Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 113

Thread: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

  1. #101
    Voluntary Resignation

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    11-30-10 @ 05:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,059

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    That part does crack me up up those who claim to be patriotic American. Some of these people on this thread I understand because they are globalist, globalist do not give a **** about the future or sovereignty of their country nor could they care less that American jobs are being outsourced.
    Which people would this be?

  2. #102
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    You are stating people are worse off, i am saying no....

    Looks like we may just disagree on this point.

    Sure even I may see a level of compensation that on an hourly basis is many times that earned by my grandfather on a weekly or even monthly basis, and when you throw in the additional income from a spouse (or similar other) it only increases the multiple more.

    I am thinking the question may be what is actually better off or worse off.

    Since there is more to life than just wages or earnings, and we need to include what those dollars actually buy due to inflation, how much of them go towards taxes, how much is needed for things that previously were free, the amount of control over our own families from two working members, the costs of government programs trying to fill in the gaps, and so so many more.


    Such as?

    Such as the obvious. Things like jobs lost to countless plant closings, consolidation, losses to small business, wages not keeping pace with inflation etc etc etc

    Which is?

    Which is the once prosperous towns, cities, and regions that are or have seen their industrial sections turned into ghost towns. Though some have seen some recovery (Pittsburgh PA, Newark NJ, and others) it has been mostly retail and residential based.

    Also the shuffling of great numbers of people into otherwise natural areas that have significant increases in population (SE, SW etc), and an obvious decline in non government union jobs (the government ranks have increased in a large way) that have been replaced with non union lower wage positions with decreased bene's etc;

    While things have changed for everyone in different ways the continued increase in the imbalance of trade in the US has put pressures on everyone from the small business owner (someone had to support or supply the various manufacturing concerns) the union laborer (who can not replace the level of wage or bene's in retail or the service industry) the retail businesses supporting and supplying the needs of the workers who are now receiving seriously lower wages, the municipalities that have seen serious decreases to their tax base from plant closings and corporate bankruptcies, and right on up to the state and federal tax collectors who have been scrambling for ways to replace the many lost taxes as well


    You are not giving any clear examples. But do tell, how many Graphic designers, desktop publishers, NET Java developers, SQL database administrators, or motion graphics specialists were employed in 1995? Do you think the number of occupational, physical, and speech therapists increased in that time?

    The US economy has shifted towards a serviced based economy. The difference is, American consumers pay less for consumption goods while real income has increased since the 80's (the last time we had a current account surplus).


    I am addressing these two as one.

    Surely there have been increases in the new technology sector(s) and there will continue to be increases in future industries not even thought of today, but just as technology based industry needs clients so does the service industry.

    Consider just who will the service based industry employees service when nothing is left except residential, retail, and government? Sure there will be other industries, but most industry depends on manufacturing in some way for their very existence.

    I remember when there was a buzz for out sourcing of all kinds, and out sourcing plant and machine maintenance caused many new small businesses to blossom out of no ware, but now even these service based companies are seeing a declining potential market as so many companies have just moved production overseas.

    Even the rush of support, customer service, and production jobs that were US based for foreign manufacturing, and non manufacturing US companies have seen reductions as we are just forced to accept speaking with someone in a foreign country (who normally speaks poor English, has no understanding of our culture or how to deal with us, and only has the position because their compensation is a mere percentage of what was paid to the previous American worker).








    Median numbers are really not a fair indicator, and just like how the unemployment rates are purposely skewed today, they leave more to question than they actually answer.

    What I do find interesting is that some of us (myself included) actually saw an increase in wealth during the down turns (I am not old enough to have seen all of them lol) due to the decrease in costs of non imported products, services, and real estate etc.

    What that showed me was that even though many believe the idea that actual wages increased etc it actually required the economy to fall back (recession?) to actually see the increase. Sort makes you wonder what was actually increasing besides taxes and real estate prices.




    Yet we would expect a massive increase in the poverty rate, if what you are saying is correct. Actually, we would see an increase, although that is really the case. Barring for the current recession, the poverty rate has actually decreased since 1959 (and 1980, right around the beginning of a successive current account deficits.


