Ah yes!!!! Four more years of THIS please!

1. 61

   JSChamsposted 11 years ago

   http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government … r-in-years
   
   We are becoming a faded version of what we used to be. This administration isn't and won't be helping.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Mighty Momposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No one disagrees that America is a faded version of what we used to be.

      replyreport
      1. 61

         JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         More faded than it was....kinda like acid washed jeans.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Jo_Goldsmith11posted 11 years agoin reply to this

              like faded washed jeans

            replyreport
   2. 59

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Yet it's the sixth best quarter in profits in American history. The truth i America is not a manufacturing economy anymore, simple as that.

      replyreport
      1. 83

         kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, because it is more cost-effective to export jobs to places like China and India, where someone will eagerly work for 1/3 federal minimum wage, and be very well off.

         replyreport
   3. 72

      Quilligrapherposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hi again, JSC.
      
      It is sad and laughable at the same time. People post links to articles that they think will bash the present administration but they don’t actually read them very closely. This article attempts to use manufacturing data to undercut the successes of the President but actually demonstrates how well this sector has been doing during his administration.
      
      Allow me to quote from the OP’s link: “The manufacturing industry had its weakest quarter in three years the last three months.” It says the weakest quarter in three years! What it does not say is all the previous 12 quarters were higher than the data three years ago! If the data were lower then the Bush years, the article would have said the weakest in more than three years.
      
      Here is another quote from this ill-informed, anti-Obama article: “The output component, which stood at 51.2, was the lowest since September 2009.” What it does not say is this quarter and all the previous 11 quarters were higher then the figures at the end of the recession in July 2009.
      
      I would be a fool to attack President Obama using manufacturing data if I knew nothing about the subject. Would you agree, JSC? I am happy to share what little I know and I am sorry it makes your OP statement look foolish.
      
      “Since 1975, manufacturing output has more than doubled, while employment in the sector has decreased by 31%."
      "While these American job losses are indeed sobering, they are not an indication of declining U.S. competitiveness. In fact, these statistics reveal that the average American manufacturer is over three times more productive today than they were in 1975 – a sure sign of economic progress.” {1}
      
      The manufacturing sector average work week in Feb 2012 was the highest since Jan. 1998.
      
      “Manufacturing employment continues to be a bright spot in 2012, and the sector has added 111,000 jobs over the past three months. Further, average weekly hours in the manufacturing sector are at a level we haven’t seen in quite some time: average weekly hours of manufacturing production workers in February were 41.9, a level not seen since Nov. 1997-Jan. 1998, and excluding those few months, you have to go back to 1945 to see a longer average work week.” {2}
      
      In 2009, the US produced 20% of the world’s manufacturing output, 45% more than China. {3} So, JSC, it seems the manufacturing sector remains smaller and stronger under the care of President Obama than it has been for decades.
      
      {1} http://mercatus.org/publication/us-manu … -jobs-1975
      {2} http://www.esa.doc.gov/Blog/2012/03/29/ … o-far-2012
      {3}http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703652104576122353274221570.html

      replyreport
      1. 61

         American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Quil,
         
         Hi and hope this finds you well.
         
         This is one of those stories in which people can make the numbers look anyway they want them to. But I have to agree with JS.
         
         You are correct when you point out that the manufacturing output in dollars is out all time high. If we look at that statistic over the years and how it is grown it would appear the manufacturing industry is strong. But is it really? To basis solely on numbers is sort of misleading. For example in 1975, I'll use that number since that was in your response, let's say a box of Lucky Charms cost 50cents to manufacture, today that same box of Lucky Charms costs $2.50 to manufacture. So as you can see I have increased my manufacturing dollars yet I have not increased actual product numbers. But there is another factor in the increase of manufacturing dollars, and that is population. In 1975 population of the world was 4.08 6 billion people. The population of the world in 2011 was 6.99 1 billion people, approximately a 28% increase. Naturally, a 28% increase in population increases the demand on product from the manufacturers. If there is somebody out there who is good enough with numbers, I think if you adjust today's manufacturing output in dollars, adjusted for population increase, and adjust for inflation, I think we would find that the difference from 1975 to 2011 would be negligible.
         
