Originally posted by deviliscious

I would like to know what exactly will Obama's Healthcare reform will do to get these people out of tents and get them back able to support themselves again?

His plan does not solve the core issues and does not provide care for all. His plan is a big mistake that is completely preventable. ALL of this is completely preventable.  The IADMD plan provides the best care to all, no exceptions, which Obama claimed could not be done. That is a lie. I am really sick of the lies and you should be too.
 

To solve this problem it is very simple. We MUST make  it more profitable to have your business in the United states using American labor than having it anywhere else and importing it. Solve that and we solve our economic woes. We will have our jobs return, we will have people gaining back homes and able to provide for themselves again.  Why is it no one wants to really solve the problems just use the problems as an excuse to push their own agendas?

We actually need welfare reform, and do away with almost all of the freebies. Instead, people are paid for a community service and in the process help enable themselves again. With the exception of the disabled, most on welfare can do something,  whether it is making blankets for the homeless,  help with home repairs for the elderly, or growing food in a community garden, they can DO something  for their community for the help they receive from the community. This would help both parties, the communities that provide for them, and themselves in the process.

 

We Need Health Care (Everyone Needs Health Care)

I do not endorse Obama's health care reform.  It is great for the industry, which is why they overall support it, but bad for Americans; it essentially forces people into the for profit health care system, which is resulting in financial ruin for individuals, households, and the entire economy.  It is an agreement between industry and government:  we will force people to buy into your plans and you will have to agree to reduce costs.  It is not reform - at all - it is an expansion of the current model.  We need medicare for all, or allow individuals to be covered under the federal employee option.  People think this will "break the system," but I think it would strengthen it and strengthen America.  Health care should be paid for through the General Fund, and, yes, taxes should be increased (on everyone) to pay for it.  Moreover, we should explore a hybrid model, such as that used in France.  France, however, is a unitary state.  The United States is a Federation (collection of non-independent states with a central government).  Aside:  The EU, e.g., is a Confederation (collection of independent states).  We should explore which systems work for different countries, with different political and health care systems, and why.  Instead, I think, we are trying to strengthen the current model without any public option.  Even when it comes to pharmaceuticals, where Americans pay more than anywhere else in the world, no reform is being pursued.  Americans, when it comes to health care, are being suckered, while some people keep insisting (often shouting at town hall meetings), "We have the best health care in the world."  When it comes to taxes and health care, ignorance is widespread.

Our employer-based for profit health care system worked great when people, after high school, the military, or college had one job, a great pension, were middle-class, and health care costs were cheaper. 

Today, we live in a different world where the employer-based for profit model does not, and cannot, work;  it cannot work even when you coerce people, through fines and punishments, to participate in it.

Today, even more, the system is designed to exclude people to make a profit; under-cover people to make a profit; and have excessive costs over delivery to make a profit.  This is health care.

The Middle-Class is Dead

Your middle-class jobs are not going to return - ever.  I am sorry.  I wish that were not the case.  I really do.  The middle-class, basically, to be middle-class today is probably what many lower middle-class consider upper middle-class.  We are witnessing extremes in income inequality and social/economic inequality because there are no institutions that create, protect, and secure a viable American middle-class:  health care, wage insurance, unions, collective bargaining, etc.  You need to basically join the government to have the middle-class security in terms of retirement benefits, health care, days off, and equitable levels of income.  The private sector middle-class, excluding some industries --consulting, health care, taxation/accounting, higher education-- is dying if not dead. 

We Did Reform Welfare (And That is the Problem)

As social inequality increases, ironically, the people struggling want to reduce their own benefits and safety nets such as welfare and other programs designed to mitigate the impact of job loss, gross underemployment, and so forth.  You mentioned the disabled, who receive social security benefits; they already paid for those benefits, with their money.  I am sorry, but there is no "welfare" for YOU. 

It is kind of like blaming the victim - again.  Why do we do this?  It is irrational to ME to do this.  Even, forgive me, a bit nutty.  You mention "blankets for the homeless" and getting rid of it.  One, I am not aware of a federal program that gives blankets to the homeless; there MIGHT be local efforts for this.  Two, giving blankets to the homeless, even if there were such a program, would not prevent you from becoming middle-class with the securities of wage insurance, bargaining power, health care, quality-of-life benefits.  Blankets for the homeless, honestly and seriously, is not the problem.  Welfare, honestly and seriously, is not the problem.  

Poor people are not the problem, and poor people are not preventing the working-class from advancing.  The problem is that the working-classes and lower middle-classes (and today somewhat the middle-class) are a few paychecks from poverty.

Originally posted by deviliscious

I would like to know what exactly will Obama's Healthcare reform will do to get these people out of tents and get them back able to support themselves again?

His plan does not solve the core issues and does not provide care for all. His plan is a big mistake that is completely preventable. ALL of this is completely preventable.  The IADMD plan provides the best care to all, no exceptions, which Obama claimed could not be done. That is a lie. I am really sick of the lies and you should be too.
 

To solve this problem it is very simple. We MUST make  it more profitable to have your business in the United states using American labor than having it anywhere else and importing it. Solve that and we solve our economic woes. We will have our jobs return, we will have people gaining back homes and able to provide for themselves again.  Why is it no one wants to really solve the problems just use the problems as an excuse to push their own agendas?

We actually need welfare reform, and do away with almost all of the freebies. Instead, people are paid for a community service and in the process help enable themselves again. With the exception of the disabled, most on welfare can do something,  whether it is making blankets for the homeless,  help with home repairs for the elderly, or growing food in a community garden, they can DO something  for their community for the help they receive from the community. This would help both parties, the communities that provide for them, and themselves in the process.

 

Let me explain again what is happening........

Following WW 2 the United States was the only remaining industrializaed nation still on it's feet. All the rest had been bombed out. If anyone in the world wanted to buy anything, tooling, machines, consumer products, the United States was the one making them. The capital of the world accumulated in the Untied States as the rest of the world bought our products.

Within 25 years the rest of the world had rebuilt newer, more efficient manufacturing plants, and was back on the prowl for market share. Prior to 1970 "Made in Japan" meant junk, and the German import car was the low tech, easily manufactured Volkswagon Beetle. After 1970 the capital of the world began to re-distribute back.

The Arab oil embargo of the 1970s marked the start of this transition. American's bought Japanese Toyotas, and Hondas, and found that, despite minor problems, they were not junk. More money flowed into the Middle East as OPEC found it had muscle. Europe exported BMWs, Audis, and a host of other products. Korea was a later arrival, as their war occurred later, but they came out of it with a sense of direction. Meanwhile, America slept on it's past accomplishments, never recognizing the threat to trade.

The playing field had been leveled, the world was flattened. Americans keep thinking the world is round, and can't understand that Columbus is wrong.  America still continues to sleep, and calls for the wrong responses, never really seeing the problem.

America has to get competitive. The old industrial age company pension plans, and health care plans, price our products out of the world market. Our education system is industrial ages, 30-40 students in a public school classroom learning at the rate of the least motivated student. We need to encourage education. We need to encourage America to be on the cutting edge in high tech information age fields, such as biology, chemistry, genetics, physics, math, engineering. The products of tomorrow may not be manufactured here, but they must be researched, created, and designed here, if America is to remain competitive in the world market. 

