Almost half of Americans work in low paid jobs

[Andylusion]

You hit on two very important points with your reply. What you don't know is that Medicare and Medicaid does exactly that. They only pay about 2/3 for the services of government patients. And yes, health facilities have to recoup those losses by increased prices.

Not that's not bad for an eighty dollar doctors visit, but real bad for a 400K surgery and post care, which most of us will receive when we are on Medicare.

So now we have government healthcare. So who is going to make up the difference in the shortages once there is no private insurance to sack with those losses?

Believe me, the payment is more than two thirds. I'm on Medicare, and have never paid the other third. Link please, proving it is only two thirds? Never heard of such a thing.

No one ever said that individuals couldn't buy into their own private plan. I know quite a few countries that have universal care with the ability to purchase a private plan.

No, they won't bill you either. They just take the loss. I worked in medical for ten years. My father is on Medicare, and he tells me what's going on with his bills. He does have secondary insurance that covers what Medicare doesn't, but a lot of older folks are not in that financial position to get that private policy.

Doctors limit new Medicare patients - USATODAY.com

You are both right and wrong.

Medicare reimbursement rates, that is Medicare approved amounts (which for part B is 80% from Medicare and 20% from the patient) is determined based on the relative, average costs of providing a service to a Medicare patient, and then adjusted to account for other provider expenses, including malpractice insurance and office-based practice costs.

Contrary to claims of a lot of people, Medicare rates are not determined by what insurance companies pay. It's actually the opposite in most cases because most insurance reimbursements today is paid to contracted providers. The medicare reimbursement rate provides a basis for negotiating contracts which makes Medicare and Insurance reimbursement rates pretty close in most places.

Getting back to the question at hand, for many years many healthcare providers would bill patients for the difference between Medicare rates and their fee . If a doctor accepted Medicare as full payment, they were "Accepting Medicare Assignment". At one time, about 25% of doctors would not accept Medicare Assignment and would bill the patient the difference. Today, due to the fact there is little difference between insurance reimbursement rates and Medicare and the number of Medicare patients, about 95% of doctors today accept Medicare Assignment. Thus patients rarely see any bill if they pay their 20% coinsurance at time service or have insurance supplement.

That's actually kind of the law. But my point is, they have to raise their rates on everybody, so it's a primary factor in private insurance premiums going up. But this is why when you see health facilities close down, they are usually in lower income areas where most of the patients are government patients and there are little to no private pay patients. There is nobody to make up the loss on.

When I got into the business back in 1979, Medicare was a gold mine for my company. It was like they were flushed with money. All you had to do is send them a bill, and they paid it no questions asked. As the funds started to show signs of weakness, that's when they started lowering their reimbursement rates. So what did we do? We raised the price of renting our hospital equipment, and again, you can't just raise it on one group of payers, you have to raise it on everybody.


Medicare is not self- supportive either. They are subsidized with money from the general fund, and of course, always trying to use as little as possible.

Ray, I don't believe your last statement is correct. Total Medicare expenditures in 2018 were $740.6 billion, and total income for for the trust funds was $755.7 billion, which consisted of $745.9 billion in non-interest income and $9.8 billion in interest earnings. Assets held in special issue U.S. Treasury securities increased by $15.1 billion to $304.7 billion. If by 2026, there is no change in the law, the Medicare Trust Funds will be depleted to a point where it will become a budget item.

I suspect that closures of healthcare facilities in low income areas is caused by lack of payment for services received. These facilities are supported primarily by Medicaid which is a state program whose reimbursement rate is determined by the state legislature each year. If state revenues decrease reimbursement rates are cut. I remember living in Florida during a recession in which the the state ran short of money in October. There were no medicaid reimbursements till Feb.

Medicare operates is entirely differently than Medicaid. All Medicare medical costs are being paid for through the Medicare Trust Funds. In few years congress will have to start supplementing these funds or Medicare taxes will have to be increased. The budget items for Medicare will not be discretionary which means congress can not cut those funds.

Lastly, I think you might be confused as to how Medicare determines reimbursement rates. The rates are not dependent on what insurance companies pay or the patient. You're correct that Medicare increases in reimbursement rates does result in insurance reimbursement rate increases in since insurance companies rely on Medicare rate changes as a starting point for contract negotiations.

Medicare uses a committee of 26 physician representatives nominated from the the major specialty societies to look at actual cost of delivery of of all services, the CPT codes. Healthcare providers supply CMS with actual cost in delivering each service. The committee compares these costs against previous costs to determine whether an adjust in reimbursement is required. Each code is reviewed at least once every 5 years. Yearly the committee submits recommended changes in reimbursement rates to CMS. So you see Medicare reimbursement rates are not based on what insurance or individuals pay for services. Even if insurance companies disappeared, there would be little impact on Medicare reimbursements.

The various states use their own methods in determining Medicaid reimbursement. Unfortunately, these methods are very dependent on state revenues. So a bad year in state revenues means a bad for Medicaid reimbursements. Thus medical facilities that are very dependent on Medicaid would have a hard time.
How is Medicare funded? | Medicare
How Medicare, Other Payers Determine Physician Reimbursement Rates

All Medicare medical costs are being paid for through the Medicare Trust Funds.

