Liberals with borders

[dnsmith]

I assume everyone on the forum knows what Doctors without borders does. So lets apply that knowledge to liberals. It has been my experience that liberals tend to only concern themselves with needy people in the US, whereas a true liberal will be concerned about people the world over.

Specifically, in addition to being a moderate democrat, I am also a humanist. I believe we should work for good economic standards for all people, not just US citizens. The majority of our poor in the US live much better than the millions and millions of poor all over the world. Because of this I question the liberality of so many of our left wing brothers who would rather see our poor live with dignity to include things like TVs, autos, good housing than to provide jobs in the third world so as to help eliminate profound poverty everywhere.

In spite of the fact that for every job we send overseas tends to create another job here in the US, the liberals with borders still whine about giving Indians or Chinese jobs. Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

 

[Deuce]

In what universe do you perceive most liberals as only being concerned with Americans? Because it isn't this one.

 

[MaggieD]

I assume everyone on the forum knows what Doctors without borders does. So lets apply that knowledge to liberals. It has been my experience that liberals tend to only concern themselves with needy people in the US, whereas a true liberal will be concerned about people the world over.

Specifically, in addition to being a moderate democrat, I am also a humanist. I believe we should work for good economic standards for all people, not just US citizens. The majority of our poor in the US live much better than the millions and millions of poor all over the world. Because of this I question the liberality of so many of our left wing brothers who would rather see our poor live with dignity to include things like TVs, autos, good housing than to provide jobs in the third world so as to help eliminate profound poverty everywhere.

In spite of the fact that for every job we send overseas tends to create another job here in the US, the liberals with borders still whine about giving Indians or Chinese jobs. Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

Coincidentally, here are some liberals doing exactly what you're talking about:

A leading American labor union is throwing its weight behind public protests against Gap Inc. planned for this weekend in what the union's leader said is an "opening salvo" in the battle against dangerous working conditions in Bangladesh.

The announcement from Noel Beasley, President of the SEIU affiliate Workers United, came as the death toll of garment workers from last week's massive building collapse near Bangladesh's capital Dhaka continued to rise, now estimated to be more than 900.

Gap clothing was not discovered in the collapse, but the popular brand is one of the largest American retailers producing clothing in Bangladesh and its products were found in a fire there two and a half years ago that killed 29 workers.

Union Protests to Target Gap over Bangladesh Worker Safety - ABC News

 

[dnsmith]

Coincidentally, here are some liberals doing exactly what you're talking about:



Union Protests to Target Gap over Bangladesh Worker Safety - ABC News

Actually no! Even though some Unions are protesting Bangladesh labor conditions, there only real concern is how to get the jobs back to the US and to hell with the poor in the 3rd world.

 

[dnsmith]

In what universe do you perceive most liberals as only being concerned with Americans? Because it isn't this one.

I have not been in an economics thread in which most of the liberals don't whine and cry about jobs going overseas to cheap labor. Are the exception which proves the rule?

 

[MaggieD]

Actually no! Even though some Unions are protesting Bangladesh labor conditions, there only real concern is how to get the jobs back to the US and to hell with the poor in the 3rd world.

You don't actually think the unions have ulterior motives, do you?? :rofl

 

[poweRob]

I assume everyone on the forum knows what Doctors without borders does. So lets apply that knowledge to liberals. It has been my experience that liberals tend to only concern themselves with needy people in the US, whereas a true liberal will be concerned about people the world over.

Specifically, in addition to being a moderate democrat, I am also a humanist. I believe we should work for good economic standards for all people, not just US citizens. The majority of our poor in the US live much better than the millions and millions of poor all over the world. Because of this I question the liberality of so many of our left wing brothers who would rather see our poor live with dignity to include things like TVs, autos, good housing than to provide jobs in the third world so as to help eliminate profound poverty everywhere.

In spite of the fact that for every job we send overseas tends to create another job here in the US, the liberals with borders still whine about giving Indians or Chinese jobs. Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

do tell us of all the conservatives you know that have a tour in the peace corp on their resume.

 

[Heebie Jeebie]

do tell us of all the conservatives you know that have a tour in the peace corp on their resume.

What does the Peace Corp have to do with anything?

 

[Deuce]

I have not been in an economics thread in which most of the liberals don't whine and cry about jobs going overseas to cheap labor. Are the exception which proves the rule?

We think Chinese laborers should have the same standards of working conditions that we do.

Which would also serve the purpose of leveling the playing field and making American jobs less likely to shift overseas. Do you have a problem with either of those outcomes?

 

[hidingrpolitics]

We think Chinese laborers should have the same standards of working conditions that we do.

Which would also serve the purpose of leveling the playing field and making American jobs less likely to shift overseas. Do you have a problem with either of those outcomes?

