Clinton has done a great job at picking up the John Edwards populist banner – talking about rebuilding infrastructure, keeping jobs in the US, etc. Problem is, many people don’t believe she’s telling the truth. Is she a populist, or merely playing one on TV?
Using the last of her spent voice at a rally, Clinton hailed the power of unions, pledged solidarity with the truck drivers, autoworkers, veterans and teachers, and promised that as president, she would not allow tax breaks “for any company that sends a single job out of Pennsylvania and overseas.”They loved that. But they really went wild when she recalled dealing with detoured traffic on I-95 a few weeks ago and asked, “Wouldn’t it be better if we put hardworking Americans back to work building roads and bridges?”
“She’s for the working person,” said George Dolbow, a 45-year-old glazier and member of Local 252 of the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades. He came to the diner with his 16-month-old, 140-pound St. Bernard, Jagger, who sported several Hillary stickers.
Jobs BS
All companies are in business to make a profit. A profit for the investors and shareholders. Regardless of the industry, the product or service has to be offered at a price consumers are willing to pay while still maintaining the aforementioned profit. Both of these objectives are acheived by sending jobs overseas. The cheap labor overseas affords these businesses the ability to satisfy the shareholder and the customer. It is foolish to think business is going to forego profit by keeping jobs in the US. In the ideal world business would offer US produced goods and services at a fair price while earning a reasonable profit. However, as we are well aware, that’s not how the game is played. In the ideal world scenario, CEO’s don’t earn hundreds of millions of dollars. Keeping jobs in the US would either mean higher prices for the consumer or lower wages for the worker. The benefits of cheap overseas labor far outweigh any tax break. Sorry to burst anyone’s bubble, but regardless of what Hillary, Obama, or John McCain say, they are not going to change any of this anytime soon.
Agreed....
While efforts can be made to stay competitive, the big bad bottom line is that we simply are no longer the 800 pound gorilla of industry…and probably never will be again. I don’t have an answer and I’m not sure anyone does.
That said, I do think that the Democrats will, at the very least, makes efforts to watch out for “the little guy” on some level…
Pilt
not necessarily
If you force countries like China and Latin America to pay for “externalized costs” like pollution, destruction of land, and exploitation of workers, then America’s products become more competitive.
When a foreign company pumps toxins in the air or destroys a rain forest, we all pay for that, not them. But, by refusing to accept products made in that way, we force them to be better global citizens. Also, our products now stand a chance of competing.
Also, if you’re going to cut wages in America to be more competitive, start with CEO salaries, which are now out of control. If public companies refuse to do anything about the hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation these fatcats receive — no matter how poorly their companies do — then our tax policies should correct that problem. Anyone who earns over, say, $30 million a year should be taxed at 60%. The government can use those tax dollars to invest in green energy, rebuild roads and bridges and schools, and put people to work.
We are among the least-taxed citizens of any major economic power, and yet greedy corporate execs and multinational corporations would see our country rot before doing anything about it.
Excellent note on
Excellent note on externalities and the gross over compensation received by CEOs.
RE: Jobs BS
It’s always interesting to hear from such strong supporters of the Pennsylvania and U.S. workforce.
Yes, standing up for our own working families is an uphill fight and eventually it may be lost entirely, which is when one turns out the lights because when we no longer “make things” our country will be an economic basket case taking hand-outs from China.
It doesn’t so much bother one that some Americans share your opinion for, tragically, in the end they may be proven right.
What does bother me is how some people are so willing to simply give up and roll over for rapacious corporate executives who place the pursuit of profits ahead of the best interests of their own country. One might possibly find among the Russian serfs of 300 years ago a more willingness to champion what is right and oppose what is so terribly wrong.
Matt Thomas
We're not immune from history
What bothers me about this debate is how many Americans lose sight of history. America didn’t start out as a manufacturing behemouth. First we were a market for good from the British Empire and Europe. Then we were a source of raw material. Then we began our own manufacturing and became our own customers. We are now at the stage where cheaper labor and raw materials mean manufacturing is moving away. This has happened to every other country, yet we somehow expect it won’t or shouldn’t happen to us.
I think many of us are old enough to remember made in the USA, then made in Japan, then made in Mexico/Central/South American, then made in Taiwan, then made in India/SE Asia and now made in China.
