Dems: At Bain, Romney was a “pioneer” in outsourcing jobs overseas

posted at 3:21 pm on June 22, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Ughh. It sickens me that our country’s leaders are thusly engaged in such damaging, cheap populism.

The Washington Post just wheeled out a new report, detailing how “Romney’s Bain Capital invested in companies that moved jobs overseas.” Am I imagining it, or is anybody else detecting a gentle hint that we’re supposed to believe that this is necessarily a bad thing?

Mitt Romney’s financial company, Bain Capital, invested in a series of firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by American workers to new facilities in low-wage countries like China and India.

During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. …

But a Washington Post examination of securities filings shows the extent of Bain’s investment in firms that specialized in helping other companies move or expand operations overseas. While Bain was not the largest player in the outsourcing field, the private equity firm was involved early on, at a time when the departure of jobs from the United States was beginning to accelerate and new companies were emerging as handmaidens to this outflow of employment.

Cue the liberals’ various denunciations of the “vulture capitalism!”-ilk, and other such disgraceful, intellectually shallow talking points:

The campaign’s senior strategist David Axelrod blasted out an email with the Washington Post story, saying it exposed “breathtaking hypocrisy” by a candidate who frequently calls for the need to return American jobs to the United States. …

In a conference call with reporters Friday, Axelrod knocked Romney as an “outsourcer in chief” and asked whether the presumptive GOP nominee’s business experience is the kind of philosophy needed in the White House. He especially questioned Romney’s ability to “stand up to China” on trade.

“It’s particularly egregious when you try to repackage yourself as someone who’s going to be tough on countries that you sent jobs to,” Axelrod said on the call. He later described the report as a “significant moment in this campaign.”

Shaking my head, people — shaking my head.

First of all, when Romney talks about China, he isn’t denying companies’ rights to move their operations out of America if they so please. He’s talking about creating a level international playing field (and no, I don’t mean that like how President Obama uses it). Free trade is spectacular, but it doesn’t work when communist China is consistently doing things like manipulating their currency, pirating our technology, and other such highly nefarious endeavors.

Well, China has an interest in trade. China wants to, as they have 20 million people coming out of the farms and coming into the cities every year, they want to be able to put them to work. They wanna have access to global markets. And so we have right now something they need very badly, which is access to our market and our friends around the world, have that same– power over China. We– to make sure that we let them understand that in order for them to continue to have free and open access to the thing they want so badly, our markets, they have to play by the rules.

They can’t hack into our computer systems and steal from our government. They can’t steal from corporations. They can’t take patents and designs, intellectual property, and, and, and, and duplicate them, and duplicate them and counterfeit them and sell them around the world. And they also can’t manipulate their currency in such a way as to make their prices well below what they otherwise would be.

We have to have China understand that like everybody else on the world stage, they have to play by the rules. And if they do, we’ll have open trade with them and work with them. And they should in every way want to collaborate with us and not become a belligerent nation economically or militarily.

Secondly, if everybody on planet earth could just get the following through their heads so we can all move on and lead more productive lives, that would be great: When businesses find ways to do business less expensively, consumers win. Whether the business can offer their product more cheaply and consumers can then stretch their dollars further, or  if the business is able to then hire more workers and grow their operation — the economy is going to grow. Which, in turn, means that everybody wins. That’s the great thing about free trade: all transactions are voluntary and mutually beneficial. When businesses outsource, they cut costs, and people in other, poorer countries with fewer opportunities are able to find jobs and income.

Everything related to this whole “Buy America” fallacy is just awful — barring even greater costs such as threats to national security, why on earth would you do something more expensively than necessary? That’s not the way to help people — buying goods from where they are most cheaply and efficiently produced is the best way to make everyone wealthier. Prosperity is not a zero-sum game, and a busy, bustling global economic village is probably just about the only true route to world peace in existence.

This sort of populist rhetoric that perpetuates these types of economic myths sorely needs to end.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

raaaaaaaaacist!!!!!!!!!!!!!

tom daschle concerned on June 22, 2012 at 4:31 PM

So weird…….

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:33 PM

The man points out fact and reality and what does the deranged ideologue say? Ban him and ban him now.

And you wonder why Americans think this new conservative movement is anti America.

Uppereastside on June 22, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Those “ban” tags are showing up accidentally on random quoted comments today and no one is sure why. He wasn’t calling for a banning.

Bishop on June 22, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Actually, I’m an Obama-hating conservative who would take the 10-to-1 deal that Bret Baier offered as a hypothetical in the debates, not for the sake of creating jobs, but for the sake of balancing the budget.