The education, research, and design is even now shifting. The rest of the world sees what has to be done, it's not just a coincidence that it was the Chinese that cloned from the skin cell of a mouse. Or the Scottish that cloned a sheep. It's not enough to point to a study of the top universities in the world and say, "see, they're all American", then sit back smugly surrounded in emotional feelings of superiority. The rest of the world is hungry like the wolf. Fat, happy, and complacent won't cut it anymore.

For all the patriotic jingoism, every day we are losing market share in the global economy. You can wrap yourself up in the American flag all day, reciting slogans from the television about how great we are, and walk around carrying signs, because you don't have a job to go to. If that's what makes you feel better at night, as you fall asleep in your tent city, there's nothing that can be done with you.

Originally posted by declaredemer

Originally posted by deviliscious

I would like to know what exactly will Obama's Healthcare reform will do to get these people out of tents and get them back able to support themselves again?

His plan does not solve the core issues and does not provide care for all. His plan is a big mistake that is completely preventable. ALL of this is completely preventable.  The IADMD plan provides the best care to all, no exceptions, which Obama claimed could not be done. That is a lie. I am really sick of the lies and you should be too.
 

To solve this problem it is very simple. We MUST make  it more profitable to have your business in the United states using American labor than having it anywhere else and importing it. Solve that and we solve our economic woes. We will have our jobs return, we will have people gaining back homes and able to provide for themselves again.  Why is it no one wants to really solve the problems just use the problems as an excuse to push their own agendas?

We actually need welfare reform, and do away with almost all of the freebies. Instead, people are paid for a community service and in the process help enable themselves again. With the exception of the disabled, most on welfare can do something,  whether it is making blankets for the homeless,  help with home repairs for the elderly, or growing food in a community garden, they can DO something  for their community for the help they receive from the community. This would help both parties, the communities that provide for them, and themselves in the process.

 

We Need Health Care (Everyone Needs Health Care)

I do not endorse Obama's health care reform.  It is great for the industry, which is why they overall support it, but bad for Americans; it essentially forces people into the for profit health care system, which is resulting in financial ruin for individuals, households, and the entire economy.  It is an agreement between industry and government:  we will force people to buy into your plans and you will have to agree to reduce costs.  It is not reform - at all - it is an expansion of the current model.  We need medicare for all, or allow individuals to be covered under the federal employee option.  People think this will "break the system," but I think it would strengthen it and strengthen America.  Health care should be paid for through the General Fund, and, yes, taxes should be increased (on everyone) to pay for it.  Moreover, we should explore a hybrid model, such as that used in France.  France, however, is a unitary state.  The United States is a Federation (collection of non-independent states with a central government).  Aside:  The EU, e.g., is a Confederation (collection of independent states).  We should explore which systems work for different countries, with different political and health care systems, and why.  Instead, I think, we are trying to strengthen the current model without any public option.  Even when it comes to pharmaceuticals, where Americans pay more than anywhere else in the world, no reform is being pursued.  Americans, when it comes to health care, are being suckered, while some people keep insisting (often shouting at town hall meetings), "We have the best health care in the world."  When it comes to taxes and health care, ignorance is widespread.

 

Our employer-based for profit health care system worked great when people, after high school, the military, or college had one job, a great pension, were middle-class, and health care costs were cheaper. 

Today, we live in a different world where the employer-based for profit model does not, and cannot, work;  it cannot work even when you coerce people, through fines and punishments, to participate in it.

Today, even more, the system is designed to exclude people to make a profit; under-cover people to make a profit; and have excessive costs over delivery to make a profit.  This is health care.

 

The Middle-Class is Dead

Your middle-class jobs are not going to return - ever.  I am sorry.  I wish that were not the case.  I really do.  The middle-class, basically, to be middle-class today is probably what many lower middle-class consider upper middle-class.  We are witnessing extremes in income inequality and social/economic inequality because there are no institutions that create, protect, and secure a viable American middle-class:  health care, wage insurance, unions, collective bargaining, etc.  You need to basically join the government to have the middle-class security in terms of retirement benefits, health care, days off, and equitable levels of income.  The private sector middle-class, excluding some industries --consulting, health care, taxation/accounting, higher education-- is dying if not dead. 

 

 

We Did Reform Welfare (And That is the Problem)

As social inequality increases, ironically, the people struggling want to reduce their own benefits and safety nets such as welfare and other programs designed to mitigate the impact of job loss, gross underemployment, and so forth.  You mentioned the disabled, who receive social security benefits; they already paid for those benefits, with their money.  I am sorry, but there is no "welfare" for YOU. 

It is kind of like blaming the victim - again.  Why do we do this?  It is irrational to ME to do this.  Even, forgive me, a bit nutty.  You mention "blankets for the homeless" and getting rid of it.  One, I am not aware of a federal program that gives blankets to the homeless; there MIGHT be local efforts for this.  Two, giving blankets to the homeless, even if there were such a program, would not prevent you from becoming middle-class with the securities of wage insurance, bargaining power, health care, quality-of-life benefits.  Blankets for the homeless, honestly and seriously, is not the problem.  Welfare, honestly and seriously, is not the problem.  

Poor people are not the problem, and poor people are not preventing the working-class from advancing.  The problem is that the working-classes and lower middle-classes (and today somewhat the middle-class) are a few paychecks from poverty.

I think you misunderstood what I was saying about Welfare reform. I have volunteered at shelters in my area. I am in NO way blaming the victims here, anhd want to actually help them help themselves. have seen what is happening here first hand. Yes, some shelters have implemented these ideas and have helped these people enable themselves again. The people receiving benefits need to be a part of the solution as well. One of the shelters here, they made their own clothing, blankets, worked on community beautification projects and have their own community garden to help provide them with their own fresh fruits and vegtables. They were required to wake up at the crack of dawn and get working again, being productive again which in turn helped them rebuild their work ethics, self esteem,  and made them proud to be able to be a productive and valueable member of society again.

You see when someone loses their job, their home, their ability to care for themselves it is not just their basic needs that need to be met, they feel broken, depressed, and need to be given a way to help themselves rather than sit around feeling sorry for themselves. I would like to see this implemented on a larger scale, because the people at that shelter actually felt human again, they had higher self esteems, higher goals, and they actually were given hope again in what seemed like a hopeless situation.
 

I am not sure about the programs where you live, but here we do have a coats and blankets for the homeless program. We DO have assistance for those in need, we have volunteer programs that people get together and go help the elderly maintain their homes, though it is funded by local charities it  makes a huge difference, especially in times like this when people need them the most.  If we are not endorsing " freebies" but rather allow them to give something back to the communities that take care of them, the entire system would benefit from this, including the people who are receiving the assistance in time of need.  Once these people get their footing back after being knocked down, many return to help these organizations because they helped them.  They put back into that system to help the next person who needs it.

Originally posted by olddaddy

 

Let me explain again what is happening........

 

I am fully aware of our history, and no I am not parading myself in an American flag silly. We will not be able to compete globally until other countries have higher wages,   They do not have the labor laws in place we do, and unless that changes either on their part or ours it will leave us far behind in the global market. Since we obviously do not control what other countries do, we can only handle the problems here at home. If we balance the cost of goods in the US to make American products competitive on our own soil it will create more American jobs immediately. We are  considered the shoppers of the world,  we are making the other countries wealthy at the expense of our own jobs. The only thing we can really do to counterthis is plug up the syphon on money leaving this country  by taxing any monies leaving this country. We have to give companies financial incintives to have their business here  with american labor rather than have it anywhere else.

