Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

Next Thread ><<  1    2    3    4    5  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Merry Christmas Carrier employees

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9701
(9700 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/8/2016 at 11:59 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It is the press who serves one role as checks and balances on the exec office.
No longer. Most gave up that duty to play cheerleader for the current administration.


They will flip back to the watchdog now that Trump has been elected. Bank on it. Their lack of consistency will further erode their credibility.

___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

A watchdog approach is exactly with the press is supposed to do. They have two responsibilities:
1.) hold the government accountable
2.) report the news to the people.

The hard part for many now is that most of what is "reported" is not the facts, not the news. it is a politically driven opinion.

Oh well. Informed people can separate the facts from the b/s.


Ah, like Flynn JR. and Pizzagate? you get dumber by the hour mule-fool

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9701
(9700 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 12:07 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
It is the press who serves one role as checks and balances on the exec office.
No longer. Most gave up that duty to play cheerleader for the current administration.


They will flip back to the watchdog now that Trump has been elected. Bank on it. Their lack of consistency will further erode their credibility.
Say, hows about some cheese with that [not so fine] Whine!. I wonder who will go to prison first? maybe ill start a pool

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3675
(3681 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 07:45 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It is the press who serves one role as checks and balances on the exec office.
No longer. Most gave up that duty to play cheerleader for the current administration.


They will flip back to the watchdog now that Trump has been elected. Bank on it. Their lack of consistency will further erode their credibility.

___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

A watchdog approach is exactly with the press is supposed to do. They have two responsibilities:
1.) hold the government accountable
2.) report the news to the people.

The hard part for many now is that most of what is "reported" is not the facts, not the news. it is a politically driven opinion.

Oh well. Informed people can separate the facts from the b/s.


Ah, like Flynn JR. and Pizzagate? you get dumber by the hour mule-fool


Saw an interview with General Barry McCaffrey last night. See the highlights below re: General McCaffrey's thoughts on Flynn & son:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/12/8/1608651/-Gen-Barry-McCaffrey-withdr aws-support-of-Trump-National-Security-Advisor-calls-for-investigation

General Barry McCaffrey tells NBC News that he was initially supportive of Donald Trump’s decision to name Lt. General Michael Flynn as his national security advisor. But, a closer look at Flynn’s social media use shows that he sent out at least 16 different fake (propaganda) news stories via social media and General McCaffrey pulled no punches, bluntly calling the tweets and stories “demented.”

The Trump transition team is also rightly getting criticism for allowing Lt. General Flynn’s son, Michael G. Flynn, to not only take part in the transition team, but to seek out security clearance for him when his own social media has shown him to be prolifically disseminating utterly false and outrageous politically motivated news. (You can watch a smarmy Mike Pence evade Jake Tapper's pointed questions about Flynn, Jr.'s security clearance six different times by clicking here.) One of those fake stories prompted a man to walk into a pizza place and fire his high-powered gun to personally “investigate” the child sex trafficking ring run by Hillary Clinton that Flynn was tweeting about to his followers. Which, of course, wasn’t happening.

General Barry McCaffrey went on to say that “we need to aggressively examine what was going on” with Lt. General Michael Flynn and his son. Hear, hear!

In short, Lt. General Flynn’s outrageous peddling of fake news and/or propaganda should be disqualifying. Period. End story.




 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8384
(8385 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 08:48 AM
quote:
In short, Lt. General Flynn’s outrageous peddling of fake news and/or propaganda should be disqualifying. Period. End story.
As we say goodbye to a President who outright lied to the American public on a number of occasions, and hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm. Yes Flynn should be fully vetted and dumped if unqualified, but the entertainment value of all this hypocrisy is worth its weight in gold.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3675
(3681 all sites)
Registered: 10/5/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 10:09 AM
quote:
quote:
In short, Lt. General Flynn’s outrageous peddling of fake news and/or propaganda should be disqualifying. Period. End story.
As we say goodbye to a President who outright lied to the American public on a number of occasions, and hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm. Yes Flynn should be fully vetted and dumped if unqualified, but the entertainment value of all this hypocrisy is worth its weight in gold.


Your generalize quite well when you state, "hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm."

As a start why don't you show where General Flynn's actions with spreading fake news is a left wing tactic. Did he do it or not? You can even quote his son's words. Fake news has become a real issue unless individuals are in denial and choose to bury their heads in the sand because it doesn't fit a narrow minded belief.

Your disdain for Pres. Obama has been noted over the years. Maybe you can cheer as Trump's entire campaign was one lie after another. Beware of what the country just voted in and got bamboozled by. You'll get what you deserve.

 

World Class Peach



Karma:
Posts: 5355
(5354 all sites)
Registered: 9/9/2011
Status: Online

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 10:14 AM
http://money.cnn.com/2016/12/08/news/companies/carrier-jobs-automation/inde x.html

Carrier to ultimately cut some of jobs Trump saved
by Chris Isidore @CNNMoney
December 9, 2016: 8:16 AM ET

It sounded like great news when Carrier said last week that it would invest millions in the Indiana plant it decided to keep in the U.S.

The company's deal with President-elect Donald Trump to keep a furnace plant from moving to Mexico also calls for a $16 million investment in the facility.

But that has a big down side for some of the workers in Indianapolis.

Most of that money will be invested in automation said to Greg Hayes, CEO of United Technologies, Carrier's corporate parent. And that automation will replace some of the jobs that were just saved.

"We're going to...automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive," he said on an interview on CNBC earlier this week. "Is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower cost labor? No. But we will make that plant competitive just because we'll make the capital investments there. But what that ultimately means is there will be fewer jobs."

The decision to keep Carrier's furnace manufacturing operations in the U.S. instead of moving them to Mexico will save about 800 jobs out of the 1,400 at the plant, at least in the near term. The company declined to say how many of the plants 800 remaining jobs could be lost to automation, or when.

The threat that automation poses to jobs a big concern for Chuck Jones, president of United Steelworkers union Local 1999, which represents the Carrier workers.

"Automation means less people," he told CNN's Chris Cuomo on "New Day" on Thursday. "I think we'll have a reduction of workforce at some point in time once they get all the automation in and up and running."

Still, automation is the only way that a plant in Indiana that pays about $20 an hour can compete with Mexican plants where workers earn $3 an hour.

The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs in the U.S. has declined sharply thanks in large part to more efficient factories.

"You can't just blame cheap labor [outside the U.S.]," said Dan Miklovic, principal analyst with LNS research. "Certainly many of the jobs that we've lost, especially in more sophisticated industries, it's not so much that they've been offshored, but it has been automation that replaced them. We use a lot more robots to build cars."

All together, U.S. factories are actually producing more products today than they did in the post-World War II era, according to the Federal Reserve's reading on manufacturing output. Output at U.S. factories is up 150% in last 40 years. But U.S. manufacturing jobs have plunged by more than 30% in that same period. And automation is a big reason why.

And it's not a trend that's going to end with Carrier or even with manufacturers.

A recent study by McKinsey & Co. said that 45% of the tasks that U.S. workers are currently paid to perform can be automated by existing technology. That represents about $2 trillion in annual wages.

