• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

Carrier to relocate 1,400 Indianapolis jobs to Mexico

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
6,048
4,106
136
LOL, nickqt is on the early stages of sitting on his ass and expecting others to feed him.

-John
LOL, you're in the late stage of spitting out irrelevant, delirious bullshit while the rest of us sit in awe at how fucking ridiculous the delusional reality you've surrounded yourself with is, in comparison to reality, bigot.
 

disappoint

Lifer
Dec 7, 2009
10,148
378
126
“Relocating our operations to a region where we have existing infrastructure and a strong supplier base will allow us to operate more cost effectively so that we can continue to produce high-quality HVAC products that are competitively positioned while continuing to meet customer needs.

“This decision is difficult and we recognize the impact on employees, their families and the community. We are committed to ensuring that our employees are treated respectfully and to working closely with their representatives throughout this transition.”
Translation: Despite knowing this will put U.S. workers out of work we want higher profits. Screw you America! LOL and in a few days you will forget we did this and buy our products anyway when our marketing team goes to work on your subconscious purchase decision making defective apparatus. HAHA.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,210
456
126
Basic Income should protect people from not only AI but also outsourcing. Outsourcing is both good and bad: Good that it gives us cheap goods, bad that it moves jobs overseas. If you have basic income, you shouldn't even care if jobs move out.

Also, basic income is going to take a shitload of time to get through congress, if at all. Most people don't even know what it is and in 6-7 years we will already see an upheaval in the transportation industry. We already have 18 wheelers that can be driven by itself. The transportation industry employs something like 4 million people, that's going to be far too many people to move into other professions.
So if you can't stop the corporate outsourcing rape start looking for corporate child support?

Trickle down didn't happen with jobs and wages and it most certainly won't happen with corporate profits trickling down to basic income (welfare by another name)

As for trucks driving themselves "Johnny cab" style that ain't happening anytime soon no matter how much smoke google and other companies like them are blowing up everyone's asses.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,964
666
126
So if you can't stop the corporate outsourcing rape start looking for corporate child support?

Trickle down didn't happen with jobs and wages and it most certainly won't happen with corporate profits trickling down to basic income (welfare by another name)

As for trucks driving themselves "Johnny cab" style that ain't happening anytime soon no matter how much smoke google and other companies like them are blowing up everyone's asses.
That's what the government is for: They would tax the corporations and/or the rich to fund basic income. Even extreme rightwingers like Hayek and Milton Friedman advocated this concept.

From what i've read the maximum we'll see driverless cabs is 10 years, but i've read it'll come shorter.
 

Zorkorist

Diamond Member
Apr 17, 2007
6,867
3
76
Yea, no.

The only thing Government should be doing is getting the hell out of the way.

-John
 

disappoint

Lifer
Dec 7, 2009
10,148
378
126
Yea, no.

The only thing Government should be doing is getting the hell out of the way.

-John
LOL Little do you realize the Govt., despite it's many flaws, is sometimes the only thing preventing the psychopaths/sociopaths from feasting on your laissez faire corpse and gobbling up your remains with a little glass of Chianti and some bread. Or jellybeans, pick your poison.

Speaking of poison...Remember the Tobacco industry? I was just reading about Project SCUM. Anytime a group of people get together and engage in an activity with the word Operation or Project in front of it watch out! Madness may follow.

Project SCUM was a plan proposed in 1995 by R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (RJR) to sell cigarettes to members of the "alternative lifestyle" areas of San Francisco, in particular the large number of gay people in the Castro and homeless people in the Tenderloin. The acronym "SCUM" stood for "subculture urban marketing." Perhaps recognizing the offensive nature of its label, the marketing plan was later renamed Project Sourdough.[1]
An anti-smoking campaign called Truth targeted R. J. Reynolds for Project SCUM, arguing that it not only showed the usual exploitative tobacco marketing techniques but added to them an explicit contempt or even hatred for the people it was trying to market its products to. SF Weekly reported:
"This is a hate crime, plain and simple," says Kathleen DeBold, who directs the Washington, D.C.-based Mautner Project for Lesbians With Cancer. "What else do you call it when a group thinks of gays and lesbians as 'scum,' and then targets us with something that kills?"
San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly, who represents the Tenderloin District, is equally upset. "It's racist, it's classist, it's oppressive. And it is really disheartening to hear. But I can't say that I am surprised. Low-income communities and people of color have always been derided and taken advantage of. Obviously, the tobacco companies feel like they can make money off other people's misery."[2]
...

Sauce: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_SCUM
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,876
460
126
if we just started import taxing US goods made overseas as we should this would quickly become a non issue as it would not be cheaper do it anymore
This is true. It's also how we used to finance our government, back before we had an income tax. Unfortunately our politicians have squandered our position of world's most desirable market in return for a small percentage of corporate profits.

