Bain is Still Sending Jobs to China and Putting Money In Mitt's Pocket

1. 69

   Ralph Deedsposted 12 years ago

   Bain is still sending jobs to China and stuffing money in Mitt Romney's pockets. The latest victim of Bain's vampire capitalism are the workers in Sensata Technologies in Freeport, Illinois. Sensata was profitable in Freeport but not profitable enough to satisfy Bain investors. Bain rubbed salt in the wounds of Sensata's Freeport workers by requiring them to train their Chinese replacements. The plant will close the day before the November 6 election.
   
   http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-ro … t-to-china

   replyreport
   1. 80

      JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Here's a personal account by one of Sensata's workers (Tom Gaulrapp) and why he will vote AGAINST Mitt Romney on November 6 after his livelihood goes away on November 5:
      
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-gaulr … 72021.html
      
      It does become more personal to individuals when their jobs are "out-sourced" to China.  Gaulrapp also points out how Romney profits financially from this deal. Romney--the candidate who keeps saying he will create jobs--he just doesn't say they will be in China!

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Wow.
         
         Romney was not involved with Sensata's purchase. Period.
         Romney was not involved with Bain at the time of the purchase. Period.
         Romey was not involved with any purchase of Sensata stocks. Period.
         
         There is nothing to tie this to Romney. Period.

         replyreport
         1. 73

            LiamBeanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            "The blind trust is an age-old ruse." -- Mitt Romney

            replyreport
         2. 69

            Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            They are following the approach invented by Romney, and he is benefiting from a sweet retirement deal from Bain.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               He's not involved with this in any way shape or form.
               
               Regardless, Sensata has been losing money. You've criticized Bain before for saving failing companies... because any kind of job cut or wage cut is a horrible, horrible thing. Isn't it?

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  I don't recall criticizing Bain for saving companies. I've criticized Bain for buying good companies, borrowing on them to the hilt, stuffing their pockets, putting them into bankruptcy, raiding the pension fund and closing their plants. Sometimes they just move the work to China.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     You criticized Bain about saving companies. Companies that were on record saying 'We are going to have to shut down'. Bain bought them, cut costs, and turned them around. You step in and say 'they cut jobs' or 'they closed a plant'.
                     
                     You have done it. You did it with the steel mill didn't you?

                     replyreport
   2. 58

      fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Deleted
      1. 80

         JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Romney continues to make MILLIONS of dollars from Bain Capital each year! With regard to Sensata, the company Bain is closing to "outsource" its jobs to China:
         
         "While the workers and the town may suffer, Romney himself has done well as a result of Bain's work with the company. According to his recently released 2011 tax returns, Romney transferred $701,703 worth of Sensata stock to the Tyler Charitable Foundation, a 501(c)3 tax-exempt nonprofit controlled by Romney. The gift is listed on page 323 of the pdf, on form 8283.
         
         Moving the stock to his nonprofit brings Romney twin benefits. First, he gets to deduct the full value of the stock. At a 35 percent tax rate, that's nearly a $250,000 benefit. At 15 percent, it's just over $100,000.
         
         Second, Romney is able to avoid paying capital gains taxes on the stock price increase. Romney's returns list no cost for the stock, and indicate he obtained them as part of a partnership interest in Bain. Avoiding capital gains taxes on the full increase would save an additional $100,000. In 2010, Romney gifted $170,000 worth of Sensata stock to his charity, saving $25,000 in capital gains taxes that year." (From article in Huffington Post, 9/27/12)
         
         He only took a leave of absence from Bain until he jumped into politics full-time.  From Wikipedia:  "However, according to some interviews and press releases during 1999, Romney said he was keeping a part-time function at Bain.[70][34]
         During his leave of absence, Romney continued to be listed in filings to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission[71] as "sole shareholder, sole director, Chief Executive Officer and President".[72][73] The SEC filings reflected the legal reality[74] and the ownership interest in the Bain Capital management company.[33][75] In practice, former Bain partners have stated that Romney's attention was mostly occupied by his Olympics position.[76][74] He did stay in regular contact with his partners, and traveled to meet with them several times, signing corporate and legal documents and paying attention to his own interests within the firm and to his departure negotiations.[75] "