 

____________________
Flies all green 'n buzzin' in his dungeon of despair
Who are all those people that he's locked away up there
Are they crazy?,
Are they sainted?
Are they zeros someone painted?,
It has never been explained since at first it was created

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 11:32 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
In short, Lt. General Flynn’s outrageous peddling of fake news and/or propaganda should be disqualifying. Period. End story.
As we say goodbye to a President who outright lied to the American public on a number of occasions, and hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm. Yes Flynn should be fully vetted and dumped if unqualified, but the entertainment value of all this hypocrisy is worth its weight in gold.


Your generalize quite well when you state, "hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm."

As a start why don't you show where General Flynn's actions with spreading fake news is a left wing tactic. Did he do it or not? You can even quote his son's words. Fake news has become a real issue unless individuals are in denial and choose to bury their heads in the sand because it doesn't fit a narrow minded belief.

Your disdain for Pres. Obama has been noted over the years. Maybe you can cheer as Trump's entire campaign was one lie after another. Beware of what the country just voted in and got bamboozled by. You'll get what you deserve.

___________________________________________________________________________ __________

"Trump's entire campaign was one lie after another"

You are very confused son.
The one lie after another was Obama's entire Presidency and the now disgraced Hillary Clinton and her campaign.

That is okay. the American People fixed that for you.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 12:31 PM



 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9701
(9700 all sites)
Registered: 8/16/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 12:35 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
In short, Lt. General Flynn’s outrageous peddling of fake news and/or propaganda should be disqualifying. Period. End story.
As we say goodbye to a President who outright lied to the American public on a number of occasions, and hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm. Yes Flynn should be fully vetted and dumped if unqualified, but the entertainment value of all this hypocrisy is worth its weight in gold.


Your generalize quite well when you state, "hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news" (now that charging everyone as racists and bigots has lost its steam), it's fun to watch these folks squirm."

As a start why don't you show where General Flynn's actions with spreading fake news is a left wing tactic. Did he do it or not? You can even quote his son's words. Fake news has become a real issue unless individuals are in denial and choose to bury their heads in the sand because it doesn't fit a narrow minded belief.

Your disdain for Pres. Obama has been noted over the years. Maybe you can cheer as Trump's entire campaign was one lie after another. Beware of what the country just voted in and got bamboozled by. You'll get what you deserve.

___________________________________________________________________________ __________

"Trump's entire campaign was one lie after another"

You are very confused son.
The one lie after another was trump's campaign, and now two million more people voted for Hillary Clinton then did for the orange jagoff.

fixed that for you.


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46487
(46488 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 03:42 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
It is the press who serves one role as checks and balances on the exec office.
No longer. Most gave up that duty to play cheerleader for the current administration.
Interesting. Can you list maybe a half dozen or so of the major media sources / outlets that you feel fit your statement?
If you don't believe the major media institutions bent over backwards to give the current administration a pass in terms of scrutiny, then no list will satisfy. Think of all the media losers who missed the Trump call and you have your answer.
When it comes a dereliction in a situation that led to massive loss of life, the media "pass" given during the runup to the Second Iraq War was far more devastating than anything else that has come after it.
No disagreement here. But in addition, consider all those in Congress who supported it AND had gov't intelligence to aid their decision, Hillary among them.


I've considered them all, and they were all wrong. Hillary as well. Said it then, I'll say it now. The media was also complicit in the drumbeats of war.

I can remember one guy who didn't vote for it, though.

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 46487
(46488 all sites)
Registered: 7/8/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 03:44 PM
quote:
hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news"


Are you saying there's not completely fabricated "news" that has been appearing all over the place for several months now? I know you are smarter than that, and your lame potshot at "the left" is just you not wanting to acknowledge the existence of something that most certainly does exist.

 

____________________
"Live every week like it's Shark Week." - Tracy Jordan

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 04:16 PM
quote:
quote:
hello to the new tactic from the left and major media losers of defining everything they don't like as "fake news"


Are you saying there's not completely fabricated "news" that has been appearing all over the place for several months now? I know you are smarter than that, and your lame potshot at "the left" is just you not wanting to acknowledge the existence of something that most certainly does exist.

___________________________________________________________________________ __________

Oh yes there is a lot of fake news.
The NYT, WAPO, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN tried to lie their way to an election to fit their political agenda and they lost.

Ha ha.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 26613
(26624 all sites)
Registered: 8/12/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/9/2016 at 06:26 PM
On the topic of manufacturing, this article sums up the region I live in pretty well

http://reut.rs/2gqM5Td

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/16/2016 at 07:23 PM
Christmas saved: Carrier families thank Trump, count blessings
By Brooke Singman - Published December 16, 2016 - FoxNews.com

Carrier employee: Trump truly wants to keep jobs in America

The Bray kids are counting on Santa Claus comin' to town, and their parents, like more than 1,000 other Carrier employees whose jobs were saved by a dramatic deal negotiated by President-elect Donald Trump, are counting their blessings.

T.J. Bray, 32, whose job at an Indianapolis air conditioner factory was saved after Trump convinced company executives not to move operations to Monterrey, Mexico, is no longer dreading a dismal holiday.
“If you had told me in February this year would end on a good note, I would have told you you’re bat crazy,” the 14-year Carrier production associate told FoxNews.com. “We can all breathe a sigh of relief knowing we can go back to doing what we’ve been doing –doing the best job we can do and going home to take care of our families.”

The Brays, T.J., Amanda, Zane and Jovie, learned 11 months ago that his job was being phased out. (Special to FoxNews.com)

The Brays spent the first 11 months of 2016 on a “roller-coaster," after learning on Feb. 10 the plant was winding down, said T.J.'s wife, Amanda, 32. Although they spared son Zane, 6, and daughter, Jovie, 4, the near year-long anxiety, the Brays told their children the good news on Nov. 30, after getting word that Carrier's parent company had reversed its plans. The decision came after officials met with Trump and got tax incentives from Indiana, where Vice President-elect Mike Pence is still governor.
“My daughter now says ‘Daddy, Donald Trump saved your job!’” T.J.Bray said. “Mommy and Daddy don’t have to worry about anything.”

Amanda Bray said the year was difficult.

“T.J. is my rock; my security blanket –but when he told me the news, I could hear the panic in his voice,” she said. “I knew at that very moment our roles were going to switch, and I would have to be the strong one and lift him up –I never had to play that role.”

The Bray family Christmas tree, (l.), will have presents under it after President-elect Trump, at right visiting Carrier's plant, struck a deal to save jobs. (Special to FoxNews.com, AP)

Her husband acknowledged there was fear behind the brave face he tried to wear for nearly a year.
“It’s a blessing to know you could lose your job a year in advance, but it’s like you’re waiting for your funeral,” he said.

But now, “It’s Christmastime and knowing my job is safe, we can now breathe a bit easier,” he added.
Robin Maynard, who has worked for Carrier for 24 years, said having his job saved has made him even more appreciative of what really matters during the season of caring and charity.

“We’re going to give a little bit more this year than we have in the past,” said Maynard, a Carrier group leader.

His wife, Candy Maynard, is a former sixth-grade teacher who is now on disability due to a decline in health this year. Losing the family income would have hit the couple and their three daughters hard.

