John R. Carroll wrote:
"F. George McDuffee" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:15:25 -0700, "John R. Carroll"
wrote:


Not this time George. I think what is happening is a refusal to admit that
their version of free markets doesn't work as advertised and never did.
That's called denial.

It's called "short selling."

They are especially trying to deny that a strong economy relies on an
upwardly mobile, prosperous, middle class and a reasonable gap between
the
upper and middle class as far as income goes.

One example is how Boeing is attempting to reduce their costs for
US engineers [while at the same time complaining that no one
wants to be an engineer any more and work 80 hours a week..]
===========
snip


Boeing's commitment to offshore manufacturing is a necessary part of their
sales strategy George.
In order to secure Asian orders, for example, Boeing agreed to put
manufacturing jobs in Asia.

As far as contributing to the American work force, Airbus puts more work in
US shops for civilian airframe parts as a percentage of sales and those jobs
pay top dollar. I've got a dozen large parts in the A380 alone and they are
fabbed right here in California.
This globalization thing works both ways but the mechanics are fairly
industry and country specific.

Were Boeing not to have agreed to build a fixed volume of their stuff in
China, the Chinese would have selected Airbus for their fleet.
The number of US jobs directly attributable to Boeing would then have been
exactly zero.
The metric of choice in civil aviation doesn't involve Boeing at all, It's
the heatlth of the operators that's important and they are very sick and
have been for years. Another instance where opaque deregulation has lead to
failure of an industry.


JC




I was with you all the way up to the end, but I disagree with the last
sentence.

Deregulation? Of civil aviation?

No, the failure of that particular industry is entirely due to the legal
industry.




--

Richard

(remove the X to email)