         replyreport
         1. 58

            fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Deleted
            1. 74

               Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               It was Romney himself who declared his record as Massachusetts governor off limits for months. He was the one who wanted to run on his Bain record. That was HIS platform.
               Whether or not he is still directing specific moves over there now is beside the point.
               It's still BAIN and indicative of the "job creation" strategies of Romney.
               In other words, Romney is the one who pointed to BAIN as evidence of his ability to create jobs.
               But we are seeing a prime example of how BAIN fires American workers and ships their jobs to China.
               Bain is still Bain.
               Those are the qualifications Romney is (or was -- of course he's completely changed his tune now) touting.
               "Vote for me. Because my BAIN experience shows I'm a job creator."
               Thanks. America does not need any more Bain style jobs.
               

               replyreport
         2. 51

            Mr. DAPposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Is any of this "illegal" or  simply within IRS Law??

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Nothing Romney did was illegal, or even morally wrong. People just get upset because he's rich, and they don't think he deserves it.
               
               I mean, how DARE he start an EXTREMELY successful company that saved dozens of companies. How DARE he work out a retirement deal, when retiring from HIS company, to continue to be paid?
               
               I mean, right?
               
               lol

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Wrong, as usual. Many people consider the modus operandi of Bain and other private equity investment funds is unethical. And the carried interest tax break and other tax breaks they get are ridiculous. I haven't suggested that the Mittster has done anything illegal, buy one must wonder what's in the tax returns that he refuses to release to the public. I have no doubt that he takes advantage of every loophole and gray area in the tax code. Now he claims he's going to close loopholes to make his latest tax proposal work, but he won't say which ones. I guess his latest is to cap deductions at $25,000, but there's not anybody not associated with his campaign or the GOP that thinks his proposal will come close to balancing the budget.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Yeah, I know Ralph. I should have said rational people.
                     
                     Company A says 'Hmmm, we are losing money. We're going to have to close down.
                     
                     Bain comes in and says 'We'll buy your company and make it profitable'.
                     
                     Bain buys the company, lays off 20% of the staff, restructures, and Company A is profitable.
                     
                     You call them unethical for laying people off. It's not rational, it's envy or partisan-driven hate.

                     replyreport
      2. 59

         JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Because they have nothing to show you but class envy and fear.
         That's the specialty of the author of this forum.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I do not feel any "class envy and/or fear", Mr. Chams. There is certainly nothing about the Romneys that inspires any type of envy in me; however, I do fear the harm he could do to this country.
            
            I do think it's relevant that Mitt Romney is making millions of dollars off jobs being outsourced by Bain Capital to China...jobs that Americans who worked at Santegas for years are losing. That a presidential candidate is profiting from Americans losing jobs to exploited workers in a Communist country, while at the same time he's talking about the U.S. debt to China, is definitely relevant.   Obviously, his personal interest lies in helping increase China's GNP,  not ours. 
            
            fundraising:  It's not "ignorant" to point out that Romney makes millions of dollars from owning Bains Capital stock. If he really meant all the lies he's spouting about creating jobs for Americans and caring about 100% of the people here (instead of having contempt for 47%), he would not want to hold stock in a company that is profiting by laying off Americans and sending their jobs to Communist China. Romney is only interested in increasing his personal wealth, with no regard for how he does it or if it harms the U.S. in the process.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               How is Mitt making millions of dollars off jobs being outsourced?
               
               Do you care at all about the health of the company?
               
               Ok, what's better. To have a company go bankrupt, or outsource some of its jobs to keep the company solvent?

               replyreport
            2. 58

               fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Deleted
               1. 69

                  Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  "Should we gripe about him making millions of dollars by trying to save the world?"
                  
                  Romney trying to save the world? Give us a break!

                  replyreport
         2. 69

            Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Bain is apparently still operation the way Mittens taught them and still giving him his cut. The twisted legacy of the great job creator!!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Ok, I'll ask you Ralph.
               
               What should a company do when they are losing money? Is it bad to outsource, or cut jobs, or cut compensation? Or, should companies that lose money just run themselves into the ground, at which point everyone loses their jobs?

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  According to what I was able to find Sensata was making plenty of money. Just not enough to satisfy Bain.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     They have lost $278 million over the last 5 years.
                     
