Yet another company decides that profits mean more than maintaining jobs in America for Americans. They will lay off about half of its 1,200 workers this year and shift some operations from Chicago to a plant in Mexico, a move intended to boost profit margins.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-oreo-bakery-layoffs-impact-0221-biz-20160219-story.html
Remarks: What are our politicians doing to help businesses STAY here, and KEEP American jobs? Okay the company is making 30 billion dollars and wants more and that is corporate greed, but to subject us to eating cookies made in Mexico when we are already sick from the produce grown there tnat is snuck into things like frozen vegetables, and even regular ones too. We deal with Monsanto ruining the corn, making us sick, vegetables grown in Mexico, migrant workers peeing on the produce in California making us sick. It's gone toooo far when we cannot even get cookies made in America. What's it going to take, do we need a cookie caliphate with the Amish running our national bakers? Seriously, they can say they will maintain US standards in the production of cookies made in Mexico, but you know in reality they will cut corners, because it will be expensive to ship in water from the US or to build the apparatus to clean their contaminated water to use in the manufacturing process. Now even our cookies have gone to hell.
[Edited on 2/20/2016 by gina]
[Edited on 2/20/2016 by gina]
They don't want us to know who finances their campaigns, because they don't want people to connect the dots that the financiers influence how they vote and what they support. When they no longer care about helping keep jobs in this country, it's time to put in new leadership. It does not have to be complicated (incentives to keep businesses in this country).
People complain a bout socialism and they point fingers at Bernie Sanders because he is a socialist, but with people paying 35% or more in taxes now, if they paid 45% and everybody got health care, housing, living wage jobs would that be terrible? Why do we have this gap between the HAVES and HAVE NOTS? Nothing but greed, and corruption in capitalism.
Yet another company decides that profits mean more than maintaining jobs in America for Americans. They will lay off about half of its 1,200 workers this year and shift some operations from Chicago to a plant in Mexico, a move intended to boost profit margins.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-oreo-bakery-layoffs-impact-0221-biz-20160219-story.html
Remarks: What are our politicians doing to help businesses STAY here, and KEEP American jobs? Okay the company is making 30 billion dollars and wants more and that is corporate greed, but to subject us to eating cookies made in Mexico when we are already sick from the produce grown there tnat is snuck into things like frozen vegetables, and even regular ones too. We deal with Monsanto ruining the corn, making us sick, vegetables grown in Mexico, migrant workers peeing on the produce in California making us sick. It's gone toooo far when we cannot even get cookies made in America. What's it going to take, do we need a cookie caliphate with the Amish running our national bakers? Seriously, they can say they will maintain US standards in the production of cookies made in Mexico, but you know in reality they will cut corners, because it will be expensive to ship in water from the US or to build the apparatus to clean their contaminated water to use in the manufacturing process. Now even our cookies have gone to hell. [Edited on 2/20/2016 by gina]
[Edited on 2/20/2016 by gina]
If you don't like this, don't eat them. Cookies aren't a basic need, but a luxury.
More to the point, the company exists to provide profits to the owners and stockholders. Obviously it's a plus if it can provide work for the greatest number of employees, but if the company is to survive, it needs to think of itself first (so to speak). If increasing government regulations, taxes, etc., threaten the company's survival, the owners' best move is whatever they decide will benefit the business. When the employees' demands become unmanageable the company can let them go (if that's legal. I don't know), relocate, or possibly go under. Think of Hostess....
"Greed" is a subjective term. Can you provide a moral foundation for your definition, or is it just your personal perspective? If you have enough to survive according to what you think is necessary, then why does the welfare of others matter to you?
Billastro
but if the company is to survive. If you don't like this, don't eat them. Cookies aren't a basic need, but a luxury
Exactly. If sales are down in the USA, why not take your business to a Country that deserves your product?
Does Mexico have the same cleanliness standards as the US? I reckon Oreos have enough chemicals in them to kill most germs, but I do wonder how many Health Department and Labor Department laws they can skip in another country.
I guess that's an argument for getting rid of all our cleanliness and labor laws.
A little bit of an older story, but with layoffs coming around the corning it is back.
It is quite simple really. Any US manufacturer that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed. Any foreign company that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed.
It is not the responsibility of corporations to see that Americans have jobs, that communities have strong tax bases for schools and services. It isn't a corporation's responsibility if unemployment grows and safetynet programs get stressed. No, that is our government's responsibility and they should act.
Corporations can do what they want, go where they want, but if they know there is an entrance fee to enter this market maybe they will reconsider moving out, or maybe more foreign companies will consider manufacturing and assembly operations right here in the US.
Sell it here build it here, or pay the price.
That is what our government should be doing.
It is no surprise that major party candidates with a D or R by their names allow corporations to write the trade laws that allow them to move operations for more profits. And it also shouldn't be a surprise the only candidates promoting tariffs right now are the outside the two party game.
If we get anyone other than Sanders or Trump then this issue will never be addressed.
