In 20 years, our children / grandchildren will be serving the affluent Chinese, Indian and Mexicans that come to this country on a Disney vacation. At that time, not a single damn thing will be produced here, as we fully transition to a service economy of the bad kind: Walmart, McDonald's, etc.. Our corporate titans with the help of our politicians in Washington DC really manage to do a number on us, and yet people can't still see it.
That's funny, because the exact opposite of what you are describing is happening in Germany. So why is it that Germany's manufacturing industries are expanding, have a trade surplus with China and all the while being ranked one of best countries in terms of low barriers to cross-border trades?
Yeah, no; our black, hispanic and under-educated caucasian female "neighbors" will still be serving two-income households with paid vacation and no student loan debt. If push comes to shove we'll just raise tariffs and cancel everyone's visa.
Trump lies. He has outsourced much of his business overseas. Hell, his clothing line is made in China. lol.
This is a fear that has been brought up since the 80's yet our economy is still the largest and strongest in the World. We've lost a lot of manufacturing jobs no doubt but our productivity is still very high and as noted many of those jobs weren't just from outsourcing but also from automation. Capital though isn't just a one way street and affluent Chinese, Indians and Mexicans aren't just coming here to spend tourist money but are also investing in the US. As someone whose actually pitched Chinese to do more business in the US I wish they would do more. Then again architecture actually is a service industry.
1. They understand that they have to innovate if their cost of labor and energy are higher than other parts of the world. 2. They're benefiting from a very weak euro right now.
Not completely accurate because in Monopoly, everyone starts out even, with $1500 and no property. In this economy, people start off with million dollar loans from their parents, then claim that they made their fortunes without help from anyone else. This economy is like a game of Monopoly where 2/3 of each color group are owned at the start by one of the six players.
You can't really stop them from leaving. You should've signed a pre-nup so you could keep America's half when they leave. Now, you have to go to court to see what you can get. The problem is, you waited so long, they bought the system. Those corporations are leaving. They want to leave in a quiet and cost effective way. It's not a conspiracy, it's just capitalism. Do what's best for yourself. Corporations don't care about race, class, etc. They're just trying to get the most out while putting the least in. The fight is not about making them stay/leave. The fight is about how easy/difficult/cheap/expensive it is to do so. If these guys are leaving, they should pay for the ideas Americans brought to the birth of the company. They should pay for potential health hazards down the line caused by their operations. They should pay for not being treated like a concentration risk - entire towns, cities sometimes bet their future on these people. They should pay for your inability to make a sideways move into another job, if that's the case. There is no doubt they're leaving. It's just about what they're taking with them. Bernie claims he will attempt to close the tax loopholes. Obviously, he won't be able to do that. But he is far more likely than Hillary to tighten it. Hillary has been either for or indifferent to the free trade agreements that lead to tragedies like this. Can Bernie do more, given the state of congress? I don't know. I know he will do whatever he can, and I don't know that Hillary will do whatever she can for you. There's a lot Obama was able to achieve without congress. There's a lot that congress won't let Hillary achieve either. Is Bernie going to let a trade agreement negotiation stay secret or is he going to come out and say he doesn't agree with it? Look, I get it. You probably voted for Obama. You thought it was going to be hope and change. Instead it was a lot of masterful compromise. So now you want to say you weren't wrong about your vote, it's just that it's impossible to do, the Republicans wrecked it. It's time to get over it. Obama did his best, he really did. And it's ok to try again, and fall short again. When Obama fell short, you still got Obamacare. Build on that momentum, aim even higher, and maybe you'll get a new gift. Maybe free tuition, maybe expanded social security, maybe an expansion of ACA, maybe you'll break up one or two big banks and prevent this bubble from bursting. I've not seen a decent analysis of how Bernie might not achieve at least as much as Hillary even if he fails in his lofty goals. He's not going to REPEAL aca. He's certainly not going fail to do ANYTHING about student debt. He's not going to be incapable of getting the minimum wage to $12 in 5 years (lol hillary). Is he going to start a war that Hillary otherwise wouldn't? Is he going to make terrorists more likely to aim for revenge in America? Is he going to allow ISIS to overpower its monstrous surroundings? Is he going to sell LESS weapons to saudis? Are Black Lives going to matter less under Bernie? Genuinely would love a more knowledgeable posters' analysis of what's the worst that can happen under Bernie. I've heard the doomsday scenario from one poster, but I'm also interested in a reasonable, realistic, almost dry expectation of what could happen if Bernie can't get EXACTLY what he wants - keeping in mind Hillary also won't get a lot of what she wants, like everyone else.
