China Exceeds US Exports of Technology for first time

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: her209
Who said a little competition was a bad thing?

Anti-trade socialist liberals.

And people that have taken enough econ classes to know that most of the theory behind "free trade" is originally founded on free trade between equal nations, not free trade between developing and developed nations. That there are SEVERE economic dislocations associated with the equalization of standard of living that must transpire in the developed nation should it institute free trade with a devloping nation. That as a whole, the developed nation must see it's standard of living lowered as part of that free trade.

Yeah, but why bother to quote economic thinking when you can simply schmere, eh ntdz?

FS

IF nations were equal, there would be no need for trade as any resourced could be produced anywhere for the same cost. Trade exists because things are not equal.

No No No - what did you do, sleep through econ 101???

By EQUAL we are merely stating roughly equivalent standards of living - NOT that they have the same costs of production for everything. Two nations can be equal, and one can STILL have comparative advantages in some things versus the other, and vice versa. Remember that there are many things that affect costs of production besides labor rates...

Take two countries, A and B. Both are civilized, similiarly affluent countries. Country A may produce cheap agricultural products (good climate), the other may have a higher cost of production in farming, but be cheaper in mining metals and coal (better geology). Therefore, even though both countries can both mine and farm, it STILL makes sense for Country A to be more farming focused, and Country B to be more industrial focused.

Now suppose that Country B is NOT as affulent as A. But it has a huge population, willing to work for much lower wages. If the differential in wages were large enough, there would be almost NOTHING (except natural resources) that A could produce that B would want to buy, as long as B had access to similar technology and production know how it's labor rates would make everything cheaper to produce. So the very best option that A could hope for would be to have it's natural resources stripped for sale to B, in order to equalize that trade. But natural resources are not sustainable, so eventually A will have little left to trade...which is then no longer free trade, as A can't compete.

Now, eventually you would expect that B must become more affluent as a result of it's trade with A, and eventually it would evolve into the first situation that we had above, trade between equals. But in the case of China and India, they EACH have populations of a billion people, the majority of them still living in abject poverty. They represent a huge mass of humanity that acts as an anchor against a general rising standard of living in these countries - it will HAPPEN, it just may take generations. Meanwhile, Country A (the US's) standard of living MUST fall, as it has had it's exports dry up, and will be in heavy debt. Country A's standard of living WILL rise again - after those billions of people in Country B (China and India) have had a real increase in their standard of living... but when talking about a billion people, expect that to take generations, not years...and during that time our standard of living will begin to resemble Brazil's, but without the topless beaches and nice weather...

Future Shock

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: her209
Who said a little competition was a bad thing?

Anti-trade socialist liberals.

And people that have taken enough econ classes to know that most of the theory behind "free trade" is originally founded on free trade between equal nations, not free trade between developing and developed nations. That there are SEVERE economic dislocations associated with the equalization of standard of living that must transpire in the developed nation should it institute free trade with a devloping nation. That as a whole, the developed nation must see it's standard of living lowered as part of that free trade.

Yeah, but why bother to quote economic thinking when you can simply schmere, eh ntdz?

FS

IF nations were equal, there would be no need for trade as any resourced could be produced anywhere for the same cost. Trade exists because things are not equal.

No No No - what did you do, sleep through econ 101???

By EQUAL we are merely stating roughly equivalent standards of living - NOT that they have the same costs of production for everything. Two nations can be equal, and one can STILL have comparative advantages in some things versus the other, and vice versa. Remember that there are many things that affect costs of production besides labor rates...

Take two countries, A and B. Both are civilized, similiarly affluent countries. Country A may produce cheap agricultural products (good climate), the other may have a higher cost of production in farming, but be cheaper in mining metals and coal (better geology). Therefore, even though both countries can both mine and farm, it STILL makes sense for Country A to be more farming focused, and Country B to be more industrial focused.

Now suppose that Country B is NOT as affulent as A. But it has a huge population, willing to work for much lower wages. If the differential in wages were large enough, there would be almost NOTHING (except natural resources) that A could produce that B would want to buy, as long as B had access to similar technology and production know how it's labor rates would make everything cheaper to produce. So the very best option that A could hope for would be to have it's natural resources stripped for sale to B, in order to equalize that trade. But natural resources are not sustainable, so eventually A will have little left to trade...which is then no longer free trade, as A can't compete.

Now, eventually you would expect that B must become more affluent as a result of it's trade with A, and eventually it would evolve into the first situation that we had above, trade between equals. But in the case of China and India, they EACH have populations of a billion people, the majority of them still living in abject poverty. They represent a huge mass of humanity that acts as an anchor against a general rising standard of living in these countries - it will HAPPEN, it just may take generations. Meanwhile, Country A (the US's) standard of living MUST fall, as it has had it's exports dry up, and will be in heavy debt. Country A's standard of living WILL rise again - after those billions of people in Country B (China and India) have had a real increase in their standard of living... but when talking about a billion people, expect that to take generations, not years...and during that time our standard of living will begin to resemble Brazil's, but without the topless beaches and nice weather...

