Jim Hampton wrote:
Yep,

Also note that this is why OPEC is cutting oil production. Their price is
benchmarked to the US dollar and they have stated that the dollar is sinking
so they have to raise prices. Given time, you may see more radios
manufactured in the USA. Of course, few in the US will be able to afford
them since we will be the cheap labor of the world. Give it about 10 or 15
more years.

Stay tuned to this one and see who blames whom for the mess that is likely
to result.

The same people they've blamed for every problem on the face of the
planet for years, Jim.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message hlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Dee D.
Flint"
writes:

And if we get lucky it will perhaps cause some of that business to return
to
the US over time.

I wouldn't count on it, Dee. Unless the American people get a lot more
choosy
about what they buy.

The Bush Administration is so desperate for good numbers that last week
they
seriously investigated the possibility of redefining the work of hamburger
assembly. IOW, they asked why jobs at Burger Meister couldn't be
classified as
"manufacturing". Whether it's a Big Mojo Burger or a minivan, it's
assembly,
isn't it?

"No Millionaire Left Behind"

The reality of things economic is that, like it or not, we are in a global
economy and that isn't going to change.

That's true to a point. But we don't have to simply accept everything
that comes down the pike as inevitable.

The drastic reduction in costs
of shipping (both importing and exporting goods) as well as
similar reductions for communications makes it cheaper to manufacture
and even provide certain service functions off-shore. That isn't
going to change in the short run.

Only if it doesn't affect buyer behavior. If buyers protest with their
dollars, things will change.

In the long run, those currently
cheap off shore labor markets will self adjust upwards.

Maybe. And if so, might they not find themselves in the same boat?

In the short
run, US labor has their head in the sand if they think there's something
either party (Dems or Reps) can really do to stem the shift of
manufacturing jobs overseas. The same thing is going on in Europe.

OTOH, unemployed workers can't buy the goods anyway. So what good are
lower prices?

In the long run, employees must be constantly reevaluating their
job skills and looking at the prospect of how vulnerable their job
may be as to their job being farmed out to off shore labor.

That's true up to a point. But how often is it reasonable to expect a
person to retrain? And what happens to "the wealth of nations" in the
meantime?

I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message hlink.net...

"N2EY" wrote in message
...

In article , "Dee D.

Flint"

writes:


And if we get lucky it will perhaps cause some of that business to return

to

the US over time.

I wouldn't count on it, Dee. Unless the American people get a lot more

choosy

about what they buy.

The Bush Administration is so desperate for good numbers that last week

they

seriously investigated the possibility of redefining the work of hamburger
assembly. IOW, they asked why jobs at Burger Meister couldn't be

classified as

"manufacturing". Whether it's a Big Mojo Burger or a minivan, it's

assembly,

isn't it?

"No Millionaire Left Behind"

The reality of things economic is that, like it or not, we are in a global
economy and that isn't going to change.


That's true to a point. But we don't have to simply accept everything
that comes down the pike as inevitable.

It will probably stabilize when one of the programmers from India
writes a good program to replace CEO's! ;^)


The drastic reduction in costs
of shipping (both importing and exporting goods) as well as
similar reductions for communications makes it cheaper to manufacture
and even provide certain service functions off-shore. That isn't
going to change in the short run.


Only if it doesn't affect buyer behavior. If buyers protest with their
dollars, things will change.


In the long run, those currently
cheap off shore labor markets will self adjust upwards.


Maybe. And if so, might they not find themselves in the same boat?

Correct! I have alway though that the best argument for what is going
on is the elevation of a population's living standard. A country has a
low standard of living, and the workforce is available for next to
nothing, wage wise. So like Pizza take-out's in a college town, everyone
ant their brother migrate there for the cheap labor. AS the standard of
living goes up, the cheap labor starts to demand more in salary and/or
benefits. This works for a while, but eventually another poor country
looks attractive to employers. So they move on to the next poor country.

Examples are what has happened to Japan. Korea is the present hot spot,
but is slowing. China is ascendant now, but the inevitible will happen
there. Mexico is now experiencing import concerns too.

What happens when the cycle is complete, and the last third world
nation is brought up to modern standards will be the interesting thing.


In the short
run, US labor has their head in the sand if they think there's something
either party (Dems or Reps) can really do to stem the shift of
manufacturing jobs overseas. The same thing is going on in Europe.