Stoic Patriot on June 22, 2012 at 4:26 PM

My problem with any concessions on raising taxes to balance the budget is that raising taxes is easy but cutting spending is hard so, historically speaking, the tax raises will happen and the spending cuts won’t (or a reduction in the rate of increase of the base-line of the budget is considered a cut and other accounting tricks are used to claim spending was cut).

Sure, theoretically if you could somehow enforce the cuts I wouldn’t be opposed to small tax increases if it would actually pay down the debt and we had a balanced budget. But we already have the highest corporate tax in the industrialized world and 48% of Americans don’t pay federal income tax and tax-the-rich schemes hit small businesses hard – so there isn’t much more to squeeze out of people who are already paying most of the taxes.

gwelf on June 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM

How do you propose we stop people from losing jobs? How do you propose we stop people from losing jobs to cheaper labor over seas?

The answer is certainly not tariffs and import controls. See Smoot/Hawley.

The answer is to restore a sense of morality and ethics to America, including the MBA’s out of Harvard who can’t pass a simple ethics exam. The boardrooms of America are composed of people who don’t give a damn about anything but profits. Check what happened at Enron, when they even prevented their employees from selling off their Enron stock in their retirement funds as the company crashed. Those guys couldn’t care less that they just condemned thousands of retirees to welfare and working their last days as Walmart greeters. That attitude is rife in corporate America.

quikstrike98 on June 22, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Del Dolemonte on June 22, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Keep it cute Del, I responded on that thread. Keep. it. cute.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:32 PM

Poor reading comprehension on your part duly noted. My 4:29 PM post was to tell you that I had seen your response on that other thread. And responded to it.

You and your Party must be so proud of having used her and her dead son solely for political gain, only to have her quit your Party.

Del Dolemonte on June 22, 2012 at 4:36 PM

So weird…….

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:33 PM

In its own words.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:36 PM

quikstrike98 on June 22, 2012 at 4:36 PM

Welcome to the socialist club! I’ve just finished a delightful vodka sauce with penne, care for some?

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:37 PM

I’m talking about a particular culture within corporate America that puts greed over national pride and obligation.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Are you talking about the Leftists who run Apple and outsource labor to China?

Or are you referring to the two Democrat hippies who amassed a fortune making ice cream in Vermont, and then sold out to a foreign corporation?

Del Dolemonte on June 22, 2012 at 4:38 PM

What about simply lowering wages, including executives, lowering perks, including executives. Finding more incrememntal ways to lower costs instead of outsourcing. And really we know that answer, because the bar thats been set for success is so ginormously ridiculous, that *anything* including sending American jobs overseas, becomes justified. Its a simple thing, and its called greed.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:22 PM | Delete | Delete and

Ban

Wrongo Buckerroo. You do NOT know the answer.
The decision to outsource is expensive proposition in its own right. And one no to be taken lightly. Irreverable for many companies.
Executive levels get hit as well.
The decision is not based on greed, but rather survival. Just a bit more powerful than greed.
The primary “greed” in question is the US consumers DEMAND to get everything for less.

Jabberwock on June 22, 2012 at 4:39 PM

Are you talking about the Leftists who run Apple and outsource labor to China?

Yes.

Or are you referring to the two Democrat hippies who amassed a fortune making ice cream in Vermont, and then sold out to a foreign corporation?

Yes.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:39 PM

My problem with any concessions on raising taxes to balance the budget is that raising taxes is easy but cutting spending is hard so, historically speaking, the tax raises will happen and the spending cuts won’t (or a reduction in the rate of increase of the base-line of the budget is considered a cut and other accounting tricks are used to claim spending was cut).

Sure, theoretically if you could somehow enforce the cuts I wouldn’t be opposed to small tax increases if it would actually pay down the debt and we had a balanced budget. But we already have the highest corporate tax in the industrialized world and 48% of Americans don’t pay federal income tax and tax-the-rich schemes hit small businesses hard – so there isn’t much more to squeeze out of people who are already paying most of the taxes.

gwelf on June 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

I agree with you about cutting spending being hard to politicians, which is why the cuts should be made specific, rather than put off to a later date in any given bill. Social Security and Medicare should be transformed so they cannot borrow, but rather shut down as soon as the dedicated revenue from their respective programs run out. Likewise, I’d like to see a budget rule that forbids spending any more than the total tax revenue collected in the previous year.

