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.
Personally, I want airplane and don't believe that America's future is in airplane manufacturing (for example). So let the Mexicans come here for those jobs or let those jobs go to Mexico... I don't care.
Anything else just means I have to pay an otherwise unecessary subsidy for an American to make my airplane because he thinks he's entitled to a certain standard of living for doing simple labor that anyone can do. Of course, nothing will really keep the American airplane factory open anyway... since consumers will just buy the socks that the Mexican's/Vietnamese/etc make cheaper with comparable quality and the American airplane factory will go out of business (for not providing something better, cheaper, or faster). Those jobs are already lost to the "standard of living entitled American", whether you know it yet or not.
There you go. This explains why we are where we are....
We're seeing that with American car-makers, refrigerator, TV, computer, furniture, textile, and barbie-dolls...
Nah, there is a "price of entry" in education, infrastructure, etc for high tech fields that once acheived by a low labor cost nation, the price advantage is no longer so significant. One also has to acknowledge the the best talent has incentive to go where they will be paid the most - being cheap is not the end all. I'll take a german car over a korean car any day of the week. Besides that, as the standard of living increases in these "cheap" countries - they are able to buy more from the US. Eventually, a sort of equilibrium is formed... and that equilibrium does not come at a cost of our living standards. You are not made poorer by your neighbor's becoming richer.
Or is the anti-free trade argument simply that we can't compete at all? Hey, you might be able to sway me on that one... if you're going to demand more money to build a car in America, it damn well be a BETTER car. Is it? I'd give that mixed results... but my Toyota made in a new US plant is honestly much better than the Chevy I had that was made in Mexico - but I paid more for it too. If you can't do it better, than you shouldn't be paid more.
On the other hand, you can keep the jobs here and allow labor to move freely and drive down wages. Protectionism will only result in the rest of the free trading world passing us by in living standards by taking advantage of the best deals each country can provide. I buy my wine from Italy, my clothes from various places in southeast asia, my entertainment and the vast majority of the software I use is still from the US. Even such, the companies that own and distribute most of the products and services I use are headquartered in the US - meaning office jobs. Do the people who run these companies want to live in vietnam?
Will airlines buy vietnamese-built aircraft? Maybe someday... will the bio-tech industry relocate there for cheaper labor in the forseeable future? Hardly. If you want to have a superior standard of living, it must be justified by producing superior products. Places like vietnam have not incurred much of the cost of infrastructure - and by the time they have, they will have lost their competitive advantage.
Last edited by DvlsAdvc8; 07-13-2009 at 02:57 PM..
Besides that, as the standard of living increases in these "cheap" countries - they are able to buy more from the US. Eventually, a sort of equilibrium is formed... and that equilibrium does not come at a cost of our living standards.
What sort of goods will they buy from the US, if we don't manufacture anything?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DvlsAdvc8
You are not made poorer by your neighbor's becoming richer.
You are made poorer by losing your job and not being able to find a viable replacement. Your neighbor may lose his/her job, too.
What sort of goods will they buy from the US, if we don't manufacture anything?
All products are not manufactured, and no one said we won't manufacture anything. Why does someone buy a Ferrari from Italy? But to answer your question, they will buy products derived from the services we offer better, faster or cheaper than they can.
In cheap-labor nations, education is usually limited and they suffer a "brain drain" to wealthier nations (we're all too happy to pay the brilliant guy from India top dollar and allow him to move here, while simultaneously keeping the poor Mexican out). The vietnamese aren't designing communications equipment, satellites, rockets, artificial intelligence, self-navigating vehicles (or software rather), lasers, robotics, products derived from pharmaceutical/bio-tech/genetic research, business management, marketing... the list goes on and on.
The US has simply gone from a factory economy to an office economy... just as once upon a time it went from a farm economy to a factory economy.
That said, we will still manufacture things... any thing that we figure out a way to do better, cheaper or faster than alternatives. We buy Ferraris built in Italy because of the exceptional quality (think of the detail, leather work etc) - something you'd be hard pressed to reproduce in vietnam... or even Korea.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gsp4ever
You are made poorer by losing your job and not being able to find a viable replacement. Your neighbor may lose his/her job, too.
That is a micro view... yes, that person is negatively affected, and to the benefit of everyone in the country that then buys the less expensive socks I (or my neighbor) may have made at greater cost.
If you can't do it better, cheaper or faster than your competition, why should you have that job?
Do you think we will be better off if we put a giant tariff on foreign goods, such that the domestic product is competitive with imports? The foreign producer does the same - soon, our entire economy is contained within our borders... eventually everything we buy is made here. Every American household pays the cost of more expensive goods... and any export of American goods and service are choked off.
