Tomorrow's Jobs

Barron's ^ | 1/5/04 | Gene Epstein

[Texas_Dawg]

THE OLD, TIRED IDEA that America has only a finite number of jobs -- and that we must guard them zealously against raids from cheap foreign labor -- has been making a remarkable comeback. The only difference is that its upside-down view of the economy has plumbed new depths.

[Beck_isright]

" The U.S. imposes a tariff on imports. This action can impede the "creation or operation" of an American business in the following manners: 1. The EU, for example, retaliates by imposing duties on American exports. More duties, less exports. Ergo, we have a restriction on the operation of American business."

So you are openly admitting that American corporations are unable or are too incompetent to find other markets for their products? Or are you admitting that the neo-socialist model where the government forces our products into markets is the acceptable method of trade and manufacturing, as is the EU model?

"2. Restricting the available market for an export raises the barrier to entry for that market. Thus, we have a restriction of the creation of American business."

So according to your logic, I must export to Europe (based on your example) instead of searching out for more viable markets, like India for example, because without Europe I can not own a business in the United States? Your logic is twisted. You are assuming that we must protect large multi-national corporations with direct government intervention (ADM comes to mind) by subsidizing our exports to keep them cheap enough to compete with the Eurosocialists. Hence, you are advocating socialism and not allowing American capitalists to expand and compete in the same manner which you proclaim to defend. You do not want "free trade". You are advocating the globalist "managed trade" model which is based on the WTO socialist "everyone must be equal" theory.

"3. Under the unbrella(sic) of the tariff, domestic producers of the "protected" product raise prices, shifting the cost of the tariff regime to producers farther down the economic ladder."

And under the umbrella you protect, income taxation has been the model, penalizing those same capitalists you allege to promote. I could create a company and compete anywhere in the world if I could lower my prices and not pay opressive personal and corporate income and capital gains taxes. You think it is better to allow foreign capitalists to have an "equal footing" by allowing the US government to penalize the producers. You need to get into business for yourself and deal with other nations. You'll find that if you could produce a good or service at a lower rate with the quality we are famous for, then we would dominate the world markets.

Tariffs worked fine for 150 years plus in this nation. The income tax which has replaced it is why we can not compete. I want to offer congrats on your coming out of the closet:

You support oppressive penalties on American capitalists (i.e. the income tax and captial gains tax) but do not feel it is beneficial to tax foreign producers. You think it is acceptable to allow American capitalists to pay foreign taxes, but not vice versa.

Now that we know where you stand, your postings finally make sense. Yet you still have not answered the question. There is zero impact on an American capitalist creating an American business. There is only an impact when and if they elect to participate overseas. It is not mandatory that I or anyone else do so. Your implication in your example that it is proves your debate has no merit.

[mac_truck]

We also had slavery from 1776-1863. Do you support re-instating that? It would protect many manufacturing and farm jobs... you know?

Capitalist economic thinkers from Adam Smith forward recognized that free labor was a more efficient system than slave labor. How do you reconcile the statement you made above with the asertion that you yourself are a capitalist?

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

Sometime ago it was learned, I believed by harpseal or Lazamataz while 'chatting' with Texas_Dawg, that Texas_Dawg makes his living from Offshoring to Communist China.
Yes, Texas_Dawg very much has a vested interest, but not in AMERICA's good future.

Every Republican Platform since its inception has had strong words of support for tariffs or more recently fair trade.
Unfortunately, an 'elite corporatism' has crept into the party, allowing a handful of execs from a handful of corporations to plunder like pirates without a thought to America's future (or even our national security and defense!). They wave the flag of the free market knowing full well that this market is NOT free, but very much manipulated and unbalanced.

Here is a direct quote Ronald Reagan's 1984 Republican Party Platform:

"But free trade must be fair trade. It works only when all trading partners accept open markets for goods, services, and investments. We will review existing trade agreements and vigorously enforce trade laws including assurance of access to all markets for our service industries. We will pursue domestic and international policies that will allow our American manufacturing and agricultural industries to compete in international markets. We will not tolerate the loss of American jobs to nationalized, subsidized, protected foreign industries, particularly in steel, automobiles, mining, footwear, textiles, and other basic industries. This production is sometimes financed with our own tax dollars through international institutions. We will work to stop funding of such projects that are detrimental to our own economy."
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/site/docs/doc_platforms.php?platindex=R1984

And from George W. Bush's 2000 Republican Party Platform:

"But free trade must be fair trade, within an open, rules-based international trading system. That will depend on American leadership, which has been lacking for the last eight years. The administration’s failure to renew fast track (expedited legislative procedures to approve free trade legislation) has undermined its ability to open new markets abroad for American goods and services. As a result, America’s trade deficit with the rest of the world has surged to record highs. We must be at the table when trade agreements are negotiated, make the interests of American workers and farmers paramount, and ensure that the drive to open new markets is successful."
http://www.rnc.org/GOPInfo/Platform/2000platform2.htm

Our enormous trade deficit with Communist China indicates a serious degree of failure here that must be addressed. I suggest a start would be to eliminate OPIC funding from nations with whom we have a clear imbalance of trade. Harpseal has 13 ideas on his profile page, all very good.

[Texas_Dawg]

Also, Rush left Manhattan to move down here. Are you implying he's stupid for wanting to keep more of his money? And Tiger Woods? And Stephen King? (etc...)

Somehow you confused my general dislike of Floridians and the state of Florida for my take on its tax policy.

[1rudeboy]

Yet you still have not answered the question. There is zero impact on an American capitalist creating an American business. There is only an impact when and if they elect to participate overseas.

