McCain Policy: The Economy

reply to post by jam321


On that note, let me give you some information about outsourcing. This was the original list of the original "Dobbs Rogue Fund" in 2004, only 216 companies at the time:
3Com
3M

A
Accenture
Adaptec
Adobe Systems
Advanced Energy Industries
Aetna
A.G. Edwards
Agere Systems
Agilent Tech.
AIG
Alamo Rent A Car
Albertson's
Alliance Semiconductor
Allstate
Alpha Thought Global
Amazon.com
AMD
American Express
American Management Systems
American Standard
Amphenol Corp.
Analog Devices
Andrew Corp.
AOL
Applied Materials
A.T. Cross Company
AT&T
AT&T Wireless
A.T. Kearney
Avanade
Avery Dennison

B
Bank of America
Bank of New York
Bank One
BearingPoint
Bear Stearns
Bechtel
BellSouth
Best Buy
Black & Decker
BMC Software
Boeing
Brocade
Bumble Bee

C
Cadence Design Systems
Capital One
Carrier
Cendant
Cerner Corporation
Charles Schwab
ChevronTexaco
CIBER
Ciena
Cigna
Circuit City, Inc.
Cisco Systems
Citigroup
Coca-Cola
Comcast Holdings
Computer Associates
Computer Sciences Corporation
Continental Airlines
Convergys
Cooper Tire & Rubber
Cooper Tools
Countrywide Financial
COVAD Comm.
CSX
Cummins

D
Dell Computer
Delta Air Lines
Direct TV
Discover
Document Sciences Corp.
Dow Chemical
DuPont

E
Earthlink
Eastman Kodak
Eaton Corporation
EDS
Electroglas
Electronics for Imaging
Eli Lilly
EMC
Emerson Electric
En Pointe Technologies
Equifax
Ernst & Young
Evolving Systems
Expedia
ExxonMobil

F
Fair Isaac
Fedders Corporation
Fidelity Investments
Financial Techologies International
First American Title Ins.
First Data
Fluor
Ford Motor
Franklin Mint

G
Gateway
GE Capital
General Electric
GlobespanVirata
Goldman Sachs
Goodrich
Google
Greenpoint Mortgage
Guardian Life Insurance

H
The Hartford Financial Services Group
HealthAxis
Hewitt Associates
Hewlett-Packard
The Holmes Group
HSN
Humana

I
IBM
IndyMac Bancorp
Infogain
Innodata Isogen
Intel
Intl. Paper
Intuit
ITT Educational Services

J
Jabil Circuit
Jacobs Engineering
Jacuzzi
JDS Uniphase
Johnson Controls
Johnson & Johnson
JPMorgan Chase
Juniper Networks

K
KANA Software
Kaiser Permanente
Keane
KeyCorp
KLA-Tencor
Kwikset

L
Lawson Software
Lehman Brothers
Levi Strauss
Lexmark International
Lifescan
Lillian Vernon
Linksys
Lionbridge Technologies
LiveBridge
Lockheed Martin
Lowe's
Lucent

M
Maritz
Marshall Fields
Mattel
Maytag
McDATA Corporation
Medtronic
Mellon Bank
Merrill Corporation
Merrill Lynch
Metasolv
MetLife
Microsoft
Monsanto
Morgan Stanley
Motorola

N
Nabco
National City Corporation
National Life
National Semiconductor
NCR Corporation
neoIT
NETGEAR
Network Associates
Newell Rubbermaid
New York Life Insurance Co.
Northwest Airlines

O
Office Depot
Ohio Art
ON Semiconductor
Oracle
OshKosh B'Gosh
Otis Elevator Co.
Owens Corning

P
palmOne
Parker-Hannifin
Parsons E&C
Pearson Digital Learning
Pericom Semiconductor
Perot Systems
Pfizer
Pitney Bowes
Planar Systems
Portal Software
Pratt & Whitney
Primus Telecom
Procter & Gamble
ProQuest
Providian Financial
Prudential Insurance

Q
Qwest Comm.