    It really depends on what is being considered poverty, and I know this changes depending on the region your discussing.

    An example is that you could be worse off in NYC making well above the poverty level than earning within the poverty level in an other area like KY or AR etc.

    There is also the missing class of the working poor.

    Now this is not directed at you etc, but I had learned early on years ago that figures lie and liars figure so please do not hate or blame me for not fully accepting the numbers in the charts. I think we all have seen numbers be made to show what the creator wanted them to, and it is nothing new for people to purposely produce inaccurate charts etc.

    Another thing to keep in mind is how the government has scrambled to create or help create those new industries to help replace jobs lost in manufacturing, how this very action shows that some at least knew of the future consequences and the real problems that would come from major trade imbalances.

    Now lets consider things like, the added costs to the typical family due to the near requirement of new HS grads to be at least looking at getting a BS to be considered for a non labor position or not considered uneducated etc ($40-100K+), now increasing this even more as those who used to be able to get away with a BS now will require a masters etc.

    Sure we needed to keep our academics and create new positions, but you also can not ignore the costs and the financial burden from losses in manufacturing being moved to the American tax payer in yet another way.

    Since I am on the rant on this subject lets not forget that after the privilege of a family putting itself into debt (most from equity loans on their homes no less) that most of these high end grads will end up with a much lower income than anticipated, and many very likely will not out earn a good master plumber.

    This is getting too long already (wish there was some way to talk it and not type it lol) but though your correct in some of your basics or at least I agree on some etc there is a whole lot more involved, and I know it varies by region or state as well, but overall at least in the NE it seems that things are much different than you seem to believe, and the costs of government involvement or just trying to pick up the slack is only adding to the problem in a very large and expensive way.
    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

  3. #103
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Another issue that messes with the whole tariff discussion is that for the most part tariffs, importing, prefer nation status, and all the trade agreements have one thing in common, and that is that they are all politically motivated and have little to do with the economics of trade or even free trade etc.

    China has enjoyed a preferred nation status as a trading partner for a reason,, and that reason has nothing to do with the costs of their products to the end consumer, and if you can not see what was to be gained and truly traded I do not know where to start.

    We have even seen an influx in textiles and other imports from Pakistan since gaining whatever help or allowance they have offered the US with the war in Iraq, or Afghanistan etc.

    That one seems pretty obvious as well.

    NAFTA, and some others are also filled with political dirt as well.

    Now were looking at carbon tariffs.

    It seems the last up tick and resulting bubble in the economy was highly based on consumer spending that was funded by abuses in the banking and mortgage industry that allowed unsupported equity to be used as discretionary income, and only to find that our own government and investors of its preferred trading partner nations were backing most of the dollars needed (sort of hedging their bets and business lol) only to later find that so much was riding on the whole thing that we tax payers ended up paying for it all (some of us twice).

    Maybe someone out there is knowledgeable enough on the topic to actually explain it all to everyone in simple English so that we can all really understand what had happened, why it happened, and why it all actually throws all the previous world trade and economics beliefs out the window.
    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

  4. #104
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by LennyD View Post
    Since there is more to life than just wages or earnings, and we need to include what those dollars actually buy due to inflation, how much of them go towards taxes, how much is needed for things that previously were free, the amount of control over our own families from two working members, the costs of government programs trying to fill in the gaps, and so so many more.
    Those dollars are adjusted for using a simple deflator, bringing all wages @ an equal respective price level. Inflation has nothing to do with it.

    Such as the obvious. Things like jobs lost to countless plant closings, consolidation, losses to small business, wages not keeping pace with inflation etc etc etc
    Care to provide numbers to the bold? The rest of that sentence is rather weak as it is based on false assumptions.

