The next Dem who speaks about 'job retraining' will get smacked

[Stinky The Clown]

I read or heard something somewhere in the last few days the same old crap about 'job retraining' for the 'new jobs' of the 'new economy'. I don't know if it was by a Dem or a Repub. No matter. Dems better be smarter.

This is such a bogus fucking 'plan' as to be laughable. It isn't that our workforce is stupid or unskilled or lacks industry-specific understandings. Its that we have NO FUCKING JOBS LEFT.

Any Democrat who spouts such pap will get smacked by a rabid, pissed off clown. Right upside his stupid, brain-dead head.

Where are the 'plans' to bring new life to the dying American economy? Where are the plans to undo the offshoring by the greedy motherfuckers who shipped those jobs to China and India? Where are the plans to start whole NEW industries - like alternative fuel infrastructure. Not just the stop-gap hybrid cars, but a WHOLE NEW TECNOLOGY that will transport our sorry asses from point A to point B and not fuck up the planet. Where is the plan for a WHOLE NEW TECHNOLOGY to move our masses instead of our individual asses?

Job retraining ...... bite me, dimwit.

[Warpy]

1. That phrase is why I can no longer watch any news fare on TV

because if I hear it one more time, my foot will be through the screen.

I know too many people who lost jobs to China or India and retrained, only to end up deeply in tuition debt and graduating just in time to see THOSE jobs get sent to China or India.

Those elitist SOBs have to be thrown out of power, both parties, and we need to prevent another group of elitist SOBs from taking their places.

[skids]

2. And what jobs we have...

...aren't given to the people who have the experience and background to do them right, resulting in project failures, resulting in job cuts.

I swear, this country has completely lost all sense when it comes to hiring. Maybe it's just that I'm in the tech field where buzzwords and capricious certification tests are all the rage, but we as a nation have forgotten every good sense principle about how to go about conducting a job search.

Jobs go, quite simply, to the people that embellish their resumes and come across as the most friendly and complaicent pushovers in a job interview conducted by people with absolutely zero HR credidentials. You know how many jobs I've been "seriously considered" for in the last two years? About 6. You know how many of those organizations that were "seriously considering" hiring me actually bothered to call even one of my references to find out how I performed in the seven years I was working my last job? Zero. Absolutely none. HR 101: the best indication of future performance is past performance. I guess they skipped that class. Oh wait, they never even took it.

Sorry but I needed to perform my weekly cathartic rant.

[Stinky The Clown]

3. Rant On!

This whole thread is a place to rant. It started as a rant. It welcomes other rants.

[sendero]

4. I know how you feel..

... but nobody calls references for a specific reason. No company will allow their employees to offer any information or opinion about a former employee beyond their hire date and termination date.

This is because many folks and companies have been sued and successfully for doing so.

Trust me, this is company policy almost everywhere. Nobody will talk about whether you were a good employee or not.

[skids]

5. Mine will.

I know this for fact. Because I know my references -- these are not just faceless managers. Most of them don't even work for the "company" in question anymore, and such is obvious if they even looked at the writeup I provide for each reference.

[sendero]

17. I should have qualified my comments..

... to say that large companies generally won't. Small companies with no deep pockets are not so much the target of those types of (mostly, but not always) frivolous lawsuits.

Certainly, where my wife works, they will tell you hire date, termination date, and that's it.

I just applied for a job and I gave 3 refs. We'll see if they call them :)

[Tunkamerica]

13. The job i just got called all my references

personal and professional.

[skids]

14. How about the ones you didn't get?

That's to be expected. These days, it appears, your references only get called after they have already decided to hire you. Ass backwards, but that's the way we do it here in the good old U S of A.

[AZBlue]

18. And they will check your credit report, driving record...

...and criminal background. The last one I can see - the first two I can't unless you are in a finance or driving position. But, that doesn't matter - my company hired a girl to answer phones for group reservations and they pulled it all.

[Greyhound]

24. Hahaha, 6? Over 100 here. Back in the great employment dearth

of 2002 - ?? (2004 for me) I had over 100 interviews after putting out well over 1000 resumes. Of the 100+ that actually brought me in for an interview, most of those were 2nd and 3rd round interviews, not one of my past employers nor any of my references was ever called.

Government jobs were the only ones that checked.

[skids]

25. Well, I'm batting higher than you were...

...so I guess I should be happy I am getting more than 1/10 interview response. But somehow I'm not, because the fact that there just are no damn jobs out here to apply for doesn't give me warm and fuzzies. You encourage me, though, in hearing that a 2-year hole in the resume probably isn't the complete end of my career. :shrug:

[HockeyMom]

6. New Jobs of the New Economy?

"Want fries with that?" "Welcome to WalMart."

Those kinds of new jobs of the new economy?

PS. I know a guy in his early 50s with 30 years in IT and a Masters Degree who is working loading boxes at Home Depot for $8/hour. He used to make $50/hour. Retrain to do WHAT?????

[Stinky The Clown]

7. "Retrain to do WHAT?????"

My point, exactly!

[skids]

9. I'll tell you what we COULD be retraining for...

...but it's not going to happen without government steering of the economy which will not occur under BushCo.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/3/11/181711/477

[Deja Q]

47. Here's the answer - I hope you are sitting down.

We went from manufacturing to service and told service was the 'in' thing.

Well, service is going to the same places manufacturing is these days -- and if you check up or even stumble on what those people pay in their countries, you'll get quite mad. (33 cents per liter of gas in China - equates to 70 cents per gallon. Doesn't sound a bad deal to me... but I digress.)

