Barack Obama will bring world class jobs

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Allowing industry to go overseas too much without regulation can be equally as dangerous though...just in a different way. This is yet another difficult equation that requires a delicate balance that must constantly be analyzed so that proper small adjustments can be made on a regular basis. It is anything but easy, but as it stands I believe we have let far too many jobs go overseas.

It is mending itself very slowly on its own in some cases. For example, it is starting to cost a lot more money to purchase software development and tech support over in India and China because they have realized that many companies over here in America have developed business plans which rely heavily on the foreign labor. That transformed them from a cheap alternative into a necessary alternative. They are now in demand. So what is happening as a result? Well, they are asking for more money and a lot of it. They know what software developers and tech support employees over here in America make and they are starting to ask for similar wages.

Now, that is great and wonderful news but it is simply not the case in many other industries and it most certainly is not changing anywhere near as fast as we currently need it to change. I believe that the government should carefully develop progressive plans to bring results faster. I also believe that Obama has some good ideas to make this happen which I provided some details about in previous posts.

This is actually why I think the gov't shouldn't interfere. As overseas companies raise their prices, the jobs will naturally return to the US as the economy continues to strive for efficiency. No bureaucracy can react quickly and efficiently to everchanging market conditions. If they jobs go overseas naturally (meaning, don't provide actual incentives to move them overseas), let them. When China and India jack up prices, let them come back (and they are as we speak).

I partially agree with you. I think that what we do should be case specific rather than universal. It does not always have to be direct regulation either although in some cases that may be for the best at least temporarily. My final paragraph in that post pretty much explains why. I think that with the right people running the show we can both walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

Obama leans much towards providing incentives through government investment rather than regulation on this one. I agree with him.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Allowing industry to go overseas too much without regulation can be equally as dangerous though...just in a different way. This is yet another difficult equation that requires a delicate balance that must constantly be analyzed so that proper small adjustments can be made on a regular basis. It is anything but easy, but as it stands I believe we have let far too many jobs go overseas.

It is mending itself very slowly on its own in some cases. For example, it is starting to cost a lot more money to purchase software development and tech support over in India and China because they have realized that many companies over here in America have developed business plans which rely heavily on the foreign labor. That transformed them from a cheap alternative into a necessary alternative. They are now in demand. So what is happening as a result? Well, they are asking for more money and a lot of it. They know what software developers and tech support employees over here in America make and they are starting to ask for similar wages.

Now, that is great and wonderful news but it is simply not the case in many other industries and it most certainly is not changing anywhere near as fast as we currently need it to change. I believe that the government should carefully develop progressive plans to bring results faster. I also believe that Obama has some good ideas to make this happen which I provided some details about in previous posts.

This is actually why I think the gov't shouldn't interfere. As overseas companies raise their prices, the jobs will naturally return to the US as the economy continues to strive for efficiency. No bureaucracy can react quickly and efficiently to everchanging market conditions. If they jobs go overseas naturally (meaning, don't provide actual incentives to move them overseas), let them. When China and India jack up prices, let them come back (and they are as we speak).

I partially agree with you. I think that what we do should be case specific rather than universal. It does not always have to be direct regulation either although in some cases that may be for the best at least temporarily. My final paragraph in that post pretty much explains why. I think that with the right people running the show we can both walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

This is i think is the major difference between Republicans and democrats. Republicans think government is incompetent. Democrats think that government can be made competent.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I partially agree with you. I think that what we do should be case specific rather than universal. It does not always have to be direct regulation either although in some cases that may be for the best at least temporarily. My final paragraph in that post pretty much explains why. I think that with the right people running the show we can both walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

This is i think is the major difference between Republicans and democrats. Republicans think government is incompetent. Democrats think that government can be made competent.

With the right people in power making the right decisions, government is competent just like any business or organized group where the right people in power are making the right decisions. I agree with your assertion though. It is also in part why I am voting Dem this election. It doesn't make sense for me to vote for a presidential candidate that sits in the seat of the highest power in government if he represents a party which doesn't believe in government.


Also, I edited that last post that you quoted just so you know.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Allowing industry to go overseas too much without regulation can be equally as dangerous though...just in a different way. This is yet another difficult equation that requires a delicate balance that must constantly be analyzed so that proper small adjustments can be made on a regular basis. It is anything but easy, but as it stands I believe we have let far too many jobs go overseas.