As for taxing the wealthy, when you have companies like General Electric paying literally zero income tax, less than I who earns a mere 5 figures, I would strongly disagree about whether or not such people can be squeezed or not. Corporate deductions have given some folks a massive opening for getting out of paying anything.

Stoic Patriot on June 22, 2012 at 4:39 PM

The answer is certainly not tariffs and import controls. See Smoot/Hawley.

The answer is to restore a sense of morality and ethics to America, including the MBA’s out of Harvard who can’t pass a simple ethics exam. The boardrooms of America are composed of people who don’t give a damn about anything but profits. Check what happened at Enron, when they even prevented their employees from selling off their Enron stock in their retirement funds as the company crashed. Those guys couldn’t care less that they just condemned thousands of retirees to welfare and working their last days as Walmart greeters. That attitude is rife in corporate America.

quikstrike98 on June 22, 2012 at 4:36 PM

I don’t disagree that there are unethical business people but for the most part most companies are ethical and their employees benefit from the company making profits.

So your solution is restoring a sense of morality? How do you do that?

Btw, conservatives aren’t pro-corporation – we’re pro liberty and free market. It just so happens that liberals love to cloak their socialist intentions behind populist anger at business, usually unfairly demonizing entire industries or economic systems with outlier examples.

gwelf on June 22, 2012 at 4:43 PM

The primary “greed” in question is the US consumers DEMAND to get everything for less.

Jabberwock on June 22, 2012 at 4:39 PM

This is also a huge problem. We have a culture where far too many people’s primary identify is derived from the amount/kind of material objects they have. I am continually astounded how ridiculous Christmas gets from year to year. To me, this is the *actual* values problem in this society. Rather than a return to “less government” why not a return to growing ones own food (I can attest this is possible in the city) making ones own clothes. Eating at home, for goodness sake leftovers! Consumerism is a huge part of what’s wrong with us. I just feel so fortunate that I don’t identify with objects.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:43 PM

Are you under the belief that industrial outsourcing slowed down or was even reversed under Reagan and Bush? I honestly want to know…because it would explain a lot about Reagan hagiography by conservatives.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:31 PM

Not necessarily, I’m saying that whatever outsourcing did happen, the rest of the economy was humming along well enough and there were enough jobs around, ie low unemployment, to OVER-compensate for any jobs lost via outsourcing.

The difference with how things are now, is that back in the late 80′s and through the 90′s, when a company outsourced a portion of their business, often times it outsourced it to American based companies, which would take the work and employ American based workers to do the work. The money the company saved by outsourcing the work, they put right back into expanding their business and employing more US workers.

Now, in this environment, when a company outsources work, they outsource to non-US based companies who in turn employ off-shore workers to do the work. This is because the company hired to do the work is no longer based in the US because they were driven out by an overall anti-business environment here in the US. And of course now, because of Obamacare looming, crappy economy and a completely anti-business regime in Washington strangling and stifling any possible recovery, businesses are NOT taking that savings and hiring more US workers. They’re sitting on it, because they don’t know where the next assault from the Obama administration is going to come from.

Meople on June 22, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Besides some of the weirdos (yes Bmore and dear Tom Daschle that means you) this was a good, honest debate. I’m off to enjoy our Friday and weekend, peace.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Hey Libfree – I’m still waiting for you to explain Reagan’s Economic Boom that happened when he cut Corporate Tax Rates.

kingsjester on June 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM

Looks like you may have missed this rephrase and re-post. No worries. One more time.

Oh, well let me rephrase it then.

Anyway, yeah its pretty obvious I’m not into the Dems on global capitalism.

deathtomediahacks on June 22, 2012 at 4:07 PM

Did you get the fine folks at Morehouse straightened out yet?

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM

As for taxing the wealthy, when you have companies like General Electric paying literally zero income tax, less than I who earns a mere 5 figures, I would strongly disagree about whether or not such people can be squeezed or not. Corporate deductions have given some folks a massive opening for getting out of paying anything.

Stoic Patriot on June 22, 2012 at 4:39 PM

GE has benefited from crony-capitalism. Paying 0 income taxes is not the norm. I support a simpler and no-favors-laden tax code.

gwelf on June 22, 2012 at 4:46 PM

the weirdo
libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM

In its own words.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:48 PM

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 4:27 PM

Another conservative on this blog that’s starting to make sense. If only your comrades can see the light.

Uppereastside on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Next stop: illegal immigration benefits America because it keeps prices low.

HB3 on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

GE has benefited from crony-capitalism. Paying 0 income taxes is not the norm. I support a simpler and no-favors-laden tax code.

gwelf on June 22, 2012 at 4:46 PM | Delete

I can’t argue with that!

