Community >> View Post
Post By

In Reply To

Subj: Re: Thought experiment...
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 at 07:32:46 pm EDT (Viewed 542 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Thought experiment...
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2008 at 01:43:32 am EDT (Viewed 623 times)

> > Well, they [American workers] could technically ask for lower wages (or not ask for higher wages), without the help from businesses or the government. That would increase their value, but not your requirement of increased productivity.
> The American worker needs higher (not lower) wages because the worker and the consumer are the same person and the American consumer is faced with escalating prices. The American worker's optimum strategy is one that will result in the highest possible overall wage including health and retirement benefits. My explorations thus far have been an attempt to identify that optimum strategy, and I believe I have done so: choose a career in a labor market that isn't global and seems least likely to become global in the future. Police officer and taxi driver are two good examples, as are doctor and lawyer.

Any worker needs a wage that can reflect their value. And the strategy for every worker is to get the most amount of money they can for their lifetime, not just the higher monthly salary. Think of it this was. Pretend your job is to put lug nuts on a car tire every 52 seconds, and you live in the southeast. Would you rather work at the Ford factory with a salary of $52K, or work at the Honda factory with at salary of $50K.

> Your suggestions to help with college tuition are good ones and I support them. Even so, not everyone has college aptitude, nor does everyone have college aspirations. We need strategies that will work for all workers. Therefore, if I'm a young person with good spatial reasoning and who likes to work with my hands, a job like auto mechanic might suit me well, and because the auto mechanic labor market is strictly local, this career choice is a smart one in America today. I encourage our government to invest in college tuition assistance, but I also encourage it to invest in trade school tuition assistance. Yet even if the latter doesn't occur, trade school is far briefer than college study and thus it ends up being much the cheaper option, so that even if the government doesn't help, many Americans can afford a trade school, and would serve themselves well by attending one and working hard at learning the skill being taught.

Certainly, and I don't think everyone should go to college, but many more people should go than are currently going. It seems like Innovation is the only thing that Americans can do better than any other country, and education is the key to innovation.

And some people should simply go to something like technical/vocational school, where they can become an electrician. This takes more pressure off the manufacturing industry, drives wages up for those workers (less supply, more demand), and just generally provides higher incomes for all.

> > 3) Reinvestment in American business. Update the factories, technology, and processes at American factories. As I mentioned earlier, the US steel industry is badly outdated. So are oil refineries. Everyone knows they need to be updated, but no one actually wants to spend the billions to do this. Things will have to change to encourage this, like reducing the corporate tax rates and personal income taxes, and even reducing capital gains taxes. Vote McCain! \:\)

> I actually support reducing (or even eliminating) corporate taxes and capital gains taxes. But I would raise personal income taxes on individual human beings who make more than $250,000 per year, raise taxes even more on individuals who make more than $500,000 per year, and continue increasing the tax percentages for individual human beings as their annual incomes ascend stratospherically. Somebody has to pay more taxes. Without tax money we can't do the excellent things you've suggested above.

I disagree with that thought as well. I'm in favor of lowering all income taxes. When you increase taxes on the rich, think of where that money would have went if they still had it.

Why would you want to reduce corporate taxes and capital gains taxes? To free up more money for corporations to invest in their businesses, and various other reasons. The same can be said for the rich. The common thought is "Oh boo hoo for the rich, now they won't be able to buy another car". Well someone has to make that car, and it means one less car sold.

Anytime you have a slowing/bad economy, you want to reduce as many taxes as you can. Think of the economy as a game, the more players involved, the better the game. Higher taxes reduce the number of players.

> > 4) Reduce wages. Get rid of, or drastically lower the minimum wage. Get rid of the vast power of labor unions. In the same way, get rid of the alot of the dumb rules that labor unions make companies use. Non safety rules of course.

> The whole aim and purpose of the game of work is to make the highest wage humanly possible while also obtaining the highest health and retirement benefits. Accepting lower wages is defeat. The American worker needs strategies that lead to victory.

Losing the job is an instant defeat. Making money isn't a short term thing, it's a game that last for your whole life. See my explanation above.

> The one problem with your progressive suggestions such as improving education, is the fact that other countries can copy whatever we do, and even improve on what we do. Anything at all that our government does, or that enlightened business owners in this country decide to do, other governments and other communities of enlightened business owners can mimic and even outbid. Once this happens, and it certainly will happen in China and India, the competition devolves once again into a contest around who can subsist on the lowest wage, and the third world countries will win that contest as they always do and always will until they cease being third world countries and join the first world. Thus even if your very good suggestions are followed, the American worker's best strategy remains an abandonment of global labor markets and an exclusive focus on labor markets that are local, which means, primarily, service jobs.

As a way of thinking, anything idea we can come up with, others can copy. Any idea that others can come up with, we can copy. So they cancel each other out, and shouldn't be considered.

> > The problem is, as EcMan noted, service jobs are also being shipped overseas. We all have experiences with foreign customer service employees, but other jobs are getting shipped as well.

> Those service jobs aren't local, this is true, and therefore those service jobs need to be excluded from any sound strategy. There are plenty of jobs that need to be performed in proximity to the customer. Auto mechanic is a good example, as is barber. Jobs of this sort cannot be shipped overseas. The strategist needs to understand the true priority, which is to select job types that require proximity to the customer, as these are the job types that by their nature can only be competed locally.

You haven't thought it out. To put it simply, the amount of money you import has to be near equal to the amount of money you export. Otherwise, your economy is losing money (spending more than making), while someone else is gaining money (making more than spending).

So if Americans are going to export a job (reading X-rays in India), then they are going to have to import some other job. You can't send money out, without receiving money in.

Posted with Mozilla Firefox 3.0.3 on Windows XP
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software