1 but... but... but the Preznit said everything's fine!

2 1ust love these democrats explaining economic theory. Changing one thing will make everything beautiful. There will never be a reaction or response to that change. and make up whatever stereotype you want, to justify your plan.

3 Good morning,  Monty!   I see it's a typically gloomy Monday,  and no signs of improvement in the short term.

Thanks for the articles.   I like having a lot of stuff linked from one post,  being basically a lazy person.  I much appreciate it.

4

If we wish to drive exports, we are going to have to be as ruthless and as bottom-line oriented as the Chinese are -- and I don't think that American workers are going to like what that means in terms of wages or benefits.

If it comes to the point where American industrial workers have to live 15 to a cube in some industrial campus apartment, eat beans and rice all the time, go without medical care, drink poisoned water, breath acid filled air, and ride bicycles/walk to work I suspect that we will have violent (and justified) revolution. 

Besides - you can't support ANY kind of economy if no one has enough discretionary income to buy the stuff that is made.  We would all go down.  Not standing up to China and nations like her is what has us in this predicament - everybody wanted their T-shirt to cost $3.50, but gave no thought to what was to be done with industries that were destroyed by foreign subsidies which made that absurd price possible.  Which, by the way, is not the same thing as creative destruction as we know it in the US, where a better business replaces a worse.  It's where a worse business is given so many advantages by its sponsor government that it destroys a better business that is not similarly supported. 

Driving our work force down to third world living conditions is not the answer, nor is it necessary.  Not all, or even most, workers are over paid, under productive union members.  A better option is to raise insurmountable trade barriers of our own against those who refuse to compete on equal grounds.  America did just fine when all we bought from China was fireworks and cheap plastic toys.  Sticking to our own market or trading only with Canada and the Europeans (and, sadly, buying oil from the damn arabs) is preferable to living the way the Chinese live.   Fuck that. 

5 Doooooom.

6

5 Greek Chorus,

well if the proper response ain't "doom!" it is certainly "ANGST!"

7 A better option is to raise insurmountable trade barriers of our own against those who refuse to compete on equal grounds. You might want to look up "Smoot-Hawley Tarriff" before you go too far down that road. Trade barriers = bad. Very bad. Besides, the genie is already out of the bottle -- people are used to paying $300 for a flat-screen TV and $100 for an MP3 player. There's no way in hell they'll stand for prices going up by 100% or more. No fucking way. Remember: the economy doesn't exist to provide employment. It exists to facilitate the movement of goods between buyers and sellers. That's it. Employment is a side-effect, not the purpose, of the exercise. When you look at an economy only in terms of how many people work in it, you're missing th entire point. You could have 100% employment in a State-run economy, and still be a failure (as the USSR was). But labor-costs more than anything are killing America's competitiveness overseas because it drives up the cost of our finished goods. If we can to increase our finished-good exports, then we're going to need to drive down wages. There's no other way to do it. Costs of materials, inventory, and shipment costs are negligible compared to that.

8 At least Nero only fiddled while Rome burned.  Ear Leader is pouring gas on the fire with his Keynsian-Fantasy Spending Spree.

9

7 Monty,

I made an epic post somewhere on "the wisdom of smoot-hawley& the restraint of the Great society" mocking Liberonomics....

There is GOING TO HAVE TO BE a wage reset, the American worker has gotten VERY spoiled by the ten-fifteen year sweet spot we were in with regards to wage/price interaction.....

the Chinese were like a pusher, "the first hit is free baby"....

10 Good Gawd but that "Wendy letter" made me want to vomit.  Bitch about somebody being  "self absorbed" because they don't want to burden or grandchildren with crushing debts just so Wendy can live as she is accustomed.

Back during the "Booming Economy" of the Clinton years I had my personal economy go BOOM.  Fifteen years as an aerospace engineer up the spout as the defense industry downsized to provide the "Peace Dividend" that eventually lead to 9/11/2001.  I was unemployed for 11 months of which I collected UI benefits for only six (after all a Democrat was in office and the economy was BOOMING doncha know).  During that time I re-educated myself and finally took a job at HALF of my old salary to get some experience.  Five years later I was back to my old salary level and today, thank God, I've fully recovered- all without the government making my future grandchildren debt slaves to the Chinese.

So I hope you'll all excuse me for being insensitive, but people like this "Wendy" who whine about "what it's like to be unemployed in America today" really irritate me...

11

10 Nighthawk,

 

But, BUT SHE IS A TEACHER! and not just a teacher but a special-ed teacher....we have a duty to make them untouchable don'tcha know?

"it's for the childrens"

12
@11

Oh, well that's different then.


NOT!

13

12 Nighthawk,

I think Chris Christie has it right, and I also think the most heinous aspect of the moonbat/media/moron(labor) triangle is that Jugears and the "public services" unions are acting under the belief that they are gonna get to keep all their jack while the actual producers of the nation take their "wage reset"....

good luck with that sale SEIU/Donks

14 I'm really surprised that a Special Ed teacher with a Masters can't find work.  She must be unwilling to move, or there is more to the story.

15 Uh the "trades" aren't doing to well right now either.  At least not the building trades.

Pick us all a new trade. Make it a winner, please.

16
@13:sven10077

Agreed.  There are no "Sacred Cows", and as for unions- well you really don't want to get me started on my "Union Rant".  Suffice to say that the situation I described above was the SECOND time in my life that I had gone broke.

The FIRST time was caused by a union...

17

14 Toby,

what?!?

Her have to move???

No way dude...hell how screwed up is it that evenMohammed moved to the mountain since the mountain wouldn't move to Mohammed but her ass can't be bothered to drive to Columbus?

That's right folks even Jihadi Jim's idol has more sense than a US moonbat

18 as if someone who chooses to be a diesel mechanic or a roofer somehow couldn't hack it in a better job. There's nothing shameful about honest work, and I think that this above all is what America has lost in the IT revolution -- the sense that working with your hands is a good thing, not an admission of failure. Much of our present troubles are compounded by a business-hostile Administration, but the denigration of manual work has been going on for decades now.