What has also happened is  at the same time the rest of the world was building up and making it more profitable to have the businesses in their countries, the US kept piling on burdens to our own businesses forcing them to leave our country.  We always attack our industry instead of take care of them. Without our industry we have no jobs .. and now that this has happened, they still do not adress these issues, they just allow the unemployed to accumulate while they turn a blind eye to the core issue here.

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by olddaddy

 

Let me explain again what is happening........

 

 

I am fully aware of our history, and no I am not parading myself in an American flag silly. We will not be able to compete globally until other countries have higher wages,   They do not have the labor laws in place we do, and unless that changes either on their part or ours it will leave us far behind in the global market. Since we obviously do not control what other countries do, we can only handle the problems here at home. If we balance the cost of goods in the US to make American products competitive on our own soil it will create more American jobs immediately. We are  considered the shoppers of the world,  we are making the other countries wealthy at the expense of our own jobs. The only thing we can really do to counterthis is plug up the syphon on money leaving this country  by taxing any monies leaving this country. We have to give companies financial incintives to have their business here  with american labor rather than have it anywhere else.

What has also happened is  at the same time the rest of the world was building up and making it more profitable to have the businesses in their countries, the US kept piling on burdens to our own businesses forcing them to leave our country.  We always attack our industry instead of take care of them. Without our industry we have no jobs .. and now that this has happened, they still do not adress these issues, they just allow the unemployed to accumulate while they turn a blind eye to the core issue here.

ahhhhhh..........devil, I was reinforcing the points that you made in your post, not arguing that Obama had the answers.

So far I have yet to see a politician that even understands the problems from either side of the aisle, let alone one that understands what has to be done. That covers the Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush eras.

Taxing outbound money will not work. This will result in a trade war that the United States will ultimately lose. If we do not allow access to our markets, we will be denied access to the world markets, at a minimum. Business will locate where they have infrastructure, abundant energy, and a highly skilled workforce capable of adding value to product. Our business will go elsewhere in order to participate in that world market. They already do.

Rather than balance the cost of goods to make American products competitive, we have to research and develope the products that the world wants to buy. They may make them for us, and we may buy them, however they will pay up the kazoo for the right to manufacture, as we hold the technology. Conversely, with their supply of abundant, cheap, labor, the prices they can command on the world market will always be low. Production rights can always be shifted to any third world country that undercuts the labor rate at any time. In the world economy money will always flow between countries, the art is making sure more money flows inbound, then outbound.

We cannot compete with large portions of the world in unskilled labor, or semi skilled labor. However they cannot compete with us in highly skilled labor. We should be playing to our strength, not our weakness.

Personally, I would rather move our society upstream through better education and high tech job creation rather than continue to try to protect manufacturing. Maybe more people will start to see the light, and not be overly worried that Johnny has too much homework and it interferes with his leisure time. Right now, we are dumbing it down to be sensitive to Johnny's feelings....

Training an engineer, or a scientist, starts in middle school, not college. Johnny better get his ass motivated if he doesn't want to live in a tent. Contrary to the popular belief on these forums, nobody on welfare lives in a mansion and eats prime rib every night, and drives a Lexus. Usually it's more like the have alot of whine with their spam.

I have a question, and the answer is probably simple, but I am ignorant to it.  Perhaps you guys can educate me to a better understanding.

I live just outside of High Point, NC.  It is largely considered the Home Furnishing Capital of the World.  In otherwords, there are (or used to be) MANY furniture factories here.  But what has happened over the past decade is more and more of these companies moving their factories to China and Mexico.  Yes, for the "bigwigs" of these companies this means they'll turn much larger profits, due to lowered labor costs.  However, what suffers is the economy of the town.  Those employees lose their jobs.  Because they lose their jobs they no longer have any money to shop.  Shopping stops, so the stores close down, thereby causing more people to be unemployed.  The endless cycle continues. 

Now, my question to this is, how is this "American"?  How is out-sourcing even legal?  I'm full aware of the supposed freedoms our country entitles us to, and I fully respect them.   However, in the cacse of outsourcing, I just do not understand.  It does nothing but completly destroy communities, families, and people here in the US. 

I've noticed alot of you mentioning requiring more severe taxing on companies that are outsourcing.  But that only helps our government.  It doesn't give the people back their jobs.  Why couldn't our country just put a stop to it plain and simple?  For example:  If you want to own a company in the US, then ALL employees must reside IN the US.  All manufacturing must reside in the US. 

I honestly do not see how these measures would infringe upon our freedoms. 

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by olddaddy

 

Let me explain again what is happening........

 

 

I am fully aware of our history, and no I am not parading myself in an American flag silly. We will not be able to compete globally until other countries have higher wages,   They do not have the labor laws in place we do, and unless that changes either on their part or ours it will leave us far behind in the global market. Since we obviously do not control what other countries do, we can only handle the problems here at home. If we balance the cost of goods in the US to make American products competitive on our own soil it will create more American jobs immediately. We are  considered the shoppers of the world,  we are making the other countries wealthy at the expense of our own jobs. The only thing we can really do to counterthis is plug up the syphon on money leaving this country  by taxing any monies leaving this country. We have to give companies financial incintives to have their business here  with american labor rather than have it anywhere else.

What has also happened is  at the same time the rest of the world was building up and making it more profitable to have the businesses in their countries, the US kept piling on burdens to our own businesses forcing them to leave our country.  We always attack our industry instead of take care of them. Without our industry we have no jobs .. and now that this has happened, they still do not adress these issues, they just allow the unemployed to accumulate while they turn a blind eye to the core issue here.

 

ahhhhhh..........devil, I was reinforcing the points that you made in your post, not arguing that Obama had the answers.

So far I have yet to see a politician that even understands the problems from either side of the aisle, let alone one that understands what has to be done. That covers the Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush eras.

Taxing outbound money will not work. This will result in a trade war that the United States will ultimately lose. If we do not allow access to our markets, we will be denied access to the world markets, at a minimum. Business will locate where they have infrastructure, abundant energy, and a highly skilled workforce capable of adding value to product. Our business will go elsewhere in order to participate in that world market. They already do.

Rather than balance the cost of goods to make American products competitive, we have to research and develope the products that the world wants to buy. They may make them for us, and we may buy them, however they will pay up the kazoo for the right to manufacture, as we hold the technology. Conversely, with their supply of abundant, cheap, labor, the prices they can command on the world market will always be low. Production rights can always be shifted to any third world country that undercuts the labor rate at any time. In the world economy money will always flow between countries, the art is making sure more money flows inbound, then outbound.

We cannot compete with large portions of the world in unskilled labor, or semi skilled labor. However they cannot compete with us in highly skilled labor. We should be playing to our strength, not our weakness.

Personally, I would rather move our society upstream through better education and high tech job creation rather than continue to try to protect manufacturing. Maybe more people will start to see the light, and not be overly worried that Johnny has too much homework and it interferes with his leisure time. Right now, we are dumbing it down to be sensitive to Johnny's feelings....

Training an engineer, or a scientist, starts in middle school, not college. Johnny better get his ass motivated if he doesn't want to live in a tent. Contrary to the popular belief on these forums, nobody on welfare lives in a mansion and eats prime rib every night, and drives a Lexus. Usually it's more like the have alot of whine with their spam.