We have to recognize what’s happening now is part of a repeating cycle and it’s imperative that we adjust and innovate. The scary part is that in a country that used to be defined by its “can do” spirit, we act like we are helpless victims.
pd
History
I think that is the point of this discussion. We are not adjusting and innovating, and this isn’t just about manufacturing. We don’t seem to be adding jobs in any sector, except perhaps retail, but trying buying a home and a car with those wages. In many ways we have become helpless victims, especially those in the middle and lower classes. Financing a college education has in itself become a challange. Many of tomorrow’s entreprenuers will be relying on that education. Granted, there are those who “play” the helpless victim and are content in that role, but there are many who still have a “can-do” attitude and just can’t make any headway. Anyone who has tried to make it in their own business can attest to the fact that starting and building a small business is an up hill battle. Garnering the start-up capital and financing is more difficult today then in the past. There is no secret that it is difficult to compete with the national chains of retailers, restaurants, and service providers. We can’t however just throw up our arms and concede defeat, but we are facing difficult times. We need to simplify the borrowing processes for education and business start-ups.
Yes, making ends meet is much harder
I don’t disagree with your comments. I see it everyday in my struggling home town. I think what we need to do is have a serious discussion and debate on our national funding priorities. Do we really need to spend upwards of 500B dollars on defense? Do we need to spend ever increasing amounts on prison building and law enforcement? I know from my own experience, American defense contractors are completely dependent on the federal government to keep them in business. That’s a key reason there’s so much outsourcing of traditional military and civilian government functions. We could spend our money so much more wisely in ways that would support new industries (ex: environmental, reuse/recycling) that would pay a living/sustainable wage.
pd
America's protectionism has worked since Day 1
Just some background to help you understand America’s long history of protectionism, and how it helped make America an economic superpower:
The “American System” worked incredibly well, despite strong opposition in Europe where the Adam Smith school of thinking on free trade was taking hold. Abraham Lincoln and subsequent Republicans also adopted protectionist policies:
In 1930, Congress went nuts and raised tariffs like crazy, which possibly contributed to the Great Depression. But then FDR stepped in and corrected things, resorting to the original American System our founding fathers established:
I agree that we need global trade, but we also need to invest in America, protect key industries, as we’ve done since our country was founded, and force other countries to pay for externalized costs like pollution and land destruction, and to protect worker rights.
a few questions
Your posts are exactly what KP is all about. I have some quesions for you… What strategy to suggest to protect American companies? What companies do we protect? Finally, the biggest question – how do we force other countries to pay for their exteranlized costs? I’m not sure its as though we can simply stop purchasing products made in China.
China
Excellent questions. China manufactures many of the products we americans can’t live without (flat screen TV, I-phones, sneakers, sunglasses, cookware, etc.). Not to mention the billions they hold in american debt. The US is not in any position to “force” China or any other country to do anything. That being said, we need to look to ourselves and determine what we can do better in today’s global economy. Practices that worked in the 19th and 20th century economy are no longer practical in the 21st century. The world is a much different place then it was 100 years ago, even 60 years ago for that matter.
Recent New Yorker magazine articles
There have been several excellent stories in the New Yorker recently including one about Britain’s largest supermarket owner deciding to try and label each product with a “carbon footprint” cost. It’s a lot harder than it sounds although I’m sure a good algorithm will be found. There was also a good story about carbon cap trading and the inventor of that market. This week James Surwocki has a great item on how the global credit market could perhaps pull down Iceland, of all places, and what that means for the US.
http://www.newyorker.com
pd
tariffs, taxes and subsidies
We should protect and promote our manufacturers, using the same things that every other nation uses: tariffs, subsidies, and taxes.
To encourage countries like China and others in Latin America to be good global citizens, you put a dollar value on “externalized” costs — like pollution — and add that cost to products in the form of tariffs. Suddenly, American products will become a lot more affordable, especially when you factor in transportation costs.
This will raise prices of goods here, so these tariffs need to be done strategically, phased in to give companies time to adjust, etc.
American products will not
American products will not become more affordable, the products from countries to whom we apply tariffs will simply rise in price to match the cost of producing them here—therefore the foreign products will become as unaffordable as the American products and everyone will simply have to adjust to making do with less. Jobs will be preserved at the cost of a lowered standard of living in America. There is no free lunch.
populist
Now Hillary wants to be John Edwards. Is there nothing she won’t say or do or claim to be like when it comes to being president? Her problem is that she has no soul. In that I mean she has no vision as to what she wants or what she believes in. Obama has vision of a goal beyond himself and that is why he shines over her.
Wow, I was Just Thinking That!
