ODL.....Lower taxes does not mean more jobs.

Corporations are moving jobs overseas because it is cheaper to make a
product or provide a service if the people who make that product or service
earn 1/2 or 1/3 of what their US counterpart is making. Taxes have nothing
to do with it. Some may try to believe that, but it isn't the case.

Have you had the chance to watch Lou Dobbs on CNN anytime during the past
two weeks or so? He's been doing a segment each night about jobs being moved
overseas. Unless I missed it, he has not mentioned taxes as the reason, just
cheaper labor. His latest report (that I was able to see) reported that the
company that makes frames (?) for Chrysler (Hi Krut) is closing their plant
up north and moving the operations to where? Mexico!!! And who the heck owns
Chrysler? A German company. They have the ability to purchase the parts for
their cars anywhere in the world, so the cheaper labor and benefits of other
countries wins out.

And where are most of the engines for Ford made? China. Transmissions?
Overseas. Dude, look at the products around your computer now. Where are all
these products made? China, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore, Mexico. Open up
your computer. Chances are it was assembled in Mexico (or in Texas by
illegals) from components made in China or Japan.

You think Ford, Siemens, IBM, Tyson and the long list of companies who are
moving jobs overseas are worried about taxes? November Pappa...they are
worried about providing the cheapest made product to consumers so they can
keep or gain market share. Period.

Lowering taxes sounds like a feasible argument. But the rubber never meets
the road. Lowering taxes on a corporation simply means more profit which in
turn means better bonuses to the managers. Lower taxes for consumers, which
I am all for, usually means more spending by consumers because they have
more money. Sounds good till you realize that most consumers are ass-high in
debt, have little or no savings, are trusting that Social Security or the
Lottery will be their retirement and therefore save zero of their 'new'
money for later.

Do you really think that if corporations didn't pay any taxes that the
prices of their products would reflect that? Hardly.

But, I offer this as an opposite opinion of mine:

http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory.cfm?Story_ID=2442040

Also, I offer this article for your reading pleasure. At first I thought
this was an article about the 'good' side of moving jobs overseas. But the
more I read and the more I paid attention to the attitude the article was
written in, I changed my mind. The author wrote the article as support for
off-shoring jobs, but the attitude used made me wonder if this person lives
in a locked room and has no concept of the impact of losing jobs. Here's a
nice quote: "The best-known report, by Forrester Research, a consultancy,
guesses that 3.3m American service-industry jobs will have gone overseas by
2015-barely noticeable when you think about the 7m-8m lost every quarter
through job-churning."

I bet the 3.3 million people who lose their jobs will notice it.

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2454530

(PS, notice the articles never mention the 'tax' word.....)




 -----Original Message-----
From:   [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]  On
Behalf Of Joe Goodson
Sent:   Thursday, February 19, 2004 8:26 PM
To:     RollTideFan-The University of Alabama Athletics Discussion List
Subject:        Re: [RollTideFan] Come one, come all.......(WARNING: NON-BAMA)

The reason why all of those jobs are leaving the United States is because
for 40 of the last 50 years the Democrats have been pulling their lungs out
with corporate taxes.  The corporations had to raise consumer prices to off
set the higher taxes which drives down their sales because of foreign
competition.  Bush is right.  Lower taxes means more jobs.  A rising tide
lifts all boats.
Joe
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
 The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.
 -- Winston Churchill

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'RollTideFan'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 8:15 AM
Subject: [RollTideFan] Come one, come all.......(WARNING: NON-BAMA)


