Are we trading our standard of living for trade profits?

1. 71

   rhamsonposted 14 years ago

   The topic of trade deficit spending always brings with it the lost jobs in the US.  The race to the bottom sends more and more jobs overseas with the demand for profits and growth by companies in the US. To compete with these overseas job markets are we just trading our standard of living for theirs?

   replyreport
   1. 57

      C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Yep....and we are not making it any better. We are supposed to be ok with it.  Just be a consumer in a service based economy. Don't actually make something...thats a bad idea. Lets give that work to China, India, Mexico, etc. We are above manual and menial labor in the US.  Want we want is FAST, CHEAP and a LIFE TIME GARANTEE!

      replyreport
      1. 71

         rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I think that most Americans don't understand where the race to the bottom may lead.  Some places in China have people living in a tin shack next to a landfill and eating garbage to sustain themselves. Some only make $0.30 a day and the US companies end up charging $75.00 plus for the pair of sneakers these people sew together for them.  Is that where we are headed?

         replyreport
2. 69

   Cagsilposted 14 years ago

   I think the problem is even bigger than that.
   
   The United States has seemed to back-track in the last decade. Yes, science has advanced, but other medical advancements have been limited.
   
   To top that- America's real image has been damaged. It's reputation is tarnished. The appearance of "equality" is an illusion. The fact- Congress does MORE for business than to protect citizens against business is appalling to say the least.
   
   Everyone knows that business has it's hands in Congress, yet voters keep voting stupid politicians, who lie about what they are going to do.
   
   If you don't believe 100% in a candidate, then do not vote. It will send a message to government that your individual vote really does count. To invoke your rights as a citizen, who wants government change- it is your responsibility to value your voice and to understand the power of being a part of America.
   
   Demand- Government change.
   
   Demand- Citizen protection against business.
   
   Demand- A better way of life.
   
   Demand- Better foreign policy.
   
   Demand- LESS Government intervention into society.
   
   Demand- Equality among citizens.
   
   Demand- Judical re-examination of Law(s) and punishments.

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with a lot of what you say but by not voting, how does that do anything but bolster the candidates in question to be elected?
      
      I think that becomming more involved in the election process is what is needed.  Take out the lobbyist power of influence by mandating publicly funded elections only.  Present only one item bills before congress to cut out the fat. Put tarrifs on imported goods that are comparable to those levied against the US.  There are other things like minimum wage levels and tax benefits to business's that produce their products domestically

      replyreport
   2. 60

      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      That is absolutely not true.

      replyreport
3. 57

   C.J. Wrightposted 14 years ago

   "Present only one item bills before congress to cut out the fat"
   
   This alone would be very HELPFULL!

   replyreport
4. 0

   Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago

   Jobs are leaving because of government regulation and taxes and in order for these companies to grow their profits they are seeking the cheaper labor and lax regulations offered by other countries like China and India.
   
   I can guarantee you it's going to get worse before it gets better. The passage of the health care bill will be a job killer for this country. Add to that cap and trade and big business will be leaving in droves!
   
   Now on top of that add the weak dollar which will continue to weaken as we print ever more dollars to pay our interest on foreign debt. This will lead to higher prices on imports particularly energy.
   
   Now imagine the credit rating of the USA being lowered from AAA. Suddenly our interests rates will have to go higher and our debt service will grow. It doesn't end there because now imagine China and the middle east wanting to eliminate the dollar as the standard currency of trade and we could face economic collapse!

