Posted on 02/20/2016 12:39:01 PM PST by SatinDoll
Well then, you must like losing your job to someone in Mexico who will make $3/hour.
Union leaders at an air conditioner factory in Indianapolis threatened with losing 1,400 jobs to Mexico said on Tuesday the plants owner expects to pay Mexican workers $3 an hour compared to an average of more than $20 an hour for the U.S. workers.
"We have not given up the fight yet," said Chuck Jones, president of the United Steelworkers union local that represents workers at the Carrier Corp plant. "But Carrier has pretty well indicated that the wage differential is too great and there is not much we can do."
A spokeswoman for Carrier, a unit of United Technologies Corp (UTX.N), said the company pays a "competitive wage" based on local conditions and could not discuss pay levels.
So what do you do about this?
Without wage and environmental parity tariffs you do nothing about it, because you can't.
This is a national policy issue. China protects its industries with tariffs and local-content rules that make it effectively impossible for firms to do the same thing to them. But the United States, in return, gives China, Mexico and other nations open access to goods and services produced there even when their "advantage" comes from paying people $3/hour or having free rein to pollute the land, water and air instead of having to dispose of their toxic wastes cleanly and safely.
What drives this disparity and wage need? Let us remember that $3/hour is in fact roughly 50% more than the minimum wage was when I started working. In other words, not a terrible wage. Now it's less than half of the minimum wage.
In the intervening years the federal government went from $600 billion in outstanding marketable debt to $14 trillion, an increase of 23 times.
Every dollar of deficit spending debases the currency every time, dollar-for-dollar. It thus makes prices go up; this is arithmetic, not politics, and cannot be prevented.
At the same time non-financial businesses increased their debt (that is, circulating "moneyness") by a factor of approximately 10 times, which also debased the currency and households were goaded into borrowing almost 12 times the amount of money, which in turn also debased the currency as well.
But while corporations were goaded by government policies that "encouraged" such borrowing, as were households (e.g. mortgage interest tax deductions, etc) the worst offender by far was the Federal Government.
Anyone and everyone complaining about Carrier and others moving jobs to Mexico who also supports or allows any form of government deficit spending, no matter what the funds are spent on, needs to STFU.
Your incessant screaming for more-more-more-more that is not paid for via current taxes is why that pay disparity exists, in part, and is a large part of why those jobs have and are leaving.
YOU are destroying this nation's job base.
Is the market the measure of success? If so, why would a person start a winery, paint paintings, build homes, etc? Why would a person race cars or go to the moon when you can just sit back and watch your money fluxuate from one set of zeros to more zeros while sitting on a yacht somewhere with other idle rich.
You do it because you’re creative, you do it because it’s hard, you do it because it’s your calling. I suppose there’s a place for fund managers in this world...but they don’t create tangible items of beauty and value..instead they bet on other people’s creations.
It’s virtually the same policy Mr. Trump is supporting...makes your statement somewhat ironic...
neat pic!
Indeed, but Trump himself presents his wealth as the great proof of his own success. Lagging the economy as a whole, measured by the valuation of a broad stock index, makes that view a bit hollow.
He says he created a great company...and he did. He says he has wonderful assets...and he does. He says he has a lot of money....and he does.
Someone who made billions while doing something he loves isn’t a hollow a success....at least not to me.
I have a book called Accidental Empires that is about the Steve Jobs, Bill Gates and others of that era - all those tech people back in the late 70s and early 80s. With the possible exception of Gates it wasn’t about the money - it was about creating something that interested them.
>Warhol School of Business
hhehe..
Yeah, it should have been the Wharton School of Business. How pathetic!
Maher: Dem Position On Immigration Has Morphed Into “You Get Across That River, You’re Here To Stay”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3411354/posts
Note: this topic is from . Thanks SatinDoll.
Well then, you must like losing your job to someone in Mexico who will make $3/hour... China protects its industries with tariffs and local-content rules that make it effectively impossible for firms to do the same thing to them. But the United States, in return, gives China, Mexico and other nations open access to goods and services produced there even when their "advantage" comes from paying people $3/hour or having free rein to pollute the land, water and air instead of having to dispose of their toxic wastes cleanly and safely... $3/hour is in fact roughly 50% more than the minimum wage was when I started working. In other words, not a terrible wage. Now it's less than half of the minimum wage.
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.