The NAFTA Of The Pacific Will Soon Send Millions of American Jobs Overseas

[bobbyw24]

Giant Sucking Sound Part 2? The NAFTA Of The Pacific Will Soon Allow Millions More American Jobs To Be Shipped Overseas

The United States is negotiating one of the biggest free trade agreements in history and there is barely a peep about it on the news. Years ago, Ross Perot warned that if NAFTA was implemented there would be a "giant sucking sound" as millions of jobs left this country. It turns out that he was right. Starting on Tuesday, the next round of negotiations on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (also known as the "NAFTA of the Pacific") will begin in Chicago. We have already seen the Obama administration push hard for free trade agreements with Panama, South Korea and Colombia and the administration is making the Trans-Pacific Partnership a very high priority. Membership in the "NAFTA of the Pacific" already includes Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore. The United States, Australia, Peru, Malaysia and Vietnam are scheduled to join. Canada, Japan and South Korea are also reportedly considering membership. So once this "free trade" agreement is ratified, will we hear another "giant sucking sound" as millions more of our jobs are shipped overseas?

Look, it is not really that complicated. If you are a giant U.S. corporation, you can either make stuff here, or you can make stuff overseas where it is far, far less expensive to do so.

To greedy corporate executives, there are a lot of advantages to moving operations out of the country....

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...ons-more-american-jobs-to-be-shipped-overseas

 

[erowe1]

There's no such thing as sending jobs overseas.

Go to any major port in the country and look in all the shipping containers and try to find the one that has the jobs in it.

 

[bobbyw24]

There's no such thing as sending jobs overseas.

Go to any major port in the country and look in all the shipping containers and try to find the one that has the jobs in it.

Ha ha

 

[ILUVRP]

There's no such thing as sending jobs overseas.

Go to any major port in the country and look in all the shipping containers and try to find the one that has the jobs in it.

better yet , try and find a shipping container leaving this country with goods in it.

 

[psi2941]

so what? all these people supporting unions and democrats deserve to have their job shipped over seas. it makes me smile when i see on the news that a union factory has to close.

 

[Jeez]

Considering most companies are still struggling to fill the openings for skilled workers i doubt NAFTA would have made any difference.

 

[-C-]

Hurray for British Free Trade Liberalism.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Free trade agreement? Yeah, right. Crony trade agreement is more like it.

And at the same time, the politicians want to spend trillions to "create jobs" here in America. Where will that taxpayer money really go? Probably to build a factory in Asia. They are having a good laugh on American workers. First, they steal their money, then they use that money to put them out of work. Nice.

 

[Cutlerzzz]

I take it this is another government regulated trade agreement that doesn't actually get rid of trade barriers.

 

[nobody's_hero]

I take it this is another government regulated trade agreement that doesn't actually get rid of trade barriers.

Yep. or more accurately, it's probably one of those that lets other countries put barriers on our exports to their country while we sit here and take it up the ass. (there's no polite way to describe it).

 

[ILUVRP]

so what? all these people supporting unions and democrats deserve to have their job shipped over seas. it makes me smile when i see on the news that a union factory has to close.

very sad..................

 

[Seraphim]

Free trade agreement? Yeah, right. Crony trade agreement is more like it.
And at the same time, the politicians want to spend trillions to "create jobs" here in America. Where will that taxpayer money really go? Probably to build a factory in Asia. They are having a good laugh on American workers. First, they steal their money, then they use that money to put them out of work. Nice.

Spot on. Calling a wolf a sheep doesn't make it a sheep.

Don't let the government control language and it's easier to understand the world around you.

 

[Seraphim]

Why?

I'd love for more government union factories to close. I'd rather have imported goods from another country then a mob of government priviledged workers who are overpaid and hold the rest of society up for ransom whenever they have a fucking hissy fit.

With that being said, I'd MUCH rather see free enterprise manufacturing produce goods for the domestic economy. It just won't happen in Soviet America any time soon. Unless, of course, there is a revolution.

very sad..................

 

[Fox McCloud]

Wouldn't be surprised if this is a "fair trade agreement" whereby we say "no tariffs on your side or we're not going to give you any of our goods"---etc.

I never got why free trade agreements were considered or are handled like bilateral agreements--they're not; they're a national policy of allowing all imported goods, no matter origin, into your country--who cares what everyone else does for your goods.

 

[ILUVRP]

The union membership rate for public sector workers (36.2 percent) was
substantially higher than the rate for private sector workers (6.9 percent).
(See table 3.)

i agree that goverment jobs should not have unions , this is still a free country where people can join a union or not. i think its called liberty.

with under 10% private jobs union , i guess thats why crest makes their tooth paste in China.

 

[Bossobass]

Throughout the history of cabals and monopolies, the worker always gets blamed to hide the true reasons for poor management and lousy products/services from lack of competition.

As an example, a US car sticker price includes around 5% labor costs. To ship that car from Asia to the US is around 7%, proving labor costs to be irrelevant.

Henry Ford announced a >100% increase in workers minimum pay, more than double the going rate. This caused a huge influx of applicants, from which Ford could cull the best workers available and build the most capable and productive work force in the world.

Many aren't aware of the odds Ford faced upon incorporating his motor company. There was a cabal who sought to exclude him to the point of bankruptcy.

The company was a success from the beginning, but just five weeks after its incorporation the Association of Licensed Automobile Manufacturers threatened to put it out of business because Ford was not a licensed manufacturer. He had been denied a license by this group, which aimed at reserving for its members the profits of what was fast becoming a major industry. The basis of their power was control of a patent granted in 1895 to George Baldwin Selden, a patent lawyer of Rochester, New York. The association claimed that the patent applied to all gasoline-powered automobiles. Along with many rural Midwesterners of his generation, Ford hated industrial combinations and Eastern financial power. Moreover, Ford thought the Selden patent preposterous. All invention was a matter of evolution, he said, yet Selden claimed genesis. He was glad to fight, even though the fight pitted the puny Ford Motor Company against an industry worth millions of dollars. The gathering of evidence and actual court hearings took six years. Ford lost the original case in 1909; he appealed and won in 1911. His victory had wide implications for the industry, and the fight made Ford a popular hero.

In 1914 the Ford Motor Company announced that it would henceforth pay eligible workers a minimum wage of $5 a day (compared to an average of $2.34 for the industry) and would reduce the work day from nine hours to eight, thereby converting the factory to a three-shift day. Overnight Ford became a worldwide celebrity. People either praised him as a great humanitarian or excoriated him as a mad socialist. Ford said humanitarianism had nothing to do with it. Previously profit had been based on paying wages as low as workers would take and pricing cars as high as the traffic would bear. Ford, on the other hand, stressed low pricing (the Model T cost $950 in 1908 and $290 in 1927) in order to capture the widest possible market and then met the price by volume and efficiency. Ford's success in making the automobile a basic necessity turned out to be but a prelude to a more widespread revolution. The development of mass-production techniques, which enabled the company eventually to turn out a Model T every 24 seconds; the frequent reductions in the price of the car made possible by economies of scale; and the payment of a living wage that raised workers above subsistence and made them potential customers for, among other things, automobiles--these innovations changed the very structure of society.

Invention and innovation lead to profits, not low wages. There isn't a single model in existence that proves lower wages are at the top of the list for success and profitability. OTOH, there are plenty of examples of low wages benefitting an illegally formed monopoly that stagnates innovation and invention after cornering a market they had nothing to do with creating in the first place.

Bosso

 

[Mogambo Guru]

^ I always love your posts bossobass.

 

[Danke]

Throughout the history of cabals and monopolies, the worker always gets blamed to hide the true reasons for poor management and lousy products/services from lack of competition.

As an example, a US car sticker price includes around 5% labor costs. To ship that car from Asia to the US is around 7%, proving labor costs to be irrelevant.

Henry Ford announced a >100% increase in workers minimum pay, more than double the going rate. This caused a huge influx of applicants, from which Ford could cull the best workers available and build the most capable and productive work force in the world.

Many aren't aware of the odds Ford faced upon incorporating his motor company. There was a cabal who sought to exclude him to the point of bankruptcy.





Invention and innovation lead to profits, not low wages. There isn't a single model in existence that proves lower wages are at the top of the list for success and profitability. OTOH, there are plenty of examples of low wages benefitting an illegally formed monopoly that stagnates innovation and invention after cornering a market they had nothing to do with creating in the first place.

Bosso

Consistently the most profitable airline, Southwest, is also the one with the most unionized workers and highest wages.

 

[Cutlerzzz]

Throughout the history of cabals and monopolies, the worker always gets blamed to hide the true reasons for poor management and lousy products/services from lack of competition.

As an example, a US car sticker price includes around 5% labor costs. To ship that car from Asia to the US is around 7%, proving labor costs to be irrelevant.

Henry Ford announced a >100% increase in workers minimum pay, more than double the going rate. This caused a huge influx of applicants, from which Ford could cull the best workers available and build the most capable and productive work force in the world.

Many aren't aware of the odds Ford faced upon incorporating his motor company. There was a cabal who sought to exclude him to the point of bankruptcy.





Invention and innovation lead to profits, not low wages. There isn't a single model in existence that proves lower wages are at the top of the list for success and profitability. OTOH, there are plenty of examples of low wages benefitting an illegally formed monopoly that stagnates innovation and invention after cornering a market they had nothing to do with creating in the first place.

Bosso

Market labor cost is not the same thing as union labor that leeches off the government.

 

[Seraphim]

Market labor cost is not the same thing as union labor that leeches off the backs of the taxpayer.

Fixed it for you.