“God is in control and we’re so blessed the Lord is taking care of us,” Candy Maynard said. “This made our Christmas so much brighter.”

The same lesson is not lost on the Brays, who say their children were “always going to have a good Christmas,” but that the family has learned time together means more than "extra things.”

“Priorities get put into perspective really quickly,” Amanda Bray said. “We’ve changed our way of life, and I don’t think I’ll go back.”

Amanda Bray said the family drew closer, as they saved whatever extra money they had for experiences and memories, rather than material things. Highlights included their family vacation to the beach, and a trip to New York City to watch the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade.

“We promised we would take the kids on vacations long before the bad news about T.J.’s job, and we made it happen – I didn’t want to disappoint them,” Amanda Bray said.

Spoiler alert: If you are one of the Bray children, stop reading now.

Zane's list has been checked twice, and Jovie is going to get the Barbie Dream House, complete with an elevator. It will come from Santa by way of a single mom Amanda Bray found on Facebook, who offered her own daughter's a gently used version for a fraction of the $149 retail price.

“I’m helping her and she’s helping me; and if my children want something, no matter what, I’ll figure it out," Amanda Bray said. "I think that’s what moms do.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/12/16/christmas-saved-carrier-families-thank -trump-count-blessings.html


 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9137
(9162 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/16/2016 at 10:21 PM
quote:
On the topic of manufacturing, this article sums up the region I live in pretty well

http://reut.rs/2gqM5Td


That is a problem. And all the new union hires at the auto plants get hired at a lower tier now, some of that thanks to the auto-bail-out.

What I've always thought is that if more of these jobs were here (either created or "reshored") then companies would have to compete for workers and wages and benefits would have to increase to attract those workers. When there is an over abundance of labor then wages can stay low. Everything has to come together for it all to work out. Business interests want one thing. Workers want another thing. What does the government want and who will they favor? Trump has signaled he will try to balance this, Carrier is just one example. He's got 4 years to make it happen on alot bigger scale than a one instance example. We shall see.

quote:
Christmas saved: Carrier families thank Trump, count blessings
By Brooke Singman - Published December 16, 2016 - FoxNews.com

Carrier employee: Trump truly wants to keep jobs in America

The Bray kids are counting on Santa Claus comin' to town, and their parents, like more than 1,000 other Carrier employees whose jobs were saved by a dramatic deal negotiated by President-elect Donald Trump, are counting their blessings.



Shouldn't a story just written now atleast have the right number of jobs that have been saved? It isn't over 1000 as has been reported.

Time to put this one to bed anyway. How much run do you want from it? I'm happy for it, I've said such in this thread. But what is next? More jobs to save at other companies in Indy. More jobs to save elsewhere in the US. Why haven't more actions similar to what happened at Carrier happened yet?

[Edited on 12/17/2016 by nebish]

 

A Peach Supreme



Karma:
Posts: 2942
(2948 all sites)
Registered: 7/14/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/17/2016 at 06:16 AM
Rome wasn't built in one day. Trump probably still has a lot of work to do getting all those Trump brand clothing lines brought back into this country.

 

____________________
Mark Ramsey

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/17/2016 at 11:22 AM
quote:
quote:
On the topic of manufacturing, this article sums up the region I live in pretty well

http://reut.rs/2gqM5Td


That is a problem. And all the new union hires at the auto plants get hired at a lower tier now, some of that thanks to the auto-bail-out.

What I've always thought is that if more of these jobs were here (either created or "reshored") then companies would have to compete for workers and wages and benefits would have to increase to attract those workers. When there is an over abundance of labor then wages can stay low. Everything has to come together for it all to work out. Business interests want one thing. Workers want another thing. What does the government want and who will they favor? Trump has signaled he will try to balance this, Carrier is just one example. He's got 4 years to make it happen on alot bigger scale than a one instance example. We shall see.

quote:
Christmas saved: Carrier families thank Trump, count blessings
By Brooke Singman - Published December 16, 2016 - FoxNews.com

Carrier employee: Trump truly wants to keep jobs in America

The Bray kids are counting on Santa Claus comin' to town, and their parents, like more than 1,000 other Carrier employees whose jobs were saved by a dramatic deal negotiated by President-elect Donald Trump, are counting their blessings.



Shouldn't a story just written now atleast have the right number of jobs that have been saved? It isn't over 1000 as has been reported.

Time to put this one to bed anyway. How much run do you want from it? I'm happy for it, I've said such in this thread. But what is next? More jobs to save at other companies in Indy. More jobs to save elsewhere in the US. Why haven't more actions similar to what happened at Carrier happened yet?

[Edited on 12/17/2016 by nebish]

___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

With the U.S. having the highest corporate tax rate in the world, a militant union environment and the thousands of regulations imposed on companies over the last eight years many companies, in order to survive, had to relocate the corporate entity and/or manufacturing outside of the U.S.

If a company cannot be profitable in the U.S. it is that company’s responsibility to go where it can continue to operate.

The best chance for that happening right now is Donald Trump.

A renegotiating of the so-called free trade agreements will really help as well. We need free and fair trade agreements which have not been the practice over the last few decades.

This $15/hr "demand" is simply impractical. Automation and common sense has shown it to be a net job loosing idea. Popular doesn't make it work.



 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1958
(1961 all sites)
Registered: 5/12/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/17/2016 at 04:16 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
On the topic of manufacturing, this article sums up the region I live in pretty well

http://reut.rs/2gqM5Td


That is a problem. And all the new union hires at the auto plants get hired at a lower tier now, some of that thanks to the auto-bail-out.

What I've always thought is that if more of these jobs were here (either created or "reshored") then companies would have to compete for workers and wages and benefits would have to increase to attract those workers. When there is an over abundance of labor then wages can stay low. Everything has to come together for it all to work out. Business interests want one thing. Workers want another thing. What does the government want and who will they favor? Trump has signaled he will try to balance this, Carrier is just one example. He's got 4 years to make it happen on alot bigger scale than a one instance example. We shall see.

quote:
Christmas saved: Carrier families thank Trump, count blessings
By Brooke Singman - Published December 16, 2016 - FoxNews.com

Carrier employee: Trump truly wants to keep jobs in America

The Bray kids are counting on Santa Claus comin' to town, and their parents, like more than 1,000 other Carrier employees whose jobs were saved by a dramatic deal negotiated by President-elect Donald Trump, are counting their blessings.



Shouldn't a story just written now atleast have the right number of jobs that have been saved? It isn't over 1000 as has been reported.

Time to put this one to bed anyway. How much run do you want from it? I'm happy for it, I've said such in this thread. But what is next? More jobs to save at other companies in Indy. More jobs to save elsewhere in the US. Why haven't more actions similar to what happened at Carrier happened yet?

[Edited on 12/17/2016 by nebish]

___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

With the U.S. having the highest corporate tax rate in the world, a militant union environment and the thousands of regulations imposed on companies over the last eight years many companies, in order to survive, had to relocate the corporate entity and/or manufacturing outside of the U.S.

If a company cannot be profitable in the U.S. it is that company’s responsibility to go where it can continue to operate.

The best chance for that happening right now is Donald Trump.

