A simple question

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Bravo STILL cannot justify corporations outsourcing jobs that can be done by Americans during an economic crisis stemming years....Bravos STILL cannot justify American taxpayers covering the corporations cost of outsourcing set-ups by granting them a tax break. Bravo STill cannot justify the reasoning for the GOP to DEFEND these corporations......who in turn want Americans to buy their products at current prices.

Yes, corporations make a profit......but if they do it by screwing over the American consumer and by exploiting the working conditions of other countries, then they are NOT a good corporation...and they must be held accountable.

Well, I'm not Bravo, but let me tackle this one. Corporations exist to make a profit. There is really no other reason or purpose for them to exist in a capitalist society. Since the early to mid 1900s, virtually every sector of manufacturing and production, have had to deal with organized labor. In the beginning, it was a good thing, if it weren't for unions, we might be just like China, people working in deplorable conditions for pennies a day. But, through the years, corruption and graft, along with political collusion, have created a behemoth, a leviathan, something that no longer resembles the great idea we started with. Each year, unions demand more for their members, more pay, better working conditions, more benefits, fewer hours of actual work, better insurance, and it repeats itself in an endless cycle of ever-increasing 'wants' from the unions, because that is what unions are there to do. This never-ending upward spiral of cost to the corporations, continued to the point the corporations could no longer afford the labor to produce a viable product. Many of them simply went belly-up, although the 'market' still existed for their products. Some capitalists figured out, they can outsource labor and maintain some sort of reasonable cost, which still allows them to make a profit, and that's kind of where we are at today. The manufacturing jobs in America went away because unions simply priced American labor out of the market.

Now... Since the entire Democrat party (and some Republicans) are completely beholden to the unions, and since people who work for unions like their gigs, it's been impossible to do anything about the situation, and things have simply continued to plod along, more and more jobs continue to go away and/or become outsourced. Your solution to the problem, is to outlaw this outsourcing thing, and force corporations to deal with collective bargaining and the ever-increasing spiral of labor costs associated with organized labor. This will not work in a capitalist system, because of what I said in the second sentence, corporations are in business to make a profit. Now, this wouldn't happen at first, it might take a decade or so, but in the meantime, US-made products will skyrocket in price, and of course, we would have to stop importing these things, or apply tariffs to create an 'even playing field' for these corporations trying to pay people way more than they are worth to produce products. But it still wouldn't create new jobs in America, not new labor unionized jobs, because corporations can't afford it, because consumers wouldn't pay the prices they would need to charge.

The ONLY way to return to what we once enjoyed, in the way of manufacturing sector jobs in America, is to do something about organized labor and collective bargaining. This does not mean we need to return to the days when children worked in sweat shops, or that American workers should have to work for $2 a week, like the Chinese. It means, we have to regain some sense of reason and understanding of how corporations work, and why they are in business. Unfortunately, Barack Obama has no idea of this, he has never worked for a corporation, and no one in his administration has ever run a corporation, to my knowledge.

 

[DamnYankee]

A perfectly legitimate question...but it requires no explanation....
If you're not inclined to vote for Democrats, don't...its understandable that you'd not want to vote for those that send jobs overseas,... and in many cases, force businesses to manufacture out of the country....

The U.S. already has one of the most punitive corporate tax regimes in the world and a Dem. advocated tax increase would make that competitive disadvantage much worse, accelerating the outsourcing of jobs.

American companies pay the corporate tax rate in the host country where the subsidiary is located and then pay the difference between the U.S. rate (35%) and the foreign rate when they bring profits back to the U.S.

The effective combined U.S. federal and state tax rate on new capital investment, taking into account all credits and deductions, is 35%. The OECD average is 19.5% and the world average is 18%.

As long as the U.S. corporate tax is 50% higher than it is elsewhere, companies will invest in other countries all other things being equal.

http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/103810999.html

Point of order: 35% is 94% higher than 18%, not 50% higher. Otherwise an excellent answer to TaiChi's ridiculous question and why he's in such a tailspin trying to respond to you now.

