It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Because the socialists are taxing everyone to death in order to provide for the poor and progressives are over-regulating businesses to death trying to emulate Europe's systems so they can't really do anything without getting in trouble somewhere.
That's the simple answer.
Originally posted by thepolish1
reply to post by FrostForests
All it boils down to is the bottom line,money...I think companys that move jobs over seas should be fined heavily, Or fire the people who made the decision to do so.
Originally posted by FrostForests
This is a thread hopefully filling the role of discussion regarding once-American jobs going overseas.
We seem to accept this trend with a nod of understanding, an acknowledgment that we accept it as a simple business plan in this modern world. There they go, and they're not coming back.
So...why exactly is this?
Are we as a whole, better off with these overseas "crap" products, at the cost of in house jobs to fix them, or are we better off having cheap consumer goods.
Is mass, compulsive consumerism the cause, and is this a good or bad thing?
Emphasis mine.
1.) NAFTA is short for the North American Free Trade Agreement. NAFTA covers Canada, the U.S. and Mexico making it the world’s largest free trade area (in terms of GDP). NAFTA was launched 20 years ago to reduce trading costs, increase business investment, and help North America be more competitive in the global marketplace.
NAFTA was signed by President George H.W. Bush (Bush 1), Mexican President Salinas, and Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in 1992.
It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on December 8, 1993 and entered force January 1, 1994.
useconomy.about.com...
2.) CAFTA is short for the Central America Free Trade Agreement.
The agreement is a treaty under international law, but not under the United States Constitution. In the U.S., laws require majority approval in both houses, while treaties require two-thirds approval in the Senate only. Under U.S. law, CAFTA-DR is a congressional-executive agreement.
The implementing legislation became Public Law 109-053 when it was signed by President George W. Bush (Bush 2 - Dubya) on August 2, 2005.
www.ustr.gov...
Classes starting in the education space, what’s interesting is the relationship between the digital studio and the college. Â Not only is this a first in a number of ways that we’ve talked about, but 30% of the workforce at our digital studio down in Florida, is not only going to be free, with student labor, it’s going to be labor that’s actually paying us for the privilege of working on our films. Now this was the controversial element of this and the first discussions with the Department of Education, ’cause it sounds like you’re taking advantage of the students. Â But we were able to persuade even the academic community, if we don’t do something to dramatically reduce costs in our industry, not only ours but many other industries in this country, then we’re going to lose these industries .. we’re going to lose these jobs. Â And our industry was going very quickly to India and China.
Originally posted by FrostForests
And that's another point, if the companies that control these products and services are getting no negative consumer feedback, or rather not enough valid feedback simply because this has become the status quo, is it really so wrong? And as noted, it all has come down to money.
I hear folks saying they call customer service, and get some "Foreign speaking person I can't understand!"
Ok. So the company puts a 40 cent surcharge on each bill to allocate funds to transfer calls to a service center in the US paying employees minimum wage.
"I don't think so! I'm not paying 40 cents a month to speak to an American!"
So...where is the line drawn?
Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Because the socialists are taxing everyone to death in order to provide for the poor and progressives are over-regulating businesses to death trying to emulate Europe's systems so they can't really do anything without getting in trouble somewhere.
That's the simple answer.
Originally posted by gostr
reply to post by FrostForests
If you are hiring for 1 position and 2 people apply for said job.
Man A says he can make that product, all included for 10$ an hour.
Man B says he can do almost a good of job as Man A, but he will only charge 0.02$ an hour.
Who do you hire?
Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
Because the socialists are taxing everyone to death in order to provide for the poor and progressives are over-regulating businesses to death trying to emulate Europe's systems so they can't really do anything without getting in trouble somewhere.
That's the simple answer.
"Liberalism is not socialism and never will be" Winston Churchill, 1908, as the Liberal Party candidate for Dundee