In that her Soul is so not there while Barack has a very large and evolved Soul, one who can take us to a more higher and positive place, where we need to go to survive as a more advanced society or if now we will all go down together. He speaks of brotherhood and unity and he is non-critical and dispassionate though has love for his fellowman.
Soul
Don’t forget his ability to walk on water or even turn it in to wine. Come on people, he’s just the senator from Illinois. Can he be a good president, perhaps, but let’s not expect miracles.
He's better than Mccain
I can’t even think what the country would be like with Mccain in the White House. He seems so stuck on his ideas instead of sharing the ideas of all Americans. Most of American want to end the war in Iraq, but he insist that we stay up to 100 years.
Bush's Third Term...
That’s exactly what a McCain Presidency would look like!
http://www.bushsthirdterm.com
McCain is a “maverick” in sheep’s clothing. A filthy rich entitled conservative who wants to be seen as “every man.” A complete and utter beltway insider who has nothing new to offer. A Proxy President, who will extend the Bush Debacle for four more years.
But hey, anyone who thinks he’d be fun to have beer with, go for it.
If you haven’t noticed,
If you haven’t noticed, everyone running for president is filthy rich. It takes a lot of money to be able to run for politics on any level—let alone POTUS. When was the last president a man of modest means—not modest upbringing but truly currently modest means?
Both Democrats are beholden
Both Democrats are beholden to environmental extremists who hurt families with their silly fixations.
Air, land, and water are all clean enough, and temperature changes are mostly caused by changes in solar output.
Trying to “fix” such things has gotten insanely expensive, but that doesn’t bother the lunatics who don’t pay the bills.
We have 3 Choices
The best choice is Sen. Obama. We need to change Washington to start working for the American people.
beholden
Where should I start? First: you’re an a**hole. Second: air, land and water quality are not clean enough. Many of our natural bodies of water can’t sustain life. Third: natural resources are limited. This planet can survive without humans. Humans on the otherhand need this planet. Fourth: all of us lunatics pay the bills. Any items or service we purchase as consumers has all of the costs included in the price. Fifth: you’re an a**hole.
Thanks for calling names.
Thanks for calling names. People who don’t know much are good at that. For some,it is their only skill.
Fact is, the solar output determines temperature. 1998 was towards the high point of the last solar cycle (when the sun puts out more energy), so the earth, along with Venus, Mars, Neptune, etc. all got warmer. A bunch of big-government fans all tried to turn than into an excuse for higher taxes, and many, like the typical name-caller above, all obediently believed them.
Finally, nearly all bodies of water, even vents of poison gases on the ocean floor, sustain life. Things are clean enough for any sane person.
Air, water, and land are so clean that typhus has all but disapperared, along with cholera. If the death lovers would let people use DDT, malaria would be gone, too.
Forgot to add that
Forgot to add that there’s been no global warming, nada, since 1998. Now, the earth appears to be cooling. Both arctic and antarctic ice packs are bigger than ever. Guess what? Solar output has been dropping since 1998.
Some people can look at the graphs and understand. Others can’t.
Check icecap.com for better info than the professional alarmists put out.
Big Picture
I’ll refrain from name calling just to keep the peace here. DDT has been proven to be toxic to fish and many insects were able to build a resistance to the chemical. As for global warming, there are many points of view and the debate continues. I am not familiar with icecap.com, but there are other web-sites out there with data on the otherside of the arguement. Just because a subject is on the internet, does not make it fact. Many natural waterways in the Northeast are not able to sustain any life form due to acid mine runoff. Fact is, the environment is delicate and we owe it to ourselves and future generations to make responsible attempts to preserve it. Environmental protection is much less costly than the alternative.
If fish and bugs are more
If fish and bugs are more important than people, then DDT should not be used. We are all agreed on that.
But, what if people dying of malaria, (a million a year? Three millions?) would have been saved with a little DDT, which, by the way is fairly harmless, unless you’re Rachael Carson, and willing to make boogeymen out of helpful chemicals?
Only a hardened leftist wouldn’t want to help people at the POSSIBLE cost of a few birds. Malaria, by the way, was almost eradicated before environmentalists decided that not enough black and brown people were dying from it, and eliminated DDT, “for their own good”.
Scratch a leftist and find a self-righteous murderer.
you're mistaken
Actually, DDT is still being used in smaller quantities to effectively combat malaria in many places. However, in some areas malaria has become a major problem, but NOT because DDT programs have been eliminated. Here are some facts about DDT and malaria…
Oops. With over a million
Oops. With over a million dying of malaria every year, I should have said
“Scratch a leftist and find a self-righteous MASS murderer.”