R
Rainbow Technologies
Radio Shack
Raytheon Aircraft
RCG Information Technology
Regence Group
Rogers
Rohm & Haas
RR Donnelley & Sons
Russell Corporation

S
SAIC
Sanmina-SCI
SBC Comm.
SEI Investments
Siebel Systems
Sikorsky
SMC Networks
Solectron
Sovereign Bancorp
Sprint
Sprint PCS
Starkist Seafood
State Farm Insurance
State Street
StorageTek
SunTrust Banks
Supra Telecom
SurePrep
The Sutherland Group
Sykes Enterprises
Synygy

T
Target
Tecumseh
Telcordia
TeleTech
Tellabs
Texas Inst.
Thrivent Financial for Lutherans
Time Warner
Toys "R" Us
Triquint Semiconductor
Tropical Sportswear
TRW Automotive
Tyco Electronics
Tyco Intl.

U
Union Pacific Railroad
Unisys
United Online
United Tech.

V
VA Software
Veritas
Verizon
VF Corporation

W
Wachovia Bank
Washington Group Intl.
Washington Mutual
WellChoice
Werner Co.
West Corporation
Weyerhaeuser
Whirlpool
Wolverine World Wide
Wyeth

Y
Yahoo!

www.capmag.com...


Here is the list now, too long to count, almost 1,000.
www.cnn.com...

Tax credits or tax cuts should not be given to companies that ship jobs overseas, there is no benefit to either the government or the workers.

Alright Bunch, I got this for you about tax cut and corporations outsourcing which I find close to the truth why jobs are being outsourced.

According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

www.factcheck.org...


Interesting info on this subject.

I also found this for you. This may help you make your argument as to why not all the tax cuts should be reinstated. But like I said before some of them would be beneficial to many Americans who aren't rich.

here's the website

www.cbpp.org...

Steve Forbes has said that the John McCain economic plan is the best way forward at this point. He has been saying so publicly.

reply to post by jam321


I can name some of these companies: Motorola, Stern Pinball, Circuit Services Inc, Siemens, Alcoa,Buehler,Baxter International,Texas Instruments, and the list goes on, and on. Many of these companies had small hubs set up in these countries until there profit margins increased from tax insentives, and then started moving entire operation to Asia for cheaper labor. Our manufaturing base for electronics,large appliances, and tangiable goods are all being made over their.

reply to post by Bunch


Outsourcing is not necessarily a bad thing. From the same article you cite:

"If a U.S. firm shifts employment abroad," said the Washington Post in an editorial on Jan. 26, "the savings flow back to the United States in the form of lower prices for consumers and higher dividends for shareholders; the consumers and shareholders will direct their new spending power at things that create employment. Meanwhile, the fall in prices will allow the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates lower, boosting the job-creation engine."

Indeed, a study by the McKinsey Global Institute, found that two-thirds of the benefits of outsourcing flow to the United States.

And many of the companies you list have their hands tied. Exxon, for example, drills in many foreign countries that demand using a certain percentage of local labor in return for the privilege of drilling in their country.

Other examples:

Alamo Rent-A-Car...what are they supposed to do? Ship a Chevy to Japan when you rent it there?

Coca Cola.... much cheaper to manufacture perishables closer to the consumer.