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Your tax breaks for the rich has had a long and storied past not just starting with Reagan.  The continual concessions made to big business and the rich has led us where?  The constant harping of tax breaks, tax breaks has had no positive affect as proven by the history of the trickle down theory on our current situation.  When is enough profit for big business going to begin this trickle down?  The profits enjoyed by our corporate hierarcy and their salaries has never been enough.  They take advantage of every back door and tax loophole presented to them and still it is not enough.  They have brainwashed you into thinking they are the answer and that if you give them some more breaks they will turn it around.  They have not proven your theory.  The enslavement of foreign labor markets to keep them rolling in the lap of luxury is just deplorable and if you try to defend that then I feel sorry for your loss of feelings for their humanity.  Face it trickle down has not worked and will not work.  We have proven it.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I disagree. Higher taxes especially corporate taxes hurt everyone. The USA has the 2nd highest corporate in the world and what has that got us? Trickle down economics does work and that's been proven and it's led to the biggest econmomic booms in history. JFK cout taxes and there was prosperity, Regan cut taxes and again we saw a boom that lasted 20 years! Bush cut taxes and again our economy recovered from the 9/11 attacks.
         
         Countries like Ireland that cut corporate taxes saw incredible economic prosperity unemployment and wealth creation. It's been shown over and over that higher taxes when too high actually lead to to less revenues as people find ways to avoid paying them.
         
         As for foreign enslaved workers, who would be for that? Why would you even bring that into a conversation on taxes? There is much evil in the world. Rape, corruption, oppression, slavery and outright theft exist all around the globe, are you suggesting that these horrors exist because of capitalism?

         replyreport
         1. 71

            rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            You know what, you can't see the forest for the trees. Every case you cite of an economic boom is not for the reasons you state.  What led those economic booms were wars my friend.  So much money was made available by your evil federal government to feed these wars and the rich with their no bid contracts guess what, took total advantage of it.  We are very good at one industry and it has helped us at every turn of the road. Even the clown prince Bush knew it when were in a recession before his election.
            
            No, I can't believe giving people who have everything more is an answer to our trouble.  Let them begin to pay their share of the spoils they have manipulated and help this country out for a change.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               9/11 conspiracy nonsense approaching!

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Nice to try and tag it with that.  Too easy to dispute so I won't. I will spend the same amount of time on it that you did.

                  replyreport
            2. 60

               tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Of course, the answer must be taking from people who have anything and giving it to someone else! 

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Good twist but not true. Try again.  Maybe you could elaborate.

                  replyreport
               2. 0

                  Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  Right! Who's asking for anyone to give anything to anybody??? All I'm suggesting is we be allowed to keep what is ours! To keep what we earn on our savings, investment and risk! How is that wrong?
                  
                  The best way to solve the problems of the world is to lead the way to prosperity through freedom, small government and low taxes and limited regulation, and to promote the same throughout the world!

                  replyreport
            3. 0

               Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Wars??? What wars? Reagen ushered in world peace. Broke up the soviet union and united Germany tearing down the Berlin wall! Sure some people get rich because of war but hose boom times in the 90s was when the world was at peace. Wars are never good they redirect resources from the private sector into government and end up costing  more than they make in taxes and debt. No my friend it wasn't because of wars that we experienced economic prosperity, if you believe that then you haven't lived those times.

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I am sorry that you did not get the gist of what I was saying.  Reagan ushered in one of the biggest threats to world peace we ever had short of Kennedys Cuban debacle.  Reagan escalated military spending way beyond what we could have imagined and that led the way to us getting out of the recession that was crippling us at the time.  And as far not believing wars in providing economic prosperity for this country I don't know what to tell you.  All wars have been very good for us economically.  Maybe not good for the common citizen, but most profitable for business.
                  You should see this video from Eisenhower forwarning us of the dangers associated with this: 
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
                  
                  If you wish to argue this point as part of your defense of the rich and their tax breaks then I am sorry you can't see how wrong you are.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Regan also cut taxes which helped business. He eliminated double digit inflation and oppressively high interest rates brought to us by Carter, (and Obama is on the same path)! Now show me the numbers. Prove to me that the GDP during that era came chiefly from military spending.

                     replyreport
                     1. 71

                        rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Take a look at this graph.  It is not the best example but it shows the amount of government spending during Reagans administration.  Mind you he drastically cut social programs during his administration.  At one point over 21% of GDP was on government spending.
                        
