No doubt some segments of our economy have not competed as effectively as others and have suffered .....but our economy is vastly more diverse and dynamic than the stagnant, decayed wasteland that you portray.....what about Microsoft, Intel, Google, Cisco, Applied Materials, Genentech, Amgen, Johnson and Johnson, Apple, not to mention the service sector and on ad infinitum..... The question remains, should US taxpayers be forced to buy goods from domestic manufacturers even if they are higher cost/lesser quality? And if so, what happens when foreign consumers are forced to do the same more so than today? Keep in mind where we stand in terms of worlds largest exporters????? Whose interest is served and who is most likely to be hurt by that game?
Even in the high tech sector we can't wait to ship out jobs overseas to low wage earners in places like India. As soon as tech jobs are deemed to be portable out they go.
Shouldn't we be more curious as to why Obama told Republican leaders that they shouldn't listen to Limbaugh. Actually, I think that Limbaugh is right. Obama IS afraid of him. The fight the stimulus because it has provisions that have nothing to do with the economy. Hundreds of millions for contraception? That might stimulate something but not the economy. As to taxes, I think that they'd prefer that the present rates remain. I know that they are constantly call the "Bush tax cuts" but they actually were a rollback of the Clinton tax increases. I think that tax cuts for the "average" family would help. They are the ones who buy the majority of large price items such as autos. The big problem is once you run on class warfare principals you have to pay off the large block of voters who are waiting for the government to GIVE them something for nothing. Since they don't pay income taxes, you literally have to give them money rather than cut their taxes.
Whether you like Limbaugh or not, he is the undisputed king of talk radio and has been for 20 years. Obama not only confirmed that by his comments but eleveated Rush to an even higher plane. That was a stupid thing for the president to do.
(CNSNews.com) – The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has launched an online petition for readers to express their outrage at conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh for saying last week that he wanted President Barack Obama to fail. House GOP member to Rush: Back off Good to know that our Congress has their pririties in order :lol:
First of all they took that comment out of context. What he said was essentially that he doesn't agree with the policies that Obama wants to implement and he hopes he fails at that....what's wrong with that.
If it is in the best interest of the enterprise, yes they do....as well they should. If the result is higher quality or lower prices for the US consumer, is that not in our collective best interest? Is it your view that the companies should not find ways to lower costs and instead force US consumers to pay higher prices or defer investment in innovation? That said, the aformentioned companies and thousands of others like them have added tens of millions of jobs as manufactuing payrolls have been shrinking for decades.... Are you of the view that all should buy American regardless of price or quality? Should all TRUE Americans be willing to subsidize inefficiency by paying higher prices than they would necessarily need to for similar goods thereby lessening their ability to invest and save, consume additional goods, enjoy the fruits of their hard work? imho, that would be catastrophic to our society and set back our way of life for generations to come......
Mostly I would say if somebody with a lower standard of living will do it for dirt cheap then that unfortunately is the deciding factor. My neighbor is a senior engineer with Chrysler and he was telling me a little inside concern of his that Chrysler has ditched a long-time drive train supplier from Tennessee in favor of a cheaper supplier from China that is having all kinds of serious quality issues. Just what Chrysler needs right now.....quality issues on their "American made" car caused by cheap foreign supplied components.
It will be interesting to see how Obama and the military get along. Certainly if previous presidents have always stopped at this ball, then shame on Obama for not continuing the tradition. But don't expect the liberal media that are currently slobbering over Obama to even report this.
That would not be classified as "in the best interest of the enterprise." That would be classified as a foolish decision..... As a society, do you not think it in our interest to continue to direct any element of the business system to that location where it is advantaged in the performance of its function? Are we not acting in our collective best interest when we export unskilled labor functions to the cheapest and most avaliable source thereby bringing lower prices to our US consumers and higher margins to our US owners, incenting and freeing up human and economic capital toward higher margin, value-added functions in management, administration, design, innovation and research and develpment? Should we not focus our national resources, not our government, our REAL national resources which is our human, intellectual and systemic capital towards those areas in which we have a competitive advantage? Those countries that have a large available supply of cheap labor are advantaged in that regard.....we are not. In any competitive endeavour I cannot conceive one in which it makes rational sense to compete - intentionally - in areas where you are disadvantaged.....sports, business or warfare. It would seem that your chances of success are vastly superior if you choose to compete where you can exploit your competitive advantages and not choose to fight where your opponent will kick your ass easily and often. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.....
Who exactly are you referring to here? you later go on to mention China, but you've made it abundantly clear that you are no fan of the Southern US auto workers..
In my previous post and Chrysler example I am leaving Southern auto workers out of the discussion....please note that. In fact...the workers that have surely lost their jobs in my example are southern workers from Tennessee who had this business for 30 years according to my neighbor.
.....on further review, this stimulus package is not so much a stimulus package at all - there are some elements of economic stimuli - but rather the largest barrel of congressional/governmental pork in the history of our nation. The majority of the funds appropriated by this bill will go to fund the "wish list" of programs that the Dems have been cobbling together for a generation......they have hung so much crap on the branches of this thing its beginning to look alot like Xmas! This system of approprations of ours is so far gone and so contrary to our collective interest that I'm looking for some change we can believe in........this is the same old sh!t, only bigger! Do yourself a favor and take a look at some of the specific "stimulus" expenditures! Let's start list of favorites.....I'll start us off, with a couple of mine.....wtf? - new office furniture for the Public Health Service - $50 million to the National Endowment for the Arts budget
I think I heard Limbaugh say $35,000,000 toward the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases! Now that will buy a lot of "raincoats"!! It occured to me that you wouldn't need $35,000,000 worth of condoms without stimulus 8)
Check that! I was a little bit off in the budgeted funds for STD prevention in the Stimulus Package.... here's the straight skinny.... bend over! :lol: $335,000,000 FOR STD PREVENTION IN ECONOMIC STIMULUS BILL Wed Jan 28 2009 09:58:30 ET Democrats may have eliminated provisions on birth control and sod for the National Mall in the "job stimulus" -- but buried on page 147 of the bill is stimulation for prevention of sexually transmitted diseases! The House Democrats' bill includes $335 million for sexually transmitted disease education and prevention programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned. In the past, the CDC has used STD education funding for programs that many Members of Congress find objectionable and arguably unrelated to a mission of economic stimulus [such as funding events called 'Booty Call' and 'Great Sex' put on by an organization that received $698,000 in government funds.]
There is a guy out there with a site who cataloged each and every campaign promise Obama made. One of his favorite ones that he'd go back to is his personal vow to do away with earmarks.... Just let that soak in on you while you read the details of 'the stimulus' Also keep in mind that figures range between 17 cents and 21 cents of every dollar in this plan will actually be spent on true economic stimulus. Also, there are estimates that said money will not actually come into play until Obama's 2nd term as president. For all he promised, he is keeping promises only to a narrow few..