Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: We need employers not *overlords* economics lesson for Wall Street

Posted 8 years ago on June 12, 2012, 8:17 p.m. EST by elf3 (4203)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

What have monopolies done for us? Killed job opportunities by shutting down their every competitor - and when they were done with that - outsourced all their labor to China and India and drove down the wages of people still working. Now they're bitching because they're the only ones able to pay taxes and whine that the only solution is to be able to pollute and get rid of labor laws. (not bring back employment and thus consumers) I say get rid of them - then Americans can open businesses to employ each other like we used to have - they called that Capitalism. By shooting all of their competitors out of business they also drove out the people that once employed their consumers - shooting themselves in the foot and taking out our economy in the process. How good will those exorbitant profits feel while barricaded in your shelter with canned goods from the anarchy Monopolies will have created when it inevitably crumbles... not too late to fix it. Stop driving all your competitors into dust - you don't really own the market if you kill the market in the process.



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 8 years ago

The irony is, small business is the silent victim of this globalization scheme (I say irony, because politicians bend over backwards to almost deify small business, while stabbing them in their backs behind closed doors). 42,000 manufacturers have shut down since the year 2000. This wasn't because of the recession (which didn't begin in earnest until 2008), it wasn't because the products became obsolete, it's because companies like Walmart make more money when they use sweat shot labor in third world countries (with virtually no labor standards, no environmental standards, etc.). Essentially, the standard political and Wall Street response is the American people need to become used to the idea of working in sweat shops (with no safety standards, yumee, toxins for dinner, welcome to the new America).

But behind each of those 42,000 factories is 42,000 stories of small business owners who went bust. This isn't even the 1%, it's more like the 0.0001%. Wealth is concentrating in this country at virtually unprecedented rates. Soon enough we'll be reduced to a banana republic. Narcissism rules (Ayn Rand is smiling in her grave)!

[-] 2 points by elf3 (4203) 8 years ago

well I'd say the working poor have been hurt most but yes if we had small businesses rather than Wal-Mart we would not have set employment rates. Politicians absolutely do deify small business owners verbally and absolutely stab them in the back on paper/ laws. They create red tape, taxes, regulations that large monopolies can duck under faster than you can say the words legal staff and lobby firm. Then they work hard at reducing regulations that keep large monopolies from fixing the markets. When they talk about reducing red tape - they don't mean for the mom and pops they mean for Wal-Mart. It's the same as when they talk about how heroic soldiers are all while slashing veterans benefits and their pay while sending them to die in wars designed so corporations can profit. They use small business owners for their own gain just like they use the soldiers because they know America supports soldiers and mom and pop businesses and small entrepreneurs. The public has woken up to the fact that Congress is working against our values and that their language has been constructed in a way that lets the corporations know they stand with them while still being able to trick the people into thinking they're with us. Actions speak louder than words and people can only be fooled for so long. Occupy is a symptom of people awakening.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 8 years ago

It's part of the depopulation agenda.

The one percenters don't know what the 0.001 % have in mind for them yet.

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 8 years ago

Well, I say if you want jobs, stop buying cheap chinese imports but instead buy American made products. Along with that, demand from our representatives to impose taxes on imports and use that money to finance people who want to start their own business.

Just think what would happen if everyone stopped buying chinese made products. It would put a halt on imports in a hurry.

Think about this - this country is no longer independent. If this country is ever attacked with nuclear weapons we don't have the capability to build it back.

We have no manufacturing plants, processing plants or steel mills. Think about that if our bridges and buildings are destroyed.

People don't think about that tough, all they think about is their own wants and needs yet continue to buy cheap chinese goods and complain about not having a job.

Stupid is as stupid does and the vast majority of Americans no longer have any loyalty towards this country.

All they are concerned about is being politically correct, not hurting anyones feelings and complaining because they can't afford to support themselves.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (4203) 8 years ago

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha - "Well, I say if you want jobs, stop buying cheap chinese imports but instead buy American made products" HELLO? Earth to Steve - we don't have any American made products anymore - where the hell are you shopping ? I don't actually buy anything these days but food but last I checked (and I do every time) every single tag I looked at is made in some other region - pS - there is a town in China called USA (and products made in Zaipan can label made in America) - hope you weren't fooled

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 8 years ago

Here are two sources:



And I am sure if you look you will find many more outlets for American Made products.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (4203) 8 years ago

Thanks for the link - that's great there are so few left you need a website to track them down for you - yikes and have to have them shipped to you

[-] 0 points by SteveKJR (-497) 8 years ago

Well, I must say, I guess it's easier for you to go to wallyworld and buy chinese made products instead. OK but I don't want to see you post any complaints on this web site about jobs being sent overseas.

[-] 1 points by elf3 (4203) 8 years ago

i am too broke to shop at wally world - so i just don't shop - I boycott Wal-Mart have for the last 17 years - I did buy stuff to make political signs from them when my candidate was talking about reigning in trade with China - I liked the irony - Wal Mart's and most mega stores entire system depends on scanner codes - I saw this documentary where all these people started drawing a sharpie line through them and were advocating if everyone did it would end Wal Mart - not advocating -just saying...if our government refuses to do what we the people want maybe the people have a right to do it themselves

[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 8 years ago

Well, I say if you want jobs, stop buying cheap chinese imports but instead buy American made products.

