The new homeless- It could be YOU. this is sad and scary....

[rufus]

We did it to ourselves. Unions priced US products out of the market with their demands. When corporations cannot make a profit, they sell the business to someone that can make it work. Trouble is that is usually someone in China.

The product still has an American name, but it is made in China by a company owned by Chinese. Even greeting cards are made in China now.

It is only a matter of time until all auto manufacturing is in China or India.

What can we do to fix this situation? I don't know, but I do not buy anything made in China. It is better to buy something used in the second hand store than to buy cheap Chinese made stuff.

Rufus

 

[cjeanean]

I understand that guy's concern about the homeless people that really are homeless due to drug problems or mental illness, but these are everyday people!!!! I can't believe people are really that heartless. Thank God that we still have what we have....Albeit it's not much, but it's a LOT more than a tent! Something needs to happen in this country, and in the meantime GOD BLESS those who set that makeshift community up!

 

[fowler_chick]

back in the depression era the goverment started ccc (can't remember what it stands for) but it did put people back to work...even though the wages where hardley enuogh to live on, you had a job and a place to stay, they fixed roads, dam's (hoover) and made man made lakes. I hope i don't come off sounding raciest but yes illigel imergration is a big problem in the u.s but what can we do about that?, i'm a canadian living in the states and have paid my way in to this country, my husband works for the sheriff's dept (he's american) and deals with the imergration all the time. and yes i do not work (stay at home mom), we do not live be on our means and are 3 months ahead on our morgage ($214.47 on a 10 acre farm with 9 1/2 years left on a 15 year note) i do drive a brand new truck that is paid for but my husband and i share it instead of having 2 trucks. we are sort of like the dugger family minus 15 kids!!...yes it can be down.....but keeping up with the jones have brought america to it's knee's ......maybe going through another dirty 30's type depression will open america's eyes. although to boost the enconmy after ww2 the states deported millions of illigels to make way for the returning GI's and there job.....shouldn't we be doing that again?.....ok now that i'm on a rant!!! how about your heath care!!! shouldn't health care be free at this time? to any one?....in the last 2 years i have been in and out of hospitals because of my youngest son, great system but how can a family aford some thing like that if your not insured?.. nothing against smokers but how about adding a tax (like a doller) to a pack of smokes and taking that tax to pay for free health care!!! with the amount of smokers that should work, shouldn't it?.......ok my rant is done...lol

 

[Rosalind]

Quote:
I don't think the unions priced products out of the market--Fords and GMs have been cheaper than Japanese and German imports for a long, long time now, yet they still can't sell cars. Only import I can think of that is street-legal and cheaper than USAian cars is a Yugo, and those didn't sell so well either. It's a quality thing, Ford & Mopar did not keep up with engineering improvements and style the way the Japanese companies did.

There are lots of union brands available that are available at the local mall and selling well even in these hard times: Brooks Brothers, Carhartt, Ellen Tracy, etc. And that's just clothing; Calgon, Clorox, Colgate, Dow, DuPont, Eastman (makes Minwax and paints), Farberware, all have products sold at Wal-Mart that you've probably bought. The reason executives took things overseas is because their profit margin is larger--even after the companies moved overseas, the prices of goods stayed the same or increased. They did not pass their savings on to consumers as promised, they took the money and pocketed it. I don't know why anyone was surprised by this, it is part of their corporate charter to make the largest profit margin for their shareholders that they can. If you can price a product at $3 and not lose sales, even though your overhead costs have gone from $1/bottle to $0.25/bottle, then as a CEO it is your job to reduce your overhead costs--regardless of the cost to communities, country or overall economy, even though they were already making profits aplenty. That's just how microeconomics works, I'm afraid. There is no such thing as "enough" once you've got shareholders.

 

[maf2008]

And when all of the stores/business are bankrupt, they will pass off the $$$ losses to insurance companies.... that then will begin to topple..... and so on. when will this end if ever?

