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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-11-2020, 07:25 PM
 
8,104 posts, read 3,963,798 times
Reputation: 3070

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Partially true but if Apple moved all those manufacturing jobs back here we would be paying more for I-phones and what happens to Samsung. They get the world market and we get more expensive phones in the US, will consumers be willing to pay more. Same with the appliance manufacturers moving to Mexico. Do we want to put up a wall around American manufacturing and contain them here and block imports.
I dont think consumers have been the benefactors in iphones but rather shareholders and management.
A study was done on how much it costs to make an iphone with labor included and it came out to $200 dollars.
Look at the prices for apple stock, very expensive, or it was.

Before Big Business moved to China, shareholder and corporate profits were weak, then strong once they outsourced.
It is very clear who the beneficiaries were. A company is not going to lower prices if they move to China.

The market has already accepted the price so they will charge the same and pocket the extra profits.

If they move back to the US, they will have to live with lower profit margins with labor that has free will.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-11-2020, 07:29 PM
 
30,075 posts, read 18,682,634 times
Reputation: 20894
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawac34618 View Post
Prior to the early 1980s, people used to actually believe this. In fact, "trickle up" is a big reason the 1950s that everyone looks back on so fondly were so prosperous. America prospers when we have a strong middle class. 40 years of trickle down has shown it to be a failure.

Most Republican voters would probably agree if they weren't welded to the GOP because of issues like abortion and gay marriage.


Yet the dem party has worked to destroy the middle class for decades with NAFTA, China trade status, and the creation of the welfare state.


I think you forgot that Ike (R) as POTUS for most of the 1950s.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 07:35 PM
 
8,104 posts, read 3,963,798 times
Reputation: 3070
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Yet the dem party has worked to destroy the middle class for decades with NAFTA, China trade status, and the creation of the welfare state.


I think you forgot that Ike (R) as POTUS for most of the 1950s.
No, it is the business class and profits at all costs that are responsible.
If you want to twist it to where all business owners are liberals, then fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 07:55 PM
 
17,311 posts, read 12,267,497 times
Reputation: 17263
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Yet the dem party has worked to destroy the middle class for decades with NAFTA, China trade status, and the creation of the welfare state.


I think you forgot that Ike (R) as POTUS for most of the 1950s.
Wow, rewrite history much? NAFTA was one of Reagan’s ideas and voted in overwhelmingly by Republicans. China trade relations kicked off with Nixon.

The North American Free Trade Agreement: Ronald Reagan's Vision Realized
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 08:47 PM
 
8,104 posts, read 3,963,798 times
Reputation: 3070
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
Wow, rewrite history much? NAFTA was one of Reagan’s ideas and voted in overwhelmingly by Republicans. China trade relations kicked off with Nixon.

The North American Free Trade Agreement: Ronald Reagan's Vision Realized
I remember the protests against a lot of these trade agreements.
It was a !ot of concerned Americans from all walks of life that could care less about the parties involved.
They knew they were being sold out.

It is like the bankster bail outs.
Millions protested against that too from all parties.

The same people sold them out as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 09:25 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,500,230 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
Wow, rewrite history much? NAFTA was one of Reagan’s ideas and voted in overwhelmingly by Republicans. China trade relations kicked off with Nixon.

The North American Free Trade Agreement: Ronald Reagan's Vision Realized
NAFTA was thought up by Carter....Zbigniew Brzezinski to be specific




Reagan was against NAFTA but his VP ( a student of Zbigniew Brzezinski ) Bush the senior (very liberal) pushed it, and as POTUS negotiated it...and President Clinton made sure it passed congress, even had Gore saying it was essential


but it was Clinton/gore that did the "full court press" for globalism

and where did 'freetrade' (ie nafta, caftan, or Obama's ofta) come from...the globalist liberals

