US workers are not competitive?

This is a stupid thread and question. People are people, some are lazy other aren't. No nation has a stranglehold on lazy or otherwise. Americans have always proven their worth, look at what they've accomplished in their short history. Lazy? Hardly.
I can't believe it myself, but I totally agree with Hawk on this. If anything, government has allowed business to screw over the worker. However, it was profits not the ability, education or the work ethic of the employees that caused business to find greener (cheaper) pastures.

Government taxes and makes it very difficult to own or start a small business and small business in N. America is the biggest job producer, not big business. Although, if big business can get away with paying less tax they leave, they are the anchors, without them smaller business will not be able to maintain their customer base either..

1 Reply

@Ceili,

Ceili wrote:

This is a stupid thread and question. People are people, some are lazy other aren't. No nation has a stranglehold on lazy or otherwise. Americans have always proven their worth, look at what they've accomplished in their short history. Lazy? Hardly.
I can't believe it myself, but I totally agree with Hawk on this. If anything, government has allowed business to screw over the worker. However, it was profits not the ability, education or the work ethic of the employees that caused business to find greener (cheaper) pastures.

Government taxes and makes it very difficult to own or start a small business and small business in N. America is the biggest job producer, not big business. Although, if big business can get away with paying less tax they leave, they are the anchors, without them smaller business will not be able to maintain their customer base either..

A lot of self-deception....

Big business are better. Economics of scale, efficiency, IP developed over 100+ years.

Mexicans and Americans are people, but Americans are more special for being born.

Bet you are not going to explain "Big business screw workers", because you don 't want to(ie: the fear that it could be wrong).

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

I'll give you a canadian example. The Government here gave John Deere a huge tax grant. This was to insure the jobs and the plants stayed in Canada. They took the money and basically told the government and the workers to go **** themselves when they moved the plant back down south. How, pray tell, is that not screwing the worker and the average tax paying citizen? What about union busting? or reneging on previously agreed to benefit plans, pension plans or layoffs when profits aren't what is expected?
I know several small businesses that when times are tough, cut back on the hours, equally, so that jobs are saved. This isn't very common in the Multi-Nationals. Just ask Romney what his modus operandi was...

1 Reply

@Ceili,

Ceili wrote:

I'll give you a canadian example. The Government here gave John Deere a huge tax grant. This was to insure the jobs and the plants stayed in Canada. They took the money and basically told the government and the workers to go **** themselves when they moved the plant back down south. How, pray tell, is that not screwing the worker and the average tax paying citizen? What about union busting? or reneging on previously agreed to benefit plans, pension plans or layoffs when profits aren't what is expected?
I know several small businesses that when times are tough, cut back on the hours, equally, so that jobs are saved. This isn't very common in the Multi-Nationals. Just ask Romney what his modus operandi was...

So moving factories to mexico is bad. A little to simple, maybe? Some groups become losers, and some become winners in the age of globalization. In this case, the US firm benefits by expanding beyond the US by killing Mexican producers, killing Mexican jobs, and creating some Mexican jobs. American consumers get cheaper stuff. This hurts American factory workers in the process. Overall, on net, it is a benefit. Trade is always a good thing if you add up all the benefits from both trading countries.

Maybe what you mean is US companies have a responsible to hire only Americans? So Toyota, and Sony should hire Japanese? Sieman should only hire Germans? Right? Is this your industrial policy?

What do mean by "small businesses". Can you give examples of it? Because I don 't see that many. The big business have 100-200 years of history, so they accumulated quite a lot of IP.

2 Replies

@TuringEquivalent,

You dont know **** about small business. They supply big business with parts and repair the the equipment that keeps big business plants going in the area that they are built. And Ceili is correct when she says that governments stupid policy of giving big business money without strings attached is what has helped screw the workers. The politicians have been bought by big business to do what is great for big business but very bad for workers. Someday the populace will come to realize this and there will be hell to pay for the parasites in the U.S.. And as I watch the occupy movement I think that time is near, if we can keep the politicians and police from destroying it for big business.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

You dont know **** about small business. They supply big business with parts and repair the the equipment that keeps big business plants going in the area that they are built. And Ceili is correct when she says that governments stupid policy of giving big business money without strings attached is what has helped screw the workers. The politicians have been bought by big business to do what is great for big business but very bad for workers. Someday the populace will come to realize this and there will be hell to pay for the parasites in the U.S.. And as I watch the occupy movement I think that time is near, if we can keep the politicians and police from destroying it for big business.