Stoic Patriot on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

I’m going to ask you the same question I ask my liberal friends when they get on this little “greed” rant of theirs.

Have you gone into work and demanded to be paid the same wages as the lowest paid employee in the company?

ButterflyDragon on June 22, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Say you pay your lowest paid employee $125/hour.

Is it really fair that they are taxed at 50% in total or close to that so that another company can pay their employees $7.25/hour knowing that most of their employees will be getting benefits paid for by the taxes of that other company?

So either argue for ending all Government payments to people of any kind and then go on to explain how your employees will not starve while homeless or just state plainly.

I want others to pay higher taxes so I can pay my employees less.

There is most likely not a city in America where even a single Adult with no children could survive on $7.25/hour. Unless they got some kind of taxpayer paid for benefit. Especially since the vast majority of these jobs only give 32 hours / week and require open availability (you can not have a second job). If you can even find a job.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

Egads. Calling the edit police on myself:

The companies Bain invested in didn’t ship jobs overseas. They did work was done for companies like Microsoft so they could, say, set up overseas call centers. Where’s the outrage at Microsoft?

Buy Danish on June 22, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Wonder if Jeffrey Immelt contributed to this article. Seeing as he’s one of Barry’s ‘job advisers’………and has done so much in moving GE jobs to China.

GarandFan on June 22, 2012 at 4:52 PM

Those “ban” tags are showing up accidentally on random quoted comments today and no one is sure why. He wasn’t calling for a banning.
Bishop on June 22, 2012 at 4:33 PM

My apologies then. A large majority here are still impossible to have a fair and intelligent conversation with regardless.

Uppereastside on June 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM

So either argue for ending all Government payments to people of any kind and then go on to explain how your employees will not starve while homeless or just state plainly.

wow…just wow.

Did they shine the BainLight™ over the asylum?

tom daschle concerned on June 22, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Let me rephrase that for you.

the weirdo
deathtomediahacks on June 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM

In its own words.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:55 PM

You know who the really ‘outsourcing US jobs overseas’ was?

The EPA- with onerous and over-reaching regulation of industry.

The UAW – when they insisted on $100,000/yr auto worker jobs

DrW on June 22, 2012 at 4:57 PM

How about this?

Extremely high Corporate tax structure, with extremely high government intrusion into Corporate decision making.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:57 PM

I am disinterested and still impossible to have a fair and intelligent conversation with regardless.

Uppereastside on June 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Exactly.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 5:02 PM

In its own words.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Bmore, in his original moniker it was upper & lower case:
DeathToMediaHacks…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 5:04 PM

There is most likely not a city in America where even a single Adult with no children could survive on $7.25/hour. Unless they got some kind of taxpayer paid for benefit. Especially since the vast majority of these jobs only give 32 hours / week and require open availability (you can not have a second job). If you can even find a job.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

We should just raise the minimum wage to $25/hour! Bam! No poverty!

gwelf on June 22, 2012 at 5:05 PM

How about this?

Extremely high Corporate tax structure, with extremely high government intrusion into Corporate decision making.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 4:57 PM

Yes, both. And this = all of us forced to live in Obamaville.

Meople on June 22, 2012 at 5:05 PM

My apologies then. A large majority here are still impossible to have a fair and intelligent conversation with regardless.
Uppereastside on June 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM

Say, aren’t you the intelligent conversationalist who constantly says conservatives are trying to exterminate the middle class?

Chuck Schick on June 22, 2012 at 5:06 PM

My apologies then. A large majority here are still impossible to have a fair and intelligent conversation with regardless.

Uppereastside on June 22, 2012 at 4:54 PM

LOL

That is all.

HumpBot Salvation on June 22, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Bmore, in his original moniker it was upper & lower case:
DeathToMediaHacks…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Good to know OC, thanks. This site is killing me today. iPad, apparently there is an issue with java, iPad, HA. I’ll make the correction here in a minute.

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 5:19 PM

Want to roll back outsourcing?

1. Reduce power & scope of EPA, reduce unnecessary EPA regulations (don’t worry, the sky won’t fall).

2. Massively slash the US corporate income tax rate, locked in for minimum 10 years (our is the highest in the world. How can we expect to compete?)

3. Eliminate minimum wage. No, that’s not advocating forced labor. If the wage is too low people will not take the job.

4. Make states “right to work.” Let the workers decide if they want to join a union or not. This would not be eliminating unions. Just giving workers more freedom of choice.