I agree with you for the most part, but where I disagree is that we have to have both. With the increase in technology to make things more efficiently , there is already going to be a decrease in lower skilled jobs worldwide.  The fact is we have 300million people in this country, and not enough jobs in all areas. There will always be a higher demand for lower skilled jobs due to  human limitations. There will always be a higher number of people in the population with the inability to do the higher tech jobs, and we either 1. have to support them, 2. let them starve, 3. create a system that allows them to  provide for themselves and be a productive member of society.
 

I personally choose the 3rd option, because the others  simply do not work, or are inhumane.  We must not only design here, but manufacture here in order to provide enough jobs in this country, or the problems will not be resolved.  We must not only play our strength, but strengthen our weakness at the same time. Thsi can be accomplished, but it will take major changes to do so.

Have you ever tried to tutor a child? Have you ever worked with the " slow learners" in school?  No matter how many different ways you try to teach them something, they may never be able to learn everything that everyone else can. Though they are not technically mentally handicapped, they just never will be able to keep at the same pace with the rest. Ask any teacher,  even the best teachers, and they will tell you the same. Some kids just can't do everything the other kids can do, and the system we implement needs to include them as well. There has to be a place for all those that cannot do the higher skilled jobs, some way for them to support their families as well. There has to be enough variety in skill level to keep up with the demand for different skill levels of jobs. The service, construction and retail industry alone  is not near enough to accomplish this.

Originally posted by Vhayne

I have a question, and the answer is probably simple, but I am ignorant to it.  Perhaps you guys can educate me to a better understanding.

I live just outside of High Point, NC.  It is largely considered the Home Furnishing Capital of the World.  In otherwords, there are (or used to be) MANY furniture factories here.  But what has happened over the past decade is more and more of these companies moving their factories to China and Mexico.  Yes, for the "bigwigs" of these companies this means they'll turn much larger profits, due to lowered labor costs.  However, what suffers is the economy of the town.  Those employees lose their jobs.  Because they lose their jobs they no longer have any money to shop.  Shopping stops, so the stores close down, thereby causing more people to be unemployed.  The endless cycle continues. 

Now, my question to this is, how is this "American"?  How is out-sourcing even legal?  I'm full aware of the supposed freedoms our country entitles us to, and I fully respect them.   However, in the cacse of outsourcing, I just do not understand.  It does nothing but completly destroy communities, families, and people here in the US. 

I've noticed alot of you mentioning requiring more severe taxing on companies that are outsourcing.  But that only helps our government.  It doesn't give the people back their jobs.  Why couldn't our country just put a stop to it plain and simple?  For example:  If you want to own a company in the US, then ALL employees must reside IN the US.  All manufacturing must reside in the US. 

I honestly do not see how these measures would infringe upon our freedoms. 

The taxing of  those companies for outsourcing balances out the cost difference between american worker and an foreign worker, and makes the american worker more competitive. It makes it so it would be more profitable to the company to hire an american worker than the foreign worker, thus increasing US jobs.  By saying that if you own a company in the US , all employees must reside in the US, you will just have the companies pack up and move saying, fine we won;t have our company in the US anymore . Many have already done this over unions ,min wage, and taxes.
 

What we can do however is counter it at import taxes, money leaving the country taxes, and give tax breaks and incentives to companies that hire americans and reinvest in our communities to balance it out, so that it is financially more profitable  for them to have their business here with american labor than to try and import here.

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by olddaddy

 

Let me explain again what is happening........

 

 

I am fully aware of our history, and no I am not parading myself in an American flag silly. We will not be able to compete globally until other countries have higher wages,   They do not have the labor laws in place we do, and unless that changes either on their part or ours it will leave us far behind in the global market. Since we obviously do not control what other countries do, we can only handle the problems here at home. If we balance the cost of goods in the US to make American products competitive on our own soil it will create more American jobs immediately. We are  considered the shoppers of the world,  we are making the other countries wealthy at the expense of our own jobs. The only thing we can really do to counterthis is plug up the syphon on money leaving this country  by taxing any monies leaving this country. We have to give companies financial incintives to have their business here  with american labor rather than have it anywhere else.

What has also happened is  at the same time the rest of the world was building up and making it more profitable to have the businesses in their countries, the US kept piling on burdens to our own businesses forcing them to leave our country.  We always attack our industry instead of take care of them. Without our industry we have no jobs .. and now that this has happened, they still do not adress these issues, they just allow the unemployed to accumulate while they turn a blind eye to the core issue here.

 

ahhhhhh..........devil, I was reinforcing the points that you made in your post, not arguing that Obama had the answers.

So far I have yet to see a politician that even understands the problems from either side of the aisle, let alone one that understands what has to be done. That covers the Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush eras.

Taxing outbound money will not work. This will result in a trade war that the United States will ultimately lose. If we do not allow access to our markets, we will be denied access to the world markets, at a minimum. Business will locate where they have infrastructure, abundant energy, and a highly skilled workforce capable of adding value to product. Our business will go elsewhere in order to participate in that world market. They already do.

Rather than balance the cost of goods to make American products competitive, we have to research and develope the products that the world wants to buy. They may make them for us, and we may buy them, however they will pay up the kazoo for the right to manufacture, as we hold the technology. Conversely, with their supply of abundant, cheap, labor, the prices they can command on the world market will always be low. Production rights can always be shifted to any third world country that undercuts the labor rate at any time. In the world economy money will always flow between countries, the art is making sure more money flows inbound, then outbound.

We cannot compete with large portions of the world in unskilled labor, or semi skilled labor. However they cannot compete with us in highly skilled labor. We should be playing to our strength, not our weakness.

Personally, I would rather move our society upstream through better education and high tech job creation rather than continue to try to protect manufacturing. Maybe more people will start to see the light, and not be overly worried that Johnny has too much homework and it interferes with his leisure time. Right now, we are dumbing it down to be sensitive to Johnny's feelings....

Training an engineer, or a scientist, starts in middle school, not college. Johnny better get his ass motivated if he doesn't want to live in a tent. Contrary to the popular belief on these forums, nobody on welfare lives in a mansion and eats prime rib every night, and drives a Lexus. Usually it's more like the have alot of whine with their spam.

Ia gree with you for the most part, but where I disagree is that we have to have both. With the increase in technology to make things more efficiently , there is already going to be a decrease in lower skilled jobs worldwide.  The fact is we have 300million people in this country, and not enough jobs in all areas. There will always be a higher demand for lower skilled jobs due to  human limitations. There will always be a higher number of people in the population with the inability to do the higher tech jobs, and we either 1. have to support them, 2. let them starve, 3. create a system that allows them to  provide for themselves and be a productive member of society.
 

I personally choose the 3rd option, because the others  simply do not work, or are inhumane.  We must not only design here, but manufacture here in order to provide enough jobs in this country, or the problems will not be resolved.  We must not only play our strength, but strengthen our weakness at the same time. Thsi can be accomplished, but it will take major changes to do so.