Self-deception + delusional....

Yes, American companies should only hire Americans, while destroy Mexican producers/jobs, but do not add any jobs into the Mexican economy. Why? because blue collar Americans are entitled to have their jobs. Why is that? Because American people are born here, and not in Mexico. In other words, Japanese companies should hire only Japanese, and German companies should only hire Germans. So, American companies are allowed to sell to foreign markets, but must not contribute to that economy/market. Am I missing something, because the level of self-deception is making me smile.

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

Really? You don't see many small businesses? Really? Are you thick?Point out where I've said trade is bad? Or globalization? In fact I quite agree with most global trade and I don't have a problem with big business per se. Why do you see things that aren't there and yet small businesses seem to be in your blind spot?
Seriously? I didn't realize small business was such a hard concept to understand.
OK, try to keep up.
Take a mid-sized town with one factory, say they build widgets. It might employ 1000 people. It will have management, office staff, accountants, sales staff, line workers, cleaning staff, maybe a cafeteria etc.
This business is the anchor in town. The plant might need specialized tools or parts or services that they themselves do not make or do. They might buy a part from China, a small company could be the importer or make it outright. All these employees got to eat right? Live in something, have their haircut, buy a car, clothing, toys and so on. Chances are, some of these employees have children. Some of these kids will go to school. Some people will have hobbies, or medical problems, or have their own business on the side. Some of the stores they shop at might be big box like walmart or safeway or use the services of a franchise like a Mr. Lube or they might need a plumber or want to go on holiday.... So for every big business, how many small businesses do you suppose are indirectly dependent on it?
Do you think that it's entirely possible that the number of people employed by these peripheral businesses might exceed the anchor business???
Now if this business decides to take the string free, tax payer incentive money and the implied promise of stability and run, as in the case of John Deere, not to Mexico, but to the USA... If you'd only bothered to investigate...
Does that make the now unemployed employees, the town, the country lazy? If the anchor is gone, where else will the 1000 employees find a job? Some could be absorbed, but the parts and service business have now lost their major customer, it's doubtful most other businesses are going to need the parts needed to build a widget, or the expertise of the widget line employee. Some of these employees might qualify for retraining, or they might be able to retool the shop to build something other than widget parts or not. Regardless, if there is either a glut or a lack of need of widget expertise, chances are the area will become depressed due to the domino effect.

Or does it make the business lazy for taking the easy way out. Does it prove that inexcusably immoral business practices are not there for the good of the "collective" but for the owners collective pocket book.

If you came on to this site and said you though put Jews or Blacks in the question, you'd be called a racist. And rightly so... That's why this is a stupid question.

1 Reply

@Ceili,

This is funny. You still hold on to the idea that blue collar American/Canadian are entitled to a middle class lifestyle from manufacturing. What a joke. Manufacturing is GONE, and workers are not entitled to have a job. Workers are suppose to adopt to the market place, and not the other way around. This is how labor market functions in a free neo-classical market economy subjected to supply, and demand. If you don 't like it, then maybe socialism, or communism is your thing. Don 't think of moving to China, because they are following free market, supply, and demand labor market to the letter.

It does not matter if it is a small , large, or whatever companies. Companies will do whatever it is in their best interest, and that includes minimizing cost. This is something all countries have to face. This is something China have to face because wages over there are also increasing 30% per year.

In your example of a manufacturing company with 1000 employees in a isolated town makes no sense to me. Manufacturing would natural gather in one place, because of the economy of scale. Suppliers would natural gather in one place, because they can be either closer to the clients and supply chain, or easier to get spear parts.

There is also a moral issue you cannot ignore. If American businesses are allowed to sell to Mexico, and in the process destroy their producers, then they have a responsibility to hire the natives.

