On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 12:33:24 -0700, Tim Wescott
wrote:
On 07/06/2010 11:48 AM, cavelamb wrote:
Tim Wescott wrote:
On 07/06/2010 03:50 AM, azotic wrote:
"You could say, as many do, that shipping jobs overseas is no big deal
because the high-value work -- and much of the profits -- remain in the
U.S. That may well be so. But what kind of a society are we going to
have if it consists of highly paid people doing high-value-added work --
and masses of unemployed?
Consider this passage by Princeton University economist Alan S. Blinder:
"The TV manufacturing industry really started here, and at one point
employed many workers. But as TV sets became 'just a commodity,' their
production moved offshore to locations with much lower wages. And
nowadays the number of television sets manufactured in the U.S. is zero.
A failure? No, a success."
I disagree. Not only did we lose an untold number of jobs, we broke the
chain of experience that is so important in technological evolution. As
happened with batteries, abandoning today's "commodity" manufacturing
can lock you out of tomorrow's emerging industry.
The first task is to rebuild our industrial commons. We should develop a
system of financial incentives: Levy an extra tax on the product of
offshored labor. (If the result is a trade war, treat it like other wars
-- fight to win.) Keep that money separate. Deposit it in the coffers of
what we might call the Scaling Bank of the U.S. and make these sums
available to companies that will scale their American operations. Such a
system would be a daily reminder that while pursuing our company goals,
all of us in business have a responsibility to maintain the industrial
base on which we depend and the society whose adaptability -- and
stability -- we may have taken for granted."
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...ndy-grove.html
Seems some people are begining to think that steering america towards a
service based eccomony
may be the biggest blunder in the last 30 years. The theory has not
lived up to reality, in fact we are now
feeling the effects. Trickle down theory has left most americans living
under wall streets dinner table
getting ****ed on by wall street bankers as thier jobs are be sent off
shore, grobbling for the crumbs
that fall off the bailout table.
Best Regards
Tom.
How about something even more basic: Make it so that I can hire just
one employee. Right now if I hire one to do work, I have to hire
another one to check all the rules, cover my ass, fill out forms,
withhold wages, etc., etc., etc.
So I'm just not going to hire the one, unless I get a clear and
present opportunity to hire two or three at once. Even then I'll
hesitate. Think about that.
Granted, I could do what most small business owners do, and just try
to muddle through without reading that stack of regulations that's
bigger than my living room. But I'd much rather be a single
contributor, limiting my business to what I can do personally, than to
ever hassle with all the crap I'd have to go through to hire
just
one
person.
Sounds like the one person you need to hire would be - a lawyer!
Who, unfortunately, would not do any productive work...
Which is my point -- if I want to hire just one person for productive
work _and_ stay within the confines of all due regulations I can't. Or
at least I can't without either taking a huge hit to my own
productivity, contracting the HR work out (it can be done, but there's
still a productivity hit), or blithely ignoring a bunch of regulations
that may or may not bite me down the road.
All the rules are written with the assumption that employers are
self-centered, evil, and have infinitely deep pockets. That describes
large corporations pretty well, but when you get down to small
businesses the "deep pockets" definition goes right out the window, and
"self-centered" and "evil" only apply to a nasty few, not the majority.
There's got to be a way to find some middle ground so that I don't have
toxic waste from some neighbor flowing across my land, yet I still have
a way to spread my wealth to happy employees without turning into an
unpaid cop* and bureaucrat for every government entity whose territory I
happen to be in.
* And Gunner, before you start cackling with glee -- if I hire someone
then _I_ have to make sure that they're not an illegal immigrant; _I_
have to get all their documentation and keep it on file -- even if
they're one of the two boys whose births I was present at, or one of my
nieces or nephews who I've watched grow up. Furthermore, if I want to
sell to the government, or to a government supplier, _I_ have to be the
asshole that sends my employees off to drug testing and then fires them
if they don't pass. So it's not just "those damn liberals" that put
this burden on me.
Oh of course not. Which is why I work by myself and when I do need a
hand..I pay em cash at the end of the day and struggle until I get paid.
So I generally work by myself. Im building a machine shop at the moment.
Electrical, pneumatics, installing machinery etc etc. I sure could use
a hand. But I cant afford to hire one. Anyone Id hire..would be making
more money than me.
Gunner
One could not be a successful Leftwinger without realizing that,
in contrast to the popular conception supported by newspapers
and mothers of Leftwingers, a goodly number of Leftwingers are
not only narrow-minded and dull, but also just stupid.
Gunner Asch