Oops?
In a previous post you chastised anonymous for calling names. Yet in each of your replys to some well written responses, you resort to name calling. I’m not sure if you are personally a victim of malaria or just trying to stir the pot, but you certainly are not capable of any kind of intelligent discussion.
Don’t think I said
Don’t think I said anything that the families of millions of malaria victims wouldn’t say about the U.N. type of “we know best” people whose anti-DDT policies were, and are, responsible for those same deaths.
But, there’s a lot of oil in Africa, and the fewer Africans there are, the easier it is to get out. Environmentalist are glad to lend a helping hand.
WHO, by the way, made/makes it nearly impossible to make DDT in many places, and they influence “leaders” to kill their people rather than go to all the work of building up productive economies and free societies.
jobs
To expect that Americans should just sit by and accept the fact that if we do nothing our jobs and industry will just go offshore and we should be satisfied with that goes beyone insanity. No nation on the face of the earth except us allows their jobs and industry to be decimated by foreigners. To allow this to go unimpeded means that we no longer have a capacity to lead in machine tools, we no longer have the capacity to build ships, much of our military spare parts are out sourced to foreign an possibley unreliable sources. Free trade should be on a level playing field where all manufacturers are dealing with the same environment. No way can American mfgs compete with non union work or i’ll blow your head off situations. Our unions in the past have fought hard to have decent working conditions and benefits. As modernization have taken the jobs out of existance we owe it too people to provide basic necesities for existance or provide training in areas which we are not going to give up. Where is our Sarcozy who is an economic nationalist. He says if it benefits France he is for it. If not go away. We should adopt the same attitude. You can talk all you want about economics and if nothing else the French revolution should be a lesson to all and that if you do not provide a way for the masses to exist they will take matters into their own hands . I for one have no problem with paying higher prices if it means more security, stable economics, etc. Keep the low priced trash out of here. If we really want it we will pay for it if its made here.
No mention of corrupt union
No mention of corrupt union leaders stuffing their pockets full of money while they were helping drive American manufacturing overseas.
show us where
Show us where your claim is valid before making the charge. No doubt there are corrupt union officials but I dare you to show where the officials lined their pockets at the expense of union jobs.
unions...
Here is a small sample of what unions have given all of us:
- 40-hour work week – safe working conditions – health benefits – higher salaries
Unions forced all companies to be better employers. What’s more, by putting money in the pockets of middle class Americans, unions have helped spark one of the largest economic booms in world history, which took place in the U.S. from the 1940s to the 1960s. Earning a decent wage, middle class Americans were able to buy homes, cars, appliances, send their kids to college, etc., etc.
Unions did that. For every corrupt union boss, I’ll show you 100 corrupt CEOs and politicians. Unless you LIKE working in a sweatshop for 30 cents a day, unions are the last organizations you should be complaining about.
?
Try decaf next time. I was on your side!
Barack A Old Wise Soul
What most people know intuitively about Barack is that Barack touches our Souls, Hearts, and collective conscience. Some speak of his so-called “inexperience” but his Soul is “old and wise”, that is why he can brush “Negativity” off his shoulders with a smile. If elected he will be much beloved and be known as the People’s President. We can sense that he is one of us and that we are all of us in this together. There is no you or me but we and us.. and together we must move forward and higher to a more positive place and state of mind. He leads without criticism, demonizing or anger, he leads with a clear sense of direction and purpose where we must go if we are to survive as a people both here in the U.S. and abroad. He represents and offers true change or else stay static and die. Hillary Clinton belongs to the old, unacceptable style of politics that we should be moving away from — the do and say anything, the distortions that in reality are lies, the smears and the anger, which are negative and demeaning. If we in America are to get to a more positive place, we must elect a leader who is positive who radiates love and goodwill to all.
This is the most
This is the most simple-minded post ever.
Simply because you have no
Simply because you have no hope. Sad. Life without hope and positivity is an empty one.
we in America are to get to a more positive place, we must ...
… elect a person who will uphold the constitution, as they are charged, by their oath of office.
Please read:
the US Constitution
H.R. 2458: the Enumerated Powers Act
and each of the Senator’s (McCain’s, Clinton’s, and Obama’s) website
side by side.
Then choose the candidate that will fulfill that pledge.