I honestly don't know what can be done but I'm willing to entertain the idea of the government taking a hand in this.
It didn't with the "buy American" campaign as it pertained to cars and it won't work now.
Something about the design of the law leaving a nice hole come to mind? Maybe it is time to amend this for more accurate labeling and penalties.
First, blindside the foreign trade groups and various business lobbies on this one as best as possible. Next, amend the law to reclassify "local factory, foreign multinational(or acting for one)" as non-US. Then assign a penalty depending on true country of origin to account for CKD/brand relabeling type practices. In short, take all the known dirty tricks played out against the law, account for new ones, and push it through before the various trade groups can buy up votes.
You can. But when they go to make a purchase, most people make price the priority--just like companies. Boycotting will never get the momentum necessary to change corporate behavior.
Fine. Displaced Economic Region Recovery Fee (which would be a tariff/subsidy of sorts) amounting to 200% of the parts+labor value of selected imports, and entire makes that use the practice of "Factory CKD"(bringing the factory here and taking locals in to "look domestic").
If you want to play the game of cost, there are ways to make the loopholes expensive.
For such a device, they sure are wanting to not release it - when that could be a good way to fund such devices. Is there some sort of problem with quality at that kind of mass amount?
Being your own boss, owning your own home, having a wife that doesn't work and children in exclusionist school. French dream (lifelong employment at one employer). The two are completely irreconcilable. Only if you're an adherent to Thatcher or Reagan.
France kept its head together (for once) and rejected globalization on the greater part, as well as seeing the CPE fail. The only thing better for them to do is to remove the lower tier of higher education and fully open up admissions to the upper.
They aren't doing incredibly well, but when you go it alone against countries that sell their workers down the river(post-Thatcher UK, post-PATCO US) to countries like China and India, they must be doing something right that keeps them running. I don't see them turning soon, much like Germany has.
What part of "businesses are not entities deserving godly privilege" do you not understand? Repeat the part in quotes if you are in doubt of it.
I believe there is a couple key point to the American Dream that you (and many others) inadvertantly miss. First, the American Dream cannot be realized by most people if they are willing to work for someone else. The American Dream--time and again--has been realized by those who, for whatever reason, could not or would not allow themselves to be wage-slaves. They started cottage industries--some failed, and some succeeded. Those who succeeded saw the American Dream fulfilled. Those who did not succeed faced a choice--either try again (to achieve the Dream) or believe that the American Dream is a lie.
Apparently you miss the idea that business ownership and all the ethical bankruptcy it brings are the universal path to the American Dream. The only way they got that way recently was by businesses given the signal that they can interfere with government (not the other way around) through Reagan's PATCO blunder.
What disgusts me most about the Circuit City scenario (which is also played out in many other industries every day) is that these "artificial persons" (for what is a corporation if not a legally recognized entity under law?) have forsaken their responsibility to society in order to worship at the altar of profitability.
That's called ethical bankruptcy, it comes with the territory. Thank all the pro-business signals being sent the last 30 years.
which is precisely why their jobs are outsourced Thankfully there will be a politician that will end up fixing that problem. That is, returning jobs back due to foreign assets being included in tax, along with penalties for corporate structures that attempt to get around such measures.
In a capitalist model, if you are not happy, you are free to look for a better job somewhere else ? If you are not happy about the package they are offering you, you can just knock at some other door if you have valuable skills (or skills more valued by another company) ?
You are assuming that the practical choice allows for it. In most cases today, it does not - see offshoring and tolerance of illegal immigration. It does not work when your replacement is easy, even for a high skill level.
I do not understand what the fuss is about...
Fly to Detroit and speak your mind to the UAW, or go where PATCO is and talk to them. They'll be quite friendly and descriptive of the situation at hand.
Do you honestly believe that the majority of programmers are undercompensated individuals working under oppressive conditions where their health and life are under threat? Why, yes I do. Companies are NOT holy entities, and should be fully aware of it.
What benefits could a union possibly bring? Taking a company and removing it's "holier than its components" status. Not to mention that it would drop such things as offshoring as soon as it could undo Reaganomics.
