I still pay almost 100 dollars for my childrens sneakers now. Are you saying that if we bring that shoe factory back I'll be paying more? I think the American consumer has not benefitted from the massive outsourcing of jobs to China or anywhere else. I think the corporations and shareholders are pocketing the profits and not passing on the savings to the consumer.
If there is a case to back-up your claim please post it for I cannot find it.
NACA has a real system and does not help people buy a house or try to get a mortgage restructure if they will not be able to afford it anyway which means that there has to be a steady income. If that means job, job, job or another form of steady income then that is the case, but we also realize that people can lose that job, job, job due to jobs being moved over seas, seas, seas or other layoff types. Due to the state of the economy everyone is suffering, but that does not mean that anyone should allow it. The problem comes that all of these people are losing their jobs or having to take pay cuts which means the loan that they originally signed up for is no longer affordable. Does that mean that people should be homeless or have to think about whether or not to feed themselves to keep the house. No!!! NACA is the best program in America and should be the national standard for mortgages.
While the EPI/AAM report provides very important data for rational economic policy making, it suffers, it seems to me, from a lack of analysis of the ‘Cost of Goods Sold’ and ‘Sales Price’ variables.
As I understand it, low cost China Labor and Capital keep American sales prices lower and units sold higher, than if the same products were manufactured in the US. If this is the case, then shoes for example manufactured in China cost less than if they were manufactured in the US and the number of shoes sold higher. If exchange rate changes what will happen to the sales price of shoes and in turn the quantity of shoes sold?
It would be interesting to see a probability correlation model, on a state-by-state basis, for the effects on both family income and expenses (75th percentile income families) per percent variation in China US exchange rate. Such a model would show the probable effects on family income and expense for every percent change in exchange rate.
It seems to me some such modeling of effects on family income and expenses would be a more informed decision making model. It seems to me that for 75 percentile income families, we have to be careful what we wish for. This China thing is a two edged sword and much of the excellent analysis like the EPI’s is only looking at one edge of the sword. If we bring home a shoe factory etc. and cost of shoes etc. results in ON AVERAGE decrease standard of family living…well…?
One wonders if the whole healthcare bill thing was more of a diversionary circus. That, in reality, legislation on regulating Wall Street was the much larger bill. We've just walked away from the world's largest economic car accident bruised and bloodied and angry.
The media was going to focus on something like bees to honey, and the paymasters of Congress knew this. They figured to get us to look at the right hand and to ignore what's happening with the left one. What better way than to get us thinking about that American nightmare we call healthcare. That isn't to say that healthcare doesn't need reform, but which do you think the power structure wanted to make sure had the least meddling? While the pirate's friends put on one hell of a shindig away from the docks, they quietly sailed away with the loot in the near darkness of night.
Nothing of true reform was established. Where is the new leverage mandates for things like oil trading? Where are the Chinese walls for places like Citi and BOA? Where was the establishment of a proper exchange for swap contracts?
It took them about 20 minutes to get Dodd's bill moving, that's pretty damn fast for such a supposed piece of information. And that resolution mechanisms being talked about seem more like another weapon for Goldman to easily dispense with another potential rival. I'm glad that there won't be more massive bailouts for banks, but at the same time, the increased costs they will have to indure to insure those bonds will be passed on to the consumer.
Once more, think about it, 20 minutes for a 1366 paged bill. Lots of proposals, new departments and such, but will they have teeth?
It was telling how upon the passage and signage of this so-called healthcare reform package, that insurance and hospital stocks didn't crater into the ground. Indeed, these folks have seen their stocks' value skyrocket over the past year.
I think there are several causes for the extended recession. And it's not the technocratic excuse offered by many.
One is that corporations insist on continued double-digit increase in profit. If one doesn't have a 20% increase in profit, it's a horroshow.
What that means is that corporations are always looking to reduce costs by reducing jobs and/or pay. It also means that prices are continually pushed upward. This creates an increasing gap between folks being gainfully employed and a steady increase in family costs due to increased prices. How does this affect the recession? Well, it becomes harder and harder to pay a mortgage that was already too high for many people.