Total Non-interest income used to pay for Medicare, is not just from payroll taxes, but also general revenue from all tax payers, taxes on the benefits themselves, and transfers from states. In short, you are paying for Medicare, not just from your 3% on your income, but also from your State and Federal income taxes, and even a tax you pay on the benefit itself.

Medicare is not entirely funded from the trust fund, and never was by the way.

Assets held in special issue U.S. Treasury securities increased by $15.1 billion to $304.7 billion.

https://www.amazon.com/High-Cost-Good-Intentions-Entitlement/dp/1503603547&tag=ff0d01-20

There are no real assets. You are actually 100% correct, that they are special issue US Treasury securities.

US securities have value, because you can sell them. What value does something have that you cannot sell? Say you buy a car, and the terms of the sale are, you can never sell the car for the rest of your life.

How much value does that car have, the day after you buy it? Zero. You can't sell it. Doesn't matter how much you paid for it, the car has zero value, because you can't sell it ever.

The US Treasury securities that are in the Social Security Trust Fund, and the Medicare Trust fund, have zero market value. They are nothing more than bits of paper.

If the government does not have the money to pay for Social Security, or Medicare, neither of those 'trust funds' can take those 'assets' and sell them on the market. They are not marketable assets.

In short, they are literally nothing more than post-it notes, saying 'IOU'. They don't even have legal protection. Meaning, neither trust fund, could even sue the government, to get payment on the securities, because they have no legal status.

Equally, by the way.... there is no real 'interest' on the 'assets'. A real asset, like a corporate bond, the money paying the interest comes from the profitability of the corporation. The government has no profitable operation. It taxes the public, to pay expenses. These securities, are just taking tax money, just like the Medicare 3% is taking tax money, just like the transfers from the general revenue is taking tax money. It's not like a Treasury bond, is magically producing value. All of the money in medicare comes from tax payers. There is no interest on the assets... the assets is the tax payer.

Medicare uses a committee of 26 physician representatives nominated from the the major specialty societies to look at actual cost of delivery of of all services, the CPT codes. Healthcare providers supply CMS with actual cost in delivering each service.

Medicare and Medicaid have always paid far less than the total cost of providing service. And by necessity hospitals, clinics and doctors, have no choice but to charge private patients a higher cost, to offset the loss of money on gov-patients.

As the payout from medicare and medicaid go down, the cost to private patients goes up.

This is unavoidable.

Yes, I understand Medicare has a committee of people, who sit around on our tax money blowing smoke in each others faces about how much stuff costs.

Doesn't change the facts. The fact is, Medicare and Medicaid both under charge for service, and that cost is passed onto private patients.

As Ray said earlier, if the number of private patients is too low, then the hospital can't survive and ends up closing. Again, Medicare and Medicaid under charge. This is well documented and established statistical fact.

 

[Andylusion]

We all have our problems

Just stop bringing them to the US when you dont belong here

nobody is bringing them here, brainwashed functional moron.
so your whole country is a war zone because of the GOP never ending War on Drugs? Is global warming hitting you so hard that farms have just dried up like in Central America? These people have no choice and the GOP gives them an open invitation to come here get a fake ID work pay taxes buy a house get Healthcare etc etc etc. Great job! Sorry you don't get any actual news dummy whoops brain-washed functional dummy.

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

 

[Mac-7]

We all have our problems

Just stop bringing them to the US when you dont belong here

nobody is bringing them here, brainwashed functional moron.
so your whole country is a war zone because of the GOP never ending War on Drugs? Is global warming hitting you so hard that farms have just dried up like in Central America? These people have no choice and the GOP gives them an open invitation to come here get a fake ID work pay taxes buy a house get Healthcare etc etc etc. Great job! Sorry you don't get any actual news dummy whoops brain-washed functional dummy.

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

The key words are “when they get here”

Business owners do not control the border that illegal aliens pass through

 

[Harpy Eagle]

nobody is bringing them here, brainwashed functional moron.
so your whole country is a war zone because of the GOP never ending War on Drugs? Is global warming hitting you so hard that farms have just dried up like in Central America? These people have no choice and the GOP gives them an open invitation to come here get a fake ID work pay taxes buy a house get Healthcare etc etc etc. Great job! Sorry you don't get any actual news dummy whoops brain-washed functional dummy.

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Read what I wrote...they are bringing them here BY paying them when they get here. If nobody would hire them they would not come. They are every bit as responsible as the coyote that leads them through the dessert

 

[Harpy Eagle]

nobody is bringing them here, brainwashed functional moron.
so your whole country is a war zone because of the GOP never ending War on Drugs? Is global warming hitting you so hard that farms have just dried up like in Central America? These people have no choice and the GOP gives them an open invitation to come here get a fake ID work pay taxes buy a house get Healthcare etc etc etc. Great job! Sorry you don't get any actual news dummy whoops brain-washed functional dummy.

