What do you mean by “should be limited”? Do you think it should be illegal for a company that currently hires x number of Americans to ever fail to hire x number of Americans? Or are you just talking in moral generalities?
This just illustrates why it’s so useless to talk to people with your beliefs. You believe in this strict us (workers, the government, the middle class) v. them (management, “OMG teh corporations,” the rich) mentality, and think that people on the other side have that same mentality just favor the other guy.
That’s not true. I don’t prefer management over workers, or corporations over the government, or the rich over the middle class. I don’t want the government to funnel money to the rich.
Sure, we all know what rich people do with their money. They invest it with big financial firms like Lehman Brothers, Morgan Stanley, , Bear Sterns and of course Goldman Sachs, who create obscene fraudulent schemes, essentially gambling with the money, and ruin the U.S. economy. Surely you remember that little event, xtisme?
They also spend millions on PACS and so forth to control Congress and the President (which is why no one went to jail over their fraud.
Now, to be fair, some portion of their money is eventually used to buy stocks in US. businesses, but you know what those businesses do? They outsource jobs, xtisme. They increase productivity by encouraging employees to work 60 hour weeks, to cut costs.
What I’m saying is, even if ALL the wealthy investors’ money went into stocks, it wouldnt help all that much if the companies were outsourcing labor and squeezing employees’ salaries and benefit and numbers. Which they are. That is why the rich are rapidly acquiring all the money as American slowly slides into becoming a third world hellhole run by a capitalist oligarchy that controls all the wealth. An outcome YOU seem to favor, xtisme. I mean, you chide me for favoring policies that may have unexpected outcomes, yet your idea of proper finance is leading straight to the Banana Republic of America.
What’s your viewpoint on regulating the economy, Rand? YUou like my tax incentive ideas? What about moving to publicly-financed-only elections?
I don’t want to funnel government money to anyone.
If giving a tax break is “funneling government money”, then you are the one wanting to funnel money to corporations.
What’s the difference between a tax break and a subsidy?
I know that for some reason, it’s much easier politically to sell tax breaks for such and such an activity than it is to just hand out cash. But it’s the exact same thing.
These tax breaks add up into the gigantic morass of our current tax code, which is so labyrinthine and complex that professional paper-pushers like Rand Rover make huge salaries advising companies how to minimize their taxes.
I’d rather just hand people cash. At least that way, when people get sick of paying for the subsidy and want to end it, we don’t hear whining about, “But that’s raising taxes!”.
I’ll also note that private health care is a huge expense for American employers. Moving to a single-payer system would be a huge competitive advantage for American companies. Right now the right-wing talking heads are furiously against “socialized medicine”. When the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies start looking at how much the crappy health benefits they provide for their workers cost, there will be a change. In 10 years or so I expect to hear Rush Limbaugh screaming about how the Liberals are strangling American businesses by forcing them to provide benefits for their lazy undeserving workers.
They’ve already seen this for quite some time. At least a decade, if not more. Why hasn’t there been “a change” already?
You, Sam Stone, John Mace, msmith, Rand Rover, most any libertarian, really.
[/QUOTE]
- I’m not a Libertarian.
- I never said I thought it was a good idea to funnel money from the government to the rich (really you mean have the government funnel money from taxpayers to the rich)
- It’s my understanding that those philosophical concepts are diametrically opposed.
Also, I could be convinced to be in favor of higher income taxes for the mega-rich and lower corporate taxes. The intent being to encourage putting money back into the business to encourage growth.
There has been, they are gradually eliminating it. Eventually the worker will pay for all his 'benefits". The copays are getting larger and the employees are kicking in more and more for health insurance in lots of companies.
rogerbox - You actually raise several separate but related issues:
Pros and cons of outsourcing
Income disparity
High cost and availability of quality higher education
I will leave you with one thought though. None of these problems are going to be fixed in the next few years. And while I appreciate that your situation does suck, at this particular point in time, it is what it is. So my question to you is this. If you feel that you can have a higher standard of living being an electrician (or whatever you happen to decide to be), what steps do you plan to take to get there?
Except that’s not the kind of “change” that **Lemur **was talking about.
I’ll admit to a bit of fantasizing there.
But when you look at the incredible costs, complexity, confusion, and wasted effort that goes into our “private” health system, that has only gotten worse, much worse, over the past decade, it’s hard for me to understand why there isn’t more consensus that some radical changes have to be made.
The idea that we have to preserve a “free market” (if only!) health care system can’t be coming from corporate America, because they don’t give a shit about the free market, they care about making money. When you look at how much money is being shoveled into health care, it’s mind boggling. So where’s the constituency for the current non-system?
We don’t have a “private” health system.
I would just say check your premises. One problem we have wrt reform in the US, is that Americans have been conditioned to think that job = health insurance. And so I would suspect that many CEO types see reform = put more burden on big companies to pay for everybody. And that’s what typically seems to happen.
As we discussed in another thread, let’s get rid of all US corporate taxes.
They pay less than 8 percent now, and many pay nothing, while still more actually get millions back.