A renegotiating of the so-called free trade agreements will really help as well. We need free and fair trade agreements which have not been the practice over the last few decades.

This $15/hr "demand" is simply impractical. Automation and common sense has shown it to be a net job loosing idea. Popular doesn't make it work.




The salaries of CEO's and higher management have climbed disproportionately over the last 60 years at the expense of worker wages and opportunities. There needs to be a much larger share of the pie allocated to worker wages. Most corporations could continue to operate in the US if they brought corporate compensation down to what it is was in the 1950’s; CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratio has Ballooned 1,000 percent since 1950. How much as minimum wage gone up in this period?

quote:

The Dodd-Frank financial reform law aimed to make it easier for the public to know how much CEOs are getting paid in comparison to their workers. The law includes a provision requiring public companies to disclose their CEO-to-worker pay ratios, but nearly three years after the law passed, the Securities and Exchange commission still hasn’t put the rule in place, thanks in part to business opposition to the proposal, according to ABC News.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who authored the provision told ABC last year: “It might embarrass some companies to reveal that they pay their CEO in the range of 400 times what they pay their typical worker.”

It can be especially embarrassing when the CEO doesn’t perform. Former J.C. Penney head Ron Johnson, whose compensation was 1,795 times the average worker pay, according to Bloomberg, was recently ousted from his post after failing to turn around the struggling company.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio_n_3184623. html

Most of the savings in labor costs achieved through relocation have gone straight into the pockets of higher management and shareholders. Management and shareholders are not going to want to split these profits with workers if they return to the US. The US government would have to subsidize this move as it has promised to do with Carrier.

Moving operations overseas has allowed companies to not only pay workers less but to take advantage of the multiple resources a worker's family has to meet household costs. Many of these companies are based in rural areas and so the daily cost of living is supplemented by keeping small farms. Wages in these areas only make up a percentage of what a worker needs to support a family.

US workers have to be given a wage that would cover a much higher proportion of household expenses. To give the average worker a chance to make a living wage and support a family minimum wage would have to be in the $35 range. This again would have to be subtracted from corporate wages.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/17/2016 at 06:07 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
On the topic of manufacturing, this article sums up the region I live in pretty well

http://reut.rs/2gqM5Td


That is a problem. And all the new union hires at the auto plants get hired at a lower tier now, some of that thanks to the auto-bail-out.

What I've always thought is that if more of these jobs were here (either created or "reshored") then companies would have to compete for workers and wages and benefits would have to increase to attract those workers. When there is an over abundance of labor then wages can stay low. Everything has to come together for it all to work out. Business interests want one thing. Workers want another thing. What does the government want and who will they favor? Trump has signaled he will try to balance this, Carrier is just one example. He's got 4 years to make it happen on alot bigger scale than a one instance example. We shall see.

quote:
Christmas saved: Carrier families thank Trump, count blessings
By Brooke Singman - Published December 16, 2016 - FoxNews.com

Carrier employee: Trump truly wants to keep jobs in America

The Bray kids are counting on Santa Claus comin' to town, and their parents, like more than 1,000 other Carrier employees whose jobs were saved by a dramatic deal negotiated by President-elect Donald Trump, are counting their blessings.



Shouldn't a story just written now atleast have the right number of jobs that have been saved? It isn't over 1000 as has been reported.

Time to put this one to bed anyway. How much run do you want from it? I'm happy for it, I've said such in this thread. But what is next? More jobs to save at other companies in Indy. More jobs to save elsewhere in the US. Why haven't more actions similar to what happened at Carrier happened yet?

[Edited on 12/17/2016 by nebish]

___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

With the U.S. having the highest corporate tax rate in the world, a militant union environment and the thousands of regulations imposed on companies over the last eight years many companies, in order to survive, had to relocate the corporate entity and/or manufacturing outside of the U.S.

If a company cannot be profitable in the U.S. it is that company’s responsibility to go where it can continue to operate.

The best chance for that happening right now is Donald Trump.

A renegotiating of the so-called free trade agreements will really help as well. We need free and fair trade agreements which have not been the practice over the last few decades.

This $15/hr "demand" is simply impractical. Automation and common sense has shown it to be a net job loosing idea. Popular doesn't make it work.




The salaries of CEO's and higher management have climbed disproportionately over the last 60 years at the expense of worker wages and opportunities. There needs to be a much larger share of the pie allocated to worker wages. Most corporations could continue to operate in the US if they brought corporate compensation down to what it is was in the 1950’s; CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratio has Ballooned 1,000 percent since 1950. How much as minimum wage gone up in this period?

quote:

The Dodd-Frank financial reform law aimed to make it easier for the public to know how much CEOs are getting paid in comparison to their workers. The law includes a provision requiring public companies to disclose their CEO-to-worker pay ratios, but nearly three years after the law passed, the Securities and Exchange commission still hasn’t put the rule in place, thanks in part to business opposition to the proposal, according to ABC News.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who authored the provision told ABC last year: “It might embarrass some companies to reveal that they pay their CEO in the range of 400 times what they pay their typical worker.”

It can be especially embarrassing when the CEO doesn’t perform. Former J.C. Penney head Ron Johnson, whose compensation was 1,795 times the average worker pay, according to Bloomberg, was recently ousted from his post after failing to turn around the struggling company.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio_n_3184623. html

Most of the savings in labor costs achieved through relocation have gone straight into the pockets of higher management and shareholders. Management and shareholders are not going to want to split these profits with workers if they return to the US. The US government would have to subsidize this move as it has promised to do with Carrier.

Moving operations overseas has allowed companies to not only pay workers less but to take advantage of the multiple resources a worker's family has to meet household costs. Many of these companies are based in rural areas and so the daily cost of living is supplemented by keeping small farms. Wages in these areas only make up a percentage of what a worker needs to support a family.

US workers have to be given a wage that would cover a much higher proportion of household expenses. To give the average worker a chance to make a living wage and support a family minimum wage would have to be in the $35 range. This again would have to be subtracted from corporate wages.


___________________________________________________________________________ ________

Your post is just more evidence as to why The American People just wholly rejected obama's policies and Hillary Clinton.

You actually believe the crap the liberals have been feeding their suckers.

BTW - The minimum wage was never intended to be a living wage. To achieve that someone need to get a good education and continue to advance through hard work and dedication.


 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9137
(9162 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/18/2016 at 09:13 AM
quote:
The salaries of CEO's and higher management have climbed disproportionately over the last 60 years at the expense of worker wages and opportunities. There needs to be a much larger share of the pie allocated to worker wages. Most corporations could continue to operate in the US if they brought corporate compensation down to what it is was in the 1950’s; CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratio has Ballooned 1,000 percent since 1950. How much as minimum wage gone up in this period?

quote:
The Dodd-Frank financial reform law aimed to make it easier for the public to know how much CEOs are getting paid in comparison to their workers. The law includes a provision requiring public companies to disclose their CEO-to-worker pay ratios, but nearly three years after the law passed, the Securities and Exchange commission still hasn’t put the rule in place, thanks in part to business opposition to the proposal, according to ABC News.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who authored the provision told ABC last year: “It might embarrass some companies to reveal that they pay their CEO in the range of 400 times what they pay their typical worker.”