So, what's left once the service jobs, which we were told were the future and how needs would never cease or decline? What do you see that people in our country need? That isn't retail?

Military.

That's the new economy.

Fighting for the people robbing you. Isn't that sweet of them?

[bluerum]

8. It's only a matter of time before the RW xtain coalition opens the

re-training and re-education camps. There we will all have the opportunity to serve our country in a patriotic xtian way.

Just a small sample of the courses that you will be able to participate in:

Creating and editing educational docu-dramas.
Writing position papers for local media outlets.
Learning to promote religious and conservative values in your local schools and businesses.
Level the playing field by encouraging local voting boards to adopt approved voting technologies.
Learn the joys of helping those who suffer from promiscuity, homosexuality, non-procreative sexual behavior, and other sexual diseases.
Determine how to spot terra-istas in your town.
How to quickly identify and cleanse the environment of languages other than english.

Course offerings are growing daily - but sign up now while you still have a choice.

[leveymg]

10. I agree. The Dem line should be reindustrialization and energy independ-

ence.

Invest $400 billion in alternative energy industry over four years -- pay for it by seizing under the RICO statute the assets of the criminal organizations, such as Exxon-Mobil, Halliburton, Wall*Mart and Carlyle Group, that conspired with BushCo to loot the Treasury, occupy Iraq, and destroyed American manufacturing and reputation around the world.

[knitter4democracy]

29. Great idea here!!!

Send that to Dr. Dean.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: How can we fight to defend ourselves, should we ever be attacked, if we can't even make our own uniforms, food, and oil for tanks? Globalism is a good idea in theory, but it'll kick our ass should things deteriorate entirely into a war.

In WWII, we fed ourselves, clothed ourselves, built all of our own tanks and airplanes and ships and all of their components. Today, we couldn't even make every part of our airplanes or missile systems.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

11. Yeah those factory workers can retrain to be a computer prog.. never mind!

[MH1]

12. Here's a plan

roundly rebuked on the "left" by certain folks who wouldn't or couldn't read and think past "corporate tax cut":

Today, our tax policy rewards US multinational companies for locating operations abroad and reinvesting profits overseas. It is hard to imagine a more backward policy. By allowing companies to defer paying taxes on foreign income until they bring it home, we invite a double-whammy on our economy. First, companies have a tax advantage to move jobs overseas. Corporate taxes are, on average, one-third lower abroad. Second, companies face a tax when they bring earnings back and, therefore, have an incentive to reinvest profits in foreign economies.

In sanctioning these foreign tax havens, US companies who choose to stay at home suffer a disadvantage. Not only is this bad for business and a strain on capital; it is a disaster for American workers. There are 1.6m more unemployed Americans today than there were in 2000.

I propose a two-step solution. First, eliminate this perverse incentive for companies to house operations overseas. Second, use the tax savings to lower the corporate tax rate across the board at home. This means taxing companies on the profits of their foreign subsidiaries as they earn them, just like domestic profits. US companies must remain competitive in a global economy, so deferral would still be permitted for income earned when a company houses production in a foreign country solely to serve its market. But if you open a call centre in India to serve American customers, you have to pay taxes just like call centres in the US do.

From an op-ed in the Financial Times on July 21, 2005. Sorry I can't give a link.

For anyone who has steam coming out their ears that any Democrat would proposes a corporate tax cut of ANY sort: let's repeat that bolded and underlined sentence: Corporate taxes are, on average, one-third lower abroad. Think about that for a sec. Then re-read the two points: 1) eliminate the tax incentive to operate overseas; 2) use increased revenues from that to offset a cut in the overall corporate tax rate. You know what? That overall cut ALSO helps small businesses, who are not likely to be operating overseas. So not only do you reduce incentives for big globals to move jobs overseas, you do a little bit of playing field leveling for small businesses.

Two guesses who wrote that op-ed (hint: it was part of his platform in 2004 also).

[Lasher]

36. There's a problem with that

You make some good points, MH1. This makes sense, but taxes are not the only corporate motivation for moving jobs overseas. Cheap labor is what they're after even more. You know this, but hear me out, I'm going somewhere with this.

The Bush tax cuts were supposed to generate more domestic investment, but they actually had the opposite effect. There is an incentive to reinvest earnings in US domestic factories due to the tax liabilities that are thereby avoided. But if tax rates are lowered this makes profits more portable than they were before, thereby diminishing an incentive to reinvest in domestic operations. This applies to tax cuts for wealthy individuals, as well as for corporations.

I believe tax cuts have actually encouraged some investment. But the money did not trickle down, it trickled over to other countries. Faced with US tax reductions on income, corporations and wealthy individuals were further encouraged to act on their wishes to relocate to other countries in order to exploit cheaper labor.

This was pointed out here by unlawflcombatnt. I recommend reading that entire message string, which was quite good.

I just wanted to point out a possible pitfall in the course of action you have recommended. I like your ideas but I'm just saying we need to make sure our efforts are not counterproductive. Good intentions sometimes just make good pavement.