Yes the problem is that what you would "like" to happen and what is feasible in reality are at odds. The reality is that countries have different living standards due to cost of energy, technological differences, culture, government, infrastructure, education, etc. You cannot expect a country like China to go from a GDP per capita that is fractions of what it is in the US to on par with the US. The reality is that companies like Apple and GM, who are shipping jobs overseas, is providing emerging markets with the same stepping stone opportunity that was once provided to the US. If you say that emerging markets countries must be paid the same as individuals in the US, you are setting a price floor that will artificially distort wages and cause unemployment to skyrocket. China has gone from a Communist country with tens of millions of starving and impoverished individuals to a capitalist society where the standard of living has increased over 1000% on the backs of hard work and cheap labor. There is nothing wrong with cheap labor--it is how countries that lag behind technologically can catch up to those who are in the lead.

 

[dnsmith]

do tell us of all the conservatives you know that have a tour in the peace corp on their resume.

Trying to make this about partisan politics? Fact is both extremes are guilty of wanting to hoard the good standards of living to the US.

 

[dnsmith]

We think Chinese laborers should have the same standards of working conditions that we do.

Kind of having excessively high expectations are we? Fact is, once the Chinese and the Indians or the Indonesians et al have more jobs there will be a labor/economic revolution which will, like us, eventually raise job standards.

Which would also serve the purpose of leveling the playing field and making American jobs less likely to shift overseas. Do you have a problem with either of those outcomes?

The problem I have is, that you like so many could care less if the poor in the 3rd world have a job or starve to death. I see our moving labor intensive jobs overseas as a boon to mankind and since we don't really lose jobs in the long run, those we do export will raise the standard of living overseas and possibly even meet our standards.

In addition, in the last 30 years India has gone from a country with 1 billion people, a few million of which were wealthy, to a country with a 300 million middle class and they are gradually becoming a market for our goods and services.Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

 

[dnsmith]

Yes the problem is that what you would "like" to happen and what is feasible in reality are at odds. The reality is that countries have different living standards due to cost of energy, technological differences, culture, government, infrastructure, education, etc. You cannot expect a country like China to go from a GDP per capita that is fractions of what it is in the US to on par with the US. The reality is that companies like Apple and GM, who are shipping jobs overseas, is providing emerging markets with the same stepping stone opportunity that was once provided to the US. If you say that emerging markets countries must be paid the same as individuals in the US, you are setting a price floor that will artificially distort wages and cause unemployment to skyrocket. China has gone from a Communist country with tens of millions of starving and impoverished individuals to a capitalist society where the standard of living has increased over 1000% on the backs of hard work and cheap labor. There is nothing wrong with cheap labor--it is how countries that lag behind technologically can catch up to those who are in the lead.

Bravo! I see you have the vision to see the good economic news.

 

[StringBean]

America is about non-protectionist free-market economics.

After all, we don't stop out-sourcing do we?

(Note it's the bleeding left that seeks to "protect" American jobs--go to any union rally)

Other countries are free to succeed as best their people and government will allow.

We do enough. We don't owe them our livelihood.

 

[dnsmith]

Nonsense. America is about non-protectionist free-market economics.

After all, we don't stop out-sourcing do we?

(Note it's the bleeding left that seeks to "protect" American jobs--go to any union rally)

That is the common thing.

Other countries are free to succeed as best their people and government will allow.

We do enough. We don't owe them our livelihood.

We don't "owe them our livelihood, but it is good economics for the long haul to elevate the standard of living all over the world as this creates huge markets for our goods and services.

 

[StringBean]

We don't "owe them our livelihood, but it is good economics for the long haul to elevate the standard of living all over the world as this creates huge markets for our goods and services.

Well then the best thing we can give them is a copy of the Constitution and a copy of The Wealth of Nations.

I won't suffer for their ignorance.

 

[spud_meister]

Why should liberals support shifting jobs overseas? The economic benefit to the individual is a fraction in China of what it is in the US. Chinese workers get ****ty pay and ****ty conditions compared to American workers. Why should liberals support the inherent inequality of that arrangement?

 

[dnsmith]

Why should liberals support shifting jobs overseas? The economic benefit to the individual is a fraction in China of what it is in the US. Chinese workers get ****ty pay and ****ty conditions compared to American workers. Why should liberals support the inherent inequality of that arrangement?

Liberals don't support allowing our jobs going overseas in spite of the fact that over the long haul it is good business. Left wingers seldom can see beyond the tip of their nose.

True humanists can see not only the value economically of building good economies overseas in addition to the unique fairness of giving jobs to the least of our world's people. It is the right thing to do AND it is good for our overall prosperity.


Nap time!

 

[Deuce]

Yes the problem is that what you would "like" to happen and what is feasible in reality are at odds. The reality is that countries have different living standards due to cost of energy, technological differences, culture, government, infrastructure, education, etc. You cannot expect a country like China to go from a GDP per capita that is fractions of what it is in the US to on par with the US. The reality is that companies like Apple and GM, who are shipping jobs overseas, is providing emerging markets with the same stepping stone opportunity that was once provided to the US. If you say that emerging markets countries must be paid the same as individuals in the US, you are setting a price floor that will artificially distort wages and cause unemployment to skyrocket. China has gone from a Communist country with tens of millions of starving and impoverished individuals to a capitalist society where the standard of living has increased over 1000% on the backs of hard work and cheap labor. There is nothing wrong with cheap labor--it is how countries that lag behind technologically can catch up to those who are in the lead.

Really now.

 

[poweRob]

What does the Peace Corp have to do with anything?

It's a response to the OP's ascertion that it's liberals who don't give a crap about needy people outside of our borders.

It has been my experience that liberals tend to only concern themselves with needy people in the US, whereas a true liberal will be concerned about people the world over.

 

[poweRob]

Trying to make this about partisan politics? Fact is both extremes are guilty of wanting to hoard the good standards of living to the US.

You straight up call out liberals in your OP and then have the gall to blame someone else of making it partisan. Interesting.

 

[Moot]

I assume everyone on the forum knows what Doctors without borders does. So lets apply that knowledge to liberals. It has been my experience that liberals tend to only concern themselves with needy people in the US, whereas a true liberal will be concerned about people the world over.

Specifically, in addition to being a moderate democrat, I am also a humanist. I believe we should work for good economic standards for all people, not just US citizens. The majority of our poor in the US live much better than the millions and millions of poor all over the world. Because of this I question the liberality of so many of our left wing brothers who would rather see our poor live with dignity to include things like TVs, autos, good housing than to provide jobs in the third world so as to help eliminate profound poverty everywhere.

Right out of the pages of AEI and Heritage foundation. Are you sure you're a moderate democrat?

The poor owning a car helps them find and go to work.

The poor owning a tv helps them stay informed and become informed voters.

The poor owning a refridgerator helps them stay healthy.

I would argue that a car, a tv and a refridgerator aren't neccessarily luxury items, they're neccessities in todays world and merely having them doesn't help the poor get out from living below the poverty line. Now if you want to argue the poor shouldn't have luxury yachts or a private jets, then I might agree with you. But you aren't, so I'm not.

BTW, third world countries are called emerging markets now and they're well on their way to out producing the US...and if they continue their momentum, it's the US that will soon become the third world if it doesn't get it's act together.

In spite of the fact that for every job we send overseas tends to create another job here in the US, the liberals with borders still whine about giving Indians or Chinese jobs. Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

You didn't read the conclusion to the article you posted, did you, dnsmith?

"....That doesn’t mean that offshoring is unambiguously good for all workers in all industries: The paper explained that, in certain manufacturing industries, the native share of employment has “ambiguously” gone down, forcing workers who’ve lost their jobs to offshoring to look for work in another sector altogether.

It’s also worth noting that the study doesn’t examine the state of U.S. manufacturing since 2007, when recession-strapped companies increased productivity while reducing employment to squeeze as much out of as few workers as possible. So the link between the “productivity effect” from overseas hiring and new jobs in the United States may have weakened in the last five years."

 

[ReformCollege]

Why should liberals support shifting jobs overseas? The economic benefit to the individual is a fraction in China of what it is in the US. Chinese workers get ****ty pay and ****ty conditions compared to American workers. Why should liberals support the inherent inequality of that arrangement?

Because they would be living in dumpsters otherwise. There are reasons why people in countries like Bangladesh migrate by the hundreds of thousands to these "****ty" factories you speak of.

 

[ThePlayDrive]

I assume everyone on the forum knows what Doctors without borders does. So lets apply that knowledge to liberals. It has been my experience that liberals tend to only concern themselves with needy people in the US, whereas a true liberal will be concerned about people the world over.

Specifically, in addition to being a moderate democrat, I am also a humanist. I believe we should work for good economic standards for all people, not just US citizens. The majority of our poor in the US live much better than the millions and millions of poor all over the world. Because of this I question the liberality of so many of our left wing brothers who would rather see our poor live with dignity to include things like TVs, autos, good housing than to provide jobs in the third world so as to help eliminate profound poverty everywhere.

In spite of the fact that for every job we send overseas tends to create another job here in the US, the liberals with borders still whine about giving Indians or Chinese jobs. Offshoring creates as many U.S. jobs as it kills, study says

Are you serious with this nonsense?

1. The distinction between liberals and "true liberals" that you make is the no true Scotsman fallacy, straightaway.

2. Most HUMAN BEINGS tend to show concern for the people and environments that are immediately around them. People tend to have great affection for and connection to the people and places that they grew up in, formed relationships with, call home and so on. I'm sure most American liberals are primarily concerned with the needy within the United States because that's where most of us grew up and that's the place whose problems most of us most thoroughly understand.

3. I don't know what kind of liberals you know or read about, but your comment that "liberals only concern themselves with needy people in the US" is preposterous. It's the kind of argument that is so dumbfounding and out of left field that I'm amazed someone came up with it.

 

[hidingrpolitics]

Really now.

Please specify what you mean by that. My point was you can't simply pay people in China what you pay people in the US until they've industrialized to the level of the US, which is what you were arguing for. China has made HUGE strides but is still very behind where the US today on a per capita basis. A large contributing factor to this has been cheap labor, and as China further improves technologically, their wages will increase as well. However, there is nothing inherently wrong with low wages.