I thought I would start a thread to vent opinions on Cabinet choices, his campaign promises, and his re-election... re-election because he really should decide right now whether or not he wants to run for another term. If he does want to go a full 8 years... he will have to do really well with all the promises he has made. This one didn't take long. Hell, he's not even President yet and he's already got Carrier to keep their plant in Indiana. I'm impressed already.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/trump-to-announce-carrier-plant-will-keep-jobs-in-us.html

*raises eyebrows* That is impressive. American politics is such a confusing thing haha. The rightwing party, Republicans, cracking down on big business in the name of the workers.

*raises eyebrows* That is impressive. American politics is such a confusing thing haha. The rightwing party, Republicans, cracking down on big business in the name of the workers.

Yes. This is an entirely new avenue for the Conservative wing of the Republican Party, and it's exactly what got Trump elected. Republicans are not against workers, another myth. Business' are against unionized labor that forces production costs into the realm of not being competitive in a free market. They have to keep the cost of labor in check so they can sell the products for a price consumers are willing to pay. Here lies the great divide.

 

For decades, due to the free trade agreements, these business' have been able to give the finger to American unions, and manufacture their goods in countries that literally pay their workers, what we in the USA, would consider slave wages. Think about that while you are reading this post on your new iPhone 7 that you paid a whopping $800.00 for that was not made in the USA. If Trump gets his way, you will be paying $1,200.00 for the same phone very soon... and about 90 million Americans will have high paying jobs again.

 

Trump will do this by destroying these free trade deals, and giving these business' huge corporate tax relief first. Then he will tax the crap out of any products made by US companies that import these products into the USA. This forces business back to the negotiating table with American workers. We will soon have these products manufactured in the USA once again, and crafted by American workers... but we will be paying a hell of a lot more for those products. We can no longer have our cake and eat it too... if we want the jobs here. If this is not done, our lives here will do nothing but continue to decline.

 

Two new developments... Donald Trump is pulling himself completely out of business to concentrate on running the country... I wasn't expecting that... and the Democrats have decided they wish to continue their free fall by staying with that airhead called Nancy Pelosi. Hey, if Dems are not happy enough with 1929 level influence in government... keep doing what you're doing!

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-tweets-he-ll-leave-his-business-focus-presidency-n690016

Heared part of the AC plant is staying, under heavy $$ incentive issued by homeboy VP-elect Mr. Pence. You people might want to go to France, they love doing such protective measures. (not saying they are good/bad, each there own tbh)

 

Just sad nobody made the obvious Mitt Romney jokes. Come on, he had a talk with Trump and suddenly some female people get staff position, clearly he gave Trump his "binders full of women"! Second Romney meeting? Taking on a +15y Goldman Sachs executive suit for Finance minister.

 

Only real "ooo yeah, thats why" pick thusfar (that I have heared off, no doubt more picks have been made then the dozen or so highlighted by out media) is his Minister of Transportation, girl has experience to continue on, being in Bush I and Bush II cabinets and in likewise positions.

 

Anyway, he seems to be in full "politician style" swing, thought he wasn't gonna do that? I just notice a new swamp being dug with the earth removed being used to just hussle any Democrat "stench" out of the area. Seems very partisan to me.

The Carrier deal is just for about 1000 jobs so not a huge deal. Plus we aren't sure what we gave to make the deal happen. Probably heavy $$ incentives worked out through Mike Pence like Onbekende suggests.

It's a good sign, I like it, but I'll be impressed when hundreds of thousands of jobs are returned to America. Until then I remain a healthy skeptic.

Heared part of the AC plant is staying, under heavy $$ incentive issued by homeboy VP-elect Mr. Pence.

That, and apparently trying to win favor with the new administration in order to keep getting juicy federal contracts.  Quote from the Indianapolis Business Journal:

 

But Mutz said he doesn’t believe the impending incentive package “really is the major reason for the decision.”

 

That, he said, is likely because of Carrier Corp. parent company United Technologies Corp's desire to keep its hefty federal contracts. United Technologies and its subsidiaries collect about $6 billion annually from U.S. government contracts, making up about 10 percent of its overall revenue

Anyone out there remember when Republicans got all pissy about the federal government bailing out General Motors (to stop bankruptcy and layoff of their US workforce), or Obama's use of subsidies/tax incentives to generate "high-paying renewable energy jobs"?

