sami wrote:He is eating his own eyeballs so he can't see what you're saying...

First off, that which is in my mouth is a marshmallow designed to look like an eyeball. I work in the laboratory and during National Lab Week, the hospital bought us a cake to celebrate and one of the decorations on the cake was this eyeball, so of course I grabbed it and someone snapped a picture.

Now as to debating. Let's first straighten out some misconceived myths that have somehow seemed to become facts on this board.

#1. The top 1% of wage earners do not own 90% of the wealth in this country. The actually total is around the 33% mark. This was obtained from the Surveys of Consumer Finances and The State of Working America.

#2 40% of people earning minimum wage were employees who did not have a job the previous year.

#3 47% of minimum wage earners are over 25 years of age, yet 56% of them only work part time and they have a average income of $33,600 per year. Only 6.1% of these individuals are single parents.

#4 53% of minimum wage earners are between 16 - 24 years of age and they have an average income of %68,500 dollars. Numbers 3 and 4 were obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

So what can we conclude from these numbers. First despite hevusa claim, the top 1% do not control 90% of America's wealth, and second, of the minimum wage earners only 26% or around 1 in 4 are over 25 and working full-time.

These numbers really blow holes in the myth being propagated that families are trying to survive on minimum wage jobs. The numbers clearly show that the majority of minimum wage job holders are students, and individuals working second (part-time) jobs.

Minimum wage is for entry level positions. This allows individuals with little or no skills to work in jobs that will give them valuable experience to obtain better jobs in the future. It also provides opportunities for young students to gain needed experience in the labor force. The BLS also shows that the majority of minimum wage earners (76%) within the first year have received a 10% or more raise.

Now the question arises about the outsourcing of jobs. The labor force most affected by outsourcing has been manufacturing. However, if we look at this issue historical we will realize that this is an expected result of the technological/information revolution. During the transition from agriculture to industry, we saw the loss of a great majority of the agricultural jobs. With industry, we were able to produce more foods with less man hours, which resulted in individuals and families leaving agricultural centers and heading toward industrial centers. Today another transition has begun, the move from industrial and manufacturing to technology or information. Rather than having an industrial society we are becoming a service society. Gone are the jobs of producing clothing, furniture and other assembly line jobs and in their place we have computer operators, technicians, sales associates and other information or technological careers. Times change and people must be able to keep up with the changes. All this complaining about the loss of manufacturing jobs is nothing more than crying over spilt milk. The same happened when we transitioned from agriculture to industry, only someone ignorant of history would not expect to see this occur during this transition as well.

As far as outsourcing goes, this is a result of our own desires not to have to pay high prices for items. WalMart is so successful because of this simple fact, people want the best bang for their buck, and this is exactly what WalMart provides.

Companies have no responsibility to society as a whole. Companies are responsible to their share holders. This is a simple fact of business. We do not get the bread on our table because of the generosity of the baker, we get it because he wants to make a profit. This is Adam Smith's "invisible hand" at work. Society has reaped many benefits thanks to competition and companies seeking to streamline production and maximize profits. Once upon a time computers required an entire room, today, they are more powerful and can fit on your lap.

Because of the fluidity of the market, companies have gone away from retirement packages. Instead most offer forms of retirement accounts that can travel with the employees from one job to the next. Those people who work in entry level positions, often do not have access to these types of benefits, however, they are available for those who want them in the forms of IRA or Roths.

We must get this notion that rich and poor are fixed groups. They are not. During the 1980's 79% of those who began the decade in the lowest 20% of the income brackets moved at least one bracket upward while a full (58%) moved at least two. Furthermore, the 1980's saw a record 15% of those in the lower bracket move all the way to the upper income bracket. (courtesy BLS).

The current tax system is broken. It offers far too many loop holes and needs to be corrected. If the goal of politicians was to accomplish this than perhaps something would get done. Alas this is not their goal. Their goal is to keep people trapped by a outdated system so that they can secure their own jobs. If we wish to see true reform, then we need to return to a system of citizen politicians. If the Constitution can limit the number of terms a President serves, should we not also do this with our Congressmen?

