Dow hit all time high just now

[DBK]

Traded above the record 11,722. Go figure.

[stalked_R/T]

Clinton did this. It has nothing to do with Bush. It's only Bush's fault for the past 5 years when the economy was doing bad.

[DBK]

Well to be fair it was only above the record close, it'd have to go about 30 points higher to hit the all the all-time trading high...

[mdhmi]

I wonder how much of the recent DOW activity is related to the slumping housing market.

[Sean124]

http://www.essortment.com/career/dowjonesblu_sycj.htm

So the DOW in reality is only an indicator not the actual reality of the economy. Downsizing can drive the dow up becuase share holders see higher profits as added value to share which drives up share trade hence the DOW goes up. Looks like a ballon to me. But again the DOW doesn;t have much to do with whats going on in the lower economic sectors of industry does it ?

[DBK]

Never said it did. I don't tie too much of what the Dow does into the overall economy. Just said it went over an all time high.

[stalked_R/T]

http://www.essortment.com/career/dowjonesblu_sycj.htm

So the DOW in reality is only an indicator not the actual reality of the economy. Downsizing can drive the dow up becuase share holders see higher profits as added value to share which drives up share trade hence the DOW goes up. Looks like a ballon to me. But again the DOW doesn;t have much to do with whats going on in the lower economic sectors of industry does it ?

it's an indicator. That's like saying that the cold weather is an indicator that winter is coming, but you refuse to believe it because it's only an indicator. :dontknow:

[stalked_R/T]

Never said it did. I don't tie too much of what the Dow does into the overall economy. Just said it went over an all time high.

I tied the economy to it. No, the economy per say isn't fully tied to the Dow, but it's a good indicator. If the large companies are doing good the economy is doing good. Does that mean that business in Flint will boom? Nope, we still have Granholm in office :laugh: .

[L98Terror]

http://www.essortment.com/career/dowjonesblu_sycj.htm

So the DOW in reality is only an indicator not the actual reality of the economy. Downsizing can drive the dow up becuase share holders see higher profits as added value to share which drives up share trade hence the DOW goes up. Looks like a ballon to me. But again the DOW doesn;t have much to do with whats going on in the lower economic sectors of industry does it ?

Now if you said something intelligent like the Dow is only made of of 30 stocks and the weight of a few stocks can have a huge effect on it so it isn't a real reflection, I would buy that. Besides most people don't own the Dow 30 the are more likely to own the S & P 500 which is well off it's highs or the NASDAQ that is almost 50% off it's highs or the fact that the NYSE is well off it's highs as well. It is only one single indicator although an important one because people trade on emotion and to pass this resistance is a big deal because father highs could follow and most people in the US have a direct interest because they have IRAs or 401ks which are invested in the market in one form or another.

BTW who gives a fuck what is happening in the lower sectors (Bottom 15%) it hardly affects the economy at all, they do not create jobs or pay into the tax system they are only a drain on the economy. Maybe you should do some reading up on the subject:dontknow: Also all of our problems have been solved since I heard we can now get like 120 gallons of gasoline from a 42 gallon barrel of oil....that should help the economy

[L98Terror]

Never said it did. I don't tie too much of what the Dow does into the overall economy. Just said it went over an all time high.
If you haven't notice people can't stay on topic, just wait and you'll have a cartoon about the war or something in here:icon_mrgr

[Sean124]

Now if you said something intelligent like the Dow is only made of of 30 stocks and the weight of a few stocks can have a huge effect on it so it isn't a real reflection, I would buy that. Besides most people don't own the Dow 30 the are more likely to own the S & P 500 which is well off it's highs or the NASDAQ that is almost 50% off it's highs or the fact that the NYSE is well off it's highs as well. It is only one single indicator although an important one because people trade on emotion and to pass this resistance is a big deal because father highs could follow and most people in the US have a direct interest because they have IRAs or 401ks which are invested in the market in one form or another.

