Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Imports can be controlled through tariffs and regulation. IMHO profits made on money invested by Amercans in foreign countries should be very heavily taxed in order to make domestic investment more profitable.
Exactly what I stated a few post back. Insane trade agrements made more insane by the unfair import tax. Just another example that the USA is morphing into a country that it was never established to be. The Founding Fathers are not just turning in their graves...they are spinning. I dare anyone to deny that we have become a corporate run nation.
Exactly what I stated a few post back. Insane trade agrements made more insane by the unfair import tax. Just another example that the USA is morphing into a country that it was never established to be. The Founding Fathers are not just turning in their graves...they are spinning. I dare anyone to deny that we have become a corporate run nation.
Then we need to STRIKE BACK. We need to say FK ALL THESE TREATIES WE ARE TEARING THEM ALL UP NOW! Then we need impose huge tariffs on everything they send back across the border. We need to make it crystal clear that we are no longer going to import labour from Mexico and export jobs to Mexico!
"We need to say FK ALL THESE TREATIES WE ARE TEARING THEM ALL UP NOW!"
"Clinton signs China trade bill"
"Trade with China will not only extend our nation's unprecedented economic growth, it offers us a chance to help shape the future of the world's most prosperous nation and to reaffirm our own global leadership for peace and prosperity."
Let's be honest, the Republicans under Bush were not helping matters in the outsourcing dept either. I don't like Obama but let's not play politics. This outsourcing started back in 2000. We had a chance to curtail it back then by fining companies or providing massive tax breaks for keeping jobs in the United States and Bush went on the record saying he supported outsourcing because it expanded a global economy. I agree that Obama deserves criticism because he ran on the platform that he was going to keep jobs here especially with his Ohio campaigning and Obama hasn't done anything.
The truth is no politician will truly curb outsourcing. There is too much money involved and the business lobby wants outsourcing because it reduces their costs significantly. I was naive enough to believe Obama would address outsourcing and I realize he is just another politician who is too afraid to stand up to corporate America and force them to limit outsourcing.
The 90's was such a robust time because the dot.com era created jobs and people out of college were earning 60K per year. That created spending and fueled our economy. Unemployment was as low as 4% and people were spending money like crazy which fueled our economy. Everything changed around 2000 when companies realized they could outsource those service oriented jobs to Asia. Companies began laying off people and our economy took a hit. To compensate, the Bush administration lowered interest rates to spur the housing boom and keep consumer spending high. That worked for a while until the bubble hit. The real root of the problem has always been lost jobs and outsourcing has been the problem behind it. If we really want to dig ourselves out of this recession, we need to fine companies for outsourcing and keep those jobs in the United States. People don't get it; the more people are employed, the more they will spend and the more money companies will make. If a President wanted to fix our economy, he or she will place limits on outsourcing or provide serious fines to companies who did thereby forcing them to hire American labor. Those companies might be stressed initially but as the American consumer is employed and hence spends, everyone will benefit.
azriverfan, I couldn't agree with you more. Except, I wouldn't necessarily fine the slimeballs as I would tariff the h*ll out of them. Additionally, I would exclude them from any protection whatsoever of United States law with respect to their corporate issues. IOW, you're over there, you make it with their law.
But do realize their decisions are what my late father used to refer to as "long-range planning with short-range brains." This is iconic to the yuppie mentality. They have no ethics, no vision, but they do have their spreadsheets and they annoying little blackberrys.
And, take heart as it will all come crashing down around their ears in the not too distant future. The unfortunate thing is the whitecaps and those who have wisdom won't necessarily be around or interested in fixing what the children have broken.
If one looks at the history of the fall of Rome, one will find Rome attempted the same thing. That is, offshoring production and relied on imports almost exclusively.
Which brings to mind another of my father's sayings ... Those who don't know their history, are bound to repeat it.
We, as the citizens can make a dent in their profits. Our purchasing decisions can make a difference.
They left Iowa a few years ago taking with them hundreds of jobs. Can't say I blame them... we have the HIGHEST corporate tax in the world in this state. I guess Indiana treated them the same way. What goes around comes around.
"We need to say FK ALL THESE TREATIES WE ARE TEARING THEM ALL UP NOW!"
"Clinton signs China trade bill"
"Trade with China will not only extend our nation's unprecedented economic growth, it offers us a chance to help shape the future of the world's most prosperous nation and to reaffirm our own global leadership for peace and prosperity."
This is something that I will never forgive Clinton for and I've said so in many posts. I don't give a damn who any representative has sexual relations with as long as his policies are on the money, so to speak. Another reason why I detest pigeonholing and labels... I do not vote party affiliation, I vote a reps stances on the issues and on this issue, Clinton was wrong.
This was a few years ago but there was a big national company in Houston. They were going to expand their operation here. Another Texas city wanted this company to move to their city so they offered them a much lower city tax rate. This company offered the city of Houston to stay here if the city would match the lower tax rate they had been offered. But Houston refused and the company moved...They had their buildings demolished so they would not have to pay the property taxes on them to Houston and the Houston school district.. So high local
business taxes cost the city of Houston taxes that would have been collected even if they were lower and jobs that were moved out of Houston.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