 

[Lowaicue]

I have heard that we have lost 4200 manufacturing plants over the last decade! I knew it was a great many, but the number staggered me!

There is nothing wrong with outsourcing.

OK. I'll let you have a moment to digest that.

There is nothing wrong with consigning jobs to other countries.

What IS wrong is how the resources that have then become available are used.

For the Tea Party and others temporarily allowed out of the institution.
If I run a business which relies on making two kinds of gizmo, one of which gives me a return of 10% and one of which give me a return of 5% would it not be prudent to send the latter to India to improve that 5% and to reassign my workers to make more of the 10% product? Kapish?
That extra profit can then be reinvested and paid in salaries, dividends, bonuses or whatever.

Anyway, rest easy america. When the tea party has recruited all the mentally challenged you will know that no one else will join. They have an extremely finite market! So loonies of the right join up. There is a man, called Koch I believe, who plays a fine whistle and will lead you into the depths of the mountain.

So dont blame the Indians. Blame the US managers.

 

[cawacko]

There is nothing wrong with outsourcing.

OK. I'll let you have a moment to digest that.

There is nothing wrong with consigning jobs to other countries.

What IS wrong is how the resources that have then become available are used.

For the Tea Party and others temporarily allowed out of the institution.
If I run a business which relies on making two kinds of gizmo, one of which gives me a return of 10% and one of which give me a return of 5% would it not be prudent to send the latter to India to improve that 5% and to reassign my workers to make more of the 10% product? Kapish?
That extra profit can then be reinvested and paid in salaries, dividends, bonuses or whatever.

Anyway, rest easy america. When the tea party has recruited all the mentally challenged you will know that no one else will join. They have an extremely finite market! So loonies of the right join up. There is a man, called Koch I believe, who plays a fine whistle and will lead you into the depths of the mountain.

So dont blame the Indians. Blame the US managers.

So you are saying offshoring American jobs is ok and then you are yelling at tea party folk?

 

[Lowaicue]

So you are saying offshoring American jobs is ok and then you are yelling at tea party folk?

Firstly, let me say how much I enjoy American neologisms. Offshoring... mmm.
Now, you have, I would suggest, deliberately misunderstood my point.

1. As has been well evidenced, the tea party is made up, primarily, of the less intelligent members of American society. These are what I call the binary thinkers (I'm sure you understand). No other reason is necessary for their international and national condemnation and ridicule but that they exist.

2. Business is about, amongst other things, the application of available resources to maximise profit. Where more humanitarian thinkers separate from the simple minds of the right, is how that profit should be used. So if I can maximise my profits by divesting my company of low profit lines and still use them as part of the brand then, to the benefit of the higher profit lines, of course I should do that.

I should also be prepared to put back into society, by way of taxes, salaries, etc. a good part of the money I have made by the labour of that society.
It's not rocket science although it might well be to the tea and koch (pron. cock) brigade.

 

[cawacko]

Firstly, let me say how much I enjoy American neologisms. Offshoring... mmm.
Now, you have, I would suggest, deliberately misunderstood my point.

1. As has been well evidenced, the tea party is made up, primarily, of the less intelligent members of American society. These are what I call the binary thinkers (I'm sure you understand). No other reason is necessary for their international and national condemnation and ridicule but that they exist.

2. Business is about, amongst other things, the application of available resources to maximise profit. Where more humanitarian thinkers separate from the simple minds of the right, is how that profit should be used. So if I can maximise my profits by divesting my company of low profit lines and still use them as part of the brand then, to the benefit of the higher profit lines, of course I should do that.

I should also be prepared to put back into society, by way of taxes, salaries, etc. a good part of the money I have made by the labour of that society.
It's not rocket science although it might well be to the tea and koch (pron. cock) brigade.

So no answer on offshoring and you've obviously have been misinformed about tea party members.


""Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public""

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Oooo... *SNAP!*

 

[Lowaicue]

So no answer on offshoring and you've obviously have been misinformed about tea party members.


