GOP Debate #1

[Fern]

I think you are overstating the wage depression for a contract work. It's not like these guys with accept 50 cents an hour. This is still skilled work and the wages are still relatively high. One of the contractors largest challenges is still finding capable people. It's not like labor markets are really slack and highly vulnerable to wage deflation. Yeah they might get a bit of a break on wages for undocumented workers, but they also have to guarantee their work and their livelihood depends on the quality of it. It doesn't always pay to go cheap.

What another issue is, is contracting companies not using properly licensed workers, such as unlicensed plumbers to do jobs when licensing is required. This happens regardless of the nationality of the worker.

The Landscaping field might be more vulnerable to this, but it's also really hard work and there's not that many people signing up to do it. Besides customers will only still pay so much, so prices have to be competitive regardless. Even if you got rid of all of them, costs can only rise so much before it became too expensive for clientele.

I know this from many immediate family members and close friends in these fields owning these businesses.

You're overlooking a substantial part of the construction industry: Small jobs such as home remodeling, kitchen and bath redoes, additions, roofing, painting, masonry and repair/handyman work.

Many of the crews around here are owned by illegals who speak enough English and hire other illegals who can't speak any. None of this is reported to the govt (i.e., no tax return and no withholding on wages). They're therefor significantly less expensive than similar crews run by citizens.

In big jobs, such as developers doing subdivisions etc. employees have withholding and W-2's. However, with contractors and subcontractors, you're right back to entire crews of illegals.

Fact: They're taking jobs.

You say the labor market is not "slack"? Where the h3ll are you living?

Fern

 

[Fern]

That you believe if Company A reports Company B for being suspected of using illegal/undocumented immigrant workers, Company A will be intentionally hounded-to-ruination by a variety of government agencies, specifically due to the perceived racism of his allegations.

Did I misread that?

Pretty much, the govt itself will warn you of that.

I've been at large conventions hosted by the IRS where they specifically warn you of civil rights trouble. The IRS has a database to confirm SS#'s for (new) employees. They're very clear about not using even that to report employees/people as suspected illegals for fear of liability.

If it's a competitor all you could know was that their employees looked Hispanic and couldn't speak English well. Report that and you're begging for serious problems.

Even without those potential problems I'm not sure what's to be gained. I've had construction clients who've had surprise inspections at job sites (to my knowledge this has only happened at govt sites - it was a govt construction project). Yeah, there were plenty of illegals. What happened? Well, after being detained a few hours to check everyone's documentation/SS#'s they were all just let go. No fine for the owner since they all filed out I-9's etc.

Do you actual think our govt deports people or fines employers?

Fern

 

[Fern]

An American company making products to sell in America should manufacture those products in America. That is the key to maintaining a country's strength. We are fast losing our manufacturing expertise, we are paying for the priveledge of giving it away to the Asians.... WE PAY THEM TO TAKE WHAT TOOK AMERICANS DECADES TO PERFECT!

Well, that's the quickest way I've heard to drive American companies out-of-business.

I take it you've never heard of importing products?

Or, do you also want to stop product imports from non-American companies?

Fern

 

[First]

Given the massive financial advantages to being an American, I don't believe we can afford to just claim that anyone who wants to be is an American.

I am for legalizing illegal immigrants and making them pay taxes, so I agree with you in a way. I'm talking about practically, there is little that separates millions of illegal immigrants south of the border from what you would consider your typical American based on core values and behavior. Knowing that, it's hard to argue they aren't American except solely in the sense of legal status. That is my point.

Regardless of who you're referring to, why does being against illegal immigration make you a knuckle dragger. Are you saying that the entire first world is a bunch of knuckle draggers? Because I'm pretty sure every first world country has a naturalization process and doesn't just let people enter as they please and then call them Germans or Swedes.