[randomelement]

43. Call me simple minded and an idealist

but shouldn't the things that are created/manufactured be valued using a different metric - something like

man hours/man minutes to create

or

machine hours/machine minutes to create

(whichever is applicable)

rather than tying all of these items to some arbitrary monetary value (I know that monetary value IS supposed to equate, in some fashion, to the cost of creating the item, but it's clear that the playing field isn't level in this world regarding currency values and it's equally clear, at least to me, that IT'S NOT CAUSED BY ANY INEFFICIENCY WITH THE AMERICAN WORKER!). Everything now is based on a "cost to create" basis (with the local currency value used as a multiplier). Get rid of the stupid multiplier and start comparing effort (apples to apples) instead!

Start valuing products based on man hours/machine hours and I'll side with the American worker EVERY TIME! At least it would provide a level playing field for every nation to be able to compete fairly ..... everything would shift to scales of efficiency and I think that is where the American worker shines.

yeah .... like that would happen ......

[Mountainman]

15. Yeh, like training an IT tech to make Mc Donald's fries.

[bobbolink]

16. Excellent point -- thank you for saying it how it is....

There seems to be more and more anger with Dems for this kind of spinelessness.

Shall we take bets on whether it will turn the party around while there's still a party to turn?

[AZBlue]

19. I must respectfully disagree.

As for the phrase, "job retraining" - yeah, that's lame.

But, if what is meant by that is a focus on computer literacy, technical careers and basic math & science skills, that is sorely needed in this country. Our education system has quickly fallen behind on a global scale because we ignore these programs. The country's education curriculum hasn't had a major overhaul since the 1950s! That "whole new technology" you speak of will continue to go abroad until we can understand it and create it ourselves (and once corporate off-shore loopholes are sealed, but that's another rant).

And, if there were programs to educate adults in these areas and catch them up to current technology (that didn't even exist when they were in school), they would be able to leave their "do you want fries with that?" jobs to higher-paying, more rewarding positions. Most of these programs would be aimed at the lower income individuals who don't have access to computers on a daily (or even sporadic) basis - so how can they even get a job as a data entry operator (something that would pay double of a McJob)?

Technology and the workplace changes rapidly now - previous generations learned what they needed in school when they were young and things didn't change all that much during their lifetime. Today, what you know now will be obsolete in 5 years. If you don't have the means to keep up with that (reading, taking classes, going online, etc), you're out of luck - and probably out of a job. We must make those means available to everyone, to give everyone the same chances.

[bluerum]

33. There are plenty of training programs available. But there are no

jobs for people once they finish spending $15,000 on the training.

This training scam is an industry in itself. Certifications programs sponsored by software and hardware manufacturers train people to use and maintain products that will be obsolete in 5 years. And the cycle continues.

[AZBlue]

57. Oh, those are not the "training programs" I'm talking about.

That's just a for-profit school making money.

[bluerum]

63. But these are the "training programs" that are replacing real

education.

Why teach basic math and science, when as the urban legend goes, all people need to do is re-tool themselves every four or five years.

[HughBeaumont]

20. The retraining argument misses the boat on MANY aspects.

Today's MBA is soon becoming as valuable as yesterday's HS diploma. So many people are getting their MBAs not simply for the purpose of bettering themselves, but for the purpose of remaining employable. There's going to come a time where a bachelors degree, which takes enough time and sacrifice to complete, simply isn't going to be enough. Frankly, it really isn't enough now. When does THAT stop?

What do you say to people like my cousin, who this August had to take a buyout from Packard Electric, which will last him only so long, or risk getting laid off for good because the plant will close? He has nothing other than a high school diploma. It's naive to think that at 35, he and his SO can just go to community college and start over. What would they do? Where would they get the money, go into more debt? Where would the experience come from?

They didn't used to have to worry about this sort of thing before. It used to be that we were able to gainfully employ people who aren't meant for college; these people were our industrial and manufacturing base and they built the quality products we used and bought. A strong economy should be capable of employing EVERYone at a fair wage regardless of education level, and when you cannot do that, all the talking points in the world aint'a gonna mask the reality that you do NOT have any such economy on your watch.

And this "re-training" crapola? To quote a line from Ed Wood: "It's horseshit, Eddie". Say you get laid off of a career and have to go and re-train for a new one. What are you going to pick that can't be offshored/inshored? Do you got a few years to put your life on hold while you GET this training, as in enough cash to pay the bills, put food on the table and a roof overhead?

Here's another thing they ain't seeing - how can you predict that the career you choose to retrain in won't be following it's predecessor overseas? Not to mention that the practice only works if your competition cannot do the exact same thing. What do they think, that Indians and Chinese DON'T have access to the same universities and opportunities we have? They can get the same degrees we can get. They have THOUSANDS that already HAVE the same degrees we have to get. And they will always, always ALWAYS be cheaper. Gonna get your Ph.D in math? Guaranteed there's already 100 Indians or Chinese or whoever that have them and are vying for your position.

ALL offshoring should be stopped until you have several new emerging technologies for the displaced to assimilate to. Oh wait, that TOO can't happen: nano-, bio- and whatever-o-tech is already getting the jumpstart in Asia and India, all because our government would rather appease a bunch of toupeed wackjobs with crosses instead of help mankind progress.

Think this isn't a foolproof plan by the wealthy, corporations and colleges to keep the middle class, poor and all of us 99%ers in "our station" for life? They don't want you NEAR their country club. A powerless, uneducated, fearful and divided work force is an OBEDIENT work force. And it's simply sad beyond belief that DEMOCRATS fall for this very Republican and regressive way of conducting business.