It is mending itself very slowly on its own in some cases. For example, it is starting to cost a lot more money to purchase software development and tech support over in India and China because they have realized that many companies over here in America have developed business plans which rely heavily on the foreign labor. That transformed them from a cheap alternative into a necessary alternative. They are now in demand. So what is happening as a result? Well, they are asking for more money and a lot of it. They know what software developers and tech support employees over here in America make and they are starting to ask for similar wages.

Now, that is great and wonderful news but it is simply not the case in many other industries and it most certainly is not changing anywhere near as fast as we currently need it to change. I believe that the government should carefully develop progressive plans to bring results faster. I also believe that Obama has some good ideas to make this happen which I provided some details about in previous posts.

This is actually why I think the gov't shouldn't interfere. As overseas companies raise their prices, the jobs will naturally return to the US as the economy continues to strive for efficiency. No bureaucracy can react quickly and efficiently to everchanging market conditions. If they jobs go overseas naturally (meaning, don't provide actual incentives to move them overseas), let them. When China and India jack up prices, let them come back (and they are as we speak).

I partially agree with you. I think that what we do should be case specific rather than universal. It does not always have to be direct regulation either although in some cases that may be for the best at least temporarily. My final paragraph in that post pretty much explains why. I think that with the right people running the show we can both walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

This is i think is the major difference between Republicans and democrats. Republicans think government is incompetent. Democrats think that government can be made competent.

More specifically, I think the difference is Republicans (true Republicans) don't think that a system that depends on "the right people" is a viable system.

Central planning has failed time and time again. Not because the wrong people were in charge, but because it's not a feasible task.

Frankly, John Stossel's "ice salesman" analogy (on 20/20 a week and a half ago) was perfect. If the government had protected the job of the ice salesman, we would all be deprived of the advancements in refrigeration technology. Overseas vs. domestic isn't that different. As a software developer, when I saw work start going overseas, I did two things: I went back to school to broaden my skills, and I made sure I was the best software developer you could find. Now, I'm obviously not "the best", but I've elevated myself to the point where, when a contract ends, I get a line outside my door. Now, I can't be complacent and depend on that always being the case, so if that fails because I can't compete with overseas rates, I'll teach Mathematics or Economics. When companies realize they can't get the same quality out of overseas firms and as those firms raise their prices, I'll find work as a software developer more easily again. I'll charge a higher price, too, because companies will recognize my value and quality over what overseas firms can provide.

People need to be willing to adapt. It's downright scary, don't get me wrong, but you can't resign yourself to pressing steel for the next 50 years.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
More specifically, I think the difference is Republicans (true Republicans) don't think that a system that depends on "the right people" is a viable system.

Central planning has failed time and time again. Not because the wrong people were in charge, but because it's not a feasible task.

Frankly, John Stossel's "ice salesman" analogy (on 20/20 a week and a half ago) was perfect. If the government had protected the job of the ice salesman, we would all be deprived of the advancements in refrigeration technology. Overseas vs. domestic isn't that different. As a software developer, when I saw work start going overseas, I did two things: I went back to school to broaden my skills, and I made sure I was the best software developer you could find. Now, I'm obviously not "the best", but I've elevated myself to the point where, when a contract ends, I get a line outside my door. Now, I can't be complacent and depend on that always being the case, so if that fails because I can't compete with overseas rates, I'll teach Mathematics or Economics. When companies realize they can't get the same quality out of overseas firms and as those firms raise their prices, I'll find work as a software developer more easily again. I'll charge a higher price, too, because companies will recognize my value and quality over what overseas firms can provide.

People need to be willing to adapt. It's downright scary, don't get me wrong, but you can't resign yourself to pressing steel for the next 50 years.

I disagree with the central planning thing. It is most certainly because of the wrong people. The people are the only thing that effects it whether it be positive or negative. The exact same thing can be said about free enterprise. If it fails, which it does constantly, it is solely because of the wrong people making the wrong decision.

However, I do agree with the general idea you proposed about adapting. That same idea needs to be applied to all things including the free market of capitalism and the government. They need to constantly be adapting with each other.

 

[TheDoc9]

Originally posted by: Xavier434


Here is a small taste of how he plans to do it. Keep in mind that this is by no means the entire picture. He wants to invest a lot of money in things like clean coal so that they grow and create more jobs. He also wants to invest money in programs to train the kinds people that have few marketable skills or simply want a change of pace in their career to be able to work at these kinds of jobs. Think of it like vocational schools/programs.