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

The key words are “when they get here”

Business owners do not control the border that illegal aliens pass through

They just give them the reason to come...take away that reason would be a great start

 

[Mac-7]

nobody is bringing them here, brainwashed functional moron.
so your whole country is a war zone because of the GOP never ending War on Drugs? Is global warming hitting you so hard that farms have just dried up like in Central America? These people have no choice and the GOP gives them an open invitation to come here get a fake ID work pay taxes buy a house get Healthcare etc etc etc. Great job! Sorry you don't get any actual news dummy whoops brain-washed functional dummy.

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

I’m not sure who that quote belongs to but it wasnt me

Most business owners are innocent victims of the lib open borders agenda

 

[Mac-7]

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

The key words are “when they get here”

Business owners do not control the border that illegal aliens pass through

They just give them the reason to come...take away that reason would be a great start

If you are the congress or the executive branch do your job and businesses can do theirs

Until trump came along the corrupt washington establishment did not lift a finger to stop the illegal alien invasion

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

I’m not sure who that quote belongs to but it wasnt me

Most business owners are innocent victims of the lib open borders agenda

This is why nothing gets better...we give one end a free pass. The chicken factories in the south that hired all those illegal are not innocent bystanders

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

The key words are “when they get here”

Business owners do not control the border that illegal aliens pass through

They just give them the reason to come...take away that reason would be a great start

If you are the congress or the executive branch do your job and businesses can do theirs

Until trump came along the corrupt washington establishment did not lift a finger to stop the illegal alien invasion

Yet Trump ignores the other end of the chain because those are his donors

 

[Mac-7]

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

I’m not sure who that quote belongs to but it wasnt me

Most business owners are innocent victims of the lib open borders agenda

This is why nothing gets better...we give one end a free pass. The chicken factories in the south that hired all those illegal are not innocent bystanders

Some are just doing what they have to do when others in their industry are allowed to hire illegal aliens and get away with

Its the Rotten Apple in the Barrel principle

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

I’m not sure who that quote belongs to but it wasnt me

Most business owners are innocent victims of the lib open borders agenda

This is why nothing gets better...we give one end a free pass. The chicken factories in the south that hired all those illegal are not innocent bystanders

Some are just doing what they have to do when others in their industry are allowed to hire illegal aliens and get away with

Its the Rotten Apple in the Barrel principle

As long as people like you give one side a free pass the problem will not get better...wall or no wall.

 

[Mac-7]

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

The key words are “when they get here”

Business owners do not control the border that illegal aliens pass through

They just give them the reason to come...take away that reason would be a great start

If you are the congress or the executive branch do your job and businesses can do theirs

Until trump came along the corrupt washington establishment did not lift a finger to stop the illegal alien invasion

Yet Trump ignores the other end of the chain because those are his donors

Who says trump is ignoring it?

The dems cpuld do a deal to improve E-Verify, increase punishment for KNOWINGLY hiring illegal workers, plus mandatory deportation of illegally working in America

And fund the wall along with ending the refugee loophole

Then everyone gets something they want

 

[Flopper]

Ok, but jobs and work is what American's need most, and not just stocks that benefit a class of people that make up a small number of the overall numbers that are needed to make this nation strong be it through in and through out again.

I don't think we need anymore jobs. We have more than enough as it is. Novembers jobs report certainly added to it.

I agree we don't need more jobs but we do need better jobs with better pay, and better benefits. We have far too many American workers who have to rely on government help to support their families. The problem of course, is that American workers are no longer the most skilled workers in the world and thus it is hard to justify higher pay without higher productivity.

There are good jobs around, but the real problem are the drugs we have in this country. Better jobs usually have drug screening as a condition of employment, and lower paying jobs don't. So people opt to work for less money so they can continue smoking pot.

I had tenants like that a few years ago. It was a young couple. Good kids, paid rent albeit late which I didn't care about. But they both worked fast food jobs because they loved their pot and couldn't give it up for anything. When my employer looks for new employees, the same thing. People are interested in the job, but can't pass a drug test. It's the same story at just about any company. I talk to people from many different industries.

To add insult to injury, states are legalizing pot, but just because it's legal doesn't mean companies don't do drug testing.

Where Pot is legal, most companies drop their zero tolerance and just disregard Pot use. However, they draw the line with hard drugs such cocaine, heroin, and crystal meth. With 34 states allowing medical use, which just requires a form filled out by a doctor and 10 allowing unrestricted use by adults, Pot is fast becoming accepted on the same level as alcohol.

Most people can control the use of Pot, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, etc so it does not interfere with their work. However, some people have addictive personalities and they are very likely to become addicted. Hard drugs are in a different category all together. Continuous use almost guarantees addiction for most people.

 

[Andylusion]

Shows how hollow the Trump economy is

Almost half of Americans work in low-wage jobs

America's unemployment rate is at a half-century low, but it also has a job-quality problem that affects nearly half the population, with a study finding 44% of U.S. workers are employed in low-wage jobs that pay median annual wages of $18,000.