By limiting how long an individual can serve, we ensure that the best interest of the people are served and not the best interest of the individuals serving.

dmk

sgtdmski wrote:It was reported, in the New York Times:
-----------------------------
A few manufacturers, though, are trying to find a way to live with deep-discount mass merchandisers without sacrificing their traditional network of smaller retailers - or their traditional profit margins. These companies, like Toro and Levi Strauss, are offering specially made low-cost goods to the big boxes while continuing to sell higher-priced products through specialty stores.
-----------------------------

Toro set up a factory in Mexico to make the el cheapo. So, look out for what you buy at WalMart, and those other such places. Although there may be a brand name on the product, it just might be an el cheapo made especially for the WalMart crowd. If you want the good stuff, go to the regular Toro dealer.

sgtdmski also wrote:Adam Smith, a British economist who has been quoted by American statesmen, and Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, wrote, in his book Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, "If the free importation of foreign manufactures were permitted, several of the home manufactures would probably suffer, and some of them, perhaps, go to ruin altogether...". He noted that "two great engines for enriching the country, therefore, were restraints upon importation, and encouragements to exportation." Mr. Smith had studied under Professor Francis Hutcheson, who had written, in his book System of Moral Philosophy, in the chapter Of the Nature of Civil Laws and their Execution: "Foreign materials should be imported and even premiums given, when necessary, that all our own hands may be employed; and that, by exporting them again manufactured, we may obtain from abroad the price of our labours. Foreign manufactures and products ready for consumption should be made dear to the consumer by high duties, if we cannot altogether prohibit the consumption;..."

What Adam Smith and Francis Hutcheson are saying is: If you do A, then B will happen.

A) Eliminate duties and tariffs on goods imported into this country from the lesser developed countries.

B) Manufactures will increase in the lesser developed countries, and will decrease in this country; some manufactures here will close down; they will move their businesses to the lesser developed countries; workers in this country will lose their jobs; the economy in this country will shrink.

Well, the Congress did A, and B happened. We were told: "Give your job to the underdeveloped countries so that they can have the wherewithall to purchase the products that you are making." Now, I'm not a Nuclear Physicist, but does anyone else see the Catch 22 in this???

And concerning technical jobs, they are going overseas also. India is one of the recipients of this outsourcing as "American" companies continually move their operations to foreign lands. It was reported in the New York Times: "IT is one of the best-kept secrets among tax preparers: a growing number of accountants across the nation are using workers in India to prepare tax returns for clients in the United States." So, your tax returns, which are supposed to be held in confidentiality, are not even safe from foreign scrutinity.

I am reminded of the scene in Soylent Green, where the throngs of homeless and unemployed people were congregating in the streets, and a huge front end loader came into the crowd and scooped them up and moved them to another location.

Yet we enjoy an unemployment rate of under 5%. Have the highest GDP of any country, only being out matched by the whole EU. Our GDP is 3 times higher than our nearest competitor, Japan.

So it would seem that despite your claims, something is still working right. We do not have double digit unemployment like the EU, and only as a whole can the out produce us.

If we were to place high tariffs on imports, countries would do the same to our exports. By lowering our tariffs on imports, we can force countries to lower their tariffs on our exports, opening new markets for our products. Come now, it is a global economy, which means that eventually all countries will be importing and exporting with each other.

dmk

sgtdmski wrote:A likely story...

sgtdmski wrote:It was reported, in the New York Times:
-----------------------------
November 25, 2006 -- The dollar dropped sharply yesterday against a range of major currencies, with the euro breaking through $1.30 for the first time in a year and a half. The fall highlighted concerns about softness in the American economy as economies abroad continue to expand.

The currency sell-off came as investors weighed a number of issues that complicate the prospects of the United States in the coming months, including a huge trade imbalance with China and a slowing domestic housing market. On top of that, economic growth in some European countries is gaining momentum, threatening to siphon investment away from the dollar.