[Stinky The Clown]

22. Excellent, thoughtful, well written, and spot on!

Thank you. :thumbsup:

[FormerDittoHead]

21. Get me started! Kicking and recommending... n/t

[welshTerrier2]

23. the corporate state ...

for starters, i'd refer you to my FDR thread ... your post is dead on the money to its main message ...

and i'd tell anyone reading this thread to read this article that discusses the exact issue raised in the OP ...

what's at stake here is so elementary that it sounds too simplistic ... what's at stake is whether our institutions, specifically commerce and government, are going to function to serve all the people or whether "we the people" are going to let them serve the wealthiest and most powerful among us ...

within the Democratic Party, many seem to accept the premise that sometimes, in the give and take of the marketplace, some of us don't make out too well and we, as Democrats, should "repair" the damage done to the weakest among us ... the focus is "on helping the victims" more than it is in de-powering the abusers ... the greed, the exploitation and the abuses are allowed to continue because they are "inevitable" outputs of commerce ... globalization, capitalism (as defined in the next sentence and mergers and acquisitions to create economies of scale are all viewed as the inevitable costs of efficient commerce ... capitalism, in this context, is defined as the acceptance that investor capital is ultimately the most important constituency in a corporation's hierarchy of "stakeholders" ... if employees can be terminated or cheaper employees can be hired or unions can be blocked or banned, these are viewed positively IF such actions benefit the stockholders ... the message is that the employees, like the desks and the chairs and the wastebaskets, are merely assets to be manipulated in the pursuit of shareholder gains ... if that doesn't define class warfare i don't know what does ...

so, one class of Democrats sees their mission as fighting to protect the working classes with certain amenities ... they offer minimum wage; they offer unemployment insurance; they offer OSHA; they offer the Family Medical Leave Act; and so on ... all excellent programs to be sure ... they see themselves as "pro worker" by pushing this agenda ...

but these same workers suffer emotional harm as they are terminated for shareholder gains at one job after the next ... these same workers see their jobs shipped to Mexico or India or China or the Philippines ... corporate decision makers merge with other companies to benefit the shareholders and jobs are eliminated ... whole towns heavily dependent on a single employer are destroyed as the manufacturing plant is moved to Mexico for cheaper labor ... globalization is inevitable we are told ... America cannot isolate itself from the global economy we are told ... yeah, tell that to someone whose company just moved to China ... why should they be worried about "isolating America from the global economy"?

companies that move jobs overseas should be crushed by the US government ... how about making all of the company's executives get the hell out of the US? how about eliminating the "stockholder's tax discount (i.e. capital gains discount) on that company's stock? why should the US government provide a tax incentive for investors who invest in a company that puts the screws to American workers?

so, somewhere out there, whether we use rhetoric like putting an end to capitalist abuses or overthrowing the corporate state or any other "lefty" rhetoric, we need to start demanding of the "People's Party" (i'd like to think this is the Democratic Party), that our government and our representatives make it very clear that we are no longer going to tolerate a state of affairs where shareholder tyranny dominates the best interests of American workers ... and when I say "workers", I do not mean just manufacturing workers or low-level, low-paid workers or even just union members; I mean every single American who works ... workers first; shareholders second ... American companies should put the needs of workers ahead of all other interest groups ... when we can earn a good living, a secure living, a respected living, then and only then can this country fulfill its promise to all its citizens ... to allow lives to be crushed by companies catering to the shareholder classes is a path that should lead to the storming of the Bastille and beheadings in the town squares ...

and in that spirit, I say kudos to the OP ... "worker retraining" is a symptom of a badly broken system; it is not the cure that is needed ... it's time for Democrats to stand up for ALL workers and recognize that the interests of ALL workers is a higher priority that catering to capital enhancement in someone's portfolio ... no amount of equity risk should be valued more than the toil of a worker ... it is time for the Democratic Party to change its focus from "repairing the damage" to making genuine, pro-worker changes to the economic model that oppresses them ...

[newportdadde]

26. Its all about H1Bs

[Deja Q]

48. Importing people here, to train and give them free room&board, then to

ship 'em back when done.

It's not about building this country. George Macaca Allen can claim that all he wants while insulting the same people he wants to bring over for a limited time only...

But, the voters want it and the world wants it because nothing's changed yet. (Oh, don't get too smug about November yet... )

[cascadiance]

27. They can instead vote to take out the removal of H1-B visa cap...

that's part of the McCain guest worker bill that they are all lined up to support. The Dems, if they really want to show leadership in proposing what they would do about immigration in 2007, really need to come up with a third alternative to the two lame Republican bills going through congress now. One that penalizes employers of illegal immigrants HEAVILY with big fines AND jail time for violations, and empower these employers with bulletproof right to work status papers for individuals so they don't have any excuses if they break the law. As Thom Hartmann would say, we have an "illegal employment" problem, not an "illegal immigrant" problem on our hands. Perhaps even call the bill that, "the illegal employment bill" when sending it through congress, and hopefully with a majority in 2007 to get it passed, and force Bush to either sign it or show his colors in his veto.

The Dems need to get some spine and do more than follow the scripts that corporate America is providing for them that don't serve us at all but just try to "herd the sheep"!

[European Socialist]

28. The real problem is "winner take all"--The Economic plan of the ruling....

classes who can see to it that they are winners.

[Gregorian]

30. We had our golden opportunity.

It's Clinton's fault that we ended up with a huge surplus. And it was at that moment when we SHOULD HAVE done something with it.

China just spent on their infrastructure what we spent on Iraq.

This is a top down process. It's not like mass transportation doesn't exist. What doesn't exist is the leadership.