I refer you to cost #3, that I described earlier.

[1rudeboy]

You support oppressive penalties on American capitalists (i.e. the income tax and captial gains tax) but do not feel it is beneficial to tax foreign producers. You think it is acceptable to allow American capitalists to pay foreign taxes, but not vice versa.

You speak of "logic?" Ever hear of the Straw Man fallacy?

[1rudeboy]

Speaking of costs, I should add a #4: American companies denied the opportunity to bring goods to a market because Beck_isright thinks they should find another one.

[Texas_Dawg]

And from George W. Bush's 2000 Republican Party Platform:

"But free trade must be fair trade

Good point. And by "fair trade", George W. Bush and the GOP have meant this to mean support for NAFTA, the WTO, a removal of steel tariffs that would lead to EU tariffs on American goods, an imposition of only the most minimal tariffs on a few Chinese goods (bras, etc.), support for the World Bank and IMF, etc, etc.

So, LibertyAndJusticeForAll, do you support GWB and the GOP in their understanding of what constitutes "fair trade"?

Sometime ago it was learned, I believed by harpseal or Lazamataz while 'chatting' with Texas_Dawg, that Texas_Dawg makes his living from Offshoring to Communist China.

Dude... you're talking about a guy who frequently misspells the word "the" as "teh". He has some problems. I wouldn't necessarily believe what he says if I were you. I don't offshore anything to China, but tens of millions of conservative, patriotic Americans are in businesses that do (and have jobs only b/c those companies are able to).

[LibertyAndJusticeForAll]

"So, LibertyAndJusticeForAll, do you support GWB and the GOP in their understanding of what constitutes "fair trade"? "

I prefer Ronald Reagan's practical application of fair trade:

"We will not tolerate the loss of American jobs to nationalized, subsidized, protected foreign industries, particularly in steel, automobiles, mining, footwear, textiles, and other basic industries. This production is sometimes financed with our own tax dollars through international institutions. We will work to stop funding of such projects that are detrimental to our own economy."

And, as I closed with, our enormous trade deficit with Communist China is evidence that GWB has failed (so far) in this arena.

[riri]

Somehow you confused my general dislike of Floridians and the state of Florida for my take on its tax policy

Jus the freedom loving, anti-commie Cubans I bet. You only like the Cubans still on that island and Uncle Fidel.

[riri]

but tens of millions of conservative, patriotic Americans are in businesses that do (and have jobs only b/c those companies are able to)

You are right, we lived in squalor before this.

[Lazamataz]

Harpseal is, I discovered today, a Navy SEAL as well as an extremely successful businessman. Other people who would criticize him would be wise to try to learn from him, first.

[Lazamataz]

Hey bud. You've always been one of the free traders I could talk with civilly. I hope you get around to answering my three questions last night.

[1rudeboy]

Sorry, I forgot. I promise to later . . . there's a blizzard going-on outside and I've promised myself a hike through the woods.

[ChicagoHebrew]

Sure since 3 million citizens have lost jobs in America. Patriotism is needed in the war for America's jobs.

You, circa 1910: "It's horrible, horrible. Twenty years ago, there were thousands of horse & buggy whip companies employing tens of thousands of good Americans. Now, all the buggy whip companies are gone-- how are we ever going to replace those jobs?"

What people like you forget is that when jobs are reduced or consolidated, costs drop-- meaning prices drop. Twenty years ago, you'd get screwed at your local general store every time you bought a hammer. Today, you go to Wall-Mart and get that hammer for 30% cheaper. That's the true patriotic way-- figure out how to do things, so as to not waste American labor unproductively.

Put it another way-- if we wanted, we could easily guarantee universal employment, with the government just paying people to dig ditches and then fill them again. Everyone would have a job, but they wouldn't be PRODUCING anything for anyone, while they would be DRAINING resources that could be used productively-- their labor, and their salaries.

If the Chinese or the Mexicans can do somethings better and cheaper than we can, that means that we pay lower prices for needed services-- while placing Americans in productive jobs that foreigners can't do.

[Beck_isright]

" Somehow you confused my general dislike of Floridians and the state of Florida for my take on its tax policy."

My bad on the confusion. There are so few of us natives, it's sad. Most of the state consists of New Yorkers and other Yankees escaping the opressive tax situations and liberal bastions. The fact that you elect to live there speaks volumes about your insights.

[Beck_isright]

" I refer you to cost #3, that I described earlier."

I refer to you the fact you can not give a direct answer to a direct question. You've got the RINOids and it's sort of disgusting to look at. You have yet to determine the direct economic impact on the American capitalist. All you have done is spout macroeconomic theories, nothing more. Nice platitudes, but weak at best.

[Texas_Dawg]

Jus the freedom loving, anti-commie Cubans I bet. You only like the Cubans still on that island and Uncle Fidel.

Like I said, "general dislike". There are anomalies to every rule of course, and in Florida, the strongly GOP Cuban crowd is that. The panhandle is another area that is generally tolerable. It's the rest of the place that is a disgrace. Most Southerners hate Florida, fwiw. If they moved it to New Jersey, where it belongs, it wouldn't be as bad and would make more sense. As it is though, it's a disgrace.

[Beck_isright]

Ever hear of a direct answer to a direct question?

Let's try one more:

Have you ever created, purchased or owned a business of your own or in partnership with someone else? This is a yes or no question.

[Beck_isright]

"Speaking of costs, I should add a #4: American companies denied the opportunity to bring goods to a market because Beck_isright thinks they should find another one."

Ah yes. Another weak pathetic deflection. Keep going, we're all entertained by your inability to give a direct factual answer.