 

You do?  Well, this is different because ... reasons ...

 

 

From on high, use of tax money to pick preferred industries (why Carrier, and not the Rexnord factory literally on the other side of the same town?), and making companies feel the need to make economically-inadvised decisions to cozy up to the government is pretty indefensible:

It is in fact a perfect example of the dumb type of crony capitalism, corruption, inefficiency, and politically-motivated investments that you see in third world countries run by tin pot leaders.

If Hillary Clinton was elected... would Carrier be moving to Mexico? The answer is yes. People are paying attention to this... it's what happens when they see with their very own eyes that the guy who got elected, when everyone said he never could be elected, actually cares about their lives. It was a shot across the bow of all business, that a new way of doing things is coming, and it's gonna be America first. Carrier is the beginning of much more to come... and he has not even been sworn in yet.

 

Will Donald Trump build the wall? The answer to that one is... he has to. It was a core promise throughout his campaign. I believe the most effective way to accomplish this would be to build an extremely strong fence directly on the border, and then about 5 miles inland, build a 4 lane freeway extending from one end of the border to the other. It just happens to be 50 feet high, and solid. This would avoid all possible means of tunneling, and it could be included in that trillion dollar infrastructure deal they are working on. Seriously... does the wall have to be "on the border"? No, it doesn't. There are literally hundreds of ways to get the money back from Mexico. Very easy to fulfill this promise, and everyone expects it already.

I have not read past the first post in this thread. Mr. Trump, is not yet president, therefore I am trying to reserve judgment as much as I can and to give him the 100 day grace period after he takes office to show what he's made of. This has proven challenging given that he has been announcing appointments, long before what is generally considered the norm for a President Elect. Thus far many of his appointments have astonished me in how completely inappropriate the person for the position. I will do my best to keep an open mind, but I am very worried.

I have not read past the first post in this thread. Mr. Trump, is not yet president, therefore I am trying to reserve judgment as much as I can and to give him the 100 day grace period after he takes office to show what he's made of. This has proven challenging given that he has been announcing appointments, long before what is generally considered the norm for a President Elect. Thus far many of his appointments have astonished me in how completely inappropriate the person for the position. I will do my best to keep an open mind, but I am very worried.

Which appointments are you worried about? Nikki Haley sends a Conservative to the U.N. and it will be a breath of fresh air to end the practice of the USA being the worlds doormat. Jeff Sessions as Attorney General means our Federal immigration laws will now be enforced instead of ignored. That sends a signal to Congress... if you don't like the laws, change them. If Mitt Romney ends up being our SoS... it would be a brilliant choice. He's a better diplomat than Rudy Giuliani, and it absolutely deflates the whole "Never Trump" crowd. People like me are very pissed at Mitt for what he did... but we can get over that because we actually voted for Mitt a few years back. Everything seems to be going well from my view. What are you concerned about?

It was a shot across the bow of all business, that a new way of doing things is coming, ...

A "shot across the bow" means you demonstrate willingness to punish, not willingness to throw goodies.

 

Any CEO can (and for the sake of their bottom line, should) threaten to move production out of the country, and extort specific tax incentives and/or federal contracts from the government.

 

Trump-land is going to be a bunch of Soviet tractor factories, with the government propping up uneconomical production at the expense of the country.

 

It was a shot across the bow of all business, that a new way of doing things is coming, ...

A "shot across the bow" means you demonstrate willingness to punish, not willingness to throw goodies.

 

Any CEO can (and for the sake of their bottom line, should) threaten to move production out of the country, and extort specific tax incentives and/or federal contracts from the government.

 

Trump-land is going to be a bunch of Soviet tractor factories, with the government propping up uneconomical production at the expense of the country.