""Tea Party supporters are wealthier and more well-educated than the general public""

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/us/politics/15poll.html

What on earth are you wittering about? I have answered. Perhaps you do not understand or perhaps I, being unfamiliar with your language, do not know what you mean by 'offshoring'. Would you care to explain to a poor furriner?
Because someone is wealthy it does not necessarily follow that they are smart or well educated. The British Chancellor of the Exchequer is obscenely rich but he is no smarter than the average docker.The tea party people on here never tire of proving their absolute stupidity. I had not realised you were one of them.
I am often civil to you because you appear to be a fairly recent graduste trying his best to succeed in his chosen career. Perhaps I have been too charitable.

 

[Lowaicue]

Oooo... *SNAP!*

Wassup, Trixie. Pulled you knickers too far up your fat, yank arse?

 

[cawacko]

What on earth are you wittering about? I have answered. Perhaps you do not understand or perhaps I, being unfamiliar with your language, do not know what you mean by 'offshoring'. Would you care to explain to a poor furriner?
Because someone is wealthy it does not necessarily follow that they are smart or well educated. The British Chancellor of the Exchequer is obscenely rich but he is no smarter than the average docker.The tea party people on here never tire of proving their absolute stupidity. I had not realised you were one of them.
I am often civil to you because you appear to be a fairly recent graduste trying his best to succeed in his chosen career. Perhaps I have been too charitable.

Offshoring is the outsourcing of jobs to another country. Some people automatically assume jobs are being shipped overseas when they hear the term outsource when in reality companies are outsourcing jobs all the time within the U.S.

 

[Lowaicue]

Offshoring is the outsourcing of jobs to another country. Some people automatically assume jobs are being shipped overseas when they hear the term outsource when in reality companies are outsourcing jobs all the time within the U.S.

Well done. Now if you scroll back to my posts you will see that I have indeed answered the point.
Perhaps you do not like my answer. For that I cannot be held responsible.

 

[DamnYankee]

LOL @ LowIQ.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Notice folks, how our intellectually impotent Bravo AVOIDS the points in post #11 by falsely focusing on one aspect of my responses.

Bravo STILL cannot justify corporations outsourcing jobs that can be done by Americans during an economic crisis stemming years....Bravos STILL cannot justify American taxpayers covering the corporations cost of outsourcing set-ups by granting them a tax break. Bravo STill cannot justify the reasoning for the GOP to DEFEND these corporations......who in turn want Americans to buy their products at current prices.

Yes, corporations make a profit......but if they do it by screwing over the American consumer and by exploiting the working conditions of other countries, then they are NOT a good corporation...and they must be held accountable.

But Bravo is either a good little soldier that never questions orders or a talkative whore for the corporate greed. Either way, he's not very bright.

I have heard that we have lost 4200 manufacturing plants over the last decade! I knew it was a great many, but the number staggered me!

Depends on who you listen to or read, but the numbers are NOT good for outsourced manufacturing or white collar jobs when you're looking at a serious recession on the home front.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Bravo STILL cannot justify corporations outsourcing jobs that can be done by Americans during an economic crisis stemming years....Bravos STILL cannot justify American taxpayers covering the corporations cost of outsourcing set-ups by granting them a tax break. Bravo STill cannot justify the reasoning for the GOP to DEFEND these corporations......who in turn want Americans to buy their products at current prices.

Yes, corporations make a profit......but if they do it by screwing over the American consumer and by exploiting the working conditions of other countries, then they are NOT a good corporation...and they must be held accountable.

Well, I'm not Bravo, but let me tackle this one. Corporations exist to make a profit. There is really no other reason or purpose for them to exist in a capitalist society. Since the early to mid 1900s, virtually every sector of manufacturing and production, have had to deal with organized labor. In the beginning, it was a good thing, if it weren't for unions, we might be just like China, people working in deplorable conditions for pennies a day. But, through the years, corruption and graft, along with political collusion, have created a behemoth, a leviathan, something that no longer resembles the great idea we started with. Each year, unions demand more for their members, more pay, better working conditions, more benefits, fewer hours of actual work, better insurance, and it repeats itself in an endless cycle of ever-increasing 'wants' from the unions, because that is what unions are there to do. This never-ending upward spiral of cost to the corporations, continued to the point the corporations could no longer afford the labor to produce a viable product. Many of them simply went belly-up, although the 'market' still existed for their products. Some capitalists figured out, they can outsource labor and maintain some sort of reasonable cost, which still allows them to make a profit, and that's kind of where we are at today. The manufacturing jobs in America went away because unions simply priced American labor out of the market.

