LET'S TALK ABOUT "YOUR" JOBS

Nealz Nuze ^ | Wednesday, February 18, 2004 | Neal Boortz

[beaureguard]

Jobs .. and the economy. Those seem to be the issues that are driving many, if not most, of those who are supporting the Kerry candidacy.

First of all ... I'm going to repeat this simply because it makes the whiners so unbelievably angry. Listen up. They're not your jobs! The jobs belong to the employers .. not to you! You have job skills and, presumably, a willingness to work. Your task in a free economy is to get out there and find some employer with a job who needs your skills ... and strike a deal.

If you do not have the particular set of job skills that an employer needs, of if you have priced your labor out of the marketplace, guess what? It's not the employer's fault. The fault lies with you. Either develop a new set of job skills that are actually in demand, or adjust your pricing. The employer knows what he's looking for you. If you're not it .. it's your problem, not his.

Now ... you say you're going to vote for a Democrat this year because of jobs? You mean to tell me that you're going to vote against George Bush this year because you don't have a set of job skills that are in demand in our free marketplace? Yeah .. that makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

Tell me. Just what do you want the president to do? You information technology people out there .. just what are you demanding? Do you want companies to stop outsourcing IT jobs to India? OK ... tell me how to do that. These companies aren't shipping parts overseas and completed products back. All they do is ship information overseas by phone lines or the Internet. Then that information is modified and shipped back the same way. What do you want the government .. the president to do? Do you want some federal law that prohibits companies from transmitting information overseas by the Internet, having that information transformed or modified, and then shipped back? And tell me just how do you enforce that law? Does that law then apply to you also if you seek information from a company that is located overseas, thus depriving a domestic company of your business?

Ditto for manufacturing. I've already told you the story about the California company that makes computer mouses. (computer mice?) This company ships the components to China. The mouse is assembled in China and shipped back, then sold for around $40. Why? Because the assembly is cheaper in China than it would be in the US. So, you say you want the president to force this company to have that mouse assembled in the US? Fine .. then the price for the mouse goes up to about $70 a pop and sales drop. As the sales drop the jobs of the people in this country who manufacture the components for that mouse go away. Then the 100 marketing jobs this company supports in California also go away. You see, perhaps you can succeed in forcing this company to assemble these mouses in the US, but there just isn't any way you can force the American consumer to pay 80% more for the "made in America" version.

As Bruce Bartlett says in an article listed in my reading assignments, "No nation has ever gotten rich by forcing its citizens to pay more for domestic goods and services that could have been procured more cheaply abroad."

What we are seeing here is a demonstration of the "government owes me" mentality of far too many Americans. Every time you arrive at a speed bump in your life's journey you start screaming to the government for help. Sure, the speed bump is going to slow you down a bit ... but just keep moving forward and things inevitably pick up speed again. Americans are becoming helpless whiners. The more helpless you are, and the more you whine, the more likely it is you're going to vote for a Democrat. Democrats specialize in stroking the malcontent.

Congratulations, whiners. At a time when America if fighting World War IV, the war against Islamic terrorism ... you're going to vote for a candidate who wants to treat terrorism as a freaking law enforcement problem because you've made some pitiful jobs choices. Pitiful.

[MacDorcha]

ok heh, had me worried for a minute there, </relieved> ;)

[FITZ]

I think what it is --- our Founding Fathers set up a government that would promote "the people" and laid the groundwork for a strong stable middle class. The Constitution never mentioned corporations --- but does mention the American people.

[MrB]

Our government is charged with "promoting the general welfare" of the American people.

Common mistake, usually made by Democrats.

The words "general welfare" are only relevant in that they describe the purpose for given Congress the power to pass laws restricted to the enumerations in Article I, Section 8.

[joesbucks]

It's the employer's job until he loses his. The minute his syndicator yanks the plug on his show, then there will be some sort of outcry from him. Remember Savage when ABC dumped him. Suddenly it wasn't their program and job, but some sort of hit on him. And even if it was a hit on him. it was still their "job" to give it or take it.

[MacDorcha]

losing tax breaks is a good move.

i do however, think that we CAN compete with the lesser wages in india, if we simply learn to deal with it as they have. it's the lazy people who expect it all on their plate for less that make this world loss its value.

[hchutch]

I find the notion that ANYONE can tell me who to hire much more outrageous.

[Taliesan]

The private property is a legal construct sustained by the rest of society, same way as a corporation is a construct.

No! No, no no!

Private property is a moral reality which exists PRIOR TO LAW OR ANY SOCIAL CONTRACT, which the rest of society is morally obligated to revere by law. The existing society helps one to acquire and hold property, but the right to own the fruit of your work is a natural right. It is recognized in law, NOT IN ANY WAY CREATED BY LAW.