BTW who gives a fuck what is happening in the lower sectors (Bottom 15%) it hardly affects the economy at all, they do not create jobs or pay into the tax system they are only a drain on the economy. Maybe you should do some reading up on the subject:dontknow: Also all of our problems have been solved since I heard we can now get like 120 gallons of gasoline from a 42 gallon barrel of oil....that should help the economy

You missed my point. 30 companies make up what % of the actuall economy. secondly I am with everybody else. the SP500 is more likely a better indicator. Large companies can artificially drive up the DOW if they outsource and drive up profits for a few qurters until they loose money from laying off workers and the loss of circulated revenue. Outsourcing is a short term strategy that drives up the DOW and the SP 500 from beter then average projected earnings per quarter. While the stocks are trading high they stand a long term chance of lossing value. Thats the point of my question. Should we base our economic health on the stock market or is the whole market really just like the Tech sector was 6 yrs ago ?artifically balloned and overvalued?

I was also posing sevral questions hence why i ended the sentence with a ?????? mark.I don't study big bussiness i look at it as the infection of our economy.Its seems the only real value large corporation have is inefficiently hoarding wealth.where you stand on that particular issue is fine but thats what they do.

Interestingly enough however is this study that was done in maine and illstrates a larger issue rising in the future.

http://www.newrules.org/retail/midcoaststudy.pdf#search=%22economy%20percentages% 20contribution%20size%20%22


have a read its interesting stuff and obviously doesn't apply universally to everywhere but its an eye opener if everything the study suggests is correct.

It suggest what many economist have long talked about.the implcations however for michigan are astounding becuase although the big 3 are laying off thousnads the thing thats really killing us is the loss of small manufacturing like machine shops suppling small parts to the big 3. there used to be tons of these small manufacturers they have all died off to overseas chinese competitors. When discussing the michigan economy this i think is the heart of the problem.

[DBK]

I don't study big bussiness i look at it as the infection of our economy.Its seems the only real value large corporation have is inefficiently hoarding wealth.where you stand on that particular issue is fine but thats what they do.

The idea that the only value "big" business has is inefficiently hoarding wealth is, at best, myopic.

I'm no Alan Greenspan but my degree was in economics, and even the most liberal of professors I ever had wouldn't come close to making that assertion...

[L98Terror]

You missed my point. 30 companies make up what % of the actuall economy. secondly I am with everybody else. the SP500 is more likely a better indicator. Large companies can artificially drive up the DOW if they outsource and drive up profits for a few qurters until they loose money from laying off workers and the loss of circulated revenue. Outsourcing is a short term strategy that drives up the DOW and the SP 500 from beter then average projected earnings per quarter. While the stocks are trading high they stand a long term chance of lossing value. Thats the point of my question. Should we base our economic health on the stock market or is the whole market really just like the Tech sector was 6 yrs ago ?artifically balloned and overvalued?

I was also posing sevral questions hence why i ended the sentence with a ?????? mark.I don't study big bussiness i look at it as the infection of our economy.Its seems the only real value large corporation have is inefficiently hoarding wealth.where you stand on that particular issue is fine but thats what they do.

Interestingly enough however is this study that was done in maine and illstrates a larger issue rising in the future.

http://www.newrules.org/retail/midcoaststudy.pdf#search=%22economy%20percentages% 20contribution%20size%20%22


have a read its interesting stuff and obviously doesn't apply universally to everywhere but its an eye opener if everything the study suggests is correct.

It suggest what many economist have long talked about.the implcations however for michigan are astounding becuase although the big 3 are laying off thousnads the thing thats really killing us is the loss of small manufacturing like machine shops suppling small parts to the big 3. there used to be tons of these small manufacturers they have all died off to overseas chinese competitors. When discussing the michigan economy this i think is the heart of the problem.


OK I'll play:wink: but not all day because I have a ton of shit to do. I do realize that you look at the world as a small business owner and how everything affects you (I'm a small business owner as well, but I've worked in small, medium and large type businesses)


You missed my point. 30 companies make up what % of the actuall economy. secondly I am with everybody else. the SP500 is more likely a better indicator.
Agreed, but I bet the % is bigger than you and I think.



