It's not just wages but benefits driving jobs out of the country.

[loudnclear]

But I as you, do you want a third world standard of living in the US?
That's what we are headed for if workers' protections and benefits aren't of concern. We are sending jobs out of this country just so a few fat cats and their families can heap more and more wealth in the form of profits and stocks upon themselves. Shouldn't there be a cap on profits? All a good business man needs is to earn a decent profit. I thought that 50% profit should be good enough for anyone. Why do some corporations (think oil) have to make 300-500% profit? (Use 1992 as a base year).

[camero]

1. Jobs aren't being driven out.

They are being moved to foriegn countries. By crooks who wish to rob us blind.

[FreakinDJ]

2. Tax increase

On companies were more then 10% of their services are provided off shore.

On companies were more then 10% of the workers do not have family medical coverage

On companies that employee more then 10% temp employees

One way or the other we are subsidizing these thieves. It is time they paid the piper

[Ilsa]

3. What are they going to do

when the rest of us that work for them (or used to work for them) can't afford to buy their products anymore?

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

6. Please Share The Economic Data That You Saw

with a link, please.

[cosmicdot]

8. please provide link to source of information

"or every 1 or 2 low paying job we lose overseas, we get 2 or 3 higher paying jobs in return"

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[camero]

10. Here's one for you

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=1412

Therefore, the old arguments about free trade versus protectionism no longer apply, though God knows ideologues never let the facts get in the way of their ideology. We are not, for the most part, trading American-made goods for foreign-owned goods. Many underdeveloped countries like China have few products to export — except cheap labor. Unless the present trend is reversed, America will continue to bleed manufacturing and high-tech jobs to cheap-labor countries. If you think America's corporate leaders today give a hoot or a damn about the American people or America, think again. Many of these corporations have even changed their names to disguise their American origins. Their loyalty is to the cash flow and their own shamefully high, undeserved cut of it.

[MrPrax]

21. So what is the alternative?

"underdeveloped countries like China have few products to export " hardly underdeveloped since they sell to Wal-Mart (14% of US imports from China) and are thinking of outspending us in a 'space race'

"except cheap labor" you can find people who want food, shelter and clothing anywhere

"will continue to bleed manufacturing and high-tech jobs to cheap-labor countries" going on for a longtime...why bring it up now and not during the 60s or 80s?

"Many of these corporations have even changed their names" like Dalmier-Chrysler? Fix it again Tony!!!

Oh well...there is always big government to save the day, right?

[camero]

24. here ya go.

This is a problem created by the federal government, which at first sacrificed American jobs as part of its Cold War strategy and is now in the tight grip of multinational corporations. It can only be solved by a political revolution — that is, by electing men and women who recognize that free trade and American jobs have become mutually exclusive. The only way to stop the export of American jobs is to tax the heck out of the practice. It's being done for economic reasons. Congress must apply an economic reason to stop it.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[camero]

34. Bullpuckey

How about we make the same penalties for corps that we have when we don't pay our taxes? Like jail.

[camero]

36. From the GAO

http://www.unclefed.com/GAOReports/ggd99-39_sum.html

GAO noted that: (1) in each year between 1989 and 1995, a majority of corporations, both foreign- and U.S.-controlled, paid no U.S. income tax; (2) among large corporations, the percentage of FCCs that paid no tax exceeded that for USCCs from 1989 through 1993; (3) in 1994, the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant, and in 1995, the percentage of large FCCs that paid no U.S. income tax was slightly less than that of large USCCs; (4) differences in the characteristics of large FCCs and USCCs may account for part of the differences in the amount of taxes paid by the two groups; (5) one difference was the percentage of new corporations--3 years old or less--in each group; (6) the Internal Revenue Service data GAO reviewed indicate that newer corporations were less likely than older corporations to pay taxes; (7) from 1989 to 1993, a greater percentage of large FCCs than large USCCs were new, but from 1994 to 1995, a greater percentage of large USCCs than large FCCs were new; (8) another significant difference between large FCCs and large USCCs was in their distribution across industrial sectors; (9) in 1995, in comparison to large USCCs, large FCCs were more heavily concentrated in the manufacturing and wholesale trade sectors and less concentrated in the financial services sector; (10) aggregate ratios of costs to receipts for all large corporations differed significantly across industrial sectors; (11) the difference in cost ratios across industries, combined with the fact that large FCCs and USCCs were concentrated in different industries, could account for some of the difference in the amount of taxes that large FCCs paid per dollar of receipts and that large USCCs paid; and (12) the ratio of taxable income per dollar of receipts should be inversely related to the ratio of costs per dollar of receipts.