Etc., etc.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by jsobecky]

reply to post by jsobecky


You dont get it. The article that I cite is from 2004, when none of these policies had shown their full effect on the economy. I can also found you another quote about the benefits of outsourcing:

Gregory Mankiw, chairman of president George W. Bush Council of Economic Advisors, recently told the Joint Economic Committee of the U.S. Congress that the outsourcing of American jobs “is something we should realize is probably a plus for the economy in the long run.”
After all, he said, “Outsourcing is just a new way of doing international trade.”
Mankiw, who testified recently in support of the Economic Report of the president for 2004, apparently didn’t share other interesting tidbits about how America’s families have fared in the face of outsourcing and Bush economics.
For instance:
•The economy has lost more than 2.8 million manufacturing jobs since Bush took office, according to the AFL-CIO. The number of long-term jobless workers has been roughly two million for months, and for much of that time, long-term unemployment has been at its highest rate since 1983.
•The International Monetary Fund, a group that is not known for criticizing the White House, recently released a report saying that the twin deficits, America’s growing budget deficit and the ballooning trade deficit, threaten the financial stability of the global economy.

Bush’s economic report, which Mankiw supports, predicts the economy will generate 3.4 million new jobs this year which would mean an average 325,000 new jobs each month. Of course, last spring, the council said the president’s “Jobs and Growth” tax cut plan for millionaires would create 306,000 jobs monthly starting in July. Yet by February 2004, actual job growth was 1.8 million jobs short of the Bush administration prediction.

One Republican, representative, Donald Manzullo, of Illinois, thought Mankiw’s comments were so out of sync with the devastation of outsourcing American jobs overseas that he suggested the Bush advisor resign. “He ought to walk away and return to his ivy-covered office at Harvard,” Manzullo told the Washington Post.

www.foxvalleylabornews.com...

This article is also from 2004. So it really depends from the perspective that you view the issue. I for one side with Sen. Obama that no tax cuts, subsidies or credits should be given to companies that ship jobs overseas, is simple, where are the benefits of doing that, does it benefit the worker? No, does it benefit the government? No. Tax policies should be put in place with the goal of benefiting both sides, if not at least one of these two, BUT NONE?

And you can say that with oursourcing goods are cheapers, well it really doesn't matter if the people that are hurting, the middle class and them poor, a merely surviving paycheck to paycheck and dont have money to buy the goods. It really doesn't matter how cheap they are if the folks that are loosing their high paying jobs and now have to get by with lower end paying jobs.


[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

reply to post by stphdys

these companies had small hubs set up in these countries until there profit margins increased from tax insentives, and then started moving entire operation to Asia for cheaper labor. [ /quote]

It isn't because of tax incentives, cuts, or breaks the US gives them. It is because other countries give them a better tax break. Kinda like when a factory is going to build a new plant but can't decide where to build. They shop around 4 or 5 cities or states to see which one will give them the best tax breaks. Ireland corporate tax rate is about 12.5% compared to the US which is about 30 something percent.

They do outsource to Asia and other countries because of lower wages. I agree with this.

The deferral clause has been in the tax code for more than half a century and has outlasted numerous reform efforts. In April 1961, even as U.S.-backed rebels were dying at Cuba's Bay of Pigs, President Kennedy asked Congress to rewrite tax provisions that "consistently favor United States private investment abroad compared with investment in our own economy."

source

This is the tax break Obama is talking about but it is a tax law. Perfectly legal. Pay attention how long this law has been in effect. The article is also interesting. I kinda question whether it is the real reason why jobs are going overseas especially since we have been losing jobs overseas for many years.

In addition if Obama really thought that this was a major reason why we were losing jobs overseas why didn't he try to pass legislation to overturn this law?

I think the real reason is that other countries offer a lower tax rate in addition to cheaper labor. A corporation number one priority is to make money for its shareholders.


jsobecky check out this article. I think you will like the information. Knowledge is power.

www.finfacts.com...

[edit on 17-9-2008 by jam321]

reply to post by jsobecky


I don't think that manufacturing of soda and car rental examples are relevant. What's more relevant are the likes of suppor centers run by Dell and other in Inda etc. Most people who had to debug their wireless router using some tech help had one of the two experiences:
a) internet chat which makes the support personnel language skills les relevant
b) endure thick accents

And in either case, good tech jobs had fled this country.

reply to post by jam321


The problem is that we never are going to be on a level playing field with these countries,there will be always countries were labor is cheaper. So the question remains, why give tax cuts to these companies that ship their jobs overseas? Sen. McCain wants not only to make the Bush tax policies permanent, but he would also add some tax cuts of his own.

