Ford promises not to go to mexico, chooses china instead. MAGA

[Jastall]

The difference is these are American companies manufacturing outside the US. As opposed to purchasing goods from outside the US.

The problem is that Ford isn't really that much of an American company anymore. Well they kinda are, but money has no borders today. Beyond the possible PR gains which evidently weren't enough to convince them, they couldn't possibly care less if the jobs they create are in small-town America or in India or China or wherever. The important part for them is how much returns they can get on their investment. And obviously they get more returns by having labor that's magnitudes cheaper and less demanding on the benefits front.

If tariffs are imposed, they will just slap the costs on consumers, just like it's always been done.

[Allybeboba]

The problem is that Ford isn't really that much of an American company anymore. Well they kinda are, but money has no borders today. Beyond the possible PR gains which evidently weren't enough to convince them, they couldn't possibly care less if the jobs they create are in small-town America or in India or China or wherever. The important part for them is how much returns they can get on their investment. And obviously they get more returns by having labor that's magnitudes cheaper and less demanding on the benefits front.

If tariffs are imposed, they will just slap the costs on consumers, just like it's always been done.

ROI is all they are looking at and you can't blame them. They have to keep their investors happy.

[Drutt]

If they did I guess keep waiting and voting R that trickle is coming, just wait...

Oh, for certain.

[Stormspellz]

The trickle is pissing right on top of their heads. But the average Murkin serf is too fucking stupid to realize it - or too gutless or lazy to do anything about it.

Same would happen if Hillary won, except more involving the banksters/Wall St. Remember Bill was the one who brought in NAFTA then wrecked millions of jobs with help from the GOP. Neo-cons vs. Neo-libs, very little difference.

The U.S. gov't is a wholly-owned subsidiary of corporate interests. That is as FDR said, fascism.

I would disagree, gutting glass/segal would of had hillary's base up in arms, a gop president doing it? par for the course.

[Gref]

Holy shit. There are thousands of kilometers between mexico and china. Logistics become much more bigger but they still prefer China over USA. Just how cheap it can be.

[Caolela]

I would disagree, gutting glass/segal would of had hillary's base up in arms, a gop president doing it? par for the course.

Bill Clinton (and his Wall St. pal Robert Rubin) repealed Glass-Steagall in 1999, by signing the bill sponsored by 3 GOPers called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Before that, G-S had worked fine for 66 years.

[Stormspellz]

Bill Clinton (and his Wall St. pal Robert Rubin) repealed Glass-Steagall in 1999, by signing the bill sponsored by 3 GOPers called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Before that, G-S had worked fine for 66 years.

oops meant dott frank from after the 08 mess

[Jastall]

ROI is all they are looking at and you can't blame them. They have to keep their investors happy.

I'm not blaming them. To seek profit at almost any cost is the nature of capitalistic industry. To blame or hate them for it is redundant, like blaming a dog for pissing on the floor when you don't take him outside, or hating a wolf eating sheep.

I am, however, somewhat blaming the people who only have a problem with this when the tables turn against them. Nobody in America had a problem with capitalism when the wheels turned in the US itself. But now that costs are much, much lower elsewhere, they're on the losing side of their own logic, and they blame literally everyone but themselves. They blame the governments they elected and still elect, the companies that they supported and still support with their money, they blame the free market but only insofar as they want to stick tariffs on goods that are better/cheaper than the ones produced at home. They're a sport player who only dislikes the rules when the ref calls foul on them.

And lately, they got into their skulls that a New York real estate billionaire with gold-clad apartments campaigning within one of the two established electoral juggernauts has their interests deep at heart and is the best possible person to fix this state of affairs. Somehow.

[Caolela]

oops meant dott frank from after the 08 mess

Well Dodd-Frank was largely toothless, and what's in it hasn't really been enforced anyway. It did make for nice press for the Dems though.

What needs to happen numero uno #1 before anything else can be improved is a repeal of the Citizens United decision from the right-wing Supreme Court. That would take a Constitutional Amendment. If that isn't changed, nothing else really gets done because you still have corporate and big money influencing politics.

[Edge-]

What needs to happen numero uno #1 before anything else can be improved is a repeal of the Citizens United decision from the right-wing Supreme Court. That would take a Constitutional Amendment. If that isn't changed, nothing else really gets done because you still have corporate and big money influencing politics.

Corporation are people, my friend!

But seriously, agreed. Getting special interest money out of politics is the first step in what will be a pretty long, painful process of limiting the corrupting influence of money in politics.

[Jastall]

Corporation are people, my friend!

But seriously, agreed. Getting special interest money out of politics is the first step in what will be a pretty long, painful process of limiting the corrupting influence of money in politics.

It should almost be a national priorities. So many of the US's woes are (IMO) tied to the ridiculous amount of influence corporate interests have on your political system. To me it's completely absurd to see these electoral apparels being funded by tens, if not hundreds of millions by corporations who then have literal armies of lobbyists and their CEOs are placed as Presidential advisors with nobody batting an eyelash.

