Posted on 08/25/2003 2:05:47 PM PDT by snopercod
CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- This year's highly publicized job losses in North Carolina manufacturing, including the Pillowtex bankruptcy, could mean trouble next year for President Bush in a region that was a stronghold in 2000.
Bush won more than 56 percent of the vote in both North Carolina and South Carolina in 2000. But his strong support of free trade has turned some against him in the South, where U.S. trade policies are blamed for the loss of jobs in textiles and other manufacturing sectors.
Andy Warlick, chief executive officer of Parkdale Mills in Gaston County, said he doubts he will repeat his 2000 vote for Bush next year.
"He made a lot of promises and he hasn't delivered on any of them," Warlick said. "I've had some firsthand experience of him sending down trade and commerce officials, but they're just photo ops. It's empty rhetoric."
Fred Reese, the president of Western N.C. Industries, an employers' association, said executives are beginning to raise their voices against Bush and are planning education and voter drives.
"We're seeing a new dynamic where the executives and employees are both beginning to see a real threat to their interests. You're going to see people who traditionally voted Republican switch over," Reese predicted.
The hard feelings were on display days after Pillowtex's July 30 bankruptcy filing, when Republican U.S. Rep. Robin Hayes walked into a Kannapolis auditorium to meet with former workers.
"Thanks for sending the jobs overseas, Robin!" shouted Brenda Miller, a longtime worker at the textile giant's Salisbury plant.
In December 2001 Hayes -- who is an heir to the Cannon family textile fortune -- cast the tie-breaking vote to give Bush the authority to negotiate "fast-track" trade agreements, trade treaties that Congress must vote up or down with no amendments.
At the time, Hayes said he won promises from the Bush administration that it would more strictly enforce existing trade agreements and pressure foreign countries to open their markets to U.S. textiles.
"Are we pleased with the way they responded? Absolutely," Hayes said. "Are we satisfied with where we are? Absolutely not."
Jobs in many industries have fled overseas since 1993, when Congress passed the Clinton-backed North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA. About half the textile and apparel jobs that existed in 1994 are gone.
Since Bush took office in January 2001, it is estimated North Carolina and South Carolina have lost more than 180,000 manufacturing jobs.
And even more textile jobs could be out the door once quotas on Chinese imports expire at the end of next year.
Republican U.S. Rep. Cass Ballenger voted for NAFTA and fast-track, and has seen his 10th District lose nearly 40,000 jobs, primarily in the textile and furniture industries.
"Certainly, there's a political cost to any controversial vote no matter which side you take," he said. "People are casting stones, but we're trying to pick them up and build something."
Democratic U.S. Sen. John Edwards voted against fast-track in 2002 after voting for an earlier version. In 2000 he voted for permanent normal trade relations with China.
Recently, though, while campaigning for the Democratic presidential nomination, Edwards has attacked Bush's trade policies and called for fairer trade measures.
Robert Neal, vice president of the local chapter of the Pillowtex workers' union, said Hayes has worked to try to ease the impact of job losses in his district.
"Though he (Hayes) voted for fast-track, he is really concerned about the workers and their conditions in the state of North Carolina," Neal said.
Not everyone feels that way.
Reese is organizing 1,500 manufacturing companies across North Carolina in an effort to leverage what he calls a new voting bloc.
In South Carolina, voter drives are planned for the first time at Milliken & Co., which has about 30 plants in the state. Mount Vernon Mills of Greenville, S.C., is forming a political action committee.
The company's president Roger Chastain, a one-time Bush voter, doesn't expect to support the president or Jim DeMint, a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Ernest Hollings.
"We're basically liquidating our whole middle class, polarizing people on the two extremes, have and have-nots," Chastain said of the manufacturing job losses. "We'll be a Third World country."
If they wish to continue shooting themselves in the foot, that's their business. I'm not in the business of saving others from their own stupidity. I gave up on that years ago.
Have you addressed once about the build-up in the Chinese military that we are helping to fund?
Ohmygosh...they're actually teaching some more of their troops to ride extremely vulnerable cargo aircraft into a combat zone.
Have you noticed that no one's done anything larger than a full brigade drop in the post-WW2 era--and that no one's done ANY major drop in anything less than the most permissive air defense environment--namely, NO air defense whatsoever?
Hell, the 173rd had to jump into the friendly part of Iraq. They sure as hell weren't going to send cargo planes where they could get shot at.
Again...I'm not going to bother rescuing the ChiComs from their own stupidity. Hell...I'm not even going to try to rescue you from your own stupidity.
Good luck trying to defeat Bush in 2004. You will lose.
