Where have our wages gone?

[Peter1469]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.


Many theories have been advanced for why unions, and median wages, aren't growing very fast. Some say there's a causal link, which runs something like this: The Reagan administration gutted union protections, making it harder to organize workers. Without a powerful union to represent them, workers were at the mercy of greedy bosses who ruthlessly forced down their wage packets. What America needs, therefore, is a powerful labor movement, protected by more powerful laws that favor organizing of employees.


It's an obviously attractive story, both because it gives us a nice, satisfying morality tale and because it offers a (relatively) easy policy solution. But there's a little problem with this story: How, then, do you explain the fate of the United Automobile Workers employees at General Motors? Theirs was a very powerful union, one that managed to stave off a lot of job-threatening changes. And thanks to that power, the union was able to mobilize politicians to get them a much better deal out of GM's bankruptcy than they probably would have gotten in a more normal proceeding. What they weren't able to do was save the old wage structure. Old workers still have some semblance of the old package, but new workers make substantially less. Meanwhile, there are a lot fewer of them than there used to be. In the 1970s, GM employed nearly a half million auto workers (https://books.google.com/books?id=XUqntww3yggC&pg=PT208&lpg=PT208&dq=gm+employed+half+a+million+auto+workers&source=bl&ots=nHHPqpqUuR&sig=Qi897-xHl-8ztSOxwF35GBuoVcM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Lt8JVZfsCsybgwS3hIRI&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=gm%20employed%20half%20a%20million%20auto%20work ers&f=false). Today, that number is more like a tenth of that.


What happened? The same thing that happened to workers across this great land of ours: competition from machines and competition from abroad. GM now has robots doing a lot of the work that used to be done by hand. It also faces a lot more competition than it did in those happy days when the Big Three automakers had virtually total control over the U.S. market. The company that once sold half of all the cars on American roads now commands less than 20 percent of the domestic market.



Read more at the link above.

[Crepitus]

We've had this discussion before, and in this case its pretty clear that the easy answer is at least mostly correct. All you have to do is look at corporate profits vs average wages.

[Redrose]

A big chunk of my paycheck just went to PUBLIX supermarket. Food prices are outrageous.

9.75% in sales tax added on hurts even more.

[Crepitus]

A big chunk of my paycheck just went to PUBLIX supermarket. Food prices are outrageous.

9.75% in sales tax added on hurts even more.
There's definitely some truth there as well.

[del]

sales tax on food?

yikes, we don't even do that in massachusetts

[Redrose]

sales tax on food?

yikes, we don't even do that in massachusetts


My tax on my food bill was $41.28. That is for two weeks worth of food and sundries. I remember in 1970, my entire weekly food bill for my husband and myself and two big dogs, was $35.00.

[Peter1469]

We've had this discussion before, and in this case its pretty clear that the easy answer is at least mostly correct. All you have to do is look at corporate profits vs average wages.

So what part of the article do you refute? And why.

All of it, because, is not an acceptable response.

[Peter1469]

My tax on my food bill was $41.28. That is for two weeks worth of food and sundries. I remember in 1970, my entire weekly food bill for my husband and myself and two big dogs, was $35.00.

What state?

[Redrose]

Corporate profits. Yes, that's part of it. Look at gas prices as they relate to food prices. When gas shot up, food prices followed. The cost of doing business we are told. Trucking, and farming are directly affected by gas prices.

But gas has come down considerably, but food prices stayed up. We're suckers folks. We put up with this crap.

[gamewell45]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.



Read more at the link above.

Automation is cheaper then employing humans; always has been, always will be. Make no bones about it, the car manufacturers do not employ people because they feel they must be charitable to society, if they could automate the entire workforce 100% in order to maximize profits, they would. It's all about money. But they still need a human presence for now.

White collar unions have also taken a beating over the years since Reagan began his anti-union purge of the country of labor organizations; they were the high end of the workforce; companies jumped on the anti-union bandwagon and did their part to bust unions that were in the workplace for decades.

Unions bear some of the blame; particularly in the blue collar trade unions for failing to educate their membership and being inflexible when it came to improvements in technology.

When I first came into the workforce over 40 years ago, my medical, life, dental and other benefits were paid by the company 100%; we had real pensions and a 401.k plan as well and the company made a fortune. When I finally retired this year, those who weren't grandfathered had no pensions, paid 50% of the total cost of their benefits packages and now have to work to 65 since there are no more retiree benefits and they have to wait until they can start medicare (this doesn't apply to the unionized workforce who kept their benefits). The executives still get real pensions, 100% paid benefits and also get golden parachutes as well. The company makes even more now then ever.

Eventually it'll catch up to the country as people will have less to spend on purchasing items and credit card companies tighten up who gets credit and who doesn't. People will begin to have issues buying or even renting in some areas of the country due to the inability to afford housing; consumer purchases will drop off as people will have to spend a majority of their monies on basic staples such as food, utilities and other necessities. It's not unreasonable to suggest that petty crime will increase as well.

People from my generation (baby boomers) should be alright for the long haul since we own our houses, have real pensions, money saved up, company paid medical benefits, etc. It's the Generation X and Millennial generation and those who follow who are going to have to deal with this. It's not about what the government has or hasn't done, rather its what the businesses have done or haven't done which is going to be the cause of this whether we want to admit it or not.

[Peter1469]

Corporate profits. Yes, that's part of it. Look at gas prices as they relate to food prices. When gas shot up, food prices followed. The cost of doing business we are told. Trucking, and farming are directly affected by gas prices.

But gas has come down considerably, but food prices stayed up. We're suckers folks. We put up with this crap.

Post a link to corporate profits by industry so we can see how much we are being fleeced. Then we can really go off on those greedy bastards.

[Redrose]

Post a link to corporate profits by industry so we can see how much we are being fleeced. Then we can really go off on those greedy bastards.


I would love to, but I can't seem to post links from my ipad. I'm doing something wrong.

[Peter1469]

I don't know I-products.

Any time. No rush.

[Reason10]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.



Read more at the link above.

Free markets do not push wages down. Never has and never will.

[Crepitus]

So what part of the article do you refute? And why.

All of it, because, is not an acceptable response.
The downward pressure on wages was indeed partially created by the gutting of the unions. It is also a product of corporate greed. The threat of offshoring is always there in many industries. "Work for this or we'll just ship your job to china" is really used as a negotiating tactic (read threat) these days. If the unions had more support from the government such as tarrifs or taxes on goods made abroad by US companies and then reimported that wouldn't be happening.

[Peter1469]

Free markets do not push wages down. Never has and never will.What would a free market do to wages if it entered into a market where wages were artificially high?

I will give you 5 guesses. :smiley:

If you read the article I bet you can answer correctly.

On edit, I hope.

[Peter1469]

The downward pressure on wages was indeed partially created by the gutting of the unions. It is also a product of corporate greed. The threat of offshoring is always there in many industries. "Work for this or we'll just ship your job to china" is really used as a negotiating tactic (read threat) these days. If the unions had more support from the government such as tarrifs or taxes on goods made abroad by US companies and then reimported that wouldn't be happening.

You have the cart in front of the horse. A true free market is global (I allow for government intervention for dumping- term of art).

Once people actually read the article they will learn that prior to globalization American unions had a lot of power and artificially raised the wages and benefits to union workers. As free trade agreements opened up markets, those arraignments hurt American business.

People who claim to believe in free trade can't have it both ways. Do you want to allow our labor to drive up their benefits, or do you want to compete globally? Pick one.

[Redrose]

I don't know I-products.

Any time. No rush.


I'll figure it out, I'm not a quitter. lol

[Tahuyaman]

Actualy globalization is more simple than people think. Back in the 1950's and into the 1960's the rest of the world was still recovering from being decimated by WWII. American homeland was virtually untouched by the war. Our resources were used to do other things than rebuild our infrastructure. Then, we had a huge advantage over the rest of the world.

Now the rest of the world has recovered and can compete on our level.

Top it off with the fact that our labor force has been slowly but steadily dumbed down over the decades since WWII ended.

We can still compete, but with a much smaller talent pool than in decades past. Less people are carrying a bigger load of the burden.

[Mac-7]

Blaming corporations ignores the basic laws of supply and demand.

Free trade is causing American wages to decline, and so is the influx of foreign workers both legal and illegal.

No corporation controls those factors.

Those are decisions made by government.

Stupid government and stupid politicians.

[Crepitus]

You have the cart in front of the horse. A true free market is global (I allow for government intervention for dumping- term of art).

Once people actually read the article they will learn that prior to globalization American unions had a lot of power and artificially raised the wages and benefits to union workers. As free trade agreements opened up markets, those arraignments hurt American business.

People who claim to believe in free trade can't have it both ways. Do you want to allow our labor to drive up their benefits, or do you want to compete globally? Pick one.
So you're saying in order to compete we have to starve? I don't buy that. The wages in developing countries are artificially depressed, usually by unscrupulous business practices or government.

As far a dumoing goes, They are essentially dumping their excess labor on our economy and shouldn't be allowed to do so.

[Mac-7]

Actualy globalization is more simple than people think. Back in the 1950's and into the 1960's the rest of the world was still recovering from being decimated by WWII. American homeland was virtually untouched by the war. Our resources were used to do other things than rebuild our infrastructure. Then, we had a huge advantage over the rest of the world.

Now the rest of the world has recovered and can compete on our level.

