The NLRB Fear Factor: How the Boeing case poisons investment.

Wall St. Journal ^ | August 13, 2011

[grundle]

The National Association of Manufacturers asked its members last month how the National Labor Relations Board's decision against Boeing's Sourth Carolina plant case is affecting their decision-making. Some 60% said the government's case already has—or could—hurt hiring. Sixty-nine percent said the case would damage job growth. And 49% said capital expenditure plans "have been or may be impacted by the NLRB's complaint." Around 1,000 of the association's 11,000 members contributed to the survey. That's a lot of lost jobs.

When CEOs or entrepreneurs fear political intervention that might impose higher costs, they are more reluctant to invest or to hire new employees.

The NLRB's assault on Boeing has been especially damaging because it violates what most Americans consider to be a core tenet of U.S. capitalism—the ability to move capital or business where you think it has the best chance of success.

In a now-famous meeting last year with then White House budget direct Peter Orszag, CEOs from the Business Roundtable complained about the costs of regulation. Give me examples, Mr. Orszag said, and the BRT followed up with a 54-page list. A measure of the Administration's responsiveness is that the NLRB launched its assault on Boeing after the BRT provided those examples, and President Obama has refused to say a word of reproach to the agency. This is how you get economic growth of 0.8%.

[Scotsman will be Free]

I would like to see our governor and Boeing tell the feds to pound sand. I think that it’s past time to get down to brass tacks.

[Pilsner]

I would like to see our governor and Boeing tell the feds to pound sand.

Because that worked out so well the last time South Carolina tried it. /sarcasm

[Scotsman will be Free]

You are so right. We should roll over onto our backs and piss on our bellies like a whipped cur.

[Alberta's Child]

This was the subject of a conversation I had with a very successful immigrant who was criticizing major U.S. companies for moving their operations overseas.

He said an American company has an obligation to engage in "patriotic" business practices. I used the Boeing case as an example of a major U.S. company whose biggest impediment to engaging in "patriotic" business practices is the U.S. government.

This is one reason why I never criticize any company that decides to move its U.S. operations to another country.

[trebb]

I would like to see our governor and Boeing tell the feds to pound sand. I think that it’s past time to get down to brass tacks.

Kind of ironic how our gubmint tells the Pentagon they have to use Boeing despite the availability of cheaper and superior aircraft from foreign makers, then chases Boeing off American soil with anti-business policies....

[Pilsner]

You are so right. We should roll over onto our backs and (deleted) on our bellies like a whipped cur.

That wouldn't be any less effective than your strategy. You would just get a warm feeling from urine, not macho posturing.

I'd rather do something useful.

[Scotsman will be Free]

“Macho posturing”? What are you talking about? You either fight the federal govt or you do what they say. The battlefield takes place in many venues such as congress, the courts, etc. Actual warfare is the last option. All options start with the state(s)telling the feds to pound sand. Otherwise, we all act like you, a cowering, belly pissing cur.

[Pilsner]

“Macho posturing”? What are you talking about?

Oh hey, my mistake, I mistook you for a keyboard commando, who mixes belligerent grandstanding with childishly uncreative personal invective. Obviously simply braying "tell them to pound sand" is the answer to every issue facing conservatives.

Carry on.