I didn't vote for Clinton, but the current admin makes me nostalgic for him. Even with Nixon's corruption, he's starting to look comparably cleaner than his Ivy-loving contemporary.
He also suggests that the some of the 'criminals' may actually be Internet entrepreneurs who crossed over to the dark side And they're different from the kind that run companies to the ground, create loopholes to avoid domestic workers, and fake their deaths to void convictions? Somehow the differences aren't stacking up.
It's an inevitable result of a thriving free market and tech expertise. Apparently the Midwest hasn't gotten the memo on that one, since the 2001 recession is still going, continued by 2003's wave of job theft. There are some things that Ivy League economists will never understand. Thriving and "free market" somehow just aren't mixing in places that get the idea of not treating businesses like $DEITY.
An underground economy often mirrors the legal, above-ground one. Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.' Wasnt that covered in Enron, Worldcom, HP (Hurd and Fiorina), and about any organization that uses loopholes to offshore work? That seems to point to a "misguided entrepreneur" as being one that has some morals left in them, not someone who's gone criminal.
Start taxing foreign assets in this manner, and something that penalizes all attempts to restructure. Corporations are not to be treated as entities with a perpetual carte blanche. The role they are seeking has already been filled.
Stuff developed overseas, but is marketed exclusively through an American company You mean like what Honda and Toyota do for manufacturing and what is done otherwise just to look the part? Time to update the Buy America law to cover these problems.
I don't know what the conditions are like in China, but sometimes good talent gets wasted. That's what you get with educational streaming, talent that would do well without it. It happens in about any country.
I'm not surprised that Tsinghua students can go toe-to-toe with the best American students and win. So much for educational streaming and "teaching to the test".
What happens in twenty years, when the * have had some time to develop their C.S. and engineering programs? We'll be able to discredit some of their teams for the one-dimensionality of going for the single test.
"Well, these foreign students may be good at these programming challenges, but what can they do in the real world?" Nothing unless some tax-evading multinational hands it to them. That has been protocol in some form since the later part of the 20th century.
As an American, I want to believe that my country produces the best engineers and programmers in the world, but I think we're going to have some very stiff competition in the future. How about scaling back exclusivity to access some of these fine universities for citizens of all social classes (or something that makes identifying a university an illegal question in the workplace)? Also, drop the funding games to give the illusion of accessibility(Yes, MIT, that means you!) - no real good comes out of it.
A lot of us in the American educational system have a kind of bigotry when looking at foreign universities Odd, I see a lot more arrogance, in the admissions departments. They've even influenced state-level institutions, who should be focusing on in-state students first, to join in the "fun". Take away the game from the admissions officers and let the students go where they wish, with no worries about funding.
Educational streaming(by economics, by hiding behind the excuse of "private organization", and by any other means that is implemented) is fun and games until it ends up making the periodic mistake.
how to do you explain Toyota who assembles most of their cars for American sale in America? Circumvention of Buy America laws, which do need to be updated to include this case. However, business lobbyists make it quite hard to pass through airtight laws.
It's not the workers, it's the crappy construction and implementation. Bottom line, American cars are absolute shit. I'll keep that in mind when I see the long defect lists for Japanese cars.
Some may look good on the outside, but the insides have gut rot. As opposed to wheel rot that's well known to a more than a few localized Hondas.
What is the point then of buying one, pride? Getting a car with an engine that isn't anemic compared to its competitors in class, stock.
They break down when the warranty runs out and seldom have I seen one go past 150,000 miles. Maintenance much? It's not as if you have a sardine can of an engine compartment in a "true domestic" car in most cases.
I find it funny that Ford and GM can blame their workers for the stupid decisions of management. They're the ones that are most ill-equipped to defend themselves. Events similar to PATCO put them in that kind of spot.
I believe you're looking for something akin to policies of IBM and NCR, where infrastructure was even poured in to the well-being and education of its workers to take at their option. Now it's something unheard of to have, or considered a bad thing to have. The only notable exception is if you work for a certain Stanford based company or some place equally exclusivist.