Well said, sir.  I have long thought the same thing!

Somewhere around the time I was born, people began to sneer at commonplace "construction workers", plumbers, electricians, people who build and fix things not located in the virtual world.  It is a point of great frustration to me for people to act as though work not done through a college degree is less worthy than that done with frilly gold trim around a certificate from some high-brow university.

IT bubble collapse impending?  Like any other fad/job, it has a point of saturation that one must be wary of.  Looks like it's been reached.

19 Special Ed used to be a hot field, too.  Lots of tax money going just for that, but nNot too many districts hiring anyone right now; But she should be willing to move.

20 If it comes to the point where American industrial workers have to live 15 to a cube in some industrial campus apartment, eat beans and rice all the time, go without medical care, drink poisoned water, breath acid filled air, and ride bicycles/walk to work I suspect that we will have violent (and justified) revolution.

I don't know why it needs to come to that.  The Germans have managed to keep their industrial base healthy, and German workers cost more to employ than Americans.

We probably won't be able to compete with the Chinese on price, but we can certainly aim for top tier price and quality like the Germans do.  The key, I think, is to put shop back in the high schools and restart apprenticeship programs.  It's not just that manual skills are devalued (though they are).  Right now the system to pick up high-end shop skills is haphazard.

21 All I can say to Wendy is Bitch Please.  Get a job.  Any job.  Anywhere.  And lose the entitled attitude. 

22 Yeah, and the solution to the Wendy letter cracked me up.  I don't know what the max unemployment is in OH, but in WI it's $389.  So that "equivalent pay" job would have to be at least $10/hr....I just don't see too many "I deserve because I have a master's degree!!" people willing to take a janitorial job or even the mail room.

a special-ed teacher....we have a duty to make them untouchable don'tcha know?

Hey, maybe if the feminists et al weren't so adamant about aborting all the "special needs" babies so their mothers can be "free" there would be some kids for her to "teach."

23 Did anyone else catch any mention of Wendy's husband, or anyway the father of her children?  Or that of her grandchildren?  Maybe I just missed it.

24

23 Heather Radish,

as a former history ed major the sense of entitlement is eclipsed in pervaisve desnity only by Barack's ego....

 

25 OT.   Unfucking believable!

http://tinyurl.com/22t7cb3

26

Re:  Wendy

The woman indicated that she took Obama at his word and got more training....(at great expense, I might add.)

And now it appears that all of her training and all of her additional training has come to naught, as she is now an overqualified individual seeking employment in a field without near term prospect.

One might, and should, take this as an object lesson. 

As important as it might seem, that one have high levels of training , and training in an area wherein one has a true avocation, it is equally, if not more, important that one obtain one's training in a field where there is a need for qualified applicants.

For example:  No matter how well qualified one might be in the field of undersea oil exploration....should President Obama get his way, the prospect of being hired in the United States is going to remain very limited.

27
Hey, maybe if the feminists et al weren't so adamant about aborting all the "special needs" babies so their mothers can be "free" there would be some kids for her to "teach."

Posted by: HeatherRadish at July 12, 2010 08:18 AM (M9BNu)

I'm sure it would be amazing to see how the left rationalizes the co-existence of two of their major beliefs: eugenics and special ed.

Amazing, revolting, and insulting to my intelligence- so I really don't want to know...

28

28 Nighthawk,

it does explain the spectacle of their wanting to catergorize "student while being a young male" and "voting Republican" as grounds for being considered "developmentally disabled"....

 

speaking of which there is an election coming up sooner or later you know Al-WaPo is going to run their bi-annual "are conservatives mentally retarded crazy people" series of medical pieces by some ivy league psychiatrist or psychologist

29

You might want to look up "Smoot-Hawley Tarriff" before you go too far down that road. Trade barriers = bad. Very bad.

I've seen as much reasoned arguement against the "Smoot-Hawley = Great Depression" as have have seen for it actually being the cause.  Key point - we did not have a massive trade deficit during those times, and mostly traded with folks who's standard of living was not dramatically lower than our own.  I agree that trade barriers with honest trading partners are bad, in that they reduce economic activity.  But allowing lopsided, self destructive trade imbalances - engineered by other nations - is folly.  And I only advocate raising barriers against the manipulators.

Anyway - would you have advocated free trade with the Soviets during the cold war?  So that we could help them become more prosperous and survive longer?  Not me.  And somehow we did pretty well without Russian trade, even though they are a huge nation, and at that time were even more huge, with vast resources.

people are used to paying $300 for a flat-screen TV and $100 for an MP3 player. There's no way in hell they'll stand for prices going up by 100% or more. No fucking way.

What size flat screen sells for $300??  Anyway, people will not like higher prices - true.  But which is worse:  Scenario 1:  Paying more for junk you dont' really need, but having a job to pay your basic bills and buy groceries.  Scenario 2:  Having really cheap shit to buy (that's been poorly made by slaves), but no job to provide money to buy anything with.  I think scenario 1 is preferable, and I doubt that anybody is willing to riot over the price of cosumer electronics, which would not even double.  Labor, even in the US, is seldom more than 1/3 - 1/2 of the cost of goods, and their labor cost advantage is not a true dollar-to-dollar comparison.  Most overseas operations use 1.5 people or more to our one, because they are inefficient and humans are cheap/disposable.  Plus there is the cost of shipping over water which, while cheap, is not zero.  Add to that the cost of having a month or more of inventory sitting on water at any given time, and increased costs due to poor quality.  By those factors the labor inequality is mitigated somewhat even now.

Remember: the economy doesn't exist to provide employment. It exists to facilitate the movement of goods between buyers and sellers.

Agreed in principle, but an economy that does not provide enough employment will not survive the modern age.  You can't go out to the frontier and build a new life by taming nature - there is no where left to go.  And we WILL go to socialism if we fail to provide employment, whether we like it or not, because people will do anything once the hardship is bad enough.  I certainly don't want socialism, so we need a better solution to the employment problem.  If we don't even have the balls to demand that others play on a level field so natural comparative advantage can play out, which would enhance US employment, we're just bending over to the merchantilists and bringing final, real DOOM even more quickly and worsening the collapse.

