Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Keeping jobs in the US by force
#1
We already covered the hypocrisy of this over here..

Quote:Despite the cheers Mr. Trump received as he walked around the factory floor, where the lines continued to run and he had to shout at times to be heard, another 1,000 workers for the company in Indiana will be losing their jobs. This includes 700 at a United Technologies factory in nearby Huntington, as well as several hundred here. The 800 or so jobs that are being preserved are mostly on the lines that build medium- and high-efficiency gas furnaces. Not long after Mr. Trump and Mr. Pence departed for the airport and to another rally in Ohio to celebrate his victory, workers coming in for the night shift received a letter titled “Company Update on Indianapolis Operations.” Photo “It sets a great tone,” Mr. Trump said in an interview as he toured the Carrier factory after the announcement that hundreds of jobs would remain there. “While this announcement is good news for many, we recognize it is not good news for everyone,” the letter stated. “We are moving forward with previously announced plans to relocate the fan coil manufacturing lines, with the expected completion by the end of 2017.”
Trump Cheered for Carrier Deal Even as Other Jobs Are Trimmed - The New York Times

Quote:It should be fairly clear what's going on here. United Technologies said it could save $65 million a year by moving, but it has $56 billion in annual revenue, according to The New York Times. Indiana will provide $700,000 in tax incentives, but adding the whole thing up is a rounding error in terms of United Technologies' overall business. Trump wants to make a deal because that's what he does — he's a deals guy. His incoming vice president is Mike Pence, the governor of Indiana. United Technologies keeps some workers in Indiana. Everybody gets to look good. But, of course, a whole bunch of jobs are still going to Mexico: 1,300, Fortune reported. The outsourcing trend remains intact.

Ford didn't even have to worry about juggling jobs. All it had to do was not move production of a vehicle it wasn't planning to move for three years anyway. The Lincoln production could also be discontinued at the Louisville plant, replaced with production of the vehicle that Ford had wanted to build, the Ford Escape. It's basically the same car. There isn't much that changes in terms of Ford's long-term thinking about sending unprofitable vehicle production to Mexico. Ford has, after all, been operating plants in Mexico since the 1960s. We're talking about only two announcements here, so it may be a stretch to call it a pattern. But if this is the way things are going to go, Trump will be spending a decent amount of time and energy negotiating deals that tweet well but that aren't really what you'd call needle-moving in the grand scheme of things.
Trump manufacturing job deals misleading - Business Insider

Quote:One of Donald Trump’s most consistent campaign promises has been to prevent U.S. businesses from moving good jobs to Mexico -- whether through taxes, jawboning, or more drastic means, such as an outright prohibition. Economists might regard this as a misguided form of protectionism, but in fact, it’s worse than that: If instituted, it could prove a major step toward imposing capital controls on the American economy and politicizing many business decisions. Let’s consider how such a policy would be enforced in practice... The biggest irony of this whole Trump initiative is that it likely would lead to higher U.S. trade deficits.

Economists stress the offsetting nature of trade flows and capital flows. As the accounting identities are constructed, a higher trade deficit corresponds to higher capital inflows, and a lower trade deficit corresponds to higher capital outflows. (To see the nature of these balanced transactions, imagine China selling goods and accumulating Treasury bills in return, a form of investment in this country.) So a Trumpian plan to limit capital outflows, through whatever means, is also -- if only indirectly and without such intent -- a plan to boost the trade deficit. How’s that for making America great again? The laws of economics and politics have not yet been repealed.
Trump's Disastrous Pledge to Keep Jobs in the U.S. - Bloomberg View
Reply
#2
This just says it all, not trade or offshoring is the main threat to manufacturing jobs, it's automation.

Trump has created a false foe, so he can pretend to be the working class hero saving their jobs (all the while appointing hard right cabinet ministers who have no time for that and will take away labor rights wherever they can)

Quote:As part of the deal President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence struck with Carrier, the company has promised to make a $16 million investment in its Indianapolis facility — an investment management plans to use on developing technology that will allow them to replace human workers with robots.

The company’s plans were confirmed by Greg Hayes, CEO of United Technologies, Carrier’s corporate parent, during a CNBC interview earlier this week. “We’re going to… automate to drive the cost down so that we can continue to be competitive,” Hayes said. “Is it as cheap as moving to Mexico with lower cost labor? No. But we will make that plant competitive just because we’ll make the capital investments there. But what that ultimately means is there will be fewer jobs.”
Carrier says it will spend millions automating Indiana plant, plans to lay off workers Trump ‘saved…
Reply
#3
Good luck with "buying American," let alone by force:

Quote:Start with Boeing’s Dreamliner itself. It’s not “made in the U.S.A..” It’s assembled in the United States. But most of it parts come from overseas. Those foreign parts total almost a third of the cost of the entire plane. For example:
  • The Italian firm Alenia Aeronautica makes the center fuselage and horizontal stabilizers. 
  • The French firm Messier-Dowty makes the aircraft’s landing gears and doors. 
  • The German firm Diehl Luftfahrt Elektronik supplies the main cabin lighting. 
  • The Swedish firm Saab Aerostructures makes the cargo access doors. 
  • The Japanese company Jamco makes parts for the lavatories, flight deck interiors and galleys. 
  • The French firm Thales makes its electrical power conversion system. Thales selected GS Yuasa, a Japanese firm, in 2005 to supply it with the system’s lithium-ion batteries. 
  • The British company Rolls Royce makes many of the engines. 
  • A Canadian firm makes the moveable trailing edge of the wings. 
Notably, these companies don’t pay their workers low wages. In fact, when you add in the value of health and pension benefits – either directly from these companies to their workers, or in the form of public benefits to which the companies contribute – most of these foreign workers get a better deal than do Boeing’s workers. (The average wage for Boeing production and maintenance workers in South Carolina is $20.59 per hour, or $42,827 a year.)

They also get more paid vacation days. These nations also provide most young people with excellent educations and technical training. They continuously upgrade the skills of their workers. And they offer universally available health care. To pay for all this, these countries also impose higher tax rates on their corporations and wealthy individuals than does the United States. And their health, safety, environmental, and labor regulations are stricter. Not incidentally, they have stronger unions.
Why Trumponomics Fails | RealClearPolitics
Reply
#4
A useful reminder..

Quote:The story of SoftWear, a sewing-automation company in Atlanta, should throw some cold water on Trump's dreams of returning thousands of Americans to manufacturing jobs. SoftWear started with a group of Georgia Tech professors playing around with robots and became a company because of an earlier "Buy American" push. Since 2002, a rule known as the Berry Amendment has prohibited the Defense Department from procuring "food, clothing, fabrics, fibers, yarns, other made-up textiles, and hand or measuring tools that are not grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States."

The DOD quickly learned why nearly all clothes are made overseas these days. Making clothes in the US is prohibitively expensive, because workers expect to receive decent wages for their labor. So what did the military do? It invested in automation. The Defense Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency granted Georgia Tech with $1.26 million to develop robotic sewing machines.

That result was SoftWear. And even its sewing robots, it turns out, don't actually produce any clothes in the US. SoftWear's CEO, Palaniswamy Rajan, 46, moved to the US from Bangalore, India, and never looked back. He's unapologetic about eliminating mechanical jobs like sewing, arguing that automation lets workers focus on more interesting, bigger-picture tasks — and often in better, higher-paying jobs. While the US producers rank third after China and India in textile exports, the country imports about 97% of its clothes, Rajan says.

Most young people nowadays would rather work in services than in a factory, he says, so why try to recreate a world that is long gone and wasn't all that great to begin with? "It's an idealization of the past, as if the past were always so rosy," he said.
There is a huge hole in Trump's promise to bring back US manufacturing jobs - Business Insider
Reply
#5
Maybe not..

Quote:Not only would he stop the losses, he claimed, but he pledged to act immediately. “We are going to stop it day one,” he said. “A Trump administration will stop the jobs from leaving America… Promise.”
But so far, that promise is going unfulfilled. Haines and Vanacker aren’t the only ones waiting to see if their president will intervene to save their jobs.

Since Trump was sworn in on January 20, at least 11,934 American jobs have either been moved abroad or are in the process of leaving the country, according to Department of Labor data analyzed by ThinkProgress.

The 11,934 figure is gleaned from the DOL’s Trade Adjustment Assistance program and offers the best, most accurate baseline, though the actual number is almost certainly much higher
.
Trump says he’s stopping jobs from going abroad. Here’s the truth.
Reply
#6
A win for the White House? It could be, but we're not so sure. If every foreign direct investment is hailed as a personal triumph of the President, there would have been plenty in the past, for starters. Secondly, these are pretty expensive jobs..

Useful overview from Vox:
  • Foxconn, the Taiwanese tech manufacturing giant that makes smartphones and other gadgets, announced yesterday it’s in talks to build a huge factory in Wisconsin to build display screens for TVs. [NYT / Nelson Schwartz and Vindu Goel]
  • The news was hailed as a jobs creation win by President Trump in an official White House announcement. Foxconn estimated the deal will bring 3,000 jobs to the state, with the potential to grow to 13,000. [Milwaukee Journal Sentinel / Patrick Marley and Jason Stein]
  • But the deal is far from done, and Foxconn has plenty of time to back out, as they’ve done in the past. [MarketWatch / Cara Linnane]
  • In 2014 the company announced it was building a new plant in Pennsylvania and bringing 500 jobs there. It never happened. [Washington Post / Todd Frankel]
  • Wisconsin is trying to sweeten the deal to entice the Taiwanese giant, giving them a $3 billion, 15-year tax credit incentive package[WSJ / Tripp Mickle and Rebecca Ballhaus]
  • That means the state is paying around as much as $1 million per job created, potentially making the deal better for Foxconn than it is for Wisconsin. [Bloomberg / Tim Culpan]
  • The other thing to watch out for is whether Foxconn will really hire up to 13,000 people as it’s hinted, or stick to its bottom line using automation. [Bloomberg / Tim Culpan]
Reply
#7
By force or by bribe..

Quote:In a study released on Tuesday, the nonpartisan Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau concluded that the $3 billion taxpayer giveaway Gov. Scott Walker ® and President Trump want to give to Foxconn in exchange for an LCD manufacturing plant in the southeastern part of the state wouldn’t be paid back for at least 25 years.

“[A]ny cash-flow analysis that covers a period of nearly 30 years must be considered highly speculative, especially for a manufacturing facility and equipment that may have a limited useful life,” the study notes. In other words, by the time the plant would theoretically pay off for taxpayers, it may be no longer be operational. No one knows if there will even be a need for these kind of LCD screens 25 years from now.

But even in the best-case scenario where the plant creates 13,000 jobs filled almost entirely by residents of Wisconsin — the study notes that “it is assumed that 10 percent of the projected new jobs will be filled by Illinois residents,” but because the plant might be built near the Illinois border, that percentage could be higher —  the billions of dollars in tax credits the Taiwanese company would receive for payroll and capital expenditures wouldn’t be paid back until about 2042.
STUDY: Trump and Walker’s huge Foxconn giveaway will cost a whole generation of Wisconsin taxpayers – ThinkProgress

Quote:While the plant will create about 3,000 jobs, Trump and Walker claim that when construction work is factored in, the project could create as many as 13,000. But those jobs come at a huge price. Before plans for the plant move forward, Wisconsin lawmakers will have to approve a public subsidy package of up to $3 billion.

Bloomberg reports that “[a]t $519 per citizen, it would have been cheaper to buy an iPhone for every man, woman and child in the midwestern state… Wisconsin is paying as much as $1 million per job, which will carry an average salary of $54,000.”
Every citizen of Wisconsin is paying $519 so Trump could have this press conference – ThinkProgress
Reply
#8
Quote:And as everyone, including Trump, was sure to point out, this development was due solely to the bold leadership of the new president. "If I didn’t get elected, [Guo] definitely would not be spending $10 billion," Trump said at the White House event. But the Foxconn deal is not a triumph for Trumponomics. Rather, it’s just the latest instance of Trump and the Republican Party’s rigged approach to economic development: using taxpayer-funded subsidies to prop up boondoggles that enrich corporations, squeeze state and municipal budgets, and generally fail to generate long-term, good-paying jobs.

In the preliminary deal to which Walker and Foxconn agreed, the state of Wisconsin will pony up $3 billion in taxpayer-funded economic incentives to the company, making it the fourth-largest corporate-welfare deal in U.S. history. That means if the deal actually does fulfill its promise of 13,000 new jobs, it would come at the cost of more than $230,000 per job in public moneyAccording to an estimate by the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, Wisconsin’s nonpartisan budget office, the state wouldn’t break even on its $3 billion incentive package until 2043—and that’s only if the deal actually does create 13,000 jobs, which is uncertain to say the least. This week, Walker will try to jam the Foxconn agreement through Wisconsin’s Republican-controlled legislature, which must approve it. But the deal has come under a great deal of scrutiny, thanks to both Foxconn and Walker’s troubling histories with labor and economic development deals.
Trump, Walker, and the Foxconn Con
Reply
#9
A side effect of Trump tax...

Quote:Saving American jobs from going overseas was the cornerstone of candidate Trump’s populist campaign for president. “We’re just shipping company after company after company is leaving this country and leaving jobs behind,” Trump said in March of 2016. “And I’m going to get it stopped.” In October of 2017, while the GOP tax bill was in its early stages, Trump announced he was looking into legislation that would actively punish companies that moved overseas. He told Forbes magazine that U.S. companies that move their operations to another country would “get penalized severely.”

An overlooked part of the Congressional Budget Office report released last week, however, suggests corporations may be incentivized under the legislation to offshore “tangible assets” like factories and offices. “By locating more tangible assets abroad, a corporation is able to reduce the amount of foreign income that is categorized as GILTI (Global Intangible Low Taxed Income),” the report said. “Similarly, by locating fewer tangible assets in the United States, a corporation can increase the amount of U.S. income that can be deducted as FDII (Foreign-Derived Intangible Income). Together, the provisions may increase corporations’ incentive to locate tangible assets abroad.”

The CBO findings echo analysis from non-partisan think tanks like the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, which found that the Republican Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would make offshore tax dodging even worse than it was before The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities similarly found that the plan is “likely to lead to more outsourcing of U.S. jobs and a larger trade deficit” due to its tax cuts for overseas profits.
CBO confirms GOP tax bill will worsen offshore tax dodging – ThinkProgress
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)