It can be especially embarrassing when the CEO doesn’t perform. Former J.C. Penney head Ron Johnson, whose compensation was 1,795 times the average worker pay, according to Bloomberg, was recently ousted from his post after failing to turn around the struggling company.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio_n_3184623. html

Most of the savings in labor costs achieved through relocation have gone straight into the pockets of higher management and shareholders. Management and shareholders are not going to want to split these profits with workers if they return to the US. The US government would have to subsidize this move as it has promised to do with Carrier.

Moving operations overseas has allowed companies to not only pay workers less but to take advantage of the multiple resources a worker's family has to meet household costs. Many of these companies are based in rural areas and so the daily cost of living is supplemented by keeping small farms. Wages in these areas only make up a percentage of what a worker needs to support a family.

US workers have to be given a wage that would cover a much higher proportion of household expenses. To give the average worker a chance to make a living wage and support a family minimum wage would have to be in the $35 range. This again would have to be subtracted from corporate wages.



I agree with your assessment on where the profits have gone with outsoucing and overseas operations. And I agree with what you state has happened over the last several decades in terms of CEO vs average worker pay. I know where you are coming from and I'm not too far away from it, although I am generally against higher minimum wages or mandated living wages. I want the process to happen naturally...as in more jobs chasing fewer workers. When more opportunities exist than can easily be filled by the existing labor pool wages will rise organically in a supply - demand of labor equation.

But let me ask you a question, you say increasing average worker pay would have to come from corporate wages (CEO and management). And you also say that the corporation isn't going to accept less profit to pay more in wages.

So then how do you do it? I mean how does it happen?

Let's just say that Washington passed some high wage requirements...ok it is law of the land. What is going to happen? It would only accelerate and expand outsourcing as corporations look to escape the new higher wage requirement to the extent they can. Right, wrong, or otherwise I understand the motives of the corporation and their shareholders. You don't just think that CEO's and upper management willingly will take less pay?

I really think the first step in the process has to be rewarding companies who stay or invest in facilities and people here. And then we must penalize those who take advantage of foreign labor and lower overhead costs to bring their goods and services to market here in the US.

Once that is achieved, and every company who wants to sell product in our market is truly on a level playing field I think the impact on wages will be dramatic. Not in this one-off Carrier example. I'm talking about Samsung building appliances here. I'm talking about more autos being made here. Everything that can be built or assembled here. The opportunities for labor would be outstanding.

Free traders like to say "the world has x number of people and we are only y% of that world population, we can't just buy and sell among ourselves we must sell to the world". Great in theory, but how many of the world population can actually buy our "stuff". How many people in Central America or Africa or even Asia, how many of those people have the income to buy things made here? And who is to say that just because an American company can sell into that market, where is that stuff made? Are we talking about an Apple iphone, made in China and sold globally? Are we talking about Cat earth moving equipment? Because Cat actually employs more people globally than they do in US and their product is built in plants all over the world. Are we talking about a Chevy Cruze that when sold abroad does not get exported from the US production plant, instead it is built in several plants around the globe to satisfy world-wide sales. I mean, there are certainly substantial stuff we export, and in some trade adjustment process I speak of, some of those people may be hurt by new trade law. However, I think as a nation and for our population in general the postitives far outweigh the negatives on balance.

 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 1958
(1961 all sites)
Registered: 5/12/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/18/2016 at 10:09 PM
quote:
quote:
The salaries of CEO's and higher management have climbed disproportionately over the last 60 years at the expense of worker wages and opportunities. There needs to be a much larger share of the pie allocated to worker wages. Most corporations could continue to operate in the US if they brought corporate compensation down to what it is was in the 1950’s; CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratio has Ballooned 1,000 percent since 1950. How much as minimum wage gone up in this period?

quote:
The Dodd-Frank financial reform law aimed to make it easier for the public to know how much CEOs are getting paid in comparison to their workers. The law includes a provision requiring public companies to disclose their CEO-to-worker pay ratios, but nearly three years after the law passed, the Securities and Exchange commission still hasn’t put the rule in place, thanks in part to business opposition to the proposal, according to ABC News.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who authored the provision told ABC last year: “It might embarrass some companies to reveal that they pay their CEO in the range of 400 times what they pay their typical worker.”

It can be especially embarrassing when the CEO doesn’t perform. Former J.C. Penney head Ron Johnson, whose compensation was 1,795 times the average worker pay, according to Bloomberg, was recently ousted from his post after failing to turn around the struggling company.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio_n_3184623. html

Most of the savings in labor costs achieved through relocation have gone straight into the pockets of higher management and shareholders. Management and shareholders are not going to want to split these profits with workers if they return to the US. The US government would have to subsidize this move as it has promised to do with Carrier.

Moving operations overseas has allowed companies to not only pay workers less but to take advantage of the multiple resources a worker's family has to meet household costs. Many of these companies are based in rural areas and so the daily cost of living is supplemented by keeping small farms. Wages in these areas only make up a percentage of what a worker needs to support a family.

US workers have to be given a wage that would cover a much higher proportion of household expenses. To give the average worker a chance to make a living wage and support a family minimum wage would have to be in the $35 range. This again would have to be subtracted from corporate wages.



I agree with your assessment on where the profits have gone with outsoucing and overseas operations. And I agree with what you state has happened over the last several decades in terms of CEO vs average worker pay. I know where you are coming from and I'm not too far away from it, although I am generally against higher minimum wages or mandated living wages. I want the process to happen naturally...as in more jobs chasing fewer workers. When more opportunities exist than can easily be filled by the existing labor pool wages will rise organically in a supply - demand of labor equation.

But let me ask you a question, you say increasing average worker pay would have to come from corporate wages (CEO and management). And you also say that the corporation isn't going to accept less profit to pay more in wages.

So then how do you do it? I mean how does it happen?

Let's just say that Washington passed some high wage requirements...ok it is law of the land. What is going to happen? It would only accelerate and expand outsourcing as corporations look to escape the new higher wage requirement to the extent they can. Right, wrong, or otherwise I understand the motives of the corporation and their shareholders. You don't just think that CEO's and upper management willingly will take less pay?

I really think the first step in the process has to be rewarding companies who stay or invest in facilities and people here. And then we must penalize those who take advantage of foreign labor and lower overhead costs to bring their goods and services to market here in the US.

Once that is achieved, and every company who wants to sell product in our market is truly on a level playing field I think the impact on wages will be dramatic. Not in this one-off Carrier example. I'm talking about Samsung building appliances here. I'm talking about more autos being made here. Everything that can be built or assembled here. The opportunities for labor would be outstanding.

Free traders like to say "the world has x number of people and we are only y% of that world population, we can't just buy and sell among ourselves we must sell to the world". Great in theory, but how many of the world population can actually buy our "stuff". How many people in Central America or Africa or even Asia, how many of those people have the income to buy things made here? And who is to say that just because an American company can sell into that market, where is that stuff made? Are we talking about an Apple iphone, made in China and sold globally? Are we talking about Cat earth moving equipment? Because Cat actually employs more people globally than they do in US and their product is built in plants all over the world. Are we talking about a Chevy Cruze that when sold abroad does not get exported from the US production plant, instead it is built in several plants around the globe to satisfy world-wide sales. I mean, there are certainly substantial stuff we export, and in some trade adjustment process I speak of, some of those people may be hurt by new trade law. However, I think as a nation and for our population in general the postitives far outweigh the negatives on balance.



quote:
When more opportunities exist than can easily be filled by the existing labor pool wages will rise organically in a supply - demand of labor equation.


