exporting american jobs

[pappy]

so how does every1 feel about this.  american jobs goiing over to countries such as india an china b/c cost are much more cheaper that people people over hear in the states.  a lot of people r losing jobs.  they say by 2008 more than 500,000 technology jobs will move outta of america b/c it will be cheaper to pay people in india an china.  an  the govt is encouraging this.  so this hurts middle class americans. so jobs that at one time were considered secure jobs are no longer.  so people in america will be forced to work for much less. an it benefits big business greatly.  an Dubbya has a lot of friends in big business.  just something to think about

[Lincoln]

I don't agree with it but that's capatilism for you. Anything to increase the money.

[infinite59]

I don't agree with it but that's capatilism for you. Anything to increase the money.

[Suga Foot]

here's one for ya:  Sometimes my dad has to go to Seattle to work on Yachts.  He isn't even allowed to pick up a tool, becuase it takes away from the American jobs.  He just has to direct them.

[The Big Bad Ass]

I don't agree with it but that's capatilism for you. Anything to increase the money.

Sadly, I agree with this statement. Word just came down last week that Guide (GM headlight making plant) is leaving Indiana to move to Mexico. 5200 jobs in a small city gone.

[Trauma-san]

It's kind of a conundrum, in a true free market capitalist society, there shouldn't be any regulations on the businesses on where they can produce things... but in the meanwhile, it's fucking over tons of american workers.  I don't know the answer, that's why I'm not the president.  

[M Dogg™]

In the words of Trauma... stopping blaming others for your problems... lol

For reals, that's what happened to San Bernardino in the late 80's. We had lost our Steel Mill in '83 I think, then later the airplane factory, and to top it all off, our Air Force base in 1991. In 1991 and 1992 we won the award, Most Dangerous City in the United States. Things grew in the late 90's and crime has been cut in half. But good paying working class jobs are gone, and most people have lower middle class jobs, and most people are making it pay check to pay check. It's all good though, it took awhile, but we were able to recover... YEAH TAX CUTS... lol. Actually since 2001, things have declined, but compared to 1991, no one really cares, We are still better off. Here's the future of the rest of the United States. Big Business is a bitch, but what's the alternative, Communism.

[M Dogg™]

It's kind of a conundrum, in a true free market capitalist society, there shouldn't be any regulations on the businesses on where they can produce things... but in the meanwhile, it's fucking over tons of american workers.  I don't know the answer, that's why I'm not the president.  

damn as I was typing, he was typing... lol

[Woodrow]

I don't see what the problem is...

Look into the law of Comparative Advantage...

"Government interference with free trade is un-American. Sacrificing one’s standard of living in order to subsidize inefficient domestic producers is un-American. The tribal fear of foreigners is un-American. Resentment at others’ success is un-American. A patriotic American acts as a capitalist and an individualist: he buys the best, wherever it may be found." -Harry Binswanger

[M Dogg™]

^^Are you American?

[Woodrow]

Yes.

[M Dogg™]

Then how can you be infavor of companies taking advantage of other peoples' human rights, by running sweat shops oversees to replace American jobs here. What we should do is make American own companies treat all their employees with the human rights given  to American workers here. Because all that is happening is that people from other countries are getting shitted on, our workers are losing jobs, and big business is getting richer. I mean, they already own most the worlds wealth. How much more richer do you want them to be?

[Woodrow]

"According to a recent poll, 80 percent of Americans think it their patriotic duty to give preference to American-made products. But “Buy American” is wholly un-American in both its economics and its philosophy.
     
America’s distinction among all the nations of the world is that it enshrined political and economic freedom. Although we have departed greatly from our original laissez-faire principles, to the whole world America still symbolizes capitalism. Americanism means understanding that a free market, domestically and internationally, is the only path to general prosperity.
     