         When they talk about jobs, whether it be overall or a particular sector, anyone could take a snippet of time and get the result from their point of view. When the argument of new jobs created comes up, they will point to that number trying to show that everything is going great. But using just the new higher statistic does not show the reality of what is actually going on in the sector. For example from your post:
         
         “Manufacturing employment continues to be a bright spot in 2012, and the sector has added 111,000 jobs over the past three months."
         
         I did not go back and research month by month to see if that 111,000 claim was accurate, but I do remember reading the last report where manufacturing lost approximately 15,000 jobs. When Obama took office January 2009 there was 13.7 million workers in the manufacturing sector, today there is 11.8 million people working in the manufacturing sector, the net loss of almost 2,000,000 net jobs( source BLS).
         
         As I said earlier, people can take snippets of information and turn it into what they want to further their point of view. People can and will debate whether this President was good for the manufacturing sector or any other sector for that matter. Did he help what did he hurt? I wonder what the coal miners would say?
         
         Wishing you well as always.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Being a former coal miner and still having friends and colleagues on the job I can tell you the coal miners are saying "Why did the GOP block the anti black lung measures that would save thousands of coal miners lives and were recommended by every independent source" it's been a while since I've met one who is going to vote for Romney.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Jo_Goldsmith11posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               What about the GOP blocking our Brave men and women who come home have the chance to get a job!? It is crazy to think that some wack jobs like the *tea party* can come in like Hurricane Katrina and Irene and everyone doesn't stop to scratch their heads! Wake up America. The jobs lose when you have Bain holding the cards. Think about it?

               replyreport
            2. 61

               American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               A proper reading of the article shows that the Republicans are not against helping coal miners if they need. it. What the funding in the Obama plan is financial payoffs, and regulatory reforms. They were told the increase in black lung disease has gone up over 4 times what it once was.A check of statistics from you link provided shows that overall there has only been a 4 tenths of a percent increase. The largest age group, people who work in the coal mines for 25 years and over went up 1%. Both levels are down 70 to 80 percent from heir all times highs in the 70's.
               
               All Republicans have asked for was a 240 wait to allow the CBO and GAO to analyze the facts and issue a report for them to base their decisions on.
               
               Interesting the Dems make this an issue on this when they do not back getting the firefighters and the personal that were at ground zero the help they need.  The media was absent on that one too.
               
               BTW, My friend did not work in the mines, but his Dad, brothers, Uncles and some cousins do. None of them are voting for Obama and according to them, they do not know anyone who is. I guess they work i different mins than your friends do.

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  More recent reports have found significant increases, but even if it wasn't increasing that's not the point, everything possible should be done to reduce it and every independent analysis has found it would save many lives, you don't postpone measures that will save lives, especially the lives of people keeping America running, if for some reason you do feel that all the independent professional analysis are wrong and you want more data then you pas a temporary measure to protect people until you have all the information but hey didn't do that either. In short they let people die in an agonizing way to save some dollars and protect their big business friends.

                  replyreport
         2. 61

            JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Now let's also talk about WHY it is more attractive for manufacturers to outsource. Higher wages have to be paid here and they are also dealing with higher costs of raw materials as others have to pass there costs along as well.
            As long as we have entities that insist all the wages go up without any corresponding spike in productive output, people will continue to look for less expensive ways to do business. That;s just natural.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Absolutely which is why we should right now reduce our wages $2 a week then we will be on par with China! Success!
               Do you think about what you write? Also having checked Quil is absolutely right, manufacturing has improved dramatically since Obama took power, profit wise anyway.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Yes I think about it. Those wages are where they are because the minimum wage continues to be shoved up when it's not necessary. That coupled with these unions who want more every year without producing more. That cost is passed along to the consumer which includes other manufacturers. Yes, people should earn a comfortable living and be happy and able to support themselves. When we ramp up these things it has a consequence.
                  I do not look to be on a par with China but between China and the US who has the upper hand right now?