    While things have changed for everyone in different ways the continued increase in the imbalance of trade in the US has put pressures on everyone from the small business owner (someone had to support or supply the various manufacturing concerns) the union laborer (who can not replace the level of wage or bene's in retail or the service industry) the retail businesses supporting and supplying the needs of the workers who are now receiving seriously lower wages, the municipalities that have seen serious decreases to their tax base from plant closings and corporate bankruptcies, and right on up to the state and federal tax collectors who have been scrambling for ways to replace the many lost taxes as well
    Being an appologist for those unwilling to compete proves very little. Just as competition reduces inefficiency, so does technology shift trends in supply practices (manufacturing). The reason we outsource is due to the opportunity cost associated with producing it, where as efficient allocation of resources (both human capital, time, and factors of production) should be maximized to produce the greatest gains.

    The more we produce cheap plastic goods in the US, the less we produce high tech computer processors, chemicals, machinery, etc... In fact, look at the amount of Toyota, Honda, Mercedes, etc... producing within the US. You state that the manufacturing base has declined, but that is none the less false. Maybe as a % of rGDP, but none the less manufacturing in the US has more than doubled since 1966 (i will prove it at the end).

    It really depends on what is being considered poverty, and I know this changes depending on the region your discussing.
    You are going back to the assumptive stance, of which your position has little if any ground to stand on. To a millionaire, poor would be making 75k/year, although you can see theProxy-Connection: keep-alive
    Cache-Control: max-age=0

    oxy-Connection: keep-alive
    Cache-Control: max-age=0

    oxy-Connection: keep-alive
    Cache-Control: max-age=0

    eakness in the statement exemplified by the use of "probably".

    An example is that you could be worse off in NYC making well above the poverty level than earning within the poverty level in an other area like KY or AR etc.
    You are not debating overall poverty, you are instead discussing relative cost of living. The conversation then shifts to the question, why do they live in NYC when New Jersey has a far less expensive cost of living? We can apply this same rhetoric to the manufacturing argument: why do people forgo improving their skill set which is proven to make them increasingly marketable in a rapidly changing economy?

    There is also the missing class of the working poor.
    Care to provide any information or a source?

    Now this is not directed at you etc, but I had learned early on years ago that figures lie and liars figure so please do not hate or blame me for not fully accepting the numbers in the charts.
    Of course you would not accept the numbers, but you can look for yourself with a more in depth view of poverty. Historical Poverty Tables

    I think we all have seen numbers be made to show what the creator wanted them to, and it is nothing new for people to purposely produce inaccurate charts etc.
    A rather weak debate tactic wouldn't you say? Attack my source, without a basis of sound reasoning, as a means to an end. The burden of proof is on you to prove the inaccuracy, of which you have failed....

    Another thing to keep in mind is how the government has scrambled to create or help create those new industries to help replace jobs lost in manufacturing, how this very action shows that some at least knew of the future consequences and the real problems that would come from major trade imbalances.
    Trade imbalances allow the US government to borrow from abroad. Being that we purchase more from China, using US dollars, they have to do something with those dollars. They could of course begin to depreciate them by selling them on the forex market, thereby driving up the price for the respective alternative currency, or... They could purchase the most liquid asset in the world, US Treasuries. This in turn allows the US to live beyond both its production possibilities frontier (on the basis of trade), and the consumption possibilities frontier (on the basis of debt).

    You have yet to make a valid case on the negativity of either (although they do exist!).

    Now lets consider things like, the added costs to the typical family due to the near requirement of new HS grads to be at least looking at getting a BS to be considered for a non labor position or not considered uneducated etc ($40-100K+), now increasing this even more as those who used to be able to get away with a BS now will require a masters etc.
    But in the long run, is that not a minimal investment that will be returned dozens of times, if not more? Besides, if you live below the poverty level, you do not have to pay for college in the US, as federal pell grants kick in for those cases. You are going to have to try to prove that a college education does not equate to greater job security, and greater income possibilities in the long run.

    Sure we needed to keep our academics and create new positions, but you also can not ignore the costs and the financial burden from losses in manufacturing being moved to the American tax payer in yet another way.
    What are these costs, and how is the American tax payer footing the bill?