Obviously, loosened regulations on the banking industry is also an important reason we're in a mess. Congress still hasn't done what's needed - regulate the banking industry.
And giving mortgages to people who really couldn't afford them - that was a load of baloney too.
The current war, which is not even being realized I guess (how can anyone not realize this, just look into your Wallet!), is on the "peasants" vs. the elites or "executive class".
And then won. They won big time and the way financial reform is going, they are going to win again.
I agree with you that war is economic generally and a huge reason why I started this site. At the time it was all Iraq on the blogs and understandably so, but I didn't see it that way, I saw Halliburton, defense stocks rising, major elites buying politicians and just barely hiding the firms they really represent....
But in the more traditional terms of war, I'm pretty certain the war on the middle class can be quantified as such and they won.
this actually would make a great post, to show how economics either is behind war, or war profiteering or is the start, or cause of war. I don't think most people put the two together.
I'm not sure who this guy is or what exactly is his justification in hard data.
I'll have to go dig around more on the analysis on currency manipulation, I'm working on it (if it was stopped). But I have huge questions on the well know MNC manipulation of using China as their jobs base to import and resale products with a "U.S. label" on it.
I'm sure this would cause some to bring back their operations to the U.S. because the cheap labor/cheap currency was no longer available.
On Financial reform though it's looking so bad we are not going to see anything on the great gambling casino/rigged game ....so Economic Armageddon redux or ? If Goldman Sachs has wiped out most of the competition and it's just a few players mostly trading these derivatives at the table..
is this like no limit poker now and what is really the money pool made of?
and why did U.S. MNCs move operations offshore, especially to China? A currency peg which made start up capital super cheap (the price to build a plant, set up infrastructure, etc.), cheap labor, the ability to manipulate currency exchanges by MNCs plus park profits offshore....
and the biggest reasons...China demanded partnership with many of these companies and these idiots believed in the 1.3 billion consumer market of China. The mythical consumer market and the strong desire to be a player in it did cause many a U.S. corporation to trade U.S. jobs to do it. So, they sold away the farm, signed onto China's demands in order to gain access to the mythical 1.3 billion consumer market as well as for their own global arbitrage (labor arbitrage) agendas.
So, I'll agree with you on MNCs and I believe they along with their financial "free flow of capital" financial sector partners helped push for these bad trade deals...
the reality is China has a host of policies to basically capture entire occupational and business sectors of the U.S. economy....therefore...
while I believe currency manipulation is just one policy change out of many that needs to happen...
well, it seems on this one we have a bi-partisan bandwagon jumping on in Congress. In addition it seems we have a host of other nations none too thrilled about losing their jobs to China and currency manipulation either...
all of which spells....we might, if we push hard enough, might have a prayer's chance of getting a bill passed on this issue...
The video got me thinking that the next war will be economic.
No offense, dude, but all wars are economic in nature (possibly with one historic exception: that soccer war in South America a year or so ago, but probably even that was economic in origin).
Bombing factories, defoliation, sanctions, frozen assets -- and on and on, in the end and after historical study, prove to be economic in nature.
That's why so much of it is always predictable. If you happen to do an intensive study of history you'll find the USA funding both sides (via those corporations and banksters), at least dating back to World War One (again, probably earlier, but historical economic data is kinda sketchy then).
In case you've missed it, again the USA is funding both sides (all sides??) in Afghanistan. That's the way to extract the most predatory capitalistic profit from war, after all.
I don't fret about China, I pay close attention to all those anti-citizen, anti-American worker cretins in this country.
and done via proxy. We are attached at hip with China - China, unless it can be create domestic demand high enough, will only be hurting itself if it chose economic warfare.
They are working to corner the market on natural resources & energy resources
I still pay almost 100 dollars for my childrens sneakers now. Are you saying that if we bring that shoe factory back I'll be paying more? I think the American consumer has not benefitted from the massive outsourcing of jobs to China or anywhere else. I think the corporations and shareholders are pocketing the profits and not passing on the savings to the consumer.
If there is a case to back-up your claim please post it for I cannot find it.
