First day of U.S.-China trade talks end; Trump's tariff hike set to take effect

[Yellowtail]

9 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

My mistake. I meant the middle class and less wealthy workers who still pay income tax. They used to be called blue collar workers back when a lot bigger percentage of Americans were employed in manufacturing.

Middle class and less wealthy, did you mean to imply the middle class was wealthy? Compared to what?

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Plenty of jobs that are taken by college graduates used to be taken by HS grads. Increasing the number of college graduates does not increase the number of good jobs for them.

 

I believe the student and the parent(s) (more and more only a mother) have more to do with the quality of education thna the local tax base.

Using words like "plenty" is meaningless unless you define it in some meaningful way. As a percentage of the workers. Especially given that the US has about 325 million people. But even taken at face value, if those college grads are taking those jobs, what happens to those who don't graduate?

And while it's true that social conditions are important, they're far from the only issue. Nations like Finland have great success in educating even the poorest kids from broken homes because they're willing to invest enough in education.

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Using words like "plenty" is meaningless unless you define it in some meaningful way. As a percentage of the workers. Especially given that the US has about 325 million people. But even taken at face value, if those college grads are taking those jobs, what happens to those who don't graduate?

And while it's true that social conditions are important, they're far from the only issue. Nations like Finland have great success in educating even the poorest kids from broken homes because they're willing to invest enough in education.

1

1

A third of the US workforce has a bachelor's degree or higher. If increasing the number of graduates decreases the number of jobs available to non-graduates, it follows that decreasing the number of graduates increases the number of jobs available to not graduates. 

 

I didn't say social conditions were the only issue, you just made that up. What I said was that I believe that the student and the parent(s) are the most important issue, and I believe that's true regardless of where they live.

 

Incidentally, using words like "poorest" is meaningless unless you define it in some meaningful way...

 

Edited May 11, 2019 by Yellowtail

[bristolboy]

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

A third of the US workforce has a bachelor's degree or higher. If increasing the number of graduates decreases the number of jobs available to non-graduates, it follows that decreasing the number of graduates increases the number of jobs available to not graduates. 

 

I didn't say social conditions were the only issue, you just made that up. What I said was that I believe that the student and the parent(s) are the most important issue, and I believe that's true regardless of where they live.

 

Incidentally, using words like "poorest" is meaningless unless you define it in some meaningful way...

 

But your premise is suspect. If the increasing demand for college graduates was only tied to putting them in jobs formerly held by high school grads would your assertion be significantly valid. It's a dubious assumption.

Well, you can believe what you believe. That doesn't make it so.

And my remarks about helping the poorest is valid because in Finland and most other northern european countries everybody gets access to the same level of education. And all the way up and all the way down, the benefits are demonstrably there.

 

[zydeco]

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Just snap your fingers and make it so? There's a lot of infrastructure and knowledge that has gone into making China what it is. You should look up what happened when Apple tried to manufacture a Macbook in the USA. Many of the same problems that bedeviled this attempt also apply to setting up manufacturing facilities in developing nations.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/28/technology/iphones-apple-china-made.html

The US has already poured billions into Mexico to develop it. USAID has already put developmental funds in Central America for mechanized harvesting. You seem to think they would be stepping off into a jungle in these countries. US money and expertise has been there for 150 years.

[zydeco]

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

If Americans had cheaper and better medical care and much lower educational costs that would go a long way towards solving that problem.

If I had wings and a jet engine, I would be a Boeing 747.

[zydeco]

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Nonsense. Interest rates are so low, that borrowing wouldn't be a problem. The fact is that a developed economy can only grow so fast. Of course, if tax cuts were directed at the middle and working class people, who have a much higher marginal propensity to spend, that would provide a boost to the American economy.

The US was a developed country from the 1950s through the 1990s and grew quite nicely with normalized interest rates. One thing the US doesn't need is more and more and more spending until people are lined up in bankruptcy proceedings. Savings with normalized interest rates are what is needed. Not so nonsensical, as it worked for most of the second half of the twentieth century.

[candide]

3 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Yes, and major American companies are leaving China and when they leave they will not come back. Trump just won the latest battle and the Chinese need to go home and make a plan.

This is a long term trend related to wage increases in China. Not much to do with Trump. Actually, the latest surveys show this phenomenon has been decreasing in 2018, not increasing.

[thaibeachlovers]

20 hours ago, Berkshire said:

Trump and many of his supporters don't really understand how the global supply chain works and America's role in it.  If I was a CEO, I'd simply plan for Trump's imminent departure, knowing that the new President will be more reasonable.  So no, US manufacturers won't consider returning to the US solely because of Trump's tariffs.  As for impact to the US economy and consumers, there will be some costs for sure...as well as collateral damage.  But for starters...

 

[President Donald Trump’s higher tariffs on Chinese imports will have “dire consequences” for U.S. equipment manufacturers and worsen prospects for American farmers and others already reeling from lower commodity prices, an industry trade group warned on Friday.]

