Posted on 07/29/2003 7:09:27 AM PDT by Mick2000
Just three years ago, Congress voted to allow more foreign workers into the United States. Times have changed.
Politicians are proposing tough — opponents say misguided — steps to keep jobs at home in the face of rising unemployment, a growing number of white-collar jobs being transferred to India and other countries and lingering anger over some U.S. allies' opposition to the war in Iraq.
The House has passed measures to require the Defense and State departments to buy a larger share of equipment from U.S. firms. The measure, which has provoked a corporate and political uproar, has not been approved by the Senate.
Legislators in several states are trying to bar the export of government jobs to foreign companies.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., chair of a Judiciary subcommittee, plans a hearing today on possible problems in the L-1 visa program, which allows companies to bring workers to the USA from their foreign operations. Workers complain that firms are using the program as a backdoor way to replace domestic employees with cheaper labor.
(Excerpt) Read more at usatoday.com ...
1st, as has been repeatedly noted, the H1-B program was a governmental intrusion into the free market. We permitted a half million non-citizens to come over here to the US and take US jobs -- no other country (other than a few oil states) permits the reciprocal action. Try going to Canada, for example, to compete for a job there.
Impact: loss of US jobs to US citizens, drop in tax revenue. Most of these jobs were the taxpaying equivalent of the engine on the train, paying a lot of taxes. That is gone. More on this in point 4. And of course as has been previously pointed out, there is a trickle down job effect. When the higher paid workers get cut, they don't take their kids to the Chuckie Cheese birthday parties, Chuckie Cheese lays off a worker. They paint their own house, local painting companies all lay off a worker. They cancel the addition to their house, the home renovation company lays off a worker.
2nd, outsourcing is a separate and old issue. I think "free market" economics should play out here, except for industries that are clearly supported by foreign governments who intend to capture market share by wiping out competition. In that case our Constitution permits us to use tariffs to balance the playing field and they should be used judiciously to do so. IMO.
3rd, when US corporations move offshore to avoid taxes, they are expecting the best of two worlds. First, they get to do business in the US, sell to US customers, take advantage of a tax subsidized infrastructure (roads, rail, criminal justice system, civil justice system, and so on), but then not pay taxes to help support the very infrastructure they are taking advantage of. This is an issue. I do not offer a solution but point out that there is a conflict between a corporation that considers itself "multinational", and the civic ethics of the American consitutional nation state.
4th and finally, our military expenditures are greater than the next 7 to 10 highest funded militaries combined. Because of our military strength, our "allies" can afford to not spend money on their militaries (Canada is a perfect example), and so they can either subsidize their industries or cover their social programs at a lower tax rate if they so choose. In any case, as point 1 indicated, replacing a half million of our more highly salaried workers cuts into the tax revenue to support this military.
And another voice is heard from the "Manufacturing in the US is sooooo expensive, so instead of trying to make changes from within we will just send our jobs overseas so some third world, non-American(and in lots of cases anti_American) slave laborer can put another American out of work" so they(the anti-US companies) can make that extra buck. Or shucks, I know lets hire all those illegals for pennies on the dollar, put more Americans out of work. After all you can make a killing by killing off the Middle class in America.
If the Americans who fought in all our history's wars, had decided that fighting for America was not worth it, you would no doubt be speaking in German, Japanese or living in just another British colony. Wake up, support the country you live in instead of finding reasons not to. And if you do not like the way things are going, then "Change them", it's that lil ole thing called democracy. You know, that thing that those third worlders do not have.
Exactly. And let the national discussion begin!
For a long time now, anti-free market Marxist/Socialists, have been busily undermining the Capitalistic system our Founders intended.
Because of their meddling, they have stifled the entrepreneurial spirit in America and made the cost of doing business in the U.S. prohibitive.
"When properly defined, Capitalism recognizes several necessary conditions for the kinds of voluntary relationships it supports.
One of these is the existence of inherent human rights, such as the right to make decisions, the right to be free, the right to hold property, and the right to exchange peacefully what one owns for something else.
Under capitalism, there are definite limits, moral and otherwise, to the ways which people can exchange. "You shall not steal" and "You shall not lie" are part of the underlying moral constraints of the system.