Have you ever tried to tutor a child? Have you ever worked with the " slow learners" in school?  No matter how many different ways you try to teach them something, they may never be able to learn everything that everyone else can. Though they are not technically mentally handicapped, they just never will be able to keep at the same pace with the rest. Ask any teacher,  even the best teachers, and they will tell you the same. Some kids just can't do everything the other kids can do, and the system we implement needs to include them as well. There has to be a place for all those that cannot do the higher skilled jobs, some way for them to support their families as well. There has to be enough variety in skill level to keep up with the demand for different skill levels of jobs. The service, construction and retail industry alone  is not near enough to accomplish this.

The higher skilled jobs are the ones that generate the inbound wealth. From 1945 to the mid 1970s that was the role of heavy manufacturing. Heavy manufacturing is unable to perform that role any more. Those that you talk about will still have jobs in what we presently call the service sector, provided those with the highly skilled jobs are competitive. The service sector will always be around, as a plumber in India cannot fix your leaking toilet. Nor can a roofer in China fix your leaking roof.

Those that you refer to who are not quite mentally handicapped will still have service industry jobs based on their level of proficiency. Yes, they will still need help with things like health care, commuting to work, etc. They do now. Nothing will ever really change for them.

Unfortunately, those poeple who were planning on working on the assembly line like their daddy did, and his daddy before him, had better get a clue. The sooner, the better. Those jobs are no longer the source of inbound wealth. Every country can now do those jobs.

It all comes down to playing to our strength to generate a surplus of inbound balance of trade payments. Manufacturing is not our strength, there are far too many places in the world that have more people who can receive semi skilled training and create a product for less. We can fight a holding action in these areas of economy, realizing that ultimately we will fail, but buying time to to bring our knowledge based strength online full force. However, we're not even close to doing that yet, we fight the losing battle, without any idea we will ultimately lose. Imagine the shock when we lose the manufacturing battle, AND lose the technological innovation battle.  Then how do we generate a surplus of inbound balance of trade?

Without addressing the problems that we have in our education system we cannot compete in the high tech sector to generate the inbound cash needed to operate our service sector. Right now we use standardized tests, an industrial age idea in which all students learn the same thing at the same rate.

When Pavlov's students correctly respond to the test question, the money machine opens up and drops cash into the laps of the school district. Everyone's happy, the teachers get their COLA raise, the administrators get their performance bonus, and the student moves down the assembly line to the next station in the sequence of standardized tests. And we wonder why students are bored, and check out mentally from the system. It's an entire education system of "been there, done that, rinse and repeat".

.......and I say to myself, what a wonderful world.

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Vhayne

I have a question, and the answer is probably simple, but I am ignorant to it.  Perhaps you guys can educate me to a better understanding.

I live just outside of High Point, NC.  It is largely considered the Home Furnishing Capital of the World.  In otherwords, there are (or used to be) MANY furniture factories here.  But what has happened over the past decade is more and more of these companies moving their factories to China and Mexico.  Yes, for the "bigwigs" of these companies this means they'll turn much larger profits, due to lowered labor costs.  However, what suffers is the economy of the town.  Those employees lose their jobs.  Because they lose their jobs they no longer have any money to shop.  Shopping stops, so the stores close down, thereby causing more people to be unemployed.  The endless cycle continues. 

Now, my question to this is, how is this "American"?  How is out-sourcing even legal?  I'm full aware of the supposed freedoms our country entitles us to, and I fully respect them.   However, in the cacse of outsourcing, I just do not understand.  It does nothing but completly destroy communities, families, and people here in the US. 

I've noticed alot of you mentioning requiring more severe taxing on companies that are outsourcing.  But that only helps our government.  It doesn't give the people back their jobs.  Why couldn't our country just put a stop to it plain and simple?  For example:  If you want to own a company in the US, then ALL employees must reside IN the US.  All manufacturing must reside in the US. 

I honestly do not see how these measures would infringe upon our freedoms. 

The taxing of  those companies for outsourcing balances out the cost difference between american worker and an foreign worker, and makes the american worker more competitive. It makes it so it would be more profitable to the company to hire an american worker than the foreign worker, thus increasing US jobs.  By saying that if you own a company in the US , all employees must reside in the US, you will just have the companies pack up and move saying, fine we won;t have our company in the US anymore . Many have already done this over unions ,min wage, and taxes.
 

What we can do however is counter it at import taxes, money leaving the country taxes, and give tax breaks and incentives to companies that hire americans and reinvest in our communities to balance it out, so that it is financially more profitable  for them to have their business here with american labor than to try and import here.

 

Thank you for trying to explain.  But I'm still a bit confused.  I understand what you're saying about the taxing.  It makes sense, but it would probably have to be insane tax rates to counter the mass profits these companies are reeling in.  It might also do exactly what you said concerning my "supposed idea", drive the companies outside the US entirely. 

Here's another suggestion...  If you live in the US, and want to own your own company, then that company must reside in the US entirely.  Maybe that's what I meant to say originally.  Basically, just make it impossible for these CEO's to go outside the US for anything other than to sell their products. 

Bring back the factories or end the companies completely.  That's the bottom line I'm trying to get across. 

Stop sending IT jobs and customer service overseas to India.  Hire US citizens that live here. 

I just don't understand why it ever was allowed in the first place.  It's appauling, to think that our country would allow a few people (the owners of these big businesses) to drop their current employee base and go OUTSIDE of our country, just so they can make a bigger profit!  Greed...that's all it is.  Selfish greed.

It is wonderful that you volunteer, and I think that is a mark of good citizenship to get involved in a variety of ways:  shelters, libraries, hospitals, highway clean-up, and in many and varied other ways.  So I honor your service to your community, and if more people we involved (politically, socially, economically, etc.) we would live in a much better society. 

We need safety nets, however, with government involvement.  We need insurance programs for health care to wage insurance to employment benefits to ensure that people do not find themselves in shanty towns. 

Charity does not have the resources, however, when we enter Great Recessions and Great Depressions.  Ordinary income-earning Americans do not have the resources themselves to prepare for these shocks, which are beyond their control.  

Originally posted by Vhayne

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by Vhayne

I have a question, and the answer is probably simple, but I am ignorant to it.  Perhaps you guys can educate me to a better understanding.

I live just outside of High Point, NC.  It is largely considered the Home Furnishing Capital of the World.  In otherwords, there are (or used to be) MANY furniture factories here.  But what has happened over the past decade is more and more of these companies moving their factories to China and Mexico.  Yes, for the "bigwigs" of these companies this means they'll turn much larger profits, due to lowered labor costs.  However, what suffers is the economy of the town.  Those employees lose their jobs.  Because they lose their jobs they no longer have any money to shop.  Shopping stops, so the stores close down, thereby causing more people to be unemployed.  The endless cycle continues. 

Now, my question to this is, how is this "American"?  How is out-sourcing even legal?  I'm full aware of the supposed freedoms our country entitles us to, and I fully respect them.   However, in the cacse of outsourcing, I just do not understand.  It does nothing but completly destroy communities, families, and people here in the US. 

I've noticed alot of you mentioning requiring more severe taxing on companies that are outsourcing.  But that only helps our government.  It doesn't give the people back their jobs.  Why couldn't our country just put a stop to it plain and simple?  For example:  If you want to own a company in the US, then ALL employees must reside IN the US.  All manufacturing must reside in the US. 

I honestly do not see how these measures would infringe upon our freedoms. 