Etc…

visions on June 22, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Correction.

Let me rephrase that for you.

the weirdo
DeathToMediaHacks on June 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM

In its own words.

Hat Tip OC.; )

Bmore on June 22, 2012 at 5:22 PM

Are you talking about the Leftists who run Apple and outsource labor to China?

Or are you referring to the two Democrat hippies who amassed a fortune making ice cream in Vermont, and then sold out to a foreign corporation?

Del Dolemonte on June 22, 2012 at 4:38 PM

or a government that sends billions to foreign countries to drill for oil or make cars?

Fighton03 on June 22, 2012 at 5:26 PM

My java was outdated so I updated it and things are smoother for me…

OmahaConservative on June 22, 2012 at 5:26 PM

What about simply lowering wages, including executives, lowering perks, including executives. Finding more incrememntal ways to lower costs instead of outsourcing. And really we know that answer, because the bar thats been set for success is so ginormously ridiculous, that *anything* including sending American jobs overseas, becomes justified. Its a simple thing, and its called greed.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:22 PM

A union thug will be visiting you shortly. Answer your door Lib.

Wolfmoon on June 22, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Obumbo policies have entire companies outsourcing themselves.

aposematic on June 22, 2012 at 5:38 PM

There is most likely not a city in America where even a single Adult with no children could survive on $7.25/hour. Unless they got some kind of taxpayer paid for benefit. Especially since the vast majority of these jobs only give 32 hours / week and require open availability (you can not have a second job). If you can even find a job.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

You do realize it is not the job of a company to pay you so you can live at a lifestyle you desire? Make yourself more marketable loser.

CW on June 22, 2012 at 6:02 PM

its called greed.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:22 PM

Such simplistic thought coming from somebody sooo smart(/).

CW on June 22, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Some of these businesses did not outsource anyway…they expanded overseas.

Terrye on June 22, 2012 at 6:17 PM

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

You do realize it is not the job of a company to pay you so you can live at a lifestyle you desire? Make yourself more marketable loser.

CW on June 22, 2012 at 6:02 PM

Where do you get that from?

I said that will not pay for rent, food, required sundries and clothing and transportation.

So when you argue for a low or lower minimum wage you are really asking for a handout from taxpayers so your employees do not starve or go homeless thus can not work for you.

The wage would vary by city of course. But to ignore this fact makes Republicans look like they are heartless. It also makes it look like few pay their employees much and expect others to pay for the things their employees need just to live. Not be rich just live.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Buying cheaply from another country does not always mean you save money. If I buy well made USA produced boots from Timberland ™, costing me $125.00 and they last me 5 years, I am way ahead then if I bought a cheap POS pair made in China for $50.00 and have to replace them once a year in that 5 year period of time.
Therefore I am “wealthier” buying American in this case.

I will always opt to buy American when and where I can. I like American made products and I like supporting American manufacturing. I am afraid I am too old to change my awful populist thinking.

DoubleClutchin on June 22, 2012 at 6:53 PM

I said that will not pay for rent, food, required sundries and clothing and transportation.

So when you argue for a low or lower minimum wage you are really asking for a handout from taxpayers so your employees do not starve or go homeless thus can not work for you.

The wage would vary by city of course. But to ignore this fact makes Republicans look like they are heartless. It also makes it look like few pay their employees much and expect others to pay for the things their employees need just to live. Not be rich just live.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 6:42 PM

And I said that it is not the business’s obligation to pay you a certain amount. Again get a skill. It is not that difficult.

Nice strawman about handouts there buddy. It is not the government’s business nor yours SB.

CW on June 22, 2012 at 6:55 PM

Clutchin not too many Timberlands made in the USA anymore.

http://responsibility.timberland.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Q4_2011_Factory_List.pdf

CW on June 22, 2012 at 7:00 PM

“Romney’s Bain Capital invested in companies that moved jobs overseas.” Am I imagining it, or is anybody else detecting a gentle hint that we’re supposed to believe that this is necessarily a bad thing?

Yes, unless you are a CEO, CFO, or stockbroker.

funky chicken on June 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

A government does not exist to improve the welfare of other countries’ peoples. It exists to improve the welfare of its own people. National economic policy should seek to improve the welfare of one’s own country and citizens. Policies that achieve the opposite are essentially a betrayal of why government exists. Rather than the government serving the people, the people instead become instruments to serve the aims of the government.