We're a bit more unique than the Swedes in terms of worldwide exposure and attraction, but I take your point and will add that I'm not for illegal immigration, I just understand and deeply sympathize with them given their aforementioned, very American qualities. I don't throw the baby out with the bathwater on illegal immigration, I look at their total impact. I don't advocate open borders or something.

Again, those are qualities of good people. That doesn't make them Americans. That makes them people that we should want to have here, but they still need to go through the naturalization process in order to BECOME Americans.

If you want to be a nation of laws, then follow through. If you don't want to be a nation of laws, well there's always Somalia, as the left always loves to tell the right.

I'm asking you what makes your native-born neighbor more American than many of these undocumented Mexicans, legal status? Literally legal paperwork? Because obviously some of them live here decades, pay taxes, have children, work, go to school and go to church, among a myriad other traditional American qualities. It's a dodge to say their questionable legal status means we're not a nation of laws. The fact that they broke the law, just like every American ever born has, whatever law it may be, does not change the crux of the argument. They're not citizens, which I never argued; they're Americans in behavior, belief, etc.

There I agree with you. We should be able to limit our immigration counts. But after those counts are met, what you're propose next is in direct opposition to your statement that we should only let in what's possible to assimilate.

I'm not saying the previous several decades of illegal immigration was acceptable, nor should it continue if I had the requisite magic wand to make it stop. So in terms of assimilation, it's not ideal but since they're already here we have to help them assimilate by making sure they realize they're Americans in spirit, despite not being American citizens. Of course, I'm for giving every last one of them a path to citizenship after a substantial wait period, and helping seal the border better in the process. But I can't control those things myself.

Treating everyone who comes here as an American, even if they do so illegally, is basically having no ability limit who comes here. I'll be clear that I don't think they should be abused, but they should not have the same benefits as citizens. If they do, then there is no reason to become a citizen, and we then have no control over our borders.

Well citizens can vote, hold office and obtain jobs that merely "legalized" folks can't, actually. There are myriad benefits to being a citizen, actually. I don't know what benefits they shouldn't have that wouldn't invariably lead to their lives being demonstrably worse, for no other reason than legal paperwork issues. I can't possibly justify that morally and certainly not economically. It's far more expensive to take care of penniless and near homeless illegal immigrants who can't get state/federal benefits than it is to give them those benefits so they're able to survive and eventually work.

Immigrants are those who came from another country. Illegal immigrants are those who choose to ignore the rule of law. Breaking the law isn't a good way to show how "American" you are and convince people that you want what's best for this country.

Ha, breaking the law is as American as apple pie! But really, it is. And I wouldn't be so quick to look down on that action, it's not done out of greed or malice.

If you want to change the rule of law, go for it. Push for an increase in immigration limits, make the process shorter and more affordable. I'd consider those good changes, why make it difficult for good people to come here?

Yeah agreed.

But until then, illegal immigrants are breaking the law and should NOT be rewarded for such. You certainly don't approve of right wingers flouting the law, why should illegal immigrants get a pass? I mean, that cattle rancher was a hard working American, so what if he was breaking the law? He was entrepreneurial, religious, hard working, family oriented, and then the big bad government came along and told him his cattle couldn't graze on their land. How dare they treat him badly!?!

Unless you're going to fight for the right of some right wing rancher to ignore the law, why treat illegal immigrants any differently?

Well because denying immigrants equal protection under the law causes all sorts of moral and civil rights violations, to say nothing of the negative economic impact it has on the country. Like I said, it's not good that they came here illegally, but once you've opened Pandora's box, I fail to see a net positive scenario where denying benefits and dignity to them portends a better future for the USA. I honestly can't envision a scenario where that posture works, can you? Does illegal immigration stop if we suddenly cut em all off, or deport them, or ignore their inalienable rights (those rights separate from the Constitution)? I don't see it.

 

[werepossum]

So we should make everything we use in America? I'm not trying to be deliberately extreme, but there is only one country in the world that follows that philosophy and that's North Korea.

If you aren't saying that, then what?