Here's a tiny example. There is a fantastic rail that runs from San Francisco to Eureka, California. This could serve a multitude of purposes. But this realitively unknown bit of rail system is not only neglected, as I have personally noted, but the land easements are literally being sold off! WTF? I have to scratch my head on this one. Especially since in several towns there are brand spanking knew train stations. And for what? That rail will never carry another train.

It's as though America has just committed suicide.

But you know what? Around 1970 I noticed that even when Subaru was starting to sell it's little car (which has an engine the size of most motorcycles that are being sold today), America was hurdling through space with it's mighty V8's, like there would be no tomorrow. I kept waiting to see when the smart people would begin engineering for a newer, more efficient world. But instead, the tug of war pulled the Subaru's of the automotive world into our car crazed culture. And before long, here came the monster Japanese vehicles. This was around the time when we decided not to adopt the metric system. Well, we did adopt it. In secret. The automotive engineers use the metric system. They have to. The parts are manufactured by other countries. And everyone but us, and I believe Somalia, use the metric system.

We'd (meaning those in power) would rather fight (using us as targets) than switch.

If we'd only been conservative. Well, that's what the liberal thinkers were thinking. Conservatives were in the clouds. Big ideas. Like the Contras. And Iraq. But those were only symptoms.

So now are we going to treat the cause? Time is up. And we spent our wad. I guess I'm not very optimistic. I see third world America, right around the corner. Not mass transportation. Not a booming alternative energy infrastructure. I would love to be wrong. And there are a lot of brilliant engineers out there. The technology is finally here. But not the leadership.

[Gman]

31. Up until the Great Revolution of 2000 this would be a timely topic

However, the shipping of jobs overseas has rendered training for future jobs irrelevant.

[UDenver20]

32. Then smack me....

There are a billion people in China who will work for less than an American will.

There are a billion people in India who will work for less than an American will.

So I'm supposed to pay 1,000 people $200 a day to manufacture something here when I can pay 10,000 people $20 a day to manufacture 10 times the product AT THE SAME COST? You're nuts.

It costs less to ship raw materials to Asia, pay someone cheaply (or, very well, from their perspective), and then to ship them back to the US (or to wherever those American companies might be selling the widgets to) than it does to conduct manufacturing operations right here in the US.

You think that's going to change? Don't count on it. Look at the numbers. Study demographics. Take a course in macro-economics.

More Americans need to GO TO school. More Americans need to GO BACK TO school. We need to be graduating more scientists. More engineers. More mathmaticians. More Doctors. More Lawyers. More Geneticists. More HIGH-END-SERVICE-SECTOR-PROFESSIONALS.

That's where our economy is heading... Its as obvious as Wile-E-Coyote being blown up by his own dynomite. Hell, we're almost there already...

We need to invest our money in elevating the credentials of our work-force... educating, re-educating, and further-educating EVERYONE... so we can become (and stay) a leader in those new technology economies (hybrid cars, bio-tech break-throughs, etc.).

Job retraining is the plan. It is the solution. Certainly not the plan of the GOP, but unfortunately not of the Democrats either... Not to bring back the crappy manufacturing jobs - but to grow the higher paying service sector.

But wait... The Indians and the Chinese are already beating us to the punch - they're already graduating scientists, engineers, and mathmatecians faster than we are (per capita - which means that together they're graduating SEVEN high-end medical, technological, or scientific professionals for every ONE we graduate)? Why? Because we're spending all our time whining about how we don't want to be retrained.

[European Socialist]

35. why retrain for something that third world people can do cheaper?

It is my government's job to keep the standard of living at a decent level. It's just as important as military protection.

[praeclarus]

37. a couple of minor disagreements...

One is that your argument for paying 10,000 people $20 per day
to manufacture 10 times whatever crap you are manufacturing
applies doubly so to the types of jobs you say nobody wants
to retrain to do. And there are no real costs to shipping
any raw materials in this case.

It is fair to say that in the US, colleges are cranking out
lawyers and MBAs at an alarming rate at the expense, if you
will, of things like engineers. It's all about follow
the money. Hence the need to import skilled workers via the
H1B route. But why bother importing a person from India with
an H1B when she can do her thing over there?

Two is that who is going to buy the 10 times whatever crap
you are manufacturing? The sweat shop workers won't, it takes
all their wages to eat and pay rent in the company living
quarters.

[UDenver20]

55. good points...

Nice to know there's someone else out there who can appreciate the perspective.

Honestly, if I had to rebut, I'd probably say the following - but your points are very well received.

#1: Okay, so imagine that productivity increases by a factor of 8, or 7, or 5 or even 3 (because of outsourcing to lower wage markets) - that'd still enough to increase profit AND cover shipping of both raw materials and/or finished goods - and have a champaign breakfast.

#2:
Also, consider that many of those finished goods are consumed by markets elsewhere anyway - which answers your question about who would consume those products (and the question you didn't ask about what it would cost to ship finished goods back to the US). Those growing economies (which includes lots of other countries, too - not just Indian and China) are consumers, too. So are the other 4 billion people around the world. Maybe not for high-end goods, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about low-end manufacturing. Yeah, lots of Chinese and Indians are living in crapsville - but their GDPs are growing a lot faster than ours is. That's got an impact on their buying habits - even if its only with a small (but increasing) demographic.


Our real competitor isn't going to be China - its going to be India. Why? because they're the ones making a run at where we are going to be (service-sector). China is the one making a run for where we were (manufacturing).

