LET'S TALK ABOUT "YOUR" JOBS

Nealz Nuze ^ | Wednesday, February 18, 2004 | Neal Boortz

[beaureguard]

Jobs .. and the economy. Those seem to be the issues that are driving many, if not most, of those who are supporting the Kerry candidacy.

First of all ... I'm going to repeat this simply because it makes the whiners so unbelievably angry. Listen up. They're not your jobs! The jobs belong to the employers .. not to you! You have job skills and, presumably, a willingness to work. Your task in a free economy is to get out there and find some employer with a job who needs your skills ... and strike a deal.

If you do not have the particular set of job skills that an employer needs, of if you have priced your labor out of the marketplace, guess what? It's not the employer's fault. The fault lies with you. Either develop a new set of job skills that are actually in demand, or adjust your pricing. The employer knows what he's looking for you. If you're not it .. it's your problem, not his.

Now ... you say you're going to vote for a Democrat this year because of jobs? You mean to tell me that you're going to vote against George Bush this year because you don't have a set of job skills that are in demand in our free marketplace? Yeah .. that makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

Tell me. Just what do you want the president to do? You information technology people out there .. just what are you demanding? Do you want companies to stop outsourcing IT jobs to India? OK ... tell me how to do that. These companies aren't shipping parts overseas and completed products back. All they do is ship information overseas by phone lines or the Internet. Then that information is modified and shipped back the same way. What do you want the government .. the president to do? Do you want some federal law that prohibits companies from transmitting information overseas by the Internet, having that information transformed or modified, and then shipped back? And tell me just how do you enforce that law? Does that law then apply to you also if you seek information from a company that is located overseas, thus depriving a domestic company of your business?

Ditto for manufacturing. I've already told you the story about the California company that makes computer mouses. (computer mice?) This company ships the components to China. The mouse is assembled in China and shipped back, then sold for around $40. Why? Because the assembly is cheaper in China than it would be in the US. So, you say you want the president to force this company to have that mouse assembled in the US? Fine .. then the price for the mouse goes up to about $70 a pop and sales drop. As the sales drop the jobs of the people in this country who manufacture the components for that mouse go away. Then the 100 marketing jobs this company supports in California also go away. You see, perhaps you can succeed in forcing this company to assemble these mouses in the US, but there just isn't any way you can force the American consumer to pay 80% more for the "made in America" version.

As Bruce Bartlett says in an article listed in my reading assignments, "No nation has ever gotten rich by forcing its citizens to pay more for domestic goods and services that could have been procured more cheaply abroad."

What we are seeing here is a demonstration of the "government owes me" mentality of far too many Americans. Every time you arrive at a speed bump in your life's journey you start screaming to the government for help. Sure, the speed bump is going to slow you down a bit ... but just keep moving forward and things inevitably pick up speed again. Americans are becoming helpless whiners. The more helpless you are, and the more you whine, the more likely it is you're going to vote for a Democrat. Democrats specialize in stroking the malcontent.

Congratulations, whiners. At a time when America if fighting World War IV, the war against Islamic terrorism ... you're going to vote for a candidate who wants to treat terrorism as a freaking law enforcement problem because you've made some pitiful jobs choices. Pitiful.

[Walkin Man]

My fear is that this will play out in such a way that we'll have President Kerry and a Rat House and Senate. Then the so-called free traders will get exactly what they don't want, oppressive government regulation, restrictive trade policies, higher taxes, and more bureaucracy. Which is a hell of a lot worse than anything anyone on FR has ever suggested.

Yup, it will probably happen. The perception is out there that President Bush not only doesn't care if my job is exported overseas, but he's damn glad about it and thinks its a good thing!

And perception is king at the voting booth.

The Republicans have a very short time to change that perception and so far they have done nothing but reinforce it IMHO.

I don't count the Presidents latest "I feel your pain" speech because he changed nothing at all that would actually impact the problem.

The time for words has passed.

