quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MarcEsadrian

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

What are the big ticket items that make it more profitable to pay the shipping costs and increased administration?
Salaries, taxes and compliance costs....all 3 of which are higher domestically due to government intervention than they would be without it. Because core salaries are lower elsewhere, some businesses would still offshore. But policy driven wage costs, taxes and compliance costs drive the decision in many cases.

And now we're back to steering around domestic taxes and getting more "bang for the buck" by outsourcing labor. Without a doubt, I believe there are additional stimulus policies the American government should enact (beyond the Economic Stimulus Package) that can help entice business to source its labor within our borders, such as subsidizing emerging industries, further reducing taxes and revising regulatory practices that make everyone happy, but I do wonder if it's going to matter much in the end. As you say, it's a business decision to outsource, and let's be honest—the primary motive is what will forever be the ultimate platinum pussy to capitalism: cheap labor. That's why all of Apple's manufacturing goes to China and Taiwan. That's why Nike's factories are beyond our borders, too. That's why I lost one of my main design clients last year.

Growth is a natural desire for a business, but when it means putting Americans out of work is of no importance compared to increasing margins, something is terribly wrong. I don't blame only the financial sector and opportunistic interests of corporations; the attitudes of Americans themselves are partially the root of the problem. They've adapted to what I call the Walmart culture, where the predominant decree from all is must be dirt cheap. Combined with the competitiveness of emerging economies, it's an increasingly bleak picture of the average American skilled worker.

You dont need to subsidize ANY industries, you just need to get out of there way and give them a level playing field with other countries.

what is wrong with putting Americans out of work is the conditions that MAKE those margins better offshore. The profit motive is responsible for most of what we enjoy today.

You are totally correct about the "Walmart culture". The way to combat "cheap" is with "better". But if people would rather buy the made in China toy with a little lead in it than pay the $1.49 extra, you can't legislate their bad decisions away.

The auto industry is a perfect example. When the quality out of Detroit sucked, we in essence "outsourced" autos to Japanese companies. The quality got better, Japanese quality got worse, and there is some hope of profitability. People actually do buy cars based on quality...but there isnt enough quality differentiation in small ticket items to change that decision.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


Your statement was a false dichotomy...the rich can get richer without everyone else getting poorer. It doesnt fit your worldview, but as that great Republican said, a rising tide lifts all boats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anarrus

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Your statement was a false dichotomy...the rich can get richer without everyone else getting poorer. It doesnt fit your worldview, but as that great Republican said, a rising tide lifts all boats.

Lame platitudes don't create jobs, nor pay mortgages or utility bills.

But if you think a cutesy saying carries any real weight, here's one for you.... hot air lifts balloons.

Judging from the volumn of hot air generated on both sides of the political aisle we could float a fleet of balloons large enough to block the sun from the sky over Washington DC and then some.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwynn

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anarrus

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
Your statement was a false dichotomy...the rich can get richer without everyone else getting poorer. It doesnt fit your worldview, but as that great Republican said, a rising tide lifts all boats.

Lame platitudes don't create jobs, nor pay mortgages or utility bills.

But if you think a cutesy saying carries any real weight, here's one for you.... hot air lifts balloons.

Judging from the volumn of hot air generated on both sides of the political aisle we could float a fleet of balloons large enough to block the sun from the sky over Washington DC and then some.

It is quite obvious by the 'lifts all boats' portion of said platitude that the self-proclaimed econ expert espousing it is incapable of reading the simplest of charts, such as the one in the article linked in the OP:

http://assets.motherjones.com/politics/2011/inequality-p25_averagehouseholdincom.png

from which chart it appears as though the bailout provided to the top 1% is being dumped into and overwhelming the inadequate buoyancy of the small boats of the lower 80%. Somehow, that lower 80% does not appear to be 'rising' to my eyes.

quote:

Just where would money come from if everybody's bank account was higher tomm. ? That CANNOT happen.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

Just where would money come from if everybody's bank account was higher tomm. ? That CANNOT happen.

Well, technically, it can, if we want to nitpick.

One way would be universally increasing productivity. Another would be universal sale of assets to foreign buyers. And the third would be to inflate the currency (obviously not something we're just going to do, but point is, its possible).

Economics is not entirely a zero sum gain. In the short run, perhaps more so, but in the long run, not at all necessarily.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

WHAT great republican ? You see how so many in the right simply have no credibility. You just as far too many on the right today, would like to continually revise history to suit your bankrupt or bankruptcy-causing ideas. It was JFK that first popularized that phrase.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Some studies have put the increase in US productivity since 1980 at 35-40%. Where's the money ? Result...the bottom half (1/2) 50% of income earners are poorer against inflation. I guess everybody will really be rich if productivity increases another 35-40% over the next 30 years resulting in maybe 2/3 or 3/4 of the people...poorer for it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

WHAT great republican ? You see how so many in the right simply have no credibility. You just as far too many on the right today, would like to continually revise history to suit your bankrupt or bankruptcy-causing ideas. It was JFK that first popularized that phrase.

Exactly my point, MR. Some dumbasses here would automatically attribute that to a Republican, not realizing it was their Camelot hero who not only said it, but cut taxes to do it. JFK's tax and foreign policies would fit better in today's GOP than the Democrat party, unlike his brother, so in that sense it was a Republican who said it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
the bottom half of income earners AFTER TAXES AND INCREASED TRANSFER PAYMENTS are not poorer against inflation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

Some studies have put the increase in US productivity since 1980 at 35-40%. Where's the money ? Result...the bottom half (1/2) 50% of income earners are poorer against inflation. I guess everybody will really be rich if productivity increases another 35-40% over the next 30 years resulting in maybe 2/3 or 3/4 of the people...poorer for it.

the bottom half of income earners AFTER TAXES AND INCREASED TRANSFER PAYMENTS are not poorer against inflation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
WHAT great republican ? You see how so many in the right simply have no credibility. You just as far too many on the right today, would like to continually revise history to suit your bankrupt or bankruptcy-causing ideas. It was JFK that first popularized that phrase.

Exactly my point, MR. Some dumbasses here would automatically attribute that to a Republican, not realizing it was their Camelot hero who not only said it, but cut taxes to do it. JFK's tax and foreign policies would fit better in today's GOP than the Democrat party, unlike his brother, so in that sense it was a Republican who said it.

If any of the dumbasses would have read my response they would have seen that he was speaking of and about and in the context of infrastructure improvements in fact the thing was a dam . Not corporate welfare.  Thats why the water reference fit in the first place because it did indeed affect every american.

As yours is the counterpoint in your usage and  your context,  simply because yours doesn't hold it.

He said:

A rising tide lifts all the boats and as Arkansas becomes more prosperous so does the United States and as this section declines so does the United States. So I regard this as an investment by the people of the United States in the.....

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy
You dont need to subsidize ANY industries, you just need to get out of there way and give them a level playing field with other countries.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


Your statement was a false dichotomy...the rich can get richer without everyone else getting poorer. It doesnt fit your worldview, but as that great Republican said, a rising tide lifts all boats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


Your statement was a false dichotomy...the rich can get richer without everyone else getting poorer. It doesnt fit your worldview, but as that great Republican said, a rising tide lifts all boats.