And the one guy who owns most of the property has had undue influence over the type of gifts/fees/punishments in community chest and chance. Also, the other 5 owe him money already cause they started the game off on his property.
The Chinese, Indian and Mexicans + Disneyland is just a metaphor. Not really picking on any particular group.
Thank you for so clearly demonstrating why any sort of rationale discourse on politics is essentially impossible. You are so wrapped in your ideology and stereotypes that you can't help but infer tone and even thought where none existed. I'm assuming the shoeshine is for the scuffing that occurred during TherestheDaggers firmly inserting his shoe in your backside in this discussion? He may indeed apply some shoeshine afterwards, but I think the scuffing you have would be more in need of bandages?
NO COMPANY puts jobs ahead of profits. This fatal flaw in thinking is so representative of the problems people have applying any sort of common sense or rationale thought to the discussion. Companies seek to make profit. If they didn't, they would go out of business, and ALL the workers would lose their jobs, as well as the stockholders and owners of the company. That is a lose-lose-lose proposition, yet it seems to be the one so many of the left favor. They fail to understand the actual implications of the policies they espouse, because they are so wrapped in ideology and class bashing that they can't get that out of the way to actually think through the problem, or their proposed solution. Hence the solutions just make the very problem they seek to fix...worse. They therefore, in actuality, want millions of workers to LOSE their jobs, and I, for one, wish they would explain why they want this to happen. I'm sure some here will now try. Bring it on. Defending a failed ideology from a flawed perspective with little basis in fact is seldom conducive to a winning debate. That should stir things up. Let the games begin!
They have quite a bit of democratic socialism, with free college, national health care, state supported child care, long minimum vacations and all the things conservatives hate.
1-Deep pockets is a plus for German companies, 3 level of banking designed to give their companies an edge . 2-Investment policy : American sell their asset+ relatively easy access .German among other rush to buy while protecting their assist . Walmart history in Germany is a classic case for that . Almost in every sector , a major acquisition has been made by foreign company supported by their governments /hedge fund . 3-FTZ free trade zone : why would you make something in the US, when you simply can assemble 95% overseas then add your local 5% and get the best of both worlds 4-GovT agency shutting down business as law makers figure out something new to do , environmental regulation shut down 60% of heavy manufacturing business or forced them to relocate : Cat for example Reagan+Clinton legacies combined created the grass root for this to happen in first place , and hardly any politician/Economist would even speak about it ,They always point to the wrong direction for endless debates And there is no end of sight to cause policy reverse, liberal they don't like trade restrictions , conservative don't like to spend : and it seems like every candidate may speed or maintain this process .
America should be using that cheap money it is creating to rebuild a lot of infrastructure. We need to go on a China-esque infrastructure building spree. There's no stopping the globalization train but this infrastructure building would act as a major stimulus to our economy and if done smartly would provide a huge economic boast for decades past it. Just think of not only upgrading and repairing our transportation (land, water, and air) infrastructure, but our water and energy.
This is the most basic implementation of a labor market. Carrier is not going to pay someone $40/hr to do what someone in Mexico is willing and able to do for $8/hr. If you want to compete, you have to make it more profitable for the corporation to hire you than to hire someone else. The workers (or their union) should offer a package where they will work at wages that, combined with the savings of not shipping every unit up from Mexico and moving all of their operations, would be a wash with relocating. Either that or see if they can follow the factory to Monterrey and do the same job there.
That's the issue with globalization. Capital flows freely, but labor is fixed. The proposed remedy in neoliberalism is welfare. What's the conservative solution?
I largely agree with you except that I would say this isn't only an issue with the Left. In last night's debate Trump brought this up prominently about how he would protect and bring back jobs from China, Mexico and Vietnam.