    Since I am on the rant on this subject lets not forget that after the privilege of a family putting itself into debt (most from equity loans on their homes no less) that most of these high end grads will end up with a much lower income than anticipated, and many very likely will not out earn a good master plumber.
    What is wrong with being a master plumber? You are very correct, although a master plumber is a service oriented type of employment. I never made the distinction between university and technological skill advancement, of which i will not. Reason be, not everyone can become doctors, and lawyers, (service) because even their plumbing goes out at times

    This is getting too long already (wish there was some way to talk it and not type it lol) but though your correct in some of your basics or at least I agree on some etc there is a whole lot more involved, and I know it varies by region or state as well, but overall at least in the NE it seems that things are much different than you seem to believe, and the costs of government involvement or just trying to pick up the slack is only adding to the problem in a very large and expensive way.
    US manufacturing has nearly doubled since 1966, even though manufacturing as a % of GDP is nearly half.

    rGDP 1966= 3.8845 trillion Manufacturing % of GDP 1966= 30% (about 25% but this number gives me a better basis)

    rGDP 2008=12892.5 trillion Manfacturing % of GDP 2008= 12% (could be higher, but revisions are about to come in)

    In 1966, manufacturing accounted for $1.165 trillion @ 30%, and $971 billion @ 25%.

    In 2008, manufacturing accounted for $1.804 billion @ 12%.

    Which is quite interesting. We produce more than we did in 1966 (between 35% and 50%) even though manufacturing as a whole has decreased somewhere between 60% and 40%. Quite interesting?
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  5. #105
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Those dollars are adjusted for using a simple deflator, bringing all wages @ an equal respective price level. Inflation has nothing to do with it.



    Care to provide numbers to the bold?
    I will try and respond in the break down fashion again below, but suffice it to say if you are going to ignore the results that are around us everyday and rely solely on data that is at min suspect of corruption and tweaking then I do not believe we are going to get to far on this as we are debating very different things.

    I am not attempting to make you believe different than you have decided on previously, but it would be interesting or a relief to know that you can look past the questionable data and resulting explanation of such and actually question what is reported as factual.

    At one time I also believed as you do, and after finding that the data did not support the conditions at hand I knew I needed to rethink or dig into why this did not match up. I am still not fully able to find the exact reasons or causes of the differences, but I have seen enough to know that just do not add up the same etc.
    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

  6. #106
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by LennyD View Post
    I will try and respond in the break down fashion again below, but suffice it to say if you are going to ignore the results that are around us everyday and rely solely on data that is at min suspect of corruption and tweaking then I do not believe we are going to get to far on this as we are debating very different things.
    Data is used to measure those so called "results around you". Without the application of data analysis, your vision vs my vision of the "current state of things" is arbitrary.

    I am not attempting to make you believe different than you have decided on previously, but it would be interesting or a relief to know that you can look past the questionable data and resulting explanation of such and actually question what is reported as factual.
    Such as? You need to back your assumptions with evidence. Yet because you fear the use of data, the ideas you ascribe to will come off as weak.

    At one time I also believed as you do, and after finding that the data did not support the conditions at hand I knew I needed to rethink or dig into why this did not match up. I am still not fully able to find the exact reasons or causes of the differences, but I have seen enough to know that just do not add up the same etc.
    Data does not support conditions? How so, and to what extent? What data and what condition(s)?

    The fact of the matter is, manufacturing is greater than it was during a time when exports exceeded imports. Because of this FACT, your view on international trade is nothing more than naive mercantilism. The world has changed and will continue to do so.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  7. #107
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    [QUOTE=Goldenboy219;1058257535]Those dollars are adjusted for using a simple deflator, bringing all wages @ an equal respective price level. Inflation has nothing to do with it.

    That sounds nice, but when wage increases do not keep pace with the increasing costs of other expenses (inflation) including the costs of an ever increasing government it creates a negative net situation for the average wage earner.