The decisions of Reagan regarding PATCO were indirectly related to this shift in perception as well, given that it signaled that it was safe to say "screw 'em". After that, you get what you see today, extreme case being Enron.
Now if tax law would catch up, close the foreign asset loophole, and undo Reagan's other mistakes. Then you might have a start on where to go with that idea you have.
Consider that the date was in a different format as well? All they'd have to do there is see when the change was made that flipped those dates and correct them.
Markets generally make them available in far greater numbers, better variety and quality than you could do so yourself.
That's odd - I've seen only a reduction in quality, yet the same exact price. I doubt I'm alone on that one.
Government is often the worst solution, can you prove that this is not the case for Wi-Fi?
When large corporations use it to take power and wield it against those who exist in physical form(and not by virtue of law), you're right. The only practical difference between government and the corporations in question is by name.
...and for most people they have been provided better than any government plan has ever done.
Then you would have no real problem letting them succeed/fail on their own before trying to buy up politicians that would kill it? There are some things that business will not do that would be of great benefit if allowed to exist on its own without business interference.
Somehow a paraphrased quote comes to mind as being the scariest words to hear in the English language, given the above: "We're from the business community. We're here to help."
How true that has been, given that about everything from product quality, worker morale, job security, and true innovation (opposed to M/A, offshoring, and the general deification of businesses) has gone down as influence has ramped up. I believe you would do well to talk to those in the Midwest US(who are still reeling from 2000 and 2003), those who worked for sellouts Arcelor, Rover and Peugeot, and those in the manufacturing region of our Most Favored Nation before thinking that they're helping. All you'll see is a bunch of morally bankrupt bunch of individuals who thought business would help them, but received greater harm from their interference.
Slashdot Mirror
I honestly don't know what can be done but I'm willing to entertain the idea of the government taking a hand in this.
It didn't with the "buy American" campaign as it pertained to cars and it won't work now.
Something about the design of the law leaving a nice hole come to mind? Maybe it is time to amend this for more accurate labeling and penalties.
First, blindside the foreign trade groups and various business lobbies on this one as best as possible. Next, amend the law to reclassify "local factory, foreign multinational(or acting for one)" as non-US. Then assign a penalty depending on true country of origin to account for CKD/brand relabeling type practices. In short, take all the known dirty tricks played out against the law, account for new ones, and push it through before the various trade groups can buy up votes.
You can. But when they go to make a purchase, most people make price the priority--just like companies. Boycotting will never get the momentum necessary to change corporate behavior.
Fine. Displaced Economic Region Recovery Fee (which would be a tariff/subsidy of sorts) amounting to 200% of the parts+labor value of selected imports, and entire makes that use the practice of "Factory CKD"(bringing the factory here and taking locals in to "look domestic").
If you want to play the game of cost, there are ways to make the loopholes expensive.
Notice how they'll only give you an XBox AFTER you hand in your weapons.
Does that weapon bounty include chairs?
For such a device, they sure are wanting to not release it - when that could be a good way to fund such devices. Is there some sort of problem with quality at that kind of mass amount?
Being your own boss, owning your own home, having a wife that doesn't work and children in exclusionist school. French dream (lifelong employment at one employer). The two are completely irreconcilable.
Only if you're an adherent to Thatcher or Reagan.
France kept its head together (for once) and rejected globalization on the greater part, as well as seeing the CPE fail. The only thing better for them to do is to remove the lower tier of higher education and fully open up admissions to the upper.
They aren't doing incredibly well, but when you go it alone against countries that sell their workers down the river(post-Thatcher UK, post-PATCO US) to countries like China and India, they must be doing something right that keeps them running. I don't see them turning soon, much like Germany has.
What part of "businesses are not entities deserving godly privilege" do you not understand?
Repeat the part in quotes if you are in doubt of it.
I believe there is a couple key point to the American Dream that you (and many others) inadvertantly miss. First, the American Dream cannot be realized by most people if they are willing to work for someone else. The American Dream--time and again--has been realized by those who, for whatever reason, could not or would not allow themselves to be wage-slaves. They started cottage industries--some failed, and some succeeded. Those who succeeded saw the American Dream fulfilled. Those who did not succeed faced a choice--either try again (to achieve the Dream) or believe that the American Dream is a lie.