Things like that could also potentially get a lot of people that are struggling to get by with their low wages to be able to get a job that pays well and allows them to move up in life. That can help provide opportunities to get people off of social services or if they are not on any then help them reduce their debt so that they can provide more opportunities for their kids to get a higher education and succeed beyond their parents. It can also reduce our dependency on foreign sources of energy and fuel.


I realize the speculation. I realize the lack of confidence a lot of people have. However, what we are doing now is not working. It is time to try something different and this sounds like it could work.

This list really is wishful thinking, especially getting people off of social services which will NEVER happen.

Everyone I've ever met on these services, that would be hundreds, dozens I know personally as I grew up in a small poor town, none of these people has any intention of getting off the juice. In fact, they're often looking for ways to get more.

Educating these parents and the public in general on psychology and teaching people goal setting and an achievement mindset might be the only thing that works for anyone.

Creating more vocational schools and programs would only be treating the symptom of deeper issues.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I partially agree with you. I think that what we do should be case specific rather than universal. It does not always have to be direct regulation either although in some cases that may be for the best at least temporarily. My final paragraph in that post pretty much explains why. I think that with the right people running the show we can both walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

This is i think is the major difference between Republicans and democrats. Republicans think government is incompetent. Democrats think that government can be made competent.

With the right people in power making the right decisions, government is competent just like any business or organized group where the right people in power are making the right decisions. I agree with your assertion though. It is also in part why I am voting Dem this election. It doesn't make sense for me to vote for a presidential candidate that sits in the seat of the highest power in government if he represents a party which doesn't believe in government.


Also, I edited that last post that you quoted just so you know.

That is rather naive to believe the above. Can you name a time where the govt was run wonderfully?

 

[Vic]

Because promising jobs is a campaign platform unique to Obama... :roll:

McCain must think he's the Messiah too!

John McCain has a comprehensive economic plan that will create millions of good American jobs, ensure our nation's energy security, get the government's budget and spending practices in order, and bring relief to American consumers. Read each of the sections below to learn how the McCain Economic Plan will help bring reform, prosperity and peace to America.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Vic
Because promising jobs is a campaign platform unique to Obama... :roll:

http://www.johnmccain.com/issues/jobsforAmerica/

John McCain has a comprehensive economic plan that will create millions of good American jobs, ensure our nation's energy security, get the government's budget and spending practices in order, and bring relief to American consumers. Read each of the sections below to learn how the McCain Economic Plan will help bring reform, prosperity and peace to America.

Is McCain winning suddenly?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Is McCain winning suddenly?

That justifies a hypocritical/one-sided judgment of the candidates' positions/promises?

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Xavier434

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Xavier434
I partially agree with you. I think that what we do should be case specific rather than universal. It does not always have to be direct regulation either although in some cases that may be for the best at least temporarily. My final paragraph in that post pretty much explains why. I think that with the right people running the show we can both walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.

This is i think is the major difference between Republicans and democrats. Republicans think government is incompetent. Democrats think that government can be made competent.

With the right people in power making the right decisions, government is competent just like any business or organized group where the right people in power are making the right decisions. I agree with your assertion though. It is also in part why I am voting Dem this election. It doesn't make sense for me to vote for a presidential candidate that sits in the seat of the highest power in government if he represents a party which doesn't believe in government.


Also, I edited that last post that you quoted just so you know.

That is rather naive to believe the above. Can you name a time where the govt was run wonderfully?

Words like "wonderfully", "competent", and the like are all completely subjective. There really is no point in discussing this. I could name a period that I thought things were working decently well and you will only come back to me with a gazillion reasons as to why you think it sucked. What's the point?

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Is McCain winning suddenly?

That justifies a hypocritical/one-sided judgment of the candidates' positions/promises?

Well, from my own personal standpoint, I reluctantly voted for Obama and it appears he's going to be elected. On that note, as I've said before, I'm far more interested in him at this point than I am in John McCain.

The time for defending one candidate or another in a knee-jerk election-period response has passed. John McCain is a distant, irrelevant memory at this point.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Is McCain winning suddenly?

That justifies a hypocritical/one-sided judgment of the candidates' positions/promises?

Well, from my own personal standpoint, I reluctantly voted for Obama and it appears he's going to be elected. On that note, as I've said before, I'm far more interested in him at this point than I am in John McCain.

