On Feb 17, 11:54*pm, Steve wrote:

The final factor operating against a decent price for a US-made good is
executive compensation. The CEO makes 300, or 3,000 times the salary of
the working stiff? *Till me how THAT makes us competitive, or,
ultimately, how we'll even be able to buy China's "China-priced" goods.


I could go on and on and on about a number of factors OTHER than
corporate executive pay. That is not the only reason our goods cost
more. Far, far from it. The average American worker gets paid a hell
of a lot more than the average Chinese worker. But that still doesn't
cover everything. Corporations get taxed out the wahzoo here and you
know what? They pass that cost along to the consumers in terms of how
much a product costs. Corporations also need to make sure everything
is so freaking environmentally clean and such and it plain costs more
to produce a widget with environmental and other governmental
restrictions that do not exist on other countries.

Don't get me wrong, it is not like I want the fish to all die or the
birds to fall out of the sky or forcing seven-year-olds to work The
fact of the matter is that we are competing against societies that
allow this and the final result is that the products are just plain
cheaper coming out of those countries than they are coming out of
ours.

And there is mo we sort of need to have higher salaries because we
have more to maintain here in terms of existing infrastructure likes
roads and schools and utilities and whatnot.

I think we are veering off-topic of the original off-topic subject:
implementing high-speed rail through government subsidies. There have
been arguments, and good ones at that, saying we don't really need it
and, if we did, it would have been done already by some private firm
because there would be money to be made. There obviously is not the
wanton need nor desire for such a thing. The bottom line is that
there is no money in the till to do this thru government. If a State
is billions of dollars in the hole, how is throwing more money at
something that will produce lukewarm results (at best) help the
State? It will be even further in debt. It will be forced to
maintain another piece of infrastructure. And, in the long run,
certainly be worse off.

Swingman makes a number of good points about how accountants and the
MBA program has all but crippled American corporations because they
are being run by people who look at the bottom line and only as far
out as the next quarter. The people who really understand the
business aren't running them. As a result, you get what you got.

Before we invest in more things that aren't really going to help us
but are, rather, a luxury in this day and age, we need to get us out
of the hole we are in. We need to understand that 8-, 10-, 12-percent
and more returns are not everlasting. I firmly believe we have gotten
to this point because of this mentality that set in whenever we had
years of such returns throughout the 90s. T'ain't that way no more,
McGee. Both the private and public sectors will be better off once we
realize that.