[TWilliam]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'H')ave you ever traveled outside the United States?

Since no country is likely to get rid of what you consider to be EXCESS PEOPLE, its instructive to examine what is happening in other countries. For instance, China and India and Brazil are creating jobs and expanding their economies rather nicely, in spite of having lots more "EXCESS PEOPLE" then the United States does, and in spite of your claim that it is not physically possible for them to do it.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'S')ince no country is likely to get rid of what you consider to be EXCESS PEOPLE, its instructive to examine what is happening in other countries. For instance, China and India and Brazil are creating jobs and expanding their economies rather nicely, in spite of having lots more "EXCESS PEOPLE" then the United States does, and in spite of your claim that it is not physically possible for them to do it.

[Don35]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TWilliam', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'W')hy not have pro-business policies that create jobs in the private sector instead?

[dissident]

Do people here really believe that the current job export to China and India is driven by resource constraints? Sorry, but we still haven't hit the wall on resources so this theory does not fly. It is driven by greed. Eventually (sooner rather than later) the resource constraints will kick in and squeeze China and India along with the US and Europe. Then it will become apparent that nobody is prepared.

[dolanbaker]

It's down to labour costs! as simple as that.
It's cheaper to manually assemble a lot of things in China than it is to build (and run) mechanised assembly plants in the west.

Another way of looking at it is to consider the fact that a machine can do the work of over 100 men for less than the cost of one man. That alone displaced most jobs, even before you consider the ones exported. There are only so many "service" jobs available for the displaced employees.

The only way any first world country can ever have full employment in the current BAU is to start a full scale war!

[cephalotus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dissident', 'D')o people here really believe that the current job export to China and India is driven by resource constraints?

[cephalotus]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dolanbaker', '
')Another way of looking at it is to consider the fact that a machine can do the work of over 100 men for less than the cost of one man. That alone displaced most jobs, even before you consider the ones exported. There are only so many "service" jobs available for the displaced employees.

The only way any first world country can ever have full employment in the current BAU is to start a full scale war!

[WyoDutch]

Not long ago, I stopped in DeWitt, Nebraska... a town of 570 souls. Eighty years ago, a Danish immigrant invented the Vise-Grip" pliers at his blacksmith shop in DeWitt. Generations of Nebraskans made a good living at the Vise Grip factory, which by the 1990's, employed over 700 people.

Then, two years ago, the new owners of Vise-Grip (Irwin Tools and Rubbermaid) announced that the doors were being closed forever and the machinery would be relocated to red china and operated by red chinese peasants who earn a dollar or two a day.

A spokesman for Irwin Industrial Tools, which operates the DeWitt plant, said the decision was a "tough one that didn't reflect on the quality of the work performed by DeWitt workers". Operations need to move to China, he said, to help lower the cost of Vise-Grips.

In a similar tale... Liberty Brass Turning Co. Inc. is exactly the type of company that low-cost Chinese imports should have swept away by now.

A small machine shop with 40 employees and sales of $5 million, Liberty is located in Queens, one of New York City's five boroughs. Doing business there is expensive. Compared with manufacturers in other parts of the country, Liberty pays more for wages, rent, utilities, shipping, and services. It faces high taxes and assertive regulators.

Liberty's CEO, David Zuckerwise, who owns the company with his brother Peter, has seen friends and competitors shut their doors. He estimates that far more than half the milling capacity in New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts has closed over the past decade.

Yet Liberty is thriving, thanks to insights gained from Zuckerwise's first exposure to Chinese competition in 1987. "We had a major customer that gave us $800,000 to $900,000 annually for lighting-fixture parts," Zuckerwise recalled. "We were charging $1.84. The Chinese quoted $2.10 to $2.15, but included assembly, plating, and polishing, so it was a much better deal.

"The next year, the Chinese said to them, 'We're making the assembly. Why not let us make the entire product?' The third year, the Chinese went directly to the stores and basically put our former customer out of business."


So on this Fouth of July... be sure to stop in at Wal-Mart and buy a pair or two of the red chinese Vise-Grips or some chinese lighting fixtures and think of the town of DeWitt, Nebraska or Liberty Brass.

[Ludi]

The new Vise-grips are crap. They bend.

[dolanbaker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cephalotus', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dolanbaker', '
')Another way of looking at it is to consider the fact that a machine can do the work of over 100 men for less than the cost of one man. That alone displaced most jobs, even before you consider the ones exported. There are only so many "service" jobs available for the displaced employees.

The only way any first world country can ever have full employment in the current BAU is to start a full scale war!

[The_Toecutter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dolanbaker', '
')
That could work if,
a, people were prepared to have a lower living standard, part-time work pays less.
b, consumers were prepaired to pay extra (the examples already in this thread says NO!)

[phaster]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', '
')
Why not have pro-business policies that create jobs in the private sector instead?

After 18 months of the Obama presidency, its already clear that Obama doesn't have a clue how to create jobs in the private sector. It was very foolish for obama to ignore the recession and ignore the need to create jobs and instead put all his feeble energy into pushing through his healthcare reform bill and to push for more and more taxes and regulations through the economy, even though each change adversely affected some part of the private sector. If you want job growth in the private sector, especially when companies are at risk of going bankrupt, you need to create a STABLE tax and regulatory environment so private companies can plan for the future and have some assurance of what their cost structure is going to be.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cephalotus', 'I')n the last months this forum had several(!) times as much threads about "self defence" (=how to shot your neighbours) compared to threads about "environment" or threads about "conservation & efficiency".

In my opinion this tells a lot about the mind of people!

That's the future you/we are heading for.

