The Root Of Economic Malaise

How does one make decisions that attenuate this power without giving said power to someone else by default?

 

Only government has the power of forcable coercion. Older competitors don't have the guns.

 

You don't think private interests could forceably coerce you into doing anything?

 

I googled Boston Consulting Group and so far haven't found an article about on accelerating US competitiveness. Do you have a link for that?

 

Bureaucrats always support their own. Any flabby fanny-sitting bureaucrat that decides to make an example of a citizen trying to uphold their own inalienable rights will be unquestionably supported by his/her fellow bureaucrats who are really doing nothing more than marking time until their lucrative retirement kicks in.

One case in point:

"U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar told a popular oyster farm at Drakes Bay on Thursday to pack up and leave, effectively ending more than a century of shellfish harvesting on the picturesque inlet where Europeans first set foot in California."/I]

http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/U-S-evicting-Point-Reyes-oyster-farmer-4077624.php

Here's the real story...

"The Park Service has leveled false charges of environmental harm against an upstanding family business, and has falsely claimed that its policies require the historic oyster farm to be removed. The truth about the Drakes Bay Oyster controversy is that this historic oyster farm is part of the working landscape the Seashore was formed to protect. The Lunnys, a third-generation Point Reyes ranching family, purchased the oyster farm in 2004 and have been superb stewards of the land and water. Read more about the Lunny family here."

http://savedrakesbay.com/core/

This is the Federal Government reaching out from on-high to take private land based on trumped-up so-called environmental regulations.

 

I've been saying that for 4-5 years now but, since I am a liberal, nobody on the right has been willing to concede that a big part of the recession is due to business nullification. Glad you're on board. BTW, the Depression ended while Roosevelt was still in office, and it ended because business saw the amazing opportunities to capitalize on a two-front war. They didn't seem to have any mistrust of Roosevelt at the time.

One other thing. I've owned a business for 30 years. Regulation ain't a problem unless I want to dump (*)(*)(*)(*) into the groundwater.

 

Let's say a business (through strong leadership, competitiveness, R&D, etc.) pummeled competitors out of a market compromised of things people needed (such as food,water, etc.) Then took this power to rid people of things they wanted (money). Businesses are not benevolent. Consumers are not well-educated on all the implications of their purchases. Businesses are trying to corner markets, raise prices, lower wages, etc. How would you feel if businesses allowed our U.S. markets to be flooded with skilled labor, and drove down your wages? Might you try to protect your wealth as they try to protect theirs? If not, you can surely expect to be rid of it, just as they would if not for their protections.

 

We would have to elect enough people, including a future president, to make such changes. And pressure enough other people in Congress to go along, which is a hard sell cuz the tax code is one big way to payback your big corp donors. Hard to see that many people in either party actually doing it, they may say they will but doing it is another thing.

Other thing is, this gov't needs to be streamlined to become more cost effective and efficient. Too much money is going to the cronies and big corps/rich people and too much is being wasted. I cannot support any tax hikes until our gov't starts doing a better job of spending the money they're already getting. If and when that happens maybe the problems with campaign finance will diminish somewhat cuz the payoff won't be as much or as often.

 

Are you trying to say the possibility exists for an armed populace in this country that extorts food, water, power, and money, along with whatever else they want from businesses at the point of a gun? Every house is a fortress with guns and whatever else to protect and keep what we have? No doubt I am misunderstanding your point here.

Businesses allowing US markets to be flooded with skilled labor? Come again, what are you talking about?

 

I'm a little unclear about your point, but I'm assuming you mean that government already does this food/water/power extortion. Please clarify so that I can reply.

The 2nd point is lost on you as well? Do you think it far-fetched that private interests would want to drive down skilled labor costs by increasing competition? Why have we out-sourced so much?

 

On the skilled labor issue, increased competition means an increase in demand for the skilled labor in question. That leads to higher wages, not lower. Outsourcing is I believe more concerned with unskilled and therefore cheaper labor, and also the desire to sell stuff in foreign markets.

 

Regulations are definitely one tool that the Oligopolies use to keep others from competing. Obama is doing the same as his predecessors by continuing to support the Oligopolies as does the rest of congress.

The problem is that the majority of the electorate does not realize what an oligopoly is never mind understand how they are controlling our economy through anti competitive practices, regulations, tax laws and so forth.

 

Increasing competition, means increasing the supply of skilled labor, not the demand for it. When you allow more people to compete for jobs it doesn't increase wages, it reduces them. I would note that this reduction is only towards the worker in the country with more wealth, the opposite would be true for the migrant worker. So i guess you're kind of right.

Outsourcing isn't limited to unskilled labor. We outsource many accounting jobs to India.

 

On the gun issue, I don't believe I used the word gun at all. Businesses wouldn't need them unless people tried to "steal" the necessities they owned. They would use their leverage (of having something you need) to charge high prices. Its already happening in developing nations without much in the way of a government to protect themselves. Water was privatized in a South American country, and price gouging ensued. I'll look for a link.

 

Which has not influenced wages for accountants here, correct?

This business of increased competition for skilled labor, it begins with more companies needing more skilled labor if they are going to compete; ergo, demand goes up for the skilled labor and wages go up too. Which means more people try to obtain the required skills, and eventually the supply of skilled labor catches up. At which point basic economics kicks in, maybe wages drop if the supply exceeds demand for the labor, or maybe wages begin to stagnate. Kinda depends on the situation I think.

 

Well I guess if your first assertion is true that would mean paying a premium to our accountants doesn't deter hiring them?

I guess your 2nd point is correct in that it would depend on the situation, but I did set up the situation. An influx of skilled laborers were injected into the USA. That's the situation. The market doesn't say, look at all these accountants that just flooded into our economy, we need to find jobs for them, they have to compete for said jobs. I don't know of too many companies that are just leaving skilled positions vacant, they just settling for what is available.

A good counterpoint would be that this influx of skilled labor would increase our productivity as better applicants could be hired at a lower rate of pay, but I'm just pointing out this would not be in our own best interest unless we owned the companies that were doing the hiring.

 

Taxcutter says:
Government is the guys with the guns. The private sector does not have the firepower.

 

If the government has the guns, and private interests have the government, who has the guns?

 

Taxcutter says:
Implicitly, you make the case for reducing the scope of government.

 

Private interests can afford their own guns, they don't need the government, but it is a handy cost-cutter.