    Just had this conversation with a retired officer who commented that at one time there was a certain comparison of his income to that of those in the private sector, and how over time due to steady increases in his compensation (typically 3-8% annual in his case) his income was well above and out of sync with that of the others from previous.

    Since the private sector did not see the steady increases due to various normal and not so normal economic pressures the middle management and trades union incomes (his other previous interests as well) lost their advantage to the steady increases of the government ranks that are somehow immune to economic fluctuations.

    Think about that before throwing more stats at me!!


    Care to provide numbers to the bold? The rest of that sentence is rather weak as it is based on false assumptions.

    No actually I do not as those suffering from this see the numbers everyday, and you should have them already being your so resourceful with charts and stats. Maybe you just discounted them because they did not fit your belief.

    Being an appologist for those unwilling to compete proves very little. Just as competition reduces inefficiency, so does technology shift trends in supply practices (manufacturing).

    Is it OK for me to call this BS?

    I am not apologizing for anyone, and thought that to be obvious anyhow.

    Since part of my professional activities includes increasing efficiencies, improvements in automation, and reducing the overall costs of production I am well aware of the effects from these cost savings changes, but this alone is not nearly as much a factor as the other concerns over unfair trade, and we have to also realize that all these automation improvements or changes require a fair amount of labor (both high tech and not) to install, keep running and repair thus creating new positions and employment that in many instances is of a higher income to the worker.

    I found this interesting "efficient allocation of resources" and "reason we outsource is due to the opportunity" as this is very true and finally something we agree on, but your missing one something here.

    If the allocation of resources and outsourcing remove the American worker, and our local economies from the picture then it would appear that this is where the problems stem from.

    Though you again produce nice informational charts etc what is missing is that at these same times population and government have increased above these gains, and are part of the out of balance situation that is producing all the pressures.

    Though you may find my style or statements to be frivolous and choose to ignore them because they do not match your beliefs I do not think you can discount that they reflect the current conditions fairly well.

    Just like we can see two totally different results of the success of our current president just by switching between CNN and FOX who both are using supposed factual numbers and charts I know and you should as well that these charts are nothing to someone who is feeling the pain of so many years of being sold out by their government.

    Just like a patient who's doctors can not find the cause of their pain is still feeling the pain these current conditions were caused by something, and are very very very friggin real.





    why do they live in NYC when New Jersey has a far less expensive cost of living? We can apply this same rhetoric to the manufacturing argument: why do people forgo improving their skill set which is proven to make them increasingly marketable in a rapidly changing economy?

    OK so I guess everyone just needs to move to China then as they have much lower cost of living (heck maybe even Mexico)

    Still your reply does not address the costs of non manufacturing related costs that are paid by the middle or working class in those areas like uncontrolled government growth and corruption etc.

    Funny you send the New Yorkers to NJ as so many of them had made that change already, but most found that this is no bargain either as corruption and socialist problems of the city were adopted by NJ years ago and they are now caught in a double dilemma with some of the nations highest property taxes (one way to pay for all that corruption and govt. growth) where tax payments are greater than mortgage payments in other states, and are now being hit twice in income tax as neither group of thugs (NY or NJ) wants to give up a damn cent.

    NJ has recently even introduced an "exit tax" so that those realizing how screwed they are remaining here supporting the liberal control on govt. have to pay a special RE tax for selling and not buying again in the state.

    Sounds like an old Mafia ploy at protection does it not!!


    A rather weak debate tactic wouldn't you say? Attack my source, without a basis of sound reasoning, as a means to an end. The burden of proof is on you to prove the inaccuracy, of which you have failed....

    Rather can not be bothered with, and have more important things to do than research the legitimacy of your specific numbers.

    Yes I am not a prisoner of the numbers, and will believe what see to be real combined with the information deciphered the conflicting data available (funny that there is almost always one report that defies the information from another lol)

    What does puzzle me though is why you seem unwilling to consider the idea that things are not all rosy and wonderful as suggested by your stats? Or how there is more to a situation than what is reported to be true.

    Are you locked in by the numbers? Can you not see the forest through the numbers?




