Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-13-2016, 06:20 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 5,438,007 times
Reputation: 4710

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossfire600 View Post
You people scare the hell out of me. You really do. These jobs are leaving because:

A) we tax the **** out of companies. The highest in the developed world
B) NAFTA and Obama's TPP will cause more to flow out.

It has EVERYTHING to do with Obama and the death grip of liberal policy and regulations for Christ's sake.
Exactly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
You're thinking on a very tiny scale. When there's 95% of the world out there to sell products to compared to the US that leaves a lot of wiggle room. You can't just sell whatever crap you want. People have to want it and be willing to pay for it. With 6.8 billion other people there is plenty of profits to be made.
You must be kidding.

6 billion of those 6.8 billion people are very poor. They live on about $500 a year if that.

Quote:
Unless of course you figured you would be able to continue to consume 5 times more than the rest of the planet for forever.
We've consumed 5 times as much because we have produced 5 times as much.

Quote:
In case you haven't noticed going green means using less stuff and wasting less as well. That's so someone else can finally get their hands on those things you've been taking for granted.

Clear enough?
What's clear is that you're very jealous and resentful of the U.S. for its success.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
That is correct. Liberals are obsessed with the US "wealth gap". However, liberal policy:

1. NAFTA
2.China trade status
3. Pacific Rim
4. Open borders immigration
5. High corporate taxes
6. Massive EPA regulations
7. Trial lawyers unchecked
8. cap and trade

....................... are the very reasons for "the wealth gap". If liberals actually cared about US workers, they would ardently oppose the above. Given that libs support these measures, it clarifies that libs are hell bent on increasing the number of poor, dependent people in the US and thus more democrat slaves.
Exactly.

Libs are big hypocrites.

Obama was in love with hedge fund traders before he even became president.

Quote:
Originally Posted by eclipse123 View Post
Which jobs are we suppose to retrain for? This is quite the standard boiler plate answer with no real information provided. Are other jobs with training immune from being done in 3rd world countries? Do you mean programmers dont exist in 3rd world countries?
I guess he thinks we can all be Chiefs without any Indians.

Quote:
Also another thing incorrect with your post is saying Americans dont have to pay inflated prices because this work is being done in 3rd world countries. This is a fallacy, the reason why this is done is for more profit not for lower prices.
Exactly.

Just as illegal immigrant labor doesn't reduce prices (the savings in labor costs go into the employers' pockets), offshoring jobs doesn't reduce prices. Apple's products are made in China with virtual slave labor. But that doesn't make them inexpensive here.

Quote:
You're right regarding conservatives being champions of the free market. they never met a trade agreement they didnt love. The more its screws the middle class the better. Yet they whine about illegal immigration? Hypocrites.
Not all or even most conservatives think that way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 11thHour View Post
Which is exactly why places like Walmart are such a pariah.


Anyway, notice he said there would be several phases. Basically company execs always seek to reduce labor costs. It's never low enough for them. In the US, corporations exist to make money for shareholders, not employees. So phase one, reduce labor costs by moving that labor to a location that will allow you to pay pennies on the dollar compared to US labor costs. Phase two, you now reap increased profit. Phase three.. well, Mexico labor costs are still to high. Damn employees actually want raises, those little bastards. Labor costs are still above $0; we gotta fix that. So now let's just automate all those jobs out of existence altogether. Voila', maximum profit for shareholders, and a handful of company execs (who never dream to automate out their own labor costs). Oh oops, down the road a ways, and onto phase four: no one has jobs anymore thanks to wanting to be paid for their work, and thus were replaced by automation/AI, so now no one can buy your air conditioner anyway.
You've put your finger on the logical trajectory of employers doing everything they can to lower labor costs.

We are now at the point where somebody like Trump becomes a desirable candidate -- someone who says he will stop the offshoring of jobs and the flood of cheap immigrant labor into this country.

