Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

This just deals with the economy and more specifically the stock market.

 

Corporate America is doing itself in - while Trump and Sanders capitalize

 

Here is the beginning part of the article.  The bold and red parts are my own.

 

Quote: 

There are always malcontents. But the portion of Americans sick of crony capitalism, ruthless corporate efficiency and do-more-for-less work is growing large enough to threaten advantages big companies have enjoyed for decades.

 
This economic frustration, of course, is propelling the insurgent presidential campaigns of Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Bernie Sanders. Trump, who seems increasingly likely to be the GOP nominee, favors steep new tariffs on imports and other protectionist measures meant to reverse key elements of globalization and bring more jobs back to America. He has also caused publicity problems for companies such as Ford (F), Nabisco (MDLZ) and Carrier (UTX), by calling out their plans to close U.S. facilities and open new ones in Mexico.
 
Sanders rails repeatedly against “disastrous trade deals” and “billionaires on Wall Street who destroyed this economy,” while calling for breaking up big banks, imposing sharp tax hikes on the wealthy and giving the government more control over the economy than it has had at any time since World War II.
With those ideas gaining traction, rival Hillary Clinton has moved left, opposing certain trade deals she once supported.
 
The revolution could peter out. It’s quite possible that Clinton—an establishment centrist on many economic issues, with close ties to Wall Street—will be the next president, more or less muzzling the roar of discontent until the next election cycle. Yet even so, the forces behind this voter outrage won’t go away, and might even intensify during coming years. And another recession is inevitable at some point, which will swell the ranks of the angry dispossessed.

 

I encourage people to actually read the article and think about it.  This is what's coming with the way that the current Presidential election coming up, and that's just the economy.

 

Discuss.

Interesting that neither the Trump supporters nor the Sanders supporters have anything to say about this.  I can't imagine that there are actually Hillary supporters on this board, but nothing is said about the implications of her actually winning.

 

This country is done, and the greatest enemy is within.

Quote:Interesting that neither the Trump supporters nor the Sanders supporters have anything to say about this.  I can't imagine that there are actually Hillary supporters on this board, but nothing is said about the implications of her actually winning.

 

This country is done, and the greatest enemy is within.

 

 

Said hundreds of people the last 200 plus years.  

America, corporate or otherwise, has been doing itself in for a long time. The great ideals this country was founded on have been trickling down the drain for decades. The Constitution gets trampled on at every turn and we have a President who thinks it gets in the way of change. Well, duh. There is a process to follow and just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong. 

 

But that's going off the subject. I was never good at really getting more than the basic concepts of economics so I'm not really one to comment on the complexities of the how, what, where, who and why of why we are where we are presently. I would just say those who can, do. And sadly they are almost all greedy bastards with no thought for the middle class on down unless it pads their pockets which just screws the rest of us even more. That's all I can really say.

Quote:This just deals with the economy and more specifically the stock market.

 

Corporate America is doing itself in - while Trump and Sanders capitalize

 

Here is the beginning part of the article.  The bold and red parts are my own.

 

 

I encourage people to actually read the article and think about it.  This is what's coming with the way that the current Presidential election coming up, and that's just the economy.

 

Discuss.

 

Hilary Clinton is NOT a centrist on most economic issues.  This is a woman who wrote her college thesis on Saul Alinsky and wants to tax the AIR!  Before i even read the article I could tell which way it leaned.  Then i see that it was linked to the DNC, Yahoo News.  

 

What the article fails to mention is that in the case of China specifically is no real free trade.  As has been pointed out, there are essentially four key pillars to the protectionist pie.  

 

1.) Currency Manipulation:  China has been the worlds most notorious currency Manipulators for years.  countries manipulate their currency to make their goods appear cheaper to foreign importers.  This is essentially cheating the foreign manufacturer who may actually have the same or a slightly lower production cost.  If this is allowed to continue it makes real free market competition impossible.  

 

2.) Administrative barriers:  As has been pointed out, China makes it very very difficult for American companies to sell goods or services in the Chinese Markets.  This curtails the supply of imported goods artificially raising their cost and making it harder to compete against domestic producers.

 

3.) Tariffs (Duties):  China has what it describes as a TARIFF WALL.  That means that after you get past the currency manipulation and after the administrative barriers then AMERICAN PRODUCERS pay inordinate Tariffs to sell their goods in china.  

 

4.) Subsidies: And the revenue generated by the Tariffs that you pay when you sell your product then go to subsidizing the infrastructure of your Chinese competitor making it even less expensive for them to produce their goods.  

 

So in essence we don't have real FREE TRADE.  We give the Chinese virtually unfettered access to our markets for their goods and services and they turn right back around to us and say we'll take your money, but we can't sell your goods.  