Apparently you miss the idea that business ownership and all the ethical bankruptcy it brings are the universal path to the American Dream. The only way they got that way recently was by businesses given the signal that they can interfere with government (not the other way around) through Reagan's PATCO blunder.
What disgusts me most about the Circuit City scenario (which is also played out in many other industries every day) is that these "artificial persons" (for what is a corporation if not a legally recognized entity under law?) have forsaken their responsibility to society in order to worship at the altar of profitability.
That's called ethical bankruptcy, it comes with the territory. Thank all the pro-business signals being sent the last 30 years.
That one has been been tried before.
moralement en faillite?
which is precisely why their jobs are outsourced
Thankfully there will be a politician that will end up fixing that problem. That is, returning jobs back due to foreign assets being included in tax, along with penalties for corporate structures that attempt to get around such measures.
In a capitalist model, if you are not happy, you are free to look for a better job somewhere else ? If you are not happy about the package they are offering you, you can just knock at some other door if you have valuable skills (or skills more valued by another company) ?
You are assuming that the practical choice allows for it. In most cases today, it does not - see offshoring and tolerance of illegal immigration. It does not work when your replacement is easy, even for a high skill level.
I do not understand what the fuss is about
Fly to Detroit and speak your mind to the UAW, or go where PATCO is and talk to them. They'll be quite friendly and descriptive of the situation at hand.
Do you honestly believe that the majority of programmers are undercompensated individuals working under oppressive conditions where their health and life are under threat?
Why, yes I do. Companies are NOT holy entities, and should be fully aware of it.
What benefits could a union possibly bring?
Taking a company and removing it's "holier than its components" status. Not to mention that it would drop such things as offshoring as soon as it could undo Reaganomics.
How about hers?
I thought it was a goblet made out of the victim's bones. After IBM's done, there might be enough for a whole set.
I didn't vote for Clinton, but the current admin makes me nostalgic for him.
Even with Nixon's corruption, he's starting to look comparably cleaner than his Ivy-loving contemporary.
President George W. Bush == 'My fraternity bought my way through PoliSci'.
In light of his membership at Yale, that's in the ballpark.
He also suggests that the some of the 'criminals' may actually be Internet entrepreneurs who crossed over to the dark side
And they're different from the kind that run companies to the ground, create loopholes to avoid domestic workers, and fake their deaths to void convictions? Somehow the differences aren't stacking up.
It's an inevitable result of a thriving free market and tech expertise.
Apparently the Midwest hasn't gotten the memo on that one, since the 2001 recession is still going, continued by 2003's wave of job theft. There are some things that Ivy League economists will never understand. Thriving and "free market" somehow just aren't mixing in places that get the idea of not treating businesses like $DEITY.
An underground economy often mirrors the legal, above-ground one. Scratch a criminal, and sometimes you find a misguided entrepreneur, looking to get rich a little too quick.'
Wasnt that covered in Enron, Worldcom, HP (Hurd and Fiorina), and about any organization that uses loopholes to offshore work? That seems to point to a "misguided entrepreneur" as being one that has some morals left in them, not someone who's gone criminal.
Start taxing foreign assets in this manner, and something that penalizes all attempts to restructure. Corporations are not to be treated as entities with a perpetual carte blanche. The role they are seeking has already been filled.
Stuff developed overseas, but is marketed exclusively through an American company
You mean like what Honda and Toyota do for manufacturing and what is done otherwise just to look the part? Time to update the Buy America law to cover these problems.
I don't know what the conditions are like in China, but sometimes good talent gets wasted.
That's what you get with educational streaming, talent that would do well without it. It happens in about any country.
I'm not surprised that Tsinghua students can go toe-to-toe with the best American students and win.
So much for educational streaming and "teaching to the test".
What happens in twenty years, when the * have had some time to develop their C.S. and engineering programs?
We'll be able to discredit some of their teams for the one-dimensionality of going for the single test.
"Well, these foreign students may be good at these programming challenges, but what can they do in the real world?"
Nothing unless some tax-evading multinational hands it to them. That has been protocol in some form since the later part of the 20th century.
As an American, I want to believe that my country produces the best engineers and programmers in the world, but I think we're going to have some very stiff competition in the future.
How about scaling back exclusivity to access some of these fine universities for citizens of all social classes (or something that makes identifying a university an illegal question in the workplace)? Also, drop the funding games to give the illusion of accessibility(Yes, MIT, that means you!) - no real good comes out of it.
A lot of us in the American educational system have a kind of bigotry when looking at foreign universities
Odd, I see a lot more arrogance, in the admissions departments. They've even influenced state-level institutions, who should be focusing on in-state students first, to join in the "fun". Take away the game from the admissions officers and let the students go where they wish, with no worries about funding.
Educational streaming(by economics, by hiding behind the excuse of "private organization", and by any other means that is implemented) is fun and games until it ends up making the periodic mistake.
Wrong compiler.
how to do you explain Toyota who assembles most of their cars for American sale in America?
Circumvention of Buy America laws, which do need to be updated to include this case. However, business lobbyists make it quite hard to pass through airtight laws.
It's not the workers, it's the crappy construction and implementation. Bottom line, American cars are absolute shit.
I'll keep that in mind when I see the long defect lists for Japanese cars.
Some may look good on the outside, but the insides have gut rot.
As opposed to wheel rot that's well known to a more than a few localized Hondas.
What is the point then of buying one, pride?
Getting a car with an engine that isn't anemic compared to its competitors in class, stock.
They break down when the warranty runs out and seldom have I seen one go past 150,000 miles.
Maintenance much? It's not as if you have a sardine can of an engine compartment in a "true domestic" car in most cases.
I find it funny that Ford and GM can blame their workers for the stupid decisions of management.
They're the ones that are most ill-equipped to defend themselves. Events similar to PATCO put them in that kind of spot.
I believe you're looking for something akin to policies of IBM and NCR, where infrastructure was even poured in to the well-being and education of its workers to take at their option. Now it's something unheard of to have, or considered a bad thing to have. The only notable exception is if you work for a certain Stanford based company or some place equally exclusivist.
The decisions of Reagan regarding PATCO were indirectly related to this shift in perception as well, given that it signaled that it was safe to say "screw 'em". After that, you get what you see today, extreme case being Enron.
Now if tax law would catch up, close the foreign asset loophole, and undo Reagan's other mistakes. Then you might have a start on where to go with that idea you have.
Consider that the date was in a different format as well? All they'd have to do there is see when the change was made that flipped those dates and correct them.
Markets generally make them available in far greater numbers, better variety and quality than you could do so yourself.
That's odd - I've seen only a reduction in quality, yet the same exact price. I doubt I'm alone on that one.
Government is often the worst solution, can you prove that this is not the case for Wi-Fi?
When large corporations use it to take power and wield it against those who exist in physical form(and not by virtue of law), you're right. The only practical difference between government and the corporations in question is by name.
Then you would have no real problem letting them succeed/fail on their own before trying to buy up politicians that would kill it? There are some things that business will not do that would be of great benefit if allowed to exist on its own without business interference.
Somehow a paraphrased quote comes to mind as being the scariest words to hear in the English language, given the above:
"We're from the business community. We're here to help."
How true that has been, given that about everything from product quality, worker morale, job security, and true innovation (opposed to M/A, offshoring, and the general deification of businesses) has gone down as influence has ramped up. I believe you would do well to talk to those in the Midwest US(who are still reeling from 2000 and 2003), those who worked for sellouts Arcelor, Rover and Peugeot, and those in the manufacturing region of our Most Favored Nation before thinking that they're helping. All you'll see is a bunch of morally bankrupt bunch of individuals who thought business would help them, but received greater harm from their interference.
Great. We can stop the witch hunt, now.
Only if it's to fix the loophole.
And that is different than the US in how? Even has the "rest of your life mapped out" reeducation camp too.