START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

:(

Not me.  I just drove through New Mexico and Arizona and stopped a few times at those   "AUTHENTIC  Indian trading posts".  Every single thing I picked up was made in China.   >:(

Stuff like this drives me crazy, we complain about people here not having jobs and there being no work but it seems every company and even state and federal organizations given the chance to save a buck will get stuff from China or some other cheap country to buy from. They are building a new span of one of the bridges that crosses the San Francisco bay right now and the sections or spans come in on barges and guess where they come from? You got it the bridge is being built in China and shipped bit by bit all be it very large bits all the way from China, am I wrong in feeling this bridge should be built here every part of it?

A bridge (or anything else, for that matter) should be built wherever the person or company building it feels as though they are getting the best value for their dollar.

Why should a contractor be required to adhere to "Made in the USA" if the quality is the same or better going overseas and it's your tax dollars that are paying for it?

A legacy for labor unions.

I would love to buy everything stamped *made in america*, but unfortunately, I can't afford it.

Quote:

A legacy for labor unions.

I've not been involved with labor unions but when unions were strong, the country prospered at levels hard to imagine today. Notice that I said "the country."

Charlie, who is zipping up his Cambodian L. L. Bean warmup jacket.

Oh dont get me started. ::)
:)

OH its just sad.
   We bought some lumber from Lowes, and were so surprised to get home and see the stickers on it said.... it came from sweden.   Whaaaa.!
   Don't we have an abundance of lumber here.!
Oh ya... it lasted about 3 years, and rotted right out.   What the heck kind of wood is that?  Dunno  ... maybe it didn't have as much preservatives in it as here!   Jeesh.         

and our 39% corporate tax rate.  Soon to be highest in the world.

Bob P wrote on Dec 18^th, 2010 at 7:42am:

and our 39% corporate tax rate.  Soon to be highest in the world.

NZ company tax is currently 30% and in 2012 it will be down to 28%.

It's not a magic bullet, but for the very large companies they are very skilled at making their profits in the countried with the lowest tax rates.

Brew wrote on Dec 17^th, 2010 at 3:44pm:

A bridge (or anything else, for that matter) should be built wherever the person or company building it feels as though they are getting the best value for their dollar. Why should a contractor be required to adhere to "Made in the USA" if the quality is the same or better going overseas and it's your tax dollars that are paying for it?

this is true however the things that were made here in the states that are now made in china cost the same if not more than they did when they were made here. should we send our industry to the biggest communist nation in the world  in the name of extreme american capitalism?

how long will it be before there are starving children in the united states and not in china?

eat your veggies

Actually is our fault for not passing by the cheap stuff when we had a choice.....now we don't.

Racer1_NC wrote on Dec 18^th, 2010 at 7:27pm:

Actually is our fault for not passing by the cheap stuff when we had a choice.....now we don't.

i still do. give you an example. i set out to buy a stud extractor to take take some studs out of engine head i was working on. spartan tool which is known for carrying high quality tools had one made by lyse tools. it was made in Taiwan and it was $29. checked at sears and they didnt carry it. then i went to an old machinist tool supplier called edco tools. they guy that owns the place was right there on the floor stocking his shelves. among the  thousands of tools he had he took me right over to the tool i needed. there it was made by proto tool in the usa for $19.95. those infamous chippawa boots of mine that jen painted a picture of. texas made. a place in columbus carried a georgia boot for $225 made in china. chippewa boots only available in southern ohio ohio   made in texas $159.  100+ miles from my house and i regret not making the trip down there cause my georgia boots dont keep my feet warm for shit.
i put allot effort into buying tools and things i use and rely on to make a living. its hard to do but its doable and in some cases cheaper. just inconvenient.

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE
START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

bridges

START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Mike NZ wrote on Dec 18^th, 2010 at 2:10pm:

...but for the very large companies they are very skilled at making their profits in the countried with the lowest tax rates.

When they're allowed to keep more of their own money, they invest it, buy more raw materials, create more jobs, and the economy thrives. It happens when individuals are allowed to keep more of their own money, too.