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     China, which is precisely my point, we will never be able to compete with that in terms of paying less.
                     
                     It's obvious we are not paying our workers too much because we have the worst wealth gap in the first world (equal worst) and it continues to grow exponentially, if workers were being paid too much the opposite would be the case. The minimum wage is barely enough to get by anywhere, anything less is not even a living wage. That is factually obviously not the problem.
                     

                     replyreport
                     1. 61

                        JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        The reason the minimum wage is not enough is because it keeps getting pushed up so the rest of the economy has to adjust. As much as we may think it would be nice no one running a good business is going to adjust their wages up without adjusting for it elsewhere in his or her business plan. Blaming one group over the other is stupid because if they are running a profitable business it does not matter what party they follow they will take care of their business first. That's normal.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Oh I forgot to mention we also have the lowest comparative minimum wage in the OECD. We have the biggest gap between rich and poor in the first world and you want to cut the wages of the poor? This seems logical to you?

                           replyreport
                           1. 61

                              JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              You see, whatever stats you have is e=irrelevant when folks go to the grocery store or the gas station.
                              The proof is in the pudding. Our wages are too high. Every time you raise the minimum it lowers all else. I would be curious to see numbers, even if I have railed about them, concerning how long after a minimum wage hike the unions and Congress pushed for an increase?
                              Understand that unions are a good thing but after a point they become just like the Congress and want more money for no extra output and that is where the problems arise. That's just the facts of life.

                              replyreport
                              1. 59

                                 Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 No the whole economy does not adjust to a minimum wage raise because most people are not affected by the minimum wage raise, it simply increases the quality of life of the working poor, and that is something we desperately need, we don't need to be keeping more money from them to further increase the wealth gap, the rich don't need the few extra dollars and the poor do, most of the economies doing better than ours have higher relative minimum wages so that is OBVIOUSLY not the problem.
                                 
                                 What's more our minimum wage is falling rapidly! it fell more than 25% between 1979 and 2003 when inflation is accounted for and about half of economists actually believe it should be raised and that this would BENEFIT the economy and not just the impacted workers.
                                 
                                 A case I agree with. It's quite simple really, when wealthy people have money that money rarely moves much, it stays in bank accounts or investments and that's that. Give a family on minimum wage a little more and it will be spent much faster thus stimulating the economy as well as helping those who most need and deserve it.
                                 
                                 Win win.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 61

                                    JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    Josak,
                                    The whole system must be affected because it is all connected. Otherwise the price of gas would be irrelevant and watch what happens when it goes up and stays there almost four years like it has done.
                                    Prices across the board rose. Raise minimum wage and the will rise also just not as much. Any competant buiness owner passes on his expenses. He must to stay in business.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 59

                                       Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                       Look, fine ignore the economics of the issue and just post truisms, that will really get you places. *sigh*

                                       report
                                 2. 83

                                    kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                    We are now at 80% of what minimum wage was in '79, and in fact, minimum wage was only in that range ($6 1996 dollars) in the 60s and the 70s. Starting in 1980, and prior to 1960, people have been doing just fine at ~$4 1996 dollars. I don't see how raising the minimum wage, as it has been the same (adjusted to inflation) since 1980, will fix the economy. The economy was good for years with that wage. Raising wages will cost us money that we do not have, and push us further into debt (or raise taxes, thus nullifying the point of raising wages).
                                    
                                    You also mention how "rich people don't need an extra couple dollars, the working poor do." Though that may be the case, raising the minimum wage does not draw from the wealthy. I have lived in Washington State for the past several years, and I have watched minimum wage rise rapidly from $7.16 in 2005 to $9.04 in January of this year. That's right, bag boy is making almost 10 bucks an hour.
                                    