                        http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/are012/ … sld008.htm

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Keep in mind that GDP was declining as well so government spending as a percentage would be higher. Even still fully 3/4 of the economy was unrelated to government spending!

                           replyreport
                        2. 61

                           Manly Manposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Please don't confuse the discussion with facts!

                           replyreport
                     2. 57

                        C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Regan especially targeted emerging tech...i.e. Silicon Valley.. That lead to the economic boom of the 90's...
                        
                        The problem is that it often takes a presidents policies more than 8 years to really make a difference. President Obama's and the Congress' spending spree really wont be fully felt for 10 to 15 years from now.

                        replyreport
5. 57

   C.J. Wrightposted 14 years ago

   Don't forget that the manufacturing industry was gutted by both the Fed and the Union....thats why it went first....
   
   Yes, American's seem to be insisting on learning this lesson the hard way. Its time to pay the piper....you can only base your economy on projections and predictions for so long. Eventually your economy has to be based on something tangible.  Now we find emporer has no clothes...ironic isn't it?

   replyreport
   1. 71

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I agree that mismanagement is mostly the culprit in the loss of our manufacturing sector both through the government and run amuck unions.  But the capitulation by the congress through lobbyist money to allow such loose rampant import regulation is deplorable. True some of the unions bled some business's to death but others were able to prosper. Is it fair to punish the ones that did make it work lose their livelihoods as well?  There is no one way to fix this and I believe you are right when you say that we are going to have to pay a hefty price for our ignoring these problems.

      replyreport
6. 60

   tksenseiposted 14 years ago

   It's funny how some people act like economics (not to mention politics) just started yesterday and they are shocked (shocked!) at how it works.
   
   
   Yes, America has drifted back to the stoneages since they started stitching Nikes in Vietnam... 

   replyreport
7. 68

   GeneralHowitzerposted 14 years ago

   Thats the price of competition and survival... the financial crunch  experienced worldwide points to Law of Averages though I think...

   replyreport
8. 61

   prettydarkhorseposted 14 years ago

   To each according to his own needs and abilities! Isnt this the capitalism way.
   
   Standard of living and quality of life! Poeple will buy things which are cheaper so that they can buy more, trading it to a more expensive buy, one that will last longer time.
   
   If given a chance I will definitely buy Nike made in USA rather than made in China which are immitations.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Everything is made in China, even original Nikes! It's almost impossible to buy everything you need or use in the USA. One woman and her family did it for a year and wrote a book about her experience and how difficult it was.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         prettydarkhorseposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Yes indeed, no offense to Chinese businessmen but I had bad experience when I went to Paris. I felt humiliated because the Louis Vuitton store checked my ID first if I am Chinese when I enter the store. They thought I am there to buy and copy their items.
         
         Anywhere in the world, in Asia specifically, they copy everything, the market is saturated with Made in China stuff, 
         
         I could watched a movie there, pirated CDs (comes form China)one month before they even show it here in the USA. it doesnt have any respect for copyrights, and they make a good copy of everything, you never know the original from the faked ones....
         
         they should embargo all proucts made in China....most are toxics and will last for few days anyway...

         replyreport
   2. 71

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      But don't you see you don't have a choice.  No business can afford to sell you a pair of Nikes made in the USA therefore they won't make it.  For other companies to be competitive they have to employ the same people to be competitive.  Perhaps it has become to entrenched to change the way we view cheaper as better and to feed the economic machine as others have directed it.
      
      Up until a few years ago New Zealand had a 100% tariff on certain goods that were imported so that the domestic manufacturers could keep their business viable and their currency stable.

      replyreport
9. 61

   prettydarkhorseposted 14 years ago

   And I dont know what the WEO- World Economic Organization, World Trade Organization are doing about this!
   
   I think these are the consequences of trade liberalization, no tariff etc.. and globalization thing. MONOPOLY of cheap materials

   replyreport
10. 71

    rhamsonposted 14 years ago

    I can't seem to make you understand that Reagan caused one of the biggest growths of the federal government and my point that a good part of it was put into technology that was associated with the military and the profits that produced.  His voodoo trickle down theory helped no one but the very wealthy.  He reduced taxes to the rich and grew the government in the process.  Is this something you would promote?