But labor-costs more than anything are killing America's competitiveness overseas because it drives up the cost of our finished goods. If we can to increase our finished-good exports, then we're going to need to drive down wages. There's no other way to do it. Costs of materials, inventory, and shipment costs are negligible compared to that.

Material, inventory, and shipping costs aren't negligible, but I'll conceed the point as I agree to some extent.  So, that tells me we need to rely less on exports and slash imports.  That much has to happen anyway, even if our labor cost is driven down.  But really, I suspect that driving down labor costs will do less to raise our exports than to simply reduce imports.  Our bread and butter exports are not cheap stuff - they're more hi tech stuff that others can't make yet.  We have to make hay while the sun in shining on that stuff - because the Chinese are busy buying up the designs or else reverse engineering them all as we speak.  They will take everything - because intellectual property is impossible to protect once someone in China has a hand on it.   

30 I'm sure it would be amazing to see how the left rationalizes the co-existence of two of their major beliefs: eugenics and special ed.

Obamacare just removed the tax deduction for tuition for special needs children...I suspect "special ed" was more about creating well-compensated jobs in the education industry (how big was the department that granted Wendy that special-ed master's degree?) than about kids.

(I expect the "right to abort" will become "legal requirement to abort" under nationalized health care...but I suppose a few false negative test results may slip through.  Interesting that "you can't demand medical treatment just because you need it!" because the collective outweighs the individual, but you can still demand your local school district pay for all kinds of expensive special services for your child, even if that takes resources away from multiple other children.)

31

reactionary,

right now with 369 bucks you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy a 32 inch 720p TV.....

http://tinyurl.com/23bzlqh

reality

32 Kemp: I saw that coming from a mile off. There was no way the Europeans were going to deliver up Polanski. No way in hell. So the pederast will continue to live the high life in European capitals. If America had a spine, we'd sanction the Swiss for this, but we don't have a spine, so we won't. This is why Western civlization may be doomed. When we suffer child-molesters to go free because it's inconvenient to prosecute them...we are staring right into the abyss. Never mind the Muslims; if this is what the future holds for us, we may finish the job ourselves.

33 Al-WaPo is going to run their bi-annual "are conservatives mentally retarded crazy people" series of medical pieces by some ivy league psychiatrist or psychologist

Posted by: sven10077 at July 12, 2010 08:30 AM (kq1lG)

Heh, yeah I've seen those stories: "Conservatives aren't really mean, greedy, insensitive, hateful people who want to starve children and drown puppies- they're just mentally ill!"

One of the many reasons why I gave up reading newspapers...

34 I expect the "right to abort" will become "legal requirement to abort" under nationalized health care...

Posted by: HeatherRadish at July 12, 2010 08:39 AM (M9BNu)

I don't want to Godwin the thread, but the world has seen this kind of thinking before and it does not end well.

35 right now with 369 bucks you can walk into Wal-Mart and buy a 32 inch 720p TV..... People always say, "Well, if someone would build a TV plant in America, we could compete!" We used to have all of the television plants until the early 1970's. Not much more than a decade later, we had none. Why? Because the Japanese, the Koreans, and then the Chinese could build them at comparable quality for about a third of the unit-cost, that's why. In America, the minimum wage is $7.25/hr, but almost no one but rank noobs at McDonald's makes this amount. Even if you work fast-food, if you stick around for more than a couple of months you're going to get a raise. This kind of money would be a Pasha's ransom for some bricklayer in Karachi or a firewood-collector in Nigeria. In other words: some fifteen-year-old kid in America makes probably five or six times what a full-grown, skilled adult worker makes in about 3/5 of the rest of the world. And this is for service-sector stuff; in manufacturing and construction, the pay is much higher (as are the associated costs related to employment like benefits). One of two things must happen if we are to compete on the international stage: let the global market dictate wages (which means a precipitous drop, don't kid yourself), or increase manufacturing efficiency. And more manufacturing efficiency generally means fewer jobs because efficiency means automation. Our goal as a nation ought not to be to strive for 100% employment because it's just not possible without a major hit to our standard of living. Rather, I think we should drive entrepreneurship and risk -- the only thing that will drive our economy is to stay ahead of the curve. We did it with industry, we did it with IT. Only time will tell if we can do it with whatever comes next. (Space-based mining or energy-production, maybe? That's the solar power I can get behind: using big-assed satellite to gather solar power and beam it to earth as microwaves. We could power the entire planet for fractions of what it costs to do so now.)

36

37 Monty,

 

The idea that you should want to work for someone else and be paid by them as a baseline in this nation is what 100 years old?

Look at what reactionary is saying, "why sure you would have to pay more but it would be worth it" WRT the feds interfering even more in the market....

I fear he doesn't get it like a French "moderate"(which by US standards is a borderline commie)that the Feds are every bit as damaging as Corporate interests to "the little man".

 

I favor abolishing minimum wage, and firing about 80% of the Federal civillian workforce.

37 As the son of a special education teacher, I can assure there is generally strong demand for special-Ed teachers (the burn out rate is tremendous). There has got to be something dear Wendy isn't mentioning

38 The idea that you should want to work for someone else and be paid by them as a baseline in this nation is what 100 years old? Yep. I think the future of employment is probably "individual contracting" where no one actually works for a single company. Instead, everyone will belong to (for want of a better word) "guilds" organized by field or talent. A person would probably belong to more than one. And bidders would ask for a worker from the guild to perform some task. It would be an exchange, only for workers rather than stocks or bonds or currencies. Example: Monty is a groundskeeper, and advertises his hourly rate on the exchange. An interested bidder looks at Monty's history: where he's at (because geographical proximity is important for manual work), positive/negative feedback from previous jobs, average wage, etc. The pay would be driven by a bid/ask mechanism: Monty wants $10/hr to cut your lawn, but the market is only paying $8/hr on average. But there is a shortage of groundskeepers in Monty's locale, even though there is a surfeit overall, so Monty actually bids up his hourly rate to $15/hr and accepts a contract from a business nearby. I think that almost all "work" in the not-too-distant future is going to be conducted in this way. Guilds would certify people as being competent in their field and provide constant training and education (for a fee), but independents might try their luck without the umbrella of a guild.