[fujiyama]

53. I don't know about graduating more lawyers

We already have plenty of those ;)

But I agree the country is simply not putting enough resources in such things as basic literacy/writing, and science and math education.

Of course this current government doesn't give a shit about any of those things, so none of that is changing anytime soon.

I also have no idea how the government can stop outsourcing of jobs. Corporations hold way too much sway for that. A few of the lower skill customer service jobs may end up back here (call center jobs for example) due to complaints over tech support (I believe Dell moved a few back here for that reason), but I expect many other skilled engineering and technical positions will continue to flow out of the country, as long as they're cheaper and provide a larger supply of those positions (even if 25% or so those that are hired overseas are not competant, they're still so cheap it won't matter).

[HughBeaumont]

59. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaand what are they going to graduate IN to, pray tell?

It's amazing . .. your first two sentences contradict the remainder of your post. And they're not even correct sentences, realistically.

It's not that the Chinese and Indians WILL work for less than an American can . .. it's that they CAN (often time, forced TO) work for less than an American can. The reality is that if our wage was the exact same as that of an Indian, Russian or Chinese, Americans would literally be living in cardboard boxes, wouldn't be able to eat but one meal a day and would be working until the day we died. And that's in mid-market areas - forget big cities or their suburbs.

Like our foreign counterparts, we get paid just enough to eke out a less-than-comfortable living; I'm saying they're cheaper to the robber-baron business owner - even if he's paying someone in Bangalore $8-11 dollars an hour, he's making out like a bandit and so is the Indian worker. Pay US that, and we're walking to work and living in the Parent's Basement Arms for life.

Fighting an education deficit is not our only problem. Fighting population and currency deficits ARE. And that's only part of it.

The first fallacy of your argument is the assumption that every American is mentally, psychologically, financially ready and time equipped to "retrain". "Re-training" isn't a matter of simply taking courses at a Community College; it requires YEARS of hourly and financial investment, often investment the individual does not monetarily have at his/her disposal. Time spent learning a new/bettering yourself at your current career is time spent away from your family, loved ones and yourself. Ever think that some of us just want to work and that's THAT?

Also, what about the people who are just flat out not meant to GO to college? Much as you don't want to think about it, not everyone in this country has the intelligence to go into the sectors you described. Some are meant for factories. Some are meant to work with their hands. These were the people that used to go directly from HS to the manufacturing and industrial sectors. Do we just say "sorry for your genetic shortcomings, better luck next life?" to these people? Those "crappy manufacturing jobs" once brought those people without many white-collar prospects for whatever reason a decent living and benefits, and for usually a long time.

It's not a matter of just saying, "well damn it, why don't they get SMARTER??" If an economy is not able to accommodate people of ALL skill levels and brain power, then is that economic model really to be considered strong and effective? China's able to (albeit under slavery conditions and corporate exploitation). Why can't we? America doesn't NEED 130 million nanotechnologists, genetic engineers and small business owners. For your plan to work, there must BE Industries for the incoming students to compete for HERE in AMERICA. Where are they? They're all relocating R&D, lab work, programming, engineering, etc, offshore. WHY? Because the Indians and Chinese ARE CHEAPER, as you said in your first two sentences.

Then there's the whole prospect of GOING to school. The process of getting a degree is PAINFUL; ask anyone who has to come from a 9-to-12 hour workday and has to spend 1-3 MORE hours in a night class, then has to do whatever super-involved project or homework assignment they're doled out for that class. I have to do this and frankly I'm DREADING it. School bored the living shit out of me and this isn't going to be any different. So why am I doing it? Because I HAVE to. Not because I WANT to. Because I HAVE to. An MBA . . . just to remain employable, and that's the reality of what most people face when they have to go back to school. That's another thing. I'm not sure of the numbers, but hasn't the number of people taking MBAs in something increased 1,000-fold from 15 years ago? With each person that gets the same MBA you get (and with each 100 Indians and Chinese per 1 American) that's vying for the same career/position you are, you're not anything special anymore. You don't stand out. Today's MBA is slowly becoming yesterday's bachelor's. And where does this leave the people with only a HS diploma looking for a bachelors? Where are THEY going to get in the door? Still think degrees are the answer?

Why did it come down to this?

Do we keep playing this never-ending game of employee musical chairs? When does the continual "retraining" stop before burnout, depression and unhappiness take over? Your job is not your life.

Incidentally, the Indians and Chinese got the jump on us because the Government is spending all of our cash on this bullshit oil war. The military gets over HALF of the Discretionary Budget each year, while everything else gets the plug nickel. It's not because we're whining. I think it's because they're more inclined to toss all of their money into the Pentagon Dumpster and to also appease a bunch of inbred Rapture Rightists than making some actual progress. This "blame the worker" bullshit has to end.

[Hippo_Tron]

60. Also doesn't help that we're spending all of our money on weapons

Instead of on the education necessary to retrain these people.

[robcon]

34. I support job retraining

The manufacturing jobs are not coming back. We nee job retraining and better educated workers.

[Vincardog]

38. REtrain for WHAT JOB? The major benefit of re training goes to

the re trainers, not the students. It is governments job to provide for the common good. While China can sell their goods here with a 2.5 % tariff we are charges a 25% tariff to sell into their market. Note to all you flat earthers out there, you want to hire all those starving peasants in China for $20/day

You should be paying an equal tariff for selling your goods here.