Stoic Patriot on June 22, 2012 at 3:40 PM

If the US had a competitive corporate tax instead of the highest and if the US did not have intrusively burgeoning regulations, our government would create a climate that improves the economic growth and thus the welfare of its own people. Unfortunately, it does not.

Bain was working within this stranglehold on American enterprise and jobs. I foresee Romney loosening this stranglehold in order to make America competitive again and assure prosperity for all Americans.

onlineanalyst on June 22, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Yes, unless you are a CEO, CFO, or stockbroker.

funky chicken on June 22, 2012 at 7:01 PM

The simplistic thinking continues.

CW on June 22, 2012 at 7:10 PM

And I said that it is not the business’s obligation to pay you a certain amount. Again get a skill. It is not that difficult.

Nice strawman about handouts there buddy. It is not the government’s business nor yours SB.

CW on June 22, 2012 at 6:55 PM

There is a large portion of the workforce in America that makes near minimum wage. Some are as skilled as they can get. Not everyone is College material. Even with skills you could end up in a near minimum wage job.

Why is it not the business of taxpayers where their taxes are spent.

It is simply a fact that near minimum wage earners get a huge amount of Government Payments from taxes.

So to argue for a low minimum wage is to argue for taxpayers to argue for Government Handouts.

If you use lead in paint on toys you will be sued into non existence. Thus you are responsible. Same with employees you abuse one and you could be out of business. So it is simply wrong you are not at all responsible for them. You ask them to work for you and only you. You then take on the obligation to pay them enough so they do not have to survive off other taxpayers taxes taken with threat of a gun and jail.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Clutchin not too many Timberlands made in the USA anymore.

http://responsibility.timberland.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Q4_2011_Factory_List.pdf

CW on June 22, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Well that’s a bummer. From your link there are still six or so types that are, so I still have a choice, albeit smaller one. I hang on to stuff for so long, that I think the last time I ordered a pair in was 2008 and they were still mainly here then. Well, it will get tougher, but I’m stubborn, with a capital S. … …..there is this Made in America garden hose down at the local hardware store I have my eye on……………

DoubleClutchin on June 22, 2012 at 7:41 PM

I posted the following some time ago but nobody seemed to notice. If you want to be truly disgusted, read the WaPo as it gives some ink to Romney’s rebuttal:

Romney response to Bain story: Outsourcing vs. offshoring

The last few lines of that are revealing:

…But that’s a narrow and nuanced argument, one that will likely have little impact on the way this story is viewed in the political realm.

President Obama’s campaign has seized on the report, which offers a fresh line of attack against Bain Capital. Previous Obama ad campaigns attacked the firm for closing American plants. In a conference call with reporters Friday, Obama strategist David Axelrod called Romney the “outsourcer in chief.”

Read the last line again:

“President Obama’s campaign has seized on the report, which offers a fresh line of attack against Bain Capital.”

I mean, that was WaPo’s intent, wasn’t it?

Drained Brain on June 22, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Sorry, WaPo, but your story and the follow-up Obama ad based on its misleading info are all wet.
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/06/sorry-washington-post-romney-didnt-get-rich-moving-u-s-jobs-overseas/

onlineanalyst on June 22, 2012 at 7:52 PM

What about simply lowering wages, including executives, lowering perks, including executives. Finding more incrememntal ways to lower costs instead of outsourcing. And really we know that answer, because the bar thats been set for success is so ginormously ridiculous, that *anything* including sending American jobs overseas, becomes justified. Its a simple thing, and its called greed.

libfreeordie on June 22, 2012 at 4:22 PM

I’m going to ask you the same question I ask my liberal friends when they get on this little “greed” rant of theirs.

Have you gone into work and demanded to be paid the same wages as the lowest paid employee in the company?

ButterflyDragon on June 22, 2012 at 4:28 PM

Say you pay your lowest paid employee $125/hour.

Is it really fair that they are taxed at 50% in total or close to that so that another company can pay their employees $7.25/hour knowing that most of their employees will be getting benefits paid for by the taxes of that other company?

So either argue for ending all Government payments to people of any kind and then go on to explain how your employees will not starve while homeless or just state plainly.

I want others to pay higher taxes so I can pay my employees less.

There is most likely not a city in America where even a single Adult with no children could survive on $7.25/hour. Unless they got some kind of taxpayer paid for benefit. Especially since the vast majority of these jobs only give 32 hours / week and require open availability (you can not have a second job). If you can even find a job.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 4:50 PM

I seldom do this because it can be quite confusing, but I felt I just had to layout the full line of thought here so I can point out just how ridiculous and nonsensical your reply was to the question I posed.