39 And, Gaia help us, is that other piece actually suggesting the old arguement "Why not make the minimum wage $25 an hour?" as a serious proposal?

40 And the biggest potential markets for finished American goods -- China, predominately -- have significant barriers erected to stymie competition.

Ok.. here's a question for all you global free-market gurus..  Why is it that the USA is the only one with no barriers?  How the fuck is that "free" market?

Why do our manufacturers have to deal with environmental and workplace rules but they don't?  And we cannot put tarrifs on incoming goods to equalize that?

All so we can buy $50 DVD players that last one year?  Or baby formula with extenders .. er.. malamine.. in it?

When the fuck are we going to wake up and have the least little bit of protection for the American worker?

41

42 Chi-town Jerry,

 

where is this "US" you speak of we have plenty of stupid barriers and make up more as we go along all the time.

Canada, for example, had to use us to get us to live up to NAFTA on lumber imports.  The EUtopian Union had to use us to get us to quit protecting steel in contravention of trade agreements.  The US has plenty of barriers set up we're just dumb about it and the barriers are very much "pay-go" with regards to the union boys getting aid while entrepenurial business gets jack.

The American consumer wants cheap product on everything that can be cheap and lives in a fantasy world where "cheap" can be gotten without cutting corners.  The hard truth is that people get way too wrapped up in the numbers game of wage rather than paying attention to their purchasing power.  Some of it is narcissism I suspect and some of it is just good old fashioned entitlement mentality.

Take the house I live in, the washer and dryer in my downstairs, the dishwasher, the fridge, the TV I own, etc etc etc to have all these things required you to exert the economic influence of a bank executive not even 75 years ago and now our welfare recipients have many if not all of what I listed.

42 After reading Wendy's letter, I think that if she wants job security, she needs to have some more kids.

43

46,

 

cue snare drum

44

"The cries de coueur of the overeducated and underskilled"

 

Ha!  Awesome line, I'll have to use this one soon.  There are plenty of these folks around my little town of Hippieville, NC.  Great post, Monty.  I'm not sure what this week will bring but if I keep working hard every day, that should at least turn out well for me.

45

The woman indicated that she took Obama at his word

ROTFL - well, maybe if she spent a little less time being indoctrinated by far left moonbat professors in the deep dark recesses of an Ivory Tower somewhere and a whole lot more time in the real world she would have known better.

As it is I have zero sympathy for her and her ilk.  I have little doubt she voted for Obama, and as such she's getting exactly what she deserves.  It's just a pity the rest of us have to suffer through the damage this imbecile and his cohorts are doing to our economy as well.

I can only hope that she and many of her other compatriots will take heed of this most valuble lesson, liberalism might sound good and it might make you feel good about yourself but all it really does is hurt people in the long run.

 

46 When the fuck are we going to wake up and have the least little bit of protection for the American worker? "Protection" is a one way street to failure. If you want to succeed, you must compete. Your wage is not what you want it to be; it's what the market will bear. If we want to play in a global market, that means we have to let the global market set the prices. There's no other way. And the Chinese, by the way, are finding that you can't treat people like slaves indefinitely. Even in a homogenous and culturally obedient nation like China, labor unrest is increasing. China is not immune from the same industrialization arc that every other developed nation has gone through. As the Chinese go from being net exporters to net consumers, they'll have their own wage problems. Then production will move again: maybe to India or Vietnam or some other third-world nation with a reasonable industrial base. The question is this: do you want to exist in a world market or not? A world market is what makes your $300 HDTV and your $500 computer possible; without that, you'd be paying five or six times as much for those things, if you could buy them at all. Is that the world you want?

47 Ok.. here's a question for all you global free-market gurus..  Why is it that the USA is the only one with no barriers?  How the fuck is that "free" market?

That's not even close to being true.  We have all sorts of trade barriers in place.  We subsidize export businesses.  The Europeans are taking us to the WTO all the time.

48

Awesome report Monty, as always.. thought it might have been a bit light on the Doom and a bit heavy on the gloom but other than that, two thumbs up.

Oh, and Veronica Lake is always a welcome addition - vavoom!

49 #39 Techie - And as the mother of 3 special-needs kids, I concur.  As a matter of fact, over the past year, several of the teachers at the different schools my kids attend have unexpectedly DIED - that's burnout with a vengeance!  But even if the school boards are hard to break into at the moment, there is a desperate, never-ending need for respite workers who actually have experience with handicapped kids.  Why doesn't Wendy try that work for a while, until something more permanent comes along?  I wonder if she's more interested in special needs as an "academic" career, not one that involves hard slogging in the trenches.

50

Monty, concerning the Steel industry.  You have no idea when it comes to the Unions. Their stupidity and demands know no bounds.

i actually feel bad for the common worker. There union bosses rip them off, steal there money, and leave them without proper retirement funds.

I know of not a single Steel Worker who was able to retire and not forced to get a second job. 

Also, it's funny because there are a lot of election for union bosses and management, because every few months one will get caught embezzling pension funds and instead of being arrested, the will be giving a retirement package and the union men will vote in a new crook. It's funny to me, because the union leadership is everything they claim the Steel Company management is. Out to screw the worker.

I know a lot of free market people made a big deal about Bush's tariff on foreign steel, but it helped the industry consolidate. I think most people who preach free markets(i consider myself a free market guy), don't understand free markets aren't free when one country cheats the system, specifically China.

Also, the Chinese Steel is crap, all of their steel parts are crap. Everyone once and a while a US Steel company will try a chinese made product in their processes, and like everything at Walmart, they break down after a year costing production and man hours. It's not a mistake many people make anymore.

