Deere announces layoffs

[cowboydoc]

I think what we need to look at for a bottom line is who in the heck is going to be able to afford to buy their $20k plus tractors and $10k plus lawnmowers? You keep sending good paying mfg. jobs out of the country and their comes a point when it will fail. I know there are alot smarter economists on this site than myself but we used to do scenarios like this when I was in school. You erode a country's mfg. base and the country will slowly crumble. Our biggest fear should be if, heaven forbid, we were ever in a war again we would have ablsolutely no mfg. base and by the time we got one going again we would probably be speaking Chinese or something. It will bite us in the butt one day whether we want to believe it or not.

 

[ejb]

I agree completely. but what is the solution? People demand low prices and are willing to shop those that give the lowest prices (look at how walmart has grown so far so fast).

You can't build a wall around the country and force people to buy american, so I am open to ideas?...besides each individual person deciding for themselves that they are willing to pay more to buy "local", I don't see any laws that could be passed or rules that could be made that will stem the tide...

 

[rdln]

Well, I dont know when but at one point Suburban production moved from the US to mexico. Do you think GM lowered the price because of the money that they saved.

 

[RoyJackson]

"I don't see any laws that could be passed or rules that could be made that will stem the tide... "

As I mentioned in my post, one potential answer is tariffs. As they Federal Gov't is supposed to be paid for by tariffs, this could be a win-win situation: the government would have to reduce it's size (get rid of the damfool Dept.of Education!!!), industry would have more incentive to keep jobs within this country. The Feds have a lousy track record when it comes to managing the economy by law...tariffs would make it a lot tougher to keep spending beyond it's means.

A big problem with globalization is that it's "levels" the wage differences world wide. That means for us to compete, we have to reduce our standard of living dramatically. Who wants that to happen? Or to see your kids at the poverty level (reducing the wages don't always result in lowering prices and the cost of living). When you average the $15.00/hr a US worker makes with that $0.15/hour a Thailander earns...that comes to 7.55/hour. Can a person make a living on that?

I hear these idiots in Washington say "do it for the children..." (mostly when they're talking about gun control, BTW). Well, putting tariffs back in place is one way to "help the children".

Remember, folks...this is really simplifying a very complex concern. As time goes by, some industries will disappear (when's the last time you saw a Help Wanted ad for a cooper?). Others may arise to take their places. The problems we're discussing will happen. As a nation, we've got to determine if those problems will happen here or another country.

 

[looch]

Ok, ready for this? Here's how I see it:

My wife and I are pretty much in agreement that this planet is doomed. Money - everybody wants it. There isn't enough integrity left at the corporate level to pull the planet out of this environmental nose dive. I do not consider myself a tree hugger. I do firmly believe though, that humans take the earth for granted.

What does this have to do with moving a manufacturing facility out of the country?

I recently heard a brief book review on TV of Eco-Economy by Lester R. Brown. You can download the book for free <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco_contents.htm>here</A>. I haven't read it yet, but what I got from the review is in line with how I see things. I have always had a problem with the concept that some product that requires 10 times as much shipping and handling costs the same as something found locally. Well, this book confirms my suspicion that it doesn't cost the same. The problem is that damage to the environment is not considered in part of the equation.

So,

- the environmental issues and impossibilty of rectifying them under our current economic structure,
- the fact that the planet will not sustain our current population growth rate,
- people fighting with each other over religion,

all this and more, is why I have absolutely no desire to have offspring of my own. I know this must seem like a pretty bleak outlook, and I guess it is. Not to say I don't enjoy my life - I do. I just don't think what the future holds in store is something I want to expose my genes too.

Heck, for all I know, it may be people like me that will be our demise - realising that there's nothing I can do so I avoid procreating and just go on enjoying my life for what it is.

 

[PitbullMidwest]

Tarriffs NOT taxes would be a big step in the right direction. The American worker demands higher wages in a never ending struggle to pay his ever increasing taxes.

The first tarriffs established by Congress was on cotton bunting. The newly formed United States lacked the manufacturing ability to compete with English imports and to protect its own interests Congress acted accordingly. Harley benefited from the same thing when Congress passed tarriffs on imported cycles 700cc and larger in the mid 80's. I have read many economists that believe without the tarriff HD would not have survived.

As long as we have a Congress that cares more about the world economy than the United States' economy we will see every aspect of our manufacturing base wither and die.

Government should be paid for by those who wish to do business with us, not by the citizens. If relieved from their heavy tax load, there would be more disposable income which in turn would drive down prices on domestic products making foreign imports even less attractive.

 

[wroughtn_harv]

What I'm hoping for is the border between us and Mexico becoming truly open, both ways.

It's a crying shame that there is so much beautiful country and weather down there that can't be comfortably settled by norte americanos with some level of confidence.

The first group that would be assisted by such a situation of course would be norte americanos who would love to retire where the weather is great year round, the cost of living isn't prohibitive, and the cost of medicine and care is still semi affordable.

The second group would be the local economies because more of their citizens could live and work at home servicing the rico gringos.

Our own labor pool wouldn't be diluted by the influx of illegal and untrained competition from south of the border. Those who did come up north would be the skilled and semi skilled to compete with our skilled and semi skilled.

You have to keep in mind the rules on immigration labor are a compromise between organized labor and organized business to keep things as they are even if it isn't fair to anyone involved except big business and in the long run not fair to them.

If we had it where a laborer from Mexico could come into the states and compete on a level playing field with gringo labor then businesses that want dummys would have to pay more to both gringos and mexicanos. Right now they can keep the wages down because the mexicanos don't dare leave for fear of discovery as illegal. That keeps the wages down for the gringo too. But if the mexicano and the gringo had the same options then the company would have to pay more to keep any help.

So the system as it is keeps the cost of labor down by taking advantage of the illegal's fear.

Except for African Americans and Native Americans this persecution we're seeing of Mexicans has accompanied each and every ethnic group that has immigrated to this great country. But what each generation with it's resentment and persecution of the immigrants has failed to see is the immigrants take the lower status jobs. That in turn lifts up the group that had those jobs before.

We're a nation that's been built from the bottom up. It's been happening for two hundred plus years. It's what's made us what we are. The influx of the mexicanos is really no different than when the polish arrived or the irish or even the british.

I imagine the borders will be opened. And when it is there will be a large sucking sound. It will be U.S. citizens going where it doesn't get too hot or too cold and the people are friendly.

 

[bgott]

I have noticed a few posts advocating tariffs. I'm sure that a whole lot of you have a deeper knowledge of this than I have but I was under the impression that excessive tariffs and protectionism were a couple of the main causes of the Great Depression. Anyone care to expound on this?

 

[RoyJackson]

"...couple of the main causes of the Great Depression"

I don't believe tariffs had anything to do with causing the Depression (watch the History Channel for some interesting documentaries on this subject). Totally unregulated investments did (a lot of people buying stocks with very little money up front)...a long time recession (in Europe) stemming from WW I did. As far as tariffs...I suppose it's possible they may have had a causal effect on the duration of the Depression though.

 

[PitbullMidwest]

<font color=blue>excessive tariffs and protectionism were a couple of the main causes of the Great Depression</font color=blue>

The depression was caused, IMHO, by bankers trying to artifictually control the world's economy.