[pscot]

14. Townhall

is a right-wing chatauqua featuring people like Anne Coulter, Rich Lowery, Emmitt Tyrell(of Spectator fame), Ollie North, Jack Kemp, Chuck Colson and many, many others. In short, a regular rogues gallery of wing-nut disinformation specialists. I doubt that anything you read there can be trusted. I would certainly not accept any fact or figure presented on that website without independent corroboration from a source I trusted. You are serving up disinformation.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

15. Town Hall=HERITAGE FOUNDATION.

Right-wing think tank.

Ergo, not relevant.

Only 1000 jobs were created last month. The economy is in the shitter. Face facts.

[FreakinDJ]

17. BULL SH@T .....CHECK THE MEMBER LIST OF THIS RAG

Townhall.com Member Groups


Full List
Become a member of Townhall.com

60 Plus Association
A World Connected
Accuracy In Academia
Accuracy in Media
Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty
AgapePress
Alliance Defense Fund
American Civil Rights Institute
American Conservative Union
The American Enterprise
American Land Rights Association
American Law and Policy Foundation
American Legislative Exchange Council
Americans for Tax Reform
AnnCoulter.org
Ashbrook Center for Public Affairs at Ashland University
Association of Concerned Taxpayers
The Bradley Foundation
BreakPoint Online
Campus Report
Capital Research Center
Cato Institute
The Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity
The Center for Consumer Freedom
Center for Equal Opportunity
Center for Individual Freedom
Center for Security Policy
Center for the Future of Russia
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
Children First America
Citizens Against Government Waste
Citizens for a Sound Economy
The Claremont Institute
Collegiate Network
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Concerned Women for America
The Conservative Caucus
Conservative Petitions.com
Conservative Political Action Conference
Defenders of Property Rights
Digital Freedom Network
Employment Policies Institute
EnviroTruth.org
Evergreen Freedom Foundation
Family Research Council
The Federalist e-journal Digest
The Federalist Society
The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies
Free Republic Network


The last one is the real tell tale sign

[brook]

11. Mind sharing with the rest of us...

where those 2 or 3 higher paying jobs are? Yeah...we're more productive than ever...working for chump change (in a desperate attempt to "keep food on our families" - while * and his buddies gut overtime regs along with every thing else that once marked a country that was great and a society that rewarded workers with something more than a sneer and a "Who cares what you think?".

[terrisel]

12. How does our standard of living "kill them"?

I understand that we have a shorter life span than the Japanese and far less in personal savings. Their housing in large cities is costly but that is partly a function of Japan's smaller geopgraphic size. They also have fewer natural resouces.

Why do you think our standard of living is higher ?

[RainDog]

18. what data do you have to back up this claim?

I'm not saying you're right or wrong, but you've just offered an opinion and I wonder what it's based upon.

I can also offer an opinion, which is that since the blue collar jobs were moved out of this country, many people who were once able to live on one salary have to have two now...whether it's one person or two working those jobs.

And why do we have the most expensive health care system, but have millions uninsured, while France has the best health care in the world (according to The Guardian in an article last year about Britain looking at the French system to see how to implement something similar in the UK).

Apparently all the bullshit about America having the best health care because we don't have that nasty "socialized" medicine is a crock.