"The final alternative to working less is for communities to become more isolated and less open to world trade. Instead of buying the cheapest product that was manufactured overseas, people could be encouraged to buy from local producers either by choice or through raising trade barriers to make locally made products more competitive on price. Economists generally agree that this would lower the gross domestic product for a country and for the world, but on the other hand it would raise employment precisely because of the inefficiency that would result. The primary argument against doing this is that the same standard of living could be obtained by encouraging people to work less so that work, and jobs, are more evenly distributed in the population."

http://jobcreationplan.blogspot.com/2012/05/work-conservation-is-solution-to-global.html (Now known as "the accelerated work week".)

Also see the example from http://jobcreationplan.blogspot.com/2012/05/alternative-to-socialism.html ...

The logic of "buying American" is more complicated. Suppose you have several choices. You can buy a shirt made overseas that costs $5, of which $4 goes to various workers in the manufacturing and transportation industries who are all poorer than you. Or you can buy a brand-name shirt made overseas that costs $25, of which $10 goes to various workers including people with about the same income as you who live in the United States and designed and marketed the shirt. Or you can buy a brand-name shirt which is advertised as having been made in the United States and costs $30, of which $15 goes to various workers in the US.

In this case it cost $5 more for a US worker to make the shirt instead of someone overseas, because of cost of things like housing and health care in the US. Now suppose that you could buy the $25 shirt and just give the US worker $5; or you could buy the non-brand $5 shirt and give the US worker $25 so they can pay for rent or food. The difference in the first case is that an overseas worker earns $1 for making a shirt and the US worker gets $5 for doing nothing instead of $6 for making a shirt. The difference in the second case is that a minimum-wage American worker gets $25 for doing nothing and other workers, including the overseas worker get a total of $4, with $1 of profit for the business, instead of $15 going to various workers including the one who made the shirt while the other $15 goes to profit.


Buying the American-made shirt is therefore better for society than the made-overseas, brand-name shirt, but still less useful for the global economy than buying the $5 shirt. The US worker, on the other hand, would probably prefer you buy the $5 shirt and give them the $25 difference.

Since it isn't possible to do this, the next best thing would be to avoid working instead of earning an extra $25, so that the US worker can use their college degree to work for your employer and earn that $25 instead of you.

No one is suicidal enough to attack us with nuclear weapons. We have thousands of them.

[-] 0 points by Misaki (893) 8 years ago

Now they're bitching because they're the only ones able to pay taxes and whine that the only solution is to be able to pollute and get rid of labor laws.

64% would choose cutting government spending over raising taxes on corporations despite that only 4% think that corporations use savings from tax cuts to hire more workers.


You have only the rest of the 99% to blame. Especially if you own any Apple products.

Want to fix it? Tell people about the accelerated work week.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 8 years ago

This is the all time best speech ever. I also put it out on twitter. If people want a blast of reality straight out of government - then they need to hear this speech. Bernie Sanders in full rant.


[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 8 years ago

Do you have a transcript?

Some people can read faster than the average rate of speech.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 8 years ago

Nope and to read it would diminish it. Take the time and get a dose of reality.


[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 8 years ago

Nope and to read it would diminish it.

The same is true with all types of advertisements, and is precisely why some people prefer to read.

60% of people get their news from TV now, compared to 40% just 30 years ago. Most Republicans were deluded about WMDs in Iraq and world support for the invasion. Coincidence? Possibly.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 8 years ago

So I take it that you will not be watching the speech.

Bernie Sanders in full rant. OK. Your Call.


[-] 0 points by Misaki (893) 8 years ago

Don't feel bad, I don't watch TV either. Or even have a TV.

(I always feel it's more useful to go directly to Youtube anyway, where you can see ratings and maybe even demographics for viewers. A certain type of [political] video is most popular with the 35~44, 45~54, 55~64 male categories...)

But also see http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/05/here-is-the-full-inequality-speech-and-slideshow-that-was-too-hot-for-ted/257323/

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 8 years ago

I don't feel bad but it says a lot about you and your inabilities.

[-] 0 points by Misaki (893) 8 years ago

$34 billion in Apple's profits = disappearing middle class, got it.

Majority of people not wanting to create jobs via government spending = oppression by the rich, right.

If you're not willing to support a "counter-culture" of promoting welfare use, you're not really concerned about income inequality or its consequence of unemployment.

OWS doesn't put priority on job creation, or they would support the accelerated work week (or its alternative mentioned above).

"Not all of the rich" — exactly. The rich really can't do all that much, and OWS is just wasting time instead of supporting an effective solution.

I have pointed out how polls show that many conservatives do not seem to value honesty, time to move beyond this fact toward a solution.

Reducing/eliminating government programs has been on the Republican agenda for decades, no surprise here.

Saying that we have "disastrous trade policies" when Bush (Republican) supported increase of free trade. And as I have pointed out, free trade lowers prices unless people buy brands made for much more than they cost to produce. If you don't want to support the accelerated work week so everyone can have a job, it means you don't care about jobs.

Romney admits that cutting the budget would lead to depression/recession. http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/05/25/490532/romney-budget-cuts-recession/

Apple exceeded, or will exceed in 2012, ExxonMobile as most profitable corporation in the world. Do YOU have any Apple products? Do your friends?