From Bloomberg News:
--------------------------------------
September 14, 2006 -- Foreclosures on prime adjustable-rate mortgages rose to a four-year high in the second quarter, a sign that more homeowners with good credit ratings are having trouble paying their bills.

sgtdmski wrote:That's what happens when you don't pay attention to our historical documents, and what the Supreme Court is telling you.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"If you act like an artificial person, you'll be treated like one" -- me

Twenty five countries comprise the European Union. Think about that for a moment. The GDP of the US in 2005 was 12,455,825(in millions of USD) the EU's GDP was 13,502,800 (in millions of USD). The Euro is based on the economy of all 25 of these countries, whereas the dollar is based solely upon our own. Despite having a huge trade deficit we continually compete and lead the world in technology and new developments. The dollar has long been weaker than the EURO.

The US GDP is 6 times Germany, UK, France and Italy. Other than the UK, all other countries of the EU have double digit unemployment. So the dollar is weak, a market economy experience cycles, a weak dollar will allow more investment, more investment in turn will create more jobs and more impotantly more money that can be added to our own GDP.

When in doubt find something to complain about.

dmk

Here's the myth of outsourcing and the "strong" economy: Old jobs are leaving, and new jobs are coming in. The comparison to the agricultural/industrial shift is incorrect because when the US began shifting from agriculture to industry, for every agricultural job that vanished, ten industrial jobs were created. The trend now, however, is for every ten industrial jobs leaving overseas, there are one or two new jobs created. The GDP remians high because many corperations that have heavy overseas facilities are based in the US. That means that 10% or so of the company is based in the US, while 90% of its capacity is overseas. The company that recently let me go is an American company, yet at least 80% of its facility (manufacturing, technology, and researching) is in Mexico and China. And China's the killer. They're quickly outpacing the US enonomically, because of their unfair labor laws, low environmental standards, and outright illegal currency manipulation. So while companies benefit from these "perks" they contribute to the GDP by being based in the US. And the unemployment rate is at a nice comfortable low number because they only calculate those eligible and receiving unemployment assistance. Not those actually out of work.

The answer seems to be not in taxes and laws that restrict imports, but rather laws that favor innovation, small business, and entreprenurial ventures. Taxing imports only adds to the outsourcing fervor, i.e. that ill-conceived Bush tax on imported steel. Of course, nothing will happen while this country maintains its happy apathy in regards to foriegn products, and its loathing of working people.

Loathing of working people??? Are you serious?? Are manufacturing jobs leaving this country, of course they are, companies can have products produced overseas at lower costs. Why, well there are no unions inflating the cost of wages, and manipulating hiring practices.

In the place of manufacturing jobs we are seeing a rise in service jobs, whether they be in sales, insurance, law, or a variety of other industries. Times change and people have to change with them. Despite the fact that we have come to expect a high standard of living in this country, what is high here is not the same as elsewhere.

Time and again we hear complaints about slave wages to people in third world countries. Because people in these countries are willing to work fro 2 dollars an hour or 2 dollars a day. What people fail to realize is that for many of these people, this is considerable more than what they would get in other endeavors. 2 dollars a day may sound terrible for having to work a 10 hour day, bet when one considers that a person might in other endeavors work a week and not make 2 dollars, this is a huge boom to these people. Tell me how can a company in this country compete with a company when they are paying union wages of 18 dollars an hour??

It would be nice to grow up, go to school, get training and work a job until you retire. Once upon a time that was possible in this country, however, today that is no longer the case. Today people move and change jobs, we are a restless society. Unfortunately there are still some people that wish to hold jobs that are labor intensive rather than technical intensive, unfortunately other than construction there are too few available. Do we stop progress and change for the better in this country for those unwilling to change?

There were some 5 million jobs lost in the recession between 2001 and 2003. However, since that time we have seen the growth of some 18 million new jobs. Yes it is not the same as the ten jobs that we once saw, it still represents an increase of 3 to 1.

dmk