Meanwhile, the Europeans continue an open trade policy and get the benefit of cheap manufactured goods while in turn exporting high end cars and high technology products and services. US standard of living will stagnate while European standards of living will rise.
Why is it always assumed that there is some holy land that can do everything better, cheaper, and faster than anywhere else? Everything is interconnected - there will always be jobs for those who are able. If American's aren't buying tons of electronics, what are those asian factories doing? It's all ebb and flow.
Let corporations decide how best to compete. The best government policy should be only to regulate whatever unfair or temporary balances there are.
Want to keep a refridgerator manufacturer in the US despite the labor cost? - build a superior refridgerator that justifies the cost.
SOMETHING has to justify, and in fact enable, one's living standards.
I think we're engaged in 2 different arguments here. One is the merit of globalization of trade while the other one is the issue of 'illegal immingration'.
So let's focus on OP's complain about illegal workers here.
It's a 2-edge sword. The politicians on both side of aisles know it and that's why the national debate on this issue has been so ambiguous.
Let's just first agree that there is no easy solution to this national problem. For some, it's very personal and emotional no matter what side you pick on this issue.
We're a capitalist nation that runs on a capitalist economy (until this administration proves differently ). As such, capitalism thrives on maximizing the margin between revenue and cost, that is called profit. One way to do so is to charge as much as one can but, at some point, in a 'perfect market' theory as prophesied by Adam Smith via supply & demand, the price of goods will be dictated by the market place. When one attempts to artificially increase the unit price of goods sold, one faces a reduced number of units of goods sold, and result in equal or lower total revenue as result.
So capitalists are forced to look at the other side of equation, that is to reduce the cost of goods produced. Among other factors, labor constitutes a big portion of cost of goods produced.
As labor pool increase, just as in the theory of supply & demand, more labor are willing to take lower wages for the services they render. Employers are increasingly looking at this labor pool as an attractive alternative. When this happens within the U.S. borders with fresh supply of cheap labor with illegal immigration status, this become a domestic issue of 'illegal immigration'. When a company decide to move its production off shores to procure the source of cheap labor, this becomes a 'out-sourcing' issue. In both cases, it is the higher cost domestic labor pool that is affected. Currently this tend to be the groups that do not require higher level of education, e.g., the blue collar working class.
Since we're addressing the domestic 'illegal worker' issue, and we don't know for a fact this particular company hire people with fake documents, we do admit that law & order must be followed but we do it with a wink. Just as in following the speed limit law (which I admit that I frequently violates), most of us acknowledge that there's a need for some underground economy and labor supply in order for our 'capitalistic' system and way of live to function (since we can no longer legally own slaves). The "liberal" side wants to legalize this group of labor, but do not want to address the cost increase once this labor pool realized that they have the legal mean to 'demand' higher wages. The 'conservative' side wants to eliminate this group of labor while admitting behind closed door that our economy can not function with out a source of cheap labor. It's a no-win situation on both sides.
However; in the future, it is forseeable that the 'elite' educated, skilled labor can be affected as well. The logic is the same, if a capitalist can procure the same quality of product (that's a big assumption there) but with a lower cost, why would it do anything but using the lower cost pool of labor? If he/she can not obtained this pool of labor domestically, he/she can thereby move the operation to 'off shore' and realize the same cost benefits and maximize profit.
This has already happen in the commercial sector. Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA) has moved much of its fleet maintenance documentation group to oversea (lower labor cost). CISCO systems just established its 2nd world headquarter in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), India. Garett Air Research, a division of Honeywell has dictated 30% of its non-defense engineering work to be done outside of U.S. for lower engineering labor cost., etc.
HB2HSV---------you mentioned--"supply and demand"-
Supply and demand works and is fair until we enter anything ILLEGAL into the equation and justify it.
ILLEGAL is ILLEGAL ( whether one uses illegal workers or runs/finances his company with laundered drug money.
I do believe that I have addressed this issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HB2HSV
Since we're addressing the domestic 'illegal worker' issue, and we don't know for a fact this particular company hire people with fake documents, we do admit that law & order must be followed but we do it with a wink. Just as in following the speed limit law (which I admit that I frequently violates), most of us acknowledge that there's a need for some underground economy and labor supply in order for our 'capitalistic' system and way of live to function (since we can no longer legally own slaves). The "liberal" side wants to legalize this group of labor, but do not want to address the cost increase once this labor pool realized that they have the legal mean to 'demand' higher wages. The 'conservative' side wants to eliminate this group of labor while admitting behind closed door that our economy can not function with out a source of cheap labor. It's a no-win situation on both sides..