[Steve_Seattle]

"I don’t care what your BS “free trade” theory is and neither do the people, many of whom were base republican voters, that are losing everything they had worked for, went to school for, sweated for, fought in wars for, because some poor sap in India is willing to do the job for starvation wages or a slave laborer in the workers paradise of Red China has a gun to his head held there by the communist government and Wal-Mart!!"

I recall talking to Dems in the 1990's who claimed that the economic boom was a direct result of Clintin signing NAFTA. So does free trade help or hurt the American economy? You talk as if America has become a wasteland of poverty and unemployment, but it looks to me pretty much the same that it did 20 years ago.

[RightWhale]

The socialist believes . . .

A good, basic standpoint. We free-enterprise capitalists don't want to hear about it, of course, it's so confusing.

For example of our logical consisency: We should reduce our dependence on imported oil. How do you like my new V-10 rig?

[Vermont Lt]

Think about this the next time you bitch about outsourcing call center (service and support) jobs:

Are you calling for something inane, like the balance of your checkbook? Is it after normal business hours? Could you have found the answer some other way? (on line for example?)

Are you calling for product support before you even read the directions? Could you have figured it out some other way--like picking up the instructions?

Are you one of those people that cannot wait to find out of their Retirement, Social Security, or SSI deposit has made it into the bank? Are you afraid they are going to forget you this month? They aren't. The money will be there--just as it always is....and your phone call ain't gonna make a difference.

Are you calling in response to an advertisement on the TV that you absolutely must have right now? Or could you go online or to Walmart and get the same thing?

You see, the service jobs that are going overseas did not exist ten years ago. Our laziness and impatience with getting stuff now has driven companies to provide this "ultra service." That drives up costs.

I worked for a small local bank. We never had folks answering the phone. Then we started to provide that service to take the pressures off our deposit operations folks. Then we grew to provide service after normal hours. Then we expanded to new areas and took over other banks.

What started with 12 people is now nearly 400. What started with normal operating hours 9-5 is a 24/7/365 operation. And you know what--our customer base stopped keeping track of their checks, debits and credits. They expect us to watch thier stuff for them. By the time I left the company, they were outsourding nearly 3,000 lame phone calls a day--with more to come.

We couldnt hire folks to do the work because the hours sucked. The pay and benefits were good, but no one wanted to start working weekends and nights.

The nice little bank that started out helping people turned into a cold bureaucracy. All because we thought customers needed to be able to reach out and touch us. I hear they are exploring sending calls to Canada--because they sound "like us."

It sucks--but it is our own damn fault. There is a collection of funny stories about the idiot customers that called in at www.thefunnycustomer.com They were collected by a guy that worked in the same business with me.


So, in the end--think before you call. Solve your own problems. Read the F'in directions.

[raybbr]

Ok, what's your solution? But before you propose your solution, here's what you're tinkering with: a country in which most people own their own hones, own one or more cars, a computer, washer and dryer, electrical appliances, indoor plumbing, access to health care, free public education, etc, and with unemployment generally half of what it is in the socialist economies you seem to be promoting. Remind me what it is you are trying to fix.

Actually, I am not trying to "fix" anything. I want America to stay the world's super-power both economically and militarily. Just the opposite is being proposed by free-traders. They want the rest of the world to compete with us on those levels. They claim by doing so we will become even better. There is no evidence of this. I say the rest of the world will catch us and eventually figure a way to defeat us. I believe that foreign governments are looking forward to the day when they can supplant us as the "greatest nation on earth".

If you dispute that then you must also dispute the claim the competition among companies is good. Governments are just like corporations. Their goal is to become the sole source of wealth in any given industry.

The future of America vis-a-vis world economic domination is what I am trying to preserve. The free traders are the ones trying to "fix" something.