                     Of course, that requires looking at those pesky SEC documents that you hate so much.
                     
                     What did you look at? Their stock price? Revenues?

                     replyreport
                  2. 90

                     wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Was that particular plant adding to profit or reducing it? What was the ROI on that plant?  Would Sensata have been better off to sell the plant and put the money in a bank savings account at 1%?
                     
                     These kind of things DO make a difference, you know.

                     replyreport
            2. 59

               JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               ENVY! ENVY! ENVY!
               
               If it weren't so sad it would be funny.
               Apparently to qualify as a viable candidate for President one must NEVER have earned a DIME in the private sector. That's what we have now.

               replyreport
      3. 69

         Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Please point to any inaccuracy in my comments!

         replyreport
         1. 0

            JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            That sensata has been doing fine.

            replyreport
            1. 69

               Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Somebody must think Sensata is doing okay. The stock is trading at 45x earnings. Moreover, how Sensata is doing is irrelevant. Sensata bought the Freeport operation from Honeywell with the intention of moving the operation to China. I doubt that any figures are available for profits from the Freeport plant.
               
               Here's an article on this from Fortune:
               
               Sorry, but Mitt Romney won't save the Freeport jobs
               
               FORTUNE -- As Occupy Wall Street celebrated its one-year anniversary yesterday in Zuccotti Park, a much smaller group of protesters set up camp in the northwestern Illinois town of Freeport. They called it called BainVille, in sarcastic homage to the private equity firm they blame for outsourcing their jobs to China.
               
               What the protesters want is for Mitt Romney to intervene on their behalf, leveraging both his national profile and his relationship with Bain Capital executives. And, in theory, it makes sense. After all, what presidential candidate wouldn't want to help save 170 American manufacturing jobs? Particularly someone who talks about getting tough with China?
               
               But it simply isn't going to happen.
               
               For the uninitiated, here's a quick backgrounder: Late last year, a Bain-owned company called Sensata Technologies (ST) agreed to buy an auto-sensor manufacturing unit from Honeywell (HON). From the outset, Sensata said that it planned to move the jobs overseas at year-end 2012, since the majority of its auto-sensor business is in Asia. In fact, Sensdata didn't even buy the manufacturing facility from Honeywell. It leased it, with Honeywell expected to hang a for-sale sign when Sensata moves out in a few months.
               
               To be sure, this is a horrible situation for the Sensata employees – the vast majority of whom have not yet found other employment (Honeywell hired just a small number of folks to work in its other Freeport facilities). After all, Sensata has never suggested that the plant was unprofitable. It simply thinks the effort would be more profitable elsewhere.
               
               Unfortunately, the workers are barking up the wrong tree with Romney.
               
               Remember, this is the guy whose campaign got into a well-publicized scuffle over whether he really stopped making decisions for Bain Capital in 1999 or 2002 (for the record, it was 1999). How could he possibly open himself up to legitimate charges of influencing Bain's behavior in 2012? Even if one argues it's the right thing to do for the workers, it's not the politically feasible thing to do (and, if anything, Romney tries to be a pragmatist in such matters).
               
               Moreover, there is little guarantee that a Romney plea would even save the jobs. Yes, he has friends and former colleagues on the Sensata board, including chairman Paul Edgerley. But they have fiduciary responsibilities to their own investors, and Sensata has made it clear that the best financial move is to shutter Freeport. In addition, Bain could have future fundraising trouble if Romney is elected president. After all, who wants to invest in a private equity firm that seems to make decisions based on a politician's best interests?
               
               What the Sensata workers really should spend their time on is pressuring state pension funds that invest with Bain (or which will be asked to invest on Bain's new fund later this year). Make a broader economic case about how keeping 170 Freeporters employed is better for the state -- and, by extension, its public pensioners -- than is making a few extra dollars on Sensata.
               
               Kind of like the pressure applied by certain Permira shareholders a few years back when it looked to shut down a Hugo Boss facility in Ohio. After all, there is no reason why Sensata, if it wanted, couldn't simply buy the Freeport building from Honeywell and keep it open.
               
