With 2.4 Million Jobs Lost to China, New Trade Battle Begins (expenses, buy)

[Grandpa Pipes]

"Concern about massive jobs losses due to unfair Chinese trade practices is reshaping the American political battle lines over trade, with labor winning new and sometimes unlikely supporters in its fight for stronger policies to protect American workers."

t r u t h o u t | With 2.4 Million Jobs Lost to China, New Trade Battle Begins

[PurpleLove08]

Plenty of people were against NAFTA to begin with.

I just hope we can try to get some of these jobs back and get our economy on track.

I don't see why more candidates for Congress aren't talking about this. It's a sure fire way to win votes.

The fight over Chinese violations of trade rules is also another story about Wall Street and big, monopolistic corporations vs. Main Street and American workers.

F yeah!

[gardener34]

That is just to China, how many to India?... it is getting pretty ridiculous how much everyone hates the American worker.

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by gardener34

That is just to China, how many to India?... it is getting pretty ridiculous how much everyone hates the American worker.

They don't hate us, just the US labor environment. They'll go to countries with no SS tax, no unemployment tax, no 401K contribution, no requirement for people with disabilities, etc.

They will go to countries where their expenses are cheap. When that country get's too expensive they will move to the next cheap labor country.

And it's not just a few dollars..it's more like $50K vs $250K (India vs US).
That figure is a superset of employee salary and extras an employee costs a company. That figure is for a white collar, BS degree Software Engineer.

[drshang]

The problem is no matter what kind of law you pass it doesn't change the fact that low wage workers are much cheaper in other countries, and it will in many cases make business sense to outsource. Executives have a fiduciary responsibility to investors to run companies in the most profitable way possible.

[Philip T]

Originally Posted by PurpleLove08

Plenty of people were against NAFTA to begin with.

I just hope we can try to get some of these jobs back and get our economy on track.

I don't see why more candidates for Congress aren't talking about this. It's a sure fire way to win votes.

There is talking and then there is doing. Do anything to harm Corporate profits and lose their Corporate Funders. Congress is bought and paid, in advance, by the (now unlimited) Corporate Donations/Bribes.

[collegeguy35]

Very well said Happy Texan. It is a point I was making in other posts. Taxes mean almost nothing it all the cost red tape and overhead. I just wonder what going to be left for us when they are done. Most jobs can be offshore made temp part time ect. As far as people who are handicapped being hired. They solve that by just not hiring us at all. I should know I am handicapped and you stand almost no chance of landing a job. Maybe one out of ten work full time. If I walk in a door for a job or even say I am handicapped on the phone it is a lock I will not get called back

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by collegeguy35

Very well said Happy Texan. It is a point I was making in other posts. Taxes mean almost nothing it all the cost red tape and overhead. I just wonder what going to be left for us when they are done. Most jobs can be offshore made temp part time ect. As far as people who are handicapped being hired. They solve that by just not hiring us at all. I should know I am handicapped and you stand almost no chance of landing a job. Maybe one out of ten work full time. If I walk in a door for a job or even say I am handicapped on the phone it is a lock I will not get called back

So sorry to hear that collegeguy. Now let me preface by saying I am all for equal opportunity for handicapped people and yes, some changes have to occur at a business that hires them based on the particular handicap.

But, the government IMHO has gone overboard with the regulations and mandates a business must adhere to. And it is an expensive cost for a company to comply with. Some of the mandates are just plain stupid.
And they can't object to them or modify to suit their particular needs.

Two glaring examples:
Vending machines have braille on the keypad selection. Good for the vending machine companies. But that is it. So a blind person can find A-3 but they don't know what is in slot A-3 nor do they know the price as that's done by visually looking at what is in the machine. That one has always stumped me and I even asked a vending machine guy one time while he was filling up the machine. He just said they had to.
Braille has it's place..elevators, building directories, but vending machines where it doesn't mean squat ?

Handicap parking - I'm not referring to retail or public buildings here but private parking. There has to be so many handicap spots yet if there are no handicap people there those spots sit empty. It can be done better..only create those handicap spots as they are needed and in such a way to accommodate the particulars of that handicap person.

The government made these general broad sweeping rules and all must comply without regard to the particulars. And some are very expensive to implement if a handicap person is hired. The bigger corporations can absorb this cost but the smaller ones can't. They already have to provide the general accessibility mandates but there's more once a handicap person is hired.

Again, I'm all for equal opportunity and I do believe adjustments should be made to accommodate handicap people in the work environment but the mandates define a rigid set of rules and regulations that just scare many employers from hiring.

A blind person, a deaf person, one in a wheelchair, one with canes.
Each is different and has different needs..but government rules put them all in the same box and have rules that are broad so as to accommodate everyone at once.

I work for a big corporation and we do have handicapped employees and I have seen what the company has to go through to accommodate.
And if that person transfers to another dept on another floor it starts all over again on that new floor..even if the handicap person doesn't needs those particular changes.

[collegeguy35]

I agree that government has gone overboard in many cases. I was just saying most business deal with it by not hiring us. Thus it is a non issues for most. I am very well educated and would need few if any adjustments. But they think I may need something at some point and do not hire me. It waste to the taxpayers as well. 25 to 35m people in the US have some type of handicapped. 70% do not work live off SSI. Millions could work can not be hired. Of the 30% that left work part retail walmart ect. They do not want to lose their state health benefits. Blue Cross will never underwrite it that simple. My health was bad as a child it's much better now. Dose not matter my medical history looks bad. So work a ton of hours at a low a wage job. Lose your state health benefits. And can not afford to buy any on your own. Or work a few hours a week stay under the cap and keep your health benefits. And with so many people out of work why hire the handicapped guy to start with is the way that they look at it. The handfu of hadicappiced who do work a fulltime do so for the government. We do not count as unemployed because most are on SSI. I if 70% of blacks or asians were nonemployed it would be a real issue. But being handicapped no one cares. I mean a parking space and a small SSI check what more do I want.

[♪♫♪♪♫♫♪♥]

Handicap parking - I'm not referring to retail or public buildings here but private parking. There has to be so many handicap spots yet if there are no handicap people there those spots sit empty. It can be done better..only create those handicap spots as they are needed and in such a way to accommodate the particulars of that handicap person.

This part is vague. How does one create handicapped spots "as they are needed and in such a way to accommodate the particulars of that handicap person"? Can you give an example?