• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GE moving X-ray business to China

The Chinese are rapidly becoming very well educated (at least those around the eastern seaboard)

We are not losing jobs to China because they are better educated.
 
We are not losing jobs to China because they are better educated.

Not yet at least

They do have a lead in at least one industries (high speed rail) over the US, though not over other industrial countries.
 
And you wonder why libs want to end the tax cuts??

Then why didn't they when they owned both house and the White House? Why make the poster boy for shipping jobs over seas your jobs czar?
 
I do not think it unreasonable to add tariffs and such to account for differences in environmental and labor laws. Clean companies and fairly paid employees are expensive.

I agree. The idea that American companies can compete with foreign companies(any outsourced company is no longer American) that pay their workers a 120 dollars a month. as well as little to no health and environmental regulations is absurd.
 
Then why didn't they when they owned both house and the White House? Why make the poster boy for shipping jobs over seas your jobs czar?

Why make your presidential frontrunner a guy who made his millions slashing jobs and sending them overseas?
 
I agree. The idea that American companies can compete with foreign companies(any outsourced company is no longer American) that pay their workers a 120 dollars a month. as well as little to no health and environmental regulations is absurd.

And your solution is protectionism?
 
And your solution is protectionism?

I seldom defend james, for good reason, but I don't quite think he said that. Regardless, what would your solution be?
 
http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2011/07
/26/ge_moving_x_ray_business_to_china/


Ge who made 15 billion in profits and paid NO TAXS...so much for tax cuts create jobs....like I said...they create jobs in CHINA....

I am actually curious to know why all the jobs and businesses are moving to a Communist country... Isn't the stereotype that the commies will tax them to death, so we give them massive tax breaks because that's freedom and commies are oppressive to companies? If we give them tax breaks and aren't commies, they why won't they stay here? lol
 
I seldom defend james, for good reason, but I don't quite think he said that. Regardless, what would your solution be?

Saying that you think tariffs should be added to account for differences in environmental and labor laws is protectionism because it restrains trade between countries. Saying that there should be a solution implies that there is a problem to begin with. I do not think there is a problem with what GE is doing. Allow them to invest in china. Shareholders (many Americans) will see returns. We will see cheaper and more goods being imported from overseas and can specialize in what we have comparative advantage in for example environmental engineering services, thus producing more goods than was possible before, a mutual benefit.
 
Saying that you think tariffs should be added to account for differences in environmental and labor laws is protectionism because it restrains trade between countries. Saying that there should be a solution implies that there is a problem to begin with. I do not think there is a problem with what GE is doing. Allow them to invest in china. Shareholders (many Americans) will see returns. We will see cheaper and more goods being imported from overseas and can specialize in what we have comparative advantage in for example environmental engineering services, thus producing more goods than was possible before, a mutual benefit.

What do we pay? And we do have a problem. I don't think we should go t slave labor in order to compete. Nor do any conservatives, or many anyway, want to go to a UHC system in order to put our indsutry on a level playing field. It seems to me that James and others are emrely seeking to put us on the same level, able to compete fairly. Am I missing something?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1059688190 said:
obama-sponsors-ge-google-msnbc-microsoft-ap-associated-press-bailout-stimulus-golf-sad-hill-news.jpg


Wasn't/Isn't G.E.’s chief executive, Jeffrey Immelt, the chairman of the President’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness? I guess he's getting out before he has to start paying taxes. This should be great for the 2012 campaign. Even paying no taxes could keep Obama's business buddy from moving business interests to China.

GE's slogan should read: Progress to China is our most important product.

images

So Obama is owned by big businesses, not a socialist....
 
We need to get serious about fixing the business atmosphere in this Nation and that might just include the need for tariffs like we used to run most of the Government off of before we changed the game.

It would make going offshore less attractive.

It would also demand that we get off this BS of free trade that has not helped us in the long run but has been great for big business, while it costs us jobs.
 
Why make your presidential frontrunner a guy who made his millions slashing jobs and sending them overseas?

I have no idea what you are talking about.
 
What do we pay? And we do have a problem. I don't think we should go t slave labor in order to compete. Nor do any conservatives, or many anyway, want to go to a UHC system in order to put our indsutry on a level playing field. It seems to me that James and others are emrely seeking to put us on the same level, able to compete fairly. Am I missing something?

Well, technically, if you want to get into the economics of it we would pay a cost called a "dead weight loss." However, I am not questioning your motivations, I am simply saying such a policy would be protectionism because it restrains trade between countries, and would be disadvantageous to the US because the benefits of trade such as being discussed in this thread outweigh the costs, morality aside. However, slave labor is a bit of a stretch considering working for GE in china would be completely voluntary. It might be hard for you to believe but many in china might want to work for the company even at wages that may be lower than they would be paid here. Is it moral to take away that opportunity? Your complaining about not being able to compete fairly with a country that is still ridden with poverty, especially when compared to a rich nation like the US, seems like your sympathies are backwards.
 
Then why didn't they when they owned both house and the White House? Why make the poster boy for shipping jobs over seas your jobs czar?

Guess you never heard of a filibuster?? Do you pay attention at all?? Obama's entire presidency has been an extension of the Bush administration because republicans have demanded a super majority for just about everything.. Anyone that blames him for anything is a complete moron and a liar..

Obama is only responsible if he was allowed to pass his legistlation and make the changes he wanted to make.. Since republicans have blocked or tried to block everything.. Then there isn't much to say.. Bush got his policies passed.. Can't republicans be good sports and let a democrat do the same thing?? Oh? Wait?? Since when are republicans good sports??

'If ballots don't work, Bullets will..' Spoken by a republican..