This labor pool right now is very large and many of them have antiquated skills. Most of these workers will require some retraining. What I suggest below is a way to give companies an incentive to retrain them and then give them good paying jobs by increasing the value of the goods they produce.

quote:
But let me ask you a question, you say increasing average worker pay would have to come from corporate wages (CEO and management). And you also say that the corporation isn't going to accept less profit to pay more in wages.

So then how do you do it? I mean how does it happen?


If you look at most of Trump’s Cabinet, they became billionaires largely by screwing people. Capitalists have never been nice guys and gals. It would seem that this group would never voluntarily ever give anything up for the workers. The best bet would be to demonstrate how workers as consumers can actually function as assets. This type of a system is called Fordism and many see it as a catalyst that helped create the US Middle Class.

Only a short time ago there was a special cachet for goods made in the USA. I lived in Mexico in the eighties and whenever I went back to the US friends would order Levi Strauss jeans, transistors and other products that were made in the USA. I would point out that most of this stuff was available in Mexico at much cheaper prices. They would respond but it’s not made in America and point to the deficiencies of the other products.

The goal of companies that manufacture goods in the US should be to make superior goods for both the US market and the fast growing middle class market abroad. The message should be if you want to buy cheap by elsewhere, but if you want quality buy American. It is really not too late to revitalize an image in the global mindset—similar to that which existed in Mexico and many other countries as recently as the eighties--that American made is synonymous with quality and longevity.

The product line from American companies has been cheapened in a number of ways over the last few decades. The first is Hollywood’s production of low end movies. How does one explain the abundance of movies on Netflix that critics on rotten tomatoes seldom score above 25%? Is it really possible that the majority of US movies are that bad? Are we witnessing the slow degradation of one of America’s premier art forms? Or have movie producers ever eager to capitalize on the continued fascination with American culture begun to cater to the low end of the global market. Anyone who has lived abroad knows that in Asia, Latin America and elsewhere workers being paid little more than subsistence wages brighten their lives by going to the movies, and they don’t like reruns. That is a huge market and it is probably where the most money from American movies is made.

This could sound elitist but Hollywood should return to making the kind of movies that Clint Eastwood always produces. Yes, there will not be as many crappy American movies in circulation at any one time, but the stuff that does get released will carry that special aura of being produced in America. American movies should be as awe inspiring as each Apple iphone release. A lot of American culture is sold abroad through movies and if the presentation is cheapened then so will the value of American goods.

Another way American goods are cheapened is by making them about the brand and not where they are made. As an example LL Bean is using America to elevate its brand. The goods though that LL Bean sells are made outside of the US. As the company looks for cheaper and cheaper manufacturing centers the contrast is between what goods are produced in China or Vietnam and which are inferior and which are superior. Any mention of America is totally absent in the new production cycle. Trump, as an example, could announce his ties and clothes will hitherto be produced in the US and will become Trump products exclusively made in the US. He could encourage other companies to follow him. America first, brand second.

Should workers be paid $35 and upward? Henry Ford believed that there was a benefit in giving workers higher wages in that they were then able to become more avid consumers. Workers who purchase American made goods could become advertising symbols for their own companies and for made in American culture abroad. Investing in workers thus becomes a hidden asset for companies who want to expand their range abroad.

One always tends to see India or China as impoverished but both countries have growing middle classes. One of the defining features of the Middle Class is that it is composed of very eager consumers ever ready to purchase items that would elevate their social status. Superior American made goods would fit right into this growing niche.

The bottom strata would still be served by other companies and they would not be deprived of entertainment or clothes by the above targeted system. Perhaps members of this rank would work harder to rise up economically and be able to purchase American made goods.

 

Universal Peach



Karma:
Posts: 6055
(6064 all sites)
Registered: 6/1/2009
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/19/2016 at 09:57 AM
quote:
quote:
quote:
The salaries of CEO's and higher management have climbed disproportionately over the last 60 years at the expense of worker wages and opportunities. There needs to be a much larger share of the pie allocated to worker wages. Most corporations could continue to operate in the US if they brought corporate compensation down to what it is was in the 1950’s; CEO-To-Worker Pay Ratio has Ballooned 1,000 percent since 1950. How much as minimum wage gone up in this period?

quote:
The Dodd-Frank financial reform law aimed to make it easier for the public to know how much CEOs are getting paid in comparison to their workers. The law includes a provision requiring public companies to disclose their CEO-to-worker pay ratios, but nearly three years after the law passed, the Securities and Exchange commission still hasn’t put the rule in place, thanks in part to business opposition to the proposal, according to ABC News.

Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), who authored the provision told ABC last year: “It might embarrass some companies to reveal that they pay their CEO in the range of 400 times what they pay their typical worker.”

It can be especially embarrassing when the CEO doesn’t perform. Former J.C. Penney head Ron Johnson, whose compensation was 1,795 times the average worker pay, according to Bloomberg, was recently ousted from his post after failing to turn around the struggling company.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/30/ceo-to-worker-pay-ratio_n_3184623. html

Most of the savings in labor costs achieved through relocation have gone straight into the pockets of higher management and shareholders. Management and shareholders are not going to want to split these profits with workers if they return to the US. The US government would have to subsidize this move as it has promised to do with Carrier.

Moving operations overseas has allowed companies to not only pay workers less but to take advantage of the multiple resources a worker's family has to meet household costs. Many of these companies are based in rural areas and so the daily cost of living is supplemented by keeping small farms. Wages in these areas only make up a percentage of what a worker needs to support a family.

US workers have to be given a wage that would cover a much higher proportion of household expenses. To give the average worker a chance to make a living wage and support a family minimum wage would have to be in the $35 range. This again would have to be subtracted from corporate wages.



I agree with your assessment on where the profits have gone with outsoucing and overseas operations. And I agree with what you state has happened over the last several decades in terms of CEO vs average worker pay. I know where you are coming from and I'm not too far away from it, although I am generally against higher minimum wages or mandated living wages. I want the process to happen naturally...as in more jobs chasing fewer workers. When more opportunities exist than can easily be filled by the existing labor pool wages will rise organically in a supply - demand of labor equation.

But let me ask you a question, you say increasing average worker pay would have to come from corporate wages (CEO and management). And you also say that the corporation isn't going to accept less profit to pay more in wages.

So then how do you do it? I mean how does it happen?

Let's just say that Washington passed some high wage requirements...ok it is law of the land. What is going to happen? It would only accelerate and expand outsourcing as corporations look to escape the new higher wage requirement to the extent they can. Right, wrong, or otherwise I understand the motives of the corporation and their shareholders. You don't just think that CEO's and upper management willingly will take less pay?

I really think the first step in the process has to be rewarding companies who stay or invest in facilities and people here. And then we must penalize those who take advantage of foreign labor and lower overhead costs to bring their goods and services to market here in the US.