Top it off with the fact that our labor force has been slowly but steadily dumbed down over the decades since WWII ended.

We can still compete, but with a much smaller talent pool than in decades past. Less people are carrying a bigger load of the burden.


True words.

[Peter1469]

No. What a silly conclusion.


So you're saying in order to compete we have to starve? I don't buy that. The wages in developing countries are artificially depressed, usually by unscrupulous business practices or government.

As far a dumoing goes, They are essentially dumping their excess labor on our economy and shouldn't be allowed to do so.

[Crepitus]

No. What a silly conclusion.
Then please explain what it is you are saying.

[Peter1469]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.

Many theories have been advanced for why unions, and median wages, aren't growing very fast. Some say there's a causal link, which runs something like this: The Reagan administration gutted union protections, making it harder to organize workers. Without a powerful union to represent them, workers were at the mercy of greedy bosses who ruthlessly forced down their wage packets. What America needs, therefore, is a powerful labor movement, protected by more powerful laws that favor organizing of employees.


It's an obviously attractive story, both because it gives us a nice, satisfying morality tale and because it offers a (relatively) easy policy solution. But there's a little problem with this story: How, then, do you explain the fate of the United Automobile Workers employees at General Motors? Theirs was a very powerful union, one that managed to stave off a lot of job-threatening changes. And thanks to that power, the union was able to mobilize politicians to get them a much better deal out of GM's bankruptcy than they probably would have gotten in a more normal proceeding. What they weren't able to do was save the old wage structure. Old workers still have some semblance of the old package, but new workers make substantially less. Meanwhile, there are a lot fewer of them than there used to be. In the 1970s, GM employed nearly a half million auto workers (https://books.google.com/books?id=XUqntww3yggC&pg=PT208&lpg=PT208&dq=gm+employed+half+a+million+auto+workers&source=bl&ots=nHHPqpqUuR&sig=Qi897-xHl-8ztSOxwF35GBuoVcM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Lt8JVZfsCsybgwS3hIRI&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=gm employed half a million auto workers&f=false). Today, that number is more like a tenth of that.


What happened? The same thing that happened to workers across this great land of ours: competition from machines and competition from abroad. GM now has robots doing a lot of the work that used to be done by hand. It also faces a lot more competition than it did in those happy days when the Big Three automakers had virtually total control over the U.S. market. The company that once sold half of all the cars on American roads now commands less than 20 percent of the domestic market.



Read more at the link above.






Then please explain what it is you are saying.

[gamewell45]

Blaming corporations ignores the basic laws of supply and demand.

Free trade is causing American wages to decline, and so is the influx of foreign workers both legal and illegal.

No corporation controls those factors.

Those are decisions made by government.

Stupid government and stupid politicians.

Corporations hire the legals; small businessmen hire the illegals. The government doesn't force them to hire anyone.

[Bob]

My tax on my food bill was $41.28. That is for two weeks worth of food and sundries. I remember in 1970, my entire weekly food bill for my husband and myself and two big dogs, was $35.00.

I picked up some food items tonight. Spent $33.98 and no taxes to CA.

All of it is food.

[Crepitus]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.

Many theories have been advanced for why unions, and median wages, aren't growing very fast. Some say there's a causal link, which runs something like this: The Reagan administration gutted union protections, making it harder to organize workers. Without a powerful union to represent them, workers were at the mercy of greedy bosses who ruthlessly forced down their wage packets. What America needs, therefore, is a powerful labor movement, protected by more powerful laws that favor organizing of employees.


It's an obviously attractive story, both because it gives us a nice, satisfying morality tale and because it offers a (relatively) easy policy solution. But there's a little problem with this story: How, then, do you explain the fate of the United Automobile Workers employees at General Motors? Theirs was a very powerful union, one that managed to stave off a lot of job-threatening changes. And thanks to that power, the union was able to mobilize politicians to get them a much better deal out of GM's bankruptcy than they probably would have gotten in a more normal proceeding. What they weren't able to do was save the old wage structure. Old workers still have some semblance of the old package, but new workers make substantially less. Meanwhile, there are a lot fewer of them than there used to be. In the 1970s, GM employed nearly a half million auto workers (https://books.google.com/books?id=XUqntww3yggC&pg=PT208&lpg=PT208&dq=gm+employed+half+a+million+auto+workers&source=bl&ots=nHHPqpqUuR&sig=Qi897-xHl-8ztSOxwF35GBuoVcM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Lt8JVZfsCsybgwS3hIRI&ved=0CEcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=gm employed half a million auto workers&f=false). Today, that number is more like a tenth of that.


What happened? The same thing that happened to workers across this great land of ours: competition from machines and competition from abroad. GM now has robots doing a lot of the work that used to be done by hand. It also faces a lot more competition than it did in those happy days when the Big Three automakers had virtually total control over the U.S. market. The company that once sold half of all the cars on American roads now commands less than 20 percent of the domestic market.



Read more at the link above.
I already read that Pete. It still says in order to compete we have to starve. What does it say to you?

[Common]

That article is disengenuous on more than one level. The auto unions had nothing to do with the american auto workers losing most of their market share. That was done by decades of poor engineering and buying cheap foriegn made parts that sent their sales into the toilet and offering models the public did not want. Unions do NOT assure a business will be successful or not. Thats not the function of the union. If a business offers a product the public wants union or not profits soar, the same in reverse.
America turned its back on American cars because the big 3 were always behind the curve of offering vehicles the public wanted and autos that had repair records in the toilet.
Thats another convenient UNTRUTH, that the poor repair records were the unions fault, thats always been a bold faced lie. The workers assemble the vehicles, with the parts they are given. Once that car is assembled "correctly" and tested its sold thats the extent of the unions involvement. The longevity of the parts the workers assemble the vehicle with has nothing to do with their quality of work. Their quality of work is ASSEMBLY only the breaking crap made foriegn parts may very well be a NON union problem. The endless recalls because of poorly designed parts and CHEAP made foriegn shit is NOT the unions fault.

The big 3 conveniently blamed the union for their bloated incompetent executive level. Chrysler has the worst repair record of any vehicle and its had that crap distinction for decades. Its almost always been last in sales, EXCEPT, when under iaococco they offered a vehicle everyone wanted, the mini van chryslers profit and sales soared and it not only got out of bankruptcy it paid the govt back its bailout. Was that the union that made chrysler soar ? No the union only ASSEMBLED the mini vans, Its was not the union that made chrysler successful. they just ASSEMBLE the vehicles. It was chrysler engineering and Iacoccos leadership that offered a vehicle that was number one in sales for almost two decades.

Look no matter how a bloomberg business wants to spin it. The truth is right in everyones face. Outsourcing millions of american jobs and a campaign to vilify and blame Unions and public workers for high taxs. When in fact the outsourcing and corporate tax breaks and inversions that allow corporations to pay nothing in taxs, has of course caused everyone else to foot the bill. Taxpayers even have to subsidize low paid wages by corporations by taxpayers paying for foodstamps, housing asst and medicaid.

Id like for the right to show me how a minimum wage worker can live on 30 hours a week pay and also show me what middleclass jobs a minimum wage worker can aspire to move up too and scrape out a living on their own.

Corporate america via right wing Politicians want to tell us that lack of ambition and drive is the reason low wage workers are stuck in low wage jobs. WRONG, its the lack of decent paying jobs because of outsourcing for more profit.

America always had poor workers ALWAYS, america always had its scrub women as they were called and bathroom attendents, laborers and low paid food workers, america always had hotel maids and retail workers, and grocery store workers. LOW PAID JOBS isnt a new phenomena in america. What is new is that the low paid jobs pay FAR less than they did in comparison to cost of living in the past.
and theres more of the low paid jobs and none of the middleclass jobs.

This right wing crap that everyone has to do well on their own. HOW, tell us how they do that??? Not everyone can be educated and have a profession. We cant all be Doctors Lawyers, Indian Chiefs and CEOs who would cut their grass and clean their toilets then ?

I WILL NOT buy the right wing rhetoric that all people are poor because they are lazy and have no drive and its all the liberals fault. I will not buy that raising the minimum wage is going to put business out of business. I will not buy that the safety nets have caused the deficit.

I blame Corporate america for outsourcing americas prosperity and milking every dime out of our country while whining incessantly and having right wing politicians carry their water, that the pay to much in taxs, when in fact they loophole and invert their way out of pay anything.

Its NOT working americas fault, its corporate americas fault. Their greed has sucked the country dry and created millions of underpaid min wage jobs. There are college grads working for the same wages as High School drop outs in retail like walmart because there is nothing else in their area for work.

[Redrose]

What state?


Long Island, NY, and we were eating good steaks.

[Common]

Long Island, NY, and we were eating good steaks.

I had some great times as a young kid the few times I went to visit my aunt in mastic beach.
It was nice there then and my uncle showed me how to crab and clam. I loved goin out and raking clams and crabbing drop line. Then we'd go back and my aunt would make spaghetti and crabs or clams for all of us. I dont know how we all fit in that little summer bungalo lol, I wish I couldve spent more time there. I know mastic beach is a hole now.

[Mac-7]

Corporations hire the legals; small businessmen hire the illegals. The government doesn't force them to hire anyone.

Sure, they have the free choice to go out of business, don't they?

Government creates the conditions that force businesses to hire cheaper workers.

[Peter1469]

If that is what it says to you, I will leave it at that.