    Trade imbalances allow the US government to borrow from abroad.

    You have yet to make a valid case on the negativity of either (although they do exist!).

    Good points here!! Wooo Hooo

    Seriously another area we seem to be in agreement, but due to the very strong political control on the money markets part of this I do not believe we have full disclosure of the information needed to make a factual based decision (with or without charts etc).

    One thing for sure is that the US govt. has learned how to leverage and manipulate almost anything it can to allow it to continue its growth to enormous levels, and dealing with the Chinese who are also no strangers to manipulation and leverage etc seems to have set up a whole new set of issues that I am sure will unfold over the next several decades.

    Would I agree that part of the costs of over running our govt. by getting into bed with the Chinese govt. have included the devaluation of currencies and also added to the negative effects of the trade imbalances at home, well absolutely.

    I am not sure where this is all leading, but it would seem that from all we are discussing (both when agreed and not) that what we are seeing is the results of a govt that is out of control in funding and growth of itself, and the many ways it has been allowed to sell out to keep itself and the country afloat.

    As we are seeing today these are some serious costs were looking at, and I can not think what the repercussions would be if there was a change in the face of policy that did not include the continued pandering to the Chinese govt. but then again with the switch over the last so many decades of putting the costs of running or ruining government solely on the backs of the middle class working families of our country I am not sure they could bear that burden either.

    Though we obviously do not agree on everything I wonder if you also could make the connection with how our government has been "working" to that of a junkie searching for his or her next fix, and maybe these new tariffs will create a hostile enough situation with the Chines govt to cause an intervention of sorts and finally put our country and its govt on the road to recovery.






    What are these costs, and how is the American tax payer footing the bill?

    Seriously are you leading or baiting me here?

    Causing a condition that those coming into the workforce without a higher degree to be imbeciles and not capable of lower to middle level positions has created an increase in the numbers of universities and those attending them so that they can employ the newly unemployable etc.

    The costs come from the amounts that the tax payer subsidizes these institutions, and direct costs borne from tuition.

    Then there are the guaranteed loans, grants, and such like that you mentioned earlier, and I am sure there are others I am not aware of as well.


    What is wrong with being a master plumber? You are very correct, although a master plumber is a service oriented type of employment. I never made the distinction between university and technological skill advancement, of which i will not. Reason be, not everyone can become doctors, and lawyers, (service) because even their plumbing goes out at times


    I believe we agree that there is nothing wrong with being a master plumber, or a mechanic, or electrician, or any other trades related career, but I also know more than one person in these positions with a BS or higher degree (even one who is also an attorney) who had either found that there was not the money they anticipated in their original career choice, or had somehow thought they would be inferior in some way without a degree

    There is so much more to this and I really need to move on, but maybe another day etc.

    It would seem practical that not everyone can be a Dr. or an attorney etc, but even with the current down turn in the economy that has devastated the income of many union tradesman (very likely the direct result of replacing some of the jobs lost in manufacturing with new ones in home construction and development etc) there are other less known or popular but similar positions (though normally lower paying, and non union protected) in various industries that are seeing an expected shortage in new qualified or even just interested employees.

    I have witnessed different trade association members address the growing problem of recruiting new talent to their industry. Many are even service based industries that just can not compete with the idea that most people seem to prefer working for in an air conditioned white collar environment, and without making a real effort to change things (at all kinds of costs) there will and maybe we are even now seeing a shortage of qualified people etc.

    The only thing saving these companies to some extent is that the losses in production have reduced their base or business and they are seeing changes in their industries that include reduced service that is being replaced with sales of new inexpensive products imported from Asia.

    Odd how things seem to work their way right back to the trade imbalances

    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

  8. #108
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    US manufacturing has nearly doubled since 1966, even though manufacturing as a % of GDP is nearly half.

    In 2008, manufacturing accounted for $1.804 billion @ 12%.

    Which is quite interesting. We produce more than we did in 1966 (between 35% and 50%) even though manufacturing as a whole has decreased somewhere between 60% and 40%. Quite interesting?[/QUOTE]

    We produce more, import even more, have a increased population, much larger govt., and we are also paying more to support it all.