Insert racist Oreo jokes here.
That sword can cut two ways...
Yet another company decides that profits mean more than maintaining jobs in America for Americans. They will lay off about half of its 1,200 workers this year and shift some operations from Chicago to a plant in Mexico, a move intended to boost profit margins.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-oreo-bakery-layoffs-impact-0221-biz-20160219-story.html
Remarks: What are our politicians doing to help businesses STAY here, and KEEP American jobs? Okay the company is making 30 billion dollars and wants more and that is corporate greed, but to subject us to eating cookies made in Mexico when we are already sick from the produce grown there tnat is snuck into things like frozen vegetables, and even regular ones too. We deal with Monsanto ruining the corn, making us sick, vegetables grown in Mexico, migrant workers peeing on the produce in California making us sick. It's gone toooo far when we cannot even get cookies made in America. What's it going to take, do we need a cookie caliphate with the Amish running our national bakers? Seriously, they can say they will maintain US standards in the production of cookies made in Mexico, but you know in reality they will cut corners, because it will be expensive to ship in water from the US or to build the apparatus to clean their contaminated water to use in the manufacturing process. Now even our cookies have gone to hell. [Edited on 2/20/2016 by gina]
[Edited on 2/20/2016 by gina]If you don't like this, don't eat them. Cookies aren't a basic need, but a luxury.
More to the point, the company exists to provide profits to the owners and stockholders. Obviously it's a plus if it can provide work for the greatest number of employees, but if the company is to survive, it needs to think of itself first (so to speak). If increasing government regulations, taxes, etc., threaten the company's survival, the owners' best move is whatever they decide will benefit the business. When the employees' demands become unmanageable the company can let them go (if that's legal. I don't know), relocate, or possibly go under. Think of Hostess....
"Greed" is a subjective term. Can you provide a moral foundation for your definition, or is it just your personal perspective? If you have enough to survive according to what you think is necessary, then why does the welfare of others matter to you?
Billastro
"if the company is to survive, it needs to think of itself first." Capitalism just plain sucks.
Yes greed is subjective, how much profit can a company make, should there be limits or theshholds, should there be regulation to provide a basic living wage to employees so that they can have what has become acceptable as minimal housing with the amenities like water, heat, electricity possible. Is Cable a necessity? With the technological advances utilized nowadays, it pretty much is to be able to communicate with others in most areas in the country.
Why does the welfare of others matter to me? Because I am from the light.
but if the company is to survive. If you don't like this, don't eat them. Cookies aren't a basic need, but a luxury
Exactly. If sales are down in the USA, why not take your business to a Country that deserves your product?
I waited long enough for those golden oreos, and I don't think Mexico deserves them more than we do!
A little bit of an older story, but with layoffs coming around the corning it is back.
It is quite simple really. Any US manufacturer that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed. Any foreign company that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed.
Corporations can do what they want, go where they want, but if they know there is an entrance fee to enter this market maybe they will reconsider moving out, or maybe more foreign companies It is not the responsibility of corporations to see that Americans have jobs, that communities have strong tax bases for schools and services. It isn't a corporation's responsibility if unemployment grows and safetynet programs get stressed. No, that is our government's responsibility and they should act.
will consider manufacturing and assembly operations right here in the US.Sell it here build it here, or pay the price.
That is what our government should be doing.
It is no surprise that major party candidates with a D or R by their names allow corporations to write the trade laws that allow them to move operations for more profits. And it also shouldn't be a surprise the only candidates promoting tariffs right now are the outside the two party game.
If we get anyone other than Sanders or Trump then this issue will never be addressed.
"It is not the responsibility of corporations to see that Americans have jobs, that communities have strong tax bases for schools and services. It isn't a corporation's responsibility if unemployment grows and safetynet programs get stressed. No, that is our government's responsibility and they should act."
Should it be the federal government or should those things fall under the state and local governments? I have long thought communities should manage these things for their residents and take the burden off the feds. Since we've been kicking the can down the road for a long time, it seems like the feds can't financially take on all those things.
"It is not the responsibility of corporations to see that Americans have jobs, that communities have strong tax bases for schools and services. It isn't a corporation's responsibility if unemployment grows and safetynet programs get stressed. No, that is our government's responsibility and they should act."
Should it be the federal government or should those things fall under the state and local governments? I have long thought communities should manage these things for their residents and take the burden off the feds. Since we've been kicking the can down the road for a long time, it seems like the feds can't financially take on all those things.
State and local governments don't draft and pass trade law. That is the federal government's role and in my strong opinion, those trade laws need to stop allowing corporations to outsource and do what is in the power of the federal government to incentivize jobs remaining here and reshoring, or insourcing jobs that should be created or come back.
When a primary employer of an area leaves to produce their product in Mexico for instance, it not only often devastates the lives of the people who lose their jobs, but the communities which loses that employer. State and local governments end up being victims just as the laid off workers are.