I already read that Pete. It still says in order to compete we have to starve. What does it say to you?

[Crepitus]

That article is disengenuous on more than one level. The auto unions had nothing to do with the american auto workers losing most of their market share. That was done by decades of poor engineering and buying cheap foriegn made parts that sent their sales into the toilet and offering models the public did not want. Unions do NOT assure a business will be successful or not. Thats not the function of the union. If a business offers a product the public wants union or not profits soar, the same in reverse.
America turned its back on American cars because the big 3 were always behind the curve of offering vehicles the public wanted and autos that had repair records in the toilet.
Thats another convenient UNTRUTH, that the poor repair records were the unions fault, thats always been a bold faced lie. The workers assemble the vehicles, with the parts they are given. Once that car is assembled "correctly" and tested its sold thats the extent of the unions involvement. The longevity of the parts the workers assemble the vehicle with has nothing to do with their quality of work. Their quality of work is ASSEMBLY only the breaking crap made foriegn parts may very well be a NON union problem. The endless recalls because of poorly designed parts and CHEAP made foriegn shit is NOT the unions fault.

The big 3 conveniently blamed the union for their bloated incompetent executive level. Chrysler has the worst repair record of any vehicle and its had that crap distinction for decades. Its almost always been last in sales, EXCEPT, when under iaococco they offered a vehicle everyone wanted, the mini van chryslers profit and sales soared and it not only got out of bankruptcy it paid the govt back its bailout. Was that the union that made chrysler soar ? No the union only ASSEMBLED the mini vans, Its was not the union that made chrysler successful. they just ASSEMBLE the vehicles. It was chrysler engineering and Iacoccos leadership that offered a vehicle that was number one in sales for almost two decades.

Look no matter how a bloomberg business wants to spin it. The truth is right in everyones face. Outsourcing millions of american jobs and a campaign to vilify and blame Unions and public workers for high taxs. When in fact the outsourcing and corporate tax breaks and inversions that allow corporations to pay nothing in taxs, has of course caused everyone else to foot the bill. Taxpayers even have to subsidize low paid wages by corporations by taxpayers paying for foodstamps, housing asst and medicaid.

Id like for the right to show me how a minimum wage worker can live on 30 hours a week pay and also show me what middleclass jobs a minimum wage worker can aspire to move up too and scrape out a living on their own.

Corporate america via right wing Politicians want to tell us that lack of ambition and drive is the reason low wage workers are stuck in low wage jobs. WRONG, its the lack of decent paying jobs because of outsourcing for more profit.

America always had poor workers ALWAYS, america always had its scrub women as they were called and bathroom attendents, laborers and low paid food workers, america always had hotel maids and retail workers, and grocery store workers. LOW PAID JOBS isnt a new phenomena in america. What is new is that the low paid jobs pay FAR less than they did in comparison to cost of living in the past.
and theres more of the low paid jobs and none of the middleclass jobs.

This right wing crap that everyone has to do well on their own. HOW, tell us how they do that??? Not everyone can be educated and have a profession. We cant all be Doctors Lawyers, Indian Chiefs and CEOs who would cut their grass and clean their toilets then ?

I WILL NOT buy the right wing rhetoric that all people are poor because they are lazy and have no drive and its all the liberals fault. I will not buy that raising the minimum wage is going to put business out of business. I will not buy that the safety nets have caused the deficit.

I blame Corporate america for outsourcing americas prosperity and milking every dime out of our country while whining incessantly and having right wing politicians carry their water, that the pay to much in taxs, when in fact they loophole and invert their way out of pay anything.

Its NOT working americas fault, its corporate americas fault. Their greed has sucked the country dry and created millions of underpaid min wage jobs. There are college grads working for the same wages as High School drop outs in retail like walmart because there is nothing else in their area for work.
Here Here!

[PolWatch]

sales tax on food?

yikes, we don't even do that in massachusetts

We pay 10% sales tax on food, medicine, everything except labor.

[Reason10]

What would a free market do to wages if it entered into a market where wages were artificially high?

I will give you 5 guesses. :smiley:

First of all, if you're going to go by ridiculous left wing sources you'll be all over the map as far as knowledge of economics goes. There are probably more CLASS ENVY articles out than there is web porn.

Ayn Rand once said that capital always flows to the most productive source. For the average-intelligence individual (and there are fewer and fewer of those these days) that says it all.

But if you'd like a specific REAL WORLD example, of course.

In the early Seventies, the UNIONS got steel workers such a sweet deal that they were paid a little over $20 an hour to SLEEP DURING THIRD SHIFT. Unless you were born last night, I think you can see that this arrangement was an artificially high wage, not bound by market forces. Steel workers COULD have been making regular market wages WITHOUT unions and they could have made a decent living. Factory workers were getting better pay and conditions through CAPITAL ACCUMULATION, not because of unions.

You know what happened to those steel workers. It's the same thing that happened to manufacturing jobs all over the fruited plain.

Meanwhile that SAME free market pushed wages UP in the much poorer regions of the world. Peasants in the far east who were either starving or working in dangerous conditions in rice paddies suddenly had a factory to work in and were making REAL money. More than they could ever have dreamed.

In a free market, capital flows to the most productive source. The American worker was the most productive source. Hell, AMERICA INVENTED the productive assembly line. Then unions ruined that, and capital flowed to the most productive source.

Put more simply, it's COMPETITION.

[Reason10]

The downward pressure on wages was indeed partially created by the gutting of the unions. It is also a product of corporate greed. The threat of offshoring is always there in many industries.
WRONG.
Workers in the Far East got HUGE raises, relative to their regular conditions. All the Unions did was give companies a good reason to shift those jobs to the most productive source.

The United States practically INVENTED the productive factory. Only UNIONS could have given the Far East such a gift.

CAPITAL FLOWS TO THE MOST PRODUCTIVE SOURCE. (Ayn Rand.)

It's a small world, after all, boys and girls.

[Peter1469]

First of all, if you're going to go by ridiculous left wing sources you'll be all over the map as far as knowledge of economics goes. There are probably more CLASS ENVY articles out than there is web porn.

Ayn Rand once said that capital always flows to the most productive source. For the average-intelligence individual (and there are fewer and fewer of those these days) that says it all.

But if you'd like a specific REAL WORLD example, of course.

In the early Seventies, the UNIONS got steel workers such a sweet deal that they were paid a little over $20 an hour to SLEEP DURING THIRD SHIFT. Unless you were born last night, I think you can see that this arrangement was an artificially high wage, not bound by market forces. Steel workers COULD have been making regular market wages WITHOUT unions and they could have made a decent living. Factory workers were getting better pay and conditions through CAPITAL ACCUMULATION, not because of unions.

You know what happened to those steel workers. It's the same thing that happened to manufacturing jobs all over the fruited plain.

Meanwhile that SAME free market pushed wages UP in the much poorer regions of the world. Peasants in the far east who were either starving or working in dangerous conditions in rice paddies suddenly had a factory to work in and were making REAL money. More than they could ever have dreamed.

In a free market, capital flows to the most productive source. The American worker was the most productive source. Hell, AMERICA INVENTED the productive assembly line. Then unions ruined that, and capital flowed to the most productive source.

Put more simply, it's COMPETITION.

Your response is internally inconsistent. You are conflating issues. Your conclusion is therefore flawed.

The issue: will we have a free market? Or will be allow protectionism and cartels?

In a true free market, many things once done in the US will be done overseas where it is cheaper to do. It can't be avoided.

With the protectionism and cartels (unions) of our past, we saw wages in the US grow stronger even artificially so. Once the protectionism and cartels lose power, those wages come down.

Choose- which do you want? You can't have both (well, you can have a hybrid model but let's get the basic concepts first).


Also, Bloomburg is a left wing source? :shocked: Wow!

[Peter1469]

Stop with the hysterical bolds, caps, and font sizes. It is rude.

Workers in the far east did not immediately get huge (no caps) wage increases. It was a slow process that had to do with the Chinese economy shifting from an agricultural society, to an export (manufacturing) society, to maybe in the future a consumption based society- which can only work with a strong middle class.

It is not a simple question of capital moving to the most productive source. If that were true then Chinese would be making the high end manufacturing goods that are made in the US or Germany as two examples.

China and other emerging economies are making low end goods. With the exception of some IT items like I-phones.




Workers in the Far East got HUGE raises, relative to their regular conditions. All the Unions did was give companies a good reason to shift those jobs to the most productive source.

The United States practically INVENTED the productive factory. Only UNIONS could have given the Far East such a gift.

CAPITAL FLOWS TO THE MOST PRODUCTIVE SOURCE. (Ayn Rand.)

It's a small world, after all, boys and girls.

[Mac-7]

In a true free market, many things once done in the US will be done overseas where it is cheaper to do. It can't be avoided.




That statement represents the triumph of theory born in a ivory tower over common sense.

The US was the shinning example of what the world could be.

We showed the monarchies, communist/socialist dictatorships and feudal third world economies how to do it right.

America was rich because we were smarter.

But leftwingers think America is rich because we cheated and in their perfect world Americans deserve to be no richer than the poorest person in India.

The New World order and the Global Economy are products of those misbegotten ideas.

I know Peter does not think of himself as a leftwinger but on this topic poverty for Americans is the end result of rigid adherence to a world free market.

[Crepitus]

That statement represents the triumph of theory born in a ivory tower over common sense.

The US was the shinning example of what the world could be.

