Utterly untrue. To be a net positive, off-shoring merely has to provide some benefit to the overall economy that is a greater good than the loss of some number of jobs at some level. The number of people employed is not the only measure of positive effect.
To carry your logic to its conclusion that numbers employed is the only possible positive measure of an action, we should disband all earthmoving companies and prevent the import of such equipment because we could get a net positive effect by hiring millions of manual laborers to construct roads and dig building foundations and manufacture shovels and picks.
Now, you are just lying.
Everything you have posted in multiple threads has been one long wholesale condemnation of off-shoring. You might (erroneously) believe that you dropped in a tiny factoid of reasonableness in one post or another–somewhere–but you have, indeed, engaged in nothing more than “wholesale condemnation” for weeks.
I wonder if we (the retards) can work this out numerically.
Let’s say a widget is produced in the US requiring $18 worth of labour, so it sells for $36.
We in the real world obey the law of supply and demand, so we know that if the price could come down, the manufacture would sell more units.
So the manufacture looks at his costs and decides that if he produces it in China his labour costs go down to $1, plus he pays $2 for shipping. He can now either sell the same item for $21, or can bring in an extra $15 worth of profit.
What is the net result? We’ve lost one job worth $18, and the price of the product came down $15. One guy loses $18 but another gains $15. Net negative of $3?
For me, I see net postive: the guy that laid off of manufacture becomes sales. A ipod costs $100 to make, retails for $300, but is sold wholesale for about $200. Apple makes $100 off each unit, and so does best buy.
If the units continue to sell for $36, our former laborer can make $15 profit, while the manufacture continues to make $18. Still looks like a loss of $3.
But consider, our labourer could only make $18 for each unit he made. Now he can make $15 for each unit he sells. It took him an hour to make a single unit, but he can sell 100 in the same time period. As long as he can average more than 1.2 units in an hour he’s ahead.
Again, supply and demand are important. If he reduces the price, he can sell more units, and make more profit. His previous job wasn’t scalable, all he could do to earn more money was to try to work more hours. Now to earn more money he just needs to sell more units–completely independent of time.
I think it should be noted that, even to the extent that he’s not lying, he’s being weasely. Sure, he’s all for offshoring – if he can be certain that the mix of comparative advantages for all involved nations is such that no one would have any reason to. Even in his ideal world, the moment someone closed a US factory to move production to (say) Canada, his reaction would be violently oppositional.
And you and everyone else here have utterly failed to show that off-shoring has provided a greater good than the loss of some number of jobs. All you’ve been able to argue, collectively, is that off-shoring lowers prices and, perhaps, that it frees Americans to do higher-value work (such as, perhaps, sitting unemployed doing nothing at all). You have not at all shown that either of these “benefits” makes up for the loss of jobs it causes.
Well, if we use your level of reading skills, I suppose you could come to that conclusion.
Ah, I see your problem. You’re just not man enough to admit when you’re wrong.
You make an accusation, get shown an example of you being wrong, and you froth and throw a temper tantrum just like you accuse me of doing.
Search my name and the word Canada or Europe and you will understand why you are the one who’s lying here. A moderator, no less. Or, perhaps you do know you’re wrong and now you’re pissed that a mere peon user showed you up.
I have said, repeatedly, that I support lowering all trade barriers with Japan, Canada and Europe. That flatly contradicts your claim that I present a wholesale condemnation of off-shoring.
There are many more instances of me saying this since as far back as October, tomndebb.
Here’s a hint for you, dude. When you say, repeatedly, that you are in favor of removing trade barriers with regions as large (population-wise) as Canada, Japan and Europe combined, you are in fact not engaging in wholesale condemnation of off-shoring.
No intelligent person on Earth defines a call for ending trade barriers with Europe, Canada and Japan as a wholesale condemnation of off-shoring. Especially when I have posted this position as many times as I have across multiple threads.
You mean, because I did not, in every single post, say “I support dropping trade barriers with Canada, Europe and Japan”, in your little mind, I have engaged in wholesale condemnation of off-shoring?
You know, if you are not intelligent enough to understand how the exception of Canada, Japan and Europe invalidates “wholesale condemnation” then you are no longer worth my time.
You seriously need to stop right now and learn some basic reading comprehension. Plus you need to look up the word “wholesale”, because it clearly does not mean what you think it does; it doesn’t fit your delusional idea of the word even if you call it hyperbole. You have been presented with multiple examples of me saying I support dropping all trade barriers with three large (well, except Canada, population-wise) and geographically distinct parts of the world and yet you accuse me of wholesale condemnation of offshoring, going so far as to call me a liar when I tell you otherwise.