IMF and World Bank: relentlessly making wage slaves of the Earth's population
NACA has a real system and does not help people buy a house or try to get a mortgage restructure if they will not be able to afford it anyway which means that there has to be a steady income. If that means job, job, job or another form of steady income then that is the case, but we also realize that people can lose that job, job, job due to jobs being moved over seas, seas, seas or other layoff types. Due to the state of the economy everyone is suffering, but that does not mean that anyone should allow it. The problem comes that all of these people are losing their jobs or having to take pay cuts which means the loan that they originally signed up for is no longer affordable. Does that mean that people should be homeless or have to think about whether or not to feed themselves to keep the house. No!!! NACA is the best program in America and should be the national standard for mortgages.
While the EPI/AAM report provides very important data for rational economic policy making, it suffers, it seems to me, from a lack of analysis of the ‘Cost of Goods Sold’ and ‘Sales Price’ variables.
As I understand it, low cost China Labor and Capital keep American sales prices lower and units sold higher, than if the same products were manufactured in the US. If this is the case, then shoes for example manufactured in China cost less than if they were manufactured in the US and the number of shoes sold higher. If exchange rate changes what will happen to the sales price of shoes and in turn the quantity of shoes sold?
It would be interesting to see a probability correlation model, on a state-by-state basis, for the effects on both family income and expenses (75th percentile income families) per percent variation in China US exchange rate. Such a model would show the probable effects on family income and expense for every percent change in exchange rate.
It seems to me some such modeling of effects on family income and expenses would be a more informed decision making model. It seems to me that for 75 percentile income families, we have to be careful what we wish for. This China thing is a two edged sword and much of the excellent analysis like the EPI’s is only looking at one edge of the sword. If we bring home a shoe factory etc. and cost of shoes etc. results in ON AVERAGE decrease standard of family living…well…?
Welcome to Socialism, America.
I went hunting for this piece, the Greenwald and it's a "403" error, also can't find it cached even.
Most interesting, did he get censored for speaking too much truth?
They are projecting more money due to the offshore outsourcing of health care sector jobs from the U.S. to be bigger than Y2K.
I believe the health care sector stocks immediately went up, but I didn't catch the percentage (after passage).
One wonders if the whole healthcare bill thing was more of a diversionary circus. That, in reality, legislation on regulating Wall Street was the much larger bill. We've just walked away from the world's largest economic car accident bruised and bloodied and angry.
The media was going to focus on something like bees to honey, and the paymasters of Congress knew this. They figured to get us to look at the right hand and to ignore what's happening with the left one. What better way than to get us thinking about that American nightmare we call healthcare. That isn't to say that healthcare doesn't need reform, but which do you think the power structure wanted to make sure had the least meddling? While the pirate's friends put on one hell of a shindig away from the docks, they quietly sailed away with the loot in the near darkness of night.
Nothing of true reform was established. Where is the new leverage mandates for things like oil trading? Where are the Chinese walls for places like Citi and BOA? Where was the establishment of a proper exchange for swap contracts?
It took them about 20 minutes to get Dodd's bill moving, that's pretty damn fast for such a supposed piece of information. And that resolution mechanisms being talked about seem more like another weapon for Goldman to easily dispense with another potential rival. I'm glad that there won't be more massive bailouts for banks, but at the same time, the increased costs they will have to indure to insure those bonds will be passed on to the consumer.
Once more, think about it, 20 minutes for a 1366 paged bill. Lots of proposals, new departments and such, but will they have teeth?
It was telling how upon the passage and signage of this so-called healthcare reform package, that insurance and hospital stocks didn't crater into the ground. Indeed, these folks have seen their stocks' value skyrocket over the past year.
I think there are several causes for the extended recession. And it's not the technocratic excuse offered by many.
One is that corporations insist on continued double-digit increase in profit. If one doesn't have a 20% increase in profit, it's a horroshow.
What that means is that corporations are always looking to reduce costs by reducing jobs and/or pay. It also means that prices are continually pushed upward. This creates an increasing gap between folks being gainfully employed and a steady increase in family costs due to increased prices. How does this affect the recession? Well, it becomes harder and harder to pay a mortgage that was already too high for many people.
