10 Ways to Get Jobs Back
Posted by jeckert on 09/08/2010
There's no way around it, unemployment is sky-high and the only way out of the economic rut in which the United States currently finds itself is to take immediate action.
The Atlantic boils it down to a simple number, running a piece entitled "10 Ways to Cut Unemployment in Half."
And while all 10 ways are useful to reinvigorate the economy and regain American jobs, ManufactureThis would like to hone in on numbers 6 and 7:
6. Pressing China. It will be hard for the economy to recover and for the jobs picture to improve if China keeps its currency advantage compared to the US. The value of the yuan almost certainly improves China's ability to keep the costs of its exports to the US low. It also raise the cost of imports from the US.The federal government would have to do two things to get China to "rethink" its trade and currency policy. Each is risky. The first is that the Treasury Department would have to make a direct threat to Beijing to label it as a Currency Manipulator, a designation which carries with it a number of trade sanctions. The second action by the American government would require that "strategic" imports from China be taxed. This would probably have to include finished metals like aluminum and finished commodities like tires. 7. Underwriting Exports. The Administration has said that the economy needs to boost exports. Even if trade issues with China are resolved, there are still some hurdles. Among the most meaningful is the cost of physical shipping. For products which have low profit margins, the price of air, sea, or ground transportation can be prohibitive. The government could elect to underwrite the cost of shipping, particularly for businesses that are relatively small or larger manufacturing businesses which are in sectors that have had large layoffs.With more and more experts, scholars, journalists and policymakers realizing that cracking down on China is one huge way to help employment rise, we wonder why Congress and the Obama administration have yet to act. Read more. ##
This post has 4 comments •
Add a comment
4 comments
Related recent Blogs
- CNBC: China investing in U.S. • by scapozzola • 05/22/2013
- In Indiana, ongoing concerns about subsidized auto parts from China and Japan • by scapozzola • 05/22/2013
- RADIO: AAM's Scott Paul on Leslie Marshall Radio Show, May 20, 2013 • by scapozzola • 05/21/2013
- May 21, 2013 Headlines: Tensions with North Korea, a stronger WTO, and more. • by LRaup • 05/21/2013
- Quote of the Day from Caterpillar's Doug Oberhelman • by LDonia • 05/20/2013
- May 20, 2013 Headlines: Manufacturing & social media, growth of the U.S. economy, and more. • by LRaup • 05/20/2013
- President Obama visits Baltimore factory to promote infrastructure investment as a means of revitalizing the middle class • by LDonia • 05/17/2013
- It's Fashion Friday, but NoCargo carries more than just American-made clothing! • by LDonia • 05/17/2013
- May 17, 2013 Headlines: Strengthening our national security, focusing on jobs, and more. • by LRaup • 05/17/2013
- Five reasons you should be concerned about the U.S. military's reliance on foreign manufacturers. • by LDonia • 05/16/2013
If the military continues a
If the military continues a plan offering incentives to foreign shipping bringing foreign goods into our country , asking them not to pollute our environment, while trying to limit US carbon emissions in manufacturing, while the administration negotiates currency manipulation, and hidden carbon emissions with a communist country, why would American manufacturing invest heavily in our country? Why is our president, trying to ease the economic problems of foreign ships, rather than trying to level the playing field for American manufacturing, by NOT helping them and protecting our environment and our economic interest? Ballast Water and how it is handled, mainly the timeline will create "CHANGE" that will affect America's stature in the world for many decades to come. It would be quite understandable for an American plan to subsidize what little shipping industry we have and perhaps even helping promote its growth. A slow plan helping foreign shipping will allow, for foreign ships to continue polluting longer, till foreign shipping industry decides to "take a step". The type of stimulus this administrations, military plan for change is offering, will only help foreign shipping and those who import foreign manufactured products, but may offer temporary economic recovery as foreign manufacturing powers carry the US on their coat tails , until the next economic crisis. Fast decisive legislation for ballast water as the law of the land, not providing economic incentives for ships, from a foreign tax base, bringing foreign goods into our country, would send a message to American manufacturing and perhaps affect their investing policy, as it would level the playing field for industry to grow, providing long term jobs and economic security to our country and may even create stronger countries on our borders where poverty and a bad quality of life is breeding growing instability and violence. Soon, September this new military study created for "change" coinciding with the Coast Guard 20 year plan, and the EPA, -- over two years after Senator Boxer killed the legislation created by the largest elected legislative voice of the American people,-- they will meet to discuss their "new findings" and might have "new" recommendations. Will they continue on a slow course for change to protect foreign economic interest, or will they speed up mandatory requirements allowing faster protection of our waters and economic growth for our country?20th
Whitehouse .com
Whitehouse .com
Don, Good angle. I have
Don,
Good angle. I have always been floored by the ability of people to demand clean air as a moral issue, and then not give a hoot when all they did is ship the pollution somewhere else. Unfortunately, it was not really a morality issue, it was a fashion issue. As long as my air looks good, fooey on everyone else.
In my opinion, the US should insist that every single EPA/OSHA/NLRB regulation should apply to every manufacturer that sends goods here. And, to have a system of rotating international inspectors. If you don't take the inspections, then no imports. Of course, its too late since China has us over a barrel. Even if we get a revalue of their currency, inflation here will be enormous (40% revaluation means 40% price increases at WongMart). So that revalue can't happen (President is not a Roosevelt after all).
Can you post the e-mail address of someone in power where I can "second" your issue.
Happy Griping!
American manufacturing should
American manufacturing should let workers know, (as unions will not inform workers) jobs that will last in manufacturing will not be created by new investments in our country, knowing that the Federal Government is not seriously addressing, the "economic pass" that has been given to foreign ships polluting our waters with ballast discharges and carbon emmissions as they bring their foreign manufactured products into our country. With this administration not addressing the issues of one Senator Boxer who objected to historic legislation passed by the House (395-7) in 2008, and then delaying action on ballast water with another study to coincide with a 20 year military plan ,it shows those who manufacture goods that a policy of economic globalization is still being pursued over economic Americanization, and will continue to stiffle the cost of manufacturing in our country. This is especially evident by a report created in 2009 for congress that describes the cost of national ballast water legislation mandating installation of technology. The report suggest the cost would be incurred by, mainly foreign ships, bring foreign imports into our country and this would cause the cost of imports to rise. Currently our military is offering incentives to foreign ships, importing foreign goods, to install technology to protect our waters. If they leveled the playing field with legislation that protected our water, and our commander and chief directed the military to worry about enforcement, rather than offering incentives to ease the problems that cost, would create for foreign shipping bringing foreign manufactured goods into our country, manufacturing may again decide to investment in America. Back in the 1990's environmentalist were not happy with President Clintons, help to delegate ballast water under the Clean Water Act to the EPA, they knew then with all the new free trade treaties and visions of economic globalization being the way for America's future that his plan had holes in it.