 DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
4 edits | reply to MrSpock29
Re: Cost of Worker Replacement Must Be Decreasing All NAFTA did was send manufacturing jobs out of the country along with the jobs of their suppliers. The ever increasing trade deficit despite the falling dollar PROVES free trade to be a total failure. And it's free trade policies that have our economy in the toilet.
US based business will NEVER be able to compete with slave wages paid overseas. And they'll certainly not compete with nations with no labor standards, no environmental standards and often gov't subsidies.
Free trade isn't fair trade. |
|
1 edit | said by Dogfather:All NAFTA did was send manufacturing jobs out of the country along with the jobs of their suppliers. The ever increasing trade deficit despite the falling dollar PROVES free trade to be a total failure. US based business will NEVER be able to compete with slave wages paid overseas. And they'll certainly not compete with nations with no labor standards, no environmental standards and often gov't subsidies. Free trade isn't fair trade. Strongly disagree. A weak dollar is a monetary issue. And now, with a weak dollar, some have speculated that manufacturing would come back into the country.
Joseph Schumpter (late economist) had a phrase, "Gales of Creative Destruction", as economies transitioned from jobs of one type to jobs of another. This country is more service-oriented than it was years ago.
100 or more years ago, I'll bet everyone was saying the same about blacksmiths, who used to be quite prevalent back then. We also heard how computers were going to replace people for work, but instead, we needed far more people to program, fix, and write software for them.
Trade deficits occur for other reasons too. When our economy is stronger, we import more than we export.
Some things might need to be fixed, but NAFTA isn't a failure. Look at the unemployment rate. About 7% when enacted, and bottomed at 3.9% before the late 2000 recession. The Fed used to worry about inflation occurring at 6% unemployment, but was taught the lesson that more people working isn't inflationary.
edit: BTW, look at the chart of the dollar. It's been base-building since February, and has been stronger as of late. Oil is a dollar-denominated asset, so a good part of the rise in prices was due to the dollar index falling from over 120 six years ago, to about 70 earlier this year. With the oil bubble bursting, that will act as a tax cut and economic stimulus, helping strengthen the dollar which is already shown signs of turning around, and that stronger dollar will in turn affect oil prices again. Most people don't realize wholesale gasoline prices have fallen by almost 60 cents in the last couple of weeks, it just isn't all reflected at the pump yet. The dollar is also affected by what other central banks do with their currency. The Euro is way too strong, and the EU has kept rates way too high for what is going on there. |
|
 JRW2R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, Max and Zen.Premium
join:2004-12-20
La La Land
kudos:5
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather:All NAFTA did was send manufacturing jobs out of the country along with the jobs of their suppliers. The ever increasing trade deficit despite the falling dollar PROVES free trade to be a total failure. And it's free trade policies that have our economy in the toilet. US based business will NEVER be able to compete with slave wages paid overseas. And they'll certainly not compete with nations with no labor standards, no environmental standards and often gov't subsidies. Free trade isn't fair trade. Someone who UNDERSTANDS reality...
When NAFTA was first proposed, those involved wanted to change the "F" in it from "free" to "fair", and all the companies screamed bloody blue murder!
The auto industry is in the mess it is in because of MANAGEMENT decisions, and has little to do with anything the unions have negotiated for.
One of the first things the auto industry did after NAFTA was signed, was to close plants in the US and open them in Mexico, all the while telling the unions they had no money to modernise the plants in the US, yet they could build BRAND NEW plants in Mexico. 
--
RIAA/MPAA... Bite me!!!!
In constant search for intelligent life on Earth! |
|
JRW2R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, Max and Zen.Premium
join:2004-12-20
La La Land
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| reply to MrSpock29
said by MrSpock29:[Look at the unemployment rate. About 7% when enacted, and bottomed at 3.9% before the late 2000 recession. You're being myopic if you are ONLY looking at the percentages of unemployment. Real wages are what you should be looking at and that has been declining for OVER 30 years. When someone loses a 40K job and takes a 30K job, the employment percentages may not change, but that person's real income has decreased...
BTW, other reasons for declines in unemployment are due to people who give up looking, not by them finding a job.
Jobs at Wal-Mart have increased over the past few years, has that had a positive impact on wages?
I doubt it. 
--
RIAA/MPAA... Bite me!!!!
In constant search for intelligent life on Earth! |
|
|
|
| reply to JRW2
said by JRW2:said by Dogfather:All NAFTA did was send manufacturing jobs out of the country along with the jobs of their suppliers. The ever increasing trade deficit despite the falling dollar PROVES free trade to be a total failure. And it's free trade policies that have our economy in the toilet. US based business will NEVER be able to compete with slave wages paid overseas. And they'll certainly not compete with nations with no labor standards, no environmental standards and often gov't subsidies. Free trade isn't fair trade. Someone who UNDERSTANDS reality... When NAFTA was first proposed, those involved wanted to change the "F" in it from "free" to "fair", and all the companies screamed bloody blue murder! The auto industry is in the mess it is in because of MANAGEMENT decisions, and has little to do with anything the unions have negotiated for. One of the first things the auto industry did after NAFTA was signed, was to close plants in the US and open them in Mexico, all the while telling the unions they had no money to modernise the plants in the US, yet they could build BRAND NEW plants in Mexico. Keep in mind capital flows where it can get the best return on investment. Maybe we should be looking there, since we have the second highest corporate tax rate in the world, just barely behind Japan. No one wants to see jobs leave this country, but job markets always change, that is part of growth and evolution. Again, why is no one complaining about protecting blacksmith's anymore, since their jobs pretty much died off? In 100 years, the economy will be different still, and the types of jobs will also be different. The new jobs of today might be on their way out then. |
|
1 edit | reply to JRW2
said by JRW2:said by MrSpock29:[Look at the unemployment rate. About 7% when enacted, and bottomed at 3.9% before the late 2000 recession. You're being myopic if you are ONLY looking at the percentages of unemployment. Real wages are what you should be looking at and that has been declining for OVER 30 years. When someone loses a 40K job and takes a 30K job, the employment percentages may not change, but that person's real income has decreased... BTW, other reasons for declines in unemployment are due to people who give up looking, not by them finding a job. Jobs at Wal-Mart have increased over the past few years, has that had a positive impact on wages? I doubt it. If they've been declining for over 30 years, then why blame NAFTA which has been around for 10? Can't have it both ways.