               Not saying such a strategy would have necessarily worked, but it would have been time better spent than hounding Romney…
               
               Sign up for Dan's daily email newsletter on deals and deal-makers: GetTermSheet.com

               replyreport
   3. 58

      fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Deleted
      1. 74

         Mighty Momposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         It's damed near impossible to buy anything anywhere that's not made in China.
         They have a heckuva lot  more "makers" there and as pointed out above, they are much better able to control their labor force. No pesky unions demanding a living wage or benefits or safe working conditions.
         
         We are ALL to blame for feeding that beast. The question is, it's a chicken and egg situation. We can't buy American made goods unless America is making goods.
         And given the choice to pay $5 or $9 for the same item to "buy American" most will pocket the money over principle.

         replyreport
      2. 69

         Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Occasionally I buy something at WalMart, and I use their excellent photo lab for prints. However, they don't have a good quality control program for some products from China, especially Winchester pocket knives which are cheap in price and even cheaper in quality.

         replyreport
   4. 60

      Repairguy47posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Don't forget he said "binders".
      
      War on women!
      
      You libs are grasping at any straw, kind of sad to watch your messiah go down in flames.
      
      I think its hilarious.
      
      Binders!!!!

      replyreport
2. 74

   Mighty Momposted 12 years ago

   "They" will say that many people invest in companies that have business in China.
   "They" will say that Romney is nothing more than an investor in Bain and has no involvement in what they do.
   "They" will somehow, some way, blame this closure on Obama's terrible economic policies.

   replyreport
3. 47

   Ericdierkerposted 12 years ago

   Sensata is an interesting case. The company is doing just fine. The economics of Freeport are not so good. Do you have any raw data for the company. Clearly if Romney was in control of the situation he would not have timed it so poorly.
   Baintown and arrests are not the signs of a clear case against Sensata, but rather really pissed off people. Thanks for bringing this situation up, it will be interesting.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Looks like Sensata stock has been doing pretty well this year. Not so for the workers in Freeport.
      
      
      
      Sensata executives are doing fine. The CEO's compensation was $4.3 million and the president's was $3.53 million in 2011.
      
      Key Executives    
          Pay    Exercised
      Mr. Thomas Wroe Jr., 61
      Chief Exec. Officer, Director, Chairman of Nominating & Governance Committee, Chairman of STI and Chief Exec. Officer of STI    1.44M    4.30M
      Ms. Martha Sullivan , 55
      Pres and Exec. Director    897.00K    3.53M
      Mr. Robert P. Hureau , 44
      Chief Financial Officer and Sr. VP    392.00K    901.00K
      Mr. Jeffrey J. Cote CPA, 45
      Chief Operating Officer and Exec. VP    763.00K    2.60M
      Mr. Steven Major , 54
      Sr. VP of The Global Sensors Bus.    584.00K    4.54M

      replyreport
      1. 73

         LiamBeanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Ralph:
         
         This one is a real head-scratcher for sure. Sensata is not only doing well the workers take pride in the product line. Why "well" is not good enough for Bain Capital is a mystery. Perhaps the partners have been "vulture capitalizing" for so long that they are desensitized to the people who actually do the work.

         replyreport
         1. 47

            Ericdierkerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            There is a lot written about this scenario, but I cannot find one thing written about why "economically the Freeport plant should remain open". Sadly the part about Romney's involvement is unsupported. At best he has a percentage of a percent and that is in a foundation. He left Bain, over 5 years before it had any interest at all in the Freeport plant. In fact it might be that Sensata kept the plant alive for 5 years longer than it should have.

            replyreport
            1. 73

               LiamBeanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               The fact that it's profitable is not a good reason?
               
               Wow!

               replyreport
               1. 47

                  Ericdierkerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Yes a big WOW! And true for many reasons. Some companies keep divisions open even though they lose money, because it is still cheaper than getting that product or service elsewhere. Some divisions operating on a good profit margin are closed because it is cheaper to get the product or services elsewhere. My point is that the plant would not be shutdown for no reason -- so I ask what is the reason to keep it open? Do not forget that both the workers and Obama both have pension dollars wrapped up in the success of Sensata. Not so simple.

                  replyreport
         2. 80

            JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            When corporate greed runs rampant, "profit" is not enough.  American workers who take pride in the products they make must be paid a living wage and some benefits.  When jobs are "outsourced" to Communist China, poor and exploited workers there can be paid a pittance and no benefits.  Result:  obscene profits so that the executives listed by Ralph can rake in more and more $$$.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               So, if the executives weren't greedy, they would be fine with losing money?

