LET'S TALK ABOUT "YOUR" JOBS

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

[The Mayor]

my site I started it a couple years ago, I am going to buy a domain name and change it, add some of the stuff I have done. Hopefully it will go.

I was in business here till 9/11- after that insurance quadroupled and I couldn't afford to stay in business. I have to do something on my own.

[MacDorcha]

and the COUNTRY was founded on freedom, not guaranteed income!

[StatesEnemy]

There is no such "equlibrium". There is no such law of economics.

Bullshyt there isn't!

In order to produce goods in any quantity, there must be proportionately sufficient available buyers with economic capacity to buy those goods. That means that the laboring force in industries must be paid wages sufficient to buy most of what they produce, or something comparable, in order for those industries to survive. As a practical matter, any industrialized market economy run with poorly paid workers will collapse or stagnate for lack of a market for the goods it produces. Mass production requires mass market requires mass decent wages.

Learn something.

[FITZ]

Not for me --- but for the many --- thousands of unemployed in the region I'm in --- I think you're right. That is the way they'll vote.

[MacDorcha]

Jerry Springer is your idea of the average person?

[MacDorcha]

random question. isnt your colour scheme the third option?

[applemac_g4]

Read Pat Buchanan's book,

"The great betrayal". It documents this problem and provides solutions for it before it started happening.

As for potential solutions...how about the following:

(1) Any corporation that shifts more than a certain percentage of jobs overseas loses all domestic tax deductions.

(1a) A foreign services tax of 25% is levied on all corporate expenditures which involve outsourcing of services to foreign lands.

(2) Any product manufactured or assembled overseas, in whole or in part, is hit with a 20% tarriff.

Canada, England, and Australia are exempted from these provisions.

(3) In conjunction with #2, income tax levied on every bracket is cut 20% (that's 3x the size of Bush's tax cut, folks).

Of course, this is just an outline of a proposal. It would probably need to be tweaked, and there are other good ideas that would increase its effectiveness.

But I believe that some variant of it would result in an unprecedented economic revival for middle class America and job growth the likes of which we haven't seen since the military-industrial complex ramped up for World War II.

[MrB]

Nice sentiment, now, what economic programs to provide incentives to work toward your goal are you offering?

The economy (and humans) work based on incentives. Provide the right incentives and things will go the way you want. (Think about the consequences of the incentives of paying teenage girls if they have babies and aren't married.)

[MacDorcha]

i work in a grocery store and live with my folks and pay for car and school at the same time. no loans. plan ahead, itll pay off.

[MEG33]

Come on down to Texas,Mayor!

[driftless]

I know a few people who discount the idea of moving to where the jobs are. They like where they live, and they can't understand why low-skill/highpaying jobs don't come to our area. They think it's government's duty to provide them with jobs. One unskilled acquaintance just lost his unskilled highpaying job (the company moved to another part of the U.S.) and was moaning about it. It was pointed out to him that there were firms in the Twin Cities (about 150 miles away) offering jobs with pay equal to what he had been making to anyone who applied. He said he wasn't interested in moving. In short, people have to go to where the jobs are. Either be so skilled that companies seek you out, go into business for yourself, take the jobs that are available, or be prepared to move to where they will hire you.

[Taliesan]

A few elites and many poor are what you find in every unstable third world country

None of them got that way by "capitalism".

These economies reflect the lack of legal protection for private property, which means there is no incentive to build wealth, since it can be taken from you without due process. It is a LACK of legal protection FOR CAPITALISTS which creates the polarization of wealth and poverty. In a society where property is sacred, there is no need to redistribute the wealth, since wealth is naturally attracted to the highest rate of return, which means invested in new business.

Sheeeesh. Is this a conservative board, or a Marxist one?

[FITZ]

the Depression affected those who didnt adapt and those who relied on the stocks the most.

The corporations? The elites? The majority of the people were still working during the depression --- so it won't hurt many of us. Many will be hurt --- maybe corporations most of all. There are worse things than depressions --- economies can collapse from the weight of Socialism --- like the Soviet Union. How much Socialism can we take? Someone has to pay for the living of all the permanent welfare class and unemployed. Plus we've got a million moving in from Mexico --- mostly impoverished and unskilled. Obviously we need to keep those families fed and given free health care.

[smith288]

Well, at least you are proposing something. a few would be considered "anti-capitalist" but at least you are telling me something. So far, I have seen nothing but calling Bush a corporate whore and that jobs are owed to us by the govt...

One of the negatives of capitalism is that it doesnt demand loyalty to the country unless the countrymen stop buying their product. That how we have to get these companies to start employing more Americans.

[JimRed]

Just try doing that in Buffalo!

Which leaves you several choices. Relocate, start your own business or complain.

[hchutch]

Take THAT, Lou Dobbs.

[FITZ]

There is Capitalism in third world countries --- such as Mexico ---- but very few participate in it ---- what those countries lack is a middle class.

[The Mayor]

I would love to, my family would kill me if I even suggested it.
We just moved back from Virginia so I could lose my job here in NY..

[johnb838]

Hi Meg - I blame the leftists. They've been preaching socialism for decades, and some people aren't all that smart. Then there is this blame the worker mentality. The cost of employing a worker here is some multiple of what a person's actual salary is due to liability insurance, OSHA compliance, Payroll tax, etc.

I don't think it's right that they allow this flood of illegals into this country because it allows employers to exploit them -- a mexican worker should be subject to all of the same rules and regs as an american.

I'm for Fair Trade with other countries, but I'm not for Free Trade. If the other country is significantly freer of government mandates, then we are exploiting THOSE workers. This says that foreigners are not as worthy of protection as Americans. Of course, we all know that this is about cheap labor, not protection, but in the end it's all the same.

[MacDorcha]

did i miss the </sarcasm> in there?