Overseas jobs hurt on home front. (Gag/Barf alert)

The Patriot News ^ | 12/28/2003 | Edward A Bianchi

[WilliamofCarmichael]

I found a few comments to question. On the whole the author is correct. Here is IMO where he is wrong. If the author is real I can understand his frustration which may have caused his errors.

"survival job" has been around for awhile -- waiting tables while waiting to become a big star, for example.

"Never mind that they've destroyed 3 million jobs." No. Three million jobs may have been lost but "they" did not destroy the jobs.

$874 billion "tax cuts for the rich" Everyone knows the answer to that one.

"[$874 billion] could have created 17.5 million jobs, assuming each job cost $50,000 to create."

874 billion / 17.5 million = 49942.8571428571428571428571428571

So he lied -- besides, that's only for one year.

"The Republicans seem to be in love with feel-good economic theories and completely blind to economic results." Wrong. Only one-armed economists have a single answer. The Republicans have ideas that may work and the Dems have ideas. Thousands of others have thousands of other ideas.

I don't get off gawking at my fellow Americans' job-related and economic misfortunes. There are indeed millions of Americans bearing the brunt of the impact of globalization. It's going to take time to adjust.

[Allegra]

It's been rough as hell for some of us, but Americans still get the boss jobs.

2003 was rough as hell and I spent most of the year in the same leaky boat. And hated it.

Now I have one of those "overseas jobs." Not quite the same as the jobs mentioned here, though. But I have to go overseas to do it. :)

[Liberty Tree Surgeon]

There are no more jobs for icemen or knife sharpners, etc.

This type of argument is mentioned often, but it fails to address how much today is not like 100 years ago. If you made buggy whips, the time it took to be retrained to make Model T parts on a production line could be measured in weeks or even days. If the next big industry that will supplant the IT sector is bio-tech, the typical high-paid research job would take 4-6 years of university-level education. Even a job taking care of the retiring baby boomers (nurse, phys. assistant) takes months or years of training, and would not replace the former salary. The disruption the coming off-shore boom will entail will trump ideology for many people.

LTS

[Ciexyz]

I sympathize with this man's employment problem, but age discrimination is a sad fact of our society. My Dad was a mechanical engineer, he's now passed on, but he lost his job when he was in his late fifties, and he found alternate employment teaching in a technical school. Yes, it effected his family's economic situation - I didn't inherit as much cause the family's earning power was decreased. This was in the '80's. It doesn't matter which party is in power.

[speekinout]

You're right that there are too many problems with this whine to know where to start. But it strikes me as amusing that this whiner thinks that he would get a good job if the gov't spent money building roads. Would he really take a job on a road crew? And, if so, why doesn't he take a job building houses? There are plenty of those jobs available.
BTW, a $50,000 job would probably be less than $30,000 in salary. The rest would be in benefits, including health, unemployment ins., and employer paid SS.

[Ciexyz]

2003 was rough as hell....

I give you credit for surviving it, and hopefully you'll experience better things in 2004! (Ditto for the rest of us!)

[JLAGRAYFOX]

You have a somewhat valid point. But, there is a bigger picture, one that small thinkers like the Democrat Party and Its labor union morons don't understand. We are witnessing a rapidly developing world with building numbers of millions of new consumers whom require multitudes of services. The USA is not the only country that can provide these services. Other countries such as China, India, etc. can and are. They can also provide these services at much lower cost that the USA economy can. The name of the game, my friend is to stay fluid and adapt to changing times. I have done it three times. Did I have to fall back and start over, you bet I did. But, I am also smart enough to realize the government was not going to be effective in protecting my job which became dispensible. Carrying out the wailers woes to a logical conclusion and you have created a false economy,(socialist) which is so evidently doomed to failure. And, if the USA economy ever goes the way the current Democrat Party wants, the USA is history as a meaningful player in the new, developing world economy. I can also assure you, our enemies would love to see that happen. Just remember, capitalism with all of its faults is the engine that drives the USA economy. I have no sympathy for these lazy naysayers that complain and whine as the real world is passing them by. I started my career many years ago thinking I would retire with forty-eight years of service. Boy, what an idiot I was! Now nine jobs and three careers later I am still standing because I acted rathered than bitched and cried to "Big Brother" to protect my job!