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-10/u-s-equipment-makers-see-trump-tariff-hike-costing-400-000-jobs

 

If I was a CEO, I'd simply plan for Trump's imminent departure, knowing that the new President will be more reasonable. 

Shouldn't that be If I was a CEO, I'd simply plan for Trump's imminent departure, knowing that the new President will be the usual stab the American worker in the back and pander to rich people swamp creature.

[bristolboy]

29 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

If I was a CEO, I'd simply plan for Trump's imminent departure, knowing that the new President will be more reasonable. 

Shouldn't that be If I was a CEO, I'd simply plan for Trump's imminent departure, knowing that the new President will be the usual stab the American worker in the back and pander to rich people swamp creature.

What has Trump done to help American workers. Both of his Supreme Court appointees are anti-worker and very pro-corporate.

Edited May 11, 2019 by bristolboy

[Yellowtail]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

But your premise is suspect. If the increasing demand for college graduates was only tied to putting them in jobs formerly held by high school grads would your assertion be significantly valid. It's a dubious assumption.

Well, you can believe what you believe. That doesn't make it so.

And my remarks about helping the poorest is valid because in Finland and most other northern european countries everybody gets access to the same level of education. And all the way up and all the way down, the benefits are demonstrably there.

 

Why do you seem to always resort to misrepresenting what I say using words like "only"? I said no such thing. In any event, many jobs that used to be held by high school graduates, are now held by college graduates, even when the job requirements do not list a college degree. You could argue there is a shortage of STEM graduates, but there is definitely no shortage of liberal arts graduates. 

 

Your claim that my believing something does not make it so is absolutely true, yet you present your beliefs about Finland as facts. To say that "...everybody gets access to the same level of education." is absolutely untrue. 

 

Incidentally, I believe a greater percentage of working-aged Americans have degrees than to working aged Finns.

 

The public school system in the US is crap, throwing more money and government at it will just generate more crap. 

 

Here's an idea, how about let's get a handle on the POC K-12 system and then take over the universities. 

[Yellowtail]

2 hours ago, candide said:

This is a long term trend related to wage increases in China. Not much to do with Trump. Actually, the latest surveys show this phenomenon has been decreasing in 2018, not increasing.

While you are generally correct, rising wages in China have less to do with it than you might think. Government corruption, rule of law, intellectual copyrights and industrial espionage are way up on the reasons, and you are correct, it has little to do with Trump. 

[Yellowtail]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

What has Trump done to help American workers. Both of his Supreme Court appointees are anti-worker and very pro-corporate.

How are they anti-worker and or pro-corporate? 

 

I would think they should be pro-worker and pro-corporate, can't really have one without the other unless you want communism, but then the government becomes the corporation and makes all the rules.

[Traubert]

6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

While you are generally correct, rising wages in China have less to do with it than you might think. Government corruption, rule of law, intellectual copyrights and industrial espionage are way up on the reasons, and you are correct, it has little to do with Trump. 

No, no, it's definitely rising wages. Nothing to do with the rest of the <deleted> you quote. Unless of course you have credible sources (not the NY Times or Washington Post).

 

Companies like Foxxcon, for instance, have moved large production facility from Shenzhen to Chongqing purely because of the cost of labour. Companies are opening in previous wastelands like Gansu because of the cheap and very available labour.

 

You know when you read all those mocking stories about ghost cities?

 

In China, that is called forward planning.

[Dumbastheycome]

23 hours ago, car720 said:

All this animosity to China,  let us not forget that it was all of the foreign companies in their greed that deserted their own countrymen and went to China for the cheap labour.  All China has really done, which is what most countries would have done, is to rub her hands together and say "thanks for the fish".

Add to that the fact that those companies set the low specs on manufactured goods "made in China ".

That's not the  same as  "made By China".

If US manufacturers are obliged to gear up to produce in lieu of Chinese based imports consumers will be in for a shock.

As an aside I wonder if Trump's tarriffs  apply to the US military aircraft components made in China? Or a  specific brand of   handbags?

Edited May 11, 2019 by Dumbastheycome

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, Traubert said:

No, no, it's definitely rising wages. Nothing to do with the rest of the <deleted> you quote. Unless of course you have credible sources (not the NY Times or Washington Post).

 

Companies like Foxxcon, for instance, have moved large production facility from Shenzhen to Chongqing purely because of the cost of labour. Companies are opening in previous wastelands like Gansu because of the cheap and very available labour.

 

You know when you read all those mocking stories about ghost cities?

 

In China, that is called forward planning.

6

6

A Taiwanese company (Foxxcon) moving jobs within China is hardly the same as General Electric moving jobs from China back to Kentucky.

 

So moving jobs Detroit to Tennesee was forward planning?

Edited May 11, 2019 by Yellowtail

[Yellowtail]

15 minutes ago, Traubert said:

No, no, it's definitely rising wages. Nothing to do with the rest of the <deleted> you quote. Unless of course you have credible sources (not the NY Times or Washington Post).

 

Companies like Foxxcon, for instance, have moved large production facility from Shenzhen to Chongqing purely because of the cost of labour. Companies are opening in previous wastelands like Gansu because of the cheap and very available labour.

