Posted on Apr 21, 2018
1
1
0
Chinese billionaire and Alibaba founder Jack Ma believes that improper distribution of funds and hyper inflated US military spending, not globalization or other countries “stealing” US jobs, is behind the economic decline in America.
Nobody ‘stealing’ your jobs, you spend too much on wars, Alibaba founder tells US
Posted from rt.com
Economy
GWOT
Defense
Crime
Propaganda
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
Thanks for sharing. I don't believe it's that simplistic. I do believe we spend too much on defense, but only because I know we don't know where our money is going. On the other hand, globalization and robotic architecture all certainly part of it too. It's not one or the other. Most everything we buy at Walmart comes from overseas, and would cost much more if made here. There are other factors too, like e-commerce and outsourcing, which companies are going to do as long as it's more profitable for them.
(2)
(0)
Maj John Bell
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter - Amen to the woes with Chinese tools. I won't buy them, but you have to really do your homework to make sure they are not an American or European brand on a Chinese junker, or "Assembled in the USA with Global Materials" Different power tools within the same label still have to be carefully scrutinized.
I buy a lot of Dairy equipment and there are no more American manufacturer's. The Indians and Pakistanis build most of it. It is well engineered but their steel is "crap." Bulgaria, Hungary, Moldova, and Poland put out the best quality dairy equipment.
I buy a lot of Dairy equipment and there are no more American manufacturer's. The Indians and Pakistanis build most of it. It is well engineered but their steel is "crap." Bulgaria, Hungary, Moldova, and Poland put out the best quality dairy equipment.
(2)
(0)
Susan Foster
Capt Tom Brown - I don't think they have the ethics we do in dealing with businesses. Certainly not all the protections!
(0)
(0)
Susan Foster
SMSgt Lawrence McCarter - You make very good points. I don't think most Americans are careful to research this, or maybe even realize they are spending more in the long run.
(1)
(0)
Capt Tom Brown
I always gripe about the proliferation of foreign-made products sold in the US. The topper was the other day when I noticed on the label plate on our new HP color 4 in 1 printer that it was made in Vietnam!! As if buying shirts and socks made in Viet Nam at our local Walmart, now the indignity of buying a major product made by our once arch commie enemies. I mourn all those of my generation who died over there making it possible for me to now buy $500 commie-made printers. How the worm turns.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I wish it were that easy. I'll agree what "we" spend too much on defense, but it's not going to those who actually defend us. ?There are just too many middle men in between.
I've written hundreds of rants/articles over the years, especially in recent years, about all the whining about minimum wage, etc. When I was young I too thought about creating a multi-million dollar corporation from the ground up. Then I grew up. I watched government intervention kill small business, taxes, crappy work ethics, and so many other factors. Let's face it, American workers are expensive. Then you get into the biggest factor facing working Americans - inflation.
I could go on and on about inflation. I'll just throw in a figure to show a point. I made around $22,000 last year. I was born in 1972. My $22,000 had the same buying power in 1972 as $3,667.80 today. The annual inflation rate over that period was 3.97%. So, let's say that I had $1,000,000 in savings then. I'll grant that interest rates were batter back when, but for argument's sake we'll say it just sat in an account with no growth. That $1 million then now has the buying power of almost $167k.
Anyway, most people think $15 an hour is absolutely doable. In isolation they'd be correct. I've worked in management though. I've seen the effect of payroll taxes, employer provided medical insurance premiums, labor costs, and other overhead on the bottom line. Sorry to say that after that I understand why some companies relocate outside the US, or export everything to keep from having to adhere to government standards. For example:
Remember when gas prices spiked after Katrina? Part of that was because of the damage done to refineries in the US. (The last refinery built in the US was in 1976.) Now, there are all kinds of additives refineries are required to add to gas sold in the US. Depending on the state the companies might make from $0.02 to $0.25 per gallon. Last time I checked those same companies could make around $0.63 per gallon selling it to certain Central and South American countries - not having to add ethanol being one of the factors. Which would you choose?
Manufacturing jobs are kind of the same deal. When all is said and done that $15 and hour employee could have an actual cost of $30 or more. That's not to say that some industries would cost less than others.
I'll shut up for now. I need more coffee, and I can ramble on for hours.