Most people can see a tiny bit of daylight between huge trade deficits and being North Korea. I'll take you at your word and assume that you cannot, so I'll spell it out:

1. No, not everything we use should be made in America, but the vast majority of what we use should be made in America.
2. What we import should be balanced by what we export, or at the very least the difference should be within the margin of newly created wealth so that we don't grow poorer as a nation each year.
3. Our government should be incentivizing production inside America and disincentivizing production outside America, so that American goods are more attractive and imported goods are at least taxed to the point of covering the taxes lost with their production.

His former boss sure didn't care. His only thought was more profit for him and screw those who wouldn't sacrifice their pay for his benefit. Why do people stand up for the "job creators" when all they care about is their ass and not the american worker's they employ?

The right has wanted to get rid of unions for years and have done a great job of weakening them or outright destroying them completely. Congratulations, you're now reaping the benefits of your actions. Unions can be bad, but one thing they did help with was raising everyone else's wages up even in non-union shops.

This has absolutely nothing to do with standing up for the "job creators"; they will make even more money with lower paid illegal labor. It's standing up for the worker. And if we set up a system where it makes no sense to produce American goods in American, then for any job which can be outsourced unions drive them offshore even as they increase pay. Artificially driving up wages while also lowering import tariffs is the single most stupid course any nation could take. At least, unless it has a population willing to spend more to keep production domestic.

I'm sure once you plug realistic numbers into your rant you will find it doesn't make sense anymore.

These are very realistic numbers. In my home town is a chair factory. In the 60s and 70s it was a place where a man without a lot of smarts or education could work very hard and make a damned good living. Everyone wanted to work there. Guys on production were paid by the piece; if you worked harder, you made more money, and if your work was rejected then you made it for free. Benefits were fairly minimal, but almost all production workers earned over $20/hour (damned good in a poor rural Tennessee county) and quality was the company's highest of any plant. Several parts' production were moved to this plant exclusively because of its mix of quality and efficiency. Come the 90s, the company began to find reasons to fire these workers - almost always within the last two years of their pension investment. Put in thirty years and get a damned good pension, put in twenty-nine and three sixty-four and get almost nothing. Rather than replace these workers with the same, the company elected to hire a LOT of illegals. Quality went to hell, as did productivity - but they were paid a flat $10/hour with no benefits. As for other jobs, most of those guys (in their forties and fifties) were lucky to find a $9/hour job.

 

[Blackjack200]

Most people can see a tiny bit of daylight between huge trade deficits and being North Korea. I'll take you at your word and assume that you cannot, so I'll spell it out:

1. No, not everything we use should be made in America, but the vast majority of what we use should be made in America.

It's true that the iPads we use are manufactured in China, but they're designed in Cupertino and the Apple execs fly to Beijing (or wherever) on Boeing planes. Obsessing over what is made where and why is a waste of time unless it's approached with some rigor.

2. What we import should be balanced by what we export, or at the very least the difference should be within the margin of newly created wealth so that we don't grow poorer as a nation each year.

It's good to balance your imports and exports, but it's not critical. I'd say it's not even in the top 10 things we should be addressing.

3. Our government should be incentivizing production inside America and disincentivizing production outside America, so that American goods are more attractive and imported goods are at least taxed to the point of covering the taxes lost with their production.

It's generally better to let the market determine what gets made where, and have the government make sure that workers are trained and able to contribute to the industries we compete well in. America competes well in tons of industries, probably more than any other country.

This has absolutely nothing to do with standing up for the "job creators"; they will make even more money with lower paid illegal labor. It's standing up for the worker. And if we set up a system where it makes no sense to produce American goods in American, then for any job which can be outsourced unions drive them offshore even as they increase pay. Artificially driving up wages while also lowering import tariffs is the single most stupid course any nation could take. At least, unless it has a population willing to spend more to keep production domestic.