Why, when Republicans have held office in the last twenty years, did the greatest income increases go to people who were already the richest...59% for the wealthiest 5%, while the poorest 20% experienced ZERO growth in income in that same period?

Tell me why those same people now need an inheritance tax cut "relief," --please.

Under Clinton, the disparity in the % of income growth was more evenly distributed, but of course the richest already -- to paraphrase Jim Hightower about George W -- had started out on third and thought they had earned a homer.

This sort of income inequity, as George Soros and Warren Buffet acknowledge, is bad for democracy, and ultimately bad for captialism, because this redistribution of wealth to the richest fosters social unrest and those societal costs, in addition to, as others note, making it impossible for America to maintain its "consumption society" status.

Our economy is fueled by us buying things...mostly from other countries. These countries, in turn, buy our debt.

This is the first time in history that a nation's debt has been held in its currency...and the debt itself is enormous.

I don't know everything about economics, but I know about common sense and personal finance, and the truth is that America cannot sustain Bushonomics.

Reagan had to surreptiously raise taxes in order to prevent a real screw up...worse than the recession he created and Bush I extended. (Read all about it at The Washington Monthly.)

So I guess I find it hard to be optimistic about America at this time with people like Bush and Cheney in power. Bush has never run a successful company, but has always been funded by his daddy's pals, whether in Saudi Arabia or America.

Cheney, as CEO of Halliburton, may possibly be indicted for attempting to bribe a French official. He was also CEO at a time when a Halliburton subsidary has been charged with forced labor in Burma. Forced at the end of a rifle.

Ashcroft opposed a hearing for this Burma law suit...no surprise.

I don't know the status of it now.

However, tell me why I should share your optimism about how great things are here with Bush and Cheney grinding the gears of our economy?

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[camero]

30. Talking points. Get your talking points here.

More drivel.

[terrisel]

42. Health Care

I am reminded of de Toqueville's comment that Americans are highly opinionated and poorly informed. Possible we sometimes avoid facts because they challenge beliefs. I don't know.


Statistics I have read indicate that people in Canada are generally happy with their system and would not want the American system. Many people here do not get needed health care or get a reduced level of care because it is not affordable for them.

Some Canadians come here for certain procedures, and busloads of Americans who can't afford their prescriptions go to Canada.

Many Americans have had to declare bankruptcy over medical bills. That usually doesn't happen in other countries.

Many Americans have stayed in jobs they don't like or get jobs they don't want because they need the health insurance provided by the group plan. They wouldn't be able to afford to purchase policies on their own because they are very costly.

However at this point I think there is going to be a universal health care system paid for by taxpayers because the corporations want it. They do not want to pay the benefits any longer and they want you and me to pay the taxes for it.

[mrdmk]

49. Cheney did not do much better than Bush as a CEO

Halliburton is in Bankruptcy Court at this moment over an Asbestos claim.

http://money.cnn.com/2002/02/15/companies/halliburton/

Cheney adventures as a CEO did not help the company one bit, a total failure. The only way he was able to help the company was with unbidden contracts for Afghanistan and Iraq.

Here is a dose of some other weird stuff Cheney was up to:

http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=3617&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

http://www.aaiusa.org/news/must_read03_12_03.htm

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Halliburton+cheney%22

[ContinentalOp]

22. Hey folks, I found the 2 or 3 jobs we're getting back.

See, here's how it works: you get layed off from your one full time job and you're forced to take 2 or 3 part time jobs with no benefits to make ends meet. Voila! A net gain in the total number of "jobs."

[brook]

27. Oh, thank goodness!

Please turn them in to the nearest lost & found...so we can all have a shot at 'em! :)

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[camero]

7. Your beloved corps are gettin kicked pretty good today huh?

Where do corp profits go? Why to the kenny boys of the world that's where.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

16. and they are sending our jobs overseas

Enjoy your brief stay here.