 

In a true FREE TRADE environment there would be a give and take, when one side gained a competitive advantage manufacturing a product  the influx of foreign currency into their market would weaken the foreign currency and make the foreign products cheaper over time bringing us a lot closer to equilibrium.  Or one country that may be more proficient at producing cars may need to import air conditioners and the like.  In this case we have a more one sided outflow in the form of a half trillion dollar trade deficit.  When one side of the equation implements protectionist policies that draconian its like sitting down at a poker table and handing your opponent a rigged deck in their favor.  

 

And that's before we get to the fact that in the case of China the goods we do export to them routinely have their intellectual property stolen with no recourse.  We also have a regulatory system in this country that makes it almost impossible to do business and we have the highest tax rate in the world.  

 

The answer that the left provides is simple: Rich people are just unpatriotic meanies and should shut up and pay their carbon taxes anyway.  Increase taxes on capital gains, increase taxes on corporations, and use the revenue to subsidize the population that can't get a job.  

 

That doesn't make any sense.  The game is still rigged and the cards are all in the favor of foreign producers.  

 

The common sense solution would be to create the best business environment domestically, lowering corporate taxes, income taxes, curtailing an out of control regulatory structure, and offering companies the ability to bring home foreign INVERTED profits to invest in infrastructure and job creation.  That gives companies the incentive to grow and produce goods and services here.  

 

At the same time, we understand in the world of modern economics that we have to be able to do business with our foreign partners, but we can not and should not sit down at a table designed for us to loose.  As a country it is our moral obligation to our producers and our workers to ensure that their is basic and fundamental reciprocity if we expose their sectors to foreign trade.  Foreign countries should be allowed to openly and blatantly manipulate their currency, they shouldn't face extra administrative burdens to export when their foreign counterparts don't have to.  They shouldn't be subject to Tariffs if their foreign competitors aren't when they import goods to us.  If other countries subsidize the costs of production we should have a tax code that has real time incentives for business investment.  

 

The concept of federalism adopted by our founding fathers was based on the idea that when we go out into the world we have to speak with one voice as a nation through the executive branch to represent our business interests.  It is their fundamental obligation to ensure that international trade is balanced and that if someone is taking advantage of us and not dealing in good faith then they should not have free and unfettered access to the most desirable consumer market in the history of all mankind. 

Quote:Hilary Clinton is NOT a centrist on most economic issues. This is a woman who wrote her college thesis on Saul Alinsky and wants to tax the AIR! Before i even read the article I could tell which way it leaned. Then i see that it was linked to the DNC, Yahoo News.


What the article fails to mention is that in the case of China specifically is no real free trade. As has been pointed out, there are essentially four key pillars to the protectionist pie.


1.) Currency Manipulation: China has been the worlds most notorious currency Manipulators for years. countries manipulate their currency to make their goods appear cheaper to foreign importers. This is essentially cheating the foreign manufacturer who may actually have the same or a slightly lower production cost. If this is allowed to continue it makes real free market competition impossible.


2.) Administrative barriers: As has been pointed out, China makes it very very difficult for American companies to sell goods or services in the Chinese Markets. This curtails the supply of imported goods artificially raising their cost and making it harder to compete against domestic producers.


3.) Tariffs (Duties): China has what it describes as a TARIFF WALL. That means that after you get past the currency manipulation and after the administrative barriers then AMERICAN PRODUCERS pay inordinate Tariffs to sell their goods in china.


4.) Subsidies: And the revenue generated by the Tariffs that you pay when you sell your product then go to subsidizing the infrastructure of your Chinese competitor making it even less expensive for them to produce their goods.


So in essence we don't have real FREE TRADE. We give the Chinese virtually unfettered access to our markets for their goods and services and they turn right back around to us and say we'll take your money, but we can't sell your goods.


In a true FREE TRADE environment there would be a give and take, when one side gained a competitive advantage manufacturing a product the influx of foreign currency into their market would weaken the foreign currency and make the foreign products cheaper over time bringing us a lot closer to equilibrium. Or one country that may be more proficient at producing cars may need to import air conditioners and the like. In this case we have a more one sided outflow in the form of a half trillion dollar trade deficit. When one side of the equation implements protectionist policies that draconian its like sitting down at a poker table and handing your opponent a rigged deck in their favor.


And that's before we get to the fact that in the case of China the goods we do export to them routinely have their intellectual property stolen with no recourse. We also have a regulatory system in this country that makes it almost impossible to do business and we have the highest tax rate in the world.


The answer that the left provides is simple: Rich people are just unpatriotic meanies and should shut up and pay their carbon taxes anyway. Increase taxes on capital gains, increase taxes on corporations, and use the revenue to subsidize the population that can't get a job.


That doesn't make any sense. The game is still rigged and the cards are all in the favor of foreign producers.


The common sense solution would be to create the best business environment domestically, lowering corporate taxes, income taxes, curtailing an out of control regulatory structure, and offering companies the ability to bring home foreign INVERTED profits to invest in infrastructure and job creation. That gives companies the incentive to grow and produce goods and services here.


At the same time, we understand in the world of modern economics that we have to be able to do business with our foreign partners, but we can not and should not sit down at a table designed for us to loose. As a country it is our moral obligation to our producers and our workers to ensure that their is basic and fundamental reciprocity if we expose their sectors to foreign trade. Foreign countries should be allowed to openly and blatantly manipulate their currency, they shouldn't face extra administrative burdens to export when their foreign counterparts don't have to. They shouldn't be subject to Tariffs if their foreign competitors aren't when they import goods to us. If other countries subsidize the costs of production we should have a tax code that has real time incentives for business investment.


The concept of federalism adopted by our founding fathers was based on the idea that when we go out into the world we have to speak with one voice as a nation through the executive branch to represent our business interests. It is their fundamental obligation to ensure that international trade is balanced and that if someone is taking advantage of us and not dealing in good faith then they should not have free and unfettered access to the most desirable consumer market in the history of all mankind.

Here's the problem, if you follow trumps plan to address the issue with China his solution is to tax the consumer. No new tax is going to change the reality it's cheaper to build something in China, it would just simply raise the cost of building something in China to bring it line with the cost of producing something here. You see Trump isn't advocating fixing the reason why it's so expensive to build something here (governments interference in the free market) instead he's advocating using government to increase the cost of making goods in China so it's more fair. That's not conservatism hell that's even a bridge to far for most Democrats.

I enjoy your posts, jj. You're a smart dude.

Quote:Here's the problem, if you follow trumps plan to address the issue with China his solution is to tax the consumer. No new tax is going to change the reality it's cheaper to build something in China, it would just simply raise the cost of building something in China to bring it line with the cost of producing something here. You see Trump isn't advocating fixing the reason why it's so expensive to build something here (governments interference in the free market) instead he's advocating using government to increase the cost of making goods in China so it's more fair. That's not conservatism hell that's even a bridge to far for most Democrats.

The free market will never win against the slave market, you either force their costs up or join them at the bottom.

Quote:The free market will never win against the slave market, you either force their costs up or join them at the bottom.

 

There has always been and always will be cultures where it's cheaper to produce goods than it is in developed nations. I'm not concerned with fixing China's slave market that's their problem. The reality of a global economy is it's cheaper to build some products over seas by trying to equalize the cost of production it's no different than trying to use government to equalize income distribution. Unless everyone is ok with just increasing all cost of goods across the board ( a tax on everyone) the free market has to be allowed to use competitive advantages over seas. Manufacturing is a dying trade anyways why are we expanding the influence of Washington for an industry that is being atomized? Manufacturing is coming here domestically it's coming with robotics not employee's 1000 people to work an assembly line.

Dude, you guys really need to calm down about Saul Alinsky.  What you write about in college or who you identify with when your in your 20's doesn't mount up to a hill of beans compared to ones actions in the real world.  Grow up

 

I listened to alot of Bob Marley, that doesn't make me a Jamaican Rastafarian. 

Quote:Here's the problem, if you follow trumps plan to address the issue with China his solution is to tax the consumer. No new tax is going to change the reality it's cheaper to build something in China, it would just simply raise the cost of building something in China to bring it line with the cost of producing something here. You see Trump isn't advocating fixing the reason why it's so expensive to build something here (governments interference in the free market) instead he's advocating using government to increase the cost of making goods in China so it's more fair. That's not conservatism hell that's even a bridge to far for most Democrats.

 

If you increase the cost of imports, those manufacturers in the country can undercut the foreign importers...  To me, that sounds like a good idea.  

Quote:The free market will never win against the slave market, you either force their costs up or join them at the bottom.

 

Agreed.  This is what I was discussing during the summer before the football season started.  A totally free market is not a good think for American middle class workers.  3rd world countries will always have a leg up in terms of labor costs, so of course business will leave hear and fly overseas, or down south.

 

I'm not a capitalist.  I'm an American.  I'd rather vote my self interest than that of some business leader that doesn't give a squat about me.  These types of messages resonate with workers, yet another reason Trump is doing well.  

Quote:Here's the problem, if you follow trumps plan to address the issue with China his solution is to tax the consumer. No new tax is going to change the reality it's cheaper to build something in China, it would just simply raise the cost of building something in China to bring it line with the cost of producing something here. You see Trump isn't advocating fixing the reason why it's so expensive to build something here (governments interference in the free market) instead he's advocating using government to increase the cost of making goods in China so it's more fair. That's not conservatism hell that's even a bridge to far for most Democrats.

Yes he is: lower taxes less regulation slicing the epa and repatriation of funds to offset doreign subsidies.


Hes simply pointing out that as long as they cheat us with currency manipulation and a tarriff wall its inpossible to reach equilibrium, especially paying our workers at a higher standard of living.

Quote:Agreed.  This is what I was discussing during the summer before the football season started.  A totally free market is not a good think for American middle class workers.  3rd world countries will always have a leg up in terms of labor costs, so of course business will leave hear and fly overseas, or down south.

 

I'm not a capitalist.  I'm an American.  I'd rather vote my self interest than that of some business leader that doesn't give a squat about me.  These types of messages resonate with workers, yet another reason Trump is doing well.  

 

The federal government DOES exist to protect American markets and interests, it's a Constitutional mandate in fact. We cannot, simply cannot, continue to compete with those who won't play by the same rules. We have to find a way to change the game and the only way to do that at the moment is to control the gateway to the American market.

Quote:The federal government DOES exist to protect American markets and interests, it's a Constitutional mandate in fact. We cannot, simply cannot, continue to compete with those who won't play by the same rules. We have to find a way to change the game and the only way to do that at the moment is to control the gateway to the American market.

Again I agree. I think the problem really began under Clinton with the passing of NAFTA. As you said, the federal government is granted the power to affect international trade. The problem is that the politicians have decided that the side that needs the protections are the businesses, not the workers. And it's been a problem every since.


One of many reasons why you'll never hear me say Bill Clinton was a good president. Heck, when it comes to the working class, I think it can be argued that he was one of the worst presidents for workers.

Quote:Said hundreds thousands of people the last 200 2000 plus years.  

 

Since the time of ancient Greece people have been saying it. 

Quote:If you increase the cost of imports, those manufacturers in the country can undercut the foreign importers...  To me, that sounds like a good idea.  

 

To me, that sounds like you are taxing the consumer to prop up manufacturers in the United States.   I'm not sold on that idea.  

 

Why should I care if a TV set is manufactured in the US or in China?   They do it a lot better in China.   We need to move our economy to something more advanced. 

If it was better cheaper etc. U would have a point. In this case the tv is cheaper because they stole the design and manipulated their currency.


You have to look at the whole chess board.

Quote:To me, that sounds like you are taxing the consumer to prop up manufacturers in the United States. I'm not sold on that idea.


Why should I care if a TV set is manufactured in the US or in China? They do it a lot better in China. We need to move our economy to something more advanced.

I mean, you wouldn't be wrong over characterizing it that way...


And while I agree that new industries should be propped up as well, I think that evening the playing field so that businesses can't exploit third world labor has many benefits.


To me, a tariff is one option that can be used to incentivize AND reward companies that manufacture in the usa.


Tv's sounds so mundane, but if you level the labor market to allow American manufactures to compete on the usa, imagine the possible advancement that could happen based on Americans finally trying to compete with Korean and Chinese manufacturers. That's true trans national competition that could drive incredible innovation.


In that way, I think the idea of getting rid of this free trade disaster is an important thing that needs to happen.

The real problem has to do with each and every one of us.  We have become a consumer based society rather than production based.  As an example, just take a look at vehicles.  There is not one single American Made vehicle in this country today (other than vintage artifacts).  Sure there are vehicles ASSEMBLED here, though not as many as there used to be.  Parts are made elsewhere from components produced elsewhere.  Really, we couldn't function without trade with other countries.

 

Now think about how higher tariffs would affect our economy.  That smart phone that you carry around would double in price.  The laptop, computer monitor, television that you use either at home or at work would cost more.  The appliances that you use in your home would be more expensive.  Cars, and the tools necessary to maintain and/or repair them would go up in price.

 

Companies can't produce those kinds of things here because of labor unions, the demand for higher wages and the "penalty" of their "carbon footprint".

 

One thing that Donald Trump pointed out in a recent debate defending his hiring of foreign workers caught my attention.  At his hotel in South Florida, he said that "people didn't want those jobs because they were seasonal".  Of course, they were lower paying jobs such as maids, food service, bar service, etc.  That might actually be true, but what happened to the high school student earning money to pay for college?  What about the single mother or a struggling family trying to make ends meet?  I'm sure they would fill the jobs.

 

Reality is the cost of hiring these people.  He would have had to pay worker's compensation insurance, taxes, etc.  It was cheaper for him to hire foreign workers rather than hire those Americans that he supposedly supports.