Contrary to popular opinion, these workers aren't teenagers or young adults just starting their careers,

Well, we could turn to Communism or strict Socialism, then everybody's poor, except the political inner-circle.
Most jobs fall into the category of "service industry employment." Such jobs as retail sales, custodial work, factory line labor, landscaping, et cetera, fall into this category. Somebody has to fill in those spots and if they were to be paid high wages for their labor, YOU the consumer, would scream that you couldn't afford their services or products, as the companies would have to raise the cost of the products significantly to continue making a profit, after all, that's why people start their own companies, to make profit and provide more for their families.
As for your figure of $18,000 as a mean annual wage. I don't know where you get your figures from, but for Americans, the average annual mean income between the ages of 25-34 is really about $41,000+. Of course, this depends on the area one is from. The Department of Labor statistics also doesn't support your claim of $18,000, unless you are specifying some specific employment.
Migrant pickers make lousy incomes, however, if you had to pay every migrant picker a $15.00 per hour wage for his/her labor, you couldn't afford to eat.

That is a misassumption

Farm labor represents only a tiny portion of the price of food in the grocery store

$8-$15 an hour would add a little but not as much as you think if we limit the same food imports from mexico where they also pay low wages

False. You changed the context in the middle of the debate. The prior poster referred to Migrant pickers, while you referred to "portion of the price of food". There are many foods, like wheat for example, that are not picked by hand by migrants.

Foods which are more automated, like potatoes for example, you as the consumer opening a bag of potato chips, might be the very first human hand to have ever touched that potato. They are pulled from the ground, sorted, shipped, skinned, cut, fried, seasoned, baked, packed and sealed, without a single human hand touching them.

In that specific situation, your claim would be correct, that the value would not directly increase in relation to the wages.

However, there are numerous other things that are picked by hand, in labor intensive farming. Apples, peppers, asparagus, grapes, cherries, and so on. Increasing the labor rates for these things, would easily increase the cost of them by a ton.

Limiting imports of food, is a horrifically bad idea.

Right now the US is a net exporter of food. The amount of food we import, is a tiny fraction of the amount we export. Starting a trade war with food, will hurt the US more than anyone else.

Even had picked food generallydoes not go directly from field to table

There are warehouses, wholesalers and retailers in the food chain, plus, transportation, insurance, and other business expenses

Right, and if we are talking about the effects of minimum wage overall, it would effect every single employee, at every step in the process. The guy driving the forklift getting pallets off the truck, is going to get paid more if the minimum wage goes up.

 

[Andylusion]

Mac-7.... Gater, is entirely 100% correct on this point.

The vast vast majority of job-loss has came from automation. The only place where jobs in manufacturing has increased, is in China, where the price of labor is so low, that it is actually profit-losing to automate.

In Mexico even, most of the manufacturing plants being built are more automated than those in the US.

Manufacturing is not dying, and manufacturing jobs will never cease to exist..... but they will also never be a major force in the US economy.

Now that isn't to say that foreign companies helped in this process. Most certainly Unions made their respective companies un-competitive on the market, relative to the non-union foreign companies.

Even within our own country, we see the rise of non-union steel companies, overtaking the union ones. Nucor for example is non-union, and slowly edging out US Steel in steel production.

So Unions certainly helped to wipe out jobs, relative to non-union foreign companies, clearly harmed employment.

However, the bottom line is that automation wiped out more jobs, than anything China did.

And even if we blocked all trade with China, it would never bring those jobs back.

If they brought iPhone production to the US, it would be entirely automated. You wouldn't have tons of high paid manufacturing workers, doing it.

We have millions of low education workers who are not suitable for high tech manufacturing

But they still need jobs

And we need to keep more of the $350-500 billion going to china in America

If automation is the future I want it in America rather than in china

I want the robots designed and manufactured here as well as put to work here

Well we do. As stated, manufacturing has not disappeared. In fact, it was a record year 2018, in manufacturing. If we rounded up the entire manufacturing sector of the US into a separate country, it was have a GDP of $1.9 Trillion, or be 8th largest economy in the world.

Nevertheless, the solution to more manufacturing in the US, is more trade, not less trade.

A trade war will not making more products be manufactured in the US, but rather fewer.

General Motors, makes more money outside the US, than inside the US. Apple makes more money outside the US. In fact, even McDonald's makes more money outside the US. Yes I realize McDonald's isn't in manufacturing, but the point is.....

Nearly all international companies make more money outside the US. Nearly all.

The US might be the single largest market, but if you consider outside the US as being a combined market, then the US is not the largest market.

The largest market, is the other 7 Billion + people on the planet.

If you force any company to choose between having a manufacturing plant in the US, that only serves the US market, or a manufacturing plant that is outside the US the serves the 7 Billion+ people in the world market.....

Which would you choose? Well I can tell you where anyone with any intelligence would choose... they would choose to build for the international market.

We need to stop making out like the US is this indispensable market. In the 50s, it most certainly was. 60s and 70s, not quite as much. But now after Capitalism has brought billions of people above poverty around the world, we are simply not the one and only market in the world, that everyone must be a part of.

If you force companies into a "our market or the worlds market", it will soon be the worlds market, and not ours.

General Motors, makes more money outside the US, than inside the US. Apple makes more money outside the US. In fact, even McDonald's makes more money outside the US. Yes I realize McDonald's isn't in manufacturing, but the point is.....