The taxing of  those companies for outsourcing balances out the cost difference between american worker and an foreign worker, and makes the american worker more competitive. It makes it so it would be more profitable to the company to hire an american worker than the foreign worker, thus increasing US jobs.  By saying that if you own a company in the US , all employees must reside in the US, you will just have the companies pack up and move saying, fine we won;t have our company in the US anymore . Many have already done this over unions ,min wage, and taxes.
 

What we can do however is counter it at import taxes, money leaving the country taxes, and give tax breaks and incentives to companies that hire americans and reinvest in our communities to balance it out, so that it is financially more profitable  for them to have their business here with american labor than to try and import here.

 

 

Thank you for trying to explain.  But I'm still a bit confused.  I understand what you're saying about the taxing.  It makes sense, but it would probably have to be insane tax rates to counter the mass profits these companies are reeling in.  It might also do exactly what you said concerning my "supposed idea", drive the companies outside the US entirely. 

Here's another suggestion...  If you live in the US, and want to own your own company, then that company must reside in the US entirely.  Maybe that's what I meant to say originally.  Basically, just make it impossible for these CEO's to go outside the US for anything other than to sell their products. 

Bring back the factories or end the companies completely.  That's the bottom line I'm trying to get across. 

Stop sending IT jobs and customer service overseas to India.  Hire US citizens that live here. 

I just don't understand why it ever was allowed in the first place.  It's appauling, to think that our country would allow a few people (the owners of these big businesses) to drop their current employee base and go OUTSIDE of our country, just so they can make a bigger profit!  Greed...that's all it is.  Selfish greed.

This is where the concept of "value added" come in. The US Information Technology (IT), or customer service worker, has to be able to add value that the worker in India or China cannot.

In the case of the IT worker, he has to be able to meet with the client, discuss the client needs, design the overall product based on those needs and expectations, then present the overall outline of the software product to a lower skilled worker in India to physically write the software. The US IT person should be design and marketing, not actual production. He is the face of the company, who the customer will go to when they have a question, problem, or another project. His job is to land the contract and keep the customer happy.

Same with legal and accounting. Why hire an American to sit behind a computer and research, or input, when that can be done in India, overnight, at a fraction of the cost, with the finished product on your desk the next morning? The US accountant is the face to the customer. He is the one that sits down with the customer and goes over the results, makes suggestions, or sells a product or idea to improve performance. Besides accounting, he is in sale and marketing.

Similiar, in customer service, Southwest airlines hires Americans to make reservations from their homes. The worker gets up, goes to their computer/phone, and goes to work. When the kids come home for lunch, they can logoff, make the kids lunch, then go back to work. In exchange Southwest Airlines gets a content, upbeat employee that is an American, is a welcome voice to American customers, understands what the customer wants, can meet the customers expectations, and can sell product.

Anyway, human civilization has changed, just as we went from the hunter-gather age to the agricultural age, and from the agricultural age to the industrial age, we are now going from the industrial age to the high tech information age. In each of these transitions in human civilization there have been major disruption and conflict, as societies struggle to deal with the transition.

Agricultural age societies needed large families to run the farm, industrial age farming techniques created population surplus that relocated to the the cities for work. High tech information age societies need less population for production, manufacturing becomes more efficient, and jobs shift to service oriented. You need to look around you, and sit down and think what type of job that you can do in the your area that someone in China or India cannot do near as well as you. What can you bring to the table that they can't bring? How can you sell your skills to an employer? What product would prople be willing to buy from you that someone in China or India can't provide?

Don't kid yourself, everything is marketing, everything is sales.

Originally posted by declaredemer

It is wonderful that you volunteer, and I think that is a mark of good citizenship to get involved in a variety of ways:  shelters, libraries, hospitals, highway clean-up, and in many and varied other ways.  So I honor your service to your community, and if more people we involved (politically, socially, economically, etc.) we would live in a much better society. 

 

 

We need safety nets, however, with government involvement.  We need insurance programs for health care to wage insurance to employment benefits to ensure that people do not find themselves in shanty towns. 

 

 

Charity does not have the resources, however, when we enter Great Recessions and Great Depressions.  Ordinary income-earning Americans do not have the resources themselves to prepare for these shocks, which are beyond their control.  

We do need safety nets. It is  what those safety nets are and how they are implemented that is the issue here.
 

I disagree about the " insurance programs"  well as they are currently structured. I am against insurance companies due to their paracitical nature. If they truely were set up to help people when they needed it as a service to humanity rather than a paracite milking people for profit then trying to weasle out of paying up when the time is due, I would feel different. But that is not the case with our current insurance industries.

What we need is bill assist programs and  free healthcare options and a complete removal of the paracites from the " basic needs" of humans. We need real consequenses placed on these industries for crimes against humanity.  We need to not hold them just financially responsible for deaths but criminally responsible as well. Our Pharmaceutical and insurance industry are both guilty of crimes against humanity and this needs to be addressed, instead of turning a blind eye to their practices simply because they pad the politcial systems pocketbooks.

What I  think needs to happen is to have our current insurance industry replaced with a direct pay system, that alone would bring down costs dramatically.  Then we need to regulate our pharmaceuticals and hold them accountable for their sick practices.

after we accomplish those 2 things we then need to replace the AMA with the IADMD and allow them to consolodate all care in order to provide better care to all. The IADMD requires doctors to hold their oaths and give everyont the best care without discrimination.

If we appropriately allocated the funds to improve the system at the core, it would not be such a burden on the overall tax system. If we actaully set up our welfare system to allow people to help themselves again and be productive while receiving aid, they would be allowed to be a part of their own solution.  There would be nothing that is " free" except of course our care to our handicapped.  Everyone able would be able to help be a part of the solution.

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by deviliscious

Originally posted by olddaddy

 

Let me explain again what is happening........

 

 

I am fully aware of our history, and no I am not parading myself in an American flag silly. We will not be able to compete globally until other countries have higher wages,   They do not have the labor laws in place we do, and unless that changes either on their part or ours it will leave us far behind in the global market. Since we obviously do not control what other countries do, we can only handle the problems here at home. If we balance the cost of goods in the US to make American products competitive on our own soil it will create more American jobs immediately. We are  considered the shoppers of the world,  we are making the other countries wealthy at the expense of our own jobs. The only thing we can really do to counterthis is plug up the syphon on money leaving this country  by taxing any monies leaving this country. We have to give companies financial incintives to have their business here  with american labor rather than have it anywhere else.

What has also happened is  at the same time the rest of the world was building up and making it more profitable to have the businesses in their countries, the US kept piling on burdens to our own businesses forcing them to leave our country.  We always attack our industry instead of take care of them. Without our industry we have no jobs .. and now that this has happened, they still do not adress these issues, they just allow the unemployed to accumulate while they turn a blind eye to the core issue here.

 

ahhhhhh..........devil, I was reinforcing the points that you made in your post, not arguing that Obama had the answers.

So far I have yet to see a politician that even understands the problems from either side of the aisle, let alone one that understands what has to be done. That covers the Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush eras.

Taxing outbound money will not work. This will result in a trade war that the United States will ultimately lose. If we do not allow access to our markets, we will be denied access to the world markets, at a minimum. Business will locate where they have infrastructure, abundant energy, and a highly skilled workforce capable of adding value to product. Our business will go elsewhere in order to participate in that world market. They already do.