"It is not the responsibility of corporations to see that Americans have jobs, that communities have strong tax bases for schools and services. It isn't a corporation's responsibility if unemployment grows and safetynet programs get stressed. No, that is our government's responsibility and they should act."
Should it be the federal government or should those things fall under the state and local governments? I have long thought communities should manage these things for their residents and take the burden off the feds. Since we've been kicking the can down the road for a long time, it seems like the feds can't financially take on all those things.
State and local governments don't draft and pass trade law. That is the federal government's role and in my strong opinion, those trade laws need to stop allowing corporations to outsource and do what is in the power of the federal government to incentivize jobs remaining here and reshoring, or insourcing jobs that should be created or come back.
When a primary employer of an area leaves to produce their product in Mexico for instance, it not only often devastates the lives of the people who lose their jobs, but the communities which loses that employer. State and local governments end up being victims just as the laid off workers are.
_______________________________________________________________________
Exactly right.
After bad trade policies, excessive regulation and the highest corporate tax rate in the world some people are actually surprised companies are fleeing the U.S.
It is amazing and sad that so many people are grossly uninformed.
Trump is the only candidate talking about the job migration. Nabisco, Ford, Carrier are some American companies with decent paying manufacturing jobs that have left for Mexico or are planning to. Ross Perot and his charts that the media all laughed at was 100% correct. Unless things change, this will continue to erode the American prosperity dream for many.
If you don't like this, don't eat them. Cookies aren't a basic need, but a luxury.
If it were only that easy. #thestruggleisreal
Do any of our friends on the left have a solution for this problem?
The Republicans have actionable legislation to solve this dilemma but Obama has vowed to veto.
The democrats whine but offer nothing.
What is the liberals plan?
Do any of our friends on the left have a solution for this problem?
The Republicans have actionable legislation to solve this dilemma but Obama has vowed to veto.
The democrats whine but offer nothing.
What is the liberals plan?
________________________________________________________________________
Like I posted, the democrats have no plan.
Do any of our friends on the left have a solution for this problem?
The Republicans have actionable legislation to solve this dilemma but Obama has vowed to veto.
The democrats whine but offer nothing.
What is the liberals plan?
Trump is the only candidate talking about the job migration. Nabisco, Ford, Carrier are some American companies with decent paying manufacturing jobs that have left for Mexico or are planning to. Ross Perot and his charts that the media all laughed at was 100% correct. Unless things change, this will continue to erode the American prosperity dream for many.
You have to be fair, Bernie Sanders I think has an almost equal position as Trump.
Politicians in the mainstream only pretend to have answers to this problem. Republicans rarely hide their love for new trade agreements. Democrats pander to the unions all while supporting and pushing the same free trade deals that cut their union constituent's throats.
The Republican answer is "less regulation and lower taxes" which isn't much more than a talking point. If you give corporations zero taxes and loosen (you can't eliminate labor and environmental regs) they will still leave. The grass is always greener, the profits can always be more somewhere else.
Of course it isn't always the corporation's fault, they aren't always full of guilt and greed. The reality of the situation is if you are in an industry where all of your competition has advantages on margin due to lower operating costs you have to evaluate your own position. The competition threatens marketshare and the existence of your company unless you overhaul how you do business and often that leads to companies outsourcing when maybe they wouldn't have in the first place. That is the problem with letting Korean appliances into our market as just one example. It puts incredible pressure on US companies building the same appliances here and puts them at great disadvantage and eventually forces them to consider shifting some production to countries where they can lower costs and compete with the import brands.
We can try the carrot approach, incentivize them to stay here and stimulate foreign companies to invest and build assembly facilities here (a 'sell it here, build it here' moto). Fine. But the stick must also be in play to penalize companies who import goods and services that could otherwise be taking place here.
The only place you get that is well outside the mainstream of R and D politics. You get it in Trump. You get it from Sanders. We remember it from Perot and Pat Buchanon. The mainstream politicians are nothing more than part of the problem.
It is quite simple really. Any US manufacturer that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed. Any foreign company that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed.
The only entity that can do anything about somehow pulling the reins back in is the GOP. Good luck with that.
It is quite simple really. Any US manufacturer that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed. Any foreign company that imports products from another country for sale in our marketplace should be tariffed.
The only entity that can do anything about somehow pulling the reins back in is the GOP. Good luck with that.
Like I said, neither party platform deals with the causes caused by NAFTA, CAFTA, normalized relations with China...TPP, whatever free trade deal the domestic and global corporations want. I agree the Republicans, save for some small small portion of the party, wants nothing more than more and more free trade. The Democrats, save for some small portion of their party, want the same. Because that is what the corporatocracy demands.
I'm not 100% sure how a President can undue and amend existing trade law, but I am 100% happy that both Sanders and Trump are talking about it and taking the position they are. Sure beats the alternative of more of the same from the typical empty suits....you know like sending us down the river without a paddle. Economic nationalism isn't a bad thing. Mercantilism isn't a bad thing. Protectionism isn't a bad thing. Other nations are using those exact systems against us.