                                    The problem? It has diminished the pay in entry-level jobs. You can't really cut the pay of a position that has been filled for years (CEO, Upper management, etc). Anyone who replaces anyone in that position will demand to be paid accordingly and equally to their predecessor. So, Washington State companies are drawing from entry-level position pay, where they know with this competative market, that the recent grad' wouldn't really have much leverage. There is always someone willing to work for less.
                                    
                                    So, we see jobs that require college degrees, that only pay between $10 and $12 per hour. That was not the case in 2005. This raising of the minimum wage, in a terrible economy, has simply bridged the income gap between lower middle class and working poor. Also, it devalues the college degree.
                                    
                                    http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html

                                    replyreport
                              2. 60

                                 Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                                 JS, don't you see that when corporations have expanded fully in places like China and India, other bric economies, and the citizens of those economies have worked towards the *dream* bought their iphones, borrowed the money for their homes and lived beyond their dreams in a "buy now pay later" culture, they will get dumped!
                                 
                                 Take a good look around you, speculaters  decide the cost of everything. How much you pay for your food, your home, how much you're paid, that's how they make their billions. You're not paid too highly, they want too much, from your labour.

                                 replyreport
                  2. 61

                     American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     JS,
                     
                     The price of salaries is not the issue, politicians been trying to make it the issue for years. Business owners try to make the issue as well. Fact is a good article about a year ago bearing the cost of products from late 70s to the cost of products today. I also compared salaries the same time. This out as of today. The fact of the matter is that salaries have not kept pace with the cost of products. When Gov. Rick need to make cuts first thing they love to do is cut fireman police and teachers. They blame the unions, it's all their fault. Of course it could be the overpriced overabundant vehicles they have in the city's parking lots. It couldn't be the overinflated prices they pay for rent or the costs of their city halls to be built if they own them. It couldn't be the high real estate taxes they pay on their buildings. It couldn't be any of that overhead, it's just the salaries of those three groups.
                     
                     Same can be said for the auto industry as just an example. Did you know that the cost of labor is approximately 6 to 7% of the sale price of the car? So you are the head of GM and you're in financial trouble, you need to save money are you going to go bankrupt. What would you do, would you make cuts in labor and lower that 6% to 7%, or would you look at that 93% and make cuts there. Which group do you think will yield you the most money if you make cuts there?

                     replyreport
                  3. 83

                     kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     As far as manufacturing and production are concerned, the US "does" have an upper hand. I quote that, because it is merely an illusion. I work in the technology industry, and my company (as well as all other successful companies in this industry) outsource their production to Malaysia, Polynesia, and Asia... So, the product is made, and then sent to American companies and distributed under an American name.
                     
                     I am sure the same chimes in for other industries. Just look at all the towels the next time you're at a deparment store; they all are either "Made in India" or "Made in Pakistan." Sometimese you will see products as "Parts Made in China; Manufactured in USA."
                     
                     So, depending on what we define as "better off," China may be better off because they produce for themselves, and export product (not jobs) to others. They bring more money in, whereas we send it out (even if low wages) to other countries.

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Those numbers as qouted by Quil were for manufacturing done in the USA.

                        replyreport
                        1. 83

                           kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Yes, but where, oh where, did we get those parts?

                           replyreport
                           1. 59

                              Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Quil did a comparison of manufacture of products in the US compared to manufacture against it's past, manufacturing parts is part of manufacturing. Manufacturing in total has been going up and has done particularly well under Obama. So if the parts are being made over seas that is being compensated for by more final manufacture here.