Large companies can artificially drive up the DOW if they outsource and drive up profits for a few qurters until they loose money from laying off workers and the loss of circulated revenue. Outsourcing is a short term strategy that drives up the DOW and the SP 500 from beter then average projected earnings per quarter. While the stocks are trading high they stand a long term chance of lossing value.

http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=djia&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&ma=0&maval=9&uf=0&lf=1&lf2=0&lf3=0&type=2&size=2&state=8&sid=1643&style=320&time=20&freq=2&nosettings=1&rand=1719&mocktick=1&rand=212

As you can see over the long run stocks of well run companies go up.

Outsourcing is a long term strategy of not going out of business. I am going to assume you are only looking as far as MI because if you look at a global market most of the stuff you said make no sense...that said. The Big threes' problems stemmed from producing cars that were designed poorly, built poorly and nobody wanted. They had your attitude and they only look locally thinking people didn't have a choice and the caved to the unions (Because they were making money hand over fist) and overpaid workers for the work that they were doing. The company and workers became lazy and they both got caught with their pants down. If they stayed on top of things they would have never allow the Japanese to enter the market with smaller, more reliable cars that got better gas mileage, if you remember Detroit didn't even think Americans wanted such cars. They were wrong. and the rest is history.

As for most other companies they need to outsource to stay competitive, and outsourcing creates better jobs here in the US. It also increases the standard of living requiring people to not need to make more money to live better.


While the stocks are trading high they stand a long term chance of lossing value. Thats the point of my question. Should we base our economic health on the stock market or is the whole market really just like the Tech sector was 6 yrs ago ?artifically balloned and overvalued?


6 years ago the P/E ratios were crazy(That's price of the stock vs earnings) Today they are at historical lows. Not the same thing, these companies are making record profits (and yes every year companies should make record profits, just like you would like to make a little more than the year before)

Example 6 years ago stocks like Yahoo, Lucent, AOL were trading at P/E of like 200 some companies never even made a profit. Example Company A makes $1 profit per share Company A was trading for like $200 a share. It didn't make sense at the time but everyone got caught up in it because everyone was making money and they wanted to too.

Today in the Dow 30 the average P/E is like 15 Exxon is 10.6, Wal-mart is 17.8, Alcoa is 13.0 you get the idea

So no it's not the same as 6 years ago the ecomony is doing great, the market is being held back because of the unknowns of the middle east, Oil prices & Terrorism but even with the stuff that has been going on it's held out well.


I don't study big bussiness i look at it as the infection of our economy.Its seems the only real value large corporation have is inefficiently hoarding wealth.where you stand on that particular issue is fine but thats what they do.


Big business is the reason we have the strongest economy in the world:dontknow: How are they hoarding wealth? Most large companies are publicly owned so that wealth is transfer to pretty much everyone, granted some people own more stock them others but they also take more risk. Most people own stock in one from or another.



Interestingly enough however is this study that was done in maine and illstrates a larger issue rising in the future.

http://www.newrules.org/retail/midcoaststudy.pdf#search=%22economy%20percentages% 20contribution%20size%20%22


have a read its interesting stuff and obviously doesn't apply universally to everywhere but its an eye opener if everything the study suggests is correct.


I didn't read it but have read many like it and I agree that it does change the landscape. There are towns that outlaw (by zoning) big business but the problem is the people of those town drive to the next town so the small guy get hurt either way. Our landscape is changing everyday it hurts the small business owner but they are going to have to adapt. There are some businesses that a shop owner can compete in and some that they can't.


It suggest what many economist have long talked about.the implcations however for michigan are astounding becuase although the big 3 are laying off thousnads the thing thats really killing us is the loss of small manufacturing like machine shops suppling small parts to the big 3. there used to be tons of these small manufacturers they have all died off to overseas chinese competitors. When discussing the michigan economy this i think is the heart of the problem.

Sorry to say it but it's like any business if you can provide a better product and a competitive cost you need to do something else, that goes for workers as well That's how I always judged my own work and how I told my employees to judge their work, be better, faster, more reliable and provide more value then anyone else or at least most and you have nothing to worry about. If you make the most you better be the best, you can't have a welfare program and stay in business.