If you are going to buy steel products, buy American or German steel. It is the best in the world.

51

@54, i didn't mean US Steel the company. I meant a steel company in America.

US Steel is an exceptional steel company. It is probably the best in America.

52

50 Monty,

one difference between our situation and the Chinese one is they are ruthless enough to play hard ball with even their consumerism.

 

My favorite "surreal global market" moment was when I childhood Vietnamese refugee friend I had was lamenting "those goddamned Cambodians undercutting the factory I am invested in in Ho Chi Minh City"....

(which his mom still calls Saigon)

53 There are 2 things which are killing the economy and that is education and health care. First, there is too much useless education simply to raise wages, mostly in the Public sector.

Years ago advanced degrees were pursued by few because they were costly, hard to get and few jobs which paid extra for them. Now they are still costly, easy to get and most Public jobs, like teachers, require mandatory raises if you get them. Why do we need a high school math teacher or a DMV manager with a Master's? We don't but we are paying them a 20% premium never the less. Pay for the education needed for the job, no more. You want a raise? Move up to a job with more responsibilities that requires more education.

Health Care is the biggie though. Why? Mostly because we have made it a hidden cost and hidden costs always seem to creep up. Make the cost of Health benefits part of the wage and tax anything above a certain amount, enough to cover a family. Allow an individual to shop and buy their own insurance as they do with all other insurance. This will save businesses and would allow extra income for working couples who are now in effect paying twice for the same insurance. Workers will be able to make themselves more attractive to employers by taking less as a health benefit because their spouse already has that covered. They can also keep and spend what they saved by not duplicating coverage.

Pay for what you need and increase competition, those are all you need to make America competitive.

54

Posted by: Monty at July 12, 2010 08:41 AM (4Pleu)

 

Polanski is getting off...AGAIN!!!  IYKWIM...  I saw this coming, too.  And you're right, this is why Europe is going to hell in a handbasket.  If they can't even stand up and assume a higher moral ground than some old freakin' pervert child-rapist like Roman Polanski, they have no chance at all against the Muslim hordes that are "infiltrating" their society.

55 Wimpy-ass Europeans piss me off!

56

59,

or you can look at it as "early submission to Sharia" since the big Mo and Roman share tastes IYKWIMAITYD

57 A thing to remember about markets, folks: asymmetries can persist for a time, decades even, but ultimately the market will prevail. Because by "market" we really just mean "reality". You cannot repeal the laws of physics or supply and demand. I've said over and over again that China is even more fucked than we are. The China-boosters would have you think that they're the next Colossus, bestriding the world as America did in the 20th. I think that's nonsense. The Chinese will get old before they get rich -- their demographic problems dwarf our own. And their authoritarian government has put stresses on the cultural structure of the nation: all the way from the horrendous Cultural Revolution of the 1960's to the mercantilist capitalist system of today. The Chinese are like toddlers who are beaten and then spoiled by turns, until they don't know how to act. They live only for the moment. The Chinese do not produce entrepreneurs for exactly this reason -- they have trouble seeing the shape of the future world. America is actually well-positioned to dominate the 21st century just as we did the 20th century...if we moderate our crazy government spending and reward entrepreneurship and risk again.

58

It's the worst of times, you need to summon your optimism.

14-06-42-08-30-27

59

62 Monty,

Your point has held true and may well hold true again.

The fact is that heretofore the US voter has grasped that when times get tough we must get tougher, but I am genuine in being afraid that the young moonbats and old hippies with a huge assist from the Moonbat media may finally outnumber the hard survivors who were in great Depression version 1.0 and said every time they were faced with the impending doom said "no thanks I've been there it is called EUrope."

60

Polanski is getting off...AGAIN!!!  IYKWIM...  I saw this coming, too.  And you're right, this is why Europe is going to hell in a handbasket.  If they can't even stand up and assume a higher moral ground than some old freakin' pervert child-rapist like Roman Polanski, they have no chance at all against the Muslim hordes that are "infiltrating" their society.

Stone him!!!!

61

Greetings all, it's been a while.  Am enjoying the lively debate. 

Speaking of the casino burning down, I've got some fresh dividends from my online brokerage account that I want to blow so I don't get taxed on them...where do you recommend to stay in Atlantic City?  Anywhere that offers a military discount? 

62 B-o-n-e-r

63

Here in Wis. we are losing another good paying company. Polaris is leaving Osceola taking 500 jobs to Mexico, citing higher taxes and regulates bringing it to the point of unprofitability. Evidently it is easier to survive with batshit crazies with guns than batshit crazies with the power to tax and regulate. This is just the latest company to leave here.

Labor costs will generally come to a level based on local conditions, and workers with more money will improve the economy. But taxes and regulations impose a burden with no upside on the other end, just a drain on the economy expanding. We almost lost Mercury Marine with 2000 jobs but the union gave concessions. However, more taxes will soon eat up the concessions and leave the company in an ever worse position, higher costs and no more ability to save on with more labor concessions.

Harley Davidson will be building a new plant, but not here. A new tax scam cost them an additional $22 million this year alone in the middle of a recession, so don't expect them to be here much longer.

Small business may create the major portion of jobs but many small businesses are suppliers to big business, so any loss to a large company is felt all down the line.

We do have a lot of manufacturing in this country, but every large company that is pushed out has repercussions for the small companies that supply them. I used to pick up camshafts from a small shop in Michigan for Polaris, guess they just lost another good customer. Giving them a small tax cut will not mean they have more work to hire someone for.

64 15 Uh the "trades" aren't doing to well right now either.  At least not the building trades. Pick us all a new trade. Make it a winner, please. ------------ World of Warcraft gold farming?