Ostensibly, yes. But I'd say if we really cared about the workers, we would be helping them cope with the evolving labor markets. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that illegal immigration doesn't impact a lof of workers here. Clearly, it does.

These are very realistic numbers. In my home town is a chair factory. In the 60s and 70s it was a place where a man without a lot of smarts or education could work very hard and make a damned good living. Everyone wanted to work there. Guys on production were paid by the piece; if you worked harder, you made more money, and if your work was rejected then you made it for free. Benefits were fairly minimal, but almost all production workers earned over $20/hour (damned good in a poor rural Tennessee county) and quality was the company's highest of any plant. Several parts' production were moved to this plant exclusively because of its mix of quality and efficiency. Come the 90s, the company began to find reasons to fire these workers - almost always within the last two years of their pension investment. Put in thirty years and get a damned good pension, put in twenty-nine and three sixty-four and get almost nothing. Rather than replace these workers with the same, the company elected to hire a LOT of illegals. Quality went to hell, as did productivity - but they were paid a flat $10/hour with no benefits. As for other jobs, most of those guys (in their forties and fifties) were lucky to find a $9/hour job.

Okay, again, I don't want to suggest that illegal immigration doesn't impact workers, it does. But I'd also point out that these jobs could have just as easily been lost to offshore furniture manufacturing. The dislocations you referred to would have been no different, and I think we are responsible as a society to support those workers. That's considered a very leftist idea though.

 

[BoberFett]

*snipped*

I'm not going to argue any further, I understand your point of view, but I respectfully disagree.

Now the "Round em up and ship em home!" and "Build a wall with mines and autocannons!" people are insane, those are both horrible ideas not even worthy of discussion to me. But I'd have no problem with greatly increasing the penalties for companies knowingly hiring illegal immigrants, enforcing those laws, and letting the problem sort itself while we modernize our immigration policies. But that's the closest I can come to a compromise.

 

[werepossum]

It's true that the iPads we use are manufactured in China, but they're designed in Cupertino and the Apple execs fly to Beijing (or wherever) on Boeing planes. Obsessing over what is made where and why is a waste of time unless it's approached with some rigor.

It's good to balance your imports and exports, but it's not critical. I'd say it's not even in the top 10 things we should be addressing.

It's generally better to let the market determine what gets made where, and have the government make sure that workers are trained and able to contribute to the industries we compete well in. America competes well in tons of industries, probably more than any other country.

Ostensibly, yes. But I'd say if we really cared about the workers, we would be helping them cope with the evolving labor markets. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that illegal immigration doesn't impact a lof of workers here. Clearly, it does.

Okay, again, I don't want to suggest that illegal immigration doesn't impact workers, it does. But I'd also point out that these jobs could have just as easily been lost to offshore furniture manufacturing. The dislocations you referred to would have been no different, and I think we are responsible as a society to support those workers. That's considered a very leftist idea though.

Three points. First, today the iPads we use are manufactured in China but designed in Cupertino under Apple execs who fly to Beijing on Boeing planes. In thirty years the iPads we use will be designed and manufactured in China, and when the Chinese executives fly to their American resorts they will do so on Chinese planes. Look through some retail outlets, look up the companies represented, and you'll be amazed at how many are now Chinese-owned companies. After some period of doing the manufacturing, the Chinese company also takes over the engineering because the American company no longer understands how to efficiently build its product. American engineers are replaced by Chinese engineers and American marketers. After some period of doing the manufacturing and the engineering, the Chinese company just sells its own product because its marketers are just as smart and work for less, and the American company, no longer associated with design or manufacturing of its product, is increasingly also clueless as to what new features can be efficiently added or expanded. The Chinese company has become the American company and the American company has become Dilbert.

Second, it's all well and good to say we should help people "cope with the evolving labor markets", but when the markets are evolving from $50k manufacturing jobs to $15 Walmart jobs it's somehow not quite the same.

And third, thank you for claiming that replacing a good manufacturing job with welfare is "a very leftist idea".