Now... Since the entire Democrat party (and some Republicans) are completely beholden to the unions, and since people who work for unions like their gigs, it's been impossible to do anything about the situation, and things have simply continued to plod along, more and more jobs continue to go away and/or become outsourced. Your solution to the problem, is to outlaw this outsourcing thing, and force corporations to deal with collective bargaining and the ever-increasing spiral of labor costs associated with organized labor. This will not work in a capitalist system, because of what I said in the second sentence, corporations are in business to make a profit. Now, this wouldn't happen at first, it might take a decade or so, but in the meantime, US-made products will skyrocket in price, and of course, we would have to stop importing these things, or apply tariffs to create an 'even playing field' for these corporations trying to pay people way more than they are worth to produce products. But it still wouldn't create new jobs in America, not new labor unionized jobs, because corporations can't afford it, because consumers wouldn't pay the prices they would need to charge.

The ONLY way to return to what we once enjoyed, in the way of manufacturing sector jobs in America, is to do something about organized labor and collective bargaining. This does not mean we need to return to the days when children worked in sweat shops, or that American workers should have to work for $2 a week, like the Chinese. It means, we have to regain some sense of reason and understanding of how corporations work, and why they are in business. Unfortunately, Barack Obama has no idea of this, he has never worked for a corporation, and no one in his administration has ever run a corporation, to my knowledge.

The fable that "it's the union's fault" doesn't wash for simple reasons: corporations like Intel are not heavily unionized, yet they outsource. Companies and corporations in the Southern states of the USA have far less (than 10%?) unionization than their Northern counterparts....yet they outsource. In the last 20 years we've seen record layoffs in such corps like IBM....yet we've seen record profits and increases in salaries for ceo's and management. Add on the bonehead moves of NAFTA and CAFTA. Bottom line: the corporations that outsource do it for sheer profit motive of shareholders owners, investors.....the working force is NOT a major concern so long as it produces cheaply.

Which doesn't do a hell of a lot of good for the working force...who are consumers in this society. Re-inventing the wheel without addressing a major flaw (i.e., corporate greed and indifference to workers rights/benefits)
doesn't work.

The logical question is that since you have people in your home country quite capable of performing the same task (and WITHOUT a heavy, sometimes hard to understand accent), WHY GO THROUGH THAT ADDITIONAL EXPENSE? And since the pay scale for outsourced personnel, say customer service to India, is a HELL of a lot lower than in America, with SERIOUS changes regarding benefits....the corporations are doing it SOLELY for the bucks! Yes, they are avoiding taxes....by having a tax break (our Federal tax dollars picking up the slack) for outsourcing their IT and HR support....and then including the service in the fees they charge customers.

So the corporation makes a profit, gets the American public to pay for the effort, charges the American public for the service, and deprives Americans that could use the jobs.


America's COLA is higher than anywhere else....as is our consumption of world resources, as is our pay scale, etc., etc. But that is no excuse for outsourcing while purely for a profit margin IN ADDITION to a hefty profit rate.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

The fable that "it's the union's fault" doesn't wash for simple reasons: corporations like Intel are not heavily unionized, yet they outsource. Companies and corporations in the Southern states of the USA have far less (than 10%?) unionization than their Northern counterparts....yet they outsource. In the last 20 years we've seen record layoffs in such corps like IBM....yet we've seen record profits and increases in salaries for ceo's and management. Add on the bonehead moves of NAFTA and CAFTA. Bottom line: the corporations that outsource do it for sheer profit motive of shareholders owners, investors.....the working force is NOT a major concern so long as it produces cheaply.