65 I often say (and I not not joking one single inch) that America ought to look to space as the next industrial frontier. There is a vast wealth -- minerals, precious metals, zero-g manufacturing, etc. -- just waiting out there to be picked up. Energy production: orbital solar satellites. And this isn't science fiction; we have the rudimentary technology to start it right now...if we wanted to. For what we wasted on TARP, we could have built a moonbase or a small colony on Mars. Think about that. The role of the government in preparing the ground for business is to break ground and blaze trails, and establish the rule of law. We could do that with the technology we have right now. Within a few decades, private companies could make some nice profits simply by mining (not just metals, but also rare gases like H³ and Helium). And to people who dislike my goldbug tendencies, the best way to shut me up would be to extract fifty billion tons of gold out of an asteroid, and drive the price of my beloved yellow metal to about two cents a troy ounce.

66 I not not joking Double-negative for great emphasis!

67 The question is this: do you want to exist in a world market or not? A world market is what makes your $300 HDTV and your $500 computer possible; without that, you'd be paying five or six times as much for those things, if you could buy them at all. Is that the world you want?

Posted by: Monty at July 12, 2010 09:22 AM (4Pleu)

I can (and do) live without HDTV.  I could readily afford one and choose not to.  My computer is quite nice - but I have two and could easily get by with one, and upgraded to my current desktop because just for the luxury of a little more speed - no practical need involved.  Regardless, a 5-6 times price increase is a gross exaggeration.  It's not like you can't open a non-union plant in the US or Canada or even Europe.  You can pay a comfortable (not luxurious) wage and make a good, non-poisonous product without such a massive increase. 

My concern is this - Western Man has invented everything of value in the last 1000+ years.  It is our people who should benefit from modern comforts - and to hell with the rest of the world.  If working in a "world market" means that our people will suffer mass unemployment, and have to dramatically regress in their standard of living, then I say PASS.  The market should serve to improve life for OUR people.    I don't care one whit if every damn villiager in China or Viet Nam or Ghana starves next year because we quit buying their crap.  I care about Americans having a decent, modern standard of living and maintaining that.  If the world market serves that purpose, then I say that's great.  But when we allow foreign governments to put our people at a disadvantage through trade barriers, we are fools not to respond with a compensatory penalty to re-level the field.  I want Americans to have the opportunity to get work, and be able to pay their rent/mortgage, buy food, and enjoy a few comforts.  If that means the cost of shoddy, poison coated luxury goods has to go up, then so be it.

 

 

68

75 Monty,

why do you think Chairman Soetoro changed NASA into "Islam's Life Coach"?

Space is our and by extension the human race's future and he wants to make sure the US "doesn't profit unfairly"....

it was not an accident that he killed our reach for mars because by necessity it would have involved a working Lunar economy....

 

and we MUST NOT HAVE THAT.

69 If working in a "world market" means that our people will suffer mass unemployment, and have to dramatically regress in their standard of living, then I say PASS. Then you are doomed. Think of it this way: if America continues to make cars, who will buy them? The car-buying market in America is fairly static: people replace old cars, but there aren't any vast new markets waiting to be exploited. So where does an American car company look for growth? Asia, particularly China. But cars in China must cost much less than their American counterparts because the Chinese don't make as much money as Americans do. So the unit-cost of a car must be brought down enough to make selling it to the Chinese profitable. You can't save much on materials or manufacturing, given current technology, so the only way to save is through labor-costs. And if American workers won't accept the wage...you take production elsewhere. It's supply and demand, and it is an iron law. Any attempt to defeat it is doomed to fail. You live in a world market now, whether you like it or not. You are not allowed to "pass" because you must live in the world. You will adapt or be driven out by those who will adapt.

70

78 Monty,

"supply and demand" are hard laws not suggestions....contrary to what Soetoro thinks.

71 37 That's the solar power I can get behind: using big-assed satellite to gather solar power and beam it to earth as microwaves. We could power the entire planet for fractions of what it costs to do so now. ----------- You mean taking energy that would otherwise miss the Earth and redirecting it here? You think the global warming hoopla is bad *now*, just wait for them to get wind of *that*!

72

You mean taking energy that would otherwise miss the Earth and redirecting it here? You think the global warming hoopla is bad *now*, just wait for them to get wind of *that*!

I think we should wrap the earth in copper wire coils and turn the whole planet into a big assed generator using the earth's magnetic field...that's the ticket

73

80,

no doubt....also there is the real possibility that an accident with a microwave emitter could fry a wide area....a risk but all opportunity carries risk....

 

well except for you and me being forced to live in caves while Al, Barry, and Leo jet around in Gulfstream Vs....

74  Monty, you are not as crazy as you think. All through history there were thing that were unthinkable, silks from China, spices from India, hell even oranges at any time but Christmas or fresh meat from Texas. What made all that happen is we allowed some people to make a profit taking the risk to figure out how to make it happen. We demonize the Robber Barons of the 19th century, but their risk taking built the railroads that made our economy possible. Look at Russia, a vast extremely rich land, but a feudal society that discouraged anyone but the elites from taking risks and improving their station in life though work and profit. Without profit there is no incentive and we remain a miserable society of hunter-gatherers. There may be something in Space or not, but it will take the profit motive to make it happen.

75 Salmon's piece is truly teh stoopid - it reads like Jerry Brown babbling under a pseudonym.  How does this clown explain that economies functioned for thousands of years without labor unions ?  Nah, history be damned - corporations will merely sweat-shop their employees unless unions are around.  Only then will the invisible hand reward employee performance. 

Individual employees can't negotiate their own terms of employment - they need a helping reach-around from some kind soul like Hoffa or Sweeney.

Open squeakhole - insert head.

76

Wendy dear, see, here's the thing I don't understand. I'm 50. I didn't live through "the Great Depression" (TM) - but I would do ANYTHING, take ANY JOB to keep going. Guess what? I don't even have a Bachelors degree. I'm making GREAT money in IT, because I worked my way into a position that I'm MORE qualified for than any 25 y/o college grad. I am so SICK AND TIRED of you overeducated College Grads (especially the ones with post-grad papers) who wouldn't even be able to FATHOM soiling their hands doing WHATEVER IT TAKES to make it - on your OWN merit, not because some political hack OWES you something, but because you have pride in supporting yourself. You know the biblical proverb that those that don't work, don't eat. I'd work THREE freaking fast-food jobs if I had to, Wendy. I'd be knocking down the door of every Walmart within 50 miles of me. And once I got in the door, I'd SHOW them what this 50 year old is made of. And I'd keep looking, and keep working my way up.