 

It looks like you are not very optimistic about keeping the jobs we have, or bringing back those jobs that they have been telling us "are gone forever". In Obama's world, it's a fake 5% unemployment rate, when it's really 9.5%... and we all know it. We are supposed to just accept 1% GDP as the new normal. We have to pay for health insurance we can't even afford to use so a few million can get it free... there is just no other way. We must believe that Obama has historic high approval... when the polls taken are the very same polls that said Hillary Clinton would win by a landslide. Democrats have not seen their influence this low since 1929... that must mean the American people have wised up. The days of Democrat lies and the media choosing who leads the country are over... for now. I'm very excited to see what we can make out of it.

 

The best thing I can see about this is a President-Elect that cares more about 1,000 American jobs than who can use which restroom. Please give me more of this!

Yes, companies threatening to leave to get tax breaks and incentives, and giving it to them, o how wonderful.  All awhile, Carrier still moving 600 jobs to Mexico.  It's going to be quite interesting to see how the precedent he has now set will play out.  Personally, I don't see it playing out well.

 

 

This has proven challenging given that he has been announcing appointments, long before what is generally considered the norm for a President Elect. Thus far many of his appointments have astonished me in how completely inappropriate the person for the position.

 

I'm curious which appointments you're worried about.

 

I can't say I've seen them all (or even a majority), but I know I recently saw him retaining an attorney general in New York that Obama appointed (7 years ago, I think I read).  I've seen a few others, but can't remember the exact positions.

 

For the most part, what I've seen is articles (and no, not Breitbart articles) that have basically said he's finding experienced people that will do well in those positions.

I am sorry I posted at all here. I do not wish to start a discussion about a bunch of billionaires, who have lived in utter privilege and have deep connections with agencies like Blackwater and Goldman-Sacks, running my country, making decisions about every aspect of the world. Suffice it to say that I dislike what I have seen so far, but as I said I wish to reserve judgement for the time being.

Yep, smells like France, subsidized factories and all.

 

Lysistrata, on 01 Dec 2016 - 10:02

It looks like you are not very optimistic about keeping the jobs we have, or bringing back those jobs that they have been telling us "are gone forever"

 

No - why should I be?

 

Manufacturing never actually left, it has retained the same proportion of the national economy for 60+ years (orange line below).  What has changed is worker productivity, which has meant that manufacturing employment as a percentage of jobs has been in continuous decline since WWII (blue line below).

Seriously, look at 1993 with the passage of NAFTA.  Do the slopes of either line change in the 10 years before and 10 years after this date?  No.

 

Trade deals didn't cause this; we didn't have "free trade" in the 1950s and 1960s.  Increasing automation did this.

And I don't see anyone lining up to smash computers and robots like the Luddites of old did with early industrial weaving technologies.

Yes, companies threatening to leave to get tax breaks and incentives, and giving it to them, o how wonderful.  All awhile, Carrier still moving 600 jobs to Mexico.  It's going to be quite interesting to see how the precedent he has now set will play out.  Personally, I don't see it playing out well.

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/12/01/bernie-sanders-carrier-just-showed-corporations-how-to-beat-donald-trump/?utm_term=.5e88c15a2601

 

Lysistrata, on 01 Dec 2016 - 10:02

It looks like you are not very optimistic about keeping the jobs we have, or bringing back those jobs that they have been telling us "are gone forever"

 

No - why should I be?

 

Manufacturing never actually left, it has retained the same proportion of the national economy for 60+ years (orange line below).  What has changed is worker productivity, which has meant that manufacturing employment as a percentage of jobs has been in continuous decline since WWII (blue line below).

Seriously, look at 1993 with the passage of NAFTA.  Do the slopes of either line change in the 10 years before and 10 years after this date?  No.

 

Trade deals didn't cause this; we didn't have "free trade" in the 1950s and 1960s.  Increasing automation did this.

And I don't see anyone lining up to smash computers and robots like the Luddites of old did with early industrial weaving technologies.

 

I see what you did with that graph. The blue line is Democrat support since 2008. Maybe a few more full page ads combined with several more useful idiots to go on television and call Trump supporters "white supremacists and xenophobes"... maybe that will stop the bleeding? Please keep doing what you're doing. You can then show this graph to people in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania... you know those states that voted for Barack Obama twice? Yeah... you can tell them they no longer have a job because of robots... I'm sure they will smile, apologize for being a little slow, and ask when they can expect their next welfare check.