               replyreport
      2. 47

         Ericdierkerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         That is what it looks like. Bain works off hard and cold numbers. I do not like the approach but understand it. So was there nothing wrong at Freeport? I don't imagine Bain closes something that is profitable.
         Don't get me wrong it still sucks in human terms.

         replyreport
4. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 12 years ago

   Actually, Sensata isnt doing so well. They have lost $278 million over the last five years.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      replyreport
   2. 90

      wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      How can that be?  The employees that want to keep their job, and asking the future president to intervene on their behalf, claim otherwise.  So does the governor.  Neither one really has access to the P&L and don't care anyway, but does that mean we should not believe them?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         http://quote.morningstar.com/stock-fili … 6602118bf5
         
         Page 31
         
         Look for the line:
         
         Net income/(loss)
         $6,474
         $130,050
         $(27,681)
         $(134,531)
         $(252,497)
         
         They had a good year in 2010. Barely broke even in 2011.

         replyreport
         1. 90

            wildernessposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I think the sarcasm got lost in the translation...
            Sorry, Jaxson.  It's just always so funny to see hugely negative forum posts that are designed to incite anger and negative emotions without giving any actual facts.  Just as the link in the OP was designed to do.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Oh, lol. Sorry

               replyreport
               1. 58

                  fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Deleted
                  1. 69

                     Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Sensata was a big chunk of the workforce in the little town of Freeport.

                     replyreport
                     1. 58

                        fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        Deleted
                        1. 69

                           Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           When Sensata bought the Freeport operation from Honeywell it had already decided to move the work to China.
                           
                           “Why is Bain Capital refusing to tell the truth to the American people, acknowledging that Sensata Technologies pays their young women workers in China just 99 cents to $1.35 an hour to work 12-hour shifts, seven days a week?  Does Bain Capital care that the young women working in Sensata factories in China have no freedom of religion, no freedom of speech, no political freedoms and no right to the International Labor Organization’s internationally recognized labor rights standards?  The American people deserve an answer.”
                           
                           - Charles Kernaghan
                             Director, Institute for Global Labor and Human Rights
                           
                           
                           
                           We know of at least four U.S.-owned Sensata/Bain factories in China, including a large manufacturing facility in northern Jiangsu Province, which was built by the Government of China for Sensata.  Much of the machinery that is moved into the new plant in Jiangsu is from the Freeport, Illinois factory Sensata is shutting down on November 5, the day before the Presidential Election in the U.S.

                           replyreport
                           1. 80

                              JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              And one very major issue about sending jobs to China is that that American businesses are sending jobs to COMMUNIST CHINA!  It's bad enough about the exploited workers there, but does it escape everyone's notice that U.S. businesses are adding to a Communist country's GNP while our own degrades?  Why do we want to help a country that not only doesn't care anything about human rights, but actually shoots its own citizens in the streets if they care to disagree?  (Has everyone forgotten the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989 when students and workers demonstrated about their lack of freedoms were crushed with force by Deng Xiopang and thousands of civilians were killed?)

                              replyreport
                           2. 58

                              fundraising cardsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              Deleted
                              1. 69

                                 Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                                 ???

                                 replyreport
5. 84

   kathleenkatposted 12 years ago

   I'm curious as to why this seems to be such a big issue to people.
   
   I personally love the concept of a global economy, where others benefit from us, and we benefit from them. I think it's a great step towards world peace, or at least, world tolerance.
   
   A lot of companies send jobs to China (and India, and Polynesia) because the labor is much, much cheaper over there. And it's not like they're paying them unfairly or anything; the United State's minimum wage goes waaaaaaaaaaaaaay farther in China and India than it does here. They can be paid half that, and still be doing very well for themselves in their countries. That's how it benefits them.
   
   It benefits us because companies get to save money and use it to expand, and with the cheaper labor can push out much more product, and make much more money. Money is sucurity in this country, like it or not. Even the homeless beg for money. You need it to survive. We all need money, and to make more of it is ensuring job security for yourself or your company.
   