We showed the monarchies, communist/socialist dictatorships and feudal third world economies how to do it right.

America was rich because we were smarter. You were going great right up to here.


But leftwingers think America is rich because we cheated and in their perfect world Americans deserve to be no richer than the poorest person in India.

The New World order and the Global Economy are products of those misbegotten ideas.

I know Peter does not think of himself as a leftwinger but on this topic poverty for Americans is the end result of rigid adherence to a world free market.
Leftwingers think things were great when we were all rich, we have a problem when it's only 1% who are rich at everyone else's expense. The rest of that is unadulterated partisan hatred.

[Mac-7]

You were going great right up to here.


Leftwingers think things were great when we were all rich, we have a problem when it's only 1% who are rich at everyone else's expense. The rest of that is unadulterated partisan hatred.

Thats why I don't support the global economy that opens our markets to cheap goods from china.

That hurts the middle class in America.

Protectionism is not a dirty word for me as it is for the libertarians.

[Reason10]

So you're saying in order to compete we have to starve? I don't buy that.
Welcome to the JUNGLE. If you want that SAME cushy job at the SAME high rate, when there is a Pacific islander willing to do it for about 80 percent less, you're going to starve. Simple Darwinian rules here.


The wages in developing countries are artificially depressed, usually by unscrupulous business practices or government.

That's not even an intelligent lie.

CAPITAL FLOWS TO THE MOST PRODUCTIVE SOURCE, whether you like it or not.

[Reason10]

Thats why I don't support the global economy that opens our markets to cheap goods from china.

That hurts the middle class in America.

Protectionism is not a dirty word for me as it is for the libertarians.

Problem is, protectionism has NEVER worked. And it is about as useful in today's economy as a record store, a video store, an eight track tape player, etc.

It's a global economy and capital is flowing to the most productive sources. The problem is not that our jobs are in trouble. The problem is that government is preventing us from moving fast enough.

THIS government is still treating the American economy like it's 1920. It's the 21st Century.

Get rid of unions, corporate taxes and crippling regulations and you'll see NEW manufacturing jobs pop up all over the fruited plain. But DON'T ask accountants to deliberately lose money for their companies.

[Mac-7]

Problem is, protectionism has NEVER worked.

And it is about as useful in today's economy as a record store, a video store, an eight track tape player, etc.

It's a global economy and capital is flowing to the most productive sources. The problem is not that our jobs are in trouble. The problem is that government is preventing us from moving fast enough.

THIS government is still treating the American economy like it's 1920. It's the 21st Century.

Get rid of unions, corporate taxes and crippling regulations and you'll see NEW manufacturing jobs pop up all over the fruited plain. But DON'T ask accountants to deliberately lose money for their companies.

Sez who?

Ayn Rand?

Shes dead.

Globalists want to merge the US economy with the rest of the world.

But in sheer numbers there are far more people with nothing than there are rich people like us.

The end result of that is poverty for Americans.

[Peter1469]

When America was young, importing stuff was much more expensive than it is now. Also our government ran off tariffs.

Globalism isn't a conspiracy, it is a modern reality. Americans are better making high end manufactured goods and buying low end goods from poor people from the Far East or Mexico.

One edit, I agree with protectionist polices when another nation dumps (legal term of art) goods onto the US market.


That statement represents the triumph of theory born in a ivory tower over common sense.

The US was the shinning example of what the world could be.

We showed the monarchies, communist/socialist dictatorships and feudal third world economies how to do it right.

America was rich because we were smarter.

But leftwingers think America is rich because we cheated and in their perfect world Americans deserve to be no richer than the poorest person in India.

The New World order and the Global Economy are products of those misbegotten ideas.

I know Peter does not think of himself as a leftwinger but on this topic poverty for Americans is the end result of rigid adherence to a world free market.

[Crepitus]

Thats why I don't support the global economy that opens our markets to cheap goods from china.

That hurts the middle class in America.

Protectionism is not a dirty word for me as it is for the libertarians.
Well that's weird......We actually agree on something.......I think I need to lay down or something..........

[Crepitus]

Welcome to the JUNGLE. If you want that SAME cushy job at the SAME high rate, when there is a Pacific islander willing to do it for about 80 percent less, you're going to starve. Simple Darwinian rules here.



That's not even an intelligent lie.

CAPITAL FLOWS TO THE MOST PRODUCTIVE SOURCE, whether you like it or not.
This is a simple cop-out.

[Mac-7]

When America was young, importing stuff was much more expensive than it is now. Also our government ran off tariffs.

Globalism isn't a conspiracy, it is a modern reality.

Americans are better making high end manufactured goods and buying low end goods from poor people from the Far East or Mexico.

One edit, I agree with protectionist polices when another nation dumps (legal term of art) goods onto the US market.

Globalism is not an accident either.

Its quite deliberate and planned whether you call a conspiracy or not.

And there are many different motives among the globalist - some altruistic and some not.

But it's not just dumb luck, or misfortune, depending on how you see it.

We are going to become a hollow economy that is better at manufacturing nothing because we have forgotten how.

Eventually we will not own high tech either if we continue making the mistakes we are making.

Specifically turning our back on blue collar factor jobs for middle class Americans because environmentalist wackos think manufacturing is dirty.

Or falling to 25th in the world in math and science.

America graduates about 300,000 engineers each year.

China graduates 3 million and so does India.

I could go on but what is the point?

Most of us here have made up our minds and nothing I say will change them.

[Reason10]

Globalists want to merge the US economy with the rest of the world.

But in sheer numbers there are far more people with nothing than there are rich people like us.

The end result of that is poverty for Americans.


Sez who?
Karl Marx?
He's dead.

Grow up. It's a global economy whether you like it or not.
Compete or starve. That's your only choice.

Let's try this again. Maybe I can make it more understandable.

THE TWO CHOICES: (check one)
___ COMPETE
___ STARVE


Got it yet?

[Reason10]

This is a simple cop-out.

Economic reality is not a cop out. If you're in the jungle and a lion eats you, that's not a cop out.

The laws of supply and demand exist whether you like it or not.

[Reason10]

When America was young, importing stuff was much more expensive than it is now. Also our government ran off tariffs.

If you'll recall, the Smoot/Hawley Tariff touched off the Great Depression.

Globalism isn't a conspiracy, it is a modern reality. Americans are better making high end manufactured goods and buying low end goods from poor people from the Far East or Mexico.
Capitalism has always been a jungle. And Capital always flows to the most productive source, whether that source is a right to work southern state like Alabama or Sri Lanka.


One edit, I agree with protectionist polices when another nation dumps (legal term of art) goods onto the US market.

Kinda like trying to explain the Bill Of Rights to that lion in the jungle who is about to eat you.

[Crepitus]

Economic reality is not a cop out. If you're in the jungle and a lion eats you, that's not a cop out.

The laws of supply and demand exist whether you like it or not.
Supply and demand exists, but it can be influenced. IMHO it has been influenced in the US to the point that it bears little relation to reality.

[Reason10]

Globalism is not an accident either.

Its quite deliberate and planned whether you call a conspiracy or not.

I see nothing planned or accidental about the laws of supply and demand.


And there are many different motives among the globalist - some altruistic and some not.

But it's not just dumb luck, or misfortune, depending on how you see it.

I'm starting to think that it's ALL dumb luck. Bottom line, a lot of people have zero understanding of macroeconomics as a concept. Nobody here wants to understand the law that CAPITAL FLOWS TO THE MOST PRODUCTIVE SOURCE.


We are going to become a hollow economy that is better at manufacturing nothing because we have forgotten how.

How ironic. We haven't forgotten how. Hell, we INVENTED manufacturing at the mega factory level. We're constantly inventing new manufacturing ways. Problem is, liberal policies make manufacturing way too expensive here in the states. No accident about that. We HAVE the most productive workers in the world. And it took GOVERNMENT to send those jobs to brand new economies on the other side of the world.


Eventually we will not own high tech either if we continue making the mistakes we are making.
Very true.

Specifically turning our back on blue collar factor jobs for middle class Americans because environmentalist wackos think manufacturing is dirty.
Can't argue with that one, either.


Or falling to 25th in the world in math and science.

How can you tell if your home has been burglarized by a Vietnamese criminal? The jewelry is gone and all the math homework is completely, accurately.



America graduates about 300,000 engineers each year.

China graduates 3 million and so does India.

What people don't realize is that neither China nor India are superior societies of intelligence. What makes those numbers so high is the fact that the populations of both countries are so high that the competition is very fierce. Most of China and most of India is illiterate and starving. What we generally see is the creme of the crop. They both have very LARGE crops.

[Mac-7]

Sez who?
Karl Marx?
He's dead.

Grow up. It's a global economy whether you like it or not.
Compete or starve. That's your only choice.

Let's try this again. Maybe I can make it more understandable.

THE TWO CHOICES: (check one)
___ COMPETE
___ STARVE


Got it yet?

Ok.

The 1% with intelligence will stay in school and find good jobs in America or Hong Kong or Paris.

They won't care because they will be part of the new international elite.

But what happens to the average person who is not a stock trader or biochemical engineer?

He gets to pull a rickshaw around town no matter what part of the world he lives in because an American will be no better off than the poorest untouchable in India.

Am I being selfish to want the American middle class to maintain its edge in income and living standards?

You betcha.

And I'm proud of it.