General Motors, makes more money outside the US, than inside the US. Apple makes more money outside the US. In fact, even McDonald's makes more money outside the US. Yes I realize McDonald's isn't in manufacturing, but the point is.....

do GM and other global companies still ant the benefits and protection afforded by the US flag?

i bet they do as they cozy up to our biggest enemy

why should Americans care how much money GM makes in china since it is not benefiting them?

But now after Capitalism has brought billions of people above poverty around the world,

That is not a compelling argument for me

we sacrificed some of our wealth through the Marshall Plan and allowed the euros and japanese to grow at our expense

But the Cold War is over and we cannot lift the whole world out of poverty on the backs of Americans

why should Americans care how much money GM makes in china since it is not benefiting them?

You missed my point. My point isn't that you should, or should not care about profits made outside the US.

Now I could make that case..... I own stock in companies that make more money outside the US. I think all people should own stock in companies, and if they have a 401K or a pension, or a annuity, then all people have a retirement at all, should support companies making money outside the US, because it benefits them.

Plus.... now with lower capital gains taxes, many of those companies, have started bringing those profits back to the US, to invest in the US.
US companies bring home $665 billion in overseas cash last year, falling short of Trump pledge

So earning money outside the US, is directly benefiting the US. By the way, other countries have much lower taxes on profits brought home. We're one of the few stupid countries that doesn't have that as a policy.

However, as I said, that was not my point. My point was.... if you make it through tariff and protectionist policy, a system where companies can either make products for the US, or the entire world.... they are going to make it for the entire world, not the US.

The world will win, and the US will lose. Have trade barriers is going to a create an "The USA or Everyone else" system... and in that system, everyone else wins.

Say I am a large company, and I have $40 Billion dollars to build a manufacturing plant, that will produce a product, and create 500 jobs.

I can either make that manufacturing plant in Mexico, or I can make it in Tennessee. I don't have $80 Billion to build two plants. I can either make it in the US, or I can make it outside the US in Mexico.

One or the other.

Where do I build the plant?

Well if I build it in the US, because of trade barriers, I can only sell to the US market.
If I build it in Mexico, I can sell it world wide, to the 8 Billion people on the planet.

Where do I build the plant? In Mexico of course. I make a ton more money selling to the world market, than I do selling to just the US market.

The US loses.... and the world wins.

So doing this "us or them" trade war game, is going to be a loser for the US. And it always has by the way. Trade barriers, and protectionism have always destroyed the people engaging in it.

Jamaica, East Berlin, Venezuela, Cuba, protectionism has never been a benefit to the countries that engage in it.

Again, as I said before on this forum.... if protectionism, and limiting trade was a net benefit, then why are we putting trade sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine? By the logic of protectionism, we are forcing Russia to be wealthy, by restricting trade on them.

Why would we 'punish' people with restrictions on trade..... and then restrict our own trade to somehow benefit us? These are mutually exclusive ideas. It can't be both.

So that is my real point. It wasn't that you should just "care" for caring sake, how much money companies make outside the US. My point was that if you make it an ultimatum, that companies either deal with the US or the rest of the world, they'll deal with the rest of the world. There is more money to be made in the rest of the world. We'll lose... the world will win.

But the Cold War is over and we cannot lift the whole world out of poverty on the backs of Americans

But we're not lifting the world out of poverty, on our backs. Trade is inherently mutually beneficial. Every company I've worked for, was making tons of sales outside the US. You put in trade barriers, and all those companies would close. All of them would. All of our material was being sourced from around world. Even those material that was sourced locally, was getting supplied around the world.

It was mutually beneficial for us to buy from various providers, and then we were able to make our product. You cut of our suppliers, and the cost of production spikes above the amount our customers are willing to pay..... we're all laid off, and unemployed.

How is this on our backs? If not for trade, we wouldn't have a job.

US companies bring home $665 billion in overseas cash last year, falling short of Trump pledge

That sounds impressive but dont expect that much every year since much of it was a one-time response to the trump tax cuts

If it has not been clear before let me say now that I’m not against international trade

Between non enemies such as the US, europe, japan, south korea, canada and others with comparable economies and costs of doing business trade is a good thing

But with raptor states like china where business exists to serve the political aggression of the dictatorship free trade is an illusion

Many Americans do not see the threat from china and see that country as a harmless panda bear

Which it is not

So I want less one-way trade with china, less wealth transfer, and no technology transfer

I do not yet see a connection between the two issues. One issue is trade. The other is the potential for Geo-political conflict with China.

While I don't see them as entirely mutually exclusive, I also don't see them as intertwined either.

China is going to grow whether we engage in trade with them, or not. Any country that moves to adopt more Capitalist economic policies, will grow.

Cutting off trade with China will not stop the economy from growing, now stop others from engaging with China.

One thing it might do, is make the Chinese more anti-American.

One of the things that has irritated me about Cuba, is that no matter how badly the Socialist government has decimated the Cuban economy, no matter how impoverished and hopeless the people are, the government simply blamed everything on the "American Embargo".

So no matter what happened, it wasn't their governments fault... it was the Americans fault. A line we hear from mindless left-wingers here in the US constantly.

So I am not in favor of cutting off trade in the name of hindering their government, because all it will do is strengthen their government, by allowing them to use the US as a scapegoat for everything that happens.

