coverage on my house insurance… can’t I at least expect someone on the other end of the phone I can understand… or knows what the hell they’re talking about? I’ve no idea why we as consumers put up with such crap. Butch

popeye1250 -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 6:19:23 PM)
Zensee's right, Canada got screwed too as well as the people of Mexico. It's funny, maybe 10-20,000 people in the U.S. made out like bandits from Nafta and the other 299,980,000 people got screwed from it and nothing's been done about it!

defiantbadgirl -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 8:41:41 PM)
NAFTA has hurt the US economy. The combination of NAFTA and immigration is destroying it. The US needs to halt immigration until the big corporations are forced to bring all the good paying jobs back.

kdsub -> RE: Bush; "Protectionism will cost U.S. jobs." (10/13/2007 9:08:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: defiantbadgirl NAFTA has hurt the US economy. The combination of NAFTA and immigration is destroying it. The US needs to halt immigration until the big corporations are forced to bring all the good paying jobs back. Hi defiantbadgirl... I think you are on the right track Illegal immigration could be stopped tomorrow if a federal law stated to the effect… Any employer who is found guilty of hiring illegal aliens will receive an automatic 20 years without parole. That way the working poor from other countries will not be uprooted and sent home. There will be no demand for illegal workers and they will not come if there is no work. Only those who come into the county on work permits will be employed making it easier to track their movements. Then if they want to apply for citizenship I welcome them. Industrious people…leaving their homes to travel thousands of miles to start a new life are what made the United States the great country it is. Butch

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875