[cp124]

Losses in one sector will be made up in another if the fat hand of regulation is loosened.

The problem is that this will not happen with leaders from either party. I afraid these regulations will continue to kill good jobs and retail will be the prominent job creator.

[cp124]

because I acted rathered than bitched and cried to "Big Brother" to protect my job!

But is ok for big brother to create regulations and policies that eliminate your job?

[RiflemanSharpe]

If the Democrats ever ovecome their hatred for straight white males, they can use this issue to unleash horrors bad enough to make Dale Gribble look like a sissy!

I agree, this is the one issue that the rat have that can really hurt Bush.

[Liberty Tree Surgeon]

In the end, whatever career you've changed into is still tied to someone spending money to buy the goods or services your career provides. If those people are Americans, who are now out of work, your business will suffer eventually. If those people are overseas, you'll face competition from those Chinese and Indians, driving down profits. It comes down to what goods and services can you provide that the lower cost competitors (LCCs, Chinese and Indians) can't.

More importantly, even if you specifically have skills that the LCCs don't, what about those whove been outsourced who don't have those skills? They should get them, I'm sure is the answer. But then, guess what, now the supply has increased and, again, you're facing competition which will drive down profit. This is fundamental economics.

What's key here is the creation of new industries that all those displaced workers can move into. If created faster than their current jobs disappear, then no problem. If not, then no amount of waving the Capitalism flag is going make the average voter stop blaming the party generally perceived to be that of Big Business. You can argue whether it is or not, but this is the general population we're talking about.

This is gloom and doom, but sometimes the truth is quite gloomy.

LTS

[JLAGRAYFOX]

You are right on the point that new industries must be created along with new jobs. However, history shows and proves that new industries and jobs are overwhelming created by the private sector. The government has a terrible track record in job creation. As for the average voter, they can't even identify one or two of the Democrat candidates running for President, let alone understand the dynamics of a free enterprise economy. They only believe what they hear, and then parrot it so they will be assumed politically astute and correct. The same folks that bitch about no jobs are found stuffing their faces at local restaurants or charging needless items on their credit cards! I am not saying that some folks don't have a rough time with a poor economy. What I am saying is that the Lord helps those that help themselves. Just because someone makes a six figure salary, does not insure that will always be the case! An economy that has only 5.8% unemployment is not exactly considered weak. As a matter of fact, this was one of the mildest recessions the USA has gone through! Our friends, the "traitor/treason" Democrats campaigned in 2002 on "it's the economy, stupid" and got their butts spanked royally! Not many political or media pundits called that shot, but I did. At the end of the day, as my British friends like to point out, security carried the day and GW Bush wiped up the floor with the "bin Laden" adoring Democrats!

[JLAGRAYFOX]

You are right on the point that new industries must be created along with new jobs. However, history shows and proves that new industries and jobs are overwhelming created by the private sector. The government has a terrible track record in job creation. As for the average voter, they can't even identify one or two of the Democrat candidates running for President, let alone understand the dynamics of a free enterprise economy. They only believe what they hear, and then parrot it so they will be assumed politically astute and correct. The same folks that bitch about no jobs are found stuffing their faces at local restaurants or charging needless items on their credit cards! I am not saying that some folks don't have a rough time with a poor economy. What I am saying is that the Lord helps those that help themselves. Just because someone makes a six figure salary, does not insure that will always be the case! An economy that has only 5.8% unemployment is not exactly considered weak. As a matter of fact, this was one of the mildest recessions the USA has gone through! Our friends, the "traitor/treason" Democrats campaigned in 2002 on "it's the economy, stupid" and got their butts spanked royally! Not many political or media pundits called that shot, but I did. At the end of the day, as my British friends like to point out, security carried the day and GW Bush wiped up the floor with the "bin Laden" adoring Democrats!