 

[LegendKiller]

Uh huh. Said from no experience.

The landscaper tried hiring gringos, has a few, but they work slow, complain a lot, and the turnover rate is very high.

A great uncle has a large fruit farm, natives never show up during picking season and those that do quit after one day.


Trump has it all backwards, the people coming here are a cut of the best workers in the home country. They travel great distances away from home, endure great hardship and expense to get here, but they come bc they want to work hard and make money for their families.

The natives that work these jobs are the ones who couldn't use all the riches and advantages of native language and excellent education in order to get better jobs. If you want to find the drug users and the losers, I'd know where to go to look.

I have a friend that works landscaping in FL. Works his fucking ass off and gets paid a decent amount. In Orlando. In the middle of the summer. He's 36.

That American's wont, or can't, do the same work, for near the same amount, is a fucking joke. Americans aren't lazy. We have one of the highest productivity of any fucking country on the planet, work more hours than anybody but perhaps the Koreans, and don't get nearly as much vacation time.

The notion that American's won't work those jobs is utterly retarded. Not mildly retarded. Seriously fucking retarded. As in I am surprised your autonomic actions actually work. It ignores all facts and data.

 

[LegendKiller]

Are you calling for autarky? That's sure what it sounds like.

Gee, no surprise coming from you.

Do you understand how China is "trading" with us, how the reduction of the Yuan on the peg works?

 

[LegendKiller]

For a CFA his understanding of international trade is complete shit. This is not even debated by serious economists. International trade has such enormous benefits that countries that can't agree on anything else will usually figure out ways to trade with each other.



People that rail against trade agreements, and China "manipulating their currency" and all this garbage ignore the fact that -trade or no trade - economies evolve. It was barely 150 years ago that virtually the entire American workforce consisted of farmers. What percentage is that today? 2%.

We have tremendous demand for skilled labor in this country, but our government has not been effective at re-training the labor that is displaced by trade and automation.

\

Yes, I have said get rid of international trade. Are you fucking moron?


China's currency manipulation is the same as Germany's. They have beggared other nations to boostrap their economies. It is unsustainable but they get away with it (for now) through currency manipulation. How do you think they get such huge foreign currency reserves without their currency appreciating? Because they peg it and sterilize the inflows. And before you say that we do the same, our currency free floats.

We have tremendous demand for unskilled labor too, at a price. That price is not below the free floating PPP of China, at least not on a long time scale. This is the nature of floating currencies and economics, any appreciating currency will lose it's economic advantage eventually. However, a non-floating and under appreciated currency will not lose the advantage and accumulate foreign currency reserves (like Germany on Target2, China for USD, and Japan did).

Furthermore, "trade" should balance internationally, where excesses increase in one area, it decreases in another, however, imbalances are created with pegs, and less "free" terms. Such as slapping tariffs or treating one country's goods differently, or constraining their ability to sell goods into the exporting country, like Japan and China does. This creates further imbalances, beggaring the importing country.

Since they do not allow their currency to float, and the USD makes up the bulk of the FCRs, the US people support their economy with no equal (or normalizing) reciprocation.

No serious economist discusses this because nobody wants to face the inconvenient truth. Do you think economists work for free? Do you think they really give a shit? Do you think they do anything but worship on the altar of "free markets" but deign to criticize China?

Do you really think Jan Hatzius is going to come out against China's currency manipulation? Or anybody in the US government who is up for re-election? Are you insane?

Goldman would lose money. Politicians would lose elections. Nope, better to just let it go. Sell the people on the notion you don't need "loser jobs".

Go to college instead. Exit with your $100k in student loans with your sub-par, below average grade, degree and your shitty-ass social working job for $45k/yr, all paid for by China, who took your ability to not take out $100k in loans by beggaring your economy and getting rid of "loser jobs".

Then you'll just go on IBR and pay $78/mo on $186k in loans and get it forgiven in 25 years.