I am well aware of the issues with data, believe me (re: Unemployment decreasing). However, these issues have always existed, if they just started TODAY, then it would be different.
The computer field makes a lot of money now, a field that didn't exist much at all 30 years ago.
Job re-training is something that should be emphasized, as that would be helpful too. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to MrSpock29
We're not talking obsolete jobs like blacksmithing. Where talking good jobs like coding, manufacturing and engineering that are being outsourced because the gov't is rewarding the outsourcing. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to MrSpock29
NAFTA accelerated the decline of US based manufacturing and when the plants left the trickle down effect decimated their suppliers.
I supply tooling to companies like Acument, Alcoa and Robert Bosch and see first hand what happens when a US factory closes and reopens in China or Malaysia. They buy tooling from there instead of here. And I certainly can't compete with slave wages being paid there or against their total lack of labor and environmental standards. Hell, the freight costs alone are a deal killer, no matter how cheap the dollar gets.
When jobs are outsources, EVERYONE loses except the shareholders. Customers don't even benefit as the quality of goods goes in the shitter...lead in toys, poison dog food and toothpaste... |
|
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather:We're not talking obsolete jobs like blacksmithing. Where talking good jobs like coding, manufacturing and engineering that are being outsourced because the gov't is rewarding the outsourcing. My point is, that when those jobs started on a major decline long ago, they weren't obsolete back then either. Nor am I saying manufacturing jobs are or should be obsolete. I am talking about CHANGE. The marketplace changed, and other areas saw job creation, where those saw job destruction. "Gales of Creative Destruction".
|
|
| reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather:lead in toys, poison dog food and toothpaste... I will agree with you here, we should never accept goods from anywhere that can do us harm, there must be standards that go with it. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to MrSpock29
My point is gov't policy is accelerating this change to the HUGE detriment of our population and economy.
Instead of insisting on FAIR trade, our gov't ignores the horribly unlevel playing field of the "world economy".
And those touting for "free trade" are those who have jobs that aren't outsourcable (eg politicians). |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | reply to MrSpock29
said by MrSpock29:said by Dogfather:lead in toys, poison dog food and toothpaste... I will agree with you here, we should never accept goods from anywhere that can do us harm, there must be standards that go with it. I'm not expecting nor want 100% trade barriers. What I want is FAIR trade, not FREE trade. We should be tariffing the equivalent of the benefit these corporations get in countries without the same regulations we have. |
|
| said by Dogfather:said by MrSpock29:said by Dogfather:lead in toys, poison dog food and toothpaste... I will agree with you here, we should never accept goods from anywhere that can do us harm, there must be standards that go with it. I'm not expecting nor want 100% trade barriers. What I want is FAIR trade, not FREE trade. We should be tariffing the equivalent of the benefit these corporations get in countries without the same regulations we have. We're not as far apart as you think, but I will say we need to be careful of tariffs too. The Great Depression had 2 major issues associated with it, high tariffs, and a max tax rate of 90%. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | The Great Depression had more to do with war reparations and the European economy that US tax rates.
I do think there should be NO corporate income tax in the United States. Consumers just end up paying it and/or business just leaves to avoid it. The amount of economic growth and jobs such a policy would create would be mind boggling. Business all over the world would race here instead of fleeing here. At the same time we should have trade controls in place to insure a level playing field for US based businesses. |
|
| said by Dogfather:The Great Depression had more to do with war reparations and the European economy that US tax rates. I do think there should be NO corporate income tax in the United States. Consumers just end up paying it and/or business just leaves to avoid it. The amount of economic growth and jobs such a policy would create would be mind boggling. Business all over the world would race here instead of fleeing here. At the same time we should have trade controls in place to insure a level playing field for US based businesses. High taxes are always a negative for the economy. The more you tax something, the less of it you get back. Kennedy cut taxes when he was president, as did Reagan, and both instances saw an economic boom. Capital will flow to where it can get the best ROI.
War reparations played a role, but one cannot discount the effects of the Smoot-Hawley Tarrif act, the excessive tightness by the fed, and taxes. |
|
 pfakBow before me for I am rootPremium
join:2002-12-29
Vancouver, BC
 ·TELUS
·Shaw
| reply to Dogfather
In Canada at least, we've seen year over year slashing of corporate income taxes with no benefit at all to the average worker.
Have our wages gone up because of slashed corporate taxes? No. Have companies still tried to slash our wages and take away benefits? Yes.
--
Xenophase - British Columbia's premier online gaming community. |
|
DogfatherPremium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Depends on what you consider a benefit. Your unemployment rate is fairly stable while ours has risen sharply. Also the IMF predicts Canada's economic growth to exceed that of the US for 2008. But our economies are tied together and as the US economy continues to collapse, we'll drag you down with us and the only hope for Canada are policies that will stimulate investment and jobs. |
|