Lysistrata, on 02 Dec 2016 - 08:02

I see what you did with that graph. The blue line is Democrat support since 2008.

Don't be a dullard.  The graph presents economic and employment trends in the period of 1947-2007.  The color choice was based on complimentary color theory.

It has no political meaning, and no relation to any political party specifically, unless a political party chooses to engage in wishful thinking that it can reverse long-standing and consistent trends that have existed for 70 years.

 

Lysistrata, on 02 Dec 2016 - 08:02

Yeah... you can tell them they no longer have a job because of robots... I'm sure they will smile, apologize for being a little slow, and ask when they can expect their next welfare check.

Someone probably should tell them to examine possibilities for employment that cannot be outsourced or easily automated.

Don't get into trucking though, that's another dead-end: "Self-driving truck makes first trip — a 120-mile beer run" - USA Today, 10/26/2016

I see what you did with that graph. The blue line is Democrat support since 2008. Maybe a few more full page ads combined with several more useful idiots to go on television and call Trump supporters "white supremacists and xenophobes"... maybe that will stop the bleeding? Please keep doing what you're doing. You can then show this graph to people in Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania... you know those states that voted for Barack Obama twice? Yeah... you can tell them they no longer have a job because of robots... I'm sure they will smile, apologize for being a little slow, and ask when they can expect their next welfare check.

Lys, this is a good example why people give up trying to reason with you. Niels made a good point and he supported it with data. Now, instead of addressing his point you go ahead and take a jab at the Democrats...which is all fine, a good part of what you said is true...but it's totally unrelated to the point at hand. The point was, that trade deals did little to actually affect manufacturing jobs, what instead makes the blue line drop, is automation. And what drives automation? Corporations wanting to skimp on HR which is far the most expensive resource. In other words: good old capitalism.

 

Does this mean people will be left behind? Yes. Is this a good thing? No. Statesmen will have to figure something out eventually, because the long-term effects might actually be catastrophic. Let's just hope the "cure" won't be worse than the disease...

Never mind. I'm avoiding participation.

My point is that none of these people effected are interested in stupid graphs to explain why they can't take care of their families... it does nothing to solve the problem. Ask Democrats and they just say the jobs are gone forever, and they are not coming back... apply for welfare and keep voting for us. The new unemployment rate came out today... it's 4.6%!!! Great right? But they don't tell you that another 500,000 American taxpayers that are able to work and continue to pay taxes... fell out of the workforce. A new record of 95,055,000... that's 95 million... Americans are not working, or not even looking for a job anymore. The real unemployment rate is 9.5%... it's been worse, but we can't stay this way.

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

Just backing that up with some data

 

So no one cares about graphs. Donald Trump offered a change, and that's why he won. Hillary Clinton offered nothing. Democrats want to blame everyone, and everything else, for losing... except their own candidate. How it all works out is still up in the air, but right now it's looking pretty damn promising... except for terrorists, illegals, and the remaining Democrats in red states.

 

 

Lys, this is a good example why people give up trying to reason with you. Niels made a good point and he supported it with data.

 
Thank you ccabal - I appreciate the support from another member of the community that values evidence-based reasoning and analysis.

 

 

 

My point is that none of these people effected are interested in stupid graphs to explain why they can't take care of their families... it does nothing to solve the problem.

 

 

1: The graph was not directed at the multitudes of people, it was directed at you and your points.  I have taken the time to address your comments specifically, and wish you would extend the same courtesy.

2: They would not have been in this bind had they occasionally checked the world around them, and planned to make adjustments accordingly.

There are many different types of jobs requiring no, or minimal, higher-education that are relatively offshoring- and automation-proof.  For example, nurses, electricians, and plumbers.  There may come a day when these can be automated, but the fact that they are so dispersed and require access to "odd" locations (it is hard to imagine a plumber robot entering a crawl space to reach a corner behind a water heater) makes them more resilient.  Small equipment operators (e.g. little backhoes used at construction sites) are also possible, since the constantly changing terrain of construction sites and the finesse needed for their operation are hard to program.

Praying that the government will help your particular factory (again, Carrier, but not other factories in the same town) to save your particular job (again, many of the Carrier jobs are still going to Mexico), is not a viable strategy.  And Trump's "plan" to "make deals" is bad precedent: today the Wall Street Journal and even Sarah Palin came out against it as "crony capitalism," a "hallmark of corruption," and "socialism."

Maybe a systemic lowering of corporate taxes, which Trump does also support, will make a difference.  However, I am skeptical of this too.  Reagan lowered corporate and personal income taxes significantly in the 1980s, and threw a lot of defense contracts out to be handled by US manufacturers.  Yet, the blue line in the graph I posted still went down in the 1980s at the same rate it did in the 1970s and would in the 1990s.  That speaks to the fact that regulations and taxes are not the primary problem with maintaining manufacturing employment.  Since we've eliminated them, and free trade deals, we really are back to having to assign the blame to automation.

I'll quote myself now:

 

Increasing automation did this. And I don't see anyone lining up to smash computers and robots like the Luddites of old did with early industrial weaving technologies.

 

 

 

2: They would not have been in this bind had they
occasionally checked the world around them, and planned to make
adjustments accordingly.


There are many different types of jobs requiring no, or minimal,
higher-education that are relatively offshoring- and automation-proof.
 For example, nurses, electricians, and plumbers.

Although it is good advice to try to focus on jobs that can't be easily out-sourced or automated, are there enough of those types of jobs for everybody? From what I'm looking up, it looks like even including all jobs we are short somewhere around maybe 15-25 million jobs. Depending on true population and stuff. However nothing you can find online is absolute proof, you have to have faith the numbers were competently gathered and presented honestly. But my gut tells me that is probably true.

Thus, even if everyone did focus on those types of jobs as you suggest - they may still have ended up in the bind they are in.

Also if it's just automation that's the problem. Why are factories moving to overseas? Just to have robots and robots only do stuff over there instead of here? Doesn't make a lot of sense. Free trade and offshoring jobs is probably a bigger issue than you give it credit for.

 

 

Although it is good advice to try to focus on jobs that can't be easily out-sourced or automated, are there enough of those types of jobs for everybody? From what I'm looking up, it looks like even including all jobs we are short somewhere around maybe 15-25 million jobs. Depending on true population and stuff. However nothing you can find online is absolute proof, you have to have faith the numbers were competently gathered and presented honestly. But my gut tells me that is probably true.

My list wasn't meant to be inclusive of all possibilities, and I don't know if overall there is demand for everyone who has stopped working in manufacturing.  I will still stand by my statement that praying for the government to save one's particular factory and one's particular job in it is a losing strategy.

I did find the figure below (Lysistrata will probably yell about the color scheme, but I can't do anything about that), which details the percentages of the economy in each of a variety of job categories, and how they changed from 1947 to 2009.  For instance finance, insurance, and real estate grew from 10.5% to 21.4%, government grew from 12.5% to 13.6%, manufacturing fell from 25.6% to 11.0%, and agriculture essentially disappeared (8.2% to 1.0%).

[Hey, why is no one focused on the displaced farmer?  Probably because he actually moved and made a new life for himself.]

Things that gained over the last 60 years probably will continue to gain, things that lost will probably continue to lose.  Persons at risk of displacement should give attention to the blue wedges.

 

 

 

Also if it's just automation that's the problem. Why are factories moving to overseas? Just to have robots and robots only do stuff over there instead of here?

 
A very astute question.  You are right that if automation was the only component to the changes in the job market, we would not see factories move overseas, but there are issues of labor costs, availability of capital, etc.  What is happening is that companies are faced with a choice:

(1) Move the job overseas, manufacture without automation, but taking advantage of cheaper labor.  (Think $3 pack of shirts from Vietnam)
(2) Keep the job in the US, manufacture with automation, because Americans demand higher pay.  (Think highly-automated BMW factory in South Carolina)

I've bolded the parts that bring about job losses to the US, and you can see that either option has that result.  If "free trade" was ended, companies would choose #2 exclusively.  Since they are allowed a choice, the one that lowers labor+capital costs the most at this given time wins.  In the long run, we can expect other countries to get richer, and for more factories to return to the US in order to lower their transportation costs, but that these factories will be automated.