FREE Trade is not FAIR or FREE

And even get me started on the environmental aspects of the corrupt race for the bottom low wage conservative economic plan.

[w4rma]

40. robcon doesn't know. He's just memorized a talking point.

Besides, I believe that robcon is Australian so he seemingly has no real reason to support the *American* worker.

[robcon]

42. Your economics are lousy, and your politics are reactionary, IMO

The increase in imports has increased the well-being of Americans tremendously.

Only a true reactionary would write: "The next Dem who speaks about 'job retraining' will get smacked"

[Stinky The Clown]

44. Here's a picture that may help you place your values in their proper

perspective. It is a recently shot picture of our plant from wherever it is you're standing right now.

[Vincardog]

65. How the hell has the increase in imports increased the well-being of

Americans? I am not willing to trade well paid American Jobs for cheap chinese imports. The only ones that are helped by "Free Trade" are parasitic corporations. They are exploiting workers as cheaply as possible, destroying the environment for a short term profit and shirking their responsibilities at every turn.

[Protagoras]

39. Sure you've built cars or worked a mine for 30 years but hey!

Being a greeter at Wal-Mart can be an exciting NEW CAREER for you as you struggle to make it to 80.

Fine that your manufacturing job paid 50K a year working 45 hours a week and was stable for 20+ years...but now you can have the joy of working for industries that change or go belly up every 5-7 years.

Oh the excitement of constant retraining...which is just the thing your older mind is equipped to do. While you're at it why not pick up those 2 or 3 new languages and that calculus class you weren't quite up to learning when you were a youngin...after all, no fool learns like an old fool.

Oh the joys of Friedman's new Flat Earth...something has to be squashed down and guess who that's gonna be.

[Joanne98]

41. All the people who went back to school FIVE OR SIX TIMES!

Will be more than happy to SMACK THEM!

[OzarkDem]

45. No investment in hi tech research

means there are no good paying new fields for people to be trained for.

We can't live on a service economy without losing the middle class.

Retraining for better paying jobs will only be useful when there are new, good paying jobs available that require higher skill levels. That's going to take a while, since Bush and the GOP Congress took away all the funding for research and removed the tax incentives that rewarded investment in new technology.

I would certainly hope Dem candidates have done better research to know this. If they're relying on DLC talking points, well, I wish them luck, they won't get far.

[robcon]

46. It's not high tech research that will solve the problem.

High tech research is a part of the solution, but the key variable is education.

Only 50% of blacks and less than 50% of Hispanics graduate from high school.

The oft-repeated statistic that black men are more likely to be in jail or probation than in college in their 20's is a major part of the problem.

Education/training is the only effective solution to increase productivity = increased job prospects = economic growth.

[Deja Q]

49. And an educated populace is a dangerous thing. Reasons are threefold:

1. Thinking is not liked when it comes to authority and conformity.

2. Educated people are far less likely to breed at ridiculously and gratuitously high rates. Who's going to be the army to defend what's going on...?

3. ...Assuming people want to defend the US, and on a certain shallow level it's clear people DO see what's going on, which is why they refuse to sign up. They know it's a farce. Don't expect them to adjust to any paradigm, however. The "dog eat dog" paradigm will only grow worse with time. That's the trouble with societies that try to breed out the concept of "community". They end up not having enough people believing they want to serve their country. They have only themselves to blame for the covert decimation of society.

I will conjecture that once the crash hits, people will want to sign up. Only for a comparatively quick death. Or they'll kill (or dumpster dive for food) on the streets and hope they get locked up in jail, where they get free room and board and food until shipped off to die in some country made to hate us (which is basically most of them at this point... :think: )

[unlawflcombatnt]

50. Right On

Excellent post.

You're right on with your assessment of the "retraining" myth. The only "retraining" that will keep jobs in the U.S. is "retraining" American workers to live on $2/day, like their slave-labor competition.

The "improved training and education" fantasy is just a cop-out to allow unfair free trade practices to continue unabated. We're not losing any jobs because of lack of education or insufficient skills. We're losing jobs because impoverished foreign workers will do those same jobs for a fraction of what Americans will, and because the Federal government continues to subsidize the transfer of American jobs to overseas sweat shops where labor is dirt cheap.

:yourock:


unlawflcombatnt

EconomicPopulistCommentary

EconomicPatriotForum

___________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."

[many a good man]

51. Can I be an angry clown, too?

Love your thought-provoking posts, H2S.

The only problem with globalization is that it has globalized corporations. Its globalized them so much they are no longer "American." Why do we direct our tax policy and industrial policy to support corporations that are no longer "American?" Their interests are no longer synonymous with the interests of our country.

Maybe the Democratic party should turn our backs on big corporations and become the party of small business (and workers). Revoke all trade agreements that harm small biz and workers. Return all campaign $$$ from corporations. Ban campaign TV ads and force broadcast stations to televise debates.

Retraining money can go to helping people learn how to run their own small business. Stop H1B visas and spend the dough retraining American tech workers. Send deserving middle and lower class kids to college. Start taking the Full Employment Act seriously.

[Stinky The Clown]

52. I've made a similar argument with respect to 'corporations'

That's become a catch-all phrase intended by many on our side to denote the bad actors of the globalization set.

I'd love to see our small and micro corporations favored with targeted help and incentives. For example, think of that pickup truck with two guys in it and some magnetic landscaping company sign on the side. Chances are, its some very small time entrepreneur and the trailer on the back with the mowers and edgers is his entire equipment fleet. Chances are high he's a corporation, too. And the kid on the passenger side, along with the guy's wife, are the only 'human resources' he has besides himself.