Future Shock

It is you who slept during econ 101. We benefit from reduced prices for goods and "low wage" country benefits by bringing more people out of poverty and into consumer markets. There will not be a race to the bottom as many want to claim there will, but a race to a balance(prosperty). Wages in both china and india are qrowing quickly.

Is it bad that GM produces and sells cars to the chinese?
Is bad that motorola makes phones in china so they tap the 300million people in china that want a cell phone?
Is it bad that indian software companies purchase lots of US made software?
Is it bad that boeing sold a large number of new jets to china and India?
Is it bad that US companies are a large suppliers to airbus products sold to china?
It is bad that GE sold 1500 new locomotives to china?


Had the citizen of these countries remained dirt farmers, none of these events would have happened and our economy would be worse off because of it.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: her209
Who said a little competition was a bad thing?

Anti-trade socialist liberals.

And people that have taken enough econ classes to know that most of the theory behind "free trade" is originally founded on free trade between equal nations, not free trade between developing and developed nations. That there are SEVERE economic dislocations associated with the equalization of standard of living that must transpire in the developed nation should it institute free trade with a devloping nation. That as a whole, the developed nation must see it's standard of living lowered as part of that free trade.

Yeah, but why bother to quote economic thinking when you can simply schmere, eh ntdz?

FS

Give one example where free trade lowered standard of living for a country.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: charrison


It is you who slept during econ 101.

I don't think so - I was a nearly straight A management student, with a business degree from a top 15 school. And minors in Comp Sci and Politics... I do know people with Econ PHds that I bow to (many of whom are friends that work on Wall St.), but I have not run into their level of speaking or thinking on this board...

Originally posted by: charrison
We benefit from reduced prices for goods

That is only from a first-order analysis, and it assumes that jobs in the US are NOT replaceable by forgein workers - which they are. You can't benefit from reduced prices if you don't have a job to earn an income with in the first place, OR if offshore wage competition has reduced the payscales in your industry to the point where the savings minor compared to the lost income.

Originally posted by: charrison
and "low wage" country benefits by bringing more people out of poverty and into consumer markets. There will not be a race to the bottom as many want to claim there will, but a race to a balance(prosperty). Wages in both china and india are qrowing quickly.

I don't qibble that the less developed countries are doing well, including growing wages - as I said, I would expect that, as they have all the trade advantages. It's not a "race to the bottom" - it's a seesaw moving - one side up, one down. And there is no doubt who is who on that ride...

Originally posted by: charrison
Is it bad that GM produces and sells cars to the chinese?
Is bad that motorola makes phones in china so they tap the 300million people in china that want a cell phone?
Is it bad that indian software companies purchase lots of US made software?
Is it bad that boeing sold a large number of new jets to china and India?
Is it bad that US companies are a large suppliers to airbus products sold to china?
It is bad that GE sold 1500 new locomotives to china?

• -GM sells almost NO cars worth mentioning to the Chinese, compared to their level of exports to us.

• -Motorola making phones in China does not help the US economy one bit, as it provides no US jobs, and Motorola (like nearly all multinationals) does NOT bring that money back to the US, to avoid paying US income taxes on it.

• -I have set up offshore IT companies in India. They almost never buy expensive packaged US software, but build it themselves. Most IT skills there are still of the C/C++/Java programming variety, not Siebel/SAP/Oracle Finanicial package programmers. Even when the DO buy software, they recieve an Indian price on it, which is far, far lower than what that same package costs here in the US.

• -It IS bad that China is using that sale to force Boeing to share some of it's production technology with them, and build large sections of that plane in China. See this for what it is - it is NOT a sale, it IS compensation for a high technology learning transfer, with the sale to sweeten the deal. In 20 years China will not be buying ANY US or Airbus planes as a result of deals like this one...

• -No, there is nothing bad with GE selling locomotives - again, the Chinese are quite willing to buy limited quantities of our products that enhance their long-term competitiveness with us, such as locomotives, power plants, airplanes, etc. Anything that can then act as an enabler for them to compete with us in another area, like CPU design and building. But that hardly counts as positive news for the US...

Originally posted by: charrison
Had the citizen of these countries remained dirt farmers, none of these events would have happened and our economy would be worse off because of it.

Do any or all of these events compare GDP-wise to losing our ENTIRE textile industry to China??? It's not even close...we have lost more on that alone than anything you can list that we have sold...

