BF2S Forums Operation Wetback (1954)

cybargs considering the only forum you post in is d&st, you get away with posting some absolute prime shite sometimes.

if we made racial comments nonstop we'd get banned outright.

contribute something based in a fact, for once in your life.

Uzique wrote:

cybargs considering the only forum you post in is d&st, you get away with posting some absolute prime shite sometimes.

if we made racial comments nonstop we'd get banned outright.

contribute something based in a fact, for once in your life.

complain to a mod then.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Globalization is the race to the bottom. What happens when the place we started giving the factory jobs to start demanding more money, they move to the next third world country and build that up. So the corporate owners can make there money with the slash and burn technic.

Well, that's more of a problem for the third world country than it is for us.  That's another discussion...

cpt.fass1 wrote:

What happens when the office jobs start getting shipped over seas and the college educated people don't have demand anymore and no factory/skill labor jobs to fall back on. When we have so many unemployed it drives down salaries and drives up taxes leaving a huge hole.

Well, the only way that can happen is if we don't properly adapt.  There will never be a point where all jobs can be outsourced.  However, even if we did reach something close to that point, it would probably involve a global situation where our standard of living would be lower than it currently is, and most of the developing world would be living at a higher standard of living than before.

Essentially, your fear is of the later stages of globalization, which is a valid concern, but protectionism doesn't really protect you from that.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

I think it's very important for a country to have all types of employment in all fields to take care of it's citizens. Why would I care if industry is booming in Indian that's to us shipping our jobs over there, it's only going to destroy my potential to make money and my country in the long run. Also it's going to push up crime, Welfare recipients and Social Service costs.

Well, I think it is inevitable that we will become less decadent over time.  As the developing world consumes more resources, we will have to consume less.  As for how this affects your own job, it depends on if you choose to advance your education or not.

The days of staying in the same job your whole life are mostly over, unless you're already a professional like a doctor.  For the most part, you should actively seek to advance in your skill set, so that you can move up before you might get replaced through outsourcing and such.  It might be somewhat annoying, but it's mostly inevitable.

The other option is to move to a smaller, more protectionist country, but that involves a lot of financial and social hassles.

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-08-23 10:42:17)

Well the constant education factor can only be obtained with a decent current job that you can work 40 hours a week for. Also in the US right now, we really need to become industriousness and need a rebuild. Problem is that China and the other developing third world countries are taking the resources we actually need right now.

Again there needs to be a happy medium, not every child is special and going to become a millionaire when they grow up. Also if the education factor is what we're looking for, why aren't we focusing more money on Arts and Literature?

We need to rebuild out countries infrastructure, but probably won't have the number of skill set people to do it.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Well the constant education factor can only be obtained with a decent current job that you can work 40 hours a week for. Also in the US right now, we really need to become industriousness and need a rebuild. Problem is that China and the other developing third world countries are taking the resources we actually need right now.

Well, if it's any consolation, I think we should socialize collegiate education more -- especially technical colleges.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Again there needs to be a happy medium, not every child is special and going to become a millionaire when they grow up. Also if the education factor is what we're looking for, why aren't we focusing more money on Arts and Literature?

Actually, arts and literature are less likely to help you get employed.  We really need more of a focus on science and engineering.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

We need to rebuild out countries infrastructure, but probably won't have the number of skill set people to do it.

Ironically, building up infrastructure is mostly done by immigrants.  This has been true for a while now.

Last edited by Turquoise (2010-08-23 10:50:40)

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

HUH about the white persons thing?

I was just making fun of the western  protectionist mentality and trying to "protect" their jobs from being "lost." If a factory gets closed down, that worker won't be forever unemployed, he'll probably find similar type of work elsewhere (shipping industry for one). There are some jobs that are really regional based that can't be really outsourced. but if someone offers a service at the same quality and a lower cost, why the hell not?

Because that only benefits the ones on top, while making the product unaffordable to the people who would buy it?

If it is unaffordable then you have a shitty product, then someone else would step up and take your place. The economy is never static.

Uzique wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Again there needs to be a happy medium, not every child is special and going to become a millionaire when they grow up. Also if the education factor is what we're looking for, why aren't we focusing more money on Arts and Literature?

Actually, arts and literature are less likely to help you get employed.  We really need more of a focus on science and engineering.

he said education factor not employment factor.

being educated and cultured is an important thing too, you know. there are other criteria for life success other than your salary.

In the context of what I was explaining, the education I was referring to was employment related.  Yes, arts and literature qualify as education, but in practical terms, they do not typically contribute much to getting a good paying job.

I would actually argue most American education systems focus too much on arts and literature and not enough on science and math.  I think this is easily demonstrated when comparing much of America's education systems vs. those of Japan, for example.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

Because that only benefits the ones on top, while making the product unaffordable to the people who would buy it?

If it is unaffordable then you have a shitty product, then someone else would step up and take your place. The economy is never static.

I'm saying taking manufacturing jobs over seas, cuts out the user base of your manufactured product..

You make a product and have people manufacture it for you, then they buy the product. You take the manufacturing overseas and lay off all your workers, you have no one else to buy your product, if you plan on selling it back to the people from where you are from.

Again you are assuming the economy is static. Those workers get laid off sure, but they will find a job some place else and the product will probably be cheaper/better because the lower production costs frees up a lot of assets for the company.

So I"m suppose to believe that while we're looking 100,000 of jobs a day, they're appearing in other sectors of work? When the unemployment rate rises and majority of college students are getting out of school and going right back because they can't find a job, that my view on the economic system is false?

That the job market is based on supply and demand of the work force and when we don't have "Real" jobs to support our workforce it doesn't effect everyone from the upper middle class down.

When you have 10 qualified people going for 5 jobs that the company isn't going to take who ever will settle for the lowest income.  My friend is a vet who became a nurse, went to school to better her education and ended up getting a job offer of 18 dollars an hour from 11-7 at night.  Most everyone I know is skilled and everyone I know has taken pay cuts. So I'm not sure how globalization makes everyone wealthier.

cpt.fass1 wrote:

So I"m suppose to believe that while we're looking 100,000 of jobs a day, they're appearing in other sectors of work? When the unemployment rate rises and majority of college students are getting out of school and going right back because they can't find a job, that my view on the economic system is false?

That the job market is based on supply and demand of the work force and when we don't have "Real" jobs to support our workforce it doesn't effect everyone from the upper middle class down.

When you have 10 qualified people going for 5 jobs that the company isn't going to take who ever will settle for the lowest income.  My friend is a vet who became a nurse, went to school to better her education and ended up getting a job offer of 18 dollars an hour from 11-7 at night.  Most everyone I know is skilled and everyone I know has taken pay cuts. So I'm not sure how globalization makes everyone wealthier.

You're taking what's taking place during a recession and making it the rule. Would you have made any of these statements three years ago? No.

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

cpt.fass1 wrote:

HUH about the white persons thing?

The jobs will eventually move out of Indian cause the costs will go up when the labor wants to make more money. Then it will go somewhere else?

Your entire view of economics is based on the false premise that wealth and jobs are finite resources. Neither is true. Jobs are created every single day and if they leave one sector, another one springs up. We haven't weakened ourselves at all by pushing our manufacturing overseas, nor do we really face any threat to other jobs that we do. Globalization makes everyone wealthier, not poorer. You need to get out of this mindset that piling up a bunch of gold in a vault makes you wealthy because it doesn't.

Globalization doesn't make everyone wealthier, but it does have a net effect of making the developing world wealthier.

It makes the production and sales of goods cheaper so it does make everyone wealthier. Sure it does shaft a lot of low end jobs, but those people can find something else to do. Hell in Australia a plumber can make 80k a year due to the lack of plumbers Australia has lol.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

It makes the production and sales of goods cheaper so it does make everyone wealthier. Sure it does shaft a lot of low end jobs, but those people can find something else to do. Hell in Australia a plumber can make 80k a year due to the lack of plumbers Australia has lol.

It makes consumers richer and producers poorer.
The net effect is to make everyone poorer, but feel richer because they have lots of junk.

If it makes the producers poorer explain the Asian economic boom.