Which doesn't do a hell of a lot of good for the working force...who are consumers in this society. Re-inventing the wheel without addressing a major flaw (i.e., corporate greed and indifference to workers rights/benefits)
doesn't work.

The logical question is that since you have people in your home country quite capable of performing the same task (and WITHOUT a heavy, sometimes hard to understand accent), WHY GO THROUGH THAT ADDITIONAL EXPENSE? And since the pay scale for outsourced personnel, say customer service to India, is a HELL of a lot lower than in America, with SERIOUS changes regarding benefits....the corporations are doing it SOLELY for the bucks! Yes, they are avoiding taxes....by having a tax break (our Federal tax dollars picking up the slack) for outsourcing their IT and HR support....and then including the service in the fees they charge customers.

So the corporation makes a profit, gets the American public to pay for the effort, charges the American public for the service, and deprives Americans that could use the jobs.


America's COLA is higher than anywhere else....as is our consumption of world resources, as is our pay scale, etc., etc. But that is no excuse for outsourcing while purely for a profit margin IN ADDITION to a hefty profit rate.

It's like you're saying: I don't do much laundry at home, but I go to the laundry mat. Therefore, my going to the laundry mat is not because I don't do much laundry at home. It makes no sense, except inside your convoluted pinhead. Companies who are outsourcing are not unionized, there is nothing to unionize, the labor jobs are outsourced, dumbass! If they hired workers in America to do the labor, they would most certainly become unionized, because that happens to every manufacturing sector industry out there.

And Two things I totally agree with you on. CAFTA and NAFTA were not good ideas for America. I opposed them when they were signed into law. Do you want to repeal them? Write to your Congressman, send a letter to Barack! I don't know what to tell you on that, looks like we are stuck with those whether we like it or not. The other point I agree with you on is, Corporations are most certainly in business to make profits. That is what they do. Now, if you want to force them to make less profit, that's not good for jobs and economic prosperity, so I would have to disagree with you on that. I want corporations to make profits, lots and lots of profits, the more the better. I don't care if they pay their CEO $10 billion a year, if he's doing his job and creating a profit for the shareholders. You shouldn't either, but you are jealous, you want to get your hands on their money, because you are a socialist communist pig who doesn't know how to earn your own money.

 

[christiefan915]

U.S. Chamber of Commerce is soliciting foreign corporate money
.
.
.
.
.
for the purpose of putting Americans out of work.

Really....you really believe the USCofC....is purposely trying to put American workers out of work...????

What I wonder is why the USCofC is pitching their spiel and spending their money on conservatives only. Do they think liberals don't run businesses?

Nice way to alienate people you're supposedly looking out for.

 

[cawacko]

What I wonder is why the USCofC is pitching their spiel and spending their money on conservatives only. Do they think liberals don't run businesses?

Nice way to alienate people you're supposedly looking out for.

It's a matter of supporting the most "business friendly or supportive" candidates. It's not about trying to alienate anyone.

 

[Crashk]

"I don't care if they pay their CEO $10 billion a year, if he's doing his job and creating a profit for the shareholders. You shouldn't either, but you are jealous, you want to get your hands on their money, because you are a socialist communist pig who doesn't know how to earn your own money."

What about the workers? They don't count in your version. They are to be used and buried like slaves in the Old South. As long as shareholders in China get their profits you are happy. Your glorious vision has made economic slaves of workers in this country in the past and you are too brainwashed to see it happening again. I believe you want the U.S. to become a 3rd world country and China's toadie.

 

[Crashk]

It's a matter of supporting the most "business friendly or supportive" candidates. It's not about trying to alienate anyone.

Foreign money supporting candidates who will legislate for foreign business interests instead of for the people in this country doesn't sound like a very good idea to me.

 

[Phantasmal]

Foreign money supporting candidates who will legislate for foreign business interests instead of for the people in this country doesn't sound like a very good idea to me.

It has been absolutely disastrous!