> Of course there's the report of Tyson Foods decreasing their work force by
> 6,000 and Siemen's Technology announcing that they are transferring 15,000
> programming jobs overseas to lower wage countries.
> But what is on the mind of the average voter? Bush's National Guard record
> and the rumor of Kerry having an affair.
> Bush Amnesty Sparks Surge in Border Crossings
> Thursday, February 19, 2004
> By Matt Hayes
>
> On Jan. 27, the Copley News Service reported that shortly after President
> Bush announced his plans to amnesty millions of illegal aliens in the
U.S.,
> more than half of the Mexicans trying to sneak into the U.S. through San
> Ysidro (search) told authorities they were doing so to position themselves
> for the amnesty.
> As one member of the U.S. Border Patrol (search) told me, "They believe
that
> they are only responding to an invitation."
> The percentage suggested by Copley probably does not come close to the
> actual number of people who are running for the American border as word of
> Bush's immigration plan (search) spreads through Mexico -- and indeed
> throughout the world. Mexico, it seems, is now regarded the world over as
> the doorway to the United States.
> In the last several weeks, a staggering 90 percent of all illegal aliens
> intercepted in one sector in southern Texas claim they've come for the
> amnesty.
> Officers of the Border Patrol have now been directed to ask a set of
> questions of the illegal aliens they apprehend running across the border.
> One of those questions is: Is the person attempting to illegally enter the
> U.S. in response to the Bush amnesty proposal? To make arrests, Border
> Patrol officers often must dodge rocks being thrown at them by aliens as
> they cross. They then are told by all but 10 percent of the illegals they
> apprehend that it is the Bush amnesty (search) they've come for.
>  "The agents were soon told to stop collecting this information,
presumably
> because it appeared as if the proposal was acting as a lure," says my
source
> within the Border Patrol.
> Word of the 2000-mile wide open door between Mexico and the U.S. has
spread
> far beyond Mexico. It is not just Mexicans who are flooding into our
border
> states anymore. Along with the Nicaraguans, Brazilians, Venezuelans,
> Ecuadorians, and Chileans, agents of the Border Patrol now encounter
> Chinese, Pakistanis, and Indians. Nationals of countries other than Mexico
> are known, in Border Patrol parlance, as "OTMs." (search) Because they
> cannot easily be returned to their home country (whereas a Mexican
national
> might be driven right back across the border), OTMs are permitted to enter
> the U.S. and given a Notice to Appear, which is a piece of paper demanding
> their appearance before an Immigration Judge.
> "I'm an OTM and I want my NTA," some have been known to declare to the
> Border Patrol. Rules require that most be given their NTA, upon which the
> OTM departs forever for some unknown location in America.
> "A lot of OTMs want to be caught so they can get their "papers," which
makes
> them legal enough to get past our checkpoint without having to ride in the
> back of an 18-wheeler or crammed into the trunk of a car," says one agent.
> This is what the Bush amnesty proposal has caused to happen at our border
> with Mexico.  Foreign nationals walk nearly unimpeded into our country --
> fully aware of ways in which our immigration laws can be used to their
> advantage and even the nomenclature of immigration law enforcement-- and
> demand that our federal officers take a certain action that gives them the
> greatest likelihood of disappearing within the U.S.
> Like a loss-making business that is kept alive by its corporate parent so
it
> can be used as a tax write-off, the Border Patrol remains deliberately
> undermanned and hogtied while the administration tries to keep up the
> appearance that the borders of the United States actually mean something.
> At a Democratic rally in Tennessee, Al Gore dumbfounded observers when, in
> criticizing President Bush's invasion of Iraq, he baroquely claimed the
> president had "betrayed his country." Right now, thousands of registered
> Republicans -- particularly those in border states -- are experiencing a
> tangible sense of betrayal. Some things are sacrosanct to the modern
> Republican, and along with such values as a strong national defense and
> limited government, one is a secure national border. That disappeared with
> President Bush's amnesty proposal, just as if he had announced that the
GOP
> is no longer interested in reducing taxes.
> I doubt that most principled Republicans will forget it.
> Matt Hayes began practicing immigration law shortly after graduating from
> Pace University School of Law in 1994, representing new immigrants in
civil
> and criminal matters. He is the author of The New Immigration Law and
> Practice, to be published in October.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> RollTideFan - The University of Alabama Athletics Discussion List
>
> "Welcome to RollTideFan! Wear a cup!"
>
> To join or leave the list or to make changes to your subscription visit
http://listinfo.rolltidefan.net
>



______________________________________________________
RollTideFan - The University of Alabama Athletics Discussion List

"Welcome to RollTideFan! Wear a cup!"

To join or leave the list or to make changes to your subscription visit
http://listinfo.rolltidefan.net


______________________________________________________
RollTideFan - The University of Alabama Athletics Discussion List

"Welcome to RollTideFan! Wear a cup!"

To join or leave the list or to make changes to your subscription visit 
http://listinfo.rolltidefan.net

Reply via email to