And the reality is, Cuba wouldn't be poor, if they engaged in Capitalism. The Embargo is just an excuse for failure, not an actual cause of it.

China is going to grow no matter what. The question is, are we going to give them excuses to blame the US for everything that happens in their country?

As for businesses exist to serve the government... I do not see that China is much different than anywhere else. I don't see that a noodle company in China, exists to serve the government. I do see that government sometimes coerces companies to operate in a favorable manor, but then we have that here in the US too.

I think free-trade is still the best way to go, even with China. The last thing I want to do, is give the Chinese people an excuse to blame the US, for their garbage governments bad policies.

 

[beagle9]

Ok, but jobs and work is what American's need most, and not just stocks that benefit a class of people that make up a small number of the overall numbers that are needed to make this nation strong be it through in and through out again.

I don't think we need anymore jobs. We have more than enough as it is. Novembers jobs report certainly added to it.

Good point. Just need people to get off the government dole then, and to get trained or rehabilitated in order to work the jobs offered.

 

[Andylusion]

You sound so uninformed about America I doubt if you even are an American

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Read what I wrote...they are bringing them here BY paying them when they get here. If nobody would hire them they would not come. They are every bit as responsible as the coyote that leads them through the dessert

Not sure if I agree with that.

Unless you are making the case that a business owner is knowingly, intentionally contacting people in Mexico, and saying openly if they come, he'll pay them illegally....... then I don't see that as being the same thing.

If someone shows up.... and asks for a job.... and I have nothing more to do with it, than determining if I wish to hire someone.....

Then that to me is not the same. It's not the job of a business owner to filter out people who should not be in the country to begin with. It's not the business owners job to control the border. It's not the business owners job to enforce immigration laws.

It is the Federal Governments job to protect the nations borders, by controlling who enters the country. It's a fundamental duty of the government, to do that.

As for requiring that business is responsible for enforcing immigration controls, this is another area, where if you flipped it around on yourself, you would never accept such logic.

Few years back, had a guy knock on my door, and ask if I wanted my back deck painted. Am I now responsible for doing a background check and determine if he is legal to work?

Say a guy asks if you if he can wash your car, or mow your lawn, or black top your drive way, or shingle your roof. Do you pay money to do a full background and I-9 lookup to determine his legal status?

Should you be tossed into jail, or fined thousands of dollars, if the guy you hired to do any of those things, turned out to be illegal?

You would never tolerate such unfair punishment against yourself. And of course not. Why would you be required to do these things?

Well what is the difference between you directly hiring a guy to mow your lawn twice a month for cash, and you hiring a lawn service that hires a guy to mow your lawn?

The only difference is, you can track with paperwork, the business owner. But otherwise they are identical actions.

So should we toss you in jail for hiring someone, who turned out to be illegal? I don't think so.

Maybe the authorities that are in charge of enforcing the law, should be the authorities who enforce the law. That's my view.

Unless you can absolutely prove that a business owner is intentionally aiding and encouraging violation of the law. Then I'm with you.

 

[beagle9]

We have millions of low education workers who are not suitable for high tech manufacturing

But they still need jobs

And we need to keep more of the $350-500 billion going to china in America

If automation is the future I want it in America rather than in china

I want the robots designed and manufactured here as well as put to work here

Well we do. As stated, manufacturing has not disappeared. In fact, it was a record year 2018, in manufacturing. If we rounded up the entire manufacturing sector of the US into a separate country, it was have a GDP of $1.9 Trillion, or be 8th largest economy in the world.

Nevertheless, the solution to more manufacturing in the US, is more trade, not less trade.

A trade war will not making more products be manufactured in the US, but rather fewer.

General Motors, makes more money outside the US, than inside the US. Apple makes more money outside the US. In fact, even McDonald's makes more money outside the US. Yes I realize McDonald's isn't in manufacturing, but the point is.....

Nearly all international companies make more money outside the US. Nearly all.

The US might be the single largest market, but if you consider outside the US as being a combined market, then the US is not the largest market.

The largest market, is the other 7 Billion + people on the planet.

If you force any company to choose between having a manufacturing plant in the US, that only serves the US market, or a manufacturing plant that is outside the US the serves the 7 Billion+ people in the world market.....

Which would you choose? Well I can tell you where anyone with any intelligence would choose... they would choose to build for the international market.

We need to stop making out like the US is this indispensable market. In the 50s, it most certainly was. 60s and 70s, not quite as much. But now after Capitalism has brought billions of people above poverty around the world, we are simply not the one and only market in the world, that everyone must be a part of.

If you force companies into a "our market or the worlds market", it will soon be the worlds market, and not ours.

General Motors, makes more money outside the US, than inside the US. Apple makes more money outside the US. In fact, even McDonald's makes more money outside the US. Yes I realize McDonald's isn't in manufacturing, but the point is.....

General Motors, makes more money outside the US, than inside the US. Apple makes more money outside the US. In fact, even McDonald's makes more money outside the US. Yes I realize McDonald's isn't in manufacturing, but the point is.....

do GM and other global companies still ant the benefits and protection afforded by the US flag?

i bet they do as they cozy up to our biggest enemy

why should Americans care how much money GM makes in china since it is not benefiting them?