[jdmartin]

This is an excellent thread and thanks SixStrings for posting it.

Bottom line is that we are going to have to accept the fact that there will never again be enough jobs for all the people who want one. Therefore, we are going to have to accept a (general) decline in standard of living, at least if you measure standard of living by purchasing power and the accumulation of material items. China, India et al are not going to willingly surrender the power they've gained at our expense - and make no mistake, that is exactly what a trade imbalance is, a redistribution of wealth from one side to another. Thus, if we're not willing to make decisions that will create full(er) employment - significant import tariffs to reignite local industry; limits on immigration; etc - then there will not be enough jobs for everyone. It has nothing to do with creating favorable business environments, unless by "favorable" you mean slave wages and environmental destruction, because that is the difference here. Unless we're willing to live like the Chinese, we cannot get those jobs back without willing intervention in the "free" market.

Personally, I'm not so sure that a reduction in purchasing power is necessarily a bad thing, if it was reasonably distributed, and there was a corresponding uptick in valuable endeavors - volunteerism, leisure time with family, etc. My guess is that it will *not* be distributed reasonably (ie, one parent staying home voluntarily), and that there will be a shitload of social upheaval tossed into the economic salad - because what we're seeing is real wage depreciation coupled with job elimination, meaning the people that are left standing have to hustle harder to make it instead of enjoying themselves a little more with the down time.

[Sixstrings]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jdmartin', 'T')his is an excellent thread and thanks SixStrings for posting it.

Bottom line is that we are going to have to accept the fact that there will never again be enough jobs for all the people who want one. Therefore, we are going to have to accept a (general) decline in standard of living, at least if you measure standard of living by purchasing power and the accumulation of material items. China, India et al are not going to willingly surrender the power they've gained at our expense - and make no mistake, that is exactly what a trade imbalance is, a redistribution of wealth from one side to another. Thus, if we're not willing to make decisions that will create full(er) employment - significant import tariffs to reignite local industry; limits on immigration; etc - then there will not be enough jobs for everyone. It has nothing to do with creating favorable business environments, unless by "favorable" you mean slave wages and environmental destruction, because that is the difference here. Unless we're willing to live like the Chinese, we cannot get those jobs back without willing intervention in the "free" market.

[the48thronin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')t least 18 provinces, including big cities like Beijing and Shenzhen, have increased the minimum wage by an average of 20 percent from Thursday as officials hint cheap labor may no longer be considered China’s sole competitive edge.

Jiangsu province was the first to increase its minimum wage this year, ushering in the beginning of a nationwide wave that will be followed by 27 provinces and municipalities by the end of this year, the First Financial Daily reported.

Sun Qunyi, an expert with Wage Research Institute at the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security, said this round of wage increases is compensation to low-income workers since the global economic crisis froze wages in 2009.

The share of personal income in China's gross domestic product has fallen to 39.7 percent in 2005 from 56.5 percent in 1983, statistics released by All-China Federation of Trade Unions showed. Wage increases were also far behind the economic growth.

Despite the increase, the minimum wage is still quite low compared with the average wage level. The average wage in Hainan was 2,077 yuan, but the minimum wage stood only at 630 yuan.

[IsThisRealLife]

I've always been supportive of extending unemployment compensation, even though I know some folks that could roll up the sleeves and get any job. But I always believed these examples were the exception, and that most folks still receiving unemployment benefits were scrapping the bottom. Same for tax cuts for the middle and lower classes. A dollar goes a long way in these days. But I think I changed my opinion a bit.

Given or taken, 210M shopped this past Thanksgiving weekend, and given or taken again, the average shopper spent over $250. That's insane!

You and I don't need to do much math and dig statistics on age distribution, unemployment beneficiaries, etc. It's clear that a huge chunk of last month's unemployment benefits and tax breaks went to discretionary holiday shopping. Life can't be that bad after all.

You may argue this spending stimulates the economy, and that's good for all. But corporations already posted the biggest ever quarterly profits ever, ever, ever. The only economy being stimulated is the corporate bonuses economy.

That's all for now. Have at it.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IsThisRealLife', 'I')'ve always been supportive of extending unemployment compensation, even though I know some folks that could roll up the sleeves and get any job. But I always believed these examples were the exception, and that most folks still receiving unemployment benefits were scrapping the bottom. Same for tax cuts for the middle and lower classes. A dollar goes a long way in these days. But I think I changed my opinion a bit.

Given or taken, 210M shopped this past Thanksgiving weekend, and given or taken again, the average shopper spent over $250. That's insane!

You and I don't need to do much math and dig statistics on age distribution, unemployment beneficiaries, etc. It's clear that a huge chunk of last month's unemployment benefits and tax breaks went to discretionary holiday shopping. Life can't be that bad after all.

You may argue this spending stimulates the economy, and that's good for all. But corporations already posted the biggest ever quarterly profits ever, ever, ever. The only economy being stimulated is the corporate bonuses economy.

[IsThisRealLife]

It's the shear amount of shoppers, Lore.

The population is 310M. When 2/3 of the population show up at the mall for discretionary holiday spending, the situation can't be that bad then, because otherwise, we'd be hanging on to our dollars for a rainy day.

Again, I continue a supporter of extending social benefits, but with a different perspective.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('IsThisRealLife', 'I')t's the shear amount of shoppers, Lore.

The population is 310M. When 2/3 of the population show up at the mall for discretionary holiday spending, the situation can't be that bad then, because otherwise, we'd be hanging on to our dollars for a rainy day.

Again, I continue a supporter of extending social benefits, but with a different perspective.