The minute a life is created it becomes a statistic the same as when no life occurs. 500 million wonât even stop the species not when there are 3 trillion at last count and still growing.
I think that many are using this taxes argument as a lever to force them to bring back jobs to the US. Thatâs just not going to happen. And an increase in their taxes will increase their production cost which will increase the price of their product, to their customers, decreasing their ability to compete, but again does not create jobs at home. Maybe raising taxes on them will allow Bernie to pay for more handouts, but it is not a way to move the country forward, only a way to help the country survive as we slowly continue our march into irrelevance.
Mr. Ha,
Itâs not THEIRS. These corporations are not sending overseas what BELONGS to a US employee. The job position belongs to the company that has the need, that creates it or eliminates in order to carry a business whose goal is to make money. Respecting this nativism of yours only ensures that the firm will be unable to compete and the jobs will be lost anyway. If they follow your lead and leave the US entirely, you have just cost US workers the opportunity to be employed. What needs to happen is a reconfiguration of US laws that make companies want to move operations back to the US as much as possible. See the example with South Carolina where companies that move operations there are afforded concessions provided that they commit to hiring local folks and provide training. So much is made of what we should do to companies that expand their operations globally, but we forget to talk about how to entice, not just US firms, but global firms to move operations to the US. Much more would be raised by creating job opportunities for local folks than by taxing globalization.
Now you are just being dumb.
I agree that hiding money in offshore accounts is dishonest and wrong. Would that disqualify Trumpâs bid for the presidency?
Sound like Fidel Castro.
You know , what if this is Trumpâs last hurrah? Spray tan , look at his eyes, mouth and hands. I caught a look at his hands and how he used them or did not control them. His mouth and eyes are not right either. Find older photos or film of him. What if this is a bucket list thing and he is going out with a bang? Would explain the say one thing, then try to disclaim it. Possible? Spend billions to fulfill a dream before you die?
The main aspect is whether a population is growing or not.
Is it not the real Trump anymore? 
Spending billions to fulfill a dream before dying is politically possible only for those who are powerful enough to do that. Otherwise they would be stopped somehow.
Canât stop someone whom you owe. Give that person their last hurrah. And yea the dude has changed , find oldest interviews.
They and their corrupted politicians would counter now: âDonât worry, economically, the globe is just the extension of the nationâ; but that is not true. A nation has the same or roughly the same economical conditions, rules, structures, but the globe has the most different economical conditions, rules, structures we know so far.
Both and he is right in that the global economy is hurting the United States.
I say global economy in that all domestic jobs have become outsourced whereas a lot of professional occupations are foreign imported to the United States.
The problem with the United States is that the very wealthy pay little taxes in comparison to the disappearing middle class and the working poor who pay the brunt of it all.
All of this left unaltered will mean disaster for the United States which of course at this point is unavoidable.
Basically since the 1970âs the world nations rushed to create a global market system without thinking of the long term extended and unintended consequences of doing so. Itâs something we can expect in a world driven by profit and greed.
So, now the consequences of globalization are glaringly obvious for everybody and currently the world governments are trying to figure how to put the genie back into the bottle. The only problem is that they canâtâŚ
Privatization and collectivism are radical on opposite spectrums. It shouldnât really be a one or the other type thing.
In reality it isnât in that most economies of the world are a mixture of both.
Still, if all of your business packs to overseas all at once your going to make the nation they all originated from very poor with a lot of pissed off angry unemployed people. Thatâs basically where we are in the United States currentlyâŚ
I think youâre incorrect on the part of the privatization.
There seems to be a big push to deindustrialize and lower wages of workers in western nations. I hardly see how a loss of living standards will ever be regained in the west especially within the United States.
This push supposedly makes things more fair across the world in terms of market equilibrium internationally however in reality fairness has nothing to do with it so much as unadulterated profit or greed does of those with the most acquired wealth.
You canât expect private entities to work on the general publicâs behalf and there lies the problem especially when those same very private entities become more powerful than the general public itself.
Also, if individuals make a majority of other peopleâs lives extremely hard leaving them into total destitution theyâll either have to patch things up with the general public or face becoming a target by it. Thatâs how societies work really and many times a lot of private enterprises or individuals refuse to cooperate with the general public society they live amongst bringing such a society on the verge of collapse where those same very individuals become executed if not imprisoned. (Execution sends a more clearer message) History is littered with many examples of this.
Agreed.
Thing is, in most cases, the financial incentives donât point toward this kind of end. I know itâs a popular thing to be like, âfuck the government no matter what! they canât tell me what to do!â. But when people do that theyâre actually saying, âfuck my fellow citizens and hooray for the people who exploit them and make my country poorer!â.
I did make a post about incentives to keep the companies from leaving or bringing them in. And fellow citizens are becoming less dependent on their own selves and too dependent upon government. Sorry, but, I hate seeing the slide that we are on. Building cooperatives , tax incentives to education would be more helpful overall. If citizens want the companies to stay then they need to talk to the companies and not send in government.
Talk to the companies? And tell them what? Weâll work for the same compensation as a person in the 3rd world? Please donât leave us? I know that it was the american workforce that helped you build up so much power that you donât need us anymore and can go to india and china, but pretty please let us be your slaves for less than a living wage?
What would you suggest we say to the companies? Weâll buy your stock? You can decrease our dividends? I meanâŚIâm just not following you here. Most of the companies that are doing this kind of stuff could never have become so strong anywhere else in the world. All weâre asking is for a bit of consideration for the environment that our country provides for them that allows them to profit more than any time or place in known history.
In the US, the government is supposed to represent the people. So if you havenât noticed, since the companies donât seem to have the interests of the people here in mind, we sort of need someone or something with some power to act as an intermediary so that thereâs some shot of getting something done. I really donât understand the whole hatred of the government doing anything for the people bit that so many people are on. You donât think that the companies are even more corrupt that the politicians?
People talk about how individuals who receive money from the tax pool are entitled and are a problem for the economy. But they donât mention that companies like google are legally allowed to move half their gross income overseas and cut their tax bills in half. If that loophole closed, then weâd have revenue off the 32 billion that they move to Bermuda, and we could use that to fund education. But I suspect you think thatâs just people mooching off the government teat and an example of the government trying to steal money from google through taxation.
You think that google would move to China is they were to have to pay their tax rate on all their gross income?
I mean do you like it when you see a bunch of board members of multi billion dollar international conglomerates cheating your city, county, state, school systems, infrastructure programs etc? Just because you like the idea of people giving the government the finger? Itâs you that suffers. Itâs the people in your town and the children in your local schools and universities. The only people who win in those scenarios are guys who want to buy yachts and retire with a billion dollars. Oh, and I guess people who think that Ayn Rand is a philosopher and that selfishness is a virtue.
And where and why did those board members get so wealthy? The poor handing their money over to them to buy products they do not need. It takes two to Tango. I blame both. The wealthy could not be wealthy unless people made them so. And you do not get wealthy over night. People allowed this and now they should work together not depend on another. And you should know by now I am neither republican or democrat. Since Rand is so uber conservative , why would I respect her?
Hello HaHaHa
The phenomenon is not concentrated to the US. It is not just Boeing opening facilities in Asia but also Airbus. I agree that globalization threatens the wages of workers in western nations, no doubt, but my point is that raising legal barriers against globalization will not work. We need to be competitive, as a nation, when it comes to offering the best total cost of ownership to all companies, foreign and domestic. WE cannot criminalize globalization because that will not tie up wealth in America but speed up its drainage. Instead we need to move resources to make America an enticing place to move operations.
GreedâŚwho is free of it? To me, those that speak against the wealthy are often envious of the wealthy. They rally against the 1% while people in China and India students become the only replacement for an American middle class. It is the distance that they see, and which they judge as insurmountable, that make them rail against the wealthy.
I believe that people have the government that they deserve. The âgeneral publicâ does not exist. We are always fractured and divided along different lines, such as ideology, economic status and even race. Because of this, private entities AND governments will always work FOR some and AGAINST others.
Tell that to the thousands of immigrants who come here to live better lives rather than living in total destitution. Everytime I see a guy at a stop light asking for a buck I can tell that he is not an immigrant and I get mad, because people risk their lives crossing a desert, constant threat of deportation to get the lowest wages we have available (and illegal), but they never lose their dignity.
This story is the story of crime itself. But hereâs the problem: Wealth is a limited good. The general public may rise and take away the wealth for themselvesâŚand then what? What happens when it is all spent? Cuba has been afforded a moment of renewal. Many say that the Castro regime will receive a cash windfall. Where they go depends on how friendly the regime becomes to capitalist corporations. Without foreign wealth, foreign banks, which will ask for interest on any loans, life in Cuba will be improved instead of transformed.
Many people in the western world, especially in US, do not have clear understanding of this issue of globalization/immigration. They do not realize that it is a two way sward, which cuts both ways. If it helps in some cases, it also harms in some others cases too. One cannot cherry pick from the premises of the globalization according to its convenience. A country has to take a side in broader terms, either you are open or not. Remember, how much door one opens, applies to the both of incoming an outgoing. But, US citizens talk about only incoming too, not outgoing.
Take any example. Most of the computer manufactures are from the US, like Apple, Dell, HP etc. But, right now, none of these make computers in the US. Appleâs manufacturing facilities are basically at Taiwan while Dell and HP makes at China.
One may conclude from this that these companies are betraying US by outsourcing their manufacturing facilities otherwise US citizens would get employment in those facilities. But,it is not true.
The fact of the matter is that most of the MNCs cannot afford to manufacture in the US now because of the wage differences. and if they do, their competitors like Sansung, Asus and many others from China and India will throw US MNCs out of the business. And, that would result even to more job cutting in US, as US based MNCs at least keep research and management bases these. The same formula applies to the most of the industries, except very highly technological ones like arms or space technology.
Secondly, what if countries like India and China ban Coke, Pepsi or MacDonalds, Ford etc there too? What if citizens here also claim that these US companies not only hurting local business here, but transfer their profit to their mother country too? Is that demand not also seems to be justified? Would that not hurt US employment more? Then, who would be held responsible for that further layoffs? And, how the behavior of US MNCs are any different from some of the US immigrants sending some of their earnings to their parent countries?
In the global capitalism, capital cannot afford be a nationalistic. If you are want to let something out, some other thing will also come in from that open door too. It cannot be exclusively one way.
People like Trump and Sanders are making a fool of the US people. And unfortunately, people fell in that trap too.
with love,
sanjay