|
Musicmystery -> RE: Why Are We Afraid to Tax the Super-Rich? (3/16/2010 2:33:43 AM)
|
No, you aren't.
People were discussing manufacturing moving overseas. I pointed out, and supported, that it's not that simple, as Dept. of Commerce data show. You responded with a personal attack and changed the subject to how we compile unemployment figures, a completely different topic. And here you are again, still unable to grasp that, continuing silly personal attacks.
Good luck in the Witless Protection Program.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Moonhead
quote:
ORIGINAL: Sanity
High taxes, thuggish and unreasonable unions, and myriad and onerous regulations combine to force manufacturering offshore. But thats not enough. Now we must drive the wealthy themselves away as well... along with whatever manufacturing may yet remain.
Whatever the question, higher taxes and more government red tape must be the answer.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Moonhead
If you live in Bombay, they'd much rather pay you to work in one of their call centres than they would provide an American with a living wage, yes. Don't even get me started on their approach to subcontracting manufacturing industry.
If they're not paying taxes or providing jobs domestically, who'll give a fuck if they're driven out of the country?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Actually, we're running a manufacturing trade surplus with our free trade partners--$2.7 billion.
People love to point to anecdotal evidence of industry moving overseas. Yet, overseas manufacturers move here too, for a variety of reasons. Goods are produced globally where it makes sense good by good, country by country. That includes then $14 trillion U.S. economy, one-fifth of the global economy.
From the Dept. of Commerce:
“These figures show that our FTAs are succeeding and that Americans benefit from open markets,” Gutierrez said. Our trade balance with FTA partners has swung from a deficit to a surplus proving that open markets are a key ingredient to the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturing and the health of the U.S. economy. Last year, manufacturing accounted for 62 percent of America’s record $1.6 trillion exports in goods and services.
"This improvement in the trade balance is due to the increasing competitiveness of U.S. manufactured goods. Since 2002, FTAs have helped U.S. manufactured exports grow steadily and at a faster rate than imports — 63 percent compared to only 42 percent, respectively, year-to-date through May 2008 (compared to same period of 2002).
"These calculations are based on the monthly data released by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Bureau of Economic Analysis in the FT900: U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, as revised annually."
I even gave you the benefit of the doubt and responded politely to your first bit of foolishness, answering the points and letting the personal attacks slide:
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:
to imply that jobs were increasing
Didn't say that at all. Read what I wrote.
I said we're not bleeding manufacturing as some claim.
In fact, I didn't mention jobs at all.
quote:
Hell, I bet you don't even know why unemployment statistics don't increase after about 6 months even as the actual number does increase.
At first, businesses turn to cost cutting to salvage profits. That includes jobs. But cost cutting can only go so far.
GDP has been rising since the third quarter of last year, and was up 5.7% in the fourth quarter. This is depleting already low inventories. As those run out in the face of continued and increasing demand (as GDP indicates), businesses will have to turn to rehiring to fill those orders.
Look for upturns around this summer. Slow at first, but steady.
From there, more crap from you returning to how unemployment statistics are compiled, which again, isn't the subject (it changes nothing about either point). Here's a clue--if you have to turn to personal attacks to construct a counterargument instead of addressing the points, it's because you're got nothing but shit instead of points yourself. First you need content.
Learn to be a grownup. Now run along. You've obviously nothing of substance to add to the discussion.
|
|
|
|