[Ortontucky Terror]

with the dollar sliding the way it is shouldnt we measure it with something else, but dont mind me i dont know much about this topic, but enjoy the reading.(err argueing) lol

[stalked_R/T]

with the dollar sliding the way it is shouldnt we measure it with something else, but dont mind me i dont know much about this topic, but enjoy the reading.(err argueing) lol

that's comparing global economics to national.

[Sean124]

OK I'll play:wink: but not all day because I have a ton of shit to do. I do realize that you look at the world as a small business owner and how everything affects you (I'm a small business owner as well, but I've worked in small, medium and large type businesses)



Agreed, but I bet the % is bigger than you and I think.





http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/charts/big.chart?symb=djia&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&ma=0&maval=9&uf=0&lf=1&lf2=0&lf3=0&type=2&size=2&state=8&sid=1643&style=320&time=20&freq=2&nosettings=1&rand=1719&mocktick=1&rand=212

As you can see over the long run stocks of well run companies go up.

Outsourcing is a long term strategy of not going out of business. I am going to assume you are only looking as far as MI because if you look at a global market most of the stuff you said make no sense...that said. The Big threes' problems stemmed from producing cars that were designed poorly, built poorly and nobody wanted. They had your attitude and they only look locally thinking people didn't have a choice and the caved to the unions (Because they were making money hand over fist) and overpaid workers for the work that they were doing. The company and workers became lazy and they both got caught with their pants down. If they stayed on top of things they would have never allow the Japanese to enter the market with smaller, more reliable cars that got better gas mileage, if you remember Detroit didn't even think Americans wanted such cars. They were wrong. and the rest is history.

As for most other companies they need to outsource to stay competitive, and outsourcing creates better jobs here in the US. It also increases the standard of living requiring people to not need to make more money to live better.




6 years ago the P/E ratios were crazy(That's price of the stock vs earnings) Today they are at historical lows. Not the same thing, these companies are making record profits (and yes every year companies should make record profits, just like you would like to make a little more than the year before)

Example 6 years ago stocks like Yahoo, Lucent, AOL were trading at P/E of like 200 some companies never even made a profit. Example Company A makes $1 profit per share Company A was trading for like $200 a share. It didn't make sense at the time but everyone got caught up in it because everyone was making money and they wanted to too.

Today in the Dow 30 the average P/E is like 15 Exxon is 10.6, Wal-mart is 17.8, Alcoa is 13.0 you get the idea

So no it's not the same as 6 years ago the ecomony is doing great, the market is being held back because of the unknowns of the middle east, Oil prices & Terrorism but even with the stuff that has been going on it's held out well.




Big business is the reason we have the strongest economy in the world:dontknow: How are they hoarding wealth? Most large companies are publicly owned so that wealth is transfer to pretty much everyone, granted some people own more stock them others but they also take more risk. Most people own stock in one from or another.





I didn't read it but have read many like it and I agree that it does change the landscape. There are towns that outlaw (by zoning) big business but the problem is the people of those town drive to the next town so the small guy get hurt either way. Our landscape is changing everyday it hurts the small business owner but they are going to have to adapt. There are some businesses that a shop owner can compete in and some that they can't.




Sorry to say it but it's like any business if you can provide a better product and a competitive cost you need to do something else, that goes for workers as well That's how I always judged my own work and how I told my employees to judge their work, be better, faster, more reliable and provide more value then anyone else or at least most and you have nothing to worry about. If you make the most you better be the best, you can't have a welfare program and stay in business.


I do agree with you on sevral points. Competition is good bussiness for sure. My issue with corporations is that the ownership isn;t domestic in many case's.Do you have any publicly avaible information for say General Motors and its share holder demographics ??

I however disagree that outsourcing is good for the economy. Thats like shopping yourself out of a job.

Imagine this scenario.

you have a piggy bank with $500 dollars in it. you work for a company that supplies you with enough income to always have $500 dollars. You buy a product made in China and you subtract $4 dollar from that account. That money never reciculated back to the company you work for so now you take a $4 pay cut and you have lost $8 dollars. do this on a very large scale and you can easily amortize why outsourcing and the trade deficiet are going to bankrupt america in the long hual. the numbers don't add up. We cannot long term sustain a massive trade deficiet. even if the trade deficiet is only %5 of the GDP if we don't not fix this offset sooner of later %5 will start to add up to something huge. But maybe it already has.