We have removed all barriers against technology transfer and all import tariffs. All we have left to maintain a high income (relative to the rest of the world) is greater productivity, but it's difficult to beat the spread between shipping costs and relatively low labor costs and regulatory burden. As other nations' workers become more used to modern production means, being more productive will be ever more difficult for us.
 

desy

Diamond Member
Jan 13, 2000
5,276
52
91
Globalization means equalization, as poorer economies average up ours must average down. Its the Christian thing to do
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
I don't know why all the concern, they're just having Mexicans do jobs Americans won't do. What's the problem?
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,499
3,004
126
"Basic income" will only further squeeze manufacturing - why work if all your needs are being met...
At a basic income of $10,000 annual per adult, you could hire people for roughly $5 an hour and double their income. People will still work. It's really just a safety net to keep people from absolute destitution AND to maintain their contribution to consumption, which I may (mistakenly?) refer to as economic liquidity.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,210
456
126
That's what the government is for: They would tax the corporations and/or the rich to fund basic income. Even extreme rightwingers like Hayek and Milton Friedman advocated this concept.

From what i've read the maximum we'll see driverless cabs is 10 years, but i've read it'll come shorter.
The same corporate bought and paid for government is going to tax all these corporations or pretend to tax them by including drive thru loopholes for the corporations while pushing the burden once again to the struggling middle class who for the most part won't be able to use the loopholes?

An example would be mandating counties and local municipalities pick up more of the welfare burden who in turn raise sales and property taxes which affect the less than affluent people more than the rich.

As for driver less auto/trucks which means no human input local or remote except when inputting pickup and drop off locations, a lot of people believe it has to do with automation which it does not.

Automation works very well in a factory or hamburger machine where all the processes and the variables are known and accounted for.

Unfortunately that is the same philosophy that google is applying to their cars by 3d mapping the road in great detail in order to account for all the variables, which works well if it was some sort of closed system where nothing changes,

Throw in some rain, snow, detours, a low bridge not on the map, paper bag blowing across the road or confused squirrel that for no reason just stops in the middle, potholes, construction, etc. etc. and all their self driving cars fail miserably as opposed to a PROFESSIONAL truck driver (that everyone all of the sudden believes is an endangered species) who can easily compensate and make the necessary decisions to keep driving along.

As you can see automation is not the problem, it is the lack of these cars to be able to account for all the unknowns in driving that human drivers do daily and in many cases very easily,
the problem is the lack of artificial intelligence capable of replicating human driving in the real ever changing world not some predetermined 3d mapped course in bright sunny weather.

https://medium.com/@scobleizer/don-t-worry-uber-lyft-drivers-self-driving-cars-won-t-take-your-job-for-at-least-a-decade-3b8c58a7f102#.c3gis66wv
When I think of self driving cars I am not thinking of mere driver assistance features like pulling out of your garage, radar-assisted cruise control (all three of my Toyotas have that, by the way), keep in lane features, or parking features.

No, I am talking about the full monty: where a car can drive around town without any human inside AND without a steering wheel.


That’s what it will take to threaten the Uber driver’s livelihood. We are a LONG way from being able to buy that kind of car for less than $40,000, which is what it would take too. Some of the insiders say we’re 15 years away from such a car. Some say even more.


There are HUGE challenges to having such a car driving around that simply haven’t been solved yet. Here’s just some:

  1. Humans don’t like programming their cars. Heck, most humans don’t even like using Waze, which helps make your drive much nicer (by routing you around traffic accidents, warning you of objects in road, potholes, and stuff like that). My wife won’t even use cruise control and we have really amazing cruise control systems in our Toyotas.
  2. We have thousands of social rules when it comes to cars. Think about it, when you are in a crosswalk you look at the eyes of the driver coming toward you to know whether or not she/he will stop. That’s just one rule. There are many, many, other rules and we don’t yet have a car that communicates with other drivers, or pedestrians, in any real way.
  3. We don’t have sensors that work in all situations. Last February I drove in a heavy snowstorm where I could hardly discern where the lane was. Yes, I know, that was stupid of me to do, but sensors simply aren’t good enough to withstand those kinds of situations yet.
  4. Our current compute power isn’t good enough. In China recently my driver went through a crowd of hundreds of people. Our current systems can’t handle that kind of complexity right up close to the car. How did our driver handle it? By relying on social rules. Going slow, honking, and watching for people who weren’t paying attention. The people working on these technologies say that’s just too complex for our current systems.
  5. Maps aren’t good enough. Next month I’ll be headed to Seattle to see Here Maps (formerly Nokia/Navtek/Microsoft map team). They are building new maps specifically for self driving cars. Why aren’t current maps good enough? They aren’t accurate enough, they don’t have all the signage on them. They haven’t yet figured out where all the potholes are and aren’t updatable easily enough by sensors being driven around.
  6. People aren’t ready for these kinds of cars. We all say we are, but, really, we aren’t even close to the place where we’d trust our kids in one of these yet. Just trusting my Toyota’s radar-assisted cruise control took me a few hundred hours. No one has had the kind of time we need to get comfortable with these cars to the level where we’ll never need a steering wheel or human assistance. Not even Larry Page is that comfortable with them.
  7. Our laws aren’t ready for these cars. Heck, many states aren’t even allowing them to be tested (Virginia is one of the few states that’s supporting their development because they know that the highly-educated geeks that these things bring to the state are great for its economy).
  8. Other drivers aren’t ready for these cars. They are gonna do weird things, at first. Like drive too slowly, or stop in complex situations and wait, or stop for kids who act like they are gonna run in front of the car. Ford’s head of safety told me that 80% of people who get into accidents don’t apply full braking pressure. That won’t be true in a self driving car. So, it will probably stop in time to avoid an accident but YOU WON’T. Already Google’s self driving cars have been hit several times from behind due to this problem. We need to have a few years of them on the road to completely get used to having no humans inside.
  9. The insurance industry isn’t ready for this yet, either. Neither are the police. The cartoon in the New Yorker that made fun of the cop who asks “do you know why my car pulled your car over?” is funny, but it’s funny because it hits on the truth that tons of things haven’t been figured out when it comes to insurance and who is to blame when things go wrong.​
  10. Security. When I asked Mercedes “why don’t you allow over-the-air updates like Tesla does?” Their answer showed they are afraid of hackers. They said they just don’t want their brand to be dragged through the mud like Jeep’s was by hackers who get access to these systems. How are you going to get conservative car companies over that fear? Many millions of dollars worth of software engineering and testing. How do you get the public over that fear? Years on the road without an incident. Let’s be honest, my Toyota was broken into by a device built by a hacker. If car companies can’t even properly secure vehicles yet, do we really trust them to build a car that can drive around?
Put these, and other issues into the mix and you see that true self-driving cars won’t be here for many years. Oh, and even after they start arriving, it will be at least another 10 years before most of the cars on the road have these new features. Probably longer, especially in poorer economies.
Translation: Uber drivers? Your job is safe for now, but do start taking long-term steps to make sure you aren’t in that career a decade from now.
That all said, that doesn’t take anything away from the driver assistance features that many cars, like Tesla and Mercedes (and my Toyotas), are getting. Just don’t expect to see humans completely removed from the act of driving anytime soon.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
5,914
1,206
136
2-28-2016


Trump says he will tax Carrier 35% for every Air Conditioner they ship to the U.S.
Sounds good on paper, but what about all the other HVAC manufacturers that have already moved their production to Mexico? Are they going to be taxed too? If not, then it's either an empty promise or putting a single manufacturer at a significant disadvantage. If he's going to tax one, he better tax all the other ones as well.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,908
44
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally Posted by dmcowen674
2-28-2016

Trump says he will tax Carrier 35% for every Air Conditioner they ship to the U.S.


Sounds good on paper, but what about all the other HVAC manufacturers that have already moved their production to Mexico? Are they going to be taxed too? If not, then it's either an empty promise or putting a single manufacturer at a significant disadvantage. If he's going to tax one, he better tax all the other ones as well.
Yes, he said he would tax them all including Ford and Nabisco he mentioned as well.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,628
4
81
2-28-2016


Trump says he will tax Carrier 35% for every Air Conditioner they ship to the U.S.
Yes, but what is the next president going to do? Is she just going to open the doors wider and keep the jobs flowing outward?
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,935
140
106
No matter what blustery politicians tell you, there is only one thing that can change this trend. It's not tariffs, taxes or regulation, in fact it has nothing to do with government. The only thing that would make the corporation not send the jobs overseas is if consumers decide they won't buy the products anymore and instead decide to purchase products made in the US. That's it, there are no magic solutions.

I'll be putting in a new heating and cooling system over the next year, and Carrier will not be on my list of options.
But what if Carrier is 20% cheaper than the next product? Tough decision for me. "Everyone has a price."
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,935
140
106
I don't know why all the concern, they're just having Mexicans do jobs Americans won't do. What's the problem?
Not exactly true. You can pay Mexicans less than Indiana's minimum wage. It has to do with these companies not willing to pay minimum wage for that work.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,038
36
86
Not exactly true. You can pay Mexicans less than Indiana's minimum wage. It has to do with these companies not willing to pay minimum wage for that work.
Bah, not even a concern. We know from the pro-Illegal Invasion crowd that the illegals are simply doing jobs Americans won't do. Now Mexicans will be doing jobs Americans won't do here. Same difference. It literally is the same thing, except in this case we don't have the illegals kids we're paying for.
 