Obviously, loosened regulations on the banking industry is also an important reason we're in a mess. Congress still hasn't done what's needed - regulate the banking industry.
And giving mortgages to people who really couldn't afford them - that was a load of baloney too.
The current war, which is not even being realized I guess (how can anyone not realize this, just look into your Wallet!), is on the "peasants" vs. the elites or "executive class".
And then won. They won big time and the way financial reform is going, they are going to win again.
I agree with you that war is economic generally and a huge reason why I started this site. At the time it was all Iraq on the blogs and understandably so, but I didn't see it that way, I saw Halliburton, defense stocks rising, major elites buying politicians and just barely hiding the firms they really represent....
But in the more traditional terms of war, I'm pretty certain the war on the middle class can be quantified as such and they won.
this actually would make a great post, to show how economics either is behind war, or war profiteering or is the start, or cause of war. I don't think most people put the two together.
They are really trying to pass this bill.
I'll be writing more up about consequences, projected gains for U.S. and so on in a later post (this one I've literally just highlighted their work)
but for now, if you want to see China's trade manipulation confronted you can easily fire off some emails to your reps via this link.
I'm not sure who this guy is or what exactly is his justification in hard data.
I'll have to go dig around more on the analysis on currency manipulation, I'm working on it (if it was stopped). But I have huge questions on the well know MNC manipulation of using China as their jobs base to import and resale products with a "U.S. label" on it.
I'm sure this would cause some to bring back their operations to the U.S. because the cheap labor/cheap currency was no longer available.
On Financial reform though it's looking so bad we are not going to see anything on the great gambling casino/rigged game ....so Economic Armageddon redux or ? If Goldman Sachs has wiped out most of the competition and it's just a few players mostly trading these derivatives at the table..
is this like no limit poker now and what is really the money pool made of?
and why did U.S. MNCs move operations offshore, especially to China? A currency peg which made start up capital super cheap (the price to build a plant, set up infrastructure, etc.), cheap labor, the ability to manipulate currency exchanges by MNCs plus park profits offshore....
and the biggest reasons...China demanded partnership with many of these companies and these idiots believed in the 1.3 billion consumer market of China. The mythical consumer market and the strong desire to be a player in it did cause many a U.S. corporation to trade U.S. jobs to do it. So, they sold away the farm, signed onto China's demands in order to gain access to the mythical 1.3 billion consumer market as well as for their own global arbitrage (labor arbitrage) agendas.
So, I'll agree with you on MNCs and I believe they along with their financial "free flow of capital" financial sector partners helped push for these bad trade deals...
the reality is China has a host of policies to basically capture entire occupational and business sectors of the U.S. economy....therefore...
while I believe currency manipulation is just one policy change out of many that needs to happen...
well, it seems on this one we have a bi-partisan bandwagon jumping on in Congress. In addition it seems we have a host of other nations none too thrilled about losing their jobs to China and currency manipulation either...
all of which spells....we might, if we push hard enough, might have a prayer's chance of getting a bill passed on this issue...
We still have a few years
The loss of jobs is not due to China, but to the deliberate policy of US corporation to move their operations offshore...
No offense, dude, but all wars are economic in nature (possibly with one historic exception: that soccer war in South America a year or so ago, but probably even that was economic in origin).
Bombing factories, defoliation, sanctions, frozen assets -- and on and on, in the end and after historical study, prove to be economic in nature.
That's why so much of it is always predictable. If you happen to do an intensive study of history you'll find the USA funding both sides (via those corporations and banksters), at least dating back to World War One (again, probably earlier, but historical economic data is kinda sketchy then).
In case you've missed it, again the USA is funding both sides (all sides??) in Afghanistan. That's the way to extract the most predatory capitalistic profit from war, after all.
I don't fret about China, I pay close attention to all those anti-citizen, anti-American worker cretins in this country.
and done via proxy. We are attached at hip with China - China, unless it can be create domestic demand high enough, will only be hurting itself if it chose economic warfare.
They are working to corner the market on natural resources & energy resources
RebelCapitalist.com - Financial Information for the Rest of Us.
thank you for catching this one, anything that gets past my spell checker is suspect. ;)
Pages