Say I have $100 more in my pocket every month. Maybe I'm going to take my family out to dinner, buy a new light fixture, and paint the shed. Without the extra $100, those things may not occur. But instead I spend it - and help keep a cook, waitress, assembly person, and paint factory worker employed. That's how, in the words of our teleprompter in chief, the wealth gets spread around.

I'm with BB - don't get me started.

Interesting reading - START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Google NZ paid NZ$7726 (about US$5000) in tax last year here in NZ, with most of the profit being "made" in Ireland.

Now if NZ had a lower business tax rate than Ireland then instead the accounting would have been done so that the profit was made here in NZ. It's likely that they'd also arrange for much more of the profit from other overseas branches of Google would have been made here too.

Imagine if NZ (or somewhere else) decided that the tax rate for companies was say 5% for companies based in NZ then you would see a large number of global companies relocating headquarters to NZ, bringing lots of investment, high paying jobs, etc. If similar measures were made so that tax credits would be generous for research done here, you'd see a lot of R&D work here, which would result in significant benefits.

The tax paid to the government at 5% tax could easily exceed that paid at the current 30%, which could result in the tax rates dropping further for both personal and company taxes.

But this doesn't happen. I know that I'd be making huge changes to the tax system if I was the prime minister of NZ.

Mike NZ wrote on Dec 18^th, 2010 at 10:25pm:

Google NZ paid NZ$7726 (about US$5000) in tax last year here in NZ, with most of the profit being "made" in Ireland. Now if NZ had a lower business tax rate than Ireland ...

Coincidentally,

fine for Google, meanwhile, the shortcomings will be borrowed.




Irish lawmakers approve EU-IMF bailout loans

Published: Wednesday, December 15, 2010, 10:27 AM

DUBLIN   -- Despite bluster from opposition parties, Irish lawmakers voted Wednesday to back the euro67.5 billion ($90 billion) international rescue for Ireland ...    

Ireland's day-to-day finances are in terrible shape, with euro50 billion ($67 billion) in spending this year being covered by just euro31 billion ($41 billion) in taxes.


START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE

Corporate taxes are in decline, not assent; considerably so compared to the 50s and 60s.

Companies don't reinvest here. These corporate icons have little if any patroitic concern.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Dec 19^th, 2010 at 3:24pm:

Corporate taxes are in decline, not assent; considerably so compared to the 50s and 60s.

Nobody - and I mean nobody - paid those exorbitant rates back then. There were shelters galore, and everybody used them.


Quote:

Companies don't reinvest here. These corporate icons have little if any patroitic concern.

Why should they? They're in business to make money - which is the number one concern of stockholders spanning the globe.

Yes, business did use those continent wide loopholes. Too bad my father couldn't.

Greed is fine but this is greed without conscience. These guys still just don't care. A lot of them  used to.

Charlie

Charlie, I agree with you to an extent.  Sam Walton is a prime example of that.  The *Wal Mart* of today is nowhere near what Sam Walton envisioned.  He's probably rolling over in his grave.

However, sometimes I find it tough to swallow when a janitor at the local GM plant (closed now) started out at $18.00 an hour.

When union rules require that a man making $36 an hour for pressing one button once a minute for 8 hours a day cannot pick up a broom to sweep up a spill or change a light bulb or do ANYTHING other than push said button for 8 hours a day I don't think it is corporate greed that caused Caterpillar to move one of its operations overseas.  Then they had the gall to go on strike for job guarantees.  Fortunately they lost out on the strike, or they would have lost the whole plant.  It was interesting that during the strike Cat took office workers that ween't qualified by union rules to push buttons, etc. they were able to decrease man hours by 30%, increase productivity by 33%, and decrease quality control problems by 35%.  Corporate greed at its worst, right?

Cat was near bankruptcy before the union went on strike and saved them.