NAFTA dreamed up by carter... negotiated by globalist liberal bush1, passed by the DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED CONGRESS, full court press by Clinton to get it passed....signed by Clinton and EXPANDED by Clinton



freetrade was started by the GLOBALIST LIBERALS.... started under carter

pushed and negotiated by globalist bush1

pushed and signed by globalist Clinton

expanded by globalist Clinton, globalist bush2, and globalist Obama (senator Obama even had his own freetrade agreement with Oman)

THE FREE-TRADE ACCORD; PRESIDENT BEGINS A LOBBYING BLITZ FOR TRADE ACCORD
By DOUGLAS JEHL,
Published: November 9, 1993

WASHINGTON, Nov. 8— President Clinton began an intensive face-to-face effort today to persuade lawmakers to throw their support behind the North American Free Trade Agreement as the White House added to his criticisms of labor unions who are the chief opponents of the accord.

Struggling to find the 218 votes he needs for the agreement's approval in the House of Representatives, Mr. Clinton met from morning until well into the night with pairs and small groups of Democratic members of Congress, nearly all of whom had not declared their position.

--snip--
THE FREE-TRADE ACCORD - PRESIDENT BEGINS A LOBBYING BLITZ FOR TRADE ACCORD - NYTimes.com
=====================


NAFTA Engulfs Clinton Team - Defeat Would Be 'Catastrophic' - NYTimes.com
WASHINGTON— Sharpening an already intensive lobbying campaign on the North American Free Trade Agreement, top aides to President Bill Clinton issued dire warnings on Sunday to reach for last-minute congressional votes.

A failure by Congress to ratify the trade accord would be "catastrophic" for U.S. foreign policy, Vice President Al Gore said in a broadcast interview.

Trade Representative Mickey Kantor said rejection of NAFTA would be "shameful." He also defended the White House against assertions that votes were being secured by promises of federal largesse to individual lawmakers.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen warned of "a real tragedy" in U.S.-Mexican relations if NAFTA fails, saying that Mexican politics would return to a era in which the United States was reviled.

Faced with considerable reluctance on the part of some Republicans, Mr. Clinton, a Democrat, promised to support them on the issue of NAFTA if a Democrat criticizes their votes in the 1994 election campaigns.

Mr. Gore reiterated the White House view that a defeat on NAFTA would be a blow to Mr. Clinton personally and to U.S. efforts to attain freer trade globally and in Asia.

========================

hmmm reluctance to pass NAFTA by the republicans, Clinton promised to SUPPORT them against the democrats......hmmm
---------

and as soon as nafta passed he went after CHINA

Clinton Puts a Foot In the Opening Door Of the Global Market - NYTimes.com

Such are the realities that Bill Clinton and his economic strategists have begun to acknowledge in a new vision of American relations with Asia -- a vision that Mr. Clinton spelled out forcefully at the meeting of Pacific leaders that concluded here this weekend. It is a vision that implies tradeoffs and job displacements far more wrenching than any posed by the North American Free Trade Agreement, which the Democrat controlled House approved last week after a Herculean display of Presidential persuasion.

Previous presidents have steered clear of the politically uncomfortable fact that Mr. Clinton addressed head-on on Friday: Creating a job for a factory worker in Seattle may first require creating six jobs in Jakarta. The new world order, Mr. Clinton suggested, seamlessly integrates security and economics. Indeed, he touted the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum -- the little-known economic consulting group under whose auspices the Pacific leaders gathered -- as something of a latter-day NATO. He said "our place in the world will be determined as much by the skills of our workers as by the strength of our weapons, as much by our ability to pull down foreign trade barriers as our ability to breach distant ramparts."

In political terms, of course, much of this oratory is about building on Nafta, Mr. Clinton's first big foreign policy win. Secretary of State Warren Christopher said Nafta should be the first out in a "triple play," one that now turns to economic integration of the Pacific and then to tearing down still more trade barriers under a new, much delayed global trade accord, which faces a deadline in mid-December.

