California: Is there a way we can start the nationwide fight against offshoring?

[jacquelope]

Are there any groups here seeking to start an initiative process to outlaw the offshoring of Government contract work? Or to prevent the offshoring of background check services or other related work?

If California joins Ohio in the anti-offshoring fight at the initiative level it would force the US Chamber of Commerce, etc., to take the fight to the People and the recent Sept 28 Wall Street Journal poll suggests well over 80% of Americans oppose offshoring at this point.

Could we do this? Would it spark a nationwide chain reaction?

[Citizen Worker]

1. We could do this with an alternative political party but not until then. A genuine Labor Party.

[jacquelope]

4. I wish I could recommend this. n/t

.

[jtuck004]

2. Take a look through history at how many places

have tried this. The economics are such that they simply go around you. And that always costs you more than them. Unless, of course, you can be South Korea - there you can implement those laws then import your cars into the U.S. to sell them, barring U.S. mfrs from your markets. Cool deal if you are SK.

Seems like it might be better to figure out how to do drive growth in a cooperative, employee-owned venture in this country.

Owners of the assets make the decisions and if the ownership is spread out over most of the workers I think they are more likely to make decisions in the interests of people who live in their community - themselves. They are also closer to the people who buy your products, and it can make the sales much more personal.

Don't mean to make this sound like it will be easier than what you suggested. Likely just as hard, and starting 40 years behind makes it worse. But I think the end game is more profitable both personally and to the community.

My thought is that when the hood owns the business it ain't goin' overseas without a fight.

[jacquelope]

3. Go around?

If you bar out-of-country contractor work outright, how can they get around that?

And down the line the kind of tariffs I would be talking about would target any country we have a significant trade deficit with. I know about the tire tariff situation - that was poorly planned and I said way back that it was an incomplete move. They should have tariffed all the low wage nations producing tires. Or we could just do what SK does. :D

Either that or we could just let the trade deficit and the attendant rising debt ruin the dollar until all imports become too expensive in a natural way. We seem to be headed for that reality if we stay our current course.

As for employee-owned companies - I'd be willing to push for that as part of a 1-2 punch.

[jtuck004]

5. We are incredibly dependent on trade with other countries.

We put a law into place that x can't be offshored, then there are 20 countries (and lots of investors) that would immediately put the same restrictions into place, and they can then trade with each other. We would isolate ourselves, and the cost would be higher than our gain, I think. The only reason South Korea's restrictions work is because we (and other nations) keep spending money there, even when their markets are closed to us.

The other thing concerns motivation and self-interest. Look at the annual reports of existing companies - they are making money off of sales, everywhere but here. We put tariffs into place, other countries do the same thing, and the sales of American companies go into the toilet, because there is no demand here. Which is why I think people need to learn to control assets and learn business - as long as just a few control the profits, there is no incentive to pull back. A larger ownership would spread those profits out, giving people more disposable income, and making it in their own self-interest to build and buy locally.

I was reading a story about a company who developed a solar film technology that sold the technology to China because of the imbalance in trying to do it here. If there had been a law that forced them to manufacture here they would be competing on the international market with smart people from China, or Vietnam, etc and labor costs of perhaps 30% of the ones they were facing. Then one needs to look at who might be buying, and that's probably not in the U.S. China is putting billions into this, so not only will they be able to build it cheaper, if the U.S. is isolating itself, aren't they and developing nations far more likely to buy from their own people, or from countries where they can get the same quality for much less?

It didn't hit the news much, but we just went through a little bout of this. We put restrictions against Mexican trucks into place to protect our sales and trucking jobs. In retaliation Mexico put restrictions on the import of a number of our products in reaction to our restrictions. In part because of that loss of markets we are now opening up trucking to Mexican trucks. We couldn't sustain our ban.

It's just not the world where tariffs and restrictions really work anymore, if they ever did.

IMHO the time for that was back in 1970 if we were going to do it. Except for some airplanes and weapons manufacturing there is very little we have in the way of manufacturing superiority left. Our stuff is in disrepair, it is old, and people are not skilled in the trades that would be needed. It would take literally trillions of dollars to bring back what we have sold or given away over the past 40 years.

If we are going to win this, or even mitigate our losses, we have to buy the right politicians that will invest in building our own country up. The existing order is outspending us to keep what we have in place, and we need to figure out how to compete with them, first.

[jacquelope]

6. Tariffs work for China.

Companies are making sales everywhere but here; and they're not hiring here, either. Their sales going into the toilet means what, then? Losses of American jobs that don't exist because of them?