[Reason10]

Supply and demand exists, but it can be influenced. IMHO it has been influenced in the US to the point that it bears little relation to reality.

That's like suggesting political opinion can change the course of a small river.

Ever wonder who made the decision to have the Smart Phone manufactured by these people?
http://siliconangle.com/files/2012/02/foxconn.jpg

You'd better sit down. This is going to hurt.

The man who made that decision was none other than liberal icon and hero STEVE JOBS.

That's right. He KNEW the SmartPhone would cost thousands of dollars if made in the US and there was no way he could have sold that device for that kind of money.

ONE OF YOUR OWN LIBERALS sent those jobs to Foxconn, in China.

[Howey]

That's like suggesting political opinion can change the course of a small river.

Ever wonder who made the decision to have the Smart Phone manufactured by these people?
http://siliconangle.com/files/2012/02/foxconn.jpg

You'd better sit down. This is going to hurt.

The man who made that decision was none other than liberal icon and hero STEVE JOBS.

That's right. He KNEW the SmartPhone would cost thousands of dollars if made in the US and there was no way he could have sold that device for that kind of money.

ONE OF YOUR OWN LIBERALS sent those jobs to Foxconn, in China.

Do you know why Reason10? It's not why you think. Perhaps if American companies worked to train engineers, paid entry level manufacturing employees a living wage or increased productivity it would happen.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/business/apple-america-and-a-squeezed-middle-class.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0&referrer=

Regardless, the number of Apple employees overseas is nothing compared to the Fortune 500 company jobs outsourced overseas by republicans

[Howey]

Sez who?
Karl Marx?
He's dead.

Grow up. It's a global economy whether you like it or not.
Compete or starve. That's your only choice.

Let's try this again. Maybe I can make it more understandable.

THE TWO CHOICES: (check one)
___ COMPETE
___ STARVE


Got it yet?

Aren't you the one whining about Steve Jobs in China Reason10? Or is it a global economy only for republicans?

[Crepitus]

That's like suggesting political opinion can change the course of a small river.

Ever wonder who made the decision to have the Smart Phone manufactured by these people?
http://siliconangle.com/files/2012/02/foxconn.jpg

You'd better sit down. This is going to hurt.

The man who made that decision was none other than liberal icon and hero STEVE JOBS.

That's right. He KNEW the SmartPhone would cost thousands of dollars if made in the US and there was no way he could have sold that device for that kind of money.

ONE OF YOUR OWN LIBERALS sent those jobs to Foxconn, in China.
Jobs was never any hero of mine for this reason.

[gamewell45]

Sure, they have the free choice to go out of business, don't they?

Government creates the conditions that force businesses to hire cheaper workers.

Mac, that is so false. No one puts a gun to corporations to hire legals and the same goes towards smaller businesses too and you know it unless you consider safety in the workplace, a living wage and medical benefits as being unfair to business owners/corporations.

[Reason10]

The 1% with intelligence will stay in school and find good jobs in America or Hong Kong or Paris.

Midas Mulligan (from Atlas Shrugged) once spoke of his successes, "to you, what I do is magic. That's becase you'll never understand."



They won't care because they will be part of the new international elite.

There is no such thing. That would assume that countries could be made to cooperate with each other. Not in this time line.


But what happens to the average person who is not a stock trader or biochemical engineer?
What happened to the high school dropout who goes on drugs, gets a girl knocked up before marriage, and continues to quit his job? There is no average person. That assumes that all people think alike. But it would appear that the high school dropout losers are multiplying in numbers.

It is not impossible to make a decent living in this country. It is also not impossible to do so without a college degree. Rush Limbaugh is a multi millionaire and he dropped out of college. Steve Jobs was a multi millionaire and he dropped out of college. Both created empires from nothing. Both EARNED everything.

He gets to pull a rickshaw around town no matter what part of the world he lives in because an American will be no better off than the poorest untouchable in India.

India's situation is much different from that of the United States. India really IS experiencing a population explosion. It has a surplus of manpower. That rickshaw puller would be considered VERY lucky to have the job in that country, were most of the population is illiterate and starving. Here we have a Muslim president practically BEGGING illegal aliens to illegally cross our borders.


Am I being selfish to want the American middle class to maintain its edge in income and living standards?
I don't think you're being selfish at all. I just think you are failing to see the proper historical perspective.

I grew up in a tiny house in Dallas that would almost qualify for either Section 8 housing or just plain HOMELESS housing. I lived WITHOUT most of the luxuries that the homeless have today. And that was the standard of living for most middle class of my time, back in the late 50s.
America has the highest standard of living in the entire world and in all of history. And this standard didn't come cheap.

You should be proud of wanting America to have the best of the world. Right now we do. The fact that some jobs are gone doesn't change that.

Ronald Reagan said it best: "The future is not for the timid, it is for the bold."

(Note to Mods: THIS is how intelligent people have disagreement. For the most part, Mac and I agree on a lot of things. We have a disagreement here. The debate is spirited and intelligent. And you'll notice there are no bad words, no attempts to change the subject and no Assssbut cartoons from Yours Truly.)

[Reason10]

Do you know why @Reason10 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1397)? It's not why you think.
Yes it is. Steve Jobs THE LIBERAL HERO HERE realized it was cheaper to train Chinese workers at Foxconn then having to train EXPENSIVE UNIONIZED WORKERS here.


Perhaps if American companies worked to train engineers, paid entry level manufacturing employees a living wage or increased productivity it would happen.

First, there is no such thing as a living wage. Secondly, why should LIBERAL STEVE JOBS waste money on training more expensive workers here when he can get the SAME results for pennies on a dollar overseas. Third, IF LIBERAL STEVE JOBS had trained those workers here, that SmartPhone would cost over $1000 and you liberals would be screaming bloody murder, calling LIBERAL STEVE JOBS a price gouging profiteer ONE PERCENTER. (Which actually he is.)

Third, sourcing the New York Times for ANYTHING other than Democrat National Committee promotion is idiotic, even for a liberal.


Regardless, the number of Apple employees overseas is nothing compared to the Fortune 500 company jobs outsourced overseas by republicans

That's a lie. Republicans have NEVER outsourced ANY jobs.
We're not the ones letting thug unions get away with this. We're not the ones allowing liberal Congresses to get away with those ridiculous regulations that further drive up the price.

This is ALL on you and your liberal buddies.

[Reason10]

Mac, that is so false. No one puts a gun to corporations to hire legals and the same goes towards smaller businesses too and you know it unless you consider safety in the workplace, a living wage and medical benefits as being unfair to business owners/corporations.

A couple of things:

1. Safety in the workplace came about NOT as a result of unions or Congress but because of capital accumulation. (BUSINESS 101) Businesses expanded. Demand for workers went up. Standards of workplaces went up.
2. There is no such thing as a living wage. Only total fucking morons who believe in the tooth fairy continue to perpetuate that LIE.

[Chloe]

(Note to Mods: THIS is how intelligent people have disagreement. For the most part, Mac and I agree on a lot of things. We have a disagreement here. The debate is spirited and intelligent. And you'll notice there are no bad words, no attempts to change the subject and no Assssbut cartoons from Yours Truly.)

Modesty must be your best feature huh?

[Mac-7]

Sez who?
Karl Marx?
He's dead.

Grow up. It's a global economy whether you like it or not.
Compete or starve. That's your only choice.

Let's try this again. Maybe I can make it more understandable.

THE TWO CHOICES: (check one)
___ COMPETE
___ STARVE


Got it yet?

An American factory worker cannot compete with a Chinese coolie.

If you are attracted to the lowest price then eventually America will produce nothing and our standard of living will plummet.

I don't know what your job is but for 99.99% of the jobs high or low I promise you there is someone in another country that can do it cheaper.

[texan]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.



Read more at the link above.

Hillary's soon to be competitor (Gov Maryland) said yesterday on George S. that the "voodoo" economics haven't been working for the regular blue collar folks.

[Reason10]

Post a link to corporate profits by industry so we can see how much we are being fleeced. Then we can really go off on those greedy $#@!s.

And do what?

[Reason10]

Hillary's soon to be competitor (Gov Maryland) said yesterday on George S. that the "voodoo" economics haven't been working for the regular blue collar folks.

Only if you define "voodoo" economics as those created by the KENYAN VILLAGE IDIOT. Obama's polices have been a dagger to the heart of the middle class.

[Reason10]

Modesty must be your best feature huh?

Modesty and humility go a long way. Hard to be humble here, though, especially when one is more educated than all the liberals combined.

[Common]

Only if you define "voodoo" economics as those created by the KENYAN VILLAGE IDIOT. Obama's polices have been a dagger to the heart of the middle class.

lol obama is to blame for everything amazing

[Reason10]

An American factory worker cannot compete with a Chinese coolie.

Not today, no. Of course not. But it IS possible, if we had a competent president and a competent Congress.


If you are attracted to the lowest price then eventually America will produce nothing and our standard of living will plummet.

If you were to look at the American economy only in a snapshot, you might have a point. I'm able to look at it from being 60 years old, and also from having an economics education. Those Chinese coolies built our railroads at the beginning of the 20th Century. Lots of jobs disappeared just because of changes in the economy, in technology, even in public interests.

American workers used to make buggy whips. (Before automobiles made horse transportation obsolete.) American workers used to make eight track tapes, cassette tapes, vcrs, VHS tape. American workers used to work at record stores, video stores, print shops. All those jobs are gone, thanks to technology. I don't hear any whining here about the workers who lost their jobs because of that.