Future Shock

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

I don't think so - I was a nearly straight A management student, with a business degree from a top 15 school. And minors in Comp Sci and Politics... I do know people with Econ PHds that I bow to (many of whom are friends that work on Wall St.), but I have not run into their level of speaking or thinking on this board...

Wow, nice job. :thumbsup: So, what do you do now for a living?

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: her209
Who said a little competition was a bad thing?

Anti-trade socialist liberals.

And people that have taken enough econ classes to know that most of the theory behind "free trade" is originally founded on free trade between equal nations, not free trade between developing and developed nations. That there are SEVERE economic dislocations associated with the equalization of standard of living that must transpire in the developed nation should it institute free trade with a devloping nation. That as a whole, the developed nation must see it's standard of living lowered as part of that free trade.

Yeah, but why bother to quote economic thinking when you can simply schmere, eh ntdz?

FS

Give one example where free trade lowered standard of living for a country.

There are SO many...

Start from Argentina and go to Zimbawe, passing through Mexico... just to pick a couple of examples where opening the markets and following exactly the IMF receipe for globalization of free trade caused a default.

Or, just buy a Stieglitz book and enjoy the ride...

By the way: I am 100% for free trade, but not all of a sudden like they did in the past 10 years. A LOT of people in the world are suffering because of the application of "free trade is always better" theories...

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: her209
Who said a little competition was a bad thing?

Anti-trade socialist liberals.

And people that have taken enough econ classes to know that most of the theory behind "free trade" is originally founded on free trade between equal nations, not free trade between developing and developed nations. That there are SEVERE economic dislocations associated with the equalization of standard of living that must transpire in the developed nation should it institute free trade with a devloping nation. That as a whole, the developed nation must see it's standard of living lowered as part of that free trade.

Yeah, but why bother to quote economic thinking when you can simply schmere, eh ntdz?

FS

Give one example where free trade lowered standard of living for a country.

There are SO many...

Start from Argentina and go to Zimbawe, passing through Mexico... just to pick a couple of examples where opening the markets and following exactly the IMF receipe for globalization of free trade caused a default.

Or, just buy a Stieglitz book and enjoy the ride...

By the way: I am 100% for free trade, but not all of a sudden like they did in the past 10 years. A LOT of people in the world are suffering because of the application of "free trade is always better" theories...

I'd like to see proof, and second, can it be proved that free trade was the reason standard of living went down, if it even did?

 

[MicroChrome]

Well, I welcome China's great lead in Education and Science. USA should be leading. We are so far behind. I figure in 10 years China will be #1 in bio/stem cell technology. Among other things. What are we doing? Spending billions in Iraq, and cutting education left and right. We are soooo stupid, but what do you expect? We have a humungus public debt. We are heading so far in the WRONG direction. We are losing big time with the administration we have in office. Everything is for oil and war... We are spending over 1.8Billion each day in Iraq yet our kids are paying for their lives and the sake of losing out with science and education.

I hate to say it... But I'd rather be living in China they are going in the RIGHT direction. They aren?t worried about gay marriage or evolution debates... And religious BS or Abortion debates. We are so caught up in all the muck that we can't even see that we are losing out big time. I welcome this and hope someone with "BRAINS" can come to the plate and bat.

By the way Mary X-mas and God ain?t gonna save you or bush from this one.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=3357 Mainland China set to rule the semi world. Dell, other US companies squeezed out

In fact, the People's Republic of China has made no secret of its ambitions. Last year, we published a news story reporting that senior government officials estimated that in 25-30 years, China would be the worldwide leader in all areas of technology.


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=5613 China's "soaring dragon" Linux chip "fully MIPS compatible" Intel, AMD watch out

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4741

By 2010 China will be the second biggest semiconductor producer in the world, with its IT industry growing between 20 to 50 per cent, the paper claims.

China already attracts 13 per cent of global investment in semiconductors, the paper claims. Outside observers think China may reach this position earlier than 2010 ? it's possible it might reach that target by 2007, some analysts believe.


http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=3405 Chinese Linux to topple MS Windows

The whole bundle of OS and Kai Office 6.0 sells for $50, as against over $700 for the Vole software.

http://www.jsonline.com/bym/news/dec03/196593.asp

If China has more than three times as many industrial-technology graduates, China theoretically also has more than three times as many folks to percolate ideas - or possibly even a three-times better chance of thinking up the next "killer application."

Intel Corp. Chairman Andy Grove marveled that the lopsided trend has caused remarkably little debate in the U.S.

"We haven't even articulated the problem," Grove said.

Investing in education
China triples college enrollment in five years

Beijing hews to a market-driven education policy, one that unabashedly aligns the curriculum with supply-and-demand economics. It compels its professors regularly to step outside the halls of academia and work directly inside factories, improving the plants' quality and productivity.