2 Replies

@TuringEquivalent,

Workers (even ex-workers who have been "down-sized" & have lost their jobs, or have had their working hours "casualized" ) still have to exist, to make ends meet (financially) , in the countries they actually live in.
There is much more to this than feeling "entitled to a middle class life style" for many, many people.
Their wages should ensure that they can actually live in the US, given the high cost of living in the US. My understanding is that many are having serious difficulties in doing that.
Nor could many (employed, unemployed, down-sized or casualized) workers have influenced their employment circumstances, by becoming more "productive" or more "completive".
How many workers in the US would have a real say in such things anyway?
Those decisions are made by management, for the benefit of management & the shareholders. .

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

I think, if you'd like a real exchange of ideas on this subject, TuringEquivalent, it might help if you didn't respond to others' contributions by labeling them as "self decptive" or "delusional", etc, etc .....

Others have different attitudes than yours. So what? That's what discussions are about: an exchange of different views.
Can't you cope with opinions different to your own & respond in a less denigratory manner?

1 Reply

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

Workers (even ex-workers who have been "down-sized" & have lost their jobs, or have had their working hours "casualized" ) still have to exist, to make ends meet (financially) , in the countries they actually live in.
There is much more to this than feeling "entitled to a middle class life style" for many, many people.
Their wages should ensure that they can actually live in the US, given the high cost of living in the US. My understanding is that many are having serious difficulties in doing that.
Nor could many (employed, unemployed, down-sized or casualized) workers have influenced their employment circumstances, by becoming more "productive" or more "completive".
How many workers in the US would have a real say in such things anyway?
Those decisions are made by management, for the benefit of management & the shareholders. .

They can start training, and work in sectors of the economy that is booming. That is how the price mechanism work in a free market economy. Don 't blame the player, blame the game. Markets do work, and do generate wealth for all parties involved. There is no doubt that blue collar workers are hurt in America, but that is just a signal by the market for people to adopt. There is no option but to be more educated, and get those certifications to compete for more productive jobs.

1 Reply

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

I think, if you'd like a real exchange of ideas on this subject, TuringEquivalent, it might help if you didn't respond to others' contributions by labeling them as "self decptive" or "delusional", etc, etc .....

Others have different attitudes than yours. So what? That's what discussions are about: an exchange of different views.
Can't you cope with opinions different to your own & respond in a less denigratory manner?

Self-deception is exactly the problem. Most of what I am saying are just basic economic theory. Anyone would know this if they study it, and they sure are passionate enough to want to learn about it. Instead, A lot of these unemployed Americans are blaming people from third world countries that are just trying their very best to make a living. Some Americans are very racist in the way they talk about how foreigners are "stealing our jobs". It is scare, and morally wrong to not correct them. Deep down, they know they they are wrong. You should look at triver 's theory of self-deception. There are even lectures on it.

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

Quote:

They can start training, and work in sectors of the economy that is booming.

By "they" you mean American workers who need jobs?
I agree that retraining workers in industries that are obsolete, or retaining workers who previously worked in industries which have moved offshore, would be an excellent development.
The question is: retraining into what types of jobs? ... meaning jobs that will provide these people with real employment opportunities in their own country.
It is difficult to know which sectors of the US economy are "booming" right now (what do you think they are?) & which sectors it would be in the interests of say, unskilled & semi-skilled workers previously employed in the vehicle manufacturing industry, to retrain into? If such training programs were available.
What would you suggest that a now unemployed worker, who previously worked in such an industry, might retrain as?

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

I think, on this thread anyway, that few (if any?) posters have been "racist" about jobs lost from the US to third world countries.
I'd say that most participants here understand that US jobs have been moved offshore because of the decisions of companies wanting to make more profit, by paying workers less than they are required to pay US (& other) workers .
Did someone here talk about foreign workers "stealing their jobs"? Of course that's not true. Those jobs were lost, or removed, because of the decisions of companies, even if US workers in their industries had been very "competitive" within the context of their own country.

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

TuringEquivalent wrote:

This is something China have to face because wages over there are also increasing 30% per year.

If this is the case, then more work will return to the U.S.

<done and dusted>

1 Reply

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

Quote:
They can start training, and work in sectors of the economy that is booming.