    I guess I could go research and post stats on census numbers, immigration both legal and not, and so many other areas to show that the numbers above actually paint a pretty scary picture, but I think that being we are living the results today and have seen how manipulating things like the real estate market and shaky loans etc to try and keep the economy chugging along and avoiding a meltdown without addressing the underlying faults in the fundamentals (foundation just like a home) has lead to a near total collapse just like what could be seen when a building collapses unto its foundation when damaged from a earthquake.

    Remember that our so called trading partners who are little more than adversaries in trade had 20-30 year plans to infiltrate our markets that included dumping products with govt. subsidiaries until our companies had to fold up and they had full access to our consumers without competition etc, and some like the Japanese did such a great job of it that ultimately they nearly caused their own economy to fail as a result of over relying on the US dollar. (OK it is a little more complicated than that, but you get the idea).

    If we continue to ignore the core problems, and fail to make changes that address the flaws in the very foundation of our own govt. and then fix the the trade imbalances we will only continue to band aid the problem and will see these short cycle results which are inevitable under the current circumstances.

    We need to fix the real problems first, and then these other problems later.


    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

  9. #109
    Advisor LennyD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    East coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-16 @ 03:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    393

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Data is used to measure those so called "results around you". Without the application of data analysis, your vision vs my vision of the "current state of things" is arbitrary.



    Such as? You need to back your assumptions with evidence. Yet because you fear the use of data, the ideas you ascribe to will come off as weak.



    Data does not support conditions? How so, and to what extent? What data and what condition(s)?

    The fact of the matter is, manufacturing is greater than it was during a time when exports exceeded imports. Because of this FACT, your view on international trade is nothing more than naive mercantilism. The world has changed and will continue to do so.
    Simply put there is more to establishing a proper working system than just selling to the highest bidder.

    Just like many corporations ignored the obvious consequences of dumping toxic materials where they knew they should not only in the name of decreased costs and increased profits some things are just not the right way to do things.

    Not to take this to a environmental or corporate greed debate as I am sure there have been some of those here already, but there are concerns beyond the typical what produces the most profit etc.

    Case in point is how the real estate market fell apart once again, and how even though there was plenty of inventory, all kinds of efficiencies, cost reductions and the like that without a solid base of potential qualified and properly funded buyers there is no market period.

    If we continue to allow ourselves to give up our wealth as a nation and especially the working or middle class etc just who will be able to purchase the products?

    Will there be a point that all the average American worker can afford is inexpensive and many times inferior products of third world nations? Are we even at or near that point now?

    All the automation and cost cutting in the world can not reverse the costs of doing business in the US that are not seen outside of our country, and oddly those countries that do have some of these costs are not producing the low or lowest cost products either.

    It would seem evident that a family with a monthly income of 3-4K and expenses compromising much of what is left after taxes would not be able to even consider purchasing a quality US made product over one imported from China with such lower production costs etc.

    Think of something as simple as an electric drill and the price difference between domestic and a chinese import. Heck you could spend the value of the lower cost Chinese product just in the time spent sourcing a domestic one as most popular retailers do not even stock them as they know the price point for domestic products is above what the typical buyer is able to pay.

    Pretty soon we may need to be exporting all of our products as those countries which we have sent our wealth to will be more able to afford them then we are.

    Just where is all this going ?????????

    "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
    Albert Einstein


    **Question Everything**

  10. #110
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: US penalizes Chinese tires, infuriating Beijing

    Quote Originally Posted by LennyD View Post
    Simply put there is more to establishing a proper working system than just selling to the highest bidder.
    What system are you referring to?

    Just like many corporations ignored the obvious consequences of dumping toxic materials where they knew they should not only in the name of decreased costs and increased profits some things are just not the right way to do things.
    Corporate disregard for property rights is an entirely different subject matter, as is the percieved decrease in cost/increase in profits associated with such acts.