"We're teaching our students to satisfy the needs of the global economy," said Zhang Yao Xue, who runs the nation's university system as director general at the Ministry of Education.

Some 60% of all students are enrolled in science and engineering disciplines, he said.

China nearly has caught up with the U.S. on the number of master's and doctoral degrees awarded annually in engineering, according to figures from both governments. China also is making huge strides in other science and technology disciplines. And at U.S. universities, there are more Chinese students earning doctorates than students from any other foreign country, according to the National Science Foundation.

 

[MicroChrome]

I guess the question you got to ask yourself is. When the next hot CPU or Graphics cards start shipping from china are you going to buy them? Esp, when they undercut intel and amd? Of course you will. Just like you buy your jeans, shirts, shoes, hats and socks from china. I buy some pretty nice high quality relaxed outdoor wear type like levi, woolrich, columbia...etc...etc... guess what they are all made in china but they fit well so I buy it.

If china came out with a new OS (unix base) and Office for 50 bucks I'd jump on that bandwagon. I'm down with that. Screw MS. I can't stand em. But that's just me. Altho if apple came out with Tigre X for PC I'd be all over that too. 😉

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Tango

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: her209
Who said a little competition was a bad thing?

Anti-trade socialist liberals.

And people that have taken enough econ classes to know that most of the theory behind "free trade" is originally founded on free trade between equal nations, not free trade between developing and developed nations. That there are SEVERE economic dislocations associated with the equalization of standard of living that must transpire in the developed nation should it institute free trade with a devloping nation. That as a whole, the developed nation must see it's standard of living lowered as part of that free trade.

Yeah, but why bother to quote economic thinking when you can simply schmere, eh ntdz?

FS

Give one example where free trade lowered standard of living for a country.

There are SO many...

Start from Argentina and go to Zimbawe, passing through Mexico... just to pick a couple of examples where opening the markets and following exactly the IMF receipe for globalization of free trade caused a default.

Or, just buy a Stieglitz book and enjoy the ride...

By the way: I am 100% for free trade, but not all of a sudden like they did in the past 10 years. A LOT of people in the world are suffering because of the application of "free trade is always better" theories...

I'd like to see proof, and second, can it be proved that free trade was the reason standard of living went down, if it even did?

I mean.. the argentinian default was a fact, not an opinion. It has been cristalline that free trade was the cause of it.

The point is: free trade CAN be beneficial, but if you just open the internal markets suddently it is very unlikely that you can control the transition from a protectionistic economy to an open one. Also, there is no international economic agency with cohercitive power, so many countries just don't follow the rules, and the basic assumptions we need for free trade to be mutually beneficial don't hold.

The countries that did better in the last years are the ones that DID not open the markets to completely free trade, notably China and India, Korea and Singapore, and in part Brazil. They followed a path of gradual reforms, and realized that SOME fields just cannot be opened because are too critical for their still delicate economies.

Free market would be mutually beneficial if both countries followed the same rules, but this almost never happens. The example of the trade between Mexico and the US in the crops market is one good example. The US refuses to remove many subsidies to the farming industry and of course at this point the free trade is not free at all.

You are right that free trade WOULD be beneficial to both parties if all the theoretical assumptions would hold. They often do not. Policy makers are not stupid. If free trade was the only way to go, everybody would embrace it no questions asked. At the moment free trade in the real world is ALWAYS beneficial for the strongest economies, and often devastating for the smaller ones.

 

[stratman]

China has come a long way, but they've got a long way to go. It's got the struggle of holding one of the world's largest countries together, with all it's different dialects and languages. It's got the struggle of ruling over populace that is getting wealthier, and through that wealth more powerful and freer. The wealth gap between the poor, rural, and the wealthier, urban people is widening at an incredibly fast rate, pissing off the rural, increasing dissent. Corruption is rampant. Literacy in the the official language is still not world-class. Infrastructure is improving quickly, but is still far behind the US. Their productivity isn't close to America's. Tensions between Japan and Korea and China are running high. The inefficiencies of China's centralized bureaucracy are coming to light and hurting growth.

Don't worry guys, you'll be the world's greatest power for some time yet. Beijing is the governmental and cultural center of China. Visit Beijing, take a taxi through its streets, try to get a phone line set up, smell the air, talk with the locals. And then come back to America, secure.

 

[imported_Tango]

Originally posted by: stratman
Beijing is the governmental and cultural center of China. Visit Beijing, take a taxi through its streets, try to get a phone line set up, smell the air, talk with the locals. And then come back to America, secure.