A corporation is a legal construct of convenience, entirely created by law. There is no natural right necessitating or hallowing the corporate form.

The argument for provate property is a moral one; the argument for corporations is a practical one.

The distinction between these two is THE CRUCIAL DISTINCTION between a socialist and and a normal person.

[MacDorcha]

that, i agree with.

[MrB]

Private property is the basis of all liberty.
The right to private property is a basic right inherent in existence - the founders even had those words in the original pre-amble: "life, liberty, and property"

[StatesEnemy]

Private property is a moral reality which exists PRIOR TO LAW OR ANY SOCIAL CONTRACT, which the rest of society is morally obligated to revere by law. The existing society helps one to acquire and hold property, but the right to own the fruit of your work is a natural right. It is recognized in law, NOT IN ANY WAY CREATED BY LAW.

Bwhahahaha!

When the revolution comes, just keep repeating "natural right".

[MEG33]

Do you realize that Mexico will not allow more than 50% foreign ownership of business.They nationalized business at one time and I believe their oil is still nationalized.They do not operate like we do.They are so afraid of foreign ownership of land homes,business,they stagnate.

[MrB]

Do you have a right to your life?
Is the government charged with protecting that right?

You have an equal right to not be enslaved,
and to own property.
And, these rights must either be protected by government, or failing that, your 2nd amendment rights.

[reformedliberal]

Exactly!

The household survey shows 200+k people have started small businesses. Eventually, they, like you, me, cripplecreek, others, hire other people. The Dems ignore this figure.

Maybe every time there is an editorial or article on this issue, small business owners should write their own letter to the editor.

1) We all need several skill sets, from high tech to garage manufaturing. If you have a small business, you start out doing everything yourself, gaining skills. Then, w/success, you hire and train others to do these jobs. Those people gain more skills and some will go out and begin their own businesses.

2) We all need to remain flexible and be aware we will change careers several times in our lifetime. I am on my 4th product line over a period of 40 years, for example and I have a couple of other skills that earn me money during the slow period for my manufacturing business.

For anyone w/an idea and the energy to go w/it, right now used machine tools are affordable...although not as affordable as they were a couple of years ago. I know a small business begun 25 years ago that has upgraded their machinery this way. BTW, they went from manufacturing in a barn to having several factory floors. Their biggest problem is finding workers w/a work ethic.


10 years ago, some people we worked with began their own manufacturing business. They needed some parts fabricated. The machine shop they used is desperate for tool-and-die men (in Milwaukee). Several retired/laid off tool-and-die guys are working for them on contract, as needed. They are like gold.


Cripplecreek: the guy near us who does small engine repair also sells refurbished snowthrowers, lawn tractors, etc. It is a nice addition to his business.

[Axenolith]

It would help if the unemployed facing foreclosure didn't refi his home X times, take cash out and blow it until he's saddled with a mortgage thats 3 or 4 times the actual value of the home...

[MEG33]

"Free traitor" is getting old.Haven't we had this whine before?

[jimt]

These economies reflect the lack of legal protection for private property...

While that's true, they also feature laws designed to favor the elite, insuring their control over natural resources, insuring they have no competitors, etc. Marxism or mercantilism, it makes no difference to them, as long as they're in control.

These countries do need better enforcement of private property rights, but they also need repeal of bunches of laws, and shriveling government back to what it should be doing, protecting individual rights.

[MacDorcha]

private property is an idea that we as humans have had for eons as long as we have tried also to excel and produce. tribal lives tend to rely on "group thinking" to survive. this means they share everything to ensure that their neighbor survives, because it means that they survive.

a society begins when someone decides they desrve more for doing more. they take something (or someone in cases) and keep it for themselves and dont share. at that moment a hierarchy is established, and thus, people begin to either allow the guy with the most toys to be the guy with the most toys, or they compete. they can do this by fighting (revolting) or by gaining more power themselves (capitalism)

[MEG33]

#104..Really a jerk statement..even if you didn't get my sarcasm.

[MacDorcha]

in a healthy economy, i think the magic number is 5%. that is the amount of unemployed you can have to maintain a competetive job market. as for feeding the non-working, i think its fine for a widow with no previous work experience (as social security was founded). and all else can kiss off.

[CajunConservative]

made with real wood and not particle board coverd with laminate.

I agree!

It boggles my mind when I see people paying a small fortune for particle board cr@p that won't last or retain value when they could spend about the same amount on a solid wood or antique piece of furniture or cabinets.

This outsourcing of everything, particularly furniture and stuff like that, can have a positive impact in certain areas, craftmanship will see an upswing. Look at all the DIY programming on television. Once people get bit by the bug, their creativity is awakened. I know for myself, I don't like to shop anymore, I like to make stuff. It allows me to put my stamp on things. I quilt, do some refinishing of antiques, and a few other crafty things.