First, as can be seen, my reply was making the point that greed is always relative. If you make more than the lowest paid employee in your place of business, I’m sure that employee might view you as being greedy. You probably drive a nicer car, wear nicer clothes and presumably received a better education.

Due to the relativity of greed, I always like to point out the hypocrisy of anyone saying someone else is greedy, especially when they’re making those judgments over the internet. Using things such as smartphones, computers, etc. to bash people of “wealth”.

Until one of you schmucks walk into your employer’s office and demand to be paid the same as the lowest paid employee in the company, then you’re a hypocrite that I refuse to listen to regarding “greed”. Until you make that adjustment you’re nothing more than a blowhard.

Now, your particular response to me really missed all of that entirely and went into some kind of strange economic ju-ju I’ve never heard. You want people to pay higher taxes so you can pay your employees less? Huh? If you want to pay your employees less, then do that. What others pay in taxes have nothing to do with it. If you feel guilty because they cannot live off of minimum wage, what the hell does that have to do with someone else’s tax code? You want a guilt tax so you’ll feel better?

Your cost of doing business is baked into your end price for your product or services you offer the public. How to lower those costs to be competitive is up to you. And I fail to see how higher taxes will make anyone more competitive. Unless of course you’re thinking you’d like to be one of those huge corporations that get to use the economy of scale to your advantage and freeze out new or smaller competition due to taxes, regulation or additional burdens placed on them by the government.

Either way you look at it, government is the problem, not the solution.

ButterflyDragon on June 22, 2012 at 7:57 PM

There is a large portion of the workforce in America that makes near minimum wage. Some are as skilled as they can get. Not everyone is College material. Even with skills you could end up in a near minimum wage job.

It is simply a fact that near minimum wage earners get a huge amount of Government Payments from taxes.

So to argue for a low minimum wage is to argue for taxpayers to argue for Government Handouts.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 7:38 PM

You keep missing a few elements out of your train of thought.

1. Higher taxes will increase the cost of doing business to whatever company you want taxed higher. Thus making them charge a higher price for the end product or service.

2. If it costs $12 to make a widget and you sell it for $12.50, but your competitor can make the same widget at a cost of $6, but sell it for $10, your competitor is going to win at the marketplace. That’s just how it’s going to be. Plus they’re going to make more money than you regardless. Increasing your cost of doing business to assuage your guilt is a bad business decision.

But no matter what you do, the consumer always ends up paying for everything. Always. Whether it be through taxes or cheap labor, it all hits the consumer. Poorer people tend to buy cheaper products. Well, except for the obese American poor. They tend to buy their iPhones, put 20″ rims on their SUV’s and wear Nikes while decrying “the man” for keeping them down.

We are living in times where the average wage is increasing faster than cost of living. There is no excuse for any American not bettering their station in life.

ButterflyDragon on June 22, 2012 at 8:09 PM

Either way you look at it, government is the problem, not the solution.

ButterflyDragon on June 22, 2012 at 7:57 PM

But no matter what you do, the consumer always ends up paying for everything. Always. Whether it be through taxes or cheap labor, it all hits the consumer. Poorer people tend to buy cheaper products. Well, except for the obese American poor. They tend to buy their iPhones, put 20″ rims on their SUV’s and wear Nikes while decrying “the man” for keeping them down.

We are living in times where the average wage is increasing faster than cost of living. There is no excuse for any American not bettering their station in life.

ButterflyDragon on June 22, 2012 at 8:09 PM

I agree Government is the Problem.

Business would be much much easier if not for the very high taxes.

I would argue strongly for the repeal of all Government transfer payments. I feel they are amoral. They government has no legitimate right to take money from taxpayers and give it to someone else they feel sorry for.

But wishing simply does not make it so.

Most here argue for a low wage and lower taxes. Just is not going to happen without drastically reduced transfer payments. Food Stamps, WIC, and on and on.

A huge expense of most business is taxes. Lowering them would help far more than higher wages would hurt.

If it were not for transfer payments it would be very unlikely that business could pay anything close to $7.25 and get anyone to work for them. They simply could not afford to work for that low a wage. They would literally starve after paying rent and necessities.

Churches could help but they would also shame the business for paying so little. In a I could care less how much my employees suffer society like we have now they would force a much higher wage.

So to argue my low wages do not raise my own and others taxes just does not pass the smell test. The low wages simply are a new form of near slavery. We now make our employees subservient to the State dependent on many different transfer payments to survive. We then pat our self on the back saying not my problem.

