Lost Your Job Yet?

Computerworld ^ | April 12, 2004 | John Pardon

[neutrino]

That's nice. Now let's look at the IMPORTS. Let's look at the balance between exports and imports.

Or, just look at the complete statistics I posted.

Posting partial numbers - goodness, you must be getting desperate!

[1rudeboy]

You didn't mention imports until just now.

[neutrino]

From my post #128: We are net importers of every technological product except aircraft and aircraft parts.

The net result being the issue that needs to be addressed.

[oceanview]

Huge portion? I never said it was a huge portion at all. It is was it is. But I am saying its not a trivial number of people who have been affected by this, its not millions either. But unfortunately for Bush, its targeted in a demographic of private sector middle class white collar workers, Bush would normally have gotten a big majority amongst. That's why its a political problem for him, and that's why Kerry is using it as a campaign issue. Any move to the Dems within that demographic could be very significant.

look at tax revenues, they aren't doing that well, especially in many states. that is also a sign to watch, if the wage base is lower, the tax base is also.

[BMiles2112]

Way to confuse the issue. I believe the intent of posting the data on exported goods was to show that we don't primarily export agricultural products and natural resources. You're bringing in the balance of trade argument, which is an entirely different issue.

[guitfiddlist]

From my post #128: We are net importers of every technological product except aircraft and aircraft parts.

An astonishing portion of our exports is aircraft. And that ain't gonna last. Watch Boeing subbing an increasing portion of the aircraft, leaving them as the titular head of a Potemkin village of a factory, as the prime, a glorified coordinator.

Second, watch Aerobus eat Boeing's lunch. But, But, But... the naysayer's say - "Aerobus is a government protected and subsidized industry!" To which one says "Yeeeeeeesss....and your point is?"

Keep up the good fight, my friend.

[1rudeboy]

My numbers are from the "2003 Annual Report of the President of the United States," posted on the website of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative here. It's a number of .pdf files, in case someone's wondering why I don't link to it directly.

You found some Census numbers broken down into, what, petroleum and non-petroleum categories? How does that help your assertion that, “. . . most of our exports are agricultural products and various natural resources?” [emphasis added]

Why did you switch to the trade deficit, all of a sudden? And if you wish to discuss various trade deficit categories, why did you begin by alleging that the U.S. has an export-profile of a banana republic? And incidentally, the USTR website has a much more detailed break-down of trade deficits by category.

[oceanview]

the government will act to protect those kinds of jobs. you don't see public school teachers having their jobs and incomes threatened by an H1B visa program, do you? and you won't. government, legal, education - all big job growth areas.

[oceanview]

if it weren't for the military component of aircraft exports - we would likely have agricultural products as the #1 export. our export model is pre-industrial revolution.

[guitfiddlist]

government, legal, education - all big job growth areas.

Yes. And the parasites are too stupid to realize that they need a host to survive.

[1rudeboy]

From my post #128: We are net importers of every technological product except aircraft and aircraft parts.

I don't see that in your #128. Did I simply miss it? If so, where?

[1rudeboy]

Good grief. It's the flat Earth argument again. The U.S. "would likely" export more ag-products than anything else? Why, because you said so?

[RockyMtnMan]

2001 up until last month has been a very tight market for techies. I'm starting to see a significant upswing in positions along the front range. A lot of tech development is defense related and the remainder is chip manufacturing. My company is in the software biz and things are starting to look good for us as well.

[oceanview]

because agricultural products are #2 behind aircraft. so if aircraft fell, food exports would move to #1. its quite simple really.

[oceanview]

actually, I will say that for the first time in years, I know two people that got new jobs working for Cisco in NC. But who knows, maybe they replaced two guys who dropped dead from job related stress!

[neutrino]

BTW, what's your take on agricultural subsidies? Should we eliminate them? Or should we expand them?

They seem about right as they are.  We need to maintain domestic production of food as a fundamental element of national security.

Hey, how about subsidies for smokestack industries while we're giving other people's money away?

Absolutely.  Steel, for example - which, fortunately, President Bush is protecting.  Machine tool manufacturers need to be protected as well.  No doubt there a a great many others.

Heck, let's give EVERYONE enough money to have an "above average income."

Which is, as we both know, a mathematical impossibility. 

That I have a rather low opinion of those who send American jobs offshore.

In what sense are these jobs the property of "Americans?" Are they the property of the employers? Are the the property of the employees?

That's an easy question to demagogue, and a hard one to answer as concisely as one might hope.  In a pure capitalist system, one could easily argue that the job belongs to the employer - the owner(s) of the enterprise.  We don't have such a system, and haven't in a long time.  We as a nation suffer a loss when domestic workers jobs are downgraded or eliminated - in terms of tax revenue, in terms of viability as a nation, and in terms of stability as a society.  In a global market for labor, the levels of wages will ultimately reach equivalence.  Do not think that such a substantial change will not have political consequences.  And remember, there is no job - anywhere - secure from the same threat.  FDR came into office due to dissatisfaction with the employment patterns of the time.  Beware lest the present-day rats do the same.

For that reason, we need to protect Americans and American workers from the profoundly negative effects of offshoring.  Note that India and China have substantial trade barriers to protect their domestic markets, and yet are growing rapidly.  Please don't use the tired old argument that they are small or poor - on a purchasing power basis, China is #2 in the world (ahead of Japan), and India is #4.  You can find it here: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html

We have, for the moment, the world's number one marketplace.  We simply need to charge a price for access to that marketplace.  American employers, by hiring American workers, pay that price.  Offshore employers - of whatever stripe - would pay the price in other ways.
 

[Euro-American Scum]

If you are not willing to or cannot move I highly suggest that you stop whining about outsourcing and kick some politician ass.

California. Arizona. Nevada. New Mexico. Colorado. Texas. That's the extent of our business activity. And I'm not whining about outsourcing, I'm stating a fact of life about business in the area in which my company is concerned. And I suggest you come up with something a little more original than Free Traitor Platitude #5173. You get an F for originality. Gosh, you're so tough, I'll bet you chew nails for breakfast.

As far as kicking some political ass, I'm all for it.

[jslade]

No, I created my own job. I'm self employed and doing well.

[VOA]

bump

[FoxPro]

I am speaking about the economic effects of low cost labor. It dosent matter what you call it, it still stifles innovation. All employment is essentially a form of enslavment.

Can I go to a website that quotes $2,000 a month? That is the lowest number I have seen.

I am telling you, thats what we are paying our guys, that is all. We dont quote these prices on our website.