There are states within this country where environmental regulations are very poor and wages are sub par(the deep south for example) , yet even that is not an incentive for these corporations. Organized labor? that is a joke. Since Reagan, the unions have become impotent and inconsequential. You seem to be making the same argument that the Capitalist makes against sensible regulation and fair worker treatment. Do you REALLY believe that no environmental, safety or labor regulations will make for a good situation? You almost seem to be advocating that Americans should go back to the old days of child labor and sweat shops since after all, it is only the rich who matter.
I'm demonstrating, through anecdotal example, WHY labor and manufacturing is being offshored. You asked why, and that's why. Don't attach some emotional attachment to the situation on my part.
Fact of the matter is, these ultra wealthy Capitalists are obsesses with greed and profit.
So is everyone in this country. So is everyone, period. We want things cheap, we want them quality and want them on demand. But greed isn't an adverse quality when it comes to economic exchange. Greed isn't enough. Greed might constitute one part of economic demand, but the other, purchasing power, is what facilitates actual economic prosperity when economic trade occurs.
You act like these large conglomerates literally take money out of people's pockets. They provide products in exchange for your money. Obviously, it benefits you economically, because you are trading your labor for something you need but they can produce more efficiently than you could.
When Nike closes a plant in Portland Oregon to make shoes in Vietnam, does the price of a pair of shoes go down? does the American and international consumer reap a reward? No! every cent of increased profit through forced Asian labor and inhumane treatment goes straight into the Capitalist`s pocket. Without regulation, Capitalism becomes a self destructive predatory monster that feeds off of death and utter destruction.
Then people should stop patronizing Nike, buying Nike corporate bonds, and purchasing equity in Nike. You act like Nike can just be evil. It takes the greed of the consumer to enable them to do so. If consumers weren't so greedy and wanted were willing to pay for a product produced with the blood of poor, would Nike have a market for the product?
Do you buy value branded items? If you so, you are JUST as guilty as everyone else for enabling the abuse of the poor. Share some of the responsibility.
You are literally blaming the gun for the killing.
Again, adamantly disagree. Without someone, somewhere to consume the goods and services that industry provides, no economic transactions take place.
So what? That is good. It means the capacity for that good has been fulfilled and society can use the excess labor resources for other things it needs. I'll write it yet again. If humans biologically didn't require nourishment, would society be better or worse off despite the fact that farmers would not be unemployed?
Consumerism absolutely is a crucial ingredient to economic health. What good is simple wealth if there is no eceonomic activity in which to utilize wealth?. I can sit on a gold mine with 500 metric tons of pure grade gold and it is totally useless unless there is economic activity in which I can use that gold to trade for goods and services.
That's like complaining if no one will buy your service of digging and filling up holes that it's not valuable. Of course it's true. It's not if something can or will be consumed, its whether or not society has need to consume it or not. That IS the problem. Regulations in the market create distortions which means producers cannot know (through the price mechanism and forces of supply/demand) which goods society actually needs for consumption.
Okay, again, without goods and services (Which directly relates to job creation and retention) how does wealth get generated???? The wealthy person has got to provide some tangible good or service that others pay for in order to remain wealthy.
I'm not sure, whatsoever, what you are talking about. Who said anything about abolishing goods and services? I suggested that if a job is destroyed because what it produces can't be consumed, that is good because it means the need for that good has been fulfilled. That labor can be reallocated elsewhere where demand hasn't been fully supplied.
Yes, because if half of the people are unemployed, society has to support them one way or the other. Whether through welfare or through the penal system when these people resort to crime to survive. There is value in maintaining the strength, health and education of a society. Sadly, the Capitalist sees only profit and does not value the society he feeds off of like a leech.
So these now free individuals can't turn their attention to new ventures? New services society could utilize? If what you are suggesting is true, we'd have enough farmers to feed us and the rest of us would sit there, waiting for our portion of food. We wouldn't have any other industry outside of the first one to arise.
Like Donutz, I see you like to assume a demographic and assign assumed positions based on it. It's often the Socialists inability to see things like unemployment and periods of economic downturn have essential roles in refocusing and reestablishing an absolute reference to work from.
It is relevant because it clearly shows this upward redistribution of wealth and the unwillingness of the upper class to reinvest into the system that got them wealthy in the first place. These salaries are voted on not by the middle class, they are voted on by millionaires sitting on these boards who demand ever increasing profits
Once again, they are enable by consumers. If the middle class weren't so busy obsessing over "need" to have gadgets and trinkets, they would stop patronizing the companies producing them so the super, unfair mega-corporate board lording over their piles of cash wouldn't be able to do so anymore.
Instead of multi million dollar bonuses, if these elites would instead share the wealth just a little, the entire economy of the country would benefit.
The entire economy already benefits. It benefits because in order for them to make money, they had to provide a service or good in the first place. They didn't just take money by threat of force. That's what the Government does. You act like they just take money but don't provide anything. Apple makes enormous profits because every year, they make a new phone everyone is willing to pay hundreds of dollars for.
The country cannot pay its debts because these Oligarchs have seized the wealth of the country and are hording it.
They didn't seize anything. The middle class continually purchases goods enabling their own captivity within an inflation driven serfdom.
They don't care about anything but gaining more and more and more and wont stop until the entire planet is a clear cut, strip mined, polluted slag heap and humanity is reduced to starving zombies so long as they have theirs.
They cannot DO this with a market to demand that services/products that create those effects. Stop painting everything as a melodramatic appeal to emotion and make your point with logic and reasoning.