Doubt GOD will see it that way.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 8:52 PM

From Paul at Powerline – excellent in-depth write up outlining precisely what each company did.

This addendum is spot-on:

JOHN adds: I don’t doubt that all of the above is true, but I think a more fundamental point should be made: there is absolutely nothing wrong with a company that has its headquarters in the United States also having facilities, whether manufacturing, call centers, local distribution centers, local subsidiaries, or whatever, located in other countries. If there are Americans who actually don’t get this, they need to grow up….(see the rest at the link)

Buy Danish on June 22, 2012 at 10:41 PM

Doubt GOD will see it that way.

Steveangell on June 22, 2012 at 8:52 PM

Cute.

tom daschle concerned on June 22, 2012 at 11:53 PM

It takes a lot of nerve to claim this after dear leader created job opportunities for 800K+ illegal kids who are here through no fault of their own and may be valedictorians or want to serve in the military or something.

Kissmygrits on June 23, 2012 at 8:31 AM

A government does not exist to improve the welfare of other countries’ peoples. It exists to improve the welfare of its own people. National economic policy should seek to improve the welfare of one’s own country and citizens. Policies that achieve the opposite are essentially a betrayal of why government exists. Rather than the government serving the people, the people instead become instruments to serve the aims of the government.

Stoic Patriot on June 22, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I disagree that a government “should” exist to improve the welfare of its citizens. I would further argue that this is not the role of the US Govt. as described in the constitution. Our government exists to provide protection from outside forces and enforce the rule of law. The life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness part are our own, individually. The idea is that people are allowed to seek to improve their own welfare, within the bounds of accepted law. National economic policy, I would argue, should seek to provide opportunity, not welfare.

I have a feeling I may be arguing semantics to some, but I believe this is a very important distinction. Government maintains order. The rest is (or should be) up to us.

drocity on June 23, 2012 at 8:52 AM

I feel obligated to remind those of you that are so bent out of shape over what YOU define as “greed” that envy is just as bad if not worse. It was one of the original 10 commandments if you recall. As evident in 3 pages of comments I typically find that those who bash outsourcing have little understanding of it and the basic economic priciples behind it.

Ellis on June 23, 2012 at 11:11 AM

When is the msm going to tell the public the reason companies go over seas to manufacture their wares? We have the highest tax in the world for our corporations and it takes some moving around the stupid regulations to make a few parts here a few parts there and put them all together some place else to get around the taxes and regulations. Some times it’s difficult to figure who is correct and who is not with both sides spitting out untruths while they feather their own beds. We are very close to Europe in our fiscal matters and a blind 2/3rds of our Government blaming each other while in the court room only to celebrate bills past together that continue their folly shows us we are in very deep trouble.

mixplix on June 23, 2012 at 11:22 AM

The Washington Post just wheeled out a new report, detailing how “Romney’s Bain Capital invested in companies that moved jobs overseas.”

This is a stupid game meant to pander to stupid people, which apparently includes WaPo “journalists”.

Let me play.

How much of what Government Motors buys to make its vehicles is manufactured overseas?

Last report I saw indicated about 50% of the parts used in GM vehicles assembled in the US are manufactured overseas.

So Obama’s government takeover of GM saved the jobs of foreign workers using US taxpayer money.

Obama’s admin is pioneering using US tax dollars to save foreign jobs.

farsighted on June 23, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Want to roll back outsourcing?

1. Reduce power & scope of EPA, reduce unnecessary EPA regulations (don’t worry, the sky won’t fall).

2. Massively slash the US corporate income tax rate, locked in for minimum 10 years (our is the highest in the world. How can we expect to compete?)

3. Eliminate minimum wage. No, that’s not advocating forced labor. If the wage is too low people will not take the job.

4. Make states “right to work.” Let the workers decide if they want to join a union or not. This would not be eliminating unions. Just giving workers more freedom of choice.

Etc…

visions on June 22, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Exactly.

Taxes, unions, excessive regulation, and red tape all contribute to making the cost of US based employees much higher than they could be.

farsighted on June 23, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Cute.

tom daschle concerned on June 22, 2012 at 11:53 PM

What exactly do you find ‘cute’ about it, wingnut?

MelonCollie on June 23, 2012 at 11:29 PM

visions on June 22, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Slash 1, 2, & 4, and add a serious effort against illegal immigration, and #3 will become irrelevant, corporatist butt-kissers aside.

MelonCollie on June 23, 2012 at 11:31 PM

Steve you’re still a loser.

CW on June 24, 2012 at 5:15 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3