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       You can't make me understand it because your conclusions are wrong! Read "The End of Prosperity".
       
       As I said no one, no president has EVER reduced the size of government. Regan DID reduce the rate of growth of government. He wanted to go further he just couldn't because congress wouldn't let him.
       
       That is the problem we have now with Obama and a democrat congress and was the problem under Bush as well. Expansion of government leads to ever higher taxes and a confiscation of wealth from the people.

       replyreport
       1. 71

          rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Again we find ourselves at an impass.  I think your conclusions are totally wrong and off base and you think the same of mine.  I guess when we find ourselves living in squalor because of this problem we will still be pointing the finger at each other.
          
          I have read extensively about Reagan and I guess you have been listening to someone else.  He was horrible for this country and his policies have left us with a more colder and selfish nation especially with the demonizing of the poor and mentally ill and his treatment of them.  Government grew at a horrendous rate and his buddies got very rich. I won't bemoan the point anymore.
          
          But your conclusions to give more tax breaks to the rich so they can create more jobs for the US domestically is way off base and up until now has been proven wrong.  Even with Bush giving his buddies the tax breaks they bought him for, the good sustainable jobs have left this country and are not coming back until we stop listening to this trickle down nonsense.

          replyreport
          1. 60

             tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             ????????????
             
             
             How old are you?

             replyreport
             1. 71

                rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                What does that have to do with anything.  I can play this game too.  Do you have something to add to the argument or do you just like to submarine discussions?

                replyreport
                1. 60

                   tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   I'm curious. Don't be so defensive.

                   replyreport
                   1. 71

                      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      I am 54 how old are you?

                      replyreport
                      1. 60

                         tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         Juuuust shy of 40. So, why would you need to "read alot" about Reagan? You were obviously an adult when he was president. Did you forget? Or are you just 'researching' things that support your political prejudice?

                         replyreport
                         1. 71

                            rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                            Well maybe you could group my conclusions as predjudice if you wished to ignore the facts.  But my fact finding was to preclude a predjudice.  Yes I did live through his presidency and thank God we all did with his blatant disregard for diplomacy.  His strong arm tactics and deals with terrorists scared the hell out of me and I wanted to know where his theories came from.  Guess what, just ask big business.

                            replyreport
                            1. 60

                               tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                               There we go.
                               
                               
                               See ya later...

                               replyreport
                               1. 71

                                  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                  Huh?

                                  replyreport
          2. 71

             rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             The reference to a book that promotes Reagans theories by one of his advisors hardly seems the way to present an objective argument. The Reagan debacle set us up for this and more of it is not the answer.

             replyreport
11. 0

    Poppa Bluesposted 14 years ago

    "The reference to a book that promotes Reagans theories by one of his advisors hardly seems the way to present an objective argument. The Reagan debacle set us up for this and more of it is not the answer."
    
    Right, so objective arguments only come from the literature of the left, people like Noam Chomsky right? Yeah I get it. How about just using common sense. Strip away the BS for a minute pretend there is no government, no borders, how does on prosper? You spend a whole day gathering your food and your leader takes it all from you to "redistribute" to the tribe. You notice there are several tribes men that don't bother collecting food at all. Instead they frolic in the river and cohort with some of the women. So where is the incentive for you to work? Now maybe you gather food all day but you hide some.
    
    Capitalism is freedom. Is there abuse and greed? Of course just as certainly as there is corruption and greed in government.
    
    Would you prefer the tax rate be 100% and government then would be responsible for all the needs of all the people? Is that the society you want?
    
    Read what you want, cite the statistics you want, spin it however you want but what you are advocating is a Utopian socialistic society and what I am telling you is that isn't possible, or natural! People were meant to be free and the only system that allows us to live that way is capitalism unless you want to go back to hunting and gathering.

    replyreport
    1. 71

       rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       I could say the same as you.  Just because something is published does not make it gospel.
       
