Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Tariffs are taxes on trades. Higher taxes on corporations cause less investment and less jobs. Conservatives used to understand this. Now they are cheering for higher taxes on consumers and corporations. But simply because someone dresses up a leftist policy and calls it "conservative" does not mean it isn't a bad idea.
U.S. tariffs on imported cars could lead BMW (BMWG.DE) to reduce investment and cut jobs in the United States due to the large number of cars it exports from its South Carolina plant, the German carmaker has warned.
President Trump’s administration last month launched an investigation into whether auto imports posed a national security threat and Trump has threatened to impose a 20 percent tariff on all imports of EU-assembled cars. ...
The BMW plant in South Carolina is its largest globally and ships more than 70 percent of its annual production to other export markets, the company said.
Chinese tariffs on U.S. passenger cars, imposed in retaliation for U.S. duties on Chinese goods, have already hiked up the cost of exporting to China, BMW said. Any U.S. tariffs would likely lead to further retaliatory measures from China and the European Union.
In addition, higher tariffs on components imported to the United States would make other production locations outside the country more competitive.
“All of these factors would substantially increase the costs of exporting passenger cars to these markets from the United States and deteriorate the market access for BMW in these jurisdictions, potentially leading to strongly reduced export volumes and negative effects on investment and employment in the United States,” BMW said in the letter.
BMW says U.S. tariffs on EU cars may hit investment there
By slapping trade taxes on the automobile companies, it just makes those companies less competitive in global markets as American-made cars become more expensive.
Economics 101
Trade policy is not socialism.
That you have to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong, on this issue.
cog·ni·tive dis·so·nancecognitive dissonance - Google Search
noun
Psychology
noun: cognitive dissonance
- the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
Trade policy is not socialism.
That you have to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong, on this issue.
cog·ni·tive dis·so·nancecognitive dissonance - Google Search
noun
Psychology
noun: cognitive dissonance
- the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
Definition of SOCIALISM
"
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
"
So, toro, explain how having a trade policy, makes one socialist.
Trade policy is not socialism.
That you have to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong, on this issue.
I have not lied about anything, when trade policy involves the Govt controlling more and more of the economy then it is socialism.
I personally do not want the Govt trying to tell me what to buy, but I happen to hold my freedom a little more closely than you apparently.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The whole point of Trade Policy is to ensure that our Trade is, at least, mutually beneficial.
It has not been.
Trade Policy that does not serve the interests of our citizens, is bad trade policy.
You saying "socialism" a lot, is not an argument against that.
Ideological purity is not a good reason to ignore the interests and well being of our citizens.
The real question is whether free trade is beneficial to the country overall. It has been beneficial as it has created more jobs. TPP would have created more opportunity for farmers.
Tariffs are taxes on trades. Higher taxes on corporations cause less investment and less jobs. Conservatives used to understand this. Now they are cheering for higher taxes on consumers and corporations. But simply because someone dresses up a leftist policy and calls it "conservative" does not mean it isn't a bad idea.
U.S. tariffs on imported cars could lead BMW (BMWG.DE) to reduce investment and cut jobs in the United States due to the large number of cars it exports from its South Carolina plant, the German carmaker has warned.
President Trump’s administration last month launched an investigation into whether auto imports posed a national security threat and Trump has threatened to impose a 20 percent tariff on all imports of EU-assembled cars. ...
The BMW plant in South Carolina is its largest globally and ships more than 70 percent of its annual production to other export markets, the company said.
Chinese tariffs on U.S. passenger cars, imposed in retaliation for U.S. duties on Chinese goods, have already hiked up the cost of exporting to China, BMW said. Any U.S. tariffs would likely lead to further retaliatory measures from China and the European Union.
In addition, higher tariffs on components imported to the United States would make other production locations outside the country more competitive.
“All of these factors would substantially increase the costs of exporting passenger cars to these markets from the United States and deteriorate the market access for BMW in these jurisdictions, potentially leading to strongly reduced export volumes and negative effects on investment and employment in the United States,” BMW said in the letter.
BMW says U.S. tariffs on EU cars may hit investment there
By slapping trade taxes on the automobile companies, it just makes those companies less competitive in global markets as American-made cars become more expensive.
Economics 101
The US market is by far the largest for BMW. If they start shifting plants to other places then it's going to cost them substantially more to ship cars BACK to the US! Sorry, but this is posturing by BMW. They need to put pressure on their own government to stop placing tariffs on US goods and then we'll have a level playing field. Until then? Buy a Lexus or a Cadillac.
This is not posturing. They can do the same thing that HD is doing. Make goods for markets overseas outside of the US so they cannot be undercut by their competitors using tariff free steel.