Fuck, here we had a rich guy be elected leader of a provincial party here, and most people were uneasy with the fact that a media mogul could potentially become Prime Minister. We have special commissions investigating the ties between political parties and illegal private donors for sums that would seem like chump change to any Republican or Democrat organizer. It's not been the most effective commission ever by a long shot, but it at least helps to keep politics somewhat clean. Parties need money, sure, but the veritable debauchery of conflicts of interests present in US elections will never cease to turn me off, and the apparent apathy of most citizens in the face of this only puzzles me more.

[Caolela]

Corporation are people, my friend!

But seriously, agreed. Getting special interest money out of politics is the first step in what will be a pretty long, painful process of limiting the corrupting influence of money in politics.

Yeah, and to this day, every time I see that spoiled brat yuppie puke's plastic face, I'd love to punch it out. He's never worked a day in his life.

What "The Mittens & Muffy Show™" there didn't seem to realize (well they obv do but wouldn't admit it to the public) is that a corporation is an entity on paper, a simple administrative construct for business purposes. But according to Justice Scalia's twisted mumblings and convoluted pretzel logic (long may he rot in hell), corporations somehow are "people" that should have the right to express their political opinions with money to politicians and campaigns.

As we're now seeing, that's not working out too well for most Americans.

[Gestopft]

It should almost be a national priorities. So many of the US's woes are (IMO) tied to the ridiculous amount of influence corporate interests have on your political system. To me it's completely absurd to see these electoral apparels being funded by tens, if not hundreds of millions by corporations who then have literal armies of lobbyists and their CEOs are placed as Presidential advisors with nobody batting an eyelash.

If I was running the Democrats, it would be THE number one issue, and the number one legislative priority next time a majority is won.

[Orbitus]

Bill Clinton (and his Wall St. pal Robert Rubin) repealed Glass-Steagall in 1999, by signing the bill sponsored by 3 GOPers called the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Before that, G-S had worked fine for 66 years.

And it was passed by a veto proof majority. You can't put the blame on Clinton for it.

[Caolela]

And it was passed by a veto proof majority. You can't put the blame on Clinton for it.

Yes you can, because Clinton supported it all the way, as did his (former Citibank exec) Treasury Sec'y Robert Rubin. It was largely to benefit those big banks that Rubin & Clinton supported it, which opened the door the the '08 financial crisis and the largest wealth transfer to the top in human history.

[Deleted]

Manufacturing jobs in the USA aren't coming back. This is par for the course.

Which is a bad for the planet overall. Every time heavy industry moves from clean high-tech countries to some shithole that has zero respect for the environment or working conditions, pollution and suffering will increase.

[Skroe]

But seriously, agreed. Getting special interest money out of politics is the first step in what will be a pretty long, painful process of limiting the corrupting influence of money in politics.

To a degree, but not to the ultimate degree.

Business interests are certainly in a state of imbalance with respect to the public interests due to money, but business interests are legitimate interest as well, and businesses engaging in political activity is certainly legitimate.

The balance between interests has certainly gone awry, but the notion of "the business of America is business" as Calvin Coolidge put it, certainly has an element of truth to it.

Or let me put it another way.

According the the US Census bureau, 99.7% of Americans are employed in firms with fewer than 500 worker, and businesses with less than 20 workers is 89.6%. This level of small business-centric entrepreneurship is a key economic asset and advantage over peers and competitors which have largely failed to replicate that level of entrepreneurship, many of which in Europe in particular suffer far higher unemployment. It is both very hard to start a company and very hard to grow it.

Political activity to encourage a favorable business environment is legitimate. What's illegitimate is when the broader public interest is greatly ill served to make that the case.

Profit is good. Entrepreneurship is noble. And there is nothing desirable about creating a political environment where business doesn't have a seat at the table. It certainly should. A significant one. But only a seat. It shouldn't own the table, the chairs or the room.

While I love sticking it to President Watersports, some of the posts in this thread forget that Americas's economy is not burdened with the structural problems that many economies in Europe and Asia area. We have our issues... significant ones, particularly in regard to wages. But those pale in comparison to Europe's unemployment (especially youth) problem, Japan's shrinking domestic market and worker shortage, or China's corporate debt supervolcano.

[Mayhem]

Which is a bad for the planet overall. Every time heavy industry moves from clean high-tech countries to some shithole that has zero respect for the environment or working conditions, pollution and suffering will increase.

... so as Ford is moving to a country that cares for these things that's progress then? ^^

[ati87]

Holy shit. There are thousands of kilometers between mexico and china. Logistics become much more bigger but they still prefer China over USA. Just how cheap it can be.

Fraction of the wages
Most metals and other resources comes from China so you save from that
environment regulations

Even manufacturing in Poland is as good as dead for example, back in the early 90s that was the hype but they all moved to asia because wages alone just doesn't cut it.

Trying to compete with china or other low wage countries for manufacturing is stupid waste of time

[The One Percent]

Even if they were forced to keep jobs in the US, they would just use robots instead of people. You're a moron if you think low skill jobs are coming back to the US.