[camero]

20. Blinders?

http://econ.ucsc.edu/grads/ralfhepp/econ130/Chapter05_StockownershipUS.htm

Direct ownership of stocks by U.S. households, however, remained relatively rare in the Fed survey. Only 21.3 percent of households reported direct stock ownership, up from 19.2 percent in 1998.

For those in the top 10 percent of incomes, 60.6 percent held stock directly, up from 53.6 percent in 1998. For those in the lowest 20 percent of earners, only 3.8 percent said they held stock directly in 2001.

[FreakinDJ]

19. We have been infiltrated

Duh

Free Rebublic Network

Duh

I beleive every thing they say

Duh

Got 5 bucks so I can contribute

Duh

Maybe I should go back to school so I could learn to spel

[camero]

23. And an econ major

Giving us so-called data from Thomas Sewell.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[camero]

29. That's a first post?

LOL

[metisnation]

40. everyone chill

welcome to DU asteroid!

[Yupster]

25. 50 % ? 300 % profits? Where?

I just looked up a few oil companies.

Exxon (XOM) has earnings of $ 2.68 per share. A share costs $ 40.28.

British Ptroleum has EPS of $ 2.86 on a share price of $ 48.25.

Haliburton barely makes abny profit. It's EPS is $ .14 on a share price of $ 26.85.

Are you using a different measure than I am, or just using numbers as an example from your head or what?

[Asteroid]

31. Profits

<posted byL loudnclear>

Shouldn't there be a cap on profits?

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

I am going to pretend that I didn't read that.

[camero]

33. Actually there used to be a cap on profits

It's called anti-trust law. You know, to keep monopolies from forming?

[Asteroid]

35. Anti trust laws

have nothing to do with putting a cap on profits. Anti trust laws were designed to stop companies from controlling an entire market segment. Profit gates exist in the consumer world by establishing what the market will pay and wont pay. Profits are generated by suppply and demand, simple economics, and always have been.

[camero]

38. Anti-trust law

Keeps wealth from being accumulated in too few hands. Thus it is a cap on profits.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

37. One gets 'stoned

and another takes its place. :eyes:

There must have been a fire sale on Talking Points today at the Rushbot Bazaar.

[camero]

39. No doubt

[Asteroid]

44. I love this website

and have no intentions in grinding this thread to a hault. So I will say that too many people were jumping the freeper gun.

BTW, I don't listen to Rush.

[Beaker]

41. MAXIMIZE shareholder value.

it's the MBA credo.

[FreakinDJ]

43. Anti Trust laws are fine but what about Tariffs and Customs

Seems to me their must be a loop hole here being exploited. If we commonly control product dumping by foreign country why wouldn't we control foreign services

[camero]

45. Jobs don't come here. Products do.

But we could charge a duty for intra-industrial trade.

[FreakinDJ]

46. Exactly

The Repugs Rush to close loop holes in the way John E Taxpayer gives his pound of flesh. Where are they now when the country is being RAPED

It is the DOUBLE STANDARD afforded them by MONEY

You steal a BIC lighter at 7/11 your going to Jail

Ken Lay steals 500Mil and gets off scott free. WHY

Because he is sucking off GW while stuffing Cheeny's pockets full of inside deals and cash donations

[Snappy]

47. Welcome to Amerika

"Do you want a third world standard of living in the US?"

No.

The Corps in Amerika are pushing for that. Lower all wages, no pay for OT, Mandatory OT, no worker's comp., no Collective bargaining, no Health Benefits, no Holiday Pay, lessen Vacation Time and pay, etc. Think pre 1930. That is what Corporate Americka wants and they are going to get it. The Repubs and Dems won't stop them from getting it either.

[mrdmk]

48. Anybody here in for a good game of Rollerball

:mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin: :mad: :smoke: :evilgrin:

[Beaker]

50. Minimum Wage is fairly meaningless-

unless you also have a Maximum Wage to balance it, enforced on the other end

[camero]

51. Agreed

If a house has a floor it must also have a ceiling.