OTOH, unemployed workers can't buy the goods anyway. So what good are
lower prices?

You see, the big trick is to have all this happen without ourselves
turning into a third world country. See below.


In the long run, employees must be constantly reevaluating their
job skills and looking at the prospect of how vulnerable their job
may be as to their job being farmed out to off shore labor.


That's true up to a point. But how often is it reasonable to expect a
person to retrain? And what happens to "the wealth of nations" in the
meantime?

I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.

Countries that are service based economies are the *servants* of other
countries.

We can "reality" each other all day long, but if economies chase the
almighty profit without any moral guidance - that is if they are not in
business for the sole purpose of making a buck, then disaster is the result.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Dee
D.
Flint"
writes:

And if we get lucky it will perhaps cause some of that business to
return
to
the US over time.

I wouldn't count on it, Dee. Unless the American people get a lot more
choosy
about what they buy.

The Bush Administration is so desperate for good numbers that last
week
they
seriously investigated the possibility of redefining the work of
hamburger
assembly. IOW, they asked why jobs at Burger Meister couldn't be
classified as
"manufacturing". Whether it's a Big Mojo Burger or a minivan, it's
assembly,
isn't it?

"No Millionaire Left Behind"

The reality of things economic is that, like it or not, we are in a
global
economy and that isn't going to change.

That's true to a point. But we don't have to simply accept everything
that comes down the pike as inevitable.

The drastic reduction in costs
of shipping (both importing and exporting goods) as well as
similar reductions for communications makes it cheaper to manufacture
and even provide certain service functions off-shore. That isn't
going to change in the short run.

Only if it doesn't affect buyer behavior. If buyers protest with their
dollars, things will change.

There's no sign that any sufficient number of folks in
the USA are going to boycott non-USA made products
or spend N dollars more to get a product "made in the USA'
as opposed to buying a cheaper imported product.

In the long run, those currently
cheap off shore labor markets will self adjust upwards.

Maybe. And if so, might they not find themselves in the same boat?

Like I said, global economy.

In the short
run, US labor has their head in the sand if they think there's something
either party (Dems or Reps) can really do to stem the shift of
manufacturing jobs overseas. The same thing is going on in Europe.

OTOH, unemployed workers can't buy the goods anyway. So what good are
lower prices?

In the long run, employees must be constantly reevaluating their
job skills and looking at the prospect of how vulnerable their job
may be as to their job being farmed out to off shore labor.

That's true up to a point. But how often is it reasonable to expect a
person to retrain? And what happens to "the wealth of nations" in the
meantime?

You retrain whenever it becomes necessary. There's nothing
mystical about it. If your job skill goes wanting, you'd
better find another skill set.

I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.

We still manufacture and produce in the USA, it is just
done with more and more automation resulting in less
and less need for skilled labor.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


Just got a AES flyer today. Prices are going to be going up in April.
Inflation starts anew!


Mike,

Is it really inflation, or perhaps changes in the exchange rate with
Japan?

The exchange rate is what is going to kick-start inflation. since the
dollar has been falling against other currencies recently, the other
countries either have to raise their prices, or keep them the same,
which is actually a price cut due to the exchange rate.

Since we import so many things, those prices will go up and business
will start charging more to offset the price rise......

Makes ya wonder who REALLY won the war, doesn't it...?!?!


Which war, Steve?

73 de Jim, N2EY

(N2EY) wrote in message . com...
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message news:cCl1c.31439$hm4.7910


In the long run, those currently
cheap off shore labor markets will self adjust upwards.

Maybe. And if so, might they not find themselves in the same boat?

It's already happened.

Among others big-name Jap manufacturers like Sony, Honda, Toshiba,
etc. have been shoveling jobs into southeast Asia at a huge rate for
years and now they're moving into China at an astonishing rate too.
The Japanese unemployment rates are much worse than ours as a result.
It's even more of a kick in the butt for them because it's happening
in a society in which full employement has historically been a major
component of their culture.

Fifteen years ago moving manufacturing to Singapore was the hot
ticket. So everybody did. The singaporean economy skyrocketed, their
per capita wealth became the global model. Now the hot ticket is
getting the hell outta Singapore because manufacturing there costs too
much.


I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.

That's because there is no such thing as a "service economy", the term
and the concept are oxymorons. Economics 101: There are only three
ways a nation can generate wealth: (1) Dig valuable minerals out of
it's ground (2) Grow, catch or raise crops and critters (3) Enhance
the value of the outputs from (1) and (2) via manufacturing. Anything
else is just passing the same bucks around in circles until they peter
out. As exemplified by our balance of trade deficit.


73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

Jim,

We are about to find out ...

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.

73 de Jim, N2EY


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 3/5/04

Brian Kelly wrote:
(N2EY) wrote in message . com...

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message news:cCl1c.31439$hm4.7910


In the long run, those currently
cheap off shore labor markets will self adjust upwards.

Maybe. And if so, might they not find themselves in the same boat?


It's already happened.

Among others big-name Jap manufacturers like Sony, Honda, Toshiba,
etc. have been shoveling jobs into southeast Asia at a huge rate for
years and now they're moving into China at an astonishing rate too.
The Japanese unemployment rates are much worse than ours as a result.
It's even more of a kick in the butt for them because it's happening
in a society in which full employement has historically been a major
component of their culture.

Fifteen years ago moving manufacturing to Singapore was the hot
ticket. So everybody did. The singaporean economy skyrocketed, their
per capita wealth became the global model. Now the hot ticket is
getting the hell outta Singapore because manufacturing there costs too
much.


I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.


That's because there is no such thing as a "service economy", the term
and the concept are oxymorons. Economics 101: There are only three
ways a nation can generate wealth: (1) Dig valuable minerals out of
it's ground (2) Grow, catch or raise crops and critters (3) Enhance
the value of the outputs from (1) and (2) via manufacturing. Anything
else is just passing the same bucks around in circles until they peter
out. As exemplified by our balance of trade deficit.

Correct! (shudder) We cannot make money by sitting in a closet and
selling our hats to each other. While the person who is a "Hamburger
Manufacturer" sells his/her wares to the buying public for minimum wage
can do that, There has to be people that are doing something else that
makes more. They have to buy from the Hamburger manufacturer. While we
can expound on trickle down and all the other theories out there, if
everyone is in a low paying service job, there won't be much
discretionary cash floating around. therefore there won't be as much
sold, and there won't be a healthy economy.

A healthy economy in the model that we in the US are used to requires a
prosperous and large middle class. Somehow that has gone missing from
some folks.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Jim Hampton wrote:

Jim,

We are about to find out ...

And that my friend, scares the bejabbers out of me.........

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

(N2EY) wrote in message
.com...
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
news:cCl1c.31439$hm4.7910

In the long run, those currently
cheap off shore labor markets will self adjust upwards.

Maybe. And if so, might they not find themselves in the same boat?

It's already happened.

Among others big-name Jap manufacturers like Sony, Honda, Toshiba,
etc. have been shoveling jobs into southeast Asia at a huge rate for
years and now they're moving into China at an astonishing rate too.
The Japanese unemployment rates are much worse than ours as a result.
It's even more of a kick in the butt for them because it's happening
in a society in which full employement has historically been a major
component of their culture.

Yep. The salarymen aren't happy.

We even got a piece of that action. There's a plant in Westmoreland, PA that
was built by Chrysler in the 1970s but never used. So VW bought it and
assembled cars there (I had two of them). Then VW moved the assembly plant to
Mexico for the cheaper labor and the plant was sold to Sony, who made CRTs in
it. (CRT manufacture requires a lot of energy so it's cheaper to make them here
than Japan. Now CRTs are being phased out....

Fifteen years ago moving manufacturing to Singapore was the hot
ticket. So everybody did. The singaporean economy skyrocketed, their
per capita wealth became the global model. Now the hot ticket is
getting the hell outta Singapore because manufacturing there costs too
much.

Bingo. Or, more like "game over"

Remember NAFTA? Jobs moved to Mexico - now they're moving to China. That's why
computer prices keep dropping.

I don't know of any country that grew prosperous on a service economy
alone.

That's because there is no such thing as a "service economy", the term
and the concept are oxymorons.

Jumbo shrimp, tight slacks, nondairy creamer,. My point exactly.

Economics 101: There are only three
ways a nation can generate wealth: (1) Dig valuable minerals out of
it's ground (2) Grow, catch or raise crops and critters (3) Enhance
the value of the outputs from (1) and (2) via manufacturing. Anything
else is just passing the same bucks around in circles until they peter
out. As exemplified by our balance of trade deficit.

Our deficit is even worse than that because it's the active transference of
capital away from this economy.

73 de Jim, N2EY