Jerry

Callico wrote on Dec 19^th, 2010 at 9:22pm:

When union rules require that a man making $36 an hour for pressing one button once a minute for 8 hours a day cannot pick up a broom to sweep up a spill or change a light bulb or do ANYTHING other than push said button for 8 hours a day I don't think it is corporate greed that caused Caterpillar to move one of its operations overseas.  Then they had the gall to go on strike for job guarantees.  Fortunately they lost out on the strike, or they would have lost the whole plant.  It was interesting that during the strike Cat took office workers that ween't qualified by union rules to push buttons, etc. they were able to decrease man hours by 30%, increase productivity by 33%, and decrease quality control problems by 35%.  Corporate greed at its worst, right? Cat was near bankruptcy before the union went on strike and saved them. Jerry

i currently work for con-way freight. con-way was started back in the 80s by consolidated freight. (CF) CF was by far the largest LTL ( less than truckload) carrier in the country. this is the company that developed the freightliner. CF was a teamsters company. con-way is the non union company. same investors. in 2005 CF closed its doors with out warning. the teamsters union did nothing. when CF closed its doors yellow freight became the biggest LTL carrier. another teamster company. yellow freight was nearly bankrupt and could still buy out 2 more union LTL freight companies, holland and roadway a few years ago. now known as YRC. if you follow the stock market YRC stock was at $0.05 a share last spring. long about this time con-way started to accumulate alot of small infractions on their senior drivers and began firing many of them. maybe something inside trailer they pulled back got punctured. or something a driver really doesnt have any control over.  with YRC going bankrupt theres really no threat of the teamsters union. currently con-way has a driver such as myself come in and drive and work the dock 16 hours on monday and 14 hours an night the rest of the week. its not safe for a person steering #80,000 down the interstate to work that many hours and drive. since i have been at con-way 50 out of 200 drivers have quit or gotten fired. these were very good drivers with squeaky clean driving records. con-way is aiming to keep a fresh driving force at the bottom of the pay scale and not collecting 3 weeks paid vacation every year.

now. you could say the teamsters union drove YRC into bankruptcy and you would be correct. a teamster LTL truck driver earns 80,000 to 100,00 a year. i feel this is a justified wage. however YRC drivers dont replace burned out lights or hook their trailers together or many other things that are not unreasonable for a driver to do.

its not the drivers in the teamsters union so much as its leadership that is to blame. hoffa jr has been the president of the teamsters for many years now and nobody runs against him.

the teamsters union doesnt try to unionize trucking companies anymore. instead they go after city garbage truck drivers, flight attendants, the NYPD and things that have nothing to do with freight which is where the teamsters union got started.

large trucking fleets like swift, schneider, werner, and many other big companies are all members of the ATA. (the american trucking association) the ATA is a big lobbying group that pushes for laws and subsidies to keep them on top. drivers for these companies come right out of school, earn about $600 a week and are kicked out in a year or less before raises and vacation time is earned. the teamsters union never ever goes after these companies and they would be an easy target because drivers are new to the business and are completely treated like shit.

its my theory that the teamsters union is receiving a vast amount of money from the ATA to steer its members into bankrupting teamster companies and drive down the labor cost and inflate profits. i have no proof but its obvious.

unions are necessary to protect workers rights and insure that blue collar workers can have a descent livelihood   with benefits and some kind of retirement but i'll be damned if the majority of unions truely have the workers best interest in mind. i've never been a teamster but i have been a member of 2 other unions and neither one was worth a shit to me

As businesses face growing regulation and cost burdens thanks to the Obama administration, there is one thing that they can be sure of -- the U.S. will soon be No. 1 when it comes to corporate taxes. Of course, in this case, being No. 1 is a bad thing. Japan is set to again lower the world's highest corporate tax rate of 39.5 percent by five percentage points. As Curtis Dubay of the Heritage Foundation puts it, Japan "has finally recognized what the rest of the industrialized world realized over a decade ago: A low corporate income tax rate is vital for economic growth in the global marketplace."
Unfortunately, Japan's move will leave the U.S. with the developed world's highest corporate tax rate at 39 percent. The average among developed nations is 25 percent, and many nations in Europe's former Eastern Bloc have tax rates below 20 percent. In 1990, the U.S. rate was below the world average, but since then, other nations have cut while the U.S. actually raised its rate by 0.6 percent, making us far less competitive in the global economy and sending jobs and businesses elsewhere. We hereby preemptively urge January's GOP-controlled House to give true stimulus to the economy by lowering the corporate tax rate.
(from the Patriot Post)

Quote:

unions are necessary to protect workers rights and insure that blue collar workers can have a descent livelihood with benefits and some kind of retirement

FedEx drivers disagree. They get all those things. Without a union.

My husband is union and they are shutting his mill down.  Guys who didn't work there would bitch that all the people did at the mill were push buttons and make a starting wage of $20+.  I can testify that my husband did not just push buttons!!  BUT, the union unfortunately protects people who do the absolute minimum work required, don't care about how the machine ran, the quality or quantity of paper that was produced and absolute safety.  I will say the union has meant pretty much crap to my husband ever since he started there, so we aren't banking on anything from them right now that they're in negotiations for severance, UE, etc.

Anyway, one thing NewPage DID do, is go to Washington to get a law passed to impose tariffs on imports of paper from China.  Go ahead and Google NewPage, tariffs and China.

Want to blame someone?  Blame the U.S. Government for F'ing American companies for decades.  If anything, I'd say the US has the worst business practices that I know of. :P

It's an old ism that it would be better for bottom line if the guys on their line, knew as little as possible other than how to operate the machinery. Knowing how to read just enough to cash a check and how spend it, is all that's really needed.

All that terrible education stirs things up. So does labor.

Things never work out, it seems.

Charlie

Brew wrote on Dec 20^th, 2010 at 7:57am:

Quote: unions are necessary to protect workers rights and insure that blue collar workers can have a descent livelihood with benefits and some kind of retirement FedEx drivers disagree. They get all those things. Without a union.

...and if you have any doubts about the drivers and this company's capabilities...I'm here to testify...

a) read Tom Peters story about a coffee cup...

b) I have had drivers seek me out to clarify what I really wanted...extra time and hassle...to them..no problem...

c) in a past life..sent upwards of 2000 packages...of those...ONE didn't make it to where I wanted...

I love me some Fedex.....ya get what ya pay for...the peace of mind is priceless...

Best,

Jon

Charlie wrote on Dec 20^th, 2010 at 7:29pm:

It's an old ism that it would be better for bottom line if the guys on their line, knew as little as possible other than how to operate the machinery. Knowing how to read just enough to cash a check and how spend it, is all that's really needed. All that terrible education stirs things up. So does labor. Things never work out, it seems. Charlie

What the hell are you talking about Charlie?

It's old Barb. It think it goes back to England. Those who ran the mines and factories in days of old never encouraged too much education among the populace. No need to enocourage workers to learn about other things that might stir things up. No money in that.

It's kind of Dickensian, I suppose.

Charlie

Who's barb?

Brew wrote on Dec 20^th, 2010 at 7:57am:

Quote: unions are necessary to protect workers rights and insure that blue collar workers can have a descent livelihood with benefits and some kind of retirement FedEx drivers disagree. They get all those things. Without a union.

most all drivers disagree brew. as bad as things get at con-way they dont want to join the teamsters union and a few of them are ex-teamsters.  they all agree that they are treated like borrowed equipment with no protection against getting fired for frivolous rule infractions. if you make top scale and your getting 3 weeks of paid vacation you are targeted for termination. you may have a million miles without a wreck or a ticket. doesnt matter, your wages and benefits cut into profit margins.

the ATA  is a union of sorts. but its a union of mega fleet companies. if its perfectly fine for them to organize why is it not ok for the drivers to organize as well?

I guess I'd have to answer your question with a question. FedEx drivers have been and continue to be free to organize if they so choose. Why do they overwhelmingly, and time after time, choose not to?

I'm pretty sure I know the answer - because they feel as though they're treated fairly. I know for a fact that FedEx management sees the value in keeping a highly motivated work force, and I sort of wish other companies saw that, too.

Drivers with 20 years get a good paycheck, are home most every night, get a very good benefits package which includes health, dental, and vision insurance, and they get 4 weeks vacation plus two floating holidays and two personal days every year. Plus they can qualify for bonus pay. It ain't a bad deal at all.

Brew wrote on Dec 24^th, 2010 at 4:42pm:

I guess I'd have to answer your question with a question. FedEx drivers have been and continue to be free to organize if they so choose. Why do they overwhelmingly, and time after time, choose not to? I'm pretty sure I know the answer - because they feel as though they're treated fairly. I know for a fact that FedEx management sees the value in keeping a highly motivated work force, and I sort of wish other companies saw that, too. Drivers with 20 years get a good paycheck, are home most every night, get a very good benefits package which includes health, dental, and vision insurance, and they get 4 weeks vacation plus two floating holidays and two personal days every year. Plus they can qualify for bonus pay. It ain't a bad deal at all.

   Labor unions were created to protect workers that were being exploited by the companies. If workers are not exploited there is no need for Unions.

   My union provides benefits for both workers and employers. The union provides all worker training, runs the health care and retirement plans and can provide workers from other areas when the local work force isn't enough.

   For the working, we get a living wage for hard and dangerous work, health care and retirement that doesn't change no matter how many employers we work for in a year.

   As for China, I have no problem with free trade. China's START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE to the USA Dollar, and START PRINTPAGEMultimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or END PRINTPAGE is not free trade.

-johnny- wrote on Dec 18^th, 2010 at 5:01pm:

Brew wrote on Dec 17th, 2010 at 3:44pm: A bridge (or anything else, for that matter) should be built wherever the person or company building it feels as though they are getting the best value for their dollar. Why should a contractor be required to adhere to "Made in the USA" if the quality is the same or better going overseas and it's your tax dollars that are paying for it? this is true however the things that were made here in the states that are now made in china cost the same if not more than they did when they were made here. should we send our industry to the biggest communist nation in the world  in the name of extreme american capitalism? how long will it be before there are starving children in the united states and not in china? eat your veggies

Hey Johhny, how have you been.
Yeah, Both you and Brew make good points. It is obvious where it is going and that it will not end until we are all flipping each others hamburgers.
I have looked at this issue so many times and have concluded that if you wish to "compete" in a "global-market" against other emerging countries that have a dirt-cheap work force and no environmental protections etc......you will simply lose.  Actually, it surprises me that we didn't go this way earlier. The Constitution allows for this type of trading & business, so off we go into the pit of lowering our standard of living.
It is  un-Constitutional, but if we could I would cut off from everyone else and keep everything here.  Unfortunately, that is not totally possible because we lack some resources and must import.
Tariffs are one thing, but usually don't solve the problem. Plus I'd keep our nose out of other countries affairs....but that'll never happen.

It's painfully obvious where this is leading and that, as of right now, there is no solution...except expecting lowered standards.

I personally have to get a second job now since I work at Caterpillar in the manufacturing plant and the pay isn't what it once was. My higher-paying skilled labor job in fabrication was eliminated because of a sick economy and other smaller companies taking the jobs for less. Their quality is terrible, but good enough to convince the customers to make a change.
I think most all of us are feeling the pinch.
Cheers, Dave

There is something else pertaining to Union/Companies that gets lost in all the emotional debate.
It really doesn't matter whether one thinks the Company is greedy or the Union is greedy...or both.
The root-problem is the ever-shrinking market share due to the infusion of this "global-economy" crap.

   The problem, as I outlined it above, will cause our wages as well as the Company's profits to shrink more & more every year.

  Expecting people to take concession after concession or expecting company's to distribute crappy stock dividends may be a result, but is hardly a solution.

Sorry, I don't have an answer, but understanding the root-causes is a start.
Cheers, Dave

Groov wrote on Dec 25^th, 2010 at 12:39am:

My higher-paying skilled labor job in fabrication was eliminated because of a sick economy and other smaller companies taking the jobs for less. Their quality is terrible, but good enough to convince the customers to make a change. I think most all of us are feeling the pinch.

There lies an underlying expression of consumer demand that is a driving factor in investment.

Cal Coolidge believed it was corporate productivity that would trickle down to all.  His treasury secretary, Andrew Mellon, third richest of the time, conceived a plan of cutting taxes for the rich, which became known as trickle down econonics for the Roaring 20's.  The windfall would spur production advances benefiting consumers.

However, this era was the rise of mass media and radio and ad men refined the craft of arousing new customer desires instead of just satisfying existing ones.  The swelling new middle class began to afford luxury buying eagerly, and on installment plans.  This was also an era of upswing after WWI, comparable to the flying 50's consumer demand for new products after WWII. 

Consumer demand has been an underlying driving force of corporate investment and credit lending.  A decrease in taxes for the rich and corporations has not coincided with low unemployment, jobs, as consumer demand has.  Countries with lower taxes in that area have usually higher individual taxes for persons living in that country.  Not mentioned in an article posted in this thread is what other taxes Japan will raise to make up for its decrease in corporate taxes, most likely a consumption tax, they are also heavily in debt. 

When lower corporate taxes don't coincide with strong consumer demand, jobs are not created so well.  Presently, lowering corp taxes would seem a gamble not well proven without consumer demand.

The Mellon Bill passed in 1926, when consumer demand was peaking. 

Also, in Cal's second term, he minimized the regulation of business and finance.  With his spiritual beliefs, hoping that competition would not degenerate into a mere selfish scramble for rewards, in the expectation they would serve society as a whole.  That didn't happen. Unfortunately human nature cannot be changed by an act of legislature.

Investment did actually overheat into speculation at that time, but it was the underlying consumer demand that actually cooled later, which made it not work.

Kevin, you never disappoint or post without giving it a lot of consideration. :)
It was really a long time coming. My Son Andy was working with me at the time and even he saw the writing on the wall.  The companies we built for loved the quality, but the market got so tough, that they had to make cuts. Apparently the lower quality issue for our customers (some of it was REALLY bad)  became acceptable when it made the difference between getting the job and not getting the job from their customers (the end users).

I was really proud of what we built and am very sad to see that era ending. Of course mainly for my loss of a good paying job,  but also for the end of an era of quality workmanship.

After reading what you have written, I would be in favor of putting it on the deficit as opposed to cutting any group of people's taxes. I know there has been a long debate over what sector's tax-cuts do the most good for the economy and job creation. Maybe putting it on the deficit would do more good and have the residual benefit of avoiding arguments as to who should get the tax-break.
Cheers, Dave

Dave,

You have a valid point about putting excess taxes on the deficit, however, that would be showing an expectation of Congress not spending whatever comes in the door.  If you have noticed, that does not happen as long as they can attach this earmark for something they can tell their constituents they were able to get for them.  In the last two years look at the number of earmarks that have been attached to almost all bills passed by Congress by an administration that campaigned on NO earmarks.  The first bill passed by Congress and signed by the President had over 1900 earmarks attached to it with NO complaint from any of the administration.

If you think I am only picking on the Obama administration you are wrong.  I had a serious falling out with the Republican Party (and they received no donations from me) over the spending during the Bush administration.  The Obama administration and the Pelosi House and Reid Senate though have far outstripped them.

Go back and look at history when it comes to tax cuts and take a look at the actual revenues generated by the Treasury following the Kennedy tax cuts in the 60's, the Reagan tax cuts, and again when Bush cut taxes.  In each case revenues actually increased dramatically, however, spending increased at a faster rate than revenues.

Jerry

No doubt Jerry. I don't think you are picking on anyone. I'm like you in that I think they all waste our cash and just love the earmarks. I probably live in a dream-world to think that we might work on reducing the defecit....LOL