Let's look at this US isolating itself thing... we already do not have jobs producing goods for third world nations. They all run a huge surplus against us. They're already buying from their own people, overall. We opened our country to Mexico's trucks because of corporate lobbyists. We could have blocked ALL goods coming from Mexico and they would have backed down when they realized the world's largest export market was closed to them.

The third world relies on exports to America; to give you an idea of how devastating the closure of our market would be to them, our recession in 2008 caused China to lose 20 million jobs. 20 million. If we get tough on trade deficits and they retaliate en masse, their biggest export market will go away and that means it hurts them more than it hurts us. Countries that are net exporters have much more to lose.

Yes, our stuff is in disrepair - and it's not going to get fixed by any other method but biting the bullet and putting Americans back to work bringing all that stuff back.


One other thing: our trade deficit with Mexico, China and India is increasing our national debt. If we don't lower those deficits our dollar will collapse anyway and they won't be able to sell anything to us because their imports will be too expensive. Then what?

In free trade you can never compete on any level with lower wage nations. No matter what innovations you come up with they can be duplicated elsewhere and implemented using cheaper labor. If we stay this course we disappear as a global export market, regardless. As I said... what then?

[jtuck004]

7. We agree on the need to build our economy and demand.

But we have already given away the store. There is nothing to protect. There is no demand, and we have already moved our manufacturing elsewhere. Go ahead and create a tariff. That stops sales overeas, and with nothing to pick it up here, it just accelerates the decline we are in.

I disagree about Mexico. The reason the lobbyists (American, btw) were able to influence this was because of the drop in our sales after Mexico put in the restrictions. That gave them money and power. If we had kept the restrictions in place Mexico would have continued to buy those products elsewhere (Brazil is doing some amazing work, and China is investing billions in that arena) while American farmers and others got nothing. There was no reason for them to back down - they had what we needed, and they could get what they wanted elsewhere. People in the U.S. are fooling themselves - they have made themselves quite dispensable to most of the rest of the world.

We agree about putting Americans back to work, but just exactly who is going to do that? Companies have NO incentive to do this. Their money is coming from sales overseas and outside of our borders because that is where the demand is. All the laws and tariffs in the world can't _create_ demand here. The only thing that does that is disposeable income, and without trillions of dollars being put into a jobs program there is and will be little to no money to spend. We are still paying off debt, replacing good-paying jobs with clerk jobs at Dollar General, watching our houses drop in value, all while 10,000 people a day are turning 65. The only real jump in demand going forward will be for medical care, and that is an expense of rather than a creator of wealth. The government is the only entity of a size that could put up the resources that could change this, but we are cutting off the heat to people with no money, not building up the country. We put an administration into place from a party that used to represent the most vulnerable, yet look what we have. We should realize there is a much bigger threat from our lack of ability to generate wealth than we face from any Afghanistan or other such conflict, but we are too busy scratching that itch to feel the saber ramming through the heart of the economy that we depend on.

It is as it has always been - those who own the assets control what happens. If people want control and power, they need to figure out that they need to pool their resources and begin to learn how to control and use the assets. It's doable, but so far most seem more likely to watch daytime tv and depend on someone else to do the heavy lifting. As a country we are still in excuse-making mode, still blaming all the wrong things, still living as if it is 1950.

The dollar is going to collapse along with our economy. It started that process when we started giving away the store 40 years ago, and there is nothing that is going to stop it. But it's our own fault.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

[jacquelope]

8. Wait a second.

There's no demand because our nation's wages are declining and jobs are going away. In fact, if we go by what you are saying, what do we have to lose with tariffs? Accelerate the decline or let it drag us more slowly to hell, it still all ends the same way.

There's no reason why we can't fire up demand if we put people back to work in $30/hour factories and keep tech and research & development jobs here. Give them more money and they'll buy stuff. We could always trade freely with Europe and other high-wage nations. I'm all for embargoing anything that comes out of cheap labor nations. Don't bring it here. You pay good wages to workers or don't export it here. American farmers are fooling themselves if they think they'll not be washed out by Brazil and China anyway. So then we'll have Mexican imports, farmers going out of business and then we'll be even worse off.

I disagree totally that we can't create demand here. Give Americans jobs producing the goods that we consume and they'll want to buy more. We cancel our debt to China and other third world nations who are fleecing us with cheap labor, start all over. It's sheer defeatism to believe we cannot fire up our factories, modernize our infrastructure and create a high-tech economy using our own home-grown talent. We just have the Koch Brothers standing in the way.