   Perhaps Mitt will have more money to pass on to his children and grandchildren. Perhaps that ensures them a college education in the future.

   replyreport
   1. 80

      JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well, kathleenkat, if you look at the U.S trade deficit with Communist China, you'll see that they are benefiting one hell of a lot more than the U.S. 
      
      The Alliance for American Manufacturing posted this data on 10/11/2012:       
      
      "The latest monthly U.S. trade figures were released this morning by the Department of Commerce:
      
      In August 2012, the U.S. racked up an international goods and services trade deficit of $44.2 billion.
      The monthly goods deficit with China fell slightly to $28.7 billion in August, down from $29.4 billion in July.  This is still the second highest monthly trade deficit with China in 2012.
      Said Scott Paul, Executive Director of the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM):
      
      "America will never see robust growth unless we manage to reduce the trade deficit. China continues to be the main impediment to progress. While trade actions on Chinese auto parts and solar panels are a good and welcome start, we need to see a comprehensive approach. Our goal shouldn’t simply be to double exports—we must erase the trade deficit."
      
      As I read your entire post, kathleenkat, it seems almost satirical, especially the last two lines.  If that's not how you meant it, it's downright scary.

      replyreport
   2. 69

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "It benefits us because companies get to save money and use it to expand, and with the cheaper labor can push out much more product, and make much more money."
      
      The don't use all of it to expand. Some goes to superpacs to buy votes for more tax loopholes and other laws beneficial to them.

      replyreport
6. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 12 years ago

   The trade deficit isn't as bad as you think. We create a lot of wealth in the country, and part of the reason we do is because we focus more on high-value products and services. We then trade for lower-value goods and services. Even with the trade deficit, the nation's aggregate wealth grows every year. It's actually beneficial to increasing the standard of living.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      "we focus more on high-value products and services." 
      
      You mean like MacIntosh IPads?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Electronics, finance, engineering. Of course we don't make it all, but we focus more on things like that than we focus on things like clothing.

         replyreport
   2. 80

      JayeWisdomposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The trade deficit isn't as bad as you think?????  Is that what you typed, Jaxson?  And you know more about this issue than the Department of Commerce? $28.7 million deficit with China PER MONTH isn't bad??? If you don't get your head out of the sand, you're going to suffocate!

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Do you really want to get into this?
         
         To understand the effects of trade deficits, you have to consider micro and macro economics, from the viewpoints of multiple economic theories. You have to consider wealth generation, comparative advantage, and the value of human capital, among other things.
         
         To get you started
         
         Trade Deficits
         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balance_of … ted_States
         http://www.investopedia.com/articles/ec … z29bTDXewi
         http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tra … z29bTDXewi
         http://www.phil.frb.org/research-and-da … eficit.pdf
         http://www.cato.org/publications/commen … y-bad-news
         http://www.economist.com/economics/by-i … -bad-thing
         http://www.infoplease.com/cig/economics … -good.html
         
         Comparative Advantage
         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage
         http://www.econlib.org/library/Topics/D … ntage.html
         http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/com … z29bTDXewi
         
         The US is a country that generates tremendous amounts of wealth. We are able to afford to trade away some of that wealth to improve our standard of living. It's what happens when you have an economy focused strongly on consuming, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

         replyreport
         1. 69

            Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            We improve the finances of the Bain stockholders like Romney and WalMart patrons, but we don't improve the standard of living of the workers who lose their jobs which have been outsourced to China. The concept of comparative advantage worked better when the disparity in wages and standard of living among the nations involved was non-existent or much smaller than it is today between the U.S. and China.

            replyreport
7. 0

   JaxsonRaineposted 12 years ago

   Ralph, funny that you still say Sensata is doing fine, but you won't even address their profits or losses!

   replyreport
   1. 69

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      I believe I did mention that the stock is trading, according to a source on My Yahoo at 45x earnings which is an indication that somebody thinks it's doing okay. Five or six private equity funds in addition to Bain are stockholders. Besides, what's relevant is how the Freeport operation has been doing. I haven't seen any figures on that. I think one of the articles about it said that it was doing okay.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Stock price is not the same as profit.
         
         Have you considered that investors have known for some time that this plant would be moved, which would increase profitability?
         