Rather than balance the cost of goods to make American products competitive, we have to research and develope the products that the world wants to buy. They may make them for us, and we may buy them, however they will pay up the kazoo for the right to manufacture, as we hold the technology. Conversely, with their supply of abundant, cheap, labor, the prices they can command on the world market will always be low. Production rights can always be shifted to any third world country that undercuts the labor rate at any time. In the world economy money will always flow between countries, the art is making sure more money flows inbound, then outbound.

We cannot compete with large portions of the world in unskilled labor, or semi skilled labor. However they cannot compete with us in highly skilled labor. We should be playing to our strength, not our weakness.

Personally, I would rather move our society upstream through better education and high tech job creation rather than continue to try to protect manufacturing. Maybe more people will start to see the light, and not be overly worried that Johnny has too much homework and it interferes with his leisure time. Right now, we are dumbing it down to be sensitive to Johnny's feelings....

Training an engineer, or a scientist, starts in middle school, not college. Johnny better get his ass motivated if he doesn't want to live in a tent. Contrary to the popular belief on these forums, nobody on welfare lives in a mansion and eats prime rib every night, and drives a Lexus. Usually it's more like the have alot of whine with their spam.

Ia gree with you for the most part, but where I disagree is that we have to have both. With the increase in technology to make things more efficiently , there is already going to be a decrease in lower skilled jobs worldwide.  The fact is we have 300million people in this country, and not enough jobs in all areas. There will always be a higher demand for lower skilled jobs due to  human limitations. There will always be a higher number of people in the population with the inability to do the higher tech jobs, and we either 1. have to support them, 2. let them starve, 3. create a system that allows them to  provide for themselves and be a productive member of society.
 

I personally choose the 3rd option, because the others  simply do not work, or are inhumane.  We must not only design here, but manufacture here in order to provide enough jobs in this country, or the problems will not be resolved.  We must not only play our strength, but strengthen our weakness at the same time. Thsi can be accomplished, but it will take major changes to do so.

Have you ever tried to tutor a child? Have you ever worked with the " slow learners" in school?  No matter how many different ways you try to teach them something, they may never be able to learn everything that everyone else can. Though they are not technically mentally handicapped, they just never will be able to keep at the same pace with the rest. Ask any teacher,  even the best teachers, and they will tell you the same. Some kids just can't do everything the other kids can do, and the system we implement needs to include them as well. There has to be a place for all those that cannot do the higher skilled jobs, some way for them to support their families as well. There has to be enough variety in skill level to keep up with the demand for different skill levels of jobs. The service, construction and retail industry alone  is not near enough to accomplish this.

 

The higher skilled jobs are the ones that generate the inbound wealth. From 1945 to the mid 1970s that was the role of heavy manufacturing. Heavy manufacturing is unable to perform that role any more. Those that you talk about will still have jobs in what we presently call the service sector, provided those with the highly skilled jobs are competitive. The service sector will always be around, as a plumber in India cannot fix your leaking toilet. Nor can a roofer in China fix your leaking roof.

Those that you refer to who are not quite mentally handicapped will still have service industry jobs based on their level of proficiency. Yes, they will still need help with things like health care, commuting to work, etc. They do now. Nothing will ever really change for them.

Unfortunately, those poeple who were planning on working on the assembly line like their daddy did, and his daddy before him, had better get a clue. The sooner, the better. Those jobs are no longer the source of inbound wealth. Every country can now do those jobs.

It all comes down to playing to our strength to generate a surplus of inbound balance of trade payments. Manufacturing is not our strength, there are far too many places in the world that have more people who can receive semi skilled training and create a product for less. We can fight a holding action in these areas of economy, realizing that ultimately we will fail, but buying time to to bring our knowledge based strength online full force. However, we're not even close to doing that yet, we fight the losing battle, without any idea we will ultimately lose. Imagine the shock when we lose the manufacturing battle, AND lose the technological innovation battle.  Then how do we generate a surplus of inbound balance of trade?

Without addressing the problems that we have in our education system we cannot compete in the high tech sector to generate the inbound cash needed to operate our service sector. Right now we use standardized tests, an industrial age idea in which all students learn the same thing at the same rate.

When Pavlov's students correctly respond to the test question, the money machine opens up and drops cash into the laps of the school district. Everyone's happy, the teachers get their COLA raise, the administrators get their performance bonus, and the student moves down the assembly line to the next station in the sequence of standardized tests. And we wonder why students are bored, and check out mentally from the system. It's an entire education system of "been there, done that, rinse and repeat".

.......and I say to myself, what a wonderful world.

Yes there will always be service jobs, but the problem is with increased technology there are less workers needed with these jobs. Even if we solely focused on tech and high skilled jobs, the unemplyment rate would still rise, we would still have an insane amount of homeless and that will only increase, not decrease with the higher number of high skilled jons becoming available.

If we fail to create the lower skilled jobs at the same time as creating the tech jobs we will never have enough jobs.  Just as we have " self checkouts' and machines to do the labor, we have people losing those positions everyday. If we do not counter this creating more low skilled jobs at the same time we are just putting these people out on the streets and removing their ability to do for themselves.  There are simply not enough low skilled jobs available for the number of people who need them.

I agree we need to have more specialized education starting at a younger age, have been saying that for years. Allow people to excel at what they are good at and become the best in that field rather than try and force them to do things they will never be good at or will ever use in their lifetime.

I am not seeing why we cannot have both, having both manufacturing jobs and the highskilled jobs at the same time solves both ends of the spectrum.  We can and should have both and I see no reason why we shouldn;t be able to accomplish both at the same time.

Originally posted by declaredemer  

We need safety nets, however, with government involvement.  We need insurance programs for health care to wage insurance to employment benefits to ensure that people do not find themselves in shanty towns.  

The problem that I keep trying to address that health care, safety nets, etc do not address the underlying problem.

That problem is that for 25 years the United States balance of trade surplus was predicated on the sale of heavy manufacturing products around the world.

The United States is no longer the only game in town. Heavy manufacturing can be done so much cheaper in other areas of the world.

We have a choice, either to reduce our standard of living, or find something else to replace heavy manufacturing as the source of our trade surplus. Right now, all the ideas I hear are that we can't afford things, we need to reduce our standard of living, or that we need to protect the old industrial age heavy manufacturing sector to prop up our balance of trade.

Both are long term losers.

We need to do something we can do better than the rest of the world. We need to innovate, and develope new processes, new products. We need to sell information age ideas to the rest of the world.

Otherwise, we will all be in the safety nets looking at collapse.

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by declaredemer  

We need safety nets, however, with government involvement.  We need insurance programs for health care to wage insurance to employment benefits to ensure that people do not find themselves in shanty towns.  

 

The problem that I keep trying to address that health care, safety nets, etc do not address the underlying problem.

That problem is that for 25 years the United States balance of trade surplus was predicated on the sale of heavy manufacturing products around the world.

The United States is no longer the only game in town. Heavy manufacturing can be done so much cheaper in other areas of the world.

We have a choice, either to reduce our standard of living, or find something else to replace heavy manufacturing as the source of our trade surplus. Right now, all the ideas I hear are that we can't afford things, we need to reduce our standard of living, or that we need to protect the old industrial age heavy manufacturing sector to prop up our balance of trade.

Both are long term losers.

We need to do something we can do better than the rest of the world. We need to innovate, and develope new processes, new products. We need to sell information age ideas to the rest of the world.

Otherwise, we will all be in the safety nets looking at collapse.

