Re: I have found the cause on the car makers bail-out and it is Me

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 06:52:45 -0800, Islander <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Hal Hanig wrote:
Evelyn wrote:
"El Castor" <No_One@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7lb4k454erbkkgg8hdgq0j4v7cv9qva2kn@xxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:12:09 -0800 (PST), p4o2 <p4o2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Every person that has purchased a non-us car is responsible for the
problem. ( I am included with a Saab and a Renau sp. in my past). I
know every one will site quality but just the same this is what
happened. A while ago someone counted the number of Japanese cars in a
Ford plant parking lot; and the number was large. In a lot of towns we
see "support the local mertients" signs. Buy American was seen in the
past but it has not worked for a lot of things.
Not my fault. Detroit has no one to blame but itself. If they made a
better car than the Japanese, that's what I would buy -- the best car
for the money. Before you tell me how unpatriotic I am, take off your
shirt and look at the label. Where was it made? Why didn't you spend
twice as much for an American made shirt?

That's IF you can find one! Everything is made outside of the USA. You
name it; shoes, cars, clothing..... there are very few products made here
anymore.

That's true, and it's because we turned over responsibility for the economic
health of our nation to people whose only interest was in their own economic
health first and foremost. So, if there was more money to be made by them
by simply outsourcing manufacturing requirements to cheaper labor markets,
that's exactly what they did. Then, when they tallied up the hugely
successful financial results of their ventures, they gave themselves
humongous bonuses without a serious thought to the country that had spawned
them and who they'd left behind in pursuit of their god, Mammon.

Hal


They thought that they could replace manufacturing with finance.

"They" (who are "they"?) didn't think they could replace anything.
Changes in global manufacturing are a natural process, and one that
has been going on since this country was founded. Was Massachusetts
worse off when Northeastern labor got too expensive and the textile
mills moved to Georgia? Massachusetts workers migrated to better
higher paying jobs, and Georgia workers made more in the mills than
they did picking cotton, and were thus able to buy more from
Massachusetts while in turn shipping less expensive cloth to the
workers of Boston. Both the Northeast and the Southeast benefited. The
same thing is happening every day on a global scale. Is California
worse off because Intel designs IC's here and manufactures them in
Malaysia? Anytime you, and people like you, want to halt imports and
force products to be manufactured here, you can do so by imposing
tariffs and quotas. It would be a disaster, but go right ahead. In
fact, you could really improve things by tweaking the constitution and
allowing California to impose tariffs and quotas on New Jersey. That
would really build up manufacturing in both states. Right?

Look
at the difference in growth rate over the past 8 years in the two
industries. Employment in manufacturing has dropped by 3.4M jobs since
2000 while employment in the financial sector has grown by 325K jobs,
despite a loss of 100K jobs over the last year.

There is considerable evidence to suggest that a national policy that
encourages the development of a financial industry that serves
*external* customers is beneficial to the local economy. But, these
idiots got it wrong. They thought that we could be a borrower and still
maintain a viable economy simply by moving a lot of financial
instruments around. It didn't work. It produced a lot of activity, but
there was no value added. While they sold a lot of these instruments to
foreign investors, their actions only served to turn our financial
crisis into a world-wide financial crisis.
.

Relevant Pages