While the US is the largest single market, the rest of the world can be as large or larger. Look at the last Avengers movie. The 600 million it made in the US is the largest but the rest of the world represents 1.4 billion which is more than twice as much.
Stupid move by Harley Davidson in my opinion. They don't make bikes that compete by undercutting anyone because to quite blunt (sorry all you Harley buffs!) there are literally dozens of other bike brands that are far less expensive...perform better and hold up better mechanically. Harley is an iconic brand that sells an image more than a product. People in Europe buy them because of that image despite what they cost now. Making them in Rumania or some other country in Europe won't have the same panache as a bike made here in the US.
If that is what you want to believe then go for it. The brand name is important not where it is made. HD did the right thing. More American companies who make in the US and export overseas will be forced to do the same thing when they get undercut by competitors overseas.
I love how all you statist try and paint me as a lefty, simply hilarious
When you find a single issue you are to the right of me on, let me know
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
You certainly are just using those words as Appeals to Emotion.
One more time, name me a single issue you think you are the the right of me on....
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Nationalism.
Ya think? How many years did you spend in service to the defense if your country?
I think you confuse jingoism for nationalism
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
I don't know how long ago your Service was,
but TODAY, you can't support a policy if the only justification is that is it good for America and Americans.
Your more concerned with personal self interest and/or ideological purity.
TODAY, on the issue of Nationalism, I am to the right of you.
You asked, and I answered.
I have not lied about anything, when trade policy involves the Govt controlling more and more of the economy then it is socialism.
I personally do not want the Govt trying to tell me what to buy, but I happen to hold my freedom a little more closely than you apparently.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The whole point of Trade Policy is to ensure that our Trade is, at least, mutually beneficial.
It has not been.
Trade Policy that does not serve the interests of our citizens, is bad trade policy.
You saying "socialism" a lot, is not an argument against that.
Ideological purity is not a good reason to ignore the interests and well being of our citizens.
The real question is whether free trade is beneficial to the country overall. It has been beneficial as it has created more jobs. TPP would have created more opportunity for farmers.
Tariffs are taxes on trades. Higher taxes on corporations cause less investment and less jobs. Conservatives used to understand this. Now they are cheering for higher taxes on consumers and corporations. But simply because someone dresses up a leftist policy and calls it "conservative" does not mean it isn't a bad idea.
U.S. tariffs on imported cars could lead BMW (BMWG.DE) to reduce investment and cut jobs in the United States due to the large number of cars it exports from its South Carolina plant, the German carmaker has warned.
President Trump’s administration last month launched an investigation into whether auto imports posed a national security threat and Trump has threatened to impose a 20 percent tariff on all imports of EU-assembled cars. ...
The BMW plant in South Carolina is its largest globally and ships more than 70 percent of its annual production to other export markets, the company said.
Chinese tariffs on U.S. passenger cars, imposed in retaliation for U.S. duties on Chinese goods, have already hiked up the cost of exporting to China, BMW said. Any U.S. tariffs would likely lead to further retaliatory measures from China and the European Union.
In addition, higher tariffs on components imported to the United States would make other production locations outside the country more competitive.
“All of these factors would substantially increase the costs of exporting passenger cars to these markets from the United States and deteriorate the market access for BMW in these jurisdictions, potentially leading to strongly reduced export volumes and negative effects on investment and employment in the United States,” BMW said in the letter.
BMW says U.S. tariffs on EU cars may hit investment there
By slapping trade taxes on the automobile companies, it just makes those companies less competitive in global markets as American-made cars become more expensive.
Economics 101
The US market is by far the largest for BMW. If they start shifting plants to other places then it's going to cost them substantially more to ship cars BACK to the US! Sorry, but this is posturing by BMW. They need to put pressure on their own government to stop placing tariffs on US goods and then we'll have a level playing field. Until then? Buy a Lexus or a Cadillac.
This is not posturing. They can do the same thing that HD is doing. Make goods for markets overseas outside of the US so they cannot be undercut by their competitors using tariff free steel.
While the US is the largest single market, the rest of the world can be as large or larger. Look at the last Avengers movie. The 600 million it made in the US is the largest but the rest of the world represents 1.4 billion which is more than twice as much.
Stupid move by Harley Davidson in my opinion. They don't make bikes that compete by undercutting anyone because to quite blunt (sorry all you Harley buffs!) there are literally dozens of other bike brands that are far less expensive...perform better and hold up better mechanically. Harley is an iconic brand that sells an image more than a product. People in Europe buy them because of that image despite what they cost now. Making them in Rumania or some other country in Europe won't have the same panache as a bike made here in the US.
If that is what you want to believe then go for it. The brand name is important not where it is made. HD did the right thing. More American companies who make in the US and export overseas will be forced to do the same thing when they get undercut by competitors overseas.
What's your alternative solution to the way Globalization has hurt the American worker?
Cause most of the oppositions, both sides of the aisle, "solution" is to do nothing, and just get used to the new normal of a Two Tier economy and let the workers suck ass.
You got something better than that?
Trade policy is not socialism.
That you have to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong, on this issue.
cog·ni·tive dis·so·nancecognitive dissonance - Google Search
noun
Psychology
noun: cognitive dissonance
- the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
Definition of SOCIALISM
"
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
"
So, toro, explain how having a trade policy, makes one socialist.
Having a trade policy does not make one socialist, having a trade policy that keeps giving the central government more and more control over the economy...that makes one socialist
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
You certainly are just using those words as Appeals to Emotion.
One more time, name me a single issue you think you are the the right of me on....
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Nationalism.
Ya think? How many years did you spend in service to the defense if your country?
I think you confuse jingoism for nationalism
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
I don't know how long ago your Service was,
but TODAY, you can't support a policy if the only justification is that is it good for America and Americans.
Your more concerned with personal self interest and/or ideological purity.
TODAY, on the issue of Nationalism, I am to the right of you.
You asked, and I answered.
But I do support policies that are good for America and Americans, that is why I oppose Trump’s trade war, it is not good for either.
Trump’s policies might be good for small segments of the population while harming much larger segments.
You accuse me of putting ideology before country while blindly following a leader because he is from the “right” party...seems you should look in the mirror.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The whole point of Trade Policy is to ensure that our Trade is, at least, mutually beneficial.
It has not been.
Trade Policy that does not serve the interests of our citizens, is bad trade policy.
You saying "socialism" a lot, is not an argument against that.
Ideological purity is not a good reason to ignore the interests and well being of our citizens.
The real question is whether free trade is beneficial to the country overall. It has been beneficial as it has created more jobs. TPP would have created more opportunity for farmers.
The US market is by far the largest for BMW. If they start shifting plants to other places then it's going to cost them substantially more to ship cars BACK to the US! Sorry, but this is posturing by BMW. They need to put pressure on their own government to stop placing tariffs on US goods and then we'll have a level playing field. Until then? Buy a Lexus or a Cadillac.
This is not posturing. They can do the same thing that HD is doing. Make goods for markets overseas outside of the US so they cannot be undercut by their competitors using tariff free steel.
While the US is the largest single market, the rest of the world can be as large or larger. Look at the last Avengers movie. The 600 million it made in the US is the largest but the rest of the world represents 1.4 billion which is more than twice as much.
Stupid move by Harley Davidson in my opinion. They don't make bikes that compete by undercutting anyone because to quite blunt (sorry all you Harley buffs!) there are literally dozens of other bike brands that are far less expensive...perform better and hold up better mechanically. Harley is an iconic brand that sells an image more than a product. People in Europe buy them because of that image despite what they cost now. Making them in Rumania or some other country in Europe won't have the same panache as a bike made here in the US.
If that is what you want to believe then go for it. The brand name is important not where it is made. HD did the right thing. More American companies who make in the US and export overseas will be forced to do the same thing when they get undercut by competitors overseas.
What's your alternative solution to the way Globalization has hurt the American worker?
Cause most of the oppositions, both sides of the aisle, "solution" is to do nothing, and just get used to the new normal of a Two Tier economy and let the workers suck ass.
You got something better than that?
Globalization has not hurt the American worker, just a small segment of them. Not unlike the advent of the horseless carriage did to buggy makers and blacksmiths.
I can picture you standing up against the rising tide of Henry Ford yelling “what about the buggy whip makers?”
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Trade policy is not socialism.
That you have to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong, on this issue.
cog·ni·tive dis·so·nancecognitive dissonance - Google Search
noun
Psychology
noun: cognitive dissonance
- the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
Definition of SOCIALISM
"
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
"
So, toro, explain how having a trade policy, makes one socialist.
Having a trade policy does not make one socialist, having a trade policy that keeps giving the central government more and more control over the economy...that makes one socialist
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The American People are a Sovereign Nation and have the right to choose who they trade with.
The election of TRump by the American People is an expression of their choice to change the status quo on Trade to one that serves the interests of the American Citizen better.
Other nations have no right to trade with us. Limiting trade from nations that are not engaging in Mutually Beneficial Trade, is not socialism.
The American people choosing to NOT engage in TRade that does not benefit US, is not socialism.
The real question is whether free trade is beneficial to the country overall. It has been beneficial as it has created more jobs. TPP would have created more opportunity for farmers.
This is not posturing. They can do the same thing that HD is doing. Make goods for markets overseas outside of the US so they cannot be undercut by their competitors using tariff free steel.
While the US is the largest single market, the rest of the world can be as large or larger. Look at the last Avengers movie. The 600 million it made in the US is the largest but the rest of the world represents 1.4 billion which is more than twice as much.
Stupid move by Harley Davidson in my opinion. They don't make bikes that compete by undercutting anyone because to quite blunt (sorry all you Harley buffs!) there are literally dozens of other bike brands that are far less expensive...perform better and hold up better mechanically. Harley is an iconic brand that sells an image more than a product. People in Europe buy them because of that image despite what they cost now. Making them in Rumania or some other country in Europe won't have the same panache as a bike made here in the US.
If that is what you want to believe then go for it. The brand name is important not where it is made. HD did the right thing. More American companies who make in the US and export overseas will be forced to do the same thing when they get undercut by competitors overseas.
What's your alternative solution to the way Globalization has hurt the American worker?
Cause most of the oppositions, both sides of the aisle, "solution" is to do nothing, and just get used to the new normal of a Two Tier economy and let the workers suck ass.
You got something better than that?
Globalization has not hurt the American worker, just a small segment of them. Not unlike the advent of the horseless carriage did to buggy makers and blacksmiths.
I can picture you standing up against the rising tide of Henry Ford yelling “what about the buggy whip makers?”
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Globalization is not a new technology.
It is a government trade policy. A shared policy with many other nations, but a policy none the less.
Policies, when they don't deliver what was promised, can be changed.
THis one, has not delivered what was promised.
Now, advocates, instead of explaining why it did not happen, are telling people just to accept the new normal, because otherwise, it's "socialism".
Trade policy is not socialism.
That you have to lie about that, shows that you know you are in the wrong, on this issue.
cog·ni·tive dis·so·nancecognitive dissonance - Google Search
noun
Psychology
noun: cognitive dissonance
- the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
Definition of SOCIALISM
"
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
"
So, toro, explain how having a trade policy, makes one socialist.
Having a trade policy does not make one socialist, having a trade policy that keeps giving the central government more and more control over the economy...that makes one socialist
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The American People are a Sovereign Nation and have the right to choose who they trade with.
The election of TRump by the American People is an expression of their choice to change the status quo on Trade to one that serves the interests of the American Citizen better.
Other nations have no right to trade with us. Limiting trade from nations that are not engaging in Mutually Beneficial Trade, is not socialism.
The American people choosing to NOT engage in TRade that does not benefit US, is not socialism.
Other nations are not trading with “us”, they are trading with private entities that should be free to make such choices. But you wish to take that freedom away.
There has been mutual benefit from our current trade deals, the economic numbers prove this.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Stupid move by Harley Davidson in my opinion. They don't make bikes that compete by undercutting anyone because to quite blunt (sorry all you Harley buffs!) there are literally dozens of other bike brands that are far less expensive...perform better and hold up better mechanically. Harley is an iconic brand that sells an image more than a product. People in Europe buy them because of that image despite what they cost now. Making them in Rumania or some other country in Europe won't have the same panache as a bike made here in the US.
If that is what you want to believe then go for it. The brand name is important not where it is made. HD did the right thing. More American companies who make in the US and export overseas will be forced to do the same thing when they get undercut by competitors overseas.
What's your alternative solution to the way Globalization has hurt the American worker?
Cause most of the oppositions, both sides of the aisle, "solution" is to do nothing, and just get used to the new normal of a Two Tier economy and let the workers suck ass.
You got something better than that?
Globalization has not hurt the American worker, just a small segment of them. Not unlike the advent of the horseless carriage did to buggy makers and blacksmiths.
I can picture you standing up against the rising tide of Henry Ford yelling “what about the buggy whip makers?”
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Globalization is not a new technology.
It is a government trade policy. A shared policy with many other nations, but a policy none the less.
Policies, when they don't deliver what was promised, can be changed.
THis one, has not delivered what was promised.
Now, advocates, instead of explaining why it did not happen, are telling people just to accept the new normal, because otherwise, it's "socialism".
3.8% unemployment, the 2nd longest period of economic expansion in the history of our country, literally more jobs than people to fill them.
What promise has not been delivered?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
cog·ni·tive dis·so·nancecognitive dissonance - Google Search
noun
Psychology
noun: cognitive dissonance
- the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
Definition of SOCIALISM
"
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
"
So, toro, explain how having a trade policy, makes one socialist.