I agree,  It is not all about " old industrial age manufacturing" I think you misunderstand what I mean by manufacturing. Yes, we need to  not only create batter ways to make products, grow food, design new products. We need to design them, grow them, build them and market them covering all ends of the spectrum rather than focus on one end of it.

We should find better ways to grow our food, then grow it here providing jobs at all ends of the spectrum. We need all of the above to put the US back where it needs to be in terms of job growth and standard of living.   These things need to be accomplished first before we can even think about being competitive in the global markets.

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by declaredemer  

We need safety nets, however, with government involvement.  We need insurance programs for health care to wage insurance to employment benefits to ensure that people do not find themselves in shanty towns.  

 

The problem that I keep trying to address that health care, safety nets, etc do not address the underlying problem.

That problem is that for 25 years the United States balance of trade surplus was predicated on the sale of heavy manufacturing products around the world.

The United States is no longer the only game in town. Heavy manufacturing can be done so much cheaper in other areas of the world.

We have a choice, either to reduce our standard of living, or find something else to replace heavy manufacturing as the source of our trade surplus. Right now, all the ideas I hear are that we can't afford things, we need to reduce our standard of living, or that we need to protect the old industrial age heavy manufacturing sector to prop up our balance of trade.

Both are long term losers.

We need to do something we can do better than the rest of the world. We need to innovate, and develope new processes, new products. We need to sell information age ideas to the rest of the world.

Otherwise, we will all be in the safety nets looking at collapse.

Spoken like a true IBM'er...lol..vary good points.

Originally posted by olddaddy

Originally posted by declaredemer  

We need safety nets, however, with government involvement.  We need insurance programs for health care to wage insurance to employment benefits to ensure that people do not find themselves in shanty towns.  

 

The problem that I keep trying to address that health care, safety nets, etc do not address the underlying problem.

That problem is that for 25 years the United States balance of trade surplus was predicated on the sale of heavy manufacturing products around the world.

The United States is no longer the only game in town. Heavy manufacturing can be done so much cheaper in other areas of the world.

We have a choice, either to reduce our standard of living, or find something else to replace heavy manufacturing as the source of our trade surplus. Right now, all the ideas I hear are that we can't afford things, we need to reduce our standard of living, or that we need to protect the old industrial age heavy manufacturing sector to prop up our balance of trade.

Both are long term losers.

We need to do something we can do better than the rest of the world. We need to innovate, and develope new processes, new products. We need to sell information age ideas to the rest of the world.

Otherwise, we will all be in the safety nets looking at collapse.

From the economic standpoint I can't help but agree with you. "We" always thought "we" were team #1 when it came to economic powers.

How many of "us" out there ever expected to see the depression return? A "few" educated people? The rest have gone on with their lives in the "American" sense. Oblivious to the facts that economy is a foot race.

The guy who starts off seeming last can still pull a victory line finish. "We" have outsourced all of our jobs, to make our lives easier. In the end those jobs were desperately needed by our own. We've essentially exported our money out, and not seen a return.Those same companies paying very little to outsourced work have in the end started to buckle due to the fact people won't have that "outsouced money" to spend here in the states.

A cascade failure.

Food,Economy,Safety.

This are three basics people need for a thriving civilization.

Food-While our farmers are now getting less money from the government. Food is going to cost more, there will be less of it.

Economy- With less money circulating even the greatest of government aid won't assist. They tried this in Germany before WW2. When peoples lights go out, they go dark ages REAL fast. I've seen it first hand. Friends who have their lights turned out have done things they've never done before. (Just small examples)

Safety- With safety of everything being so unsure people will not "live" as designed. Birth rates will decrease (at this point maybe a good idea) so population will reduce. People will be less secure in their homes/streets because Emergency Services are being cut. Those who are going to Dark Ages route have free reign, or atleast easier times doing what they have to do.

That leaves you Joe/Jane civilian in troubled waters. I know personally that the city I am from (one of the hardest crime location in CA) is dropping police,firefighters,EMT's left and right to make budget cuts. I've seen the dramatic effect it has had. Crime is unstoppable by nature, however take those who fight it out of the picture and you have a force that cannot even be slowed.

Originally posted by deviliscious  

Yes there will always be service jobs, but the problem is with increased technology there are less workers needed with these jobs. Even if we solely focused on tech and high skilled jobs, the unemplyment rate would still rise, we would still have an insane amount of homeless and that will only increase, not decrease with the higher number of high skilled jons becoming available.

If we fail to create the lower skilled jobs at the same time as creating the tech jobs we will never have enough jobs.  Just as we have " self checkouts' and machines to do the labor, we have people losing those positions everyday. If we do not counter this creating more low skilled jobs at the same time we are just putting these people out on the streets and removing their ability to do for themselves.  There are simply not enough low skilled jobs available for the number of people who need them.

I agree we need to have more specialized education starting at a younger age, have been saying that for years. Allow people to excel at what they are good at and become the best in that field rather than try and force them to do things they will never be good at or will ever use in their lifetime.

I am not seeing why we cannot have both, having both manufacturing jobs and the highskilled jobs at the same time solves both ends of the spectrum.  We can and should have both and I see no reason why we shouldn;t be able to accomplish both at the same time.

That is the problem of technological advancement.

When human civilization went from the agricultural age to the industrial age alot of people were left behind. Slums abounded, wars abounded, there was alot of grief and strife.

The British entered the industrial age first, creating massive unemployment and starvation in Europe, which led the the French Revolution and Napoleon. Germany transitioned to the industrial age by the Franco-Prussian War, France not until around WW 1. The British "got it", they understood, and carved out an empire the sun never set on from a small island/nation. The capital of the world flowed to them.

Why can't we "get it"? Industrial age manufacturing has no future, everyone and their brother in the world can do it at a lower cost than we can. Our society moved upscale, do we really want to go back to a lower standard of living just so we can manufacture?

Ultimately the world population has grown since the Napoleonic period, and new jobs and industries have opened up. Employment is up, population is up, and people have jobs never dreamed of in the Napoleonic Era.  

We need to work on transitioning our society into the high tech information age, looking at where we will need labor in the future and preparing our people for those jobs. As those opportunities open up, those that are prepared will take them. If they are never prepared, they will never get the opportunities.

EXAMPLE: "Green" technology, though there are plenty that oppose it, is one area. New jobs will open up there, new industries. So you can't work on the Chrysler assembly line, can you learn how to repair a wind turbine? Someone in China, or India, can't repair a wind turbine in Kansas, now, can they? That's just one example. Technological changes will open up new careers and new opportunities that have never existed before.

Another is shipping. When the global economy hums, product is shipped all across the world. Can't work on the Pontiac assembly line, can you run the engine room of a freighter? There's a maritime academy in Traverse City, Michigan for any that are interested.

Hunter-gatherers never needed blacksmiths, agricultural age societies never needed car washes, industrial age societies never needed IT departments. But a high tech information age global economy needs plenty of people, at all levels. People have to get out of their comfort zone and start thinking about what they can do, and how it will be needed.

Things change, opportunities arise. Let's do try and make this a controlled transition without resorting to the age old solution of killing off large segments of our world population. A little bit of thought, training, and education would go a long way. Is this too much to ask of our political leadership?

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs didn't get rich staying in a rut and doing what everyone else did.

And the government wasn't a barrier to stopping them.