But now after Capitalism has brought billions of people above poverty around the world,

That is not a compelling argument for me

we sacrificed some of our wealth through the Marshall Plan and allowed the euros and japanese to grow at our expense

But the Cold War is over and we cannot lift the whole world out of poverty on the backs of Americans

why should Americans care how much money GM makes in china since it is not benefiting them?

You missed my point. My point isn't that you should, or should not care about profits made outside the US.

Now I could make that case..... I own stock in companies that make more money outside the US. I think all people should own stock in companies, and if they have a 401K or a pension, or a annuity, then all people have a retirement at all, should support companies making money outside the US, because it benefits them.

Plus.... now with lower capital gains taxes, many of those companies, have started bringing those profits back to the US, to invest in the US.
US companies bring home $665 billion in overseas cash last year, falling short of Trump pledge

So earning money outside the US, is directly benefiting the US. By the way, other countries have much lower taxes on profits brought home. We're one of the few stupid countries that doesn't have that as a policy.

However, as I said, that was not my point. My point was.... if you make it through tariff and protectionist policy, a system where companies can either make products for the US, or the entire world.... they are going to make it for the entire world, not the US.

The world will win, and the US will lose. Have trade barriers is going to a create an "The USA or Everyone else" system... and in that system, everyone else wins.

Say I am a large company, and I have $40 Billion dollars to build a manufacturing plant, that will produce a product, and create 500 jobs.

I can either make that manufacturing plant in Mexico, or I can make it in Tennessee. I don't have $80 Billion to build two plants. I can either make it in the US, or I can make it outside the US in Mexico.

One or the other.

Where do I build the plant?

Well if I build it in the US, because of trade barriers, I can only sell to the US market.
If I build it in Mexico, I can sell it world wide, to the 8 Billion people on the planet.

Where do I build the plant? In Mexico of course. I make a ton more money selling to the world market, than I do selling to just the US market.

The US loses.... and the world wins.

So doing this "us or them" trade war game, is going to be a loser for the US. And it always has by the way. Trade barriers, and protectionism have always destroyed the people engaging in it.

Jamaica, East Berlin, Venezuela, Cuba, protectionism has never been a benefit to the countries that engage in it.

Again, as I said before on this forum.... if protectionism, and limiting trade was a net benefit, then why are we putting trade sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine? By the logic of protectionism, we are forcing Russia to be wealthy, by restricting trade on them.

Why would we 'punish' people with restrictions on trade..... and then restrict our own trade to somehow benefit us? These are mutually exclusive ideas. It can't be both.

So that is my real point. It wasn't that you should just "care" for caring sake, how much money companies make outside the US. My point was that if you make it an ultimatum, that companies either deal with the US or the rest of the world, they'll deal with the rest of the world. There is more money to be made in the rest of the world. We'll lose... the world will win.

But the Cold War is over and we cannot lift the whole world out of poverty on the backs of Americans

But we're not lifting the world out of poverty, on our backs. Trade is inherently mutually beneficial. Every company I've worked for, was making tons of sales outside the US. You put in trade barriers, and all those companies would close. All of them would. All of our material was being sourced from around world. Even those material that was sourced locally, was getting supplied around the world.

It was mutually beneficial for us to buy from various providers, and then we were able to make our product. You cut of our suppliers, and the cost of production spikes above the amount our customers are willing to pay..... we're all laid off, and unemployed.

How is this on our backs? If not for trade, we wouldn't have a job.

US companies bring home $665 billion in overseas cash last year, falling short of Trump pledge

That sounds impressive but dont expect that much every year since much of it was a one-time response to the trump tax cuts

If it has not been clear before let me say now that I’m not against international trade

Between non enemies such as the US, europe, japan, south korea, canada and others with comparable economies and costs of doing business trade is a good thing

But with raptor states like china where business exists to serve the political aggression of the dictatorship free trade is an illusion

Many Americans do not see the threat from china and see that country as a harmless panda bear

Which it is not

So I want less one-way trade with china, less wealth transfer, and no technology transfer

I do not yet see a connection between the two issues. One issue is trade. The other is the potential for Geo-political conflict with China.

While I don't see them as entirely mutually exclusive, I also don't see them as intertwined either.

China is going to grow whether we engage in trade with them, or not. Any country that moves to adopt more Capitalist economic policies, will grow.

Cutting off trade with China will not stop the economy from growing, now stop others from engaging with China.

One thing it might do, is make the Chinese more anti-American.

One of the things that has irritated me about Cuba, is that no matter how badly the Socialist government has decimated the Cuban economy, no matter how impoverished and hopeless the people are, the government simply blamed everything on the "American Embargo".

So no matter what happened, it wasn't their governments fault... it was the Americans fault. A line we hear from mindless left-wingers here in the US constantly.

So I am not in favor of cutting off trade in the name of hindering their government, because all it will do is strengthen their government, by allowing them to use the US as a scapegoat for everything that happens.

And the reality is, Cuba wouldn't be poor, if they engaged in Capitalism. The Embargo is just an excuse for failure, not an actual cause of it.