         But, I'm sure you're right. The company lost $278 million in 5 years, so surely they are doing fine. It's stupid for them to be looking at cutting costs, right?

         replyreport
      2. 0

         JaxsonRaineposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Also, trading at 45x earnings doesn't mean much when the company hasn't been earning very much.

         replyreport
         1. 47

            Ericdierkerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            Very good minds have responded here. Freeport closure is a right business move. Romney has nothing to do with it. The upper management of the Freeport plant should be taken out and lynched for not staying current and updating. The workers obviously did not care abut the bottom line or help to keep the plant competitive. Obama's Chicago pension does have a stake in Bain and Sensata.
            This little drama shows one thing clear -Unproductive wasteful spending needs to be cut, keeping Freeport alive is wasteful. Bless those workers but entitlement living will cost you.
            As for that highly published guy of 33 years employment there. Why in the heck didn't you look for a job earlier? But most important, he should be giving some hugs to folk that saved his pension.

            replyreport
            1. 69

               Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               Applying your theory will result in outsourcing the majority of U.S. manufacturing to China, Bangladesh and other countries where slave labor is available. We are screwing ourselves with our blind devotion to free trade. What's good for an individual business doesn't always coincide as you seem to believe with what's good for our country.

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  You know what is interesting is all this is happening even though Barack Obama is President.
                  I wonder what the odds are it will continue even after he is re elected. Because that is the idea of the whole argument right? If we give him four more he will straighten all this out?
                  Curious to know what the President's portfolio looks like. Even Micheal Moore has Halliburton stock.
                  Does that not make him evil?

                  replyreport
                  1. 69

                     Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     No, I'm not naive enough to think Obama will "straighten this out." But he may take action that will bring some progress. Romney certainly isn't the one to do anything about the migration of American manufacturing to China.

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        JSChamsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        I highly doubt that Ralph. Why didn't Bill Clinton do something?
                        The answer is simply that they are all, Barack Obama included. complicit.
                        I hate to tell you but there is not a dimes worth of difference in the parties.

                        replyreport
                        1. 69

                           Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I agree that the economics and foreign policy establishment, left and right, is blindly devoted to unalloyed free trade.

                           replyreport
            2. 73

               LiamBeanposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I want to get something clear here. To do so I'll provide a definition.
               
               Entitlement: the right to have something
               
               As a writer with some command of the language and a fair understanding of the meaning of words, if you really mean "entitlement living will cost you," you are way off the mark. Please use a different word because you, and everyone who misuses that word that way, confuse the issue and demonstrate that you either do not have a firm grasp of the language, or worse, you are attempting to redefine a word to suit your own purposes.
               
               
               
               As a highly published writer (a single hub of mine has 168,000 views) I implore you expand your horizons, attempt to think outside your own box, and do something new like attempting empathy.
               
               I read your piece "Obama, Biden and the type of person who taunts." and your declaration that were you in school you'd report Biden as a bully. You and I must have watched three different debates. Biden was routinely taunted with outright lies and mis-characterizations. To not stand up to such an assault is called "masochistic."
               
               In all three debates Romney attempted to take charge, which is not his job in this particular venue, talk over his opponent or dominate the time allowed. In short he was cheating in every instance.
               
               The purpose of a debate is to determine who has the best ideas and mind. This is determined in a number of ways. All of which the debate style sets up. One of the most important aspects is limiting the speakers time. If the speaker cannot convey his or her ideas in the time allotted it demonstrates that they do not have their own concepts firmly established enough to properly convey those ideas. Clearly Romney does not.  And this on a number of issues. He is unable or unwilling to explain what he will do for the economy, women's rights, foreign threats, and the all important job creation.
               
               In this last instance he said two different things in the same debate. He'd create twelve million jobs (which we are on track to do if nothing changes) and that job creation is not the government's job.
               
               Oddly this race is not about the best person for the job in far too many minds. What it is for many is a football game. To hell with who the best team is "my side must win" and I don't care if I have to cheat to create that outcome.
               
               You are a good (if not great) writer, but your world view is twisted by near sociopathic self interest. If you are a real member of this long suffering society you pitch in and help rather than adhere to a "winner take all" position. Remember those that are doing without vastly outnumber the haves. Revolutions have come about for far fewer reasons than exist today and in those cases the haves have disappeared as so much dust under the feet of the revolutionaries.

               replyreport
               1. 69

                  Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  +++

                  replyreport