Harold and Susan Vordos wrote:

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold and Susan Vordos says...

I can't help but think that had we been more level headed, years ago,
when
Japan started kicking our butts with higher quality and better autos,
you'd
think the American worker would have made a decision to keep their jobs
secure by giving a little more, including having more pride in doing a
good
job. Industry wide it was a problem. I remember all too well the drive
from
the production industries to improve quality---even in the aero-space
industries, which affected me.

Well, look at where ford and GM were making all their money until
recently - the SUV and truck market. There recent run-up in gas
prices was a big trigger for their woes I think. They just never
learned their lesson.

Good example, and not only for the manufacturers. They build what we
demand. How about us? The buying public? How much did we learn? Higher
wages demanded and bigger autos. It's as if we think there's no bottom to
the well. That's the point I've been discussing right along----and it is
pointed at us as a nation------not just the unions----not top
management----we all share the same philosophy, at least from all
appearances. No one is willing to bite the bullet, but we're quickly
running out of ways to avoid doing so. I rember the air traffic
controllers demanding more----and I also remember they lost their ticket
when they refused to bend. As it should have been.

As I see it, we've lost something here in the States since WWII. Too
bad
we, as a nation, don't pull together to salvage what's left instead of
encourage the hemorrhaging. I don't see how we can recover once all the
steel mills are gone, along with related industries. We'll be at the
mercy
of foreign countries for almost everything. They won't have to defeat us
in
battle, all they have to do is cut us off from supplies.

Honestly I think our politicians are letting us down on this. There
has to be some way to provide financial incentives for companies to
keep jobs and manufacturing in the US, and penalties for those who
offshore jobs and import the goods - and boost their profits.

I still can't help but think that had the workers taken a good look at this
long ago and realized what was in store, they could have prevented a lot of
the job losses. That, of course, depended on the corporations doing the
right thing, too. Given recent history, I realize that I'm dreaming. All
they'd have done is line their pockets and shipped the work to other
countries, anyway.

Is this
a call for import tarrifs? I don't know, because they're not really
imports if it's an american company....

How about Ed's example of import offsets? For every dollar of goods
we import, china has to import a dollar of ours. Or even, a dime's worth.


I realize that shipping both directions somewhat equally would be the
solution----but do you think that's going to happen? As quickly as they can
tool up, they start building what ever they import now. I don't see that
changing any time soon. Don't you wonder how long it will be before they
start building serious aircraft, which they now import?

I'm not arguing with you, Jim. Really, I'm not. I'm just damned
frustrated
at how I'm seeing everything that made this country great go down the
tubes,
mostly at our own hand, thanks to greed at all levels. Wish to hell
I
had a solution, but I do well just to run my own affairs. Can't imagine
knowing how to solve these problems.

Times change Harold. The companies that offshore are doing what they
have to do, based on the regulatory and financial situation at hand.
The workers are doing what they think, overall, is best for them in the
short term. I would like to think that a *long*-term economic policy,
at the national level, could help to tip the balance even a little bit,
and slow down the bleed-out.

I can't see that happening without wages being a serious part of the
equation. Seems that's the main attraction----they can get it cheaper over
*there*. Surely our workers wouldn't be willing to sustain a cut of
several hundred percentage points, but I also understand that we can't just
keep doing business as usual. A concerted effort on the part of the
worker to put in a serious day, and to do it for smaller pay might beat the
alternative of being out of a job and having no source of income, with no
hopes of having one. It would also requite that corporations be willing to
compromise somewhat, perhaps settling for smaller profits, and CEO's taking
home less pay as well. Failing to do so, in a sense, they're shooting
themselves in the foot, especially if they're producing consumer items. Who
in hell will buy them when everyone is broke? Must this entire mess undergo
a complete collapse before it can stand up again?

We're living in tough times, Jim. Keep a good thought, we may be in for
some rough times in the near future.

Harold

One of the biggest problems is that investors and corporate board are
driven to show constant growth as opposed to the stability and
consistent profits of the old days.

Constant growth is simply not sustainable, there is a relatively finite
market for any given product. Corporations found out some years back
that they had reached market saturation on many products.

Lately all this "growth" that they show in the bottom line profit
numbers is not driven by increased sales and market share, but rather by
false profits from outsourcing and layoffs. The very outsourcing and
layoffs they are using to try to fudge the bottom line is also causing a
shrinkage in the market as people who are out of work are buying fewer
products.

When they have outsourced and laid off all they can in a few years there
will be nowhere else for them to create the phony growth from and this
will likely trigger a giant stock market crash when the bottom line
profits go flat on nearly every company.

Pete C.