Unless they're extremely stupid, Americans won't vote themselves out of being able to to make a decent living.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Places like Carrier move their jobs but still expect U.S. courts to do things like protect their patents.
Good point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
The new agreement was pushed by Obama. You (liberals) voted for Obama. Don't use the cop out like so many do about Bush (he wasn't a real Conservative).

Unfortunately, most do not care what position a politician takes, only the letter after their name.
Well said.

Democrats stopped defending American workers and jobs a long, long time ago.

The only American workers they defend now are government employees.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Obama picked one of the biggest jobs exporters in our country as his jobs czar. Jeffrey Immelt. When you do this, what message do you suppose you are sending to business?
Yes, and Immelt and Obama giggled when it was pointed out that the stimulus didn't result in the promised shovel ready jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2016, 06:24 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,210,872 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
Sorry, you CAN'T have it BOTH ways.

Many on the left STILL say Iraq was ALL Bush's, ignoring the quotes from the top dems DURING the Clinton admin.
One does have to note, while they did argue for regime change, they did not undertake it and do it with what now seems no actual plan in doing it.

Quote:
They ignore that Clinton SIGNED the regime change for Iraq bill.

The DEM Senate Majority Leader CO,SPONSORED the bill giving Bush the authority to invade Iraq.

As we know with harry reid, the SML CAN KILL any bill.

The dems accept NO responsibility. They holler, "Bush gave the order"

So, the same goes here. CLINTON SIGNED IT THEREFORE IT IS HIS.

It doesn't matter WHAT H. Bush did. Clinton could have vetoed it. He DIDN'T
The (D)'s did in large part go right along with it. Not Sanders or Paul though and they are still considered the wrong ones today for some odd reason.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 06:30 AM
 
59,082 posts, read 27,318,346 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter View Post
Nothing.

LMAO

Yeah...that's the ticket. Meanwhile, Germany finds a way to keep their high paying manufacturing work.

Why? Trump couldn't care less.

Nope. Arizona was founded as a RTW state and we've never attracted much in the way of manufacturers.

That's the point. What good were right to work laws then?


Nope.
" Meanwhile, Germany finds a way to keep their high paying manufacturing work"

Do you mean like the Mercedes and BMW plants in the U.S.

And this:

"New generation of German SUVs made in USA

With today's third generation of the ML, you'd be hard-pressed to tell that it was built anywhere but in Germany. In fact, if you buy one of these anywhere in the world, including in Germany, it was built at the Alabama plant.
Yes, Mercedes-Benz exports cars from the United States so does BMW. In the world economy, auto companies have found it easy and cost effective to set up shop anywhere in the world."


New generation of German SUVs made in USA | abc7.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 06:37 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,210,872 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
" Meanwhile, Germany finds a way to keep their high paying manufacturing work"

Do you mean like the Mercedes and BMW plants in the U.S.

And this:

"New generation of German SUVs made in USA

With today's third generation of the ML, you'd be hard-pressed to tell that it was built anywhere but in Germany. In fact, if you buy one of these anywhere in the world, including in Germany, it was built at the Alabama plant.
Yes, Mercedes-Benz exports cars from the United States so does BMW. In the world economy, auto companies have found it easy and cost effective to set up shop anywhere in the world."


New generation of German SUVs made in USA | abc7.com
Try importing a Chevy into Germany. BMW builds cars here to sell them here.

Yes, Germany is a great example. They protect their domestic jobs while expanding by creating jobs in the markets they want to grow.

That is exactly what Henry Ford was talking about above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 07:09 AM
 
30,065 posts, read 18,670,668 times
Reputation: 20885
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Again, NAFTA negotiations began in the St Reagan Admin. Bush 1 did the ceremonial signing thing during his term, subject to Congress approval. Congress approved and Clinton signed it and did so in opposition to his own party.

What does this situation have to do with NAFTA?

This company maintains manufacturing plants at 80 facilities all over the world. 60% of their sales are off shore. Mexico maintains more bilateral free trade agreements with the rest of the world than most countries.