I've written hundreds of rants/articles over the years, especially in recent years, about all the whining about minimum wage, etc. When I was young I too thought about creating a multi-million dollar corporation from the ground up. Then I grew up. I watched government intervention kill small business, taxes, crappy work ethics, and so many other factors. Let's face it, American workers are expensive. Then you get into the biggest factor facing working Americans - inflation.
I could go on and on about inflation. I'll just throw in a figure to show a point. I made around $22,000 last year. I was born in 1972. My $22,000 had the same buying power in 1972 as $3,667.80 today. The annual inflation rate over that period was 3.97%. So, let's say that I had $1,000,000 in savings then. I'll grant that interest rates were batter back when, but for argument's sake we'll say it just sat in an account with no growth. That $1 million then now has the buying power of almost $167k.
Anyway, most people think $15 an hour is absolutely doable. In isolation they'd be correct. I've worked in management though. I've seen the effect of payroll taxes, employer provided medical insurance premiums, labor costs, and other overhead on the bottom line. Sorry to say that after that I understand why some companies relocate outside the US, or export everything to keep from having to adhere to government standards. For example:
Remember when gas prices spiked after Katrina? Part of that was because of the damage done to refineries in the US. (The last refinery built in the US was in 1976.) Now, there are all kinds of additives refineries are required to add to gas sold in the US. Depending on the state the companies might make from $0.02 to $0.25 per gallon. Last time I checked those same companies could make around $0.63 per gallon selling it to certain Central and South American countries - not having to add ethanol being one of the factors. Which would you choose?
Manufacturing jobs are kind of the same deal. When all is said and done that $15 and hour employee could have an actual cost of $30 or more. That's not to say that some industries would cost less than others.
I'll shut up for now. I need more coffee, and I can ramble on for hours.
(1)
(0)
Susan Foster
Barry Davidson - All very good points. And with no coffee yet? Amazing. LOL On the drug costs, that's part of it, but not all. Our government doesn't negotiate drug costs and insurance companies (and pharmaceuticals) are making record profits, so it's not all because they've spent so much. It certainly is a flawed system. This was an article I found that I thought you'd enjoy: https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/080615/6-reasons-healthcare-so-expensive-us.asp
6 Reasons Healthcare Is So Expensive in the U.S.
Here's why America's healthcare still ranks low among developed countries.
(1)
(0)
Barry Davidson
Susan Foster - The biggest flaw with this article is that the government already has a huge role. They're the largest reason we went from paying for a doctor's visit out of pocket to having to take out a loan to pay for anything if you don't have insurance.
When you get politicians, groups like the AMA, lobbyists, and corporations into bed together the only people being screwed are those who weren't invited to the orgy - the rest of us.
One thing a lot of the so-called studies and articles I've seen fail to take into account is the trickle down payment system. Not trickle down economics as most people think, but something worse.
A hell of a lot of pharmaceuticals are shipped abroad by American companies. Many governments will protect the company's patents, but some countries like India will sell a company's intellectual properties to "generic drug" manufacturers in India for a nice kick-back to the government. Other countries, Japan for instance, tightly regulate the cost of pharmaceuticals.
Now, I agree that a 10,000% markup is bull, but who do the people conducting the studies think pays for the comfort of the rest? Americans, like they usually do, are picking up the bill. Add that with all the other factors, and we're screwed.
Number 3 in the article really jumps out because it's true. Tort reform is an absolute must or we're just spinning our wheels.
When you get politicians, groups like the AMA, lobbyists, and corporations into bed together the only people being screwed are those who weren't invited to the orgy - the rest of us.
One thing a lot of the so-called studies and articles I've seen fail to take into account is the trickle down payment system. Not trickle down economics as most people think, but something worse.
A hell of a lot of pharmaceuticals are shipped abroad by American companies. Many governments will protect the company's patents, but some countries like India will sell a company's intellectual properties to "generic drug" manufacturers in India for a nice kick-back to the government. Other countries, Japan for instance, tightly regulate the cost of pharmaceuticals.
Now, I agree that a 10,000% markup is bull, but who do the people conducting the studies think pays for the comfort of the rest? Americans, like they usually do, are picking up the bill. Add that with all the other factors, and we're screwed.
Number 3 in the article really jumps out because it's true. Tort reform is an absolute must or we're just spinning our wheels.
(1)
(0)
Susan Foster
Barry Davidson - Good point. Another is branding. "Prices are made up depending on who the payer is.” It's certainly a complicated system.
(1)
(0)
Barry Davidson
Other than voting out the entire Congress, and replacing it with a younger crowd of non-political elite I can't think of a single way to change for the better that can't be turned around to bite us in the ass.
As for defense spending, the Puzzle Palace doesn't work in isolation. I'd say we could start by bringing in some of the people purged during the Clinton witch hunts, but that's problematic at best. I'd like to see the military be able to renegotiate all the contracts Congress has foisted upon them.
It is said that soldiers can break anything. That being said, it would be a damned sight harder to break those things if, 1) they were made with better materials, 2) weren't made by the lowest bidder, 3) quality control was better and, 4) corporations didn't think of soldiers as expendable resources when designing the equipment.
I've had quite a few friends in various branches who actually worked on military vehicles like the HMMWV. Some of the stories might have been embellished, but if even half were true they're pretty much a nightmare for anyone in the motor pool tasked with keeping them operational. Depending on the function, you can bet that each one of those cost the military a few hundred-grand each at minimum. Then you throw in operational costs, spare parts, maintenance. An Abrams costs in the realm of $9 million each, and have to ordered in lots of around 1000 if I'm remembering correctly. Not sure about Bradleys, Strykers, and all the others. Let's just say that it's a hell of a fleet for all those poor sergeants to keep their subordinates working on - endlessly.
Notice I haven't even gotten into the procurement process, political generals who push through crap so they can get a cushy retirement gig, and things like it? That, essentially an article the length of War and Peace. I also haven't gotten into outsourcing on all levels of the DoD. Most people always think "military" when they hear defense spending. The plethora of alphabet organizations always seem to fall by the wayside unless it's a story about how a few thousand people can spy on everyone, everywhere, every day. Most of you already know this. Sorry for rehashing.
I'm basically just talking about supply and demand. In a truly free market soldiers (I'll add Marines here as well because people should know by now how much y'all hate being called soldiers) would not be getting screwed, and neither would their services.
I'll stop here. I've only had one cup of coffee, and I'll go on for another few pages if I don;t force myself to stop.
As for defense spending, the Puzzle Palace doesn't work in isolation. I'd say we could start by bringing in some of the people purged during the Clinton witch hunts, but that's problematic at best. I'd like to see the military be able to renegotiate all the contracts Congress has foisted upon them.
It is said that soldiers can break anything. That being said, it would be a damned sight harder to break those things if, 1) they were made with better materials, 2) weren't made by the lowest bidder, 3) quality control was better and, 4) corporations didn't think of soldiers as expendable resources when designing the equipment.
I've had quite a few friends in various branches who actually worked on military vehicles like the HMMWV. Some of the stories might have been embellished, but if even half were true they're pretty much a nightmare for anyone in the motor pool tasked with keeping them operational. Depending on the function, you can bet that each one of those cost the military a few hundred-grand each at minimum. Then you throw in operational costs, spare parts, maintenance. An Abrams costs in the realm of $9 million each, and have to ordered in lots of around 1000 if I'm remembering correctly. Not sure about Bradleys, Strykers, and all the others. Let's just say that it's a hell of a fleet for all those poor sergeants to keep their subordinates working on - endlessly.
Notice I haven't even gotten into the procurement process, political generals who push through crap so they can get a cushy retirement gig, and things like it? That, essentially an article the length of War and Peace. I also haven't gotten into outsourcing on all levels of the DoD. Most people always think "military" when they hear defense spending. The plethora of alphabet organizations always seem to fall by the wayside unless it's a story about how a few thousand people can spy on everyone, everywhere, every day. Most of you already know this. Sorry for rehashing.
I'm basically just talking about supply and demand. In a truly free market soldiers (I'll add Marines here as well because people should know by now how much y'all hate being called soldiers) would not be getting screwed, and neither would their services.
I'll stop here. I've only had one cup of coffee, and I'll go on for another few pages if I don;t force myself to stop.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google