No, it used to be much better. It’s founder was a right-wing provocateur, but the material was well written and trustworthy. Since his death, it got hijacked as a propganda arm of the Alt-Right worms, and it’s roundly considered a joke in terms of journalism.
Alt-Right sycophants like Raj think it’s chapter and verse, but it’s garbage. And the late Andrew Breitbart is rolling over in his grave at What his magazine has become.
Good, then by rule, you have a problem with Breitbart.
Read the article you posted - it’s an incentive package of tax breaks inducing companies not to move jobs offshore. Companies are going to look more and more at opportunities in other countries to leverage that for their own sweetheart deal with the administration.
Is it better for the government to sprinkle some sugar and keep jobs, some taxation, and a lack of increase in unemployment benefits (also food stamps, etc) or to lose this to some other country? Particularly in light of no import tariff? Asking your opinion on how we keep America working.
Or is your main dislike that some get benefits and others don’t?
There’s been 1 million net jobs lost in the US since the introduction of NAFTA
For every company thinking of threatening to outsource to capture a sweet deal there are likely exponentially more putting their plans on halt and in wait and see mode.
What exactly is the alternative and how is it better?
There’s absolutely zero way to quantify that there are “exponentially more”. There’s nothing likely about it.
Generally you can use historical data to predict the future with a decent degree of accuracy. This is what is known as a forecast.
I am all for providing incentives for businesses to stay and keep jobs here (and attract others to do so for the first time). Add having some carrots to go with the sticks is fine and generally makes sense.
But you do so as a matter of policy that affects businesses generally, and with special, customized privileges for none.
The Carrier deal is pure special privilege.
And look, this is what the hatred about the Establishment is based on - the fact that the rich and well-connected can get things the regular guy can’t get. You think a small business in Indiana that happens to employ 1,000 that has no overseas operations is going to get anything resembling these sweet, sweet tax breaks?
Well, this is Establishment-flavored politics at its finest - so why aren’t all the Trumpkins who said they hate the Establishment foaming at the mouth over this?
But you didn’t do that. You just noted a bunch of jobs have been lost.
And?
Are you guys really denying there’s a troubling trend taking place with massive amounts of jobs leaving the country regardless of Trump?
NAFTA is only one place to look at outsourcing.
No, Einstein, Aragorn explained your claim that “exponentially” more businesses are “waiting to see” is not based on anything, and it’s not. You said a bunch of jobs have been lost - and? That has nothing to do with your claim.
And no, no one is claiming jobs haven’t been lost. You’re not very good at this.
I know what a forecast is. This is NOT a forecast. You make a claim based on an N of 1. An N of 1 is not “data”. It is a point.
Data is hard and quantifiable. You don’t have data, and this is not a forecast. It is an opinion, presented as likely fact.
Also, the EPI is an advocacy organization. Its chairman was the head of the AFL-CIO. The figure of 1 million jobs lost was also from an EPI document (basically self referential) and was not explained nor was the methodology. Thus that claim is suspect–it may not be wrong, but it is not really all that satisfatory either given no methodology, no references to how it was derived, and the advocacy nature of the organization.
Based on what we’ve historically seen there’s already a trend in place of companies outsourcing jobs in massive amounts.
Companies are not going to continue outsourcing jobs at least not the in same scale when they could be hit with massive tariffs only to have to eventually bring the jobs back. That’s why many companies who have outsourcing plans in place are in “wait and see mode”
I meant to write that’s what forecasts are built upon that wasn’t a forecast.
Also I think your standard of evidence is way too high for the claim. You need a full scale study with pristine methodology to tell you massive amounts of jobs have been outsourced? If it’s 600,000 in actuality does it really deter my point?
No I don’t–the point was that they made a claim (which you referenced in your post) and they did not show how they got there. There’s nothing pristine about what I want–I want a clear explanation of what they did to come up with that final number so that I can decide whether or not it is likely. Economic analysis is very difficult for numerous reasons, and it is flat unacceptable that a paper would make a specific claim without even doing so much as referencing the source of their stat.
They don’t even source the 660,000 number. There is no way to check their work, that is why it is unacceptable. I have no difficulty in thinking that it is plausible that NAFTA influenced loss of jobs in manufacturing industries, however it is unacceptable to claim something specific and then not give any way to check your work. That’s not abnormal, it’s the STANDARD of practice.
Nafta 1994,
US population in 1998 - 276,000,000 2016 - 325,000,000
I have heard from militant left wing cousin that GOP neocons ‘encouraged’ offshoring of manufacturing. Not farfetched, but regardless we have lost huge amounts of employment in the sector while adding 50MM people and being awash in material goods. So someone somewhere is building them.
Whether businesses continue to offshore operations or not will be based on business conditions and incentives produced by government. Your data point doesn’t tell us one way another which way businesses will go in the future.
According to the economic policy Institute 3.2 million jobs have been lost to China between 2001 to 2013.
There’s no reason to doubt outsourcing will not continue when you can drop your labor costs to pennies on the dollar if you operate overseas . If your competitors are doing this it’s the only way to stay competitive.
If you are running a firm where you have access to the Same technology and same capital regardless if you operate in China or in the US but wages will make up 25% of costs in America vs 5% of costs of China it’s a no brainer
It’s just a matter of time until all low skill manufacturing jobs will
be totally automated. What do we do then? What happens when truck
drivers are replaced with autonomous trucks? If you truly believe in
the free market, creative destruction is going to happen, so we must
accept it and focus on what’s next. I don’t think it’s possible to turn
back the clock.