If current American companies flee America then we just take their factories, sell them cheap and let new companies produce for America, in America.

America has lost its spirit of self-sufficiency. We need a kick in the butt to regain it. If it is impossible for us to regain it, then frankly all this is moot - we're done for no matter what we do.

[jtuck004]

9. You are correct.

No demand because of no wages - accelerate or slow, same outcome.

Who, exactly, is going to give anyone more money? Companies have NO incentive - they are making crazy money outside of this country. Look at the stock market and read their reports. Coke - sales down 20% domestically, but up 2-3 times that overseas. Company after company reports similar results.

The government? That should be where a jobs program comes from, but even the Democrats just pulled money from heat for the most vulnerable. Not a chance in hell they are going to make the investment needed for $30/hr jobs in the millions that would be needed.

If current companies flee, what are you going to sell? And to whom? A bunch of broken down machines with no one who knows how to run them for pennies on the dollar to make crap that no one has the money to buy? While China, Brazil, Vietnam (where China is outsourcing some of their work to these days), Russia are all running factories with the latest automation, making things for a tenth of what it costs us to produce, making trade deals and daily increasing the amount they trade with each other?

I never said we couldn't create demand, I said it comes from wages. But there are none, and they are decreasing as we speak, with nothing to bring them back.

In the great scheme of things the Koch brothers are just little pissants. There are a lot more of us that could work together and change things. But we don't seem to be able to put aside our differences long enough to address the real threats, and that's is what makes the Koch suckers seem important.

I think we agree on the solution, but I don't see it happening without leaders who care more about the country than they do about enriching their donors (who care about nothing but enriching themselves). Short of that it is up to the people to gain control of the assets (and thus the power) and make the kind of changes needed.

And if that doesn't happen, we fall.

[jacquelope]

10. You have a point.

The problem here is our elected officials bow and scrape to the corporate elite, and we are divided as a people by rampant tribalism.


But...

What about America's demand for stuff? it's madness to think America won't have a demand for soft drinks. We're always thirsty! But the company that fills in that vacuum will need to hire and invest here. The same is true with computers and iPods - we still sell them here, even if more of them are being sold elsewhere. It's not like America completely forgot how to make a Coca Cola drink or a bottle, or that we don't know how to design computers and iPods. We still have research and development... for now. What we should NOT do is give that away, the problem is that we're on our way to doing exactly that.

The only way we could lose the ability to build factories to produce the computers and soft drinks that are still being consumed by Americans is if we totally go Idiocracy. Our brains would have to be re-wired by aliens not to be capable of that.

My answer to your question "what are you going to sell? And to whom?" is that we will continue to sell soft drinks and computers and cars to Americans; if our market was as lost as you believe, then we would already be no better than Somalia. America has a massive thriving market and if we close down, the world closes down. We're a big export market to all those countries - their jobs depend on trade with us. Look what happened to Chinese workers at the outset of the Great Recession.


BRIC can do whatever they want to - but they, too, will fall victim to the same curse that now afflicts America - and worse. They already have a big jobless problem, especially China. Their automation and free trade madness will only make things worse. You may think that BRIC+Vietnam can leave us behind but they won't - they'll be brought down by the same issues. They'll be brought down by an oil crisis, and if not that, then by a rare earth resource crisis, a youth bulge crisis and a global unemployment crisis. And finally? A freshwater crisis... driven by their own rampant pollution.

We here in America have an insatiable demand for energy. We can force construction to be done by American workers using American-made products. We can beef up our space program. Oh and yes, like you said, we can also seize control of the assets.

We need to raze the entire capitalist system to the ground and start all over. Replace coal plants with nuclear and solar. Institute stronger environmental protections and start providing incentives for students to go into the sciences. Build the most eco-friendly country on Earth using American parts and labor, and let the rest choke on their filth until they're begging us to come send our workers to fix them.

And if the Tea Party won't go for that then split America in half and cut THEM loose. We Blue States keep all the ivy league colleges, and they can keep the NASCAR race tracks.

[jacquelope]

11. Adding to this... China has tariffs, and it's not ruining them.

Seems all countries do well until they start buying into the free trade thing.

We're the suckers here.

Come on, America, organize!!

[blue97keet]

13. Yes if the free traders are scared to death of a "wave of protectionism" that must mean

that protectionism works pretty well with a pretty good insulation value.

[golfguru]

12. Best solution: Stop buying Toyota's & Honda's

because you then offshore jobs and profits.