Would you say the same of Shangai? The financial and economical center of the country..

http://www.jrcasan.com/IMPACTO/Shangai.jpg

It's changing so fast it's almost unbelievable...the point about China is not how long the road it has to do is, but how fast it is running on that road. That's why you call them emerging markets.. because they are, well... emerging.

Nobody questions today's postion of the US in the global markets, what is being questioned is tomorrow.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: charrison


It is you who slept during econ 101.

I don't think so - I was a nearly straight A management student, with a business degree from a top 15 school. And minors in Comp Sci and Politics... I do know people with Econ PHds that I bow to (many of whom are friends that work on Wall St.), but I have not run into their level of speaking or thinking on this board...

Originally posted by: charrison
We benefit from reduced prices for goods

That is only from a first-order analysis, and it assumes that jobs in the US are NOT replaceable by forgein workers - which they are. You can't benefit from reduced prices if you don't have a job to earn an income with in the first place, OR if offshore wage competition has reduced the payscales in your industry to the point where the savings minor compared to the lost income.

Originally posted by: charrison
and "low wage" country benefits by bringing more people out of poverty and into consumer markets. There will not be a race to the bottom as many want to claim there will, but a race to a balance(prosperty). Wages in both china and india are qrowing quickly.

I don't qibble that the less developed countries are doing well, including growing wages - as I said, I would expect that, as they have all the trade advantages. It's not a "race to the bottom" - it's a seesaw moving - one side up, one down. And there is no doubt who is who on that ride...

Originally posted by: charrison
Is it bad that GM produces and sells cars to the chinese?
Is bad that motorola makes phones in china so they tap the 300million people in china that want a cell phone?
Is it bad that indian software companies purchase lots of US made software?
Is it bad that boeing sold a large number of new jets to china and India?
Is it bad that US companies are a large suppliers to airbus products sold to china?
It is bad that GE sold 1500 new locomotives to china?

• -GM sells almost NO cars worth mentioning to the Chinese, compared to their level of exports to us.

• -Motorola making phones in China does not help the US economy one bit, as it provides no US jobs, and Motorola (like nearly all multinationals) does NOT bring that money back to the US, to avoid paying US income taxes on it.

• -I have set up offshore IT companies in India. They almost never buy expensive packaged US software, but build it themselves. Most IT skills there are still of the C/C++/Java programming variety, not Siebel/SAP/Oracle Finanicial package programmers. Even when the DO buy software, they recieve an Indian price on it, which is far, far lower than what that same package costs here in the US.

• -It IS bad that China is using that sale to force Boeing to share some of it's production technology with them, and build large sections of that plane in China. See this for what it is - it is NOT a sale, it IS compensation for a high technology learning transfer, with the sale to sweeten the deal. In 20 years China will not be buying ANY US or Airbus planes as a result of deals like this one...

• -No, there is nothing bad with GE selling locomotives - again, the Chinese are quite willing to buy limited quantities of our products that enhance their long-term competitiveness with us, such as locomotives, power plants, airplanes, etc. Anything that can then act as an enabler for them to compete with us in another area, like CPU design and building. But that hardly counts as positive news for the US...

Originally posted by: charrison
Had the citizen of these countries remained dirt farmers, none of these events would have happened and our economy would be worse off because of it.

Do any or all of these events compare GDP-wise to losing our ENTIRE textile industry to China??? It's not even close...we have lost more on that alone than anything you can list that we have sold...

Future Shock

When you get some basic fact right, I might respond to your entire post. But lets clear up where you have things completely wrong.


There are no Chinese GM car imported into the us. Compared to the US the chinese market for car is small, but it is rapidly growing and all the world car makers are their gearing up for this market.


Why dont companies always bring offshore profits back to the us .China tax profits at 10%, our corperate tax is mid 30s. It is not hard to figure out. This past tax season the IRs allowed offshore profits to come in at 10% rate and our coffers flooded with off shore moneys. This is a very fixable problem.

China has a deal with airbus not boeing to product planes in china.

You experience wth software developer types in inidia is quite limited.

Textiles, if you are in fact an econ major, you would know have been moving to low wage countries for hundreds of years. This is not a new trend,

THere are so many innacuries in your response, it is not even funny.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: charrison


When you get some basic fact right, I might respond to your entire post. But lets clear up where you have things completely wrong.

I will claim I know the basic facts, but I don't believe that your reading comprehension is 100% here, so let me clarify...

Originally posted by: charrison
There are no Chinese GM car imported into the us. Compared to the US the chinese market for car is small, but it is rapidly growing and all the world car makers are their gearing up for this market.

My statement was NOT about GN/China cars imported into the US, it was in relation to the ENTIRE volume of Chinese goods imported into the US...which make US produced autos sold into China not even register economically, as the original post claimed that I responded to.