Yeah, "retrain" people.

You're a fucking loon.

I just gave you more economics and finance knowledge in the above post than you've probably learned in 5 years. Read it, re-read it, and figure it the fuck out.

 

[fskimospy]

Gee, no surprise coming from you.

Do you understand how China is "trading" with us, how the reduction of the Yuan on the peg works?

Yup. Understand it perfectly. My question stands.

This raging alpha shit is wasted here. You realize I see finance douches try to pull that shit all the time, right?

 

[LegendKiller]

Yup. Understand it perfectly. My question stands.

This raging alpha shit is wasted here. You realize I see finance douches try to pull that shit all the time, right?

I do too, but you also realize that I have been right about housing and right about student loans. The vast majority of finance douches weren't right about either.

I am right about China also.

Your question does not stand because it's idiotic attempt at marginalization through polarization. I have never said we should be an autarky without global trade. I have said that we should have *FREE* trade and not what we have now, which is "free trade".

 

[fskimospy]

I do too, but you also realize that I have been right about housing and right about student loans. The vast majority of finance douches weren't right about either.

I am right about China also.

Your question does not stand because it's idiotic attempt at marginalization through polarization. I have never said we should be an autarky without global trade. I have said that we should have *FREE* trade and not what we have now, which is "free trade".

I agree that China is being shitty and they need to be reined in, but Trump's idea of a trade war is stupid. The WTO does not allow for that kind of bullshit and we would be fools to leave it.

 

[LegendKiller]

I agree that China is being shitty and they need to be reined in, but Trump's idea of a trade war is stupid. The WTO does not allow for that kind of bullshit and we would be fools to leave it.

Why not just give them reciprocal trade agreements? Want to hold up our goods? We can hold up yours. Want to peg your currency? Then we'll slap a tariff on them equivalent to a derived calculation of float vs pegged. There has been a trade war going on with China for almost 20 years. It's just Americans are too fucking blinded by bullshit like Gay Rights and Pro Life to see the truth, the "loser jobs" we have given to China, for free, were sold to them on our backs for the enrichment of the wealthy while we scrabble for table scraps and Bread and Circuses.

Trade is trade. I give you something of value at an agreed upon price. The problem is that American people are being sold goods at a fake price, agreed upon by our political establishment (aka wealthy billionaires), for their own enrichment.

You can see the effects on the Clintons. They peddle this shit all day for millions.

That's exactly what Trump is saying. Clintons? Soros Whores. Bush/Walker/Cruz/Romney? Koch Whores. Soros and Koch? China Whores.

 

[fskimospy]

Why not just give them reciprocal trade agreements? Want to hold up our goods? We can hold up yours. Want to peg your currency? Then we'll slap a tariff on them equivalent to a derived calculation of float vs pegged. There has been a trade war going on with China for almost 20 years. It's just Americans are too fucking blinded by bullshit like Gay Rights and Pro Life to see the truth, the "loser jobs" we have given to China, for free, were sold to them on our backs for the enrichment of the wealthy while we scrabble for table scraps and Bread and Circuses.

Trade is trade. I give you something of value at an agreed upon price. The problem is that American people are being sold goods at a fake price, agreed upon by our political establishment (aka wealthy billionaires), for their own enrichment.

You can see the effects on the Clintons. They peddle this shit all day for millions.

How are you fitting the WTO into this?

 

[Blackjack200]

\

Yes, I have said get rid of international trade. Are you fucking moron?

China's currency manipulation is the same as Germany's. They have beggared other nations to boostrap their economies. It is unsustainable but they get away with it (for now) through currency manipulation. How do you think they get such huge foreign currency reserves without their currency appreciating? Because they peg it and sterilize the inflows. And before you say that we do the same, our currency free floats.