The time for defending one candidate or another in a knee-jerk election-period response has passed. John McCain is a distant, irrelevant memory at this point.

Not for another week he isn't. This ain't over 'til the fat lady sings.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: TheDoc9

Originally posted by: Xavier434


Here is a small taste of how he plans to do it. Keep in mind that this is by no means the entire picture. He wants to invest a lot of money in things like clean coal so that they grow and create more jobs. He also wants to invest money in programs to train the kinds people that have few marketable skills or simply want a change of pace in their career to be able to work at these kinds of jobs. Think of it like vocational schools/programs.

Things like that could also potentially get a lot of people that are struggling to get by with their low wages to be able to get a job that pays well and allows them to move up in life. That can help provide opportunities to get people off of social services or if they are not on any then help them reduce their debt so that they can provide more opportunities for their kids to get a higher education and succeed beyond their parents. It can also reduce our dependency on foreign sources of energy and fuel.


I realize the speculation. I realize the lack of confidence a lot of people have. However, what we are doing now is not working. It is time to try something different and this sounds like it could work.

This list really is wishful thinking, especially getting people off of social services which will NEVER happen.

Everyone I've ever met on these services, that would be hundreds, dozens I know personally as I grew up in a small poor town, none of these people has any intention of getting off the juice. In fact, they're often looking for ways to get more.

Educating these parents and the public in general on psychology and teaching people goal setting and an achievement mindset might be the only thing that works for anyone.

Creating more vocational schools and programs would only be treating the symptom of deeper issues.

"You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink."

Yes, I know. However, with enough opportunities in place it could allow us to start implementing ways to be a little more aggressive about welfare restrictions. If you got an awesome system of vocational schools and jobs available for those that attend them then you are on the right track.

We have to do something man. We can't stay on this beaten track forever. Providing incentives and investments for the right industries such as clean coal to flourish is a damn good start.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: jbourne77
Is McCain winning suddenly?

That justifies a hypocritical/one-sided judgment of the candidates' positions/promises?

Is that all you have? Who cares what McCain says, Obama is obviously going to win this one. The old Vic would probably have criticized Obama for this deceitful ad. If you can't bear to criticize Obama without mentioning McCain then by all means, criticize them both for making this kind of claim.

So far we have "it's just an empty campaign promise", "It's just his vision", and "but but McCain" from the Obama supporters. I didn't expect that from Vic, but I certainly expected it from Red Dawn and Finger. Xavier434 is the only Democrat/liberal that has actually put some thought into this and tried to explain it, thank you for that. Even though I disagree with you about this, you have earned my respect. :thumbsup:

 

[Vic]

The "old Vic" would have asserted the same "it's coming from both sides" that today's Vic does. I have NEVER been one to criticize one side for something the other side is equally guilty of. When the election is over next week, then there will be only one side to criticize. Not before then.

And FFS, promising jobs on the campaign trail is a tradition as American as apple pie, and probably dates even further back.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Vic
The "old Vic" would have asserted the same "it's coming from both sides" that today's Vic does. I have NEVER been one to criticize one side for something the other side is equally guilty of. When the election is over next week, then there will be only one side to criticize. Not before then.

And FFS, promising jobs on the campaign trail is a tradition as American as apple pie, and probably dates even further back.

 

[Vic]

I'm confused at your confusion.

 

[Red Dawn]

Scratches head. What exactly does he mean by "World Class Job"?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Scratches head. What exactly does he mean by "World Class Job"?

our hookers are better than anyone else's?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Scratches head. What exactly does he mean by "World Class Job"?

our hookers are better than anyone else's?

It all depends on what part of the world you are from. A world class job in China isn't all that great.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Scratches head. What exactly does he mean by "World Class Job"?

our hookers are better than anyone else's?

You obviously haven't done a lot of international travel.

 

[Stuxnet]

Originally posted by: Vic
I'm confused at your confusion.

I'm confused by your unnecessary deflection. It's not like admitting to any of Obama's flaws on AT is going to swing the election in McCain's favor. It's ok to be objective again.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Scratches head. What exactly does he mean by "World Class Job"?

our hookers are better than anyone else's?

You obviously haven't done a lot of international travel.

Clearly this needs to change. Think of all the jobs we can create with it!

 

[NoStateofMind]

When I hear Obama claiming "world class jobs" I'm thinking Military/Peace corps. Not something most of us would want IMO.