Low wages, no benefits, no unions, little to no wage/ labor/ safety laws and those bilateral free trade agreements create a winning combination.
What does losing 1400 manufacturing jobs to Mexico have to do with NAFTA??

CLINTON PASSED NAFTA. In opposition to his own party members (initially) Clinton leaned on democrat legistlatures and carried the day to pass NAFTA. NAFTA is Clinton's baby.

"Low wages, no benefuts, no unions, little to no safety laws.........."

Yes- that is why it is not FREE TRADE. We have nations using slave labor and eggregious working conditions to lower costs. Is that what you want for American workers? Are those the situations you would prefer that workers from other nations suffer under?

Wake up- The dems and their "free trade", massive imoportation of poor, unskilled illegals, and high taxes and regulations are killing the US. If you want to have the standard of living "enjoyed" by the third world nations who benefit from our "free trade", be my guest. I, for one, do not want the US turned into a third world cesspool.

German and Japanese manufacturing does just fine with higher wages than the US. What do we have that they don't? TERRIBLE ONE SIDED TRADE AGREEMENTS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Wartrace,TN
8,070 posts, read 12,784,000 times
Reputation: 16497
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamies View Post
Wow. I'm surprised the employees just stood there and took it. I saw one guy walked out. Good for him. They ought to ALL have just walked off the job right then and shut the company down. I understand they have mortgages to pay and kids to feed. But all they are doing is delaying the inevitable.
The company will most likely be offering severance pay and other adjustment benefits IF the employee's stick around. If you walk off the job you get nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 07:52 AM
 
140 posts, read 124,698 times
Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
What does losing 1400 manufacturing jobs to Mexico have to do with NAFTA??

CLINTON PASSED NAFTA. In opposition to his own party members (initially) Clinton leaned on democrat legistlatures and carried the day to pass NAFTA. NAFTA is Clinton's baby.

"Low wages, no benefuts, no unions, little to no safety laws.........."

Yes- that is why it is not FREE TRADE. We have nations using slave labor and eggregious working conditions to lower costs. Is that what you want for American workers? Are those the situations you would prefer that workers from other nations suffer under?

Wake up- The dems and their "free trade", massive imoportation of poor, unskilled illegals, and high taxes and regulations are killing the US. If you want to have the standard of living "enjoyed" by the third world nations who benefit from our "free trade", be my guest. I, for one, do not want the US turned into a third world cesspool.

German and Japanese manufacturing does just fine with higher wages than the US. What do we have that they don't? TERRIBLE ONE SIDED TRADE AGREEMENTS.
Bush Sr actually started the NAFTA issue, Clinton just followed the lead. Nafta has been terrible for the Mexican people. They work for less than 9 dollars a day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 08:02 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,210,872 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yabbhadou View Post
Bush Sr actually started the NAFTA issue, Clinton just followed the lead. Nafta has been terrible for the Mexican people. They work for less than 9 dollars a day.
Mexico's government is terrible for their people. Rather than concentrating on business and exporting products they concentrate on exporting people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 08:06 AM
 
Location: Ft. Myers
19,719 posts, read 16,846,967 times
Reputation: 41863
I heard one word in that speech that jumped out at me..........Union. While it is a sucky move for Carrier to do this, I bet the Union made it difficult for Carrier to be competitive.Personally, I hate unions...........they had their purpose at one time, but that time has passed.

I worked for a company that was non union, but then the plant decided they wanted to join a union. Things changed over night.......for the worse. Our once friendly company turned into us versus them. I worked in the office in management and I was not allowed to enter the plant without a union person accompanying me. They made it impossible to get anything productive done, and there was always some grievance about one thing or another. A once friendly environment because hostile and hateful.

Not saying this move was caused by the union, but I bet those workers were making a Hell of a lot of money for the jobs they were doing.

Don
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2016, 08:08 AM
 
24,415 posts, read 23,070,474 times
Reputation: 15020
Gotta love the New World Order. And they wonder why nobody wants another Bush or Clinton in The White House....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top