Or think of the guy who's father built a small tool and die shop to make stuff for the now-gone auto industry. The son has started making ..... widgets of value to some other industry. He's retooled and hired a cracker jack salesman - on full commission - to sell what he makes. If he's successful, he can hire maybe 10 skilled workers and a half dozen semi- or unskilled workers to help the business grow. In a good year, he'll do $2M in gross, take home a hundred and twenty K for himself, and keep 30 other families off welfare or unemployment.

THOSE are the corporations we need to be helping.

[many a good man]

54. Winning over small business owners

should be a top priority. Right now they hate liberals because they think we're responsible only for imposing regulations, fees, and senseless paper work on them. Maybe they'd like us better if we helped them out. Let's pay their workers' health insurance, number one. Tax breaks for creating new jobs. Loans to expand their business.

I think semantics is not the problem. People think of corporations as big and small business as small. The Fortune 500 has added ZERO net new jobs to the economy in the past 30 years (look it up). We shouldn't be helping THEM. All job growth has come from small and midsize businesses.

America is supposed to be the bastion of capitalism so I am always amazed when I travel to Europe and see the millions of small, family-owned businesses. Here, we have franchises, chains, and big boxes. I'd much rather spend my money supporting a community business than some huge distant heartless corporation. Don't you think most people feel this way? How can we make it a reality?

[Stinky The Clown]

56. "Don't you think most people feel this way? How can we make it a reality?"

For openers, we can stop vilifying those who ought to be our kindred souls.

You'd be amazed (or maybe not) at what comes up when you use the word 'capitalist'.

Those people you cite - small business owners - see themselves as capitalists. Call out the megacorps who *are* stealing our country bit by bit and the small buiness owner thinks you mean him, too.

[many a good man]

58. I wasn't using "capitalist" in a pejorative way

I'm surprised you read it that way. I think my post was making the point that small-scale capitalism is good and should be encouraged, or at least given preference over the "megacorps." Good political leadership should point out the difference between the two.

Americans are motivated by fairness. They can see how the system benefits the large corporations at the expense of everything else. People are thirsting for a political party that fights for them and is on their side. I think if Democrats can make this their priority we can turn this country around.

___
On edit: upon re-reading your response I see you were making a more general statement. I agree with you completely. Democrats saved capitalism once (FDR) and now its time to save it again.

[Stinky The Clown]

61. I didn't mean you, personally. I'm sorry it was read that way.

I was agreeing with you and suggesting a way to move forward on what I assumed you posed as a rhetorical question, not a literal one.

We're in full agreement and I'm glad you saw it the way it was intended. :thumbsup:

[alvarezadams]

62. 50-50

Multinationals are no longer "American". Yet of all the nations on earth, what country is so willing and able to be used as a tool by multinationals?

That's the crux of the biscuit. Presence and ownership everywhere - but the US government provides the support they need to enforce monopolies.

[mcscajun]

64. Retraining, Ha!

Tell that to older, college-educated, IT workers who heard Bush talk about "retraining" at community colleges. All the retraining in the world won't let middle-aged, formerly high-paid IT workers compete in a market where younger workers will work for half, and foreign workers, especially Indian workers, will work for a 1/4 to a 1/3 of what they made.

Many account for the long-term unemployed, and the UNDERemployed. Look Around, read the newspaper stories, talk to the checker at the local supermarket, the waitress at a favorite restaurant, or the patient intake desk at the doctor's office; chances are, one of them used to work in IT.

I echo many others on this thread: retrain for WHAT Jobs? X-Rays are being read overseas, accounting and tax returns are being remotely transmitted from overseas "white-collar sweatshops". Your order at the drive-thru window at McDonald's is being answered in some windowless cubicle far from the steam tray and heat lamps that hold what passes for food. And yes, some former IT worker is burning your fries behind the counter.

All the retraining in the world won't be of any use unless there are Livable-wage jobs for older workers at the end of it. There aren't, and you can tell there aren't by the crunch faced this past year by teenagers looking for entry-level, part-time, and summer jobs. They've had to compete with their parent's and grandparent's generation of unemployed and underemployed.

I agree - Slap the bastards silly who talk of retraining as the solution. Tax policies that encourage domestic employment are the solution. Until and unless tax incentives exist to keep jobs here, until and unless tax loopholes that allow evasion or reduction of taxes for income made offshore are radically changed or eliminated, no posturing, no editorializing, no petitions or stockholders resolutions will change the situation. Capital flows to where the most profit can be made; change the profit equation, and you'll change corporate behavior. Carrot and stick is the answer, and while we're at it, it's way past time to raise the income tax rate on the wealthy in this country; even Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, two of the richest men in America, agree with that.

70% *would* do *quite* nicely. During the Great Depression and World War II, the top income tax rate rose, reaching 91% during the war; this top rate remained in effect until 1964.

1964 - the top rate was decreased to 70%, and then to 50% in 1981.
1986 - the top rate was reduced to 28%.

During the 1990s the top rate rose again, standing at 39.6% by the end of the decade.

2001 the top rate was cut to 35%.

I think we have some room here for a big increase in the highest marginal tax rate. Of course, the rich (except for those I mentioned above and a few others like them) would vehemently disagree.

[loyalsister]

66. or.........

The call for single payer health care so that people can start their own businesses, go to school, invent stuff, or otherwise work it out.