I can't believe you TOOK OUT LOANS to go to school when you had no job. What MORON gave you that advice... oh yeah, President Putter. Well, that was your biggest mistake... he's bankrupting the whole country! That's the LAST person I'd take advice from!

Me? I'd FIND a JOB. I suspect by the time I'm ready to retire, I'll be outsourced. Yup. I'm fully expecting it. But if/when that happens, I have 100 different skills that I can bring to an employer. If not more. And I have a large network of friends/acquaintances that I'd tap into for leads. If IT dries up tomorrow, I'm not going to sit around crying in my beer waiting for Obumbles to find me a high-paying management position. I'll cut ALL unecessary expenses and find ANYTHING to keep my family eating. PERIOD. Now quit whining and go find a JOB, Wendy. You're kinda making me sick.

77

Posted by: cwking at July 12, 2010 10:58 AM (QVa83)

 

What he said!

78 76 Right on.

I could give a flying fuck  about the Chinese or Vietnamese or Cambodian workers.  Why should all this global market growth come at the expense of American workers.

Monty would have us out of work for the next 40 years while the rest of the world catches up. 

Compete, Monty?  The whole point is they are NOT competing on the same level.  The Chinese create barracks for their workers.  They build whole new cities where the people live in deplorable conditions.. it's one rung above slave labor.  And their currency?  Do they use the same curency we do?  No.. they undervalue it to encourage exports.

Well.  Fuck. That.

We cannot compete.  Ever.  There will always be some fucktard nation that will exploit its people to produce crappy shit cheaper than we can.

I say fuck world trade.  Make computers here and pay $50 more.  The slave labor that produces those goods overseas really only lessens the price a few dollars.

I will gladly pay the extra to keep jobs here.

But.. this is all predicated on a business-friendly environment.  The current trend with most state governments and jug ears in chief is to move toward a decidedly anti-business environment.  So.. maybe after 2012...

79 The whole point is they are NOT competing on the same level. Oh Jesus. What level? Who decides? We don't decide; the market does. Like I said: your pay isn't what you say it is; it's what the market will bear. Every time somebody pisses and moans about how China is "cheating" by currency manipulation or whatever, I bring up US farm subsidies, surtaxes and tarriffs on imports, and our "strong dollar" policy. The US "cheats" just as much as everyone else. Entrepreneurship and risk are the only things that will put us back on top, as they have in the past. That is our only real strength -- the ability to accept and capitalize (interesting word, that) on risk. Without risk there is no profit.

80

88 Chi-Town, it isn't "50 bucks more" when Americans are the ones making the computers it is more like an additional 25%....

 

and unlike the past we simply can't magic up enough advantage to justify the 25%....used to be our logistical superiority, stability, and relative lack of hard EUtopian governmental interference made us the most lucrative of the western nations but not even that is true anymore since we have religious zealots from the Church of Gaia writing our resource recovery and industrial rules.....

the problem is about 40 years in the making and would take at least 12 years to fix....and the haranguing and cauterwailing while we dismantled the anti-business bueracracy we've put in place makes 12 unitterputed years a longshot....

I detest Bush not so much for what he did but the things he, Boner, and Lott left undone.

 

81 Make computers here and pay $50 more. We couldn't make computers here now even if we wanted to. We don't have the infrastructure any more. Oh, we might assemble them here, but most of the parts would still come from overseas. If we say we have to do an end-to-end manufacturing of computers here, your PC would cost upwards of $5K or even more, and be less powerful than the one on your desk right now. We'd need not just assembly factories, but new mines and foundries (for copper, silver, platinum, gold, gallium arsenide, and other exotics); a new University system (because our current one isn't training engineers at a high enough rate); a more science-oriented populace (because most people don't know shit about math or engineering); and so on. In the final estimation: it's not worth it. It would cost hundreds of billions, maybe trillions, and give us no real benefit. We're pissing away billions on car companies right now as a kind of social welfare because they can't compete on an open market. Chrysler would have died long ago were it not for Uncle Sugar, and GM would have expired a couple of years ago -- deservedly. Those companies are essentially governmental welfare cases, and I doubt whether they'll ever turn an honest dollar of profit ever again. Our goal should not be re-inventing the last industry, but in finding and exploiting new ones.

82

89 Monty,

 

Wrapped again in numbers....

I think he falls squarely in the "loved to be spoiled by the mid-late '90s sweetspot of glabalization".......

you have a lot of people who enjoyed the benefit of lower prices harder competition right up until it started hurting their town....

I'm from Dayton, Oh(Fairborn actually) and the GM workers got the gag of nafta first because they understood, correctly, that GM would move heaven and earth to get away from  the UAW and their desire for a 15 minute paid coffee break every hour.....

 

si si mi amigo say hello to the mequiladoras.....

 

and the beat goes on.

83

91 Monty,

 

an excellent point but again we can't break the walls of the known so long as the federales have such vested interest in maintaining the status quo vis a vis the unions and dinosaur industry.....

the game is supposed to be: the US invents a new tech makes the first generation and maybe the second and then the world benefits from eonomic efficiencies in the second and third world, BUT we have in power right now neo-luddites who see innovation as an attack on mother earth.

84 merkets weak....I am thinking last weeks' "triumph" was bargain hunters....we'll know this weekend.

85

What level? Who decides? We don't decide; the market does. Like I said: your pay isn't what you say it is; it's what the market will bear.