Economic exchanges can hardly be "voluntary" if one participant is coerced, deceived, defrauded, or robbed."
The statements in quotes were excerpted from the pages of an excellent book entitled, "Why the Left is not Right" - The Religious Left - Who they are and what they believe", by Ronald H. Nash, PhD, Copyright 1996 Zondervan Publishing House Grand Rapids, Michigan 43530.
If you think you've suffered a decline in your quality of life, wait until you get your wish of a "good dose" of protectionism.
Absolutely!
Instead of the income tax, replace it with a national retail sales tax:
-prices don't increase
-the prices of our exports decreases by 25% or so
-the prices of imports increase by 25% or so
-since there is no tax on any income, companies will bring all their capital home (foreign companies may bring their capital here too!)
All in all, it's the income tax that's the main culprit for our economic problems. Time to end the income tax and collect tax with a national retail sales tax
Eliminating the income tax code and implementing a national retail sales tax would make the US the most business and capital friendly place on earth.
From the corporate perspective it is the only thing to do if the board members want to remain board members. From the shareholders perspective the same logic applies. Might they both make more money if they were not so myopic and focused on long term revenue growth? Sure. The only problem is the word “Might”.
For that matter, as multinational corporations, it might make more sense as a long term strategy to move these positions now and apply the excess capital to capture market share in emerging economies.
Don’t get me wrong, I have been personally affected by outsourcing and want the problem solved as much as anyone, I just don’t think it’s fair to blame businesses.
I understand your sentiment, but you can't be serious. Growing the fed gov't and giving it more power over business will just send business (and its capital) away faster.
We need to become more business friendly, not less.
We need more capital here, not less.
Having said that, I agree that the federal income tax is a MAJOR impediment to fiscal health in this country, at ALL levels! This is, of course, exacerbated by out of control gov't spending and unconstitutional intrusion by the FEDERAL gov't into state and local issues, but that's another thread.....
Dear Ann Coulter:
Please write a book about these traitors who object to helping American job seekers.
Thank you,
American citizen
P.S. I vote and so does my family
I chose Stanley Tools as an example to avoid that rebuttal. The tools that Stanley makes in the US are taxed, the profits on tools manufactured here are taxed. What Stanley was trying to avoid was paying taxes on goods made overseas and sold overseas. A wrench made in China being sold to a worker in Germany resulted in the profit being taxed in the US. Multinationals like to make foreign subsidiaries - like a whole company in China that does nothing but manufacture tools with Stanley's name on it.
A fine example of that was when IBM was going a great job around the world, they had an office in South Africa. Due to the government giving endless grief to companies doing business in South Africa during the aparteid years, IBM spun off a business called SBM and the new company employees still could receive IBM training and benefits, but the new company didn't have a US nexus so they didn't have to fork over any portion of the profits to the US.
I am curious to find out these things.
#1: Offshoring a job reduces the tax revenue associated with that job. H1-B's, on the other hand, still pay U.S. taxes on their income. I do not wish to rehash old H1-B arguments, but their effect on tax revenues is minimal.
#2: I agree.
#3: You are correct, but you stop short. We should eliminate corporate income taxes (as well as personal, in my opinion) simply because the corporation doesn't "pay" the tax. The consumer does.
#4: I do not have a big problem with spending on defense that is disproportionate to other countries. But, that spending should be efficient, and should reflect the ultimate mission of protecting the people and interests of the U.S. Iraq, as far as I'm concerned, met that criteria. I was not, and am not, so sure about Kosovo, among others.
Agreed, you propose doing absolutely, positively "Nothing".
"In my point that you quote, I clearly invite anyone to start up the flat screen business mentioned in the article. No one is stopping anyone from doing so. The reason they won't? They can't compete, thanks to the costs associated with that particular venture in this country."
Again agreed, after all, how can anyone compete with employees that will work for $1.00 per hour or less, and with the comunist/anti_American government of that country subsidizing said industry.
"You propose an infusion of subsidies to prop up non-existent demand? That's brilliant. Who's fighting for the welfare of the U.S. here?
I propose giving Americans and America, a level playing field. Now if you are the type of person that supports sending jobs overseas to be done by $1.00 per hour slave laborers, instead of looking for Americans first even if it costs you more ,well I guess that speaks volumes all by itself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.