I don't know what your job is but for 99.99% of the jobs high or low I promise you there is someone in another country that can do it cheaper.


Without divulging any information that the liberal trolls here don't need to know, let's just say that I'm extremely fortunate to have the occupation I have and for as long as I've had it. For an entire lifetime, I've been lucky enough to do this while facing unemployment prospects EVERY WEEK. That's why it's hard for me to produce crocodile tears for the manufacturing worker who believed he was entitled to that job, only to see it go overseas. I've faced that all my life.

[Reason10]

lol obama is to blame for everything amazing

He's CERTAINLY to blame for today's RECORD WORST ECONOMY IN HISTORY.

[Common]

American workers used to make buggy whips. (Before automobiles made horse transportation obsolete.) American workers used to make eight track tapes, cassette tapes, vcrs, VHS tape. American workers used to work at record stores, video stores, print shops. All those jobs are gone, thanks to technology. I don't hear any whining here about the workers who lost their jobs because of that.

How the hell is new and better technology replacing old have anything to do with the PIGS outsourcing american midddle class jobs to china. Get a grip

[Reason10]

You brought up some good points and I didn't want that last post to be thousands of words.

An American factory worker cannot compete with a Chinese coolie.
There's a way. Walmart checkout workers DEFINITELY compete with regular grocery store workers. The self checkout center in the store makes it possible for ONE worker to monitor ten checkout lines. The key is to use technology to increase productivity.
Foxconn workers have maybe ONE TENTH the education of the average American worker. (which means they're REAL idiots.) China is not creating new factory techniques, new products, etc. It is using the only real resource it has: a surplus of human beings.
You can compete with that with technology. BUT you have to get the government out of the way. You've got to get unions out of the way. You've got to get LEFT WING GREED out of the way and let an economy evolve. Right now, the jobs are moving overseas TOTALLY because of greedy left wing policies. PERIOD.



If you are attracted to the lowest price then eventually America will produce nothing and our standard of living will plummet.

I pisss off a lot of liberals with this line: Companies shop labor like we shop for gasoline. SAME CONCEPT.

[Mac-7]

lol obama is to blame for everything amazing

It makes more sense than you insisting that obumer is responsible for nothing bad that happens.

[Common]

It makes more sense than you insisting that obumer is responsible for nothing bad that happens.

I never said he wasnt responsible for anything, I said plainly that hes not responsible for everything like you spout in most every post

[Mac-7]

You brought up some good points and I didn't want that last post to be thousands of words.

There's a way. Walmart checkout workers DEFINITELY compete with regular grocery store workers. The self checkout center in the store makes it possible for ONE worker to monitor ten checkout lines. The key is to use technology to increase productivity.
Foxconn workers have maybe ONE TENTH the education of the average American worker. (which means they're REAL idiots.)

China is not creating new factory techniques, new products, etc. It is using the only real resource it has: a surplus of human beings.

You can compete with that with technology. BUT you have to get the government out of the way. You've got to get unions out of the way. You've got to get LEFT WING GREED out of the way and let an economy evolve. Right now, the jobs are moving overseas TOTALLY because of greedy left wing policies. PERIOD.


I don't care how Foxconn makes my iPhone.

Yes it would cost more if we still made it here.

But to me its more important to have that technology and manufacturing base here than in china.

Even if we only hire 1/10th of the workers in America to produce it.

But I think it would be more because many workers would be needed in the factories that make the machines and so on.

[Peter1469]

An American factory worker cannot compete with a Chinese coolie.

If you are attracted to the lowest price then eventually America will produce nothing and our standard of living will plummet.

I don't know what your job is but for 99.99% of the jobs high or low I promise you there is someone in another country that can do it cheaper.

An American factory worker can compete with Chinese- on high end manufacturing.

Not low end crap.

[Peter1469]

Hillary's soon to be competitor (Gov Maryland) said yesterday on George S. that the "voodoo" economics haven't been working for the regular blue collar folks.

He is far left. I wouldn't listen to his advice on the economy.

[Peter1469]

And do what?

lol

Have data to come to a rational conclusion with. :shocked:

It will show you that the profit margin is not very large in most industries.

[Peter1469]

Modesty and humility go a long way. Hard to be humble here, though, especially when one is more educated than all the liberals combined.

lol

that took balls

[Mac-7]

An American factory worker can compete with Chinese- on high end manufacturing.

Not low end crap.

If you think there is a genetic flaw preventing the Chinese from making high tech you are mistaken.

just because they haven't gotten around to those industries yet doesn't mean they can't.

[Bob]

Where have our wages gone? (http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-24/unions-wages-and-the-hand-of-competition)

It is easy to say that wages of declined because the evil right destroyed unions and are greedy. Usually the easy answer is incorrect. Perhaps globalization broke up cartels that had gained too much power and artificially drove wages and benefits up?

A freer market pushed wages down in the US. Competition.

Just a thought.



Read more at the link above.

We all know the unemployment rates are not an accurate measure of the employment.

I suggest one uses wages and decreases or increases as a tool to examine the unemployment rate.

If wages are going up, the unemployment figure given is much more accurate.

Falling wages means the unemployment figures are not accurate. Same thing with stagnant wages.

To prove this, during low employment companies have to bid for workers. Therefore wages are going up.
Today wages are not going up. Companies don't need to compete for workers.

Bad use of unemployment rates by the Feds since they pretend things are very good.

[Peter1469]

If you think there is a genetic flaw preventing the Chinese from making high tech you are mistaken.

just because they haven't gotten around to those industries yet doesn't mean they can't.

Genetic flaw? How did that idea pop up in your mind?

China is not a first world nation. It is as simple as that.

If race issues are flooding your brain you can compare the high end manufacturing of South Korea to the low end manufacturing in China.

lol

[Mac-7]

Corporations hire the legals; small businessmen hire the illegals. The government doesn't force them to hire anyone.

If one corporation is allowed to hire the illegals that government allows to be here the competitive marketplace forces everyone to hire them.

[Mac-7]

Genetic flaw? How did that idea pop up in your mind?

China is not a first world nation. It is as simple as that.

If race issues are flooding your brain you can compare the high end manufacturing of South Korea to the low end manufacturing in China.

lol

You claim that Americans can do high tech and Chinese can't.

You are the one who called the Chinese uncompetitive at high techno products.

[Peter1469]

You claim that Americans can do high tech and Chinese can't.

You are the one who called the Chinese uncompetitive at high techno products.

Neg. Sue your teachers- they failed you.

I said that China can't compete with America (or German for example) in high end manufacturing.

[Captain Obvious]

Neg. Sue your teachers- they failed you.

I said that China can't compete with America (or German for example) in high end manufacturing.

Try as they might, their strategy is to at least from a perception standpoint to duplicate our products.

As China's standard of living grows, so will it's production intellect. It has to.

[Mac-7]

Corporations hire the legals; small businessmen hire the illegals. The government doesn't force them to hire anyone.

Hiring a legal worker is not desirable either.

So we don't disagree about that.

But at least the job remains in this country which contributes to secondary support jobs.

If you have ever seen an 18 something trying to make change with the machine telling her how much you can appreciate why companies may think foreigners make better employees.

But I know that companies do some underhanded things so I'm not offering them a blanket amnesty here.

[Mac-7]

Neg. Sue your teachers- they failed you.

I said that China can't compete with America (or German for example) in high end manufacturing.

And I say they can.

They just have not reached that stage yet.

But it is free trade praised by libertarians that is helping china get there.

[Mac-7]

Try as they might, their strategy is to at least from a perception standpoint to duplicate our products.

As China's standard of living grows, so will it's production intellect. It has to.

Peter apparently thinks Americans were born with the ability to do high tech and we have always done so.

[Captain Obvious]

Peter apparently thinks Americans were born with the ability to do high tech and we have always done so.

I think we had a head start for a couple of reasons, one of them being virtually unlimited, unfettered resources.

[Bob]

Peter apparently thinks Americans were born with the ability to do high tech and we have always done so.

It would not shock me to learn Apple products come from China.

[Captain Obvious]

It would not shock me to learn Apple products come from China.

They're designed here though, that's the big difference.

China's ability to design (not steal) has kept it a 3rd world production country. Apple's outsourcing labor to China is actually a pretty big technology risk.

[Mac-7]

It would not shock me to learn Apple products come from China.

They do.

[Bob]

And I say they can.

They just have not reached that stage yet.

But it is free trade praised by libertarians that is helping china get there.

It would be interesting as to what the quality engineers say about China. As with made in America, one can expect some shit and some that is just awesome.

[Mac-7]

I think we had a head start for a couple of reasons, one of them being virtually unlimited, unfettered resources.

And more importantly an industrial base that made all sorts of products and the people to produce those unsexy but necessary items.

[PolWatch]

lol

that took balls

no...just ego. This is the one who wants everyone to think he is 60+ but slips and talks about college classes studying the Clinton presidency....among other ooopppss

[Mac-7]

And more importantly an industrial base that made all sorts of products and the people to produce those unsexy but necessary items.

In fact, up until the end of WWII most high tech came from Germany and England.

[Bob]

This can be valuable to study quality in China

http://www.ifm.eng.cam.ac.uk/uploads/Research/CIM/china09.pdf

[Mac-7]

It would be interesting as to what the quality engineers say about China. As with made in America, one can expect some $#@! and some that is just awesome.