China is going to grow no matter what. The question is, are we going to give them excuses to blame the US for everything that happens in their country?

As for businesses exist to serve the government... I do not see that China is much different than anywhere else. I don't see that a noodle company in China, exists to serve the government. I do see that government sometimes coerces companies to operate in a favorable manor, but then we have that here in the US too.

I think free-trade is still the best way to go, even with China. The last thing I want to do, is give the Chinese people an excuse to blame the US, for their garbage governments bad policies.

Huh ? So appease China no matter what they do to us, and this just so they don't BLAME us for something we are innocent of ??? That sounds like a sell out to me or rather a cowardace way of looking at the world around us. Better to work from a position of respect and strength, instead of from a position of weakness and capitulation.

 

[beagle9]

Any argument at all? Or just the usual idiocy? So who's bringing these illegals here LOL? Do you have a Social Security card that cannot be faked in your imaginary America? What the hell are you babbling about LOL?

Who is bringing the illegals here?

Business owners that are will to pay them when they get here

Do you have clear direct evidence that business owners are intentionally bringing illegals into the country, in direct violation of the law? I honestly can't even imagine that many business owners would pay thousands on thousands of dollars, and risk losing everything they have, to get a few minimum wage workers picking fruit or something.

Read what I wrote...they are bringing them here BY paying them when they get here. If nobody would hire them they would not come. They are every bit as responsible as the coyote that leads them through the dessert

Not sure if I agree with that.

Unless you are making the case that a business owner is knowingly, intentionally contacting people in Mexico, and saying openly if they come, he'll pay them illegally....... then I don't see that as being the same thing.

If someone shows up.... and asks for a job.... and I have nothing more to do with it, than determining if I wish to hire someone.....

Then that to me is not the same. It's not the job of a business owner to filter out people who should not be in the country to begin with. It's not the business owners job to control the border. It's not the business owners job to enforce immigration laws.

It is the Federal Governments job to protect the nations borders, by controlling who enters the country. It's a fundamental duty of the government, to do that.

As for requiring that business is responsible for enforcing immigration controls, this is another area, where if you flipped it around on yourself, you would never accept such logic.

Few years back, had a guy knock on my door, and ask if I wanted my back deck painted. Am I now responsible for doing a background check and determine if he is legal to work?

Say a guy asks if you if he can wash your car, or mow your lawn, or black top your drive way, or shingle your roof. Do you pay money to do a full background and I-9 lookup to determine his legal status?

Should you be tossed into jail, or fined thousands of dollars, if the guy you hired to do any of those things, turned out to be illegal?

You would never tolerate such unfair punishment against yourself. And of course not. Why would you be required to do these things?

Well what is the difference between you directly hiring a guy to mow your lawn twice a month for cash, and you hiring a lawn service that hires a guy to mow your lawn?

The only difference is, you can track with paperwork, the business owner. But otherwise they are identical actions.

So should we toss you in jail for hiring someone, who turned out to be illegal? I don't think so.

Maybe the authorities that are in charge of enforcing the law, should be the authorities who enforce the law. That's my view.

Unless you can absolutely prove that a business owner is intentionally aiding and encouraging violation of the law. Then I'm with you.

Every American should do their part. What part of United don't you understand ? Can't operate as undermining forces that destroy the nations security for self serving interest or profits above the long term security of the nation, and the general welfare of it's citizen's.

 

[Andylusion]

Ok, but jobs and work is what American's need most, and not just stocks that benefit a class of people that make up a small number of the overall numbers that are needed to make this nation strong be it through in and through out again.

I don't think we need anymore jobs. We have more than enough as it is. Novembers jobs report certainly added to it.

I agree we don't need more jobs but we do need better jobs with better pay, and better benefits. We have far too many American workers who have to rely on government help to support their families. The problem of course, is that American workers are no longer the most skilled workers in the world and thus it is hard to justify higher pay without higher productivity.

There are good jobs around, but the real problem are the drugs we have in this country. Better jobs usually have drug screening as a condition of employment, and lower paying jobs don't. So people opt to work for less money so they can continue smoking pot.

I had tenants like that a few years ago. It was a young couple. Good kids, paid rent albeit late which I didn't care about. But they both worked fast food jobs because they loved their pot and couldn't give it up for anything. When my employer looks for new employees, the same thing. People are interested in the job, but can't pass a drug test. It's the same story at just about any company. I talk to people from many different industries.

To add insult to injury, states are legalizing pot, but just because it's legal doesn't mean companies don't do drug testing.

Where Pot is legal, most companies drop their zero tolerance and just disregard Pot use. However, they draw the line with hard drugs such cocaine, heroin, and crystal meth. With 34 states allowing medical use, which just requires a form filled out by a doctor and 10 allowing unrestricted use by adults, Pot is fast becoming accepted on the same level as alcohol.

Most people can control the use of Pot, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, etc so it does not interfere with their work. However, some people have addictive personalities and they are very likely to become addicted. Hard drugs are in a different category all together. Continuous use almost guarantees addiction for most people.

And I worry about that.

Let me ask you directly..... do you, yes or no, think that those on pot are as productive as those who are not?