We already face a record deficit, we are loosing jobs at a record pace, more tax cuts would only serve to expand that deficit, and it would NOT create jobs as it has been proven for the past 8 years.

How Sen. McCain plan of more tax cuts would create jobs and reduce the record deficit? Please someone explain.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

This morning on 'Good Morning America' McCain, when asked about the current state of the economy, railed against what he described as 'corruption' in big businesses as well as poor oversight and greed as being the basis of our current economic nightmare. He said that only a short time ago these CEO's were saying 'everything is fine, everything is fine', when in fact it was not. He suggested that they should be investigated and potentially jailed for this deception.

Day-before-yesterday, as the NYSE tanked, he said to the cameras, 'The economy is sound'. This a day after Alan Greenspan (somewhat better-heeled in economics than McCain) said the economy was in a 'once-in-a-hundred-years crisis'. 90 minutes after McCain made his statement about the economy being sound he was again in front of cameras saying the economy was in a crisis. Which is it?

It would take a great deal of space to chronicle the instances of Bush et al saying 'the economy is sound' as it unraveled. So, using McCain's position on corporate liability for deception of their financial condition, wouldn't it stand to reason that the Administration is responsible for misleading us during this economic meltdown? Shouldn't they be investigated and potentially jailed? And what about McCain himself? Isn't he guilty of the same thing (as recent as Monday)?

reply to post by Bunch


Let's be honest. Neither one will reduce the defecit. They will promise but they won't be able to.

Now there are 4 tax cuts I think we should keep. These are lower corporate taxes, the 10% tax bracket, marriage penalty relief, and the child credit.

3 of these help low and middle income family. The corporate tax cut helps corporations and consumers. If you raise the corporate tax consumers will pay more in the form of prices.

One also has to take into consideration the global market. When the global market is struggling we will also struggle. We are becoming a global nation whether we like it or not. A lot of the job loss are due to this. Not because of tax cuts. I will say this, you are correct in this area. History has shown that tax cuts do not always create the jobs politicians think they will. Part of the problem is that everything is based on an assumption that the economy would remain good. Under this assumption the numbers of jobs created would be high. However, reality is that the economy is always up and down.

Your right we will never be on a level playing field but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. If we get too harsh on all of these corporations you might as well kiss them good-bye. Other countries will welcome them with open arms. I think that instead of making corporations, especially oil, look like villians, Obama should try the same kind of diplomacy he intends to use with our enemies. He wants to sit down, talk, and iron our differences with our enemy but wants to belittle, punish, and tarnish the image of some of the corporations that America depends on. Diplomacy goes a long way in both foreign and domestic policy.

reply to post by jtma508


Thanks for your post and a star!

This what many people fail to recognize, Bush policies have fail, McCain is criticizing them, but a great portion of his economic plan is a recycle waste from Bush policies.He clearly has no clue about the economy and I dont know why people would defend his plan.

If people want to vote for Sen. McCain they should vote for him for the other qualities that he has, good on foreign policy, good for education, he is a republican....or whatever.

But trying to defend a McCain vote because of his economic vision or knowledge is just absolutely ridiculous.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]

reply to post by Bunch

Originally posted by Bunch
You dont get it. The article that I cite is from 2004, when none of these policies had shown their full effect on the economy. I can also found you another quote about the benefits of outsourcing:

No, you don't get the fatal effects of isolationism in a global market. Why should I be forced to pay $100 for a $25 pair of sneakers?

Overcharging for a product because of high labor costs results in one thing: a shrinking customer base as your global customers choose to buy from overseas. The end result is that the only market you have left is your own citizens.

Economic evolution requires adaption to a changing world. You cannot demand that labor-intensive jobs remain in the country when those jobs can be performed much cheaper overseas. That is, unless you want inflation, wages, and interest rates to spiral out of control.

The key to surviving is job creation in the fields in which we excel. Do it faster, cheaper, better, or else die.

reply to post by buddhasystem

Originally posted by buddhasystem
reply to post by jsobecky

 

I don't think that manufacturing of soda and car rental examples are relevant.

I only used them to prove that there is more than meets the eye when people create these huge lists of companies which have "outsourced" jobs.

What's more relevant are the likes of suppor centers run by Dell and other in Inda etc. Most people who had to debug their wireless router using some tech help had one of the two experiences:
a) internet chat which makes the support personnel language skills les relevant
b) endure thick accents

And in either case, good tech jobs had fled this country.

Behind the support centers, someone had to create and design the hardware and software that needs call support. That's where we excel, and that's where we should continue to concentrate our efforts.

Failure to do that will result in a $400 eMachine to cost $700 to cover the additional labor costs.

reply to post by jsobecky


Thanks for your response. I think we can agree to disagree which is perfect, it shows what people cares the most and there is nothing wrong to say about that. Only the election would tell who the overall majority of the people think can lead this country in the right directio as far as the economy goes.

Again thanks for your input.

reply to post by jam321

Originally posted by jam321
Not because of tax cuts. I will say this, you are correct in this area. History has shown that tax cuts do not always create the jobs politicians think they will. Part of the problem is that everything is based on an assumption that the economy would remain good. Under this assumption the numbers of jobs created would be high. However, reality is that the economy is always up and down.

Another fact to consider is that tax cuts do not endlessly return higher revenue to the gov't. There is a point of diminishing returns.

But that does not mean we cannot continue to use them when they are beneficial.

reply to post by Bunch


Well, thank you, too. Let's just hope that the people make the right choice.

reply to post by jam321


Let me be clear about something, I am not against tax credit for corporations, if these corporation can show that they are actively creating jobs here on the U.S. like Sen. Obama's plan proposes, I have no problem with that.

I agree that none of this candidates would be able to reduce the deficit in its entirity but a good economic plan could lead the country in the right direction.

Originally posted by jsobecky
[Behind the support centers, someone had to create and design the hardware and software that needs call support. That's where we excel

We do? That's big news, considering the outsourcing rush in these areas as well.

Failure to do that will result in a $400 eMachine to cost $700 to cover the additional labor costs.

Guess what, this is just as well. We'll have more prosperous workers here, and maybe they still should be able to buy a $700 computer.

John McCain continues to support NAFTA. This agreement that has cost an estimated 3 million jobs since 2000 and stagnated American middle class wage rates. It has also hastened a race to the bottom where off shoring of industries to low paying, poor labor standard nations is the only way domestic companies can compete. This is wrong

NAFTA is not serving the interests of the U.S. economy or the American people. It is dismantling our chance as a country to compete rather than enabling it. McCain's ideas on this issue are dead wrong. A new vision on America's trade polices is needed.

Source Insurancenewsnet:

"If I am elected president, this country will honor its international agreements, including NAFTA, and we will expect the same of others," McCain said. "And in a time of uncertainty for American workers, we will not undo the gains of years in trade agreements now awaiting final approval."

www.economyincrisis.org...

This is another example of Sen. McCain wrong vision on the economy, this FTA's clearly are hurting the american working class, those in the middle class have seen theor jobs been taken overseas by thses type of agreement that Sen. McCain say he has no problem with, contrary to Sen. Obama's plan that calls for a redo of many of this FTA's

Amend the North American Free Trade Agreement: Obama and Biden believe that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. They will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers

www.barackobama.com...

By taking on NAFTA Sen. Obama shows that he has show that he in fact independent from his own party, the Clinton's were supporters of it, George HW and the current president were supporters of it, Sen. McCain even after seeing that is not working supports it also.





[edit on 17-9-2008 by Bunch]