What usually happens is that the US company has to share all its manufacturing secrets with the Chinese so that they can deliver products that the US company can put its name on.

But pretty soon they will know everything we know.

[PolWatch]

for many years 'Made in Japan' was synonymous with junk.

[Mac-7]

They're designed here though, that's the big difference.

China's ability to design (not steal) has kept it a 3rd world production country. Apple's outsourcing labor to China is actually a pretty big technology risk.

Why spend money designing when they can steal?

But china graduates 10 times more engineers than America does.

Sooner our layer that will make a difference.

[Mac-7]

for many years 'Made in Japan' was synonymous with junk.

True.

[Captain Obvious]

Why spend money designing when they can steal?

But china graduates 10 times more engineers than America does.

Sooner our layer that will make a difference.

And 9.8 of them work here.

[Peter1469]

Try as they might, their strategy is to at least from a perception standpoint to duplicate our products.

As China's standard of living grows, so will it's production intellect. It has to.

That is the direction it is heading. In fact, SE Asia is starting to take the low end manufacturing away from China.

[Peter1469]

Peter apparently thinks Americans were born with the ability to do high tech and we have always done so.

lol

I never said that. But keep spinning.

[Peter1469]

I think we had a head start for a couple of reasons, one of them being virtually unlimited, unfettered resources.

Geography made it cheaper and easier to move goods to market.

[Mac-7]

And 9.8 of them work here.

And a few may even stay rather than going back to china to apply what they have learned.

[Mac-7]

lol

I never said that. But keep spinning.

You said we can do high tech and china can't.

The only way that can justify your complacency is if you think we are inherently superior and china can never catch up.

[Mac-7]

Geography made it cheaper and easier to move goods to market.

And tariffs on imported goods.

[PolWatch]

I think we will see more American manufacturers returning to the US. Issues like violation of copyright laws & theft of production design in Asia is already costing them money. Asian knockoffs are beating the real items to market. Poor quality of the knockoffs is damaging the reputation of the companies. Some companies are finding out there is a price to getting cheap labor.

[Bob]

They're designed here though, that's the big difference.

China's ability to design (not steal) has kept it a 3rd world production country. Apple's outsourcing labor to China is actually a pretty big technology risk.

I can be at Apples HQ in less than 45 minutes. I once had a good friend there as a buyer.

It seems to me that China has sent engineers and scientists to the USA and the UK for a long time so their professionals would appear to be improving very fast. I posted a report from the UK that shows that.

[Peter1469]

You said we can do high tech and china can't.

The only way that can justify your complacency is if you think we are inherently superior and china can never catch up.

Compete. Get it right Mac.

[Mac-7]

Compete. Get it right Mac.

If china can't compete then you are calling them inferior.

[Peter1469]

I think we will see more American manufacturers returning to the US. Issues like violation of copyright laws & theft of production design in Asia is already costing them money. Asian knockoffs are beating the real items to market. Poor quality of the knockoffs is damaging the reputation of the companies. Some companies are finding out there is a price to getting cheap labor.





In the most recent data, manufacturers contributed $2.09 trillion to the economy, having risen steadily since being $1.73 trillion in 2009. The sector currently accounts for 12.0 percent of GDP. 1 For every $1.00 spent in manufacturing, another $1.37 is added to the economy, the highest multiplier effect of any economic sector. 2



Manufacturing supports an estimated 17.6 million jobs in the United States""about one in six private-sector jobs. More than 12 million Americans (or 9 percent of the workforce) are employed directly in manufacturing.3



In 2013, the average manufacturing worker in the United States earned $77,506 annually, including pay and benefits. The average worker in all industries earned $62,546.4



Manufacturers in the United States are the most productive in the world, far surpassing the worker productivity of any other major manufacturing economy, leading to higher wages and living standards.5



Manufacturers in the United States perform more than three quarters of all private-sector R&D in the nation, driving more innovation than any other sector.6



Taken alone, manufacturing in the United States would be the 9th largest economy in the world.7

- See more at: http://www.nam.org/Newsroom/Facts-About-Manufacturing/#sthash.46RQ6BN3.dpuf


It is increasing. (http://www.nam.org/Newsroom/Facts-About-Manufacturing/)

[Peter1469]

If china can't compete then you are calling them inferior.

Again. Sue all people who were your teachers. They failed you.

[Mac-7]

Again. Sue all people who were your teachers. They failed you.

Not at all.

The Chinese work cheaper.

Americans can compete, but at lower wages than the American workers are used to earning.

[nic34]

sales tax on food?

yikes, we don't even do that in massachusetts

or even here in Arizona....!!!!

[Peter1469]

Not at all.

The Chinese work cheaper.

Americans can compete, but at lower wages than the American workers are used to earning.

Off point.

China can compete and win with low end manufacturing. China can't compete with high end manufacturing. Example: China can't manufacture a car Americans would buy and compete with American auto manufacturers. Yet. They very may well soon.

It has nothing to do with race. It is economic development.

[Mac-7]

Off point.

China can compete and win with low end manufacturing.

China can't compete with high end manufacturing.

It has nothing to do with race. It is economic development.

You can't have both ways.

Either china can compete, if not now then tomorrow, or they can't because they are somehow inferior to America.

You assume that because they are not beating the pants off us in high tech now that they never can.

And I say you are wrong.

and I also say that giving them our low tech manufacturing base helps them take our high tech base later.

[nic34]

Since 1979, the nation’s productivity has risen 65 percent (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html?_r=0), but workers’ median compensation has increased by just 8 percent (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html?_r=0). Almost all the gains from growth have gone to the top.

This is not a winning corporate strategy over the long term because higher returns ultimately depend on more sales, which requires a large and growing middle class with enough purchasing power to buy what can be produced.

But from the limited viewpoint of the CEO of a single large firm, or of an investment banker or fund manager on Wall Street, it’s worked out just fine – so far.

Low unemployment won’t lead to higher pay for most Americans because the key strategy of the nation’s large corporations and financial sector has been to prevent wages from rising.

And, if you hadn’t noticed, the big corporations and Wall Street are calling the shots.

http://robertreich.org/post/107998491550

[Peter1469]

You can't have both easy.

Either china can compete, if not now then tomorrow, or they can't because they are somehow inferior to America.

You assume that because they are not beating the pants off us in high tech now that they never can.

And I say you are wrong.

and I also say that giving them our low tech manufacturing base helps them take our high tech base later.

LOL.

I have been clear that I am talking about today. In that post of mine that you are quoting (after cutting parts out) I even provided an example of cars. I said that they can't compete in US markets..., yet.

But you cut that out, and then claimed that I said they never can compete.

Oops. Dumb, or a fraud? Maybe both?

Which of the three options, Mac?

[Mac-7]

Since 1979, the nation’s productivity has risen 65 percent (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html?_r=0), but workers’ median compensation has increased by just 8 percent (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/sunday-review/americas-productivity-climbs-but-wages-stagnate.html?_r=0). Almost all the gains from growth have gone to the top.

This is not a winning corporate strategy over the long term because higher returns ultimately depend on more sales, which requires a large and growing middle class with enough purchasing power to buy what can be produced.

But from the limited viewpoint of the CEO of a single large firm, or of an investment banker or fund manager on Wall Street, it’s worked out just fine – so far.

Low unemployment won’t lead to higher pay for most Americans because the key strategy of the nation’s large corporations and financial sector has been to prevent wages from rising.

And, if you hadn’t noticed, the big corporations and Wall Street are calling the shots.

http://robertreich.org/post/107998491550

Robert Reich?

you must be kidding.

[Mac-7]

LOL.

I have been clear that I am talking about today.

"Today" meaning as long as it takes for YOU to retire and live out your normal lifespan.

Future generations say thanks for nuthin.

[nic34]

Robert Reich?

you must be kidding.

You have something to say, or just shooting the messenger as usual?

[The Sage of Main Street]

What would a free market do to wages if it entered into a market where wages were artificially high?





The wages in sweatshop countries are artificially low. We should outlaw outsourcing instead of subsidizing wage slavery.

[Mac-7]

You have something to say, or just shooting the messenger as usual?

I have no comment on anything Reich has to say.

[The Sage of Main Street]

That article is disengenuous on more than one level. The auto unions had nothing to do with the american auto workers losing most of their market share. That was done by decades of poor engineering and buying cheap foriegn made parts that sent their sales into the toilet and offering models the public did not want. Unions do NOT assure a business will be successful or not. Thats not the function of the union. If a business offers a product the public wants union or not profits soar, the same in reverse.
America turned its back on American cars because the big 3 were always behind the curve of offering vehicles the public wanted and autos that had repair records in the toilet.
Thats another convenient UNTRUTH, that the poor repair records were the unions fault, thats always been a bold faced lie. The workers assemble the vehicles, with the parts they are given. Once that car is assembled "correctly" and tested its sold thats the extent of the unions involvement. The longevity of the parts the workers assemble the vehicle with has nothing to do with their quality of work. Their quality of work is ASSEMBLY only the breaking crap made foriegn parts may very well be a NON union problem. The endless recalls because of poorly designed parts and CHEAP made foriegn $#@! is NOT the unions fault.