You are not only a liar but you are an idiot to boot. You are immature and you throw yourself into the same temper tantrums you accuse me of when you find you’ve been shown up.
Furthermore, on your forum, you allow fucktard white trash like Draggin’ asshole to disparage African Americans because he hates what I have to say.
Thanks for uncovering your true colors.
Now you understand why politicians don’t go around on TV pronouncing opposition to laws against off-shoring. They get saddled with idiots like you as allies and, staying on-topic with this thread… it costs them far more voters than it gains.
And you, Draggin asshole, are the best evidence we’ve seen that the “Ugly white American” stereotype is still well justified.
It’s also not evidence that they’re far-sighted, either. Your one-dimensional argument that hardly even addresses my claim, doesn’t factor in obvious issues of whether what they’re researching is of any value… like GM researching everything BUT fuel-efficient vehicles, which is why they’re still putting out sub-30mpg piece of shit Buicks. It’s research, it goes beyond the quarterly statement situation, but they’re doing R&D for dominating an ancient old market no one wants to buy into anymore - and that’s why they got their ass kicked by a Japanese company like Toyota, whose R&D is, in consistency with my point, aimed at future innovations. Unlike American companies.
My foggy-eyed white trash friend, you are by far the biggest Planned Parenthood poster child on here. If your mother had swallowed who knows how many taxpayer dollars would have been saved keeping a mental cripple like you alive?
As for the rest of your claptrap, there’s only so many of your delusions and nutball “reasoning” that is worth the time to deal with.
I’ve heard a statistical theory that if you gave a zillion monkeys typewriters and set them to work, they’d eventually recreate the complete works of Shakespeare. Thanks to Le Jerkoff’s postings, we now know this isn’t true.
Listen you ignorant waste of space: Once and for all - offshoring benefits countries as a whole. Over the short term, it can be a negative for some groups. Over the short term, the group(s) that benefit may not necessarily be the same group that is hurt. But in the longer term, it is primarily positive. Remember the ‘85% of people used to be farmers bit’? Read up about it - it’s important.
The key to offshoring is to ensure an improved education and training system that keeps each generation of US worker competitive in skills, improve labor liquidity, endure sufficent safety net is in place. The way to really makes thing go bad is to do what you want to do, and stop all global trade. Well, you say you’re not against ‘some’ offshoring’. Fine, please explain precisely how you’d measure offshoring, and what barometers you’d find ‘acceptable’.
All the time. They buy TVs with 1080i resolution, BluRay players, and surround sound systems, maybe grabbing a box of cat litter on the way out because it’s on sale. Part of the reason many people are rich or middle class is because they don’t frivolously spend money when they don’t have to. So if it’s cheaper at WalMart than somewhere else, guess where they’re going to buy it?
It’s a lot like companies offshoring jobs to other countries where the wages are lower…
No, in other words, I’ve dealt with your idiotic arguments before and I am rapidly running out of patience with you.
No it doesn’t, you nutjob insane waste of flesh. You repeatedly assert it does, but
People haven’t moved from farming to new industries because of offshoring. Your argument is pure non sequitur.
Yet offshoring does none of that. What we are finding now is that we can hire equally well educated people overseas to do cutting edge stuff like R&D. Why else is Google building R&D facilities in India?
And this is why human women don’t breed with monkeys: it results in shit-flinging idiots like you.
In other words what you said in the previous sentence was proof that white Americans have an insanity problem - or, at least the trailer park dwellers in your family do. (Betcha the moderators get mad at me hitting you with a taste of your own medicine, eh?)
Slap sliding scale tariffs on countries that employ dirt cheap labor. Higher tariffs for those that have lax environmental and workplace safety, laws and which have crappy human rights track records.
By the way, Draggin’ Asshole, you, being the pimple faced racist that you are, say that I’m proof that “African-Americans in the US get significantly sub-standard education in the US”… what do you have to say about all the white people out there who feel the same way I do? You ever gonna tell them that “white people in the US get significantly sub-standard education” or some bullshit like that? Because there are more white people who oppose offshoring than there are blacks. Oh yeah, you’ve got no answer to this, you silly ass-faced baboon.
You sure as hell wouldn’t say that racist bullshit to anyone’s face you coward.