By "they" you mean American workers who need jobs?
I agree that retraining workers in industries that are obsolete, or retaining workers who previously worked in industries which have moved offshore, would be an excellent development.
The question is: retraining into what types of jobs? ... meaning jobs that will provide these people with real employment opportunities in their own country.
It is difficult to know which sectors of the US economy are "booming" right now (what do you think they are?) & which sectors it would be in the interests of say, unskilled & semi-skilled workers previously employed in the vehicle manufacturing industry, to retrain into? If such training programs were available.
What would you suggest that a now unemployed worker, who previously worked in such an industry, might retrain as?

Yes! it is not hard to find out what is booming. Just look job requirements for jobs in the industry they want to go into( try indeed.com, or craigslist). Most semi-blue collar work do pay quite well, and minimum required certifications, training, and exams. Any factory worker in China would love to be in the place of an unemployed blue collar worker in the US. Why? They are willing to adopt, to work, study, and kiss ass to get a job to provide for their family. The Chinese have a go-getters attitude, because they are willing to work more, and harder to stay out of poverty. Don 't tell that American workers are special just for being born, and breathing.

1 Reply

@msolga,

msolga wrote:

I think, on this thread anyway, that few (if any?) posters have been "racist" about jobs lost from the US to third world countries.
I'd say that most participants here understand that US jobs have been moved offshore because of the decisions of companies wanting to make more profit, by paying workers less than they are required to pay US (& other) workers .
Did someone here talk about foreign workers "stealing their jobs"? Of course that's not true. Those jobs were lost, or removed, because of the decisions of companies, even if US workers in their industries had been very "competitive" within the context of their own country.

I am not here 24/7. I mostly read the news in places like NYT, or other news media. I am constantly surprise at the number of racist, hawkish mannerism in the comment sections of those articles. They give the impression that Americans are spoil brats. On the one hand, they have disgust for socialism, but yet they are advocating for socialist policies in their labor market. Basically, they are all for American companies destroying other countries industries, but require American companies to only hire Americans. This is distorting the market, and immoral. I don 't agree with this ****.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

TuringEquivalent wrote:
This is something China have to face because wages over there are also increasing 30% per year.

If this is the case, then more work will return to the U.S.

<done and dusted>

What 's your point? What is done, and busted mean here? Is this war to you? That China sells more to the US, and that means china is winning? If so, I have a surprise for you. Jobs are not finite. What determines national income, or individual income is productivity which corresponds to the level of investment. The "wage" or rather the "real wage" corresponds to "productivity". China is winning not by price, but by productivity. Wages in Africa, or other Asians countries are lower than Chinese wages, but they makeup for it by productivity gain which is a result of investment. Manufacturing is gone, and it will never come back. It they do come back, it is going to be done by machines. The is not wage, it hell a lot of a lot more. Immoral policy like only hire Americans is market distortion, it will back fire. In fact, markets tend to punish market distortions. The minimum wage law generate huge about of unemployed minority youth, and causing trouble for tax payers in things like prison, and crime rate.

2 Replies

@TuringEquivalent,

done and dusted

not

done and busted

~~~~

As has been pointed out to you already, China is not a leader in productivity. American workers are more productive than Chinese workers.

At this point in time, their salaries are still low enough that it doesn't really matter that Chinese workers are less productive. If the salaries increase at 30%/year as you have suggested, then the jobs will leave China - either to go to a country/region where workers are paid significantly less or to return to the U.S. where productivity is higher.

It's done and dusted for Chinese workers as that point - unless they are able to increase their productivity levels.

It's a competitive world out there.

1 Reply

@TuringEquivalent,

TuringEquivalent wrote:

Manufacturing is gone, and it will never come back.

I guess you've forgotten about the number of companies that have brought their work back to North America.

Even a toothpick manufacturer brought the work back.

http://www.bizjournals.com/twincities/morning_roundup/2011/10/toothpick-manufacturing-comes-back.html

Quote:

A Time magazine story said that skyrocketing wages in China and shipping problems were the cause.

(link to the Time story at the link)

1 Reply

US workers are not competitive?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know