What if we go to war with that country or one their allies? Will they still make things for us?
I don't think you are quite aware of how the global market works. Companies are not controlled like how Communist countries are run. We still have US and Western countries trading with Iran despite heavy sanctions. Just because a company's location of headquarters is engaged in war with us doesn't mean they won't sell us products. And you forget how companies can influence conflicts. The heads of several large firms directly phoned the leaders of Pakistan and India during the last major crisis to inform them of the consequences of open conflict: aka, no more FDI. That played a significant role in tampering down the hostility. Integration of economies reduces chances of war. This is a very good thing.
Cheaper, superior quality products helps the US as it helps everyone who trades. We get cheap clothes from Mexico, Mexico in turn buys relatively cheap and superior planes from America. Win-win on both sides. Trade is effectively magic as it turns products like sheep into oil.
Thats because we allowed companies to outsource to countries were they can exploit people for cheaper prices. Had our politicians not tossed the salads of disloyal anti-American businesses, we and the rest of the world still have a lot of blue collar manufacturing jobs.
So you are okay with paying higher prices for inferior goods? By the way, a great many technological products you use and that we rely upon for our daily lives came directly from outsourcing production. By outsourcing production, companies in Japan and elsewhere were able to improve upon the process and make better products. Televisions underwent serious improvements once the Japanese figured out how to do it. Explain to me how business is disloyal when it primary purpose it increase shareholder wealth, and when those shareholders are primarily Americans. And the only way we'd still have lots of blue collar manufacturing jobs is if we were North Korea, adamant is preventing imports. We'd have poor quality products at high prices. You'd have to effectively suspend free market capitalism to maintain lots of blue collar jobs. Banning automation would be primary. Many jobs have been lost due to technology.
You sound a lot like a Luddite.
So if Mexico wanted to secure our southern border you would have no problem?
Sure as that would involve primarily securing their northern border. I don't have a problem with states securing their own borders.
Only a internationalist/globalist piece of **** would see no problem with letting another country or foreign company run our ports and borders.
Because you say so? You still haven't answered my question.
Why would a firm who spent billions of dollars on a massive investment be willing to throw it all away?
Do you normally buy huge investments only to light them on fire? This goes for Sovereign Wealth funds as well. Only a moron would think that funds who just invested hundreds of billions of dollars would be willing to destroy that wealth. Do you normally burn your paychecks before cashing them?
You seem to rely a lot on hate and I say so rather then actual argumentation.
Explain to me how it is patriotic to ship all your manufacturing jobs to other countries at the expense of American workers.
Come again? At expense of American workers? Do you really understand what you just said? I take you've never had any part in any business?
American firms cannot compete with cheap labor. Therefore, they are going to go under. That results in not only the loss of manufacturing jobs (as well as a few other industries) but everyone who had a interest in that firm. Explain to me how it patriotic to let millions of American's investments to be reduced to nothing. And by terminating these workers when you can provide severance and money for retraining, you give these workers a much better chance then letting them go during bankruptcy when you can't help them at all.
Furthermore, NAFTA has cost the American job market a mere 250,000 jobs total. That's fewer job losses then the normal structure of job losses annually.
Outsourcing Not the Culprit in Manufacturing Job Loss | Web Exclusive | Automation World
Technology Is a Major Cause of Job Loss: Offshoring Costs Americans Jobs, but Automation Is a Bigger Factor
http://www.slp.org/res_state_htm/tech_jobloss.html
Manufacturing job losses in China far surpass those in the United States. | Asia > East Asia from AllBusiness.com
Manufacturing Jobs | Automation Causes Job Destruction | Control Design
Read up. You should be attacking technology, not outsourcing.
Guess how many workers you can fire when you replace them with machines?
A hell of alot. Guess how many construction workers you can fire when you buy a big backhoe? Lots. Guess how many telephone operators you can fire when you replace them with a computer? Lots.
What is real interesting is despite the mounting job losses in manufacturing, US exports of manufactured products has only gone up in terms of value. So really we are replacing workers with machines to produce high quality products that bring in lots of money.
Explain how is it patriotic to let other nations produce our **** when we have Americans who are capable of doing those things and explain how we won't be crippled if we go to war with those countries or their allies that manufacture our ****?
It's the traditional value system of America. Free Market Capitalism. We don't hire Americans do to those jobs because they aren't as efficient to earn a huge wage. An American worker sewing socks for minimum wage has to be 10X as efficient as a Thai working getting 1/10th their pay. If you don't like this, look at the USSR for what a country looks like when it refrains from trading. And we won't be crippled if we go to war. Aside from possibly oil, there isn't a single product that we cannot produce ourselves given sufficent time and that is absolutely vital. But oil isn't that big of an issue given the Saudis and their desire to keep us on their side.
What you are blaming is economic progress.
How is selling your sovereignty down the river equal a better outcome for your country?
http://www.debatepolitics.com/1057878838-post5.html
Already addressed.