                              replyreport
   4. 81

      2besureposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No matter who is in office America will fall apart, unless we need some new ideas, new avenues for people to earn a good living and benefits.  Over the past 20 years 6.4 million manufacturing jobs have been lost....When I was a kid. my Mom and Dad had factory jobs.  Where do people without a college degree get a job that can life them out of poverty.  McDonanld, Wal-Mart nor being a checker at the supermarket will do it.

      replyreport
      1. 83

         kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Maybe not McDonalds or WalMart, but when I worked for a grocery store (Kroger subsidiary) journeyman cashiers and grocery clerks made $18.03/hr. That is well above poverty level. The worker's union was to thank for that.

         replyreport
2. 63

   Greek Oneposted 11 years ago

   I would argue that the Oval office has more color then it ever has
   
   

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      That has nothing to do with manufacturing which sucks right now. It's not being helped by the colorful occupant either.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      American Viewposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      First, this new format sucks, go back to the old way.
      
      Being cool while in office does not mean anything when you cannot do the job.

      replyreport
3. 63

   Greek Oneposted 11 years ago

   

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Oh I got it...

      replyreport
      1. 68

         junkoposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         So you think Romney would have done a better job than the current President or anybody but Obama,because of color?

         replyreport
         1. 61

            JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            No, I  didn't bring up the color thing.  It doesn't matter what I think Romney or anyone else would have done because they aren't the President.

            replyreport
4. 60

   Matt M.posted 11 years ago

   What are we even supposed to be talking about?

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Look at the link on the first post.

      replyreport
5. 56

   quatrainposted 11 years ago

   Most people who write these articles on manufacturing do not a single person who has ever manufactured anything. I do. One of my friends, now retired, had to move his factory producing dolls from the US when he was 40. Why? Regulations. Literally, our government regulates millions of jobs away. I don't mean health and safety regulations, either. I'm talking about regulating the size of labels, the color of parts. It's crazy how many regulations the average manufacturing business in the US has to endure. The upshot of it is that, in another 4 years, most of our kids and grandkids will face an American job market that is too anemic and decimated by Obama to offer them a chance to move up. Sad. Truly sad. And most of the well-intentioned people who continue to support Obama don't realize how fully they've been played by a master con man.  What will any of you do when the providers/business owners realize it's no longer worth it to keep fighting  government tyranny? Gibson Guitars, etc. will all pick up and leave.
   
   PS: Please take the time to read about what our government is doing to Gibson Guitars, an American company that produces iconic guitars. Read about the real world effects of Obama's disastrous administration.  Your kids and grandkids are counting on you.

   replyreport
   1. 61

      JSChamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Oh I have a hub on what they are doing to Gibson guitars of which I have owned at least two Les Paul's in my life. I was astounded that the musicians, particularly the left leaning ones., were silent. Price you pay for selling your soul I suppose.

      replyreport
6. 60

   Wizard Of Whimsyposted 11 years ago

   

   replyreport
7. 60

   Wizard Of Whimsyposted 11 years ago

   

   replyreport
8. 60

   Wizard Of Whimsyposted 11 years ago

   

   replyreport
9. 60

   Wizard Of Whimsyposted 11 years ago

   

   replyreport
10. 61

    JSChamsposted 11 years ago

    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Wizard Of Whimsyposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       

       replyreport
11. 77

    Mighty Momposted 11 years ago

    During the "This Week" roundtable's discussion of the politics of immigration reform and the Latino vote, conservative commentator Ann Coulter made the provocative claim that "Democrats are dropping the blacks and moving on to the Hispanics," while arguing that immigrant rights should not be considered civil rights.
     
    Coulter: "... Democrats are dropping the blacks and moving on to the Hispanics," seeming to claim that Democrats are more aggressively courting the Latino vote than the African American vote, which polls show is firmly behind President Obama.
    
    "I think what - the way liberals have treated blacks like children and many of their policies have been harmful to blacks," Coulter said. "
    
    When asked whether immigrant rights were not civil rights, Coulter responded, "No. I think civil rights are for blacks… What have we done to the immigrants? We owe black people something. We have a legacy of slavery. Immigrants haven't even been in this country."
    
    So, what does this bode? Since Democrats have apparently turned their back on Blacks and Romney bombed out with Latinos, can we expect a big push to win over the African American vote?
    Who can say what this week will bring!
    
    
    

    replyreport