We have tremendous demand for unskilled labor too, at a price. That price is not below the free floating PPP of China, at least not on a long time scale. This is the nature of floating currencies and economics, any appreciating currency will lose it's economic advantage eventually. However, a non-floating and under appreciated currency will not lose the advantage and accumulate foreign currency reserves (like Germany on Target2, China for USD, and Japan did).

Furthermore, "trade" should balance internationally, where excesses increase in one area, it decreases in another, however, imbalances are created with pegs, and less "free" terms. Such as slapping tariffs or treating one country's goods differently, or constraining their ability to sell goods into the exporting country, like Japan and China does. This creates further imbalances, beggaring the importing country.

Since they do not allow their currency to float, and the USD makes up the bulk of the FCRs, the US people support their economy with no equal (or normalizing) reciprocation.

No serious economist discusses this because nobody wants to face the inconvenient truth. Do you think economists work for free? Do you think they really give a shit? Do you think they do anything but worship on the altar of "free markets" but deign to criticize China?

Do you really think Jan Hatzius is going to come out against China's currency manipulation? Or anybody in the US government who is up for re-election? Are you insane?

Goldman would lose money. Politicians would lose elections. Nope, better to just let it go. Sell the people on the notion you don't need "loser jobs".

Go to college instead. Exit with your $100k in student loans with your sub-par, below average grade, degree and your shitty-ass social working job for $45k/yr, all paid for by China, who took your ability to not take out $100k in loans by beggaring your economy and getting rid of "loser jobs".

Then you'll just go on IBR and pay $78/mo on $186k in loans and get it forgiven in 25 years.


Yeah, "retrain" people.

You're a fucking loon.

I just gave you more economics and finance knowledge in the above post than you've probably learned in 5 years. Read it, re-read it, and figure it the fuck out.

If we're so beggard why are we sitting on $18 trillion GDP? Yeah, that's after (X-M). We grossed $2.3 trillion in imports last year, $466 billion from China. Less than 3% of GDP.

Chinese currency manipulation is a canard. It makes no sense to manipulate currency to affect the balance of trade, you manipulate your currency to stimulate or retard economic growth, and control inflation.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/chinese-currency-manipulation-by-jeffrey-frankel-2015-02

I don't know if you noticed, but we engaged in some pretty heavy duty "currency manipulation" ourselves since 2008-2009 setting our interest rates at zero and three rounds of quantitative easing.

Face what you want shithead. The problem in this country is not the amount of economic activity or wealth, it's the way it's distributed.

Don't even fucking talk about the higher education situation in this country after all the federal and state cuts to education budgets.

 

[Blackjack200]

Oh yeah, fucking LOL at claiming to be an economic expert of some kind and pretending that productivity is a measure of how hard people work:

That American's wont, or can't, do the same work, for near the same amount, is a fucking joke. Americans aren't lazy. We have one of the highest productivity of any fucking country on the planet, work more hours than anybody but perhaps the Koreans, and don't get nearly as much vacation time.

Worker productivity is economic value created per hour worked. Productivity gains are driven by technology and capital investment. Not because people are "working harder". Jesus Christ.

 

[LegendKiller]

Oh yeah, fucking LOL at claiming to be an economic expert of some kind and pretending that productivity is a measure of how hard people work:



Worker productivity is economic value created per hour worked. Productivity gains are driven by technology and capital investment. Not because people are "working harder". Jesus Christ.

And american workers work more hours than almost any worker in the world, while being one of the most productive. Jesus Christ.

 

[Blackjack200]

And american workers work more hours than almost any worker in the world, while being one of the most productive. Jesus Christ.

And productivity is a measure of how hard people work?

Good thing you got your CFA in the turnstyle days. Now you actually need to know something.

 

[Blackjack200]

Oh no, China devalues its currency again!

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/12/china/china-currency-explainer/index.html

Must be escalation of trade war rather than an economically developed nation using monetary policy to stimulate economic growth!

Fuck out of here you clown.