Yes.  And if my nation pays me to make stuff to export, my price goes down below that of my foreign competitors and the market comes to me.  If the state sets up barriers so that my foreign competition can't sell to my domestic customers, I gain further market advantage.  If they let me dump my raw waste in the river, that gives me even more advantage (short term).  I can destroy the foreign manufacturing base for the product I make, such that it can never recover and I gain virtual (maybe total) monopoly in typical beggar-thy-neighbor fashion.  All the while I can offer my victims the consolation that it's just "relative advantage" playing out naturally.

Every time somebody pisses and moans about how China is "cheating" by currency manipulation or whatever, I bring up US farm subsidies, surtaxes and tarriffs on imports, and our "strong dollar" policy. The US "cheats" just as much as everyone else.

Citing moral equivelence is hardly an answer to the trade barrier issue.  Our trade restrictions are rarely correlated to the misdeeds of other nations, which is why they fail.  If we simply compensated for the trade engineering that other nations do, rather than trying to pick unrelated winners and losers based on politics, it would be a more effective tool.

Entrepreneurship and risk are the only things that will put us back on top, as they have in the past. That is our only real strength -- the ability to accept and capitalize (interesting word, that) on risk. Without risk there is no profit.

I don't think anyone disputes this.  But when there is one law for me and other for thee, as in global trade, it is deeply harmful to entrepreneurship.  Good luck finding some innovative product or service that can't be cloned in the third world within a couple years and stolen from you regardless of intellectual property laws.

The tactic of lying down and allowing our own producers to be locked out of foreign markets while opening our own up to be raped has not bee very helpful in recent years.  Neither to us nor to anyone else (long term).  The benefits are short term, because once we're fully fleeced, who is going to buy all that stuff?  Only developing our internal market will bring long term stability and prosperity.

We couldn't make computers here now even if we wanted to. We don't have the infrastructure any more.

Is there any industry we think shouldn't share this fate? 

If we say we have to do an end-to-end manufacturing of computers here, your PC would cost upwards of $5K or even more, and be less powerful than the one on your desk right now.

What do you base this estimate on?  Why would the people who invented the chips, and design all the best ones, make inferior goods?

We'd need ... a new University system (because our current one isn't training engineers at a high enough rate); a more science-oriented populace (because most people don't know shit about math or engineering); and so on.

I agree we need a new U system, but because ours is contaminated by Leftists rather than because it doesn't make enough engineers.  Apparently supply and demand aren't working to produce enough engineers??  Maybe because they aren't paid enough to make it worth it.  Our laws are such that we import people as well as goods.  An Indian engineer is easy to come by.  Why pay more for a local when you can have one shipped from Bangalor?

86 Just as an aside, it's difficult to put up with the "the American working class wants too much money" bitching when

a) Most of the "benefits" and regulations that make American workers expensive, from the unions, to the pensions, to the health plans, don't really benefit the workers; they're basically just pyramid schemes run by rent-seekers who hurt the guys on the assembly line more than help them.

b) AND when the Executive Branch has basically shut down the primary industry in my state (Louisiana) BY EXECUTIVE FIAT in such a way that will cause something like 50% or larger unemployment by the time all the domino effects have worked their way through the local economy.

There are a lot of very productive, cost-effective, and hard working people here, who basically aren't allowed to get ahead because our government has a rectal-cranial inversion.

87 The question is this: do you want to exist in a world market or not? A world market is what makes your $300 HDTV and your $500 computer possible; without that, you'd be paying five or six times as much for those things, if you could buy them at all. Is that the world you want?

Actually, well, if you look at the numbers... a lot of the stuff in computers gets made in more advanced industrialized countries and merely gets shipped to China for assembly. Intel "Core 2" and "Core i3/i5/i7" processors? Designed in the US and Israel (which I doubt is one of those low-wage lowballing countries) , packaged in China. Ram and Displays are made in the US, Japan, and Korea, but packaged in China.... this whole scheme is kept afloat by very low transportation costs and trade barriers that exist everywhere BUT the US.

(Oh, and AMD's foundaries are in the US and Germany, last I checked).

And let's take another example of the Modern Lifestyle. The iPhone costs $ 200.00 to make, but you can't buy one without a contract that'll eventually cost you somewhere around $ 2000.00. Apple will sell you one without a contract for some $ 500.00, which is a markup of about 150%. But you're sure they couldn't make it here?

In a way, the whole "free trade" thing is a massive FAIL on the part of conservatives when it comes to playing the prisoner's dilemna, because companies like Apple and HP have been and are big proponents of the regulations that make it hard to do business here; we let them push for that crap and then turn around and let them escape the consequences of their actions by offshoring their manufacturing, while those of us without the large amounts of money and contacts it takes to do business in China without getting screwed get shafted.

88 I agree we need a new U system, but because ours is contaminated by Leftists rather than because it doesn't make enough engineers.  Apparently supply and demand aren't working to produce enough engineers??  Maybe because they aren't paid enough to make it worth it.  Our laws are such that we import people as well as goods.  An Indian engineer is easy to come by.  Why pay more for a local when you can have one shipped from Bangalor?

Warning: quality of engineering students from Bangalore may vary widely. I know this from experience.

89 Wow, that's quite the flamefest over at the "Wendy's Story" link.  Maybe we need to put them some flippin' knowledge...

90 The WSJ finally notices all the folks rushing towards the exit as the casino burns down around them. From the linked story. In 2002, investors withdrew more money from mutual funds that invest in U.S. stocks than they put in. Then from 2007 through 2009 they withdrew money for three consecutive years. That marked the first three-year period of withdrawals since 1979-1981 Note that 1981 would have been a insanely great time to put a lot of money in stocks and let them sit for a decade or two. Hell, you could have let it ride through the dot com crash and still looked like a Buffet level investor.

91 Baah. Last paragragh shouldn't have been in italics.

92 > 80, no doubt....also there is the real possibility that an accident with a microwave emitter could fry a wide area....a risk but all opportunity carries risk.... Posted by: sven10077 Not possible. The energy density of beamed power from a microwave sat is low enough that cattle could graze right underneath the receiving antenna. It's not a death ray - you can't even feel it.

93 The Pile Of Cash That Everyone Wants To See Gone