 

You know when you read all those mocking stories about ghost cities?

 

In China, that is called forward planning.

Incidentally, I would not trust the Times or the Post to wipe my ***.

[candide]

26 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

While you are generally correct, rising wages in China have less to do with it than you might think. Government corruption, rule of law, intellectual copyrights and industrial espionage are way up on the reasons, and you are correct, it has little to do with Trump. 

While the reasons you cite certainly played a role in decisions to leave, they have not aggravated over time. Only wages have increased. So it is reasonnable to think that this factor played a major role.

 

Actually it is likely that wage increases have been an aggravating factor for the other factors. When wages are very low, it compensates for the other problems you cite. When wages become more expensive ( currently around 5 times higher than in 2000), it does not compensate as much for the other problems.

[Yellowtail]

6 minutes ago, candide said:

While the reasons you cite certainly played a role in decisions to leave, they have not aggravated over time. Only wages have increased. So it is reasonnable to think that this factor played a major role.

 

Actually it is likely that wage increases have been an aggravating factor for the other factors. When wages are very low, it compensates for the other problems you cite. When wages become more expensive ( currently around 5 times higher than in 2000), it does not compensate as much for the other problems.

It is easy to project and account for wage increases. It is impossible to project and account for difficulties resulting from corruption, trademark infringement and industrial espionage. It takes a few years for a Chinese company to duplicate your product and processes, poach all your help and choke your distribution.

 

Most US companies that actually have operations in China and are not just outsourcing there, are there to grow their market, not just to ship back to the US. Once they build the domestic market and realize it is being stolen from them they have little reason to stay.

 

If it were strictly labor, they would just relocate to someplace with cheaper labor. 

[candide]

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

If it were strictly labor, they would just relocate to someplace with cheaper labor. 

Which is what they often do. Most manufacturing companies relocate in SE Asia and India. The ones that relocate in the US or in Europe seem to be more anedoctical.

What you describe certainly happens. There must be companies that withdraw from China because the domestic market is not profitable for them. Withdrawing from a market is a type of behaviour which is diffferent from relocating.

 

[Traubert]

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

A Taiwanese company (Foxxcon) moving jobs within China is hardly the same as General Electric moving jobs from China back to Kentucky.

 

So moving jobs Detroit to Tennesee was forward planning?

I never said it was, Clearly you didn't follow the thread. I said the production was moved within China to lessen the labour costs. It has SFA to do with GE doing anything.

 

Neither has Detroit or Tennessee got anything to do with moving Chinese manufacture in-country to reduce labour costs.

 

Have you got ADHD or something?

[billd766]

8 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

So how would you cut their taxes? 

To me as a Brit, the easiest would would be to raise the tax threshold so that they can earn more before paying tax. You want to get that tax money back? Tax the rich more to make up for it. Trump seems to have got that the wrong way around.

 

If the poor workers have more money they can spend more. If the rich have less money, they won't hurt that much, as they will still be richer than the richest poor.

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, Traubert said:

I never said it was, Clearly you didn't follow the thread. I said the production was moved within China to lessen the labour costs. It has SFA to do with GE doing anything.

 

Neither has Detroit or Tennessee got anything to do with moving Chinese manufacture in-country to reduce labour costs.

 

Have you got ADHD or something?

3

That's all you have, really?

[Yellowtail]

11 minutes ago, billd766 said:

To me as a Brit, the easiest would would be to raise the tax threshold so that they can earn more before paying tax. You want to get that tax money back? Tax the rich more to make up for it. Trump seems to have got that the wrong way around.

 

If the poor workers have more money they can spend more. If the rich have less money, they won't hurt that much, as they will still be richer than the richest poor.

Taxes were cut for average wage earners and the bottom half pay nothing now.

 

Yeah, tax the rich, great plan.

[Mavideol]

On 5/10/2019 at 11:43 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Good news. China has been stealing the west's technology and jobs for years. It's payback time.

what goes around comes around.... for how long did the US kept stealing European technology and taking in all the top scientists from Europe

[Mavideol]

On 5/10/2019 at 12:15 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm laughing when China threatens to impose higher tariffs on US goods given they don't buy that much US stuff.

and if they do the Chinese citizens are the ones that will be paying for it, not the government, same in the US the import taxes will passed on to the consumers, Trump is not telling it how it is
 

[Mavideol]

21 hours ago, Youlike said:

The West placed the factories there, trained the staff and taught them how to produce.

 

That's not stealing.....

 

Apple should produce their own phones in the US...

they are (were) stealing intellectual property and forcing western companies, including US companies, to provide access to their servers

[Mavideol]

10 hours ago, bristolboy said:

I guess you don't understand the significance of the lack of emergency funds. Most Americans are living paycheck to paycheck. 

not only Americans, the majority of the world population is in the same boat

[simple1]

9 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Yes, and major American companies are leaving China and when they leave they will not come back. Trump just won the latest battle and the Chinese need to go home and make a plan.

A reality check...

 

https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-12-26/trump-hypes-jobs-relocating-back-us-are-they