Subyman

Moderator <br> VC&G Forum
Mar 18, 2005
7,876
32
86
But what if Carrier is 20% cheaper than the next product? Tough decision for me. "Everyone has a price."
I just bought a $200 control panel for a broken Carrier unit. I'd rather do that than buy a new unit, so I guess that is my price. :D
 

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
8,888
1,164
126
THIS is business in todays world.
No one, no president can stop this.
Since when have governments been allowed to run, and to dictate to business what to do?
Didn't we just have this big discussion when Obama wanted to clean up the air and move to cleaner fuels?
Did not the republicans, lead by none other than TED CRUZ gripe and bitch that Obama was a dictator and could not and should not tell business what to do?
Have republicans and especially Donald Trump since had a change of heart the headlines failed to report?
Wasn't Obama labeled as a dictator for even suggesting the government have any influence on how private business should be ran?
Is everybody going nutz and forgetful?
Are we all losing our minds?

Sure, corporations will absolutely move to Mexico, and China, and Japan if it means dirt cheap labor and the ability to pollute the environment all they want.
Will Donald Trump fix this? NO!!!!
Will Hillary? NO!!!!!
Is this a problem caused by the liberals democrats? NO!!!!
Is this a problem caused by the conservative republicans? NO!!!!
Will the problem be fixed by democrats or republicans? Hell No!
Is this just business as usual? YES!

So... what "WILL" keep business and corporations here in the USA?
What would it take to return business and companies back to the USA?
Answer...?
When corporations can get HERE what they get THERE, then they might return.
And what is it they want ????
Dirt cheap wages. Freedom to pollute all they want. No EPA. No minimum wage laws. No labor laws. NO UNIONS. No regulation what so ever.
And if and when some corporation should screw up by poisoning a cities water supply, or causing great environmental harm, they want NO LEGAL OR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY. NONE! Nada!
THAT, folks, is exactly what business and corporations want if they are to be lured back into the good old US of A by any future president.

And an interesting note...
Why is it that Hispanics flee Mexico and flood into America?
Oh say, could it be for better wages, cleaner air and water, and an over all better life?
And if president Donald Trump does have a plan for returning corporations back to America, what would you think that plan might be?
Could it be... oh say lowering American wages? Eliminating the EPA? Ending all regulation? Giving corporations all the freedom they want to legally pollute and destroy the environment? Killing off every Union in America?

Oh sure... let Donald lure Carrier, GM, Nabisco, and all the other corporations back to America.
The only hitch, YOU their employee will have to work for $2 an hour.
And with no benefits, no healthcare, no Unions, no protections for life and liberty, and in a dangerous working environment where it will be a 50-50 toss up if you make it back home to your family in one piece.
But don't worry about that so much. You'll be working 85 hours a week at $2 an hour, so I doubt you will ever see your family.

And THAT is why Mexicans want to live HERE and not THERE.
And THAT is the only feasible plan Donald Trump could have up his sleeve.
But he won't tell you that before hand. You must elect Donald first then find out.

But not to just dump on Donald... Hillary nor Bernie will have any success bringing back jobs to the US either unless business and corporations are allowed to operate HERE as they do THERE.
And when you are working 85 hours a week @ $2 an hour in a plant or on some assembly line, which foreign country will YOU and your family flee to ????
On the plus side, this new opportunity could be your exit from that ho hum job of flipping burgers.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,964
666
126
Like i said, basic income, you dummies, then you can get rid of minimum wage and bring the jobs back.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,935
140
106
Bah, not even a concern. We know from the pro-Illegal Invasion crowd that the illegals are simply doing jobs Americans won't do. Now Mexicans will be doing jobs Americans won't do here. Same difference. It literally is the same thing, except in this case we don't have the illegals kids we're paying for.
Your argument is all over the place:
1) Americans aren't willing to do Carrier's jobs that Mexicans would in the U.S. (not true btw), which is why you think Carrier left for cheaper labor. When the truth is that it's cheaper to pay workers in Mexico than min wage here. There was no shortage of Carrier jobs being filled and if you think there was, post a link.
2) Illegals are willing to do jobs that Americans don't want to. I agree for certain jobs (e.g. food picking, construction), but what does that have to do with point #1 i.e. Carrier jobs? To reiterate, nowhere was it stated that Carrier couldn't fill their jobs with American workers. They left because of cost:
“Relocating our operations to a region where we have existing infrastructure and a strong supplier base will allow us to operate more cost effectively so that we can continue to produce high-quality HVAC products that are competitively positioned while continuing to meet customer needs.
Even if Carrier paid their U.S. workers min wage, it's still cheaper to pay them in Mexico.
 

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,488
3,826
136
Yea, no.

The only thing Government should be doing is getting the hell out of the way.

-John
Perhaps they will get out of the way the next time somebody wants to bop you over the head with a shovel. :colbert:
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY