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.
Which is why I pointed to immigration. Companies are hiring immigrants to do these jobs. We have truck drivers on the road that are not only terrible drivers, but can't read or speak a word of English. They are a danger to American motorists and keeping the wages down because they take jobs that don't pay very well.
And all those jobs could be filled and the unemployment rate probably wouldn't move. Fact is if there were lots of good jobs going unfilled wages would go up, they aren't. Immigration is a small part of the problem, it is dwarfed by all the jobs that got shipped out.
Median family income is lower than when Obama first took office. DumBama and the Democrats are hell bent on bringing foreigners into this country. Hispanics generally vote Democrat once they get the right to vote, but Democrats don't care about Americans here.
It's not just in my field of work, but nearly all fields. It's much worse down south than here, but it's all over the country.
You are only worth as much as the next person willing to do your job. If you are making $20.00 per hour, and a company can't find others to work for that wage, you are actually worth $21.00 an hour or more. However if you can be replaced by somebody making $15.00 per hour, your financial future is in jeopardy, and that's why we have lower paying jobs.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
That explains some, but still MANY just got shipped to China. Also I don't think that explains the IT jobs and other types also lost.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
Another reason McDonald's is flailing around as a company. That and their food sucks.
Frankly, I want my food prepared by a person. Preferably one who actually gives a shit about his job.
I'm not sure why you don't.
Why are the expected to carry the weight of the other 300 million?
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
Another reason McDonald's is flailing around as a company. That and their food sucks.
Frankly, I want my food prepared by a person. Preferably one who actually gives a shit about his job.
I'm not sure why you don't.
The rest of the world didn't have government promoting bad loans and making bad loan practices. The banks that escaped all that nonsense were those that told government to F-off. HUD lowered the bar for Fanny and Freddy in order to have record amount of loans. Banks merely loan money to government standards. A bank cannot sell a loan in the market unless they meet those government standards. Most complied.
Actually, exactly the opposite was true. Of the top 25 banks that failed, only 1 wrote loans under the Community Reinvestment Act.
You should be able to get a fair days pay for a fair days work? Where is that written? Who is it that judges a fairs day work or pay? Business are not socially obligated to anybody for anything. Businesses are in business to make money--not provide you with a living. That's not why any business owner starts a business.
Our rules shouldn't revolve on what is convenient for business owners.
"Well, I'd like to not dump toxins into your children's drinking water, but gosh darn, I'm in the business to make money!"
Fuck, are you dumb. We have government to protect us from these people.
We shouldn't have to bend over for companies? Well that's just too bad. It's called the Golden Rule: the man with the gold makes the rules. If you don't like his rules, then open up your own company and make your own rules. You can hire fellow Americans and pay them 20.00 an hour to ride around on floor sweeping machines or cleaning toilets if you want. See how long you stay in business while trying to compete with foreign companies that don't have nearly your expenses.
GUy, I'm fairly convinced conservatism is a form or Stockholm Syndrome where you start to sympathize with your abusers.
Here's the thing, guy, this is a democracy. If we decide we want clean water, we pass clean water rules.
If we decide we want a $15.00 minimum wage, we pass a minimum wage law.
And if some asshole wants to move his factory to China, then we audit him, we tax him, and we let everyone know what a scumbag he is.
Problem. FUcking. Solved.
And all those jobs could be filled and the unemployment rate probably wouldn't move. Fact is if there were lots of good jobs going unfilled wages would go up, they aren't. Immigration is a small part of the problem, it is dwarfed by all the jobs that got shipped out.
Median family income is lower than when Obama first took office. DumBama and the Democrats are hell bent on bringing foreigners into this country. Hispanics generally vote Democrat once they get the right to vote, but Democrats don't care about Americans here.
It's not just in my field of work, but nearly all fields. It's much worse down south than here, but it's all over the country.
You are only worth as much as the next person willing to do your job. If you are making $20.00 per hour, and a company can't find others to work for that wage, you are actually worth $21.00 an hour or more. However if you can be replaced by somebody making $15.00 per hour, your financial future is in jeopardy, and that's why we have lower paying jobs.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
So are you actually trying to say we haven't lost many, many jobs to outsourcing? You can't be serious.
As the article points out, yes, we lost jobs, but we gained those jobs back and then some with insourcing. You can't have a country that insources but not outsources. Nobody would deal with that.
And all those jobs could be filled and the unemployment rate probably wouldn't move. Fact is if there were lots of good jobs going unfilled wages would go up, they aren't. Immigration is a small part of the problem, it is dwarfed by all the jobs that got shipped out.
Median family income is lower than when Obama first took office. DumBama and the Democrats are hell bent on bringing foreigners into this country. Hispanics generally vote Democrat once they get the right to vote, but Democrats don't care about Americans here.
It's not just in my field of work, but nearly all fields. It's much worse down south than here, but it's all over the country.
You are only worth as much as the next person willing to do your job. If you are making $20.00 per hour, and a company can't find others to work for that wage, you are actually worth $21.00 an hour or more. However if you can be replaced by somebody making $15.00 per hour, your financial future is in jeopardy, and that's why we have lower paying jobs.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
That explains some, but still MANY just got shipped to China. Also I don't think that explains the IT jobs and other types also lost.
It's the same problem that I described in my line of work. What they are doing is bringing in foreigners who will work for much less money. It's not totally a blue collar thing. Foreigners are taking our jobs is on nearly every level.
Median family income is lower than when Obama first took office. DumBama and the Democrats are hell bent on bringing foreigners into this country. Hispanics generally vote Democrat once they get the right to vote, but Democrats don't care about Americans here.
It's not just in my field of work, but nearly all fields. It's much worse down south than here, but it's all over the country.
You are only worth as much as the next person willing to do your job. If you are making $20.00 per hour, and a company can't find others to work for that wage, you are actually worth $21.00 an hour or more. However if you can be replaced by somebody making $15.00 per hour, your financial future is in jeopardy, and that's why we have lower paying jobs.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
So are you actually trying to say we haven't lost many, many jobs to outsourcing? You can't be serious.
As the article points out, yes, we lost jobs, but we gained those jobs back and then some with insourcing. You can't have a country that insources but not outsources. Nobody would deal with that.
We'll the asians seem to manage the outsource, insource ratio to their benefit better than the USA.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
So are you actually trying to say we haven't lost many, many jobs to outsourcing? You can't be serious.
As the article points out, yes, we lost jobs, but we gained those jobs back and then some with insourcing. You can't have a country that insources but not outsources. Nobody would deal with that.
We'll the asians seem to manage the outsource, insource ratio to their benefit better than the USA.
According to Dr. Williams, we gained 2 million more insourcing jobs than we outsourced in the early 2000's each year. How much more to our advantage do you want?
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
So are you actually trying to say we haven't lost many, many jobs to outsourcing? You can't be serious.
As the article points out, yes, we lost jobs, but we gained those jobs back and then some with insourcing. You can't have a country that insources but not outsources. Nobody would deal with that.
We'll the asians seem to manage the outsource, insource ratio to their benefit better than the USA.
According to Dr. Williams, we gained 2 million more insourcing jobs than we outsourced in the early 2000's each year. How much more to our advantage do you want?
He says some of the jobs created are insourcing.
Manufacturing is still down. Way more outsourcing than insourcing.
I didn't say I did or didn't. What I am pointing out is that we are making machines to do the job of humans. If McDonald's A has cheaper but the same food as McDonald's B, then most people will deal with McDonald's A whether it's run by humans or machines. Raise minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, no problem, the machines work for the same price as before the minimum wage went up.
People already know where their products are made. It's printed on the package, and guess what? Nobody cares. They buy those cheap Chinese products anyway. Our US government cannot tax or audit a company that moves out of the country. Once they are out of the country, they are out of jurisdiction of the federal government. If they are multinational and our government harasses them, they will move out of the country entirely.
Manufacturing is still down. Way more outsourcing than insourcing.
Well, true, but here's the thing. Manufacturing jobs are down worldwide. Manufacturing is going to eventually become like farming, with a very small slice of the population meeting all the world's needs.
So that leaves us with a problem of whatever are we going to do with those people with limited skill sets who can neither farm nor assemble widgets because they've got machines to do that now?
The ironic thing about you wingnuts is that you have worked so hard to destroy the middle class through union busting, outsourcing, automation, etc that you are probably going to get to the forced redistribution socialism you all fear that much faster.
Because poor people just refuse to starve when rich people don't have a use for them. The bastards. .
And all those jobs could be filled and the unemployment rate probably wouldn't move. Fact is if there were lots of good jobs going unfilled wages would go up, they aren't. Immigration is a small part of the problem, it is dwarfed by all the jobs that got shipped out.
Median family income is lower than when Obama first took office. DumBama and the Democrats are hell bent on bringing foreigners into this country. Hispanics generally vote Democrat once they get the right to vote, but Democrats don't care about Americans here.
It's not just in my field of work, but nearly all fields. It's much worse down south than here, but it's all over the country.
You are only worth as much as the next person willing to do your job. If you are making $20.00 per hour, and a company can't find others to work for that wage, you are actually worth $21.00 an hour or more. However if you can be replaced by somebody making $15.00 per hour, your financial future is in jeopardy, and that's why we have lower paying jobs.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
That explains some, but still MANY just got shipped to China. Also I don't think that explains the IT jobs and other types also lost.
It's the same problem that I described in my line of work. What they are doing is bringing in foreigners who will work for much less money. It's not totally a blue collar thing. Foreigners are taking our jobs is on nearly every level.
You make employees promise not to commit suicide?
This is why I like drama queens, they make some of the stupidest statements and what's better, they stand behind their stupid.
Do you have reading comprehension problems, Corky? Did they not cover basic sentence structure in Special Ed for you?
You do get that these sweatshops are pretty miserable places to work, right?
Here, fucking educate yourself, tool of the 1%
Inside Apple's Chinese 'sweatshop' factory where workers are paid just £1.12 per hour to produce iPhones and iPads for the West
Apple have opened the doors to their Chinese 'sweatshop' factories where employees are paid as little as £1.12 an hour.
Many of the staff perform monotonous tasks like wiping down screens or shaving aluminium from the edge of the Apple logo for ten tedious hours at a time.
And now the conditions inside the factory in Shenzhen - where 18 employees have killed themselves - can be seen, after ABC TV network were given exclusive access.
I didn't say I did or didn't. What I am pointing out is that we are making machines to do the job of humans. If McDonald's A has cheaper but the same food as McDonald's B, then most people will deal with McDonald's A whether it's run by humans or machines. Raise minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, no problem, the machines work for the same price as before the minimum wage went up.
I think you are falling into a fallacy here, guy. If a machine is a good deal when the Min Wage is $15.00 it's a good deal when the Min Wage is $7.25.
The machine will ALWAYS be cheaper.
People already know where their products are made. It's printed on the package, and guess what? Nobody cares. They buy those cheap Chinese products anyway. Our US government cannot tax or audit a company that moves out of the country. Once they are out of the country, they are out of jurisdiction of the federal government. If they are multinational and our government harasses them, they will move out of the country entirely.
THat's because we aren't doing it right. Instead of "Made in China" written in small font, you put a BIG OLD CHINESE FLAG with a picture of a dissident about to be run over by a tank on every Chinse product sold in America.
We can also slap this shit with huge tarriffs to make them more expensive.
But outsourcing has always been about breaking the middle class. They just can't wait to get to the Socialism.
Median family income is lower than when Obama first took office. DumBama and the Democrats are hell bent on bringing foreigners into this country. Hispanics generally vote Democrat once they get the right to vote, but Democrats don't care about Americans here.
It's not just in my field of work, but nearly all fields. It's much worse down south than here, but it's all over the country.
You are only worth as much as the next person willing to do your job. If you are making $20.00 per hour, and a company can't find others to work for that wage, you are actually worth $21.00 an hour or more. However if you can be replaced by somebody making $15.00 per hour, your financial future is in jeopardy, and that's why we have lower paying jobs.
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
That explains some, but still MANY just got shipped to China. Also I don't think that explains the IT jobs and other types also lost.
It's the same problem that I described in my line of work. What they are doing is bringing in foreigners who will work for much less money. It's not totally a blue collar thing. Foreigners are taking our jobs is on nearly every level.
Wouldn't more unions fix that problem?
That is a trend that started long before Obama. There aren't enough immigrants to do all the damage that has been done. Much more is from shipping off jobs to other countries.
Here are some interesting numbers:
2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. Between August 2000 and February 2004, manufacturing jobs were lost for a stunning 43 consecutive months—the longest such stretch since the Great Depression.” Manufacturing plants have also declined sharply in the last decade, shrinking by more than 51,000 plants, or 12.5 percent, between 1998 and 2008. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.
5 Facts About Overseas Outsourcing
In a growing economy our manufacturing should have been growing, not declining. And that is just manufacturing. Many other types of jobs have been outsourced.
What you probably never realized is that automation plays a larger role in American job losses than anything else. In fact some McDonald's restaurants are experimenting with nearly employee free outlets. You go up to the window or counter, punch your order in on the screen, and machines will start producing your order.
It's a growing trend, and I see it all the time since I deal with manufacturing.
Here is a dated article from Professor Walter E Williams, an economist. Again, dated, but it highlights some good points:
The United States is the world's largest recipient of foreign direct investment. According the Economic Report of the President, in 2004, foreigners owned $5.5 trillion in U.S. assets and had $2.3 trillion in sales. They produced $515 billion of goods and services, accounting for 5.7 percent of total U.S. private output, and employed 5.1 million workers, or 4.7 percent of the U.S. workforce in 2004. According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 alone, foreign investors spent $184 billion investing in U.S. businesses and real estate, the highest amount foreign investors have spent since 2000. My question to Clinton, Obama and the anti-trade lobby is, would Americans be better off if there were no foreign investment in our country?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, between 1996 and 2006, about 15 million jobs were lost and 17 million created each year. That's an annual net creation of 2 million jobs. Roughly 3 percent of the jobs lost were a result of foreign competition. Most were lost because of technology, domestic competition and changes in consumer tastes.
Some of the gain in jobs is a result of "insourcing". Foreign companies, such as Nissan, Honda, Nokia, and Novartis, set up plants, hire American workers and pay them wages higher than the national average. According to Dartmouth College professor Matthew Slaughter, "insourced" jobs paid a salary 32 percent higher than the average U.S. salary. So here's my question to anti-traders: If "outsourcing" is harmful to the U.S., it must also be harmful to European countries and Japan; would you advise them to take their jobs back home?
Wal-Mart has become the whipping boy for political demagogues, unions and anti-traders. I suggest that they have the wrong target. The correct target is revealed by answering the question: "Why does Wal-Mart exist and prosper?"
Wal-Mart exists and prospers because tens of millions of Americans find Wal-Mart to be a suitable source of goods and services. Clinton, Obama, unions and anti-traders should direct their outrage and condemnation at the tens of millions of Americans who shop at Wal-Mart and keep it in business.
There's great angst over the loss of manufacturing jobs. The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs has fallen, and it's mainly a result of technological innovation, and it's a worldwide phenomenon. Daniel W. Drezner, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, in "The Outsourcing Bogeyman" (Foreign Affairs, May/June 2004), notes that U.S. manufacturing employment between 1995 and 2002 fell by 11 percent. Globally, manufacturing job loss averaged 11 percent. China lost 15 percent of its manufacturing jobs, 4.5 million manufacturing jobs compared with the loss of 3.1 million in the U.S. Job loss is the trend among the top 10 manufacturing countries who produce 75 percent of the world's manufacturing output (the U.S., Japan, Germany, China, Britain, France, Italy, Korea, Canada and Mexico).
But guess what — globally, manufacturing output rose by 30 percent during the same period. According to research by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, U.S. manufacturing output increased by 100 percent between 1987 and today. Technological progress and innovation is the primary cause for the decrease in manufacturing jobs. Should we save manufacturing jobs by outlawing labor-saving equipment and technology?
Economist Joseph Schumpeter referred to this process witnessed in market economies as "creative destruction," where technology, innovation and trade destroy some jobs while creating others. While the process works hardships on some people, any attempt to impede the process will make all of us worse off.
Walter Williams
That explains some, but still MANY just got shipped to China. Also I don't think that explains the IT jobs and other types also lost.
It's the same problem that I described in my line of work. What they are doing is bringing in foreigners who will work for much less money. It's not totally a blue collar thing. Foreigners are taking our jobs is on nearly every level.
Wouldn't more unions fix that problem?
No, because history has a way of repeating itself. Bring in unions, and those companies that are employing foreigners will move out of the country and still employ non-Americans.