The big 3 conveniently blamed the union for their bloated incompetent executive level. Chrysler has the worst repair record of any vehicle and its had that crap distinction for decades. Its almost always been last in sales, EXCEPT, when under Iacocca they offered a vehicle everyone wanted, the mini van chryslers profit and sales soared and it not only got out of bankruptcy it paid the govt back its bailout. Was that the union that made chrysler soar ? No the union only ASSEMBLED the mini vans, Its was not the union that made chrysler successful. they just ASSEMBLE the vehicles. It was chrysler engineering and Iacoccos leadership that offered a vehicle that was number one in sales for almost two decades.

Look no matter how a bloomberg business wants to spin it. The truth is right in everyones face. There are college grads working for the same wages as High School drop outs in retail like walmart because there is nothing else in their area for work. College grads are no-talent brown-noses with no self-respect and no reason to respect themselves. By pitying these ones, your playing into the cradle-to-grave brainwashing about unpaid education that makes the white-collar bootlickers who do have "good jobs" conceited enough to blame everything on what they believe are inferior people.

Also, you neglect to mention the controlling element in this false distribution of status and pride: those who get where they are solely because of Daddy's money. The most hidden part of that is they don't have to live like 15-year-olds in college. The allowance they mooch off Daddy is the equivalent of having a full-time job, so they can live like young adults and will be the only ones to graduate with their self-respect intact.

Iacocca had also saved Ford. But the worthless Heirhead, Henry Ford's brat's brat, was jealous that a commoner had so much prestige and fired him out of reverse class envy.

[nic34]

I have no comment on anything Reich has to say.

Didn't think so, but thought I'd give you a chance anyway. :laugh:

[Mac-7]

Didn't think so, but thought I'd give you a chance anyway. :laugh:

I'm not interested in Robert Reich's opinion on any subject.

But don't let me stop you from discussing him if you can find anyone who does care.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Sure, they have the free choice to go out of business, don't they?

Government creates the conditions that force businesses to hire cheaper workers. Business owns GUBMINT and orders that the false-flag Liberals put on a show of persecuting businesses in order to give the corporate parasites a plausible excuse for deporting our jobs.

Why would the ruling class allow us to read Machiavelli, Orwell, and Huxley if those authors revealed the true depth and sophistication of plutocratic deception?

[gamewell45]

A couple of things:

1. Safety in the workplace came about NOT as a result of unions or Congress but because of capital accumulation. (BUSINESS 101) Businesses expanded. Demand for workers went up. Standards of workplaces went up.

Wrong. OSHA (Occupational Safety & Health Administration) came about by the government, because they felt that people should not have to go to work and die or be injured while at their work place. Companies historically placed employee safety on the back burner over profit margins which over time forced the Federal government to step in.

https://www.osha.gov/history/OSHA_HISTORY_3360s.pdf



2. There is no such thing as a living wage. Only total $#@!ing morons who believe in the tooth fairy continue to perpetuate that LIE.

Based on that perfidious statement, one can safely assume you are still in high school and living at home with mommy & daddy or at best run a hot dog stand on the corner somewhere and have no idea what a living wage is.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Problem is, protectionism has NEVER worked.

It's a global economy and capital is flowing to the most productive sources. The problem is not that our jobs are in trouble.

THIS government is still treating the American economy like it's 1920. It's the 21st Century.

Get rid of unions, corporate taxes and crippling regulations and you'll see NEW manufacturing jobs pop up all over the fruited plain. But DON'T ask accountants to deliberately lose money for their companies. Saying that Capitalists create jobs is like saying that vampires create blood. They sink their fangs into the juiciest morsel, slavish Third World coolies.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Ok.

The 1% with intelligence will stay in school and find good jobs in America or Hong Kong or Paris.

They won't care because they will be part of the new international elite.

But what happens to the average person who is not a stock trader or biochemical engineer?

He gets to pull a rickshaw around town no matter what part of the world he lives in because an American will be no better off than the poorest untouchable in India.

Am I being selfish to want the American middle class to maintain its edge in income and living standards?

You betcha.

And I'm proud of it. You fall for the plutocratic parasites' lie that High IQs have it made. This creates jealousy and hatred from everyone else, making the lives of creative geniuses miserable and motivating them to escape rather than create.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Jobs was never any hero of mine for this reason. He was a parasite. Americans are as brainwashed as @Reason10 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1397) if they think that this coding-illiterate high-roller actually created any of his products himself or played any significant part in the invention. Inventors are dynamic, investors are static. But due to massive highly financed self-glorifying publicity, these
lyin' leeches get away with getting the Lion's Share of what their employees produce.

[The Sage of Main Street]

lol obama is to blame for everything amazing That makes politics easy for the simple-minded Aynal Randies. Out of compassion for the disabled, we should go easy on the Libretardians.

[The Sage of Main Street]

You can't have both ways.

Either china can compete, if not now then tomorrow, or they can't because they are somehow inferior to America.

You assume that because they are not beating the pants off us in high tech now that they never can.

And I say you are wrong.

and I also say that giving them our low tech manufacturing base helps them take our high tech base later. That's exactly what Japan did. The key that we are not allowed to think about is that their managers are not snobs who think the production-line workers are morons doing a moron's job.

[Mac-7]

Business owns GUBMINT and orders that the false-flag Liberals put on a show of persecuting businesses in order to give the corporate parasites a plausible excuse for deporting our jobs.

Why would the ruling class allow us to read Machiavelli, Orwell, and Huxley if those authors revealed the true depth and sophistication of plutocratic deception?

Most businesses are too small to own government.

Joes Lawn Care or All-Pro Roofing are too small to own a city councilman much less a senator in Washington.

Most of the companies that the left hates are not to blame for our situation.

Sure big business has influence but voters have the final decision.

And they frequently choose wrong.

[Mac-7]

That's exactly what Japan did. The key that we are not allowed to think about is that their managers are not snobs who think the production-line workers are morons doing a moron's job.

Yes, I believe to paraphrase what someone said about Bear Bryant the Alabama football coach, the Japanese can take their workers and beat American managers and workers.

Or they can take American workers and beat Japanese workers under American managers.

[Common Sense]

Most businesses are too small to own government.

Joes Lawn Care or All-Pro Roofing are too small to own a city councilman much less a senator in Washington.

Most of the companies that the left hates are not to blame for our situation.

Sure big business has influence but voters have the final decision.

And they frequently choose wrong.

You're diminishing the role of corporate lobbyists and particularly lobbying by the US Chamber of Commerce.

[Peter1469]

"Today" meaning as long as it takes for YOU to retire and live out your normal lifespan.

Future generations say thanks for nuthin.

You have left the conversation. Come back - China's current manufacturing capability. Not its future capability.

[Mac-7]

You have left the conversation. Come back - China's current manufacturing capability. Not its future capability.

No I summed up the reason for your lack of concern.

It's a problem for future generations to deal with not you.

Another reason America is in trouble is because too many in America do not want to think ahead.

[Mac-7]

You're diminishing the role of corporate lobbyists and particularly lobbying by the US Chamber of Commerce.

I don't buy that as an excuse for the rest of us to just turn on and drop out.

[Common Sense]

I don't buy that as an excuse for the rest of us to just turn on and drop out.

I agree. But let's not pretend that money is more influential in politics than it should be. It's corrupted the political process.

[Bob]

I agree. But let's not pretend that money is more influential in politics than it should be. It's corrupted the political process.

I watched a CSPAN discussion over this.

The lawyer blurted out that Money is not speech. And he blasted only Citizens United (but liking how it works for Unions).

Then he proceeded to blast money in campaigns. Why if money is not speech.

http://www.c-span.org/video/?324985-1/panel-discussion-money-politics

[Peter1469]

No I summed up the reason for your lack of concern.

It's a problem for future generations to deal with not you.

Another reason America is in trouble is because too many in America do not want to think ahead.

OK. Let me know when you decide to get back on point.

[Mac-7]

OK. Let me know when you decide to get back on point.

I'm on point now.

you cling to the thin reed that the Chinese have not done to high tech what they have done to all the unsexy industries that used to provide jobs for millions of Americans - YET.

[Peter1469]

I'm on point now.

you cling to the thin reed that the Chinese have not done to high tech what they have done to all the unsexy industries that used to provide jobs for millions of Americans - YET.

lol

OK. I will keep waiting.

[Mac-7]

lol

OK. I will keep waiting

i won't.

Its obvious that you are a lost cause.

You'll never see.

[Peter1469]

i won't.

Its obvious that you are a lost cause.

You'll never see.

I see perfectly well that you have failed to keep up. You went off the reservation.

[Mac-7]

I see perfectly well that you have failed to keep up. You went off the reservation.

No you did when you abandoned our future because it does not apply to you.

[Peter1469]

LoL.

Forget it. Lol.

[Mac-7]

LoL.

Forget it. Lol.

Ok.

Just leave your white flag at the door for the next lib to use.

[Reason10]

He was a parasite. Americans are as brainwashed as @Reason10 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1397) if they think that this coding-illiterate high-roller actually created any of his products himself or played any significant part in the invention. Inventors are dynamic, investors are static. But due to massive highly financed self-glorifying publicity, these
lyin' leeches get away with getting the Lion's Share of what their employees produce.

Where are you getting this fairy tale that Jobs is any kind of hero to me? (And for the mods who are wondering about another infraction, the phrase "fairy tale" existed for centuries long before the left made it into a saga of Barney Frank. I read "fairy tales" to my daughters at bedtime, and they were just that. No homophobia here.)

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/60820976.jpg