Also don;t forget to look at who is buying the stocks of once american companys. is GM an american car company by ownership ????

[Sean124]

that's comparing global economics to national.

Global economic aren;t really my issue. We are lossing jobs here.

[L98Terror]

I do agree with you on sevral points. Competition is good bussiness for sure. My issue with corporations is that the ownership isn;t domestic in many case's.Do you have any publicly avaible information for say General Motors and its share holder demographics ??

I however disagree that outsourcing is good for the economy. Thats like shopping yourself out of a job.

Imagine this scenario.

you have a piggy bank with $500 dollars in it. you work for a company that supplies you with enough income to always have $500 dollars. You buy a product made in China and you subtract $4 dollar from that account. That money never reciculated back to the company you work for so now you take a $4 pay cut and you have lost $8 dollars. do this on a very large scale and you can easily amortize why outsourcing and the trade deficiet are going to bankrupt america in the long hual. the numbers don't add up. We cannot long term sustain a massive trade deficiet. even if the trade deficiet is only %5 of the GDP if we don't not fix this offset sooner of later %5 will start to add up to something huge. But maybe it already has.

Also don;t forget to look at who is buying the stocks of once american companys. is GM an american car company by ownership ????


The largest owner of GM stock is Kirk Kerkorian at 9.9% Here are the owners of more than 5%



Holder Name
State Street Global Advisors 15.3%--- Capital Research & Management Co 10.8%,----Brandes Investment Partners 10.5%, ---- Kerkorian (Kirk ) 9.9%, --- Southeastern Asset Management 7.2%



Who owns the fund:dontknow:

[L98Terror]

I however disagree that outsourcing is good for the economy. Thats like shopping yourself out of a job.

Imagine this scenario.

you have a piggy bank with $500 dollars in it. you work for a company that supplies you with enough income to always have $500 dollars. You buy a product made in China and you subtract $4 dollar from that account. That money never reciculated back to the company you work for so now you take a $4 pay cut and you have lost $8 dollars. do this on a very large scale and you can easily amortize why outsourcing and the trade deficiet are going to bankrupt america in the long hual. the numbers don't add up. We cannot long term sustain a massive trade deficiet. even if the trade deficiet is only %5 of the GDP if we don't not fix this offset sooner of later %5 will start to add up to something huge. But maybe it already has.



Not to be insulting but your dumbing it down to much

First of all your recirculating theory is flawed, people have shown they will buy the best product for the money and most will just buy the cheapest product.


So in reality if the company doesn't outsource then the company has to build the widget with high labor cost causing them to charge $6 vs the $4 that they could have produced the widget for if they outsourced. They hold their ground and don't outsource. Eventually another company figures out they can make and sell the same widget for $4 if the outsource so they go ahead and do that, now when the customers go to the store they can choose widget A for $6 or Widget B for $4 guess which one they buy?? Eventuality you have two choices find a way to produce the widget for less(outsource or give labor wage cuts) and sell your widgets for $4 to compete or go out of business. Now in a state like MI the unions won't allow wage cuts so you have no choice but to outsource. The other alternative is is to increase productivity (which unions resist also).


Now to your recirculating theory, it doesn't work because Company A will never produce everything a person needs so they will spend thier money on otherthings and with other companies.

Besides for every $10 a company takes in say $3 goes to materials, $3 to labor $2 to taxes and $2 to profits. of the $3 the worker gets $1 goes to taxes and they are only left with $2 if they spend all $2 with company A that leaves company A $8 short. Even if everyone that works for a company buys it's products it's not enough to support itself, it will need other consumers and if it can't produce a competitive Widget than the go out of business and the offer ZERO jobs.



I however disagree that outsourcing is good for the economy. Thats like shopping yourself out of a job.


Outsourcing allows companies that would normally go out of business stay in business. The only way the US is going to stay competitive is to be able to provide products around the world that countries can't provide themselves. We are not a maufacturing country anymore and if you a banking on a Maufacturing job you are in trouble. The USA in a information and service country now.