Once that is achieved, and every company who wants to sell product in our market is truly on a level playing field I think the impact on wages will be dramatic. Not in this one-off Carrier example. I'm talking about Samsung building appliances here. I'm talking about more autos being made here. Everything that can be built or assembled here. The opportunities for labor would be outstanding.

Free traders like to say "the world has x number of people and we are only y% of that world population, we can't just buy and sell among ourselves we must sell to the world". Great in theory, but how many of the world population can actually buy our "stuff". How many people in Central America or Africa or even Asia, how many of those people have the income to buy things made here? And who is to say that just because an American company can sell into that market, where is that stuff made? Are we talking about an Apple iphone, made in China and sold globally? Are we talking about Cat earth moving equipment? Because Cat actually employs more people globally than they do in US and their product is built in plants all over the world. Are we talking about a Chevy Cruze that when sold abroad does not get exported from the US production plant, instead it is built in several plants around the globe to satisfy world-wide sales. I mean, there are certainly substantial stuff we export, and in some trade adjustment process I speak of, some of those people may be hurt by new trade law. However, I think as a nation and for our population in general the postitives far outweigh the negatives on balance.



quote:
When more opportunities exist than can easily be filled by the existing labor pool wages will rise organically in a supply - demand of labor equation.


This labor pool right now is very large and many of them have antiquated skills. Most of these workers will require some retraining. What I suggest below is a way to give companies an incentive to retrain them and then give them good paying jobs by increasing the value of the goods they produce.

quote:
But let me ask you a question, you say increasing average worker pay would have to come from corporate wages (CEO and management). And you also say that the corporation isn't going to accept less profit to pay more in wages.

So then how do you do it? I mean how does it happen?


If you look at most of Trump’s Cabinet, they became billionaires largely by screwing people. Capitalists have never been nice guys and gals. It would seem that this group would never voluntarily ever give anything up for the workers. The best bet would be to demonstrate how workers as consumers can actually function as assets. This type of a system is called Fordism and many see it as a catalyst that helped create the US Middle Class.

Only a short time ago there was a special cachet for goods made in the USA. I lived in Mexico in the eighties and whenever I went back to the US friends would order Levi Strauss jeans, transistors and other products that were made in the USA. I would point out that most of this stuff was available in Mexico at much cheaper prices. They would respond but it’s not made in America and point to the deficiencies of the other products.

The goal of companies that manufacture goods in the US should be to make superior goods for both the US market and the fast growing middle class market abroad. The message should be if you want to buy cheap by elsewhere, but if you want quality buy American. It is really not too late to revitalize an image in the global mindset—similar to that which existed in Mexico and many other countries as recently as the eighties--that American made is synonymous with quality and longevity.

The product line from American companies has been cheapened in a number of ways over the last few decades. The first is Hollywood’s production of low end movies. How does one explain the abundance of movies on Netflix that critics on rotten tomatoes seldom score above 25%? Is it really possible that the majority of US movies are that bad? Are we witnessing the slow degradation of one of America’s premier art forms? Or have movie producers ever eager to capitalize on the continued fascination with American culture begun to cater to the low end of the global market. Anyone who has lived abroad knows that in Asia, Latin America and elsewhere workers being paid little more than subsistence wages brighten their lives by going to the movies, and they don’t like reruns. That is a huge market and it is probably where the most money from American movies is made.

This could sound elitist but Hollywood should return to making the kind of movies that Clint Eastwood always produces. Yes, there will not be as many crappy American movies in circulation at any one time, but the stuff that does get released will carry that special aura of being produced in America. American movies should be as awe inspiring as each Apple iphone release. A lot of American culture is sold abroad through movies and if the presentation is cheapened then so will the value of American goods.

Another way American goods are cheapened is by making them about the brand and not where they are made. As an example LL Bean is using America to elevate its brand. The goods though that LL Bean sells are made outside of the US. As the company looks for cheaper and cheaper manufacturing centers the contrast is between what goods are produced in China or Vietnam and which are inferior and which are superior. Any mention of America is totally absent in the new production cycle. Trump, as an example, could announce his ties and clothes will hitherto be produced in the US and will become Trump products exclusively made in the US. He could encourage other companies to follow him. America first, brand second.

Should workers be paid $35 and upward? Henry Ford believed that there was a benefit in giving workers higher wages in that they were then able to become more avid consumers. Workers who purchase American made goods could become advertising symbols for their own companies and for made in American culture abroad. Investing in workers thus becomes a hidden asset for companies who want to expand their range abroad.

One always tends to see India or China as impoverished but both countries have growing middle classes. One of the defining features of the Middle Class is that it is composed of very eager consumers ever ready to purchase items that would elevate their social status. Superior American made goods would fit right into this growing niche.

The bottom strata would still be served by other companies and they would not be deprived of entertainment or clothes by the above targeted system. Perhaps members of this rank would work harder to rise up economically and be able to purchase American made goods.

___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

Another regurgitation of the left-wing talking points and factually wrong as in your line "If you look at most of Trump’s Cabinet, they became billionaires largely by screwing people"

From the loading dock down at the garbage dump that mat be your outlook but demonstrates your lack of experience and understanding of the real world.


 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9137
(9162 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/19/2016 at 10:32 AM
Appreciate your well reasoned response Swifty - ah an intelligent exchange of ideas in the Whipping Post. It feels good.

I see the retraining issue as a bottle neck, there simply are not enough opportunities in the "new" economy than existed previously for people who were able to attain middle class status in the "old" economy.

I went to automotive trade school with some people who were laid off a Werner ladder manufacturing plant in PA as the production was shifted to Mexico. But new hire auto techs don't get paid what they used to. Why? Because there is an oversupply of qualified applicants trying to get in the field. So much so that alot of old-time techs, the ones with decades of knowledge are being forced out by new hires because they can pay them less and the employer believes they produce similar results. And I have friends and family in teaching and nursing - both fields are saturated with people looking for work in those areas. The gas and oil work was booming here for a while, but that too has fallen on hard times. There are just so many people trying to find that good paying job and it truly is a bottle neck, too many workers fighting for too few jobs. Atleast in my area of NE Ohio and Western PA there just is not enough well paying jobs or even just enough jobs in general in healthcare, education or other service industries, including building or automotive trades.

I know there are new fields of advanced manufacturing that require new skills that some laid off old manufacturing workers could receive. And I know there are opportunities in tech, depending on where one lives. It just doesn't seem like enough is out there, retrained or otherwise.

I just feel that saying "people need retraining" as kind of an easy way to offer a solution to the problem, when in reality, my opinion, by and large it doesn't even begin to solve the issue. Retraining into what? If 1000 people at a manufacturing plant get laid off, what field of employment is lacking 1000 workers that they need to be absorbed into if they get retrained?

I also want to say that LL Bean does make and sell some things in the USA. I am very very in touch with what is or isn't available made in USA to the extent my life almost revolves around it. LL Bean produces some of their boots in the US as well as blankets for beds. Pretty sure they also sell a heavy fabric (almost canvas) material bag, like one might take to the beach or something that is made in USA. You can get your name on it. LL Bean's catalog, as do other catalogs, state which products are USA or some companies use an American flag or something to identify which products are USA as a selling point.

