One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Lindsey's Pain Will Cost Everyone
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
Sep 8, 2019 01:49:22   #
PeterS
 
America 1 wrote:
The real lunacy is to allow the imbalance to continue.
Your business us paying out $5.00 and taking in $1.00, how long are you going to stay in business?

And what businesses are paying out $5 and taking in $1? Name them...

Reply
Sep 8, 2019 02:13:00   #
PeterS
 
EconomistDon wrote:
I said JOBS are up; we were not talking about wages. Pay attention T***handlies.

You are probably too young to remember the decades when America was great. Of course, for lefties, if they didn't see it or live it, it didn't happen; right thruhandlies? America was great through the 1960s. We still had a "national" economy. That means that nearly everything we consumed was made in America by American workers.

The average manufacturing wage in the US is $22 an hour and the average wage in China $24.72 for a 7 day work week. You will never see manufacturing return to the US. Not in a capitalistic economy...

Reply
Sep 8, 2019 05:38:55   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
PeterS wrote:
And what businesses are paying out $5 and taking in $1? Name them...


Are you possibly so dense not to know it is an example?

Reply
 
 
Sep 8, 2019 05:43:01   #
America 1 Loc: South Miami
 
PeterS wrote:
The average manufacturing wage in the US is $22 an hour and the average wage in China $24.72 for a 7 day work week. You will never see manufacturing return to the US. Not in a capitalistic economy...


The US is sending way more to China than what we receive in return.
U.S. exports to China were only $120 billion while imports from China were $540 billion.
The U.S. trade deficit with China was $419 billion in 2018.

Reply
Sep 8, 2019 16:42:25   #
Radiance3
 
PeterS wrote:
The average manufacturing wage in the US is $22 an hour and the average wage in China $24.72 for a 7 day work week. You will never see manufacturing return to the US. Not in a capitalistic economy...

==================
The quality of materials and workmanship for those made in China are so inferior with the US. US creates quality products that last for years. China last for few months. Buy China apparel for instance. Very cheap quality materials made of cheap labor.

Always buy US made products. And be proud of it. You are helping your own people and country.

Reply
Sep 8, 2019 17:02:15   #
Seth
 
America 1 wrote:
Are you possibly so dense not to know it is an example?


Every three months PeterS visits his doctor for a density scan. The doctor, impressed at the record high density levels he encounters, just published a book on it that has turned an entire industry upside down.

Reply
Sep 9, 2019 00:20:44   #
EconomistDon
 
PeterS wrote:
The average manufacturing wage in the US is $22 an hour and the average wage in China $24.72 for a 7 day work week. You will never see manufacturing return to the US. Not in a capitalistic economy...


EXACTLY!!!! See F*****t Pete? You are not as dumb as you look.
Sooooo, tariffs and import quotas are the only answer.

Reply
 
 
Sep 9, 2019 01:43:44   #
truthiness
 
EconomistDon wrote:

First, let me say that you redeemed a great deal of respect with your support of Reagan. He was the most brilliant and successful President of my lifetime which began with Truman. Reagan was a silver-tongued communicator. He worked closely with Gorbachev to end the Cold War. And he understood economics and how to make it work. His policies pulled us out of the worst recession since the Great Depression. Unemployment and inflation were at double digits when Reagan took office. His supply-side economic expansion became the longest, strongest expansion in history.

Reagan's import restrictions were very helpful, and could be pressed into service today. It is China's primary defense against us. Many American goods are banned from import to China. But tariffs also work. I do not agree that Smoot-Hawley played much of a role in the Great Depression. There were too few goods being imported at that time to have much effect.

The boom years of the 50s and 60s had nothing to do with political parties. It had everything to do with pent-up demand following the Depression when people didn't have money to buy things followed by the war when rationing prevented people from buying things. After the war, factories hummed and people bought things that they needed for years. And all that purchasing went to American producers, not foreign producers. America's middle class flourished.
br First, let me say that you redeemed a great de... (show quote)

....
Don,
You and I rarely agree on anything, and that is OK. It is a learning situation when done in the right frame.

Me Angst? :) The only Angst I will have is if I don't get to v**e against Trump in 2020.

We do agree in part on Reagan. I v**ed for him in his first e******n. But not in the second; no pol, right or left, should govern from a landslide. It creates problems as it did for Reagan. In that period, they posted the eastern results as they came in rather than waiting until polls closed as they do now. I was in the west, and I could see how it was going to turn out. It wasn't his silver tongue that impressed me; it was his sincere desire to bring the country together. Some of his ideas were good--firing the air traffic controllers. Some were not good--trickle down, which his budget director showed would not work. And of course Iran-Contra. Reagan was not the brightest guy, but less corrupt and more moral than most. It will not surprise you to hear me say that Trump is the antithesis of Reagan in virtually everything positive.

It was a conervative commentary that I quoted that said Smoot-Hawley, according to most economists, added to the length of the Great Depression. I have no opinion as to whether this oinion or yours about being not enough goods to have an effect.

As I said, the boom years of the 50s-60s could not be identified with either political party, so I guess we agree on that.

I find it somewhere between inconsistent and hypocritical for someone to say that it is commendable, even morally obligatory (ala Milton Friedman), for companies to make the maximum profits and therefore take production out of the US to foreign countries in order to increase profits and at the same time say it is not appropriate (even unpatriotic) for the American consumer to pay more for the more costly American product. Why not chastise Apple for not being patriotic to produce in the US? I don't think that is a "whine," it is good economics: produce at the lowest cost, buy at the lowest price. It has nothing to do with quality as someone spuriously brought into the argument. Apple is quality.

My appreciation to you and Rad3 for providing data and making this thread at least about opinion based on facts the way you see them. For me, the subject of this thread has been squeezed dry.

Danke.

t

Reply
Sep 9, 2019 23:48:04   #
EconomistDon
 
t***hiness wrote:
....
Don,
You and I rarely agree on anything, and that is OK. It is a learning situation when done in the right frame.

Me Angst? :) The only Angst I will have is if I don't get to v**e against Trump in 2020.

We do agree in part on Reagan. I v**ed for him in his first e******n. But not in the second; no pol, right or left, should govern from a landslide. It creates problems as it did for Reagan. In that period, they posted the eastern results as they came in rather than waiting until polls closed as they do now. I was in the west, and I could see how it was going to turn out. It wasn't his silver tongue that impressed me; it was his sincere desire to bring the country together. Some of his ideas were good--firing the air traffic controllers. Some were not good--trickle down, which his budget director showed would not work. And of course Iran-Contra. Reagan was not the brightest guy, but less corrupt and more moral than most. It will not surprise you to hear me say that Trump is the antithesis of Reagan in virtually everything positive.

It was a conervative commentary that I quoted that said Smoot-Hawley, according to most economists, added to the length of the Great Depression. I have no opinion as to whether this oinion or yours about being not enough goods to have an effect.

As I said, the boom years of the 50s-60s could not be identified with either political party, so I guess we agree on that.

I find it somewhere between inconsistent and hypocritical for someone to say that it is commendable, even morally obligatory (ala Milton Friedman), for companies to make the maximum profits and therefore take production out of the US to foreign countries in order to increase profits and at the same time say it is not appropriate (even unpatriotic) for the American consumer to pay more for the more costly American product. Why not chastise Apple for not being patriotic to produce in the US? I don't think that is a "whine," it is good economics: produce at the lowest cost, buy at the lowest price. It has nothing to do with quality as someone spuriously brought into the argument. Apple is quality.

My appreciation to you and Rad3 for providing data and making this thread at least about opinion based on facts the way you see them. For me, the subject of this thread has been squeezed dry.

Danke.

t
.... br Don, br You and I rarely agree on anything... (show quote)


Ich auch. Auf wiedersehen.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 5 of 5
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.