    Not to take this to a environmental or corporate greed debate as I am sure there have been some of those here already, but there are concerns beyond the typical what produces the most profit etc.
    Of course there is, but this is not truly a debate on profit motive; instead, this is a debate on whether autarkic trade theory is the desirable in both the long and short run. You have said it is, but offer no evidence.

    Case in point is how the real estate market fell apart once again, and how even though there was plenty of inventory, all kinds of efficiencies, cost reductions and the like that without a solid base of potential qualified and properly funded buyers there is no market period.
    Non sequitur. The real estate market has nothing to do with the debate at hand.

    If we continue to allow ourselves to give up our wealth as a nation and especially the working or middle class etc just who will be able to purchase the products?
    This goes back to the earlier discussion, where you assert your form of capitalism as zero sum game relative to nationalist interest. The fact of the matter is, only a nation of great wealth can have a current account in the negative, and with that being said, not every country can have a positive current account. In a perfect world, exports = imports, but because the majority of the worlds wealth does in fact reside within our borders, we are naturally going to import more than we export.

    In economic terms, our national [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indifference_curve"]indifference curve[/ame] relative to our budgetary constraint forces us to move past our own [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_possibilities_frontier"]production possibilities frontier[/ame] in order to maximize our utility.

    In plain English, we have more demand for total goods than we can produce given our resources (labor, capital, time, etc...) In order for us to obtain our "maximum value derived from consumption", we then need to move the more archaic means of production outside of the US, and perform more productive avenues in which we can then obtain them.

    Will there be a point that all the average American worker can afford is inexpensive and many times inferior products of third world nations? Are we even at or near that point now?
    The difference in quality among an entire basket of goods produced anywhere is negligible based upon relative requirements in human capital, and factors of production. Who makes a better car for the money, Toyota or Ford? The answer is quite simple at this point; Toyota makes a superior product relative to price. But Toyota cannot make all the cars in the world; therefore there is room for other firms to compete.

    All the automation and cost cutting in the world cannot reverse the costs of doing business in the US that are not seen outside of our country, and oddly those countries that do have some of these costs are not producing the low or lowest cost products either.
    I have been wondering why you never reply to my specific points, and it is apparent now. You have no desire to straight talk, and instead just side step any counter argument, and then reply in the same fashion. This is not a debate, because you have not said anything different in the three replies you have made towards me; same story, different ways of saying it.

    It would seem evident that a family with a monthly income of 3-4K and expenses compromising much of what is left after taxes would not be able to even consider purchasing a quality US made product over one imported from China with such lower production costs etc.
    And why would they, given their respective budget constraints? Can you prove that the demand for US goods increases as peoples respective income increases? I reject the notion that all foreign goods are inferior. Reason be, people purchase Porsche, Cognac, etc....

    Think of something as simple as an electric drill and the price difference between domestic and a Chinese import.
    And what about the German counterpart in Bosch? Do they make a less quality drill? Given the long run costs associated in replacing a inferior drill, a rational consumer would purchase the "longer lasting" if it is in their interest to use it on a constant basis. If they are only going to assemble furniture a few times per year, why not buy one that does not come with the "heavy duty" cost?

    [quote]Heck you could spend the value of the lower cost Chinese product just in the time spent sourcing a domestic one as most popular retailers do not even stock them as they know the price point for domestic products is above what the typical buyer is able to pay.[QUOTE]

    Wrong. Given various applications for specific goods, not everyone needs a Milwaukee drill, and a the Black and Decker model made in Taiwan will work just fine for them. I mean, why spend $300 on a drill if you are going to use it seldom?

    Pretty soon we may need to be exporting all of our products as those countries which we have sent our wealth to will be more able to afford them then we are.
    That makes no sense at all.... Before attempting to tackle such complicated issues as foreign trade, i recommend you study some basic economics. It would save us a bunch of time deciphering your false assumptions and inaccuracies.

    Just where is all this going ?????????
    I can see this conversation is going nowhere. If you cannot reply to me in due fashion, i will no longer respond.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •