I want inflation. I want debt. I want spending. It's the only way to get us booming!

The American worker is an uneducated, fat slob who doesn't want to put in the 80-100 hour weeks necessary to truly achieve anything in America. The American worker is a fat lazy goon who refuses to even show up on time for work anymore or do anything productive. The American worker is a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing disgrace to this nation!

I work for Indians and THEY have a work ethic. They'll put in 7 day work weeks without blinking an eye like Americans USED TO DO. They wonder why we Americans are so lazy and I'm sick of defending us. Compared to the rest of the world we are fat lazy slobs.

 

LOL. Keep digging yourself a hole. I want your side to insult the American worker openly. Yell it from the highest mountain tops globalists. Just make sure to get all the democrats and republicans running in 2012 to do the same.

There is one thing I can thank globalists for. Both sides of the American electorate have needed a common internal enemy to unite behind destroying. A philosophy for those in charge to stand behind when they come out the shadows. It has been a long road, but to think I might be part of the generation to get America back sends goose bumps down my skin.

 

In a recent survey, the #1 problem employers had when hiring new employees was WORK ETHIC and UNRELIABILITY.

When Americans are willing to put in the same amount of hours of hard, back breaking labor as a Chinaman or Mexican or an Indian, then they can demand a change. As far as I'm concerned 40 hour work weeks are for weak vaginas. Losers and pikers worry about vacations.

Ambitious men don't know such limitations.

The mark of a good man is he never asks anyone else to do what he wouldn't, or hasn't already done, himself.

I'm not asking the American Worker to put in anything more than I haven't done myself at one time or another in my life.

 

By all means, please explain how an employer can know if a worker has ethic or is reliable when they haven't even seen him work. You do know that a previous employer can only say "no comment" when asked about a past employee they didn't like, or be sued for slander? I want to see this survey.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/02/AR2010040201452.html

Get it now? The American worker is now the millenial and I wouldn't hire a millenial to clean my toilets reliably. Except for a few cases here and there the entire generation is a useless waste. Generation X is the last "good" generation of America. All that follows is garbage.

 

1200 people? Out of 300 million? Really? And that didn't back up anything you said before.

Not to mention, how does one develop work ethic without practice from JOBS?

Not to mention, how does one work 100 hours a week when they are lucky to find one job that will only give them 20-30 hours?

Not to mention, which generation raised those kids? Are you telling me a bunch of grown adults, with decades of work experience from when America HAD JOBS defined themselves with better work ethic than those who are 18-29? Surprise (*)(*)(*)(*)ing surprise.

 

And consumption based economies fail.. there has to be balance. There is only 2 ways to get businesses to come back to the US. Tax breaks or lower Corporate taxes rates.

Rather see the later then the former.. like closing all loopholes but lowering the rate to say 25 or 30% instead of the 35% which just makes us barely better then Japan.

 

Tell me, where do you suggest they get the money for another stimulus?

I'm not paying for it. If my taxes go up, I'll cut more out of my budget which means I'll spend less so you trying to get me to spend won't work.

What will happen is the US dollar will become even more devalued which means prices of everything from gasoline to milk will increase.

How does that help anyone?

And last, how many stimulus bills would you pass if you could before you realized that they won't solve the problem?

We've already had at least three big printing sessions passed and those are just the ones you were told about from the sell out mainstream media.

Please just go sit in the corner and stay there. Forever.

 

America has jobs, it's just that the high paying ones are reserved for those with education and skill set. The rest are on their own, (*)(*)(*)(*) em.

 

Tax breaks? From what? They get tax breaks to go over seas my man. That is the extent of the treason.

 

Hahaha.

Try to actually say something, get shut down. Go back to rhetoric.

Try to be wise, get shutdown. Go back to rhetoric.

Try to pretend you have facts to back up your assertions, get shutdown. Go back to rhetoric.

If you are not a politician, SM, you're in the wrong field.

 

And this shows you as an Idiot. Japan is an aging economy that requires 77 yen to get 1 USD. It still hasn't recovered from the boom of the 1980s and does nothing but spend money (stimulus) to keep it's economy going. It only averages 1-2% GDP and will contract .7% this year alone. The only reason it gets it's 1-2% GDP is because it's a top exporter because their products are so cheap.

If you are looking for the USD to become a carry trade by all means lets do it. The rich will still get richer and the poor will become poorer.

 

But that is certainly how I read your original comment.

Thanks for clarifying.

That's not completely unreasonable.

That isn't what the study proved. The study proved other aspects of the stimulus were less effective than food stamps. That means a couple of things, that the other aspects of the stimulus were handled poorly and that FOOD spending was better than the less organized methods. That isn't giving away free money to buy anything, it has one function, to buy food. Also we had a food stamp system in place. There was no "magic job creation" system in place, which is why that aspect was more vague and less successful.

 

I never said I was in favor of tax breaks. In fact I despise them and look I am an Austrian.

My point which you fail to grasp is TO BRING JOBS BACK. Companies leave money overseas due to cheaper tax rates overseas. If GE pays 15% in taxes in one country and the US is gonna tax them at 35% of course they are gonna leave their money overseas. It's a fact of life as the whole point of it is to lower your tax liabilities. Which by the way.. every American on this forum does it.

Those are the only 2 solutions in that equation. Liberals want tax breaks gone but not lower corporate tax rates which will lead to more jobs going overseas as it's in the companies interest to make money not lose it. It's why they are a company and not the Government.

No company has a duty to a country, certainly not in Global Markets. If you feel this way move to China, then when you cause a serious "malfunction" at work and you disappear ask yourself.. where are my rights?

 

Um.....I don't know where to start.
It is not up to a company to be loyal, it is up to a government. That is where treason comes into play. Without economic sovereignty, what is the point of any other? Giving tax breaks to companies to go over seas is beyond a simple bad choice and proof positive of treason.

Also, saying it's good for companies to go to China and then fallowing it with "be glad you're not a Chinese worker" blows my mind.

Plenty of trade went on without all the free trade agreements. To pretend there is only a "global market" with free trade is disingenuous at best.

I realize pretending options are givens is part of globalist rhetoric, I just have argued them all so many times I get really short when not presented a new reason for it to debate.

 

Riddle me this Batman.. what do you think would happen if the US Government forced all 500 members of the S&P to be loyal to the US tomorrow? I can tell you for a fact that they will seek to move their Headquarters elsewhere in the world.

Economic Sovereignty comes in many forms. The US controls the major factors in this. What it does not control trade, only one organization controls that and that's the WTO which is very corrupt. You'll get no argument from me on that. I hate the WTO but we'll get to that later.

I never said that was a good idea. I'll only say it one more time.. learn to understand it or go back to 1st grade and learn to read.

The only way to bring jobs back to the US is to A) either give tax breaks to Companies to bring jobs back or B) Close tax breaks and lower overall corporate tax rates.

It's that simple.

No, your ignorance assumes I said it was good for companies to go to China as they have to give a bit of control of their company to the Chinese. You know give up their economic sovereignty just to do business in China.. Hence the over your head jab at your theory as you know (*)(*)(*)(*) all about economic sovereignty and what other countries do.. let alone china which explains why you are so lost in that jab.

But then again I expect this from the peanut gallery of ill-informed blog readers of Workers Unite.

Trade did take place but Tariffs were put in place or you have the other position that many countries (European) took which was to colonize areas and export. Like for example North America was used by the British to export furs, lumber and tobacco to the rest of Europe and other countries had to pay huge fees to the British for these products.

Today we don't have this which makes the little things like having a German beer in the US cheaper then it was 50 years ago making it affordable for the blue collar worker.

I have no problem with globalism because sooner or later we are gonna enter the tech phase (more then now) in which majority of people will not work on assembly lines or whatever as Robots will be doing it.

What I have a problem with is a person bashing something that has been used and championed by the neo-liberal movement since 1949. GATT is the father of WTO.

WTO is corrupt and should kick out all countries which refuse to meet labor and wage standards, but will it? Certainly not.

 

Wow. You got nasty fast. Riddle me this, what is the difference between "tax breaks" for coming back and protectionism? With tariffs in place, they don't have to pay them IF THEY COME BACK. Hello?

I said "treason", you said, "companies aren't required to be loyal", so I explained. And you question my reading comprehension?

I don't even know wth "workers united" is.

The Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution gives the congress total control of trade with foreign nations, there is no higher power. You claim you don't like the WTO, but once again give the "option" of us being obligated to their decrees as a "given".

You're not very good. Leave the argument to the others.

Oh, and no one cares if they moved their headquarters. Their money isn't being invested in American infrastructure, their jobs have been outsourced, let them go someplace else and take the corruption they bring with them. They would get killed any place but Europe, and Europe deserves them. I would laugh.

 

The stimulus stimulated the economy in the short term...as it is designed to do. The only question of the spending might be to assess the efficiency of the spending in terms of the goals of the stimulus.

What did not happen is People, industry and government, in parallel with the stimulus, did nothing to create a better environment that encourages more production and jobs. Seems that most everyone felt that things would correct themselves if given a little time and nothing else...well they were wrong.

If there are truly 20-25 million Americans unemployed, or under-employed, or forced out of the job market, this is a (*)(*)(*)(*)load of jobs to create! You talk about the last stimulus creating 2 million jobs, and it's easy to see if we compare 2 million to 20-25 million, why things don't seem better. So even if we do another stimulus of <$1 trillion, if it only creates 2 million jobs, we still have a (*)(*)(*)(*)load of people out of work.

Politics aside for a moment, which in itself is impossible for most people, this unemployment issue will IMO linger at least for a decade! If this can be true, this means the economy remains very fragile, and this is not the time to cut spending or increase taxes...

 

The point of a stimulus is not to fill every single lost job. It's not even to replace any jobs. It's to provide temporary work while the economy fixes itself. 7% unemployment is bad but it's better than 9%.

Really it comes down to what you'd rather pay for. Would you rather pay for food for people without jobs? Or would you rather hire people who want to work and build something useful. The smart thing would be to do both. But personally I'd rather put people to work if I had to choose.

 

And, what kind of work do you do, Tao? What business are you in? Are you responsible for a family?

 

Arbitrarily forcing higher pay on lower wages is stupid and VERY short term!

If current <$12/hour workers suddenly feel like they have hit the jackpot by having goverment mandate $20/hour minimum, which is generally a 100% increase in wages, the very next day all other workers in the pay scales above them will also demand their 100% increases in pay. At the end of that day, the lower-wage earners will still be lower-wage earners and inflation will be out of control, with no one advancing an inch! And BTW...this will place the final nail in the coffin in terms of competing in the global market place...

 

The stimulus placed money into all people's hands as well as created some jobs via stimulus funded projects. The stimulus is not really meant to create jobs, although this is a byproduct, as much as it is to force some cash into the economy with the presumption that it will be spent.

I suggest in today's economy, that if kicked hard enough, the economy won't simply 'fix itself'. Maybe it can over 10-20 years, but if we expect things to be back to pre-recession levels in 1-2 years, I think we will be disappointed. Having 20-25 million people unemployed, with millions more deep in debt, and millions more living pay check to pay check, with no real signs that this will change soon, it is unlikely IMO that the economy will fix itself.

This is a very complex issue...

 

There are real consequences to a lack of intelligent money flow. There are also real consequences to a lack of intelligent deficit and debt reduction policy. There are real consequences to a lack of intelligent and innovative job creation policy. There are real consequences to redundant regulations imposed on small businesses by government as well as the lack of intelligent regulations, and no regulations imposed on large financial institutions. There are real consequences to having rampant free trade. There are real consequences to having dismal revenue levels. There are real consequences of outsourcing of private sector jobs.

We must ensure that we never get face all the consequences of these economic factors.

 

And if what you are saying is correct (And I think it may be), then the reverse must also be true. If we eliminate the minimum wage, Employers will lower the pay rates for ALL of their employees to the minimum they can, In order to make the most profit. After all, If the employees refuse to have their pay lowered, The employer could just FIRE them.

This is why I am ok with the minimum wage and feel the minimum wage should be raised if needed to cover all basic living expenses on a 40 hour workweek (Food,Clothes,Housing,Basic Healthcare). Why do you want us to race to the bottom? Do you want us to live like a 3rd world country? Do you think employees won't fight a decision like that?

Thank you for your time.

 

i completely understand you point of view... and thanks for having a calm discussion about this one.....

The theory is.... that if you can pump enough money into the system that you can "fill the hole" until private industry can gather enough steam to begin to move forward again. This works... and works well... when industry can move forward fast enough to outpace debt. As in GDP growth is increasing faster than the debt is.

The govt goes 1 trillion or so in the hole, pumping money into all of these "stimulus" efforts. Finally business begins to take off... and begins to do SO well... that they bring in 5 trillion of the next few years... and the "debt hole" that the govt created... is now effectively filled. GDP growth has outpaced debt in this case.

Normally... this might actually work. However, I believe that this time the debt is SO huge.... that there is no way that the US can "grow it's way" out of it.... and fill the "debt hole". So in effect... in their efforts to stimulate the economy... it is just digging a bigger hole.... which industry STILL cannot fill.

There comes a point where the amount of debt that you have cannot be overcome by your ability to gain more revenue any more.... And I think we are there at this point....