       Capitalism is freedom is so general a statement.  You just cannot see the corelation between capitalism and the power that can be abusive to others who are not in the clique.  1% of the populace holds 95% of the wealth.  Whos' puppet are you?

       replyreport
       1. 0

          Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Are you familiar with the Williams sisters, two black tennis players from the Ghetto? Bill Gates? Michael Dell? Who held these people down? Of course there is great imbalance, that's what drives the system! It is that way everywhere in nature! We are all different, some are predators and some are prey but we all have the ability to not only survive, but to prosper! If you aren't part of the 1%, don't blame the 1% for keeping you out, blame yourself for not achieving what is possible!

          replyreport
          1. 71

             rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             There is no doubt that great talent will win great wealth if properly managed.  My premise of 1% of the populace controlling 95% of the wealth does not apply to that scenario.  What about Exxon/Mobil, Haliburton and such.  Subsidies and no bid contracts to line their pockets.  Are you sure you want to defend this crowd.  How about Nike and others that skirt moral issues with huge pofits and hurt us in the long run. I still can't believe you have no concience when defending these opportunists.  Where is the moral concience in free capitalism? And how can it be the leadership that takes us out of this dilemma?

             replyreport
             1. 0

                Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                Remember subsidies and no bid contracts are brought to you by the government! These are the regulations you keep clamaring for, the way to level the playing field! It's interference in the free market! It creates the inequities!
                
                And please, don't speak to me about my conscience, you know nothing about me!
                
                I think you've lived long enough to know that behind every joy there is sorrow, that good and evil are lovers that dance hand in hand. I have said in several posts in this thread that I recognize there is abuse, and manipulation, corruption and greed, but that exists no matter what! You simply refuse to acknowledge that anything good is created in the free market. That capitalism is all evil, all bad, and that just isn't true! It's through risk taking and investment that innovation takes place and it is that innovation that has brought great benefits to you, me, and all the world over. Our lives have improved in so many ways all thanks to capitalism, and freedom! Please, don't forget that while you're trashing the very system that has allowed you to amass the wealth you have and live the life you live. The system that puts food on your table and gives you heat, light and electricity and a roof over your head, clothes and medical care, cures for your disease! Don't forget that!

                replyreport
                1. 71

                   rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   I am sorry to have put a bad slant on your concience and moral character.  I really appologize for that.  I did not intend for you to take it that way.
                   
                   I don't believe that all government is right and good.  I merely contend that we need to fix governmet where it is not working and do the same with our unbridled capitalism.
                   
                   I am a capitalist with two companies.  Both providing very different manufactured product here domestically and the other in China.  I have to compete with other products on the shelf who also have their products made in China.  What should I do?  Have my product made here in the US at three times the cost and surely fail?  I can't approach my competition and present them with the idea that we should all make our product here and save American jobs.  They will opt for the cost factor everytime as must I. Who is the benefactor from this dilemma? Me and at the cost of American labor which is the problem.  You can say I am a hypocrite for this but if I am I must be one that survives.
                   
                   No my friend when it comes to capitalism being the answer for our countries woes it falls far short without some intervention to make the playing field fair.

                   replyreport
                   1. 0

                      Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Well so far that's not working out for you is it? Maybe what you need is to get after China! Make them pay their workers more and subject them to the same enviromental and other labor laws that you are forced to meet...
                      
                      You see, they probably aren't going to pay much attention to you. Our government can't even get them to improve their human rights record!
                      
                      So what's the option? We need to make businesses here better able to compete against the business there. So should we force workers to take less money? Seems to me that's not an option, so what else can we cut? Taxes and ease regulation! We MUST do this if we are going to compete with the labor of the third world. We must do this if we are going to keep jobs here! It's our only hope!

                      replyreport
                      1. 71

                         rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                         Have you or do you own or operate any business'?

                         replyreport