Untrue. The rich prefer buying TVs that last. As does more and more of the entire country, as per the link I just posted. That’s also why they don’t buy Yogo or Yugo equivalents when they can buy better-made Mercedes-Benz.
If your logic held the rich would rather go to the Dollar Tree since they sell stuff even cheaper.
You’ve made two errors here: one, rich people, or even middle class people, care too much about their image (in fact, to the point of impracticality) to shop at places like Wal Mart if (see: the old jokes about K-Mart), and they want better quality.
This is why Wal Mart is trying so hard to move up the value chain to compete with marginally better-quality competitors like Target. This perception by consumers is by far not a mere anecdote.
I guarantee you Nieman-Marcus stores get more rich customers than Wal Mart. As does Nordstrom, which is still expanding even in the recession.
My dad still has a TV that he bought at Wal Mart about 9 or 10 years ago. Does that count as a “TV that lasts”? If not, what do you consider t be an average lifespan of a TV?
They sell TVs at the Dollar Tree?
So your position is that people will spend more on a TV because they are trying to impress other people with how much they spent on their TV?
Please tell me you’re not citing a blog with three responses as being representative for the average rich/middle class consumer.
Clearly Wal-Mart skews lower-income more than a retailer like Target, but 58% of its customers earn not far below the median US income (just under $50,000) – and a large proportion makes more than that. It’s simply false to imply that middle class individuals don’t shop there.
Since I have never made any argument on the topic, that is understandable. I asked a speicific question that you dodged while going off on a rant. Beyond that I have not actually gotten involved in this mess.
My reading skills are more than adequate to the task. I asked a question; you dodged it. In your rant, you made the spurious claim that there was only a single metric by which off-shoring could be judged and I pointed out that using only that sole metric would lead to an outlandish result. You are the one with the non-answers and the bad logic.
It is difficult to be “wrong” when asking a question. Since I have not expressed any of the positions that you have attributed to me, it remains true that you are lying.
“Man enough”? Simple internet chest beating. Pretty much what I have come to expect from you.
You haven’t? Well then why don’t you adult-up and tell us what your position is? Does off-shoring provide a net benefit or not?
Zero for two in accuracy.
You were not asking a question when you outright accused me of issuing a wholesale condemnation of off-shoring. An accusation I showed you to be wrong by the posting of numerous examples of me stating I support free trade with a large part of the world.
Chest beating? I’m not challenging you to a duel. I’m just pointing out that you lied about me and when you got called out and shown to be wrong you doubled down on your idiotic accusation instead of being a mature adult and admitting that a wholesale condemnation of off-shoring was never my position and I have, several times over several months, clarified that it was not my position.
You know, at some point you just might get pissed enough to ban me. After this, though, the damage you’ve done to your own cause is so great it really doesn’t matter. If not? I’ll be satisfied with watching you or your pals here post more lame 1-dimensional arguments and lies and inbred clubfooters like Dragon Ash throwing racist temper tantrums because neither I nor much of America are buying your bullshit defense of offshoring anymore.
As your cause gets smaller you will only get angrier. Enjoy.
swims closer SOOO shinny. Just a little nibble. What could it hurt? Don’t mind the string or those barb thingies at the back. So bright…so colorful! SOOOOOSHIIINNNNNNNNYYYYYY! Just. One. Nibble.
What could it hurt? Wonder what that dude drooling over the side of the boat is really doing up there…
He really pwned you, Tom. He called you out and showed you dat you waz wrongy, then he made you double down and when you drew the next card it was a 12!! You lose mon! Better luck next time! HE IS THE SAVER!
Any mention of the Canada/Europe/Japan exclusion? You know Canada only has a population about 32million right? Japan is about 127million. Include the 852.4 million in “Europe” and you’ve barely reached 1/6th of the world’s population.
And some how those three are considered a large part of the world? What about Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, Korea? Is the whole of South and Central America right out? The Caribbean and West Indies? Russia and the Balkans?
Your desperate attempt to back peddle from your original premise isn’t getting you as far as you thought. Perhaps consider turning around and running like a scared little girl.
It’s okay to admit you fucked up. This is a safe space. Just tell us you finally got around to reading that chapter on tariffs. Tell us you looked at the issues of country of origin labeling. We’ll laugh at you for a while but in the end respect you for your honesty.
As far as I can tell, post 161 is where you first mentioned J.E.C. in this thread. And that was after a lengthy beat down before you finally accepted that you need maple syrup.