------------

and he continued to EXPAND nafta...
Chile Is Admitted as North American Free Trade Partner - NYTimes.com

MIAMI, Dec. 11— President Clinton and the leaders of Canada and Mexico said today that they had agreed to admit Chile to the North American Free Trade Agreement, a move that clearly puts pressure on the other nations of South and Central America to speed the opening of their markets if they want expanded trade with the United States
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,500,230 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by J746NEW View Post
I remember the protests against a lot of these trade agreements.
It was a !ot of concerned Americans from all walks of life that could care less about the parties involved.
They knew they were being sold out.

It is like the bankster bail outs.
Millions protested against that too from all parties.

The same people sold them out as well.


correct..Unions (specifically the teamsters union (my union)) was very much against NAFTA and all the other globalist liberal so-call "free" trade agreements..... they were not free trade, as you CAN NOT have real free trade unless all aspects (labor) are equal




idiots like Clinton calling this "free-trade"...that was one whopper of a lie
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 09:40 PM
 
17,311 posts, read 12,267,497 times
Reputation: 17263
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
NAFTA was thought up by Carter....Zbigniew Brzezinski to be specific




Reagan was against NAFTA but his VP ( a student of Zbigniew Brzezinski ) Bush the senior (very liberal) pushed it, and as POTUS negotiated it...and President Clinton made sure it passed congress, even had Gore saying it was essential


but it was Clinton/gore that did the "full court press" for globalism

and where did 'freetrade' (ie nafta, caftan, or Obama's ofta) come from...the globalist liberals

NAFTA dreamed up by carter... negotiated by globalist liberal bush1, passed by the DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED CONGRESS, full court press by Clinton to get it passed....signed by Clinton and EXPANDED by Clinton



freetrade was started by the GLOBALIST LIBERALS.... started under carter

pushed and negotiated by globalist bush1

pushed and signed by globalist Clinton

expanded by globalist Clinton, globalist bush2, and globalist Obama (senator Obama even had his own freetrade agreement with Oman)

THE FREE-TRADE ACCORD; PRESIDENT BEGINS A LOBBYING BLITZ FOR TRADE ACCORD
By DOUGLAS JEHL,
Published: November 9, 1993

WASHINGTON, Nov. 8— President Clinton began an intensive face-to-face effort today to persuade lawmakers to throw their support behind the North American Free Trade Agreement as the White House added to his criticisms of labor unions who are the chief opponents of the accord.

Struggling to find the 218 votes he needs for the agreement's approval in the House of Representatives, Mr. Clinton met from morning until well into the night with pairs and small groups of Democratic members of Congress, nearly all of whom had not declared their position.

--snip--
THE FREE-TRADE ACCORD - PRESIDENT BEGINS A LOBBYING BLITZ FOR TRADE ACCORD - NYTimes.com
=====================


NAFTA Engulfs Clinton Team - Defeat Would Be 'Catastrophic' - NYTimes.com
WASHINGTON— Sharpening an already intensive lobbying campaign on the North American Free Trade Agreement, top aides to President Bill Clinton issued dire warnings on Sunday to reach for last-minute congressional votes.

A failure by Congress to ratify the trade accord would be "catastrophic" for U.S. foreign policy, Vice President Al Gore said in a broadcast interview.

Trade Representative Mickey Kantor said rejection of NAFTA would be "shameful." He also defended the White House against assertions that votes were being secured by promises of federal largesse to individual lawmakers.

Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen warned of "a real tragedy" in U.S.-Mexican relations if NAFTA fails, saying that Mexican politics would return to a era in which the United States was reviled.

Faced with considerable reluctance on the part of some Republicans, Mr. Clinton, a Democrat, promised to support them on the issue of NAFTA if a Democrat criticizes their votes in the 1994 election campaigns.

Mr. Gore reiterated the White House view that a defeat on NAFTA would be a blow to Mr. Clinton personally and to U.S. efforts to attain freer trade globally and in Asia.