Having a trade policy does not make one socialist, having a trade policy that keeps giving the central government more and more control over the economy...that makes one socialist
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The American People are a Sovereign Nation and have the right to choose who they trade with.
The election of TRump by the American People is an expression of their choice to change the status quo on Trade to one that serves the interests of the American Citizen better.
Other nations have no right to trade with us. Limiting trade from nations that are not engaging in Mutually Beneficial Trade, is not socialism.
The American people choosing to NOT engage in TRade that does not benefit US, is not socialism.
Other nations are not trading with “us”, they are trading with private entities that should be free to make such choices. But you wish to take that freedom away.
There has been mutual benefit from our current trade deals, the economic numbers prove this.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
THe Private entities are not free to make such choices. Trade policy has always been there.
THat we have had, for the last couple of decades, a very open trade policy, was our choice.
Now the decision has been made to change that policy.
We have discussed how the macro economic numbers hide the large numbers of people hurt by that policy.
The owners made money. The workers lost jobs or just didn't get wages,ever.
If that is what you want to believe then go for it. The brand name is important not where it is made. HD did the right thing. More American companies who make in the US and export overseas will be forced to do the same thing when they get undercut by competitors overseas.
What's your alternative solution to the way Globalization has hurt the American worker?
Cause most of the oppositions, both sides of the aisle, "solution" is to do nothing, and just get used to the new normal of a Two Tier economy and let the workers suck ass.
You got something better than that?
Globalization has not hurt the American worker, just a small segment of them. Not unlike the advent of the horseless carriage did to buggy makers and blacksmiths.
I can picture you standing up against the rising tide of Henry Ford yelling “what about the buggy whip makers?”
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Globalization is not a new technology.
It is a government trade policy. A shared policy with many other nations, but a policy none the less.
Policies, when they don't deliver what was promised, can be changed.
THis one, has not delivered what was promised.
Now, advocates, instead of explaining why it did not happen, are telling people just to accept the new normal, because otherwise, it's "socialism".
3.8% unemployment, the 2nd longest period of economic expansion in the history of our country, literally more jobs than people to fill them.
What promise has not been delivered?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
When are wages going to start climbing?
The American Dream was that your children were supposed to have it better than you.
Definition of SOCIALISM
"
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
"
So, toro, explain how having a trade policy, makes one socialist.
Having a trade policy does not make one socialist, having a trade policy that keeps giving the central government more and more control over the economy...that makes one socialist
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
The American People are a Sovereign Nation and have the right to choose who they trade with.
The election of TRump by the American People is an expression of their choice to change the status quo on Trade to one that serves the interests of the American Citizen better.
Other nations have no right to trade with us. Limiting trade from nations that are not engaging in Mutually Beneficial Trade, is not socialism.
The American people choosing to NOT engage in TRade that does not benefit US, is not socialism.
Other nations are not trading with “us”, they are trading with private entities that should be free to make such choices. But you wish to take that freedom away.
There has been mutual benefit from our current trade deals, the economic numbers prove this.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
THe Private entities are not free to make such choices. Trade policy has always been there.
THat we have had, for the last couple of decades, a very open trade policy, was our choice.
Now the decision has been made to change that policy.
We have discussed how the macro economic numbers hide the large numbers of people hurt by that policy.
The owners made money. The workers lost jobs or just didn't get wages,ever.
So, you do agree that freedom is being taken away, that is a start I suppose.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
What's your alternative solution to the way Globalization has hurt the American worker?
Cause most of the oppositions, both sides of the aisle, "solution" is to do nothing, and just get used to the new normal of a Two Tier economy and let the workers suck ass.
You got something better than that?
Globalization has not hurt the American worker, just a small segment of them. Not unlike the advent of the horseless carriage did to buggy makers and blacksmiths.
I can picture you standing up against the rising tide of Henry Ford yelling “what about the buggy whip makers?”
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
Globalization is not a new technology.
It is a government trade policy. A shared policy with many other nations, but a policy none the less.
Policies, when they don't deliver what was promised, can be changed.
THis one, has not delivered what was promised.
Now, advocates, instead of explaining why it did not happen, are telling people just to accept the new normal, because otherwise, it's "socialism".
3.8% unemployment, the 2nd longest period of economic expansion in the history of our country, literally more jobs than people to fill them.
What promise has not been delivered?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
When are wages going to start climbing?
The American Dream was that your children were supposed to have it better than you.
Wages are, or should be, set by the market. For the last few years we had more workers than jobs so there was no force driving wage increases. We have now got to the point that has changed and wages will likely follow, if employers have to fight for good workers.
I wonder, do you support the Govt imposed minimum wage?
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