Quote:
I don't think the unions priced products out of the market--Fords and GMs have been cheaper than Japanese and German imports for a long, long time now, yet they still can't sell cars. Only import I can think of that is street-legal and cheaper than USAian cars is a Yugo, and those didn't sell so well either. It's a quality thing, Ford & Mopar did not keep up with engineering improvements and style the way the Japanese companies did.

There are lots of union brands available that are available at the local mall and selling well even in these hard times: Brooks Brothers, Carhartt, Ellen Tracy, etc. And that's just clothing; Calgon, Clorox, Colgate, Dow, DuPont, Eastman (makes Minwax and paints), Farberware, all have products sold at Wal-Mart that you've probably bought. The reason executives took things overseas is because their profit margin is larger--even after the companies moved overseas, the prices of goods stayed the same or increased. They did not pass their savings on to consumers as promised, they took the money and pocketed it. I don't know why anyone was surprised by this, it is part of their corporate charter to make the largest profit margin for their shareholders that they can. If you can price a product at $3 and not lose sales, even though your overhead costs have gone from $1/bottle to $0.25/bottle, then as a CEO it is your job to reduce your overhead costs--regardless of the cost to communities, country or overall economy, even though they were already making profits aplenty. That's just how microeconomics works, I'm afraid. There is no such thing as "enough" once you've got shareholders.

 

[beak]

Quote:
I don't think the unions priced products out of the market--Fords and GMs have been cheaper than Japanese and German imports for a long, long time now, yet they still can't sell cars. Only import I can think of that is street-legal and cheaper than USAian cars is a Yugo, and those didn't sell so well either. It's a quality thing, Ford & Mopar did not keep up with engineering improvements and style the way the Japanese companies did.

There are lots of union brands available that are available at the local mall and selling well even in these hard times: Brooks Brothers, Carhartt, Ellen Tracy, etc. And that's just clothing; Calgon, Clorox, Colgate, Dow, DuPont, Eastman (makes Minwax and paints), Farberware, all have products sold at Wal-Mart that you've probably bought. The reason executives took things overseas is because their profit margin is larger--even after the companies moved overseas, the prices of goods stayed the same or increased. They did not pass their savings on to consumers as promised, they took the money and pocketed it. I don't know why anyone was surprised by this, it is part of their corporate charter to make the largest profit margin for their shareholders that they can. If you can price a product at $3 and not lose sales, even though your overhead costs have gone from $1/bottle to $0.25/bottle, then as a CEO it is your job to reduce your overhead costs--regardless of the cost to communities, country or overall economy, even though they were already making profits aplenty. That's just how microeconomics works, I'm afraid. There is no such thing as "enough" once you've got shareholders.

You have it exactly right. It's not that they can't afford to operate in America. It's just that in America the CEO's can only make 2 to 3 million a year. If they operate in China they can make 100 million a year. It's all about greed. I could have cared less about Clinton and Monica but Clinton and Nafta was the beginning of the end for the US as we know it. Now we are so in debt to China that there is no choice but to honor our trade agreements. That's how we get China to lend us all the money that they have in the past and that we plan to borrow from them in the future. So there won't be any jobs coming back anytime soon.

 

[hearthnsoul]

Quote:
Um... Lemme think a minute...

McDonalds & other fast food crud
#2 field corn and its associated pasteurized processed food products
Weapons (not kidding, arms is one of our big moneymakers--we are something like the #1 supplier of arms to overseas militias and paramilitary folks, ex-USSR is #2)
Micro$oft software. Well, maybe that should come under "weapons"

Entertainment--we're still the super movie makers
College degrees, ours are still considered some of the best although others are catching up
Religion; lots of USAian missionaries

Hunh. Can't really think of anything much else that isn't at least partly made overseas, or rivaled by overseas companies. There are some things still made in the US due to the curiosities of intellectual property laws--in other countries, IP laws are not as respected or enforced, so some companies (entertainment, businesses that rely on heavy research investments) continue to make their stuff here because they know that they would not be as able to protect their patents overseas.

I guess that our government, if it is business minded would want to have other countries fat, coach potatos who in their spare time rage war so we could benefit...scary