 
Well, technically, if you want to get into the economics of it we would pay a cost called a "dead weight loss." However, I am not questioning your motivations, I am simply saying such a policy would be protectionism because it restrains trade between countries, and would be disadvantageous to the US because the benefits of trade such as being discussed in this thread outweigh the costs, morality aside. However, slave labor is a bit of a stretch considering working for GE in china would be completely voluntary. It might be hard for you to believe but many in china might want to work for the company even at wages that may be lower than they would be paid here. Is it moral to take away that opportunity? Your complaining about not being able to compete fairly with a country that is still ridden with poverty, especially when compared to a rich nation like the US, seems like your sympathies are backwards.

One man's exploitation may seem like another man's opportunity, but it would still be exploitation. Instead of moving China towards fairness, we seem to want to profit off their unfairness. I do see that as a moral issue, and not something that can be fairly competitive. these ultimately leads to the very wealthy becoming more so, and working people having to get less and less. How this plays largely depends on where you sit.

China is a world power. It is not Afghanistan. It is not Sudan. It is not even mexico. There is not as much reason for their poverty as you seem to suggest.
 
Well I don't think Obama is anymore interested in American jobs than Bush was. They all wanna protect their big corporate buddies out there.

Bashing both sides again with no solution of your own.
 
China just announced their Aircraft carrier...if that isnt a threat to us NOTHING IS....and they just told the USA to stop the spy planes...any one else feel a sense of forboding over china....oh and THANK YOU AMERICAN GREEDY CORPORATIONS for creating our biggest threat..

China refitting aircraft carrier body for research, training

China tells US to halt spy plane flights: report - Yahoo! News

None of you conservative corporatist cheerleaders can convince me corporations havent become a scourge on this country and the working class for GREED...
I used to buy all the bs just like YOU guys for decades...but how in the world cant you see whats going on right under your nose
 
GE moving X-ray business to China - The Boston Globe

The business climate is not conducive to expansion or growth especially with the threat of higher taxes on profits.

BTW China has a growing middle class not slaves.

Why isn't the business climate conducive to growth? If our government did the right thing by the U.S. workers (and I'm not talking about or defending unions here so don't lump me in with the nutty progressives screaming pro union nonsense) and levied tariffs on Chinese products such that the U.S. market has an opportunity to compete again, we might find that sending jobs to China to produce cheap **** that breaks every 3-5 years and must be replaced isn't such a good idea. What the current environment does is extend this idea of an endless consumerism. American's have to re-purchase electronics, appliances, etc. every 3-5 years now because the products we buy from China a.) are made not to last b.) are made not to be fixed or at best, fixed at a price that is less than purchasing new and c.)are meant to maximize profit at the cost of quality.

Were tariffs applied to make a new U.S. company or manufacturer or even other worldwide manufacturers who have a better product competitive, the amount of consumerism may actually level off. Ikari had it right, the level of slave labor in China is too attractive - so why not maximize profits and move production there if the President and U.S. government will continue to hold the door open? The companies can't complain because they get repeat customers buying **** products ever 3-5 years instead of creating good to great products which are fixable and would last 10-20 years. The middle class is not working the mass production line putting together cheap electronic components... they are the middle management now extending and expanding the slave labor class in China while exploiting them for profit.... it's not the profit I have a problem with, it's the exploitation and the U.S. consumer suffering for it. I'd rather see China have to compete on a level playing ground.

But, we have an immature regime in power.

Over their heads and sinking fast. They have no clue what the hell they're doing...
 
Proof there's more to economics the current recession than taxes and government action, whoever says its only because we have such high taxes needs this as a reality check.

Absolutely. A business environment is more than just about narrow dimensions of tax and regulatory policy. Access to skilled workers, comparative national advantages, competitive clusters, structural market conditions, etc., all are important. The U.S. is producing relatively fewer science/engineering graduates than its overseas competitors. U.S. educational attainment has flatlined even as it is growing in various OECD countries. In an increasingly knowledge-intensive global economy, such an outcome poses a significant threat to U.S. competitiveness. In addition, long-term, U.S. macroeconomic growth prospects, including domestic demand conditions, have worsened. For some companies, it makes more competitive sense to relocate parts of their operations abroad. Failure to do so could undermine their own comeptitiveness down the road. Barring fundamental reforms that address U.S. weaknesses and threats facing the U.S., including its erosion of competitiveness in some sectors, such stories could become more commonplace, especially as capital flows shift to more attractive economies (raising the cost of capital/eroding economic profits).
 
Last edited:
And your solution is protectionism?

If imposing tariffs on companies that outsource to exploit dirt cheap labor and lack of safety and environmental laws so that American companies can actually compete with foreign ones is protectionism then so be it.Other than reworking the trade agreements requiring participating parties to pay their workers what they would pay Americans and adhere to the same worker safety and environmental laws then tariffs is the only other solution. I suppose that if you see nothing wrong with manufacturing jobs leaving the US, the US being at the mercy of these countries that manufacture, unpatriotic, and could care less about the fact we are literally aiding one the largest communist countries in the world then I suppose unrestricted outsourcing is a good thing to you. Our elected officials should not have allowed this to happen and should not be encouraging it.If our elected officials suppose to benifit anyone it should be we Americans.
 
I do not think it unreasonable to add tariffs and such to account for differences in environmental and labor laws. Clean companies and fairly paid employees are expensive.

We were warned about this leading up to the passing of the various free trade agreements. When a company like GE is doing business around the world they have to compete with the likes of Germany and Japan for these types of markets. If they leave manufacturing in the United States their equiment will cost much more and eventually their market share will shrink to zero and the X-ray division of GE will no longer exist. So there goes all of your jobs anyway. We have to do something about this but what?
 
Back
Top Bottom