========================

hmmm reluctance to pass NAFTA by the republicans, Clinton promised to SUPPORT them against the democrats......hmmm
---------

and as soon as nafta passed he went after CHINA

Clinton Puts a Foot In the Opening Door Of the Global Market - NYTimes.com

Such are the realities that Bill Clinton and his economic strategists have begun to acknowledge in a new vision of American relations with Asia -- a vision that Mr. Clinton spelled out forcefully at the meeting of Pacific leaders that concluded here this weekend. It is a vision that implies tradeoffs and job displacements far more wrenching than any posed by the North American Free Trade Agreement, which the Democrat controlled House approved last week after a Herculean display of Presidential persuasion.

Previous presidents have steered clear of the politically uncomfortable fact that Mr. Clinton addressed head-on on Friday: Creating a job for a factory worker in Seattle may first require creating six jobs in Jakarta. The new world order, Mr. Clinton suggested, seamlessly integrates security and economics. Indeed, he touted the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum -- the little-known economic consulting group under whose auspices the Pacific leaders gathered -- as something of a latter-day NATO. He said "our place in the world will be determined as much by the skills of our workers as by the strength of our weapons, as much by our ability to pull down foreign trade barriers as our ability to breach distant ramparts."

In political terms, of course, much of this oratory is about building on Nafta, Mr. Clinton's first big foreign policy win. Secretary of State Warren Christopher said Nafta should be the first out in a "triple play," one that now turns to economic integration of the Pacific and then to tearing down still more trade barriers under a new, much delayed global trade accord, which faces a deadline in mid-December.

------------

and he continued to EXPAND nafta...
Chile Is Admitted as North American Free Trade Partner - NYTimes.com

MIAMI, Dec. 11— President Clinton and the leaders of Canada and Mexico said today that they had agreed to admit Chile to the North American Free Trade Agreement, a move that clearly puts pressure on the other nations of South and Central America to speed the opening of their markets if they want expanded trade with the United States
That’s some fairy tale. Reagan was the first one who proposed it in his campaign. The heritage foundation that practically worships Reagan even says so. It was passed with a majority of Republican votes.
House Yay Nay
Republican 132 43
Democratic 102 156

Senate
34 Republican for
27 Democrats for
https://www.heritage.org/trade/repor...ision-realized

Seems someone has fed you some serious propaganda.

Last edited by notnamed; 04-11-2020 at 09:54 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 10:00 PM
 
Location: Santa Monica
36,853 posts, read 17,382,061 times
Reputation: 14459
Ronald Reagan was the biggest Marxist since LBJ. I think only Trump is close to him on the socialism scale since Ronnie signed off in 1989.

Obama is in there...for sure.

Point is, they're all Marxists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-11-2020, 10:05 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,500,230 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by notnamed View Post
That’s some fairy tale. Reagan was the first one who proposed it in his campaign. The heritage foundation that practically worships Reagan even says so. It was passed with a majority of Republican votes.
House Yay Nay
Republican 132 43
Democratic 102 156

Senate
34 Republican for
27 Republicans for
https://www.heritage.org/trade/repor...ision-realized

Seems someone has fed you some serious propaganda.
[quote]


[T]he "house of world order" will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down.... [A]n end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault....
Among other things, we will be seeking new rules in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade to cover a whole range of hitherto unregulated nontariff barriers. These will subject countries to an unprecedented degree of international surveillance over up to now sacrosanct "domestic" policies, such as farm price supports, subsidies, and government procurement practices that have transnational effects. {/quote]
-- Richard N. Gardner Foreign Affairs, April 1974 (Foreign Affairs is the journal of the Council on Foreign Relations. Gardner has held a number of posts in the U.S. State Department.)


liberals were thinking of this before Reagan even got close to the WH.... but you keep being a deer in headlights, wanting to bash Reagan, when this was put in place well before him




Quote:
“This regionalization is in keeping with the progressive Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of one world government. National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept.”
― Zbigniew Brzezinski
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
Similar Threads

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