Your fellow Brigadiers.
Lie down with dogs, and others will assume that you've gotten up with fleas. Tango Sierra.
Isn't it amazing that these people that hate the ChiComs so much are so concerned about helping them fix their bad economic policies?
Beautiful. I am all in favor of that. You guys though seem to be opposed to us pressuring the other nations to remove their barriers to our goods. Why is that? Seriously. It baffles me. Is it perhaps because you feel it is moot? Even with lowered tarriffs, what are Indian Engineers making $6,000 a year going to buy anyways? What gives. You all don't bend though. We must do everything to make ourselves more like India. India doesn't have to do anything. Keep the tarriffs, employ children, dump toxic waste into the rivers... do whatever you want. America should change to be more like them.
Point blank, and I will repeat it continuously until you guys answer. Do you believe american taxpayers should insure businesses that move their operation to China, in case the Chinese ever see it? Do you believe that they should get a tax deduction for the expenses occured by tearing down a plant, shipping old machines, and buying new ones for their factories overseas.
Simple questions. Not complicated.
That's Mad Dawgg, (two G's) old lady and, I speak from experience. I voted for Ross in '92 to send a message and I gota bigger one in return.
Now I make my voice heard in the primaries, but no longer waste my vote in the Election!
I can say it...especially when people equate pro-globalism with pro-Americanism...thats typical neo-con dribble, unless you're one of the "I've got mine" strain of neo-cons.
Spare me.
Are you joking? This is EXACTLY what the WTO is setup to do. You know... the WTO? That NWO/UFO/PROMIS/GATT/CIA/UN/KingofLichtenstein/Illuminati-loving spy agency?
Truly you are not that dense are you? Read the text in italics in your post (#826) and then think a few minutes.
If you are still have trouble then let me know, I can type it again, only slower this time so your finger can keep up!
I will go check the news headlines. I don't want to miss the announcement of them doing something in our favor. It should be happening today surely don't you think?
P.S. if you had a mote worth of decency, you would change that tagline. But you don't. Carry on.
This is one of the places they are wrong.
In determining the "optimal" state that the consumer can enjoy, one uses tools of multivariable calculus to reach a point where "equilibrium" is reached. At that point, the marginal utility of good "x" divided by the price of good "x" is equal to the marginal utility of good "y" over the price of that good. (I have not done the mathematical work on this page for obvious reasons.)
For the sake of discussion I will presume this is an accurate stating of the formula. In other words unless I take the time and trouble to verify your formula I can not be expected to verifiy its accuracy and teh derivation of it.
The problem here is that this "solution" is nonsense. Utility (or consumer satisfaction) cannot be measured in cardinal terms. There is no way to take a cardinal measure of someone's satisfaction. I can say that I like chocolate more than vanilla, but I cannot put that preference in cardinal numbers. An attempt to do so is nothing short of an exercise in fraud.
If the mathematical construct explains teh reaslity observed the the mathematical contruct must be the benefit of the doubt if it consistently predicts future behavior in agiven set of circumstances then taht may be considered supprt for teh construct If it explains all observations and predicts without fail then that means the theory is proven as an explanation for the phenominae. That is the logical basis for economics as a science. If it is not a science and just a philosophy or religion then why should the USA adopt your philosophy when it is contrary to our Constitution? Further it is contrary to the liberty defined in the Constitution as the USA is a palce where liberty may be exercised behind Constitutionally authorized duties and imposts.
As stated I have read von Mises and Rothbard I do not agree with all they wroyte for such is an act of faith and I do not hav ethat much faith in any mere human. If you are stating that faith in these men should be established as a basis for American policy I would again refer you to teh Constitution.
And India couldn't have raised its tariffs without the WTO? I love you guys who think the WTO is some ultimate, interantional superagency run by secret Merchants but then when it isn't even strong enough to do what you want all of the sudden it's some pansy group of Turd World lovers with no balls. It is so nice to know this country is still capitalist and not run by people that think like you.
Reality: it works, but only if you preload the equations with enough bullcrap to make the desired results come out.
It has zero predictive power; it only works in hindsight.
Yee haw, Cletus.
I quite comprehend the statement and I reject the so called understanding as religous in nature and not economic. It has to to do with teh fundamental view of humanity which while a good subkect for a philosophical debate the view expressed is not the basis for our Constitution and the antithesis of science.
Now that you share tehir understanding as your own understanding is as I say your right but by promulgating it as a rational basis for policy you are using religion as your argument for policy and trying to force it on a majority who do not agree with it.
Can you show me a 500-page regression analysis of this belief of yours that "bullcrap" is a bad thing?
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.