[Steve_Seattle]

So you think the Dems are going to get the USA out of the WTO and repeal NAFTA and all those other trade agreements? NO WAY IN HELL. This outsourcing issue has come to the fore now as a propaganda tool against Republicans, but the Dems are every bit as committed to free trade as the Republicans.

[shempy]

States Enemy? Sounds more like you are a good friend of the state. You seem to advocate bringing a larger chunk of private production under state controls and restrictions. I don't think the state would put you in the enemy category.

[going hot]

but it looks to me pretty much the same that it did 20 years

Not only that, but I remember the same lamentations about jobs being lost overseas and the economy will be in ruination blah blah if the repubs gain the presidency mouthed by carter 24 years ago and Mondale 20 years ago. Seems they were slightly off.

[hedgetrimmer]

but the Dems are every bit as committed to free trade as the Republicans.

Read "global government".

[Poohbah]

And who should the corporations belong to?

Why, to THE PEOPLE, of course. To ensure that the will of THE PEOPLE is reflected in corporate decisions, the revolutionary vanguards will act on their behalf...

BTW, that was sarcasm...

[StatesEnemy]

You seem to advocate bringing a larger chunk of private production under state controls and restrictions

Not at all.

I'm just not for allowing international corporatists to bleed this country dry.

[Dawgreg]

Thanks for posting this beaureguard and thank God for a man like Neil Boortz!

[navyblue]

The words "general welfare" are only relevant in that they describe the purpose for given Congress the power to pass laws restricted to the enumerations in Article I, Section 8.

Yes, and I think it also says something about providing for the common defense. I'll leave it to you to provide the cite.

We now have the most powerful military ever known. Please tell me after outsourcing all the jobs we can, importing guest workers for the jobs we cannot and eliminating the source of corporate and personal income taxes as a source of revenue, how we still will be able to support a military to defend our country?

Oh! I lost my head for a moment there. Of course. The U.N. will protect us all.

[vaudine]

Not this time. He has said that although he disagrees with Bush on many things, this time he is voting for Bush because of the importance of the War on Terrorism and Bush's leadership abilities in this war.

vaudine

[alrea]

home run record

[A. Pole]

And who should the corporations belong to? Why, to THE PEOPLE, of course.

Sarcasm aside. What about restoring the personal responsibilty? Let owners and CEOs be personally liable without hiding behind the corporate disguise. And let us bring debtor prison back too, the corporate types wanted to tighten the bankruptcy rules for the regular people, why not to have them their own medicine?

[Steve_Seattle]

You still haven't proposed an alternative, which I assume is some form of protectionism. But keep in mind that government can't force a bankrupt company to stay in business. Take Boeing versus Airbus. Not many years ago, Boeing was the undisputed leader in commercial aviation; now they are in big trouble. Now, one element in a business is having good ideas, a product that people want to buy. Another element is cost - what are the trade-offs between cost and quality? So what if - to SURVIVE the competition from Airbus - Boeing needs to outsource a lot of jobs to other countries? What if that is the only way for them to price their airplanes competitively? Would you prevent them from doing that - drive them out of business - just so you could make a moral statement about "the American Way"? A corporation is like a person - it wants to survive, anyway it can. If you were to propose for people what you seem to propose for corporations, no person would ever be allowed to move to another city to find a better job; in fact, no person would ever be allowed to quit a job, because that would presumably harm the employer. Corporations, like employees, are always looking for a better deal, and will take it when they can. Not to do so is economic suicide, and that is what these corporate critics are demanding - corporate suicide.

[A. Pole]

how we still will be able to support a military to defend our country?

Like the late ancient Rome did - by hiring the foreigners and extracting the tribute.

[kenth]

Yep. We went from manufacturing to service. If service leaves, what's left?

We're trying to play free trade with people who don't follow the rules, which includes both the other countries and Congress. We need to ease our taxation and regulation while leaning on the other countries to get them to open up their markets.

[A. Pole]

A corporation is like a person - it wants to survive, anyway it can.

Corporation is not a man. The man is behind the curtain.