Originally posted by: charrison[
Why dont companies always bring offshore profits back to the us .China tax profits at 10%, our corperate tax is mid 30s. It is not hard to figure out. This past tax season the IRs allowed offshore profits to come in at 10% rate and our coffers flooded with off shore moneys. This is a very fixable problem.

No, it didn't "flood" our coffers with offshore money. The overall amount of money we collected was not really significant (a few tens of billions), compared to the total international trade imbalance and impact. We got some monies that companies had been holding in abeyance, but the US is a net loser if we simultaneously export jobs overseas and reduce taxes on that money to a pitance. - remember all of those workers that need to be retrained??? That will have to be paid for, and the other economic dislocations supported. And the Chinese tax rate isn't really 10% - as the Chinese government OWNS either partially or fully a large number of the biggest firms - effectively making ALL of their profits tax. So the overall corporate tax rate in China, for Chinese companies, is much higher than 10%...

Originally posted by: charrison
China has a deal with airbus not boeing to product planes in china.

Actually, Boeing's McDonnell Douglas subsidiary outsourced the MD 90 to China earlier, and worse China also is licensing defense-applicable guidance systems used in the 737, which can also be used to direct cruise missles, etc. They haven't equalled the desperation of Airbus yet, but hard to say they haven't done so...

Originally posted by: charrison
You experience wth software developer types in inidia is quite limited.

Please present some counter arguements here, or at least relate to personal experience that you can share with the group, otherwise this is just a troll...I haven't spent 15 years working with the Indian GDCs like some I know have, but at least I spent a large part of this Spring in Chennai, and still have an active Indian business visa...unlike so many that are quick to comment on these boards. I have set up Indian offshoring groups. So your own relevant experience would be what?

Originally posted by: charrison
Textiles, if you are in fact an econ major, you would know have been moving to low wage countries for hundreds of years. This is not a new trend,

And do you even have a point here? The statement still stands - all of the minor sales victories that the post I responded to do NOT add up to the loss of that single large industry, let alone the others that have been significantly affected by it. My point was to simply show the OP how the sheer volume of 1500 locomotives, a few hundred planes, etc. only sounds impressive when considered out of the total, broader context... these are small fry victories in an overall losing battle of export/import...and that still stands, regardless of how "inevitable" one or another industries decline might be. (and econ wasn't my major, industrial management was my concentration within business school).

Originally posted by: charrison
THere are so many innacuries in your response, it is not even funny.

There is so much ideologic trolling in your response, it IS funny...

Future Shock

 

[EagleKeeper]

FutureShock:

You may wish to review the article closely on respect to what is states about the US Defense industry.

There is a potential future problem.
The DOD is aware of it and will not allow it to occur. The DOD will not allow a critical component to be manufactured by a company under the influence of what is considered to be a hostile government.

Most key military components will be made by US companies and US workers.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: alchemize
So from all the doomers and gloomers, what do you propose we *DO* about this?

Become less competitive against other world corporations? Become more socialist? Or just put up trade barriers?

For those workers who seem to think that a high school degree and sweat on the back means lifetime employment, a pension and free health care - <insert middle finger icon> here. You are reaping what you've sown. This isn't a one sided equation.

For the record, my company doesn't outsource. Yet. But if it gets tied down by unproductive unions and workers, it will.

Trade barriers already exist, look no further than softwood, beef, steel and grain.

 

[Genx87]

The thing I wonder about you guys is what it will take to prove to you that overseas trade relationships are not in the least destroying the American way of life as you so claim.

Makes you wonder doesnt it? Since the end of WWII and us opening up our borders for trade the US has seen huge amounts of growth. We cant put up walls around our country like the Soviets and hope for the best. The idea is to embrace the idea of international trade. No empire has ever survived in the history of man kind by building up walls around its borders and not interacting economically with the outside world.

Will China eventually have a larger economy than the United States? Yes it will because of demographics. In the eyes of liberals this is scary because we wont be #1 anymore. In the eyes of a capitalists they see a new huge market from which to tap and sell their wares and goods.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Engineer
I don't give a goddamned fvck about people in those other countries. We'll be consumers until the money and credit runs out! I hope you all are the first on the soup lines while looking for your new fangled service job!

Bolded is what is wrong with this world. Somehow people get this notion that because they were the lucky winner of a birth in a privileged nation, they are entitled to all the world's wealth through whatever means necessary.

Why not apply the same logic domestically Engineer?...Why allow the poor to succeed, they were not the ones born with wealth...pfff, 'fvck em'.

I'm sorry people like you exist. Blind with nationalistic hate.

I'm sorry people that don't have any pride in the U.S. and progress exist like you.

Oh wait, you're not even in the U.S.

Your Country can go down the drain, who cares, but leave the U.S. out of it.