While your politician (whatever side that you're on) cater to your emotional sentiment (to keep your vote), generally both sides decided to DO NOTHING about this issue, maintain the status quo, and keeping the thing the way they are.
I'm glad the Dekalb County Sheriff is doing more than ---catering to my emotions.
According to the Times Journal, a raid was made at an illegal cockfight and all the spectators ( Hispanic) had their names checked and were released cuz there were no outstanding warrants.
However, their names are being checked to see if thjey are illegals by ICE.
If they are ILLEGAL , they face deportation.
I think we're engaged in 2 different arguments here. One is the merit of globalization of trade while the other one is the issue of 'illegal immingration'.
Yeah, sorry about that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by HB2HSV
The "liberal" side wants to legalize this group of labor, but do not want to address the cost increase once this labor pool realized that they have the legal mean to 'demand' higher wages. The 'conservative' side wants to eliminate this group of labor while admitting behind closed door that our economy can not function with out a source of cheap labor. It's a no-win situation on both sides.
I agree that its a no win situation either way you go, but I disagree on the "liberal" vs "conservative" positions. This issue is so prickly because both major parties are schizophrenic in relation to it. Liberals have a major interest in
Quote:
Originally Posted by HB2HSV
However; in the future, it is forseeable that the 'elite' educated, skilled labor can be affected as well. The logic is the same, if a capitalist can procure the same quality of product (that's a big assumption there) but with a lower cost, why would it do anything but using the lower cost pool of labor? If he/she can not obtained this pool of labor domestically, he/she can thereby move the operation to 'off shore' and realize the same cost benefits and maximize profit.
I don't believe this is so much the case with skilled labor. Where unskilled labor is readily available or able to be performed by virtually anyone, skilled labor takes a significant investment - often taking years of training and/or education. That places additional constraints on labor supply. It demands a significant education infrastructure necessary to produce that labor. That infrastructure is extremely expensive. Additionally, not all skilled labor is created equal. There may be a competitive advantage found in hiring the most creative or skilled employees. This would support what we already see - competition among employers for highly skilled labor. Very recently (until the recession), companies (mine included) were sponsoring work visas, not to drive down costs so much - but just to fill open positions. The Universities simply weren't producing the quantity nor quality of skilled labor demanded.
That said, if a company can maintain quality and reduce costs by going overseas they should do so. We live in a global economy - European companies will seek the competitive advantage leaving ours out in the cold unable to compete globally. There really is no choice! Take solace in the fact that nations providing cheap skilled labor cannot do so forever... and the more wealthy they become, the less their advantage and the more they begin to import themselves. The only alternative is not a good one; tariffs on imported goods/services from nations that have such advantages though I'm not sure how you manage that when we're talking Engineering work and information services (additional taxes on domestic companies using overseas labor would only serve to drive those companies to headquarter overseas).
This shouldn't be a discussion of whether we should or should not be globalizing. This is a matter of determining how we should adapt to the inevitability. My view on this is that our economy will focus more and more on the management and research side of things - and our relative wealth compared to competitors declines (i.e. our standard of living in relation to that of india) but there is no REAL standard of living loss, partly as a result of cheaper imported goods. The temporary competitive advantage that places like india currently enjoy will eventually evaporate - and we will all be better off for it as India becomes an equal trading partner - increasing its own imports.
All of this stuff has a way of balancing itself out.
Last edited by DvlsAdvc8; 07-14-2009 at 09:08 AM..
I'm glad the Dekalb County Sheriff is doing more than ---catering to my emotions.
According to the Times Journal, a raid was made at an illegal cockfight and all the spectators ( Hispanic) had their names checked and were released cuz there were no outstanding warrants.
However, their names are being checked to see if thjey are illegals by ICE.
If they are ILLEGAL , they face deportation.
Good job, Dekalb County !
A useless drop in the bucket. Estimates are there are something like 12 to 20 million illegals in this country. Do you realize how BIG that number is? Can you even imagine the logistics and cost of deporting all of them?
THAT is why both sides of the isle let it go with a wink wink and give lip service to your emotions.
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.
). As such, capitalism thrives on maximizing the margin between revenue and cost, that is called profit. One way to do so is to charge as much as one can but, at some point, in a 'perfect market' theory as prophesied by Adam Smith via supply & demand, the price of goods will be dictated by the market place. When one attempts to artificially increase the unit price of goods sold, one faces a reduced number of units of goods sold, and result in equal or lower total revenue as result.