Which brings me to your largest point.

Many companies have realized that advertising and marketing items as Made in USA can be a selling feature which I am very happy about and I even take time to thank some companies for doing so on their websites or catalogs.

But very very few companies, certainly no large companies, are going to market Made in USA over their brand. I might like that, as it sounds you would. But from a business standpoint, growing and promoting a brand name will always be the primary objective. Companies own their brand, it's who they are and they use it to differentiate themselves from the competition. Nobody owns Made in USA, piling money into an ad campaign to promote a companies products that are Made in USA may net positive results, but it isn't the same as promoting their own brand as being the go to source for quality. If two American companies make a boot in the USA, say Thorogood brand and Danner brand...advertising both as made in USA means less because they are both made in the USA. So then these companies are going to use the good will and reputation of their brand to help the sale. The USA feature cancels out.

I know what you are saying that the quality, or perceived quality of a USA made product is what should be promoted. But I'm sure we both know that the USA has no monopoly on quality. I mean, hell, an Oppo DVD player made in China is one of the best DVD/BuRay/Media players on the market period.

So what is better really? Many Japanese products are of very high quality, in some cases better than US. Is a Toyota branded car engineered and made in Japan better than a Ford branded car engineered and made in the USA? Some would say the Toyota.

If we look at electronics, there are still some very high end audio components made in the US and Japan. Most as we know have gone to China, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, etc. Not really even that many electronics coming out of Korea these days that I see. Seems most of the A/V equipment in my lifetime was first made in Japan, then outsourced to Korea, now outsourced to a host of lower wage Asian companies. But I am getting off track.

When it comes to high end electronics there is a huge price difference from say made in USA Triad Speakers vs imported big box store Klipsch speakers. Put Triad and Klipsch in a store at their representative price points and what will sell more?

Put a 6' long metal shelf assembly, the kind you might buy for your garage, made in China for $85 vs a 6' long shelf assembly made in USA for $135 and what will the sales be? Will the USA one be of higher quality, probably, the fitment and quality control will be likely be higher. But will the consumer value that?

I know your example of people in Mexico wanting made in USA, but if you have an American consumer standing in Home Depot wanting a shelf for their garage, which one will sell more? 8 out of 10 consumer I would suggest will buy the cheaper one. Sure maybe they know it may not be as high of quality, but it might be good enough quality for what they need it for. And they can make their dollar stretch further and buy more stuff. Price controls a majority of purchasing decisions. And alot of times it comes down to what people can afford.

Now I've cited many examples where something made in USA is sold for the exact same price as something imported. I actually see it all the time. And in those cases, people are going to buy a brand they know more often than not. Somebody is likely to buy a Stanley hammer vs an off brand hammer if the price is the same irregardless of where it is made. While buying things made in USA has become more important for people, at the end of the day brand and price are bigger driving factors for the majority of people I find.

My friends and family know how much of a USA freak I am, and they all tell me how important it is to them often giving me stories they think I will appreciate. But then I catch them not following their own practices. My Mom just gave me a made in China Christmas card! My Mom! If anyone is more in touch with my country of origin obsession it would be her. Of course I called her on it and she said she forgot to look. A good friend of mine tells me how much he always buys USA, then I see him wearing shoes that are imported. People often say one thing and do another.

I do not think we are going to get a significant number of US consumers who want to buy on the USA feature first and foremost, at best it may be a 3rd criteria for most people after price and brand. And since I don't see companies abandoning brand promotion in favor of USA promotion, and vast majority of people are always going to buy on price then I don't see your solution being viable. As to the Mexican consumers wanting things made in USA, I'm sure your experience is true. But then I read that people in Korea buy Korean, and in fact there are protests over the importation of US beef that is going to compete with Korean raised beef.

So then, I feel that it can't be left to business to do the right thing and it can't be left to consumers to do the right thing. What is the right thing? The right thing is doing what benefits local communities, states and ultimately the federal government. Financially healthy communities, states and government at the federal level, I feel, is best achieved by having people employed, making good wages with more tax revenue coming in than expenditures going out. Less social program spending as people are more self sufficient.

I believe you and I both want the same net result, we just have different visions on how it could be achieved. I think the only realistic way to achieve my vision is with the hand of the government because I can't see consumers or producers doing what is necessary on their own to achieve the goal.

 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4333
(4350 all sites)
Registered: 11/9/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/19/2016 at 11:22 AM
quote:
So what is better really? Many Japanese products are of very high quality, in some cases better than US. Is a Toyota branded car engineered and made in Japan better than a Ford branded car engineered and made in the USA? Some would say the Toyota.



Toyota, Honda, Kia, Nissan, VW, Hyundai, BMW actually all have manufacturing plants in the US (Toyota and Honda each have 4). Sure, they are engineered abroad, but nice to know some of the work and profits go to US workers.

 

____________________
http://www.porkchopbob.com/ | http://www.brettbob.com/

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 9137
(9162 all sites)
Registered: 4/27/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 12/19/2016 at 01:22 PM
quote:
quote:
So what is better really? Many Japanese products are of very high quality, in some cases better than US. Is a Toyota branded car engineered and made in Japan better than a Ford branded car engineered and made in the USA? Some would say the Toyota.



Toyota, Honda, Kia, Nissan, VW, Hyundai, BMW actually all have manufacturing plants in the US (Toyota and Honda each have 4). Sure, they are engineered abroad, but nice to know some of the work and profits go to US workers.


Sure they do. An argument could be made that Toyota and Honda are fairly vital to the US economy. And some of the lesser companies who make very limited models in the US an argument could be made they have a net negative impact here. But at the end of the day, I want to get more of these foreign auto companies to build more models here.

In the context we were discussing in terms of made in USA or America representing quality, we can't always claim that. For a couple decades the Japanese have also earned a reputation of quality, unlike the post-WWII perception of Japanese products, which at that time they were more comparable to the China in today's market in terms of quality.

Here is an example of perhaps the Japanese product being of better quality than a US product.

Large tires, the kind that lifted trucks or Jeeps might want to use. Goodyear, Interco, and other US companies make some of these tires with aggressive mud tread. And so do some Japanese companies, such is Nitto (a line of Toyo Tire) and Yokohama tires. The large tires made by US companies are very hard to balance. When it is on a tire balancing machine you can see oscillation in the tread and sides of the tire as it spins. The Japanese tires by comparison balance easier. One reason for this could be the Japanese have better quality molds or they replace their molds more often than US companies.

Swifty said that US companies have let some quality go and that is true with alot of things.

If you can build the bestest highest quality thing possible and priced it accordingly, perhaps nobody would buy it. Perhaps the highest level of quality is overkill if nobody appreciates it and pays for what it costs? Manufacturers try and strike a balance of quality, durability, retail price point and profitability. Some quality may be sacrificed in order to achieve some other goals.

Again, US companies can't be left to themselves to look out for what is best for America. And these companies can't be relied upon to promote the made in USA label as that of the highest quality because frankly these companies have other self interests that do not always align with what the interests our federal government has, or should have.

 
<<  1    2    3    4    5  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software

Privacy | Terms of Service | Report Infringement | Personal Data Management | Contact Us
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com