 

[piasabird]

A lot of these so-called exports are basically equipment being outsourced to China from Taiwan like computer motherboards, Computer Cases, Memory, Silicone, CPU'S, Etc.

Oh Yeah; Walmart is helping out too.

We cant possibly have enought cheaply made Toy Cars and chaep plastic balls.

I await the first Chinese Made Automobile.

If South American Countries were not all backward 3rd World Dictatorships, then maybe we could be buying products made by them. If Mexico was not so corrupt it could become a great nation.

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: piasabird
We cant possibly have enought cheaply made Toy Cars and chaep plastic balls.

Last I checked, plastic balls and toy cars dont count as IT products.

Originally posted by: piasabird
If South American Countries were not all backward 3rd World Dictatorships, then maybe we could be buying products made by them. If Mexico was not so corrupt it could become a great nation.

Maybe if the USA stopped invading whenever some South/Central American elected government chooses to be socialist based.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Engineer
I don't give a goddamned fvck about people in those other countries. We'll be consumers until the money and credit runs out! I hope you all are the first on the soup lines while looking for your new fangled service job!

Bolded is what is wrong with this world. Somehow people get this notion that because they were the lucky winner of a birth in a privileged nation, they are entitled to all the world's wealth through whatever means necessary.

Why not apply the same logic domestically Engineer?...Why allow the poor to succeed, they were not the ones born with wealth...pfff, 'fvck em'.

I'm sorry people like you exist. Blind with nationalistic hate.

I'm sorry people that don't have any pride in the U.S. and progress exist like you.

Oh wait, you're not even in the U.S.

Your Country can go down the drain, who cares, but leave the U.S. out of it.

I may not live in the US; but I know what will have dire consequences on the American way of life and stagnate your economy. --> trade barriers and sanctions.

Put up the walls, favour increase in labour wages...watch the US fall...fast! I am happy your *solutions* are not used as my way of life is directly related to yours.

Look at Germany, they put up walls, they let labour movements succeed; huge investment was made in automation...this will be the end result (10.5% and rising).

Dave; tell me what country YOU want the US to be like.

 

[Genx87]

Dave; tell me what country YOU want the US to be like.

This will be a hard question for him to answer because I dont think he honestly understands half the things he spouts.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Engineer
I don't give a goddamned fvck about people in those other countries. We'll be consumers until the money and credit runs out! I hope you all are the first on the soup lines while looking for your new fangled service job!

Bolded is what is wrong with this world. Somehow people get this notion that because they were the lucky winner of a birth in a privileged nation, they are entitled to all the world's wealth through whatever means necessary.

Why not apply the same logic domestically Engineer?...Why allow the poor to succeed, they were not the ones born with wealth...pfff, 'fvck em'.

I'm sorry people like you exist. Blind with nationalistic hate.

I'm sorry people that don't have any pride in the U.S. and progress exist like you.

Oh wait, you're not even in the U.S.

Your Country can go down the drain, who cares, but leave the U.S. out of it.

I may not live in the US; but I know what will have dire consequences on the American way of life and stagnate your economy. --> trade barriers and sanctions.

Put up the walls, favour increase in labour wages...watch the US fall...fast! I am happy your *solutions* are not used as my way of life is directly related to yours.

Look at Germany, they put up walls, they let labour movements succeed; huge investment was made in automation...this will be the end result (10.5% and rising).

Dave; tell me what country YOU want the US to be like.

Like the U.S. was before being corrupted by the Republicans.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
[

Originally posted by: charrison
There are no Chinese GM car imported into the us. Compared to the US the chinese market for car is small, but it is rapidly growing and all the world car makers are their gearing up for this market.

My statement was NOT about GN/China cars imported into the US, it was in relation to the ENTIRE volume of Chinese goods imported into the US...which make US produced autos sold into China not even register economically, as the original post claimed that I responded to.

Right now that may be true, but the volume of car sold in china is growing rapidly. IT will not be long before there a multi million/vehicle year market in china. I would rather our car markets be there, than to ignore this radidly growing market. This however is just one example of probably hundreds of US companies setting up shop in china to take advantage of the rising market. About 1/2 the trade deficit is companies importing from their out of country counterparts.

Originally posted by: charrison[
Why dont companies always bring offshore profits back to the us .China tax profits at 10%, our corperate tax is mid 30s. It is not hard to figure out. This past tax season the IRs allowed offshore profits to come in at 10% rate and our coffers flooded with off shore moneys. This is a very fixable problem.