 

[fskimospy]

Most people can see a tiny bit of daylight between huge trade deficits and being North Korea. I'll take you at your word and assume that you cannot, so I'll spell it out:

If not producing things in America is bad then logic dictates we should produce everything here. If you mean 'almost everything' then what is exempt from the rule? Be specific.

1. No, not everything we use should be made in America, but the vast majority of what we use should be made in America.

Imports comprise about 16% of GDP right now, so 85% of our economy is internal. What percentage should it be?

2. What we import should be balanced by what we export, or at the very least the difference should be within the margin of newly created wealth so that we don't grow poorer as a nation each year.

Good news! That already happens. US trade deficit was ~2.4% of GDP, which was the same rate of economic growth.

3. Our government should be incentivizing production inside America and disincentivizing production outside America, so that American goods are more attractive and imported goods are at least taxed to the point of covering the taxes lost with their production.

Ahh, so a worldwide trade war. That sounds productive.

This has absolutely nothing to do with standing up for the "job creators"; they will make even more money with lower paid illegal labor. It's standing up for the worker. And if we set up a system where it makes no sense to produce American goods in American, then for any job which can be outsourced unions drive them offshore even as they increase pay. Artificially driving up wages while also lowering import tariffs is the single most stupid course any nation could take. At least, unless it has a population willing to spend more to keep production domestic.

These are very realistic numbers. In my home town is a chair factory. In the 60s and 70s it was a place where a man without a lot of smarts or education could work very hard and make a damned good living. Everyone wanted to work there. Guys on production were paid by the piece; if you worked harder, you made more money, and if your work was rejected then you made it for free. Benefits were fairly minimal, but almost all production workers earned over $20/hour (damned good in a poor rural Tennessee county) and quality was the company's highest of any plant. Several parts' production were moved to this plant exclusively because of its mix of quality and efficiency. Come the 90s, the company began to find reasons to fire these workers - almost always within the last two years of their pension investment. Put in thirty years and get a damned good pension, put in twenty-nine and three sixty-four and get almost nothing. Rather than replace these workers with the same, the company elected to hire a LOT of illegals. Quality went to hell, as did productivity - but they were paid a flat $10/hour with no benefits. As for other jobs, most of those guys (in their forties and fifties) were lucky to find a $9/hour job.

It's always fascinating to me how people who argue that an individual should be paid what the market deems they are worth then argue for $20 an hour chair makers.

What's funny is that a $15 burger flipper is way more economically viable than a $20 chair maker. Restaurants are confined by geography, but you can get a chair shipped from anywhere.

We are simply not going to be lowering manufacturing wages enough for products that can be made with unskilled or low skill labor to compete with countries with hundreds of millions of impoverished people. Ever. It's a fools errand.

We shouldn't want to even if we could. Manufacturing is generally dangerous and environmentally costly. When people say they want manufacturing back they forget about the toxic rivers, the superfund sites, etc that come with it.

 

[Blackjack200]

Good news! That already happens. US trade deficit was ~2.4% of GDP, which was the same rate of economic growth.

It's also worth pointing out that the reason for our trade deficits are completely different than what they have traditionally been. We used to run trade deficits because of energy imports. Now we're a net exporter of energy, and prices are low anyway.

We are currently running trade deficits because effective stimulus policies have increased consumer demand (i.e. made consumers richer) and US consumers are buying more imports as a result.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

We are currently running trade deficits because effective stimulus policies have increased consumer demand (i.e. made consumers richer) and US consumers are buying more imports as a result.

Richer?

 

[Blackjack200]

Richer?

My comments about the root cause of our trading deficit reflect mainstream economic wisdom and are not in any way at odds with stagnant real median household wages.

Also, why the fuck would you chart real (i.e. inflation adjusted) incomes against nominal (i.e. not inflation adjusted) debt levels? Why we are charting it against securitized debt and not total debt? Why does it matter if the debt is securitized or not? Why would you begin a chart at $47,100 and end it at $58,388?

Think there might be an agenda there?