International trade is not mortal combat but a form of cooperation, a means of expanding worldwide production. The benefits of international trade flow to both trading partners, even when one of the countries is more efficient across the board. This is the “Law of Comparative Advantage,” covered in every economics textbook. Free trade does not destroy but creates employment.
     
The lucrative workings of free markets do not depend upon lines drawn on a map. The economic advantages of international commerce are the same as those of interstate, intercity, and crosstown commerce. And if we kept crosstown trade accounts, the “trade deficits” that would appear would be as meaningless as are our international “trade deficits.” Fact confirms theory: the U.S. ran a trade “deficit” practically every year of the nineteenth century, the time of our most rapid economic progress.
     
Philosophically, Americanism means individualism. Individualism holds that one’s personal identity, moral worth, and inalienable rights belong to one as an individual, not as a member of a particular race, class, nation, or other collective.
     
But collectivism is the premise of “Buy American.” In purchasing goods, we are expected to view ourselves and the sellers not as individuals, but as units of a nation. We are expected to accept lower quality or more expensive goods in the name of alleged benefits to the national collective.
     
Most “Buy American” advocates are motivated by misplaced patriotism. But for some the motive is a collectivist hostility towards foreigners. This xenophobic attitude is thoroughly un-American; it is plain bigotry.
     
Giving preference to American-made products over German or Japanese products is the same injustice as giving preference to products made by whites over those made by blacks. Economic nationalism, like racism, means judging men and their products by the group from which they come, not by merit.
     
Collectivists project a dog-eat-dog world, where one man’s gain is another man’s loss, where everyone has to cling to his own herd and fight all the other herds for a share of the spoils. And that is exactly the premise of the “Buy American” campaign. “It’s Japan or us,” is the implication. If Japan is getting richer, then we must be getting poorer.
     
Individualism teaches that the interests of men are in harmony — provided we are speaking of self-supporting individuals who deal with each other by voluntary exchange, paying for what they get.
     
The same principle applies on an international scale. One nation’s enrichment raises the standard of living of all other nations with which it trades. Which nation adds more to your standard of living: Japan or Bangladesh? And how would you fare if Japan were suddenly reduced to the economic level of Bangladesh?
     
The patriotic advocates of buying American would be shocked to learn that the economic theory underlying their viewpoint is Marxism. In describing the influx of Japanese products and investment, they don’t use the Marxist terminology of “imperialism” and “exploitation,” but the basic idea is the same: capitalistic acts are destructive and free markets will impoverish you. It’s the same anti-capitalist nonsense whether it is used by leftists to attack the United States for its commerce with Latin America or by supposed patriots to attack Japan for its commerce with the United States.
     
Contrary to Marxism, one does not benefit from the poverty or incompetence of others. It is in your interest that other men — in every country — be smart, ambitious, and productive, not stupid, lazy, or incompetent. Would you be better off if Thomas Edison had been dim-witted? Nothing is changed if we substitute a Japanese inventor for Edison.
     
More and better production is good for all men, everywhere. What’s good for Toyota is good for America. That’s individualism, and that’s Americanism.
     
The converse is that an individualist refuses to trade with dictatorships; trade means the exchange of values by free men, but dictatorships, such as Cuba and China, systematically reject individual rights and treat their citizens as slaves.
     
Government interference with free trade is un-American. Sacrificing one’s standard of living in order to subsidize inefficient domestic producers is un-American. The tribal fear of foreigners is un-American. Resentment at others’ success is un-American. A patriotic American acts as a capitalist and an individualist: he buys the best, wherever it may be found.

-Harry Binswanger

You don't understand simple economic principals.

[LuvMilkshakes]

You don't understand simple economic principals.

LMFAO. How ironic. This guy can't even spell PRINCIPLES, and wants to teach others what they are. Shut your ass up and refrain from making yourself look like a fool.

[hector]

^^ Next time you want to try and expose someone for a spelling issue, perhaps you should look up the definition of the word principal. You can take your foot out of your mouth at any time now. Assuming of course you looked the word up. Jack ass.