No, it didn't "flood" our coffers with offshore money. The overall amount of money we collected was not really significant (a few tens of billions), compared to the total international trade imbalance and impact. We got some monies that companies had been holding in abeyance, but the US is a net loser if we simultaneously export jobs overseas and reduce taxes on that money to a pitance. - remember all of those workers that need to be retrained??? That will have to be paid for, and the other economic dislocations supported. And the Chinese tax rate isn't really 10% - as the Chinese government OWNS either partially or fully a large number of the biggest firms - effectively making ALL of their profits tax. So the overall corporate tax rate in China, for Chinese companies, is much higher than 10%...

Well if you are foreign company doing business in china, you are paying a 10% tax. Nice try on dodging reality. I dont see how we would be a net loser by encouraging tax dollarts to come into the country. I would even argue that setting our corperate taxes a flat 10% would encourage more companies to set up shop in the US. We may not have cheap labor in the us, but we have a very productive workforce. All we have to do is make the complete package attractive and we bring lots of jobs into this country.

Originally posted by: charrison
China has a deal with airbus not boeing to product planes in china.

Actually, Boeing's McDonnell Douglas subsidiary outsourced the MD 90 to China earlier, and worse China also is licensing defense-applicable guidance systems used in the 737, which can also be used to direct cruise missles, etc. They haven't equalled the desperation of Airbus yet, but hard to say they haven't done so...

you just cited two examples that dont apply. The boeing example was about export, not manufacturing. The MD-90 was a failed production attempt that only made 20 aircraft and has since been shutdown.

I do agree that you must be vigilant to protect IP when dealing with china, but that would be a different subject.

Originally posted by: charrison
You experience wth software developer types in inidia is quite limited.

Please present some counter arguements here, or at least relate to personal experience that you can share with the group, otherwise this is just a troll...I haven't spent 15 years working with the Indian GDCs like some I know have, but at least I spent a large part of this Spring in Chennai, and still have an active Indian business visa...unlike so many that are quick to comment on these boards. I have set up Indian offshoring groups. So your own relevant experience would be what?

I dont care how cheap the labor is in india, they are not going to be paid to reinvent the wheel. Labor is not cheap enough to rewrite their own proramming languages, application servers, databases or developer tools. IF you are setting up you Indian offshore groups to write their own tools, then write the desired application you are wasting lots of money. RAD tools exist so you dont have to reinvent the wheel. Or maybe this is why alot of the offshore work is coming back to the states as it was bumbled by managers. My relevernt experience is a masters in computer science and currently a senior systems developer.

Originally posted by: charrison
Textiles, if you are in fact an econ major, you would know have been moving to low wage countries for hundreds of years. This is not a new trend,

And do you even have a point here? The statement still stands - all of the minor sales victories that the post I responded to do NOT add up to the loss of that single large industry, let alone the others that have been significantly affected by it. My point was to simply show the OP how the sheer volume of 1500 locomotives, a few hundred planes, etc. only sounds impressive when considered out of the total, broader context... these are small fry victories in an overall losing battle of export/import...and that still stands, regardless of how "inevitable" one or another industries decline might be. (and econ wasn't my major, industrial management was my concentration within business school).

You may see it as a losing battle, but I see as an expansion of the consumer that US companies can take advantage of. It would be an even larger mistake to ignore the chinese market.

There are valid reasons to not trade with china, but the your claim of race to the bottom is not one of them. SOmehow manufacting has continued to expand even though we have trade defecit. Even with record trade defecits of the past few years, our manfucturing base as been expanding at a good clip. THis far from the doom and gloom you see.

And if you go back and look at historical data, the times when we have had a trade surpluse, you will find there were not also not terribly good economic times either.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Engineer
I don't give a goddamned fvck about people in those other countries. We'll be consumers until the money and credit runs out! I hope you all are the first on the soup lines while looking for your new fangled service job!

Bolded is what is wrong with this world. Somehow people get this notion that because they were the lucky winner of a birth in a privileged nation, they are entitled to all the world's wealth through whatever means necessary.

Why not apply the same logic domestically Engineer?...Why allow the poor to succeed, they were not the ones born with wealth...pfff, 'fvck em'.

I'm sorry people like you exist. Blind with nationalistic hate.

I'm sorry people that don't have any pride in the U.S. and progress exist like you.

Oh wait, you're not even in the U.S.

Your Country can go down the drain, who cares, but leave the U.S. out of it.

I may not live in the US; but I know what will have dire consequences on the American way of life and stagnate your economy. --> trade barriers and sanctions.

Put up the walls, favour increase in labour wages...watch the US fall...fast! I am happy your *solutions* are not used as my way of life is directly related to yours.

Look at Germany, they put up walls, they let labour movements succeed; huge investment was made in automation...this will be the end result (10.5% and rising).

Dave; tell me what country YOU want the US to be like.

Like the U.S. was before being corrupted by the Republicans.

Perfect example.

Ask him what that means and watch the generalized response he gives.