The reason the trade deficit is so large is because Americans are doing well and buy a shit load of stuff. or are you talking about the National Deficit :dontknow:

[Sean124]

Not to be insulting but your dumbing it down to much

First of all your recirculating theory is flawed, people have shown they will buy the best product for the money and most will just buy the cheapest product.


So in reality if the company doesn't outsource then the company has to build the widget with high labor cost causing them to charge $6 vs the $4 that they could have produced the widget for if they outsourced. They hold their ground and don't outsource. Eventually another company figures out they can make and sell the same widget for $4 if the outsource so they go ahead and do that, now when the customers go to the store they can choose widget A for $6 or Widget B for $4 guess which one they buy?? Eventuality you have two choices find a way to produce the widget for less(outsource or give labor wage cuts) and sell your widgets for $4 to compete or go out of business. Now in a state like MI the unions won't allow wage cuts so you have no choice but to outsource. The other alternative is is to increase productivity (which unions resist also).


Now to your recirculating theory, it doesn't work because Company A will never produce everything a person needs so they will spend thier money on otherthings and with other companies.

Besides for every $10 a company takes in say $3 goes to materials, $3 to labor $2 to taxes and $2 to profits. of the $3 the worker gets $1 goes to taxes and they are only left with $2 if they spend all $2 with company A that leaves company A $8 short. Even if everyone that works for a company buys it's products it's not enough to support itself, it will need other consumers and if it can't produce a competitive Widget than the go out of business and the offer ZERO jobs.





Outsourcing allows companies that would normally go out of business stay in business. The only way the US is going to stay competitive is to be able to provide products around the world that countries can't provide themselves. We are not a maufacturing country anymore and if you a banking on a Maufacturing job you are in trouble. The USA in a information and service country now.

The reason the trade deficit is so large is because Americans are doing well and buy a shit load of stuff. or are you talking about the National Deficit :dontknow:

Oh come on. I can't belive you are trying to sell this to me. First of all outsourcing isn't keeping companies in bussiness. If they are so unprofitable to begin with then all outsorucing is doing is prolonging the inevitable.

Secondly the reason we had been so succesful for the last 50 or so years was becuase of simple trade. We sold more then we imported and thats what built this economy. That and forgien investment dollars.

here is a report to read.

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_tradetestimony

Your attitude towards manfuacturing is pervasive. thats not to say that some of the Job loss isn;t directly cuased by increased automation but usually companies got more productivity out of the same workforce through increase automation. Not the case this time around. Instead of increased automation and the accompanying job cuts it produced there is a wholesale sluaghter in the jobs economy. Secondly don;t proport that the loss of Manufacturing is a nesscity. A service economy is not a good idea unless you have trade balance which we do not.

the three major points from this report are


First, the U.S. should enter into no new trade agreements, including China's proposed entry into the WTO, unless and until those agreements are revised to include enforceable labor rights and environmental standards as core elements. This will require, at a minimum, agreements to achieve internationally agreed upon standards, international performance reviews, and enforcement of these standards through trade sanctions.

Second, measures must be taken to reduce chronic U.S. trade deficits with certain key countries, and in a few critical industries such as motor vehicles and commercial aircraft. These include China, Japan, the NAFTA countries, and Europe. The reasons for these deficits differ in each case. Part of Europe's problem is simply slow growth. The Chinese situation is more complex, involving exchange rate manipulation and systematic discrimination against U.S. imports, as well as advanced industrial policies that pilfer critical jobs and technologies from U.S. firms doing business there.

Third, the U.S. must reduce steadily reduce the value of the U.S. dollar, in coordination with other major advanced industrial nations. Similar steps were taken between 1985 and 1987 period, the last major period of dollar-overvaluation and exploding trade deficits. The over-valued dollar is having a particularly damaging impact on U.S. agriculture (Scott 1999b).






So I don't subscribe to that line of Bs. Trade deficiets are bad for the American economy pure and simple. Secondly outsourcing leading to a service economy is a horridly wretched idea with stagnant wages low paying jobs and rampant inflation with overvauled propertys. Just look at new york city if you want to see what a national service industry economy would look like.

Mind you this report was written in 1999 it totally explains the current economic crissis looming in this country and our current fiscal issues. the exploding National Debt or US goverments deficiet is directly related to the loss of high paying jobs in this country. when you lose alot of high wage earners you loss tax base. the answer isn;t higher taxs or for that matter ending a war we could barely afford. the issue is that we allow everybody to dump product on our shores. short term thinking at best. We need to overhual our economic policies with forgien trade and balance the trade deficiet. the rest of it should ease itself up without to much further interfernce. Although a positive deficiet trending in our favor would easily speed the recovery.

[L98Terror]

Oh come on. I can't belive you are trying to sell this to me. First of all outsourcing isn't keeping companies in bussiness. If they are so unprofitable to begin with then all outsorucing is doing is prolonging the inevitable.

Secondly the reason we had been so succesful for the last 50 or so years was becuase of simple trade. We sold more then we imported and thats what built this economy. That and forgien investment dollars.

here is a report to read.

http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_viewpoints_tradetestimony

Your attitude towards manfuacturing is pervasive. thats not to say that some of the Job loss isn;t directly cuased by increased automation but usually companies got more productivity out of the same workforce through increase automation. Not the case this time around. Instead of increased automation and the accompanying job cuts it produced there is a wholesale sluaghter in the jobs economy. Secondly don;t proport that the loss of Manufacturing is a nesscity. A service economy is not a good idea unless you have trade balance which we do not.

the three major points from this report are


First, the U.S. should enter into no new trade agreements, including China's proposed entry into the WTO, unless and until those agreements are revised to include enforceable labor rights and environmental standards as core elements. This will require, at a minimum, agreements to achieve internationally agreed upon standards, international performance reviews, and enforcement of these standards through trade sanctions.

Second, measures must be taken to reduce chronic U.S. trade deficits with certain key countries, and in a few critical industries such as motor vehicles and commercial aircraft. These include China, Japan, the NAFTA countries, and Europe. The reasons for these deficits differ in each case. Part of Europe's problem is simply slow growth. The Chinese situation is more complex, involving exchange rate manipulation and systematic discrimination against U.S. imports, as well as advanced industrial policies that pilfer critical jobs and technologies from U.S. firms doing business there.

Third, the U.S. must reduce steadily reduce the value of the U.S. dollar, in coordination with other major advanced industrial nations. Similar steps were taken between 1985 and 1987 period, the last major period of dollar-overvaluation and exploding trade deficits. The over-valued dollar is having a particularly damaging impact on U.S. agriculture (Scott 1999b).






So I don't subscribe to that line of Bs. Trade deficiets are bad for the American economy pure and simple. Secondly outsourcing leading to a service economy is a horridly wretched idea with stagnant wages low paying jobs and rampant inflation with overvauled propertys. Just look at new york city if you want to see what a national service industry economy would look like.

Mind you this report was written in 1999 it totally explains the current economic crissis looming in this country and our current fiscal issues. the exploding National Debt or US goverments deficiet is directly related to the loss of high paying jobs in this country. when you lose alot of high wage earners you loss tax base. the answer isn;t higher taxs or for that matter ending a war we could barely afford. the issue is that we allow everybody to dump product on our shores. short term thinking at best. We need to overhual our economic policies with forgien trade and balance the trade deficiet. the rest of it should ease itself up without to much further interfernce. Although a positive deficiet trending in our favor would easily speed the recovery.

First of all I haven't given any opinions or at least I tried not to.

I don't think we should be a Information & service based economy just that's the way it's headed.

I do agree that trade agreement with other countries need to be fair, it's not right that European companies such as Airbus are subsidised buy the govn't or they don't have the same environmental regulations. I think any country that we do business with should have the same restrictions placed on them that they place on us.


The problem is that is not what is happening and until the people of the US get mad as hell and make sure their representatives make it happen and stop buying cheap Chinese crap the companies have to do what they have to do and I don't blame them I blame the unfair agreements with foreign countries and the American people for not supporting US manufacturers.

I personally have made a point to buy American made products if it's available and of equal quality. I'll even pay a little extra but it's not an easy thing to do.