Save American jobs....start with a grasshopper & a Train wreck.

[Fred22]

Since this thread has jumped across the rails into the politics usually kept out of here:

It's been alternately amusing/bemusing/disturbing/enraging the past several days to hear one particular bat-brained candidate of one particular party spew out gooey runny bull-stuff about putting a colony on the moon, when his party has been attempting to strangle NASA with both fists for 50 years, they battled JFK tooth and nail when he proposed the Apollo program in 1961, they didn't want any of their tax money spent on that junk, they would have been deliriously happy to cancel Apollo on Jan. 21, 1969 if Apollo 8 had not made the circumlunar flight three weeks before, but they couldn't get away with it politically, they then started the shutdown of Apollo the minute Armstrong's boots hit the surface, then instead of a real manned space program, they mandated a penny-pinching, jury-rigged and inherently-unsafe (no escape system; guaranteed to kill full crews sooner or later) design for the shuttle, then a decade later when a shuttle blew up they refused to authorize a full-fledged next-generation launch vehicle, then 15 years later when another shuttle went down, instead of authorizing a viable follow-up program, they get up and say "Lookee here!!! Bright Shiny Lights!!! Let's Go To Mars!!!" (they might as well have said, "let's go to Krypton") and then immediately short-cut the development budget, utterly guaranteeing it would not meet ANY of its target dates, then when the next election rolls around they're all screaming, "You said we were going to Mars!! Why aren't we on Mars yet! Privatize everything!!!! NASA can't do anything right and I don't want to pay no taxes for nothin' anyway," and all of a sudden they are faced by an opposing president whose game plan is "punt, punt and punt some more, let's give them everything they want and maybe they will love me" so the U.S. manned space program gets deep-sixed. Starve The Beast. It only took them 50 years.

depressing but on the mark in a lot of ways

 

[New Ocean]

I keep forgetting in the environment down south socialist is an insult. It is not I assure you up here.

I live in New York City! My friend is an anarcho/socialist but I can't really agree with most of those ideas even after lots of thinking.

For the record, republicans are usually good funders of science and space exploration, even if they are ideologically anti-science these days. No republican wants to die poor, and they know that RnD makes money. They also have good friends in the corporations that make rockets and weapons. I would mention that it was president Bush, about the most ignorant president to date when it comes to science, who put us on track for moon missions and new rockets. Obama is the one who changed that and scrapped two perfectly fine rockets. It hurts me to no end that the president who was supposed to be pro-science has largely neglected NASA. The ideal stimulus at a time of recession would have been to challenge the nation (in 2009) to land men on Mars by 2020. People probably would have made fun of him for it, but it would have been the right thing. A mars mission would have created lots of new, good quality jobs, and it would have cost less than the 1.4 trillion bailouts.

 

[Buckeye]

Chevy Camaro: Designed in Australia, engineered in Detroit, assembled in Oshawa, Canada

Honda Accord: Designed, engineered, and headquartered in Japan. Assembled in Ohio

Now, which one is "Made in USA?" It is a nice-sounding catch phrase, but meaningless. It is a global economy.

Companies will leverage the best capability and prices around the globe. Technology and innovation are best done in the Western world. Commodity work is destined for the low-cost Third World. An equilibrium may eventually happen, but that is a long way off.

 

[FastCargo]

Some of the folks on here have shown outrage at something like Apple outsourcing manufacturing to China, yet show just as much annoyance when Toyota builds cars in Texas.

Seriously...somehow they BOTH are bad for you? Get real. It is no different then say a rocket company making parts in one state, kitting them in another state, and selling the kits to you in a third state...the difference is a matter of scale.

I will say it again, manufacturing knowledge can be bought and built locally if the incentive is there. A friend of mine who works for VW in Tennessee had been recruited there from Toyota in TX, and before that, Sony in NC. All three jobs were high paying manufacturing engineer jobs, for plants in all 3 locations. So that's 3 very large companies, with plants in all those locations, and all the associated jobs, from the line worker all the way to upper management and engineers.

Did mention he was recruited for each job? The jobs came looking for him, not the other way around.. You're not thinking straight if you believe this is a bad thing.

You want jobs back here? Let oil continue to creep up in price. Transportation costs are tied directly to the price of fuel. Increased transportation costs provide incentive to localize production. It also provides incentive for alternate energy solutions, smaller, more efficient vehicles (without clumsy CAFE rules), increased use and expansion of public transportation, investment back into urban areas vs suburban sprawl. It is not a quick solution, and there will be costs in the short term.

FC

 

[Fred22]

I live in New York City! My friend is an anarcho/socialist but I can't really agree with most of those ideas even after lots of thinking.

For the record, republicans are usually good funders of science and space exploration, even if they are ideologically anti-science these days. No republican wants to die poor, and they know that RnD makes money. They also have good friends in the corporations that make rockets and weapons. I would mention that it was president Bush, about the most ignorant president to date when it comes to science, who put us on track for moon missions and new rockets. Obama is the one who changed that and scrapped two perfectly fine rockets. It hurts me to no end that the president who was supposed to be pro-science has largely neglected NASA. The ideal stimulus at a time of recession would have been to challenge the nation (in 2009) to land men on Mars by 2020. People probably would have made fun of him for it, but it would have been the right thing. A mars mission would have created lots of new, good quality jobs, and it would have cost less than the 1.4 trillion bailouts.

Also good points. Now Im confused lol I live in Northern Alberta but Im heading your way in ten days for a quick peek around after a business conferance in New Jersey
Cheers
Fred

 

[JStarStar]

I would mention that it was president Bush, about the most ignorant president to date when it comes to science, who put us on track for moon missions and new rockets.

Uh no, Bush said "let's go to the moon by 2020" and then funded the program at a level which would have gotten us there by about 2050. That's how Starve the Beast works. Set absurd goals, then hamstring the budget, then start pounding your fists when those goals aren't met.

So by the time he was term-limited out of office, all his tax-cutting pals were screaming at NASA, "you said we were going to the moon, why aren't we on the moon yet, NASA Sucks!!!"

So the new prez comes in and is faced with throngs screaming, "cut the budget, I don't care what, I don't want to pay no taxes for nothin," and he thinks, "gee I guess I better cut the budget for SOMETHING so I can get these people to really really like me," so what's the biggest juiciest target on the chopping block? Well, NASA of course.

So hasta la vista to manned space flight. But of course he got all that screaming crowd to really love and respect him, right? Right?? Yeahhhhh I bet they'll be showing up at his campaign rallies any ole day now, you betcha. But that's his strategy: punt, punt and punt some more and when you're done punting everybody will love you.

:eyeroll:

 

[Buckeye]

But is that the kind of job we need? Screwing together high-tech devices made in Asia? I would rather go to school, get the training, and design this technology. Or work for the company that has them made in Asia. Exporting low paying jobs is not automatically bad if we then replace them with better jobs. When you get promoted, you leave the low end work for others so you can think about high level things. You get more money because of it... Look at the jobs created at Google or Apple... These are among the most profitable companies in the World, and they are American. I don't know about Apple, but Google keeps winning for "best place to work." You get more money and work under better, more rewarding conditions at a place like Google than on an assembly line. Mushkin is also an American company, so your example is a good one in that sense. They buy the hardware from economic slaves in Asia, and then assemble it here and sell at a vast profit. That may not be nice, but it is good for America and I can live with that. Certainly better us than them...

People lament the loss of blue collar jobs, when they seem to be ignoring the vast increase in really high paying technology jobs. It circles back to personal responsibility and job training, that is never as popular as something easy like "buy American." Some how there is always someone else to blame for whatever problem we have at the moment. And always some quick fix scheme to go along with it. That would best explain why nothing gets done.

Well said. Adapt or die.

 

[New Ocean]

Uh no, Bush said "let's go to the moon by 2020" and then funded the program at a level which would have gotten us there by about 2050. That's how Starve the Beast works. Set absurd goals, then hamstring the budget, then start pounding your fists when those goals aren't met.:

Fair enough, but even if we would have been late on the Moon goal, we would have been in better shape re the rocket gap currently in place.

I will borrow from Zubrin: We can't go to Mars (or the Moon) in 30 years, or 20 years... only in 10 years or less can ambitious space missions be completed. This ensures the political environment that existed when the mission was started also exists when it comes time to actually fly. So until someone sets the goal within 10 years, it will never happen.

 

[JStarStar]

Fair enough, but even if we would have been late on the Moon goal, we would have been in better shape re the rocket gap currently in place.

I will borrow from Zubrin: We can't go to Mars (or the Moon) in 30 years, or 20 years... only in 10 years or less can ambitious space missions be completed. This ensures the political environment that existed when the mission was started also exists when it comes time to actually fly. So until someone sets the goal within 10 years, it will never happen.

That's precisely right. Any goal more than 8 years, the odds are high an opposing administration will take office in the interim, and your big fat space project will look awful attractive on the chopping block.

 

[skybuster]

Well said. Adapt or die.

Not everyone can adapt. A 50 year old line worker who has his job outsourced can't start college that late in life, and besides that, employment for someone that age will be next to impossible with retirement within sight.

 

[Buckeye]

Not everyone can adapt. A 50 year old line worker who has his job outsourced can't start college that late in life, and besides that, employment for someone that age will be next to impossible with retirement within sight.

Why the hell not? Nobody is stopping you. This is America. Anything is possible, provided you take responsibility for yourself. Yeah, it is easier to take a defeatist attitude and blame somebody else.......

And since when is 50 years old considered retirement time? That is an outdated union fantasy. In my neck of the woods, this entitlement mentality has produced retirees (public and private) receiving fat pensions and bennies for longer periods of time than they spent actually working! That's why the rust belt economy went bankrupt and the states are in a financial mess with legacy costs.

 

[JStarStar]

Not everyone can adapt. A 50 year old line worker who has his job outsourced can't start college that late in life, and besides that, employment for someone that age will be next to impossible with retirement within sight.

Most prospective employers won't even look at anybody over 50 (usually, over 35).

Adapt or die.

 

[Buckeye]

Most prospective employers won't even look at anybody over 50 (usually, over 35).

Adapt or die.

Good grief. I hope that I am never in a foxhole with you guys who give up so easily.

I am ready to hire a 55 year old guy with the skills I need.

 

[JStarStar]

Good grief. I hope that I am never in a foxhole with you guys who give up so easily.

I am ready to hire a 55 year old guy with the skills I need.

You and exactly nobody else. Whoever is writing the checks looks at anybody age 55 and says, "Higher health care costs, higher absenteeism."

Most companies in fact are getting rid of everybody over 35 as fast as they can.

So ... adapt or die.

 

[Fred22]

Good grief. I hope that I am never in a foxhole with you guys who give up so easily.

I am ready to hire a 55 year old guy with the skills I need.

I was in a foxhole at 20 and now I'm 48 tbinking man was I dumb. :lol: I run a small retail business and thats all I know. I can say that 50 years are what I love to hire. Unlike a lot of 20 somethings they have a strong work ethic,they dont phone in sick every Saturday after payday or make 15 trips to the bathroom to use their cell. I think a more pertinent question is getting a job that pays enough and has good benefits? Going to colledge at 50 and fulfilling the obligations a lot of fifty year old folks normally have would be very difficult. It, a tough question that merits more then anti-union rhetoric and simplistic dont you have any guts kind of statements. I would hasten to add as well that that some of us are not American but wrestle with similar problems.
cheers
fred

 

[troj]

I was in a foxhole at 20 and now I'm 48 tbinking man was I dumb. :lol: I run a small retail business and thats all I know. I can say that 50 years are what I love to hire. Unlike a lot of 20 somethings they have a strong work ethic,they dont phone in sick every Saturday after payday or make 15 trips to the bathroom to use their cell. I think a more pertinent question is getting a job that pays enough and has good benefits? Going to colledge at 50 and fulfilling the obligations a lot of fifty year old folks normally have would be very difficult. It, a tough question that merits more then anti-union rhetoric and simplistic dont you have any guts kind of statements. I would hasten to add as well that that some of us are not American but wrestle with similar problems.

Your description reminds me of my brother's comment about the typical American teenager right now -- "They don't want a job, they want a paycheck".

-Kevin

 

[sodmeister]

Your description reminds me of my brother's comment about the typical American teenager right now -- "They don't want a job, they want a paycheck".

-Kevin

I have to work and teach apprentices everyday....:eyeroll:

Me - please quit texting and grab your tools...because next time ,my size 12 steel toes are going to do the 5 minute waltz on your I phone !

Apprentice - what`s a 5 minute waltz ?

Oh my sweey mother of ^%$#...you have no frick`n idea :kill:

Paul T

 

[Fred22]

Your description reminds me of my brother's comment about the typical American teenager right now -- "They don't want a job, they want a paycheck".

-Kevin

Same up here for lots Not all but lots.
Cheers
fred

 

[Fred22]

I have to work and teach apprentices everyday....:eyeroll:

Me - please quit texting and grab your tools...because next time ,my size 12 steel toes are going to do the 5 minute waltz on your I phone !

Apprentice - what`s a 5 minute waltz ?

Oh my sweey mother of ^%$#...you have no frick`n idea :kill:

Paul T

I have taken to a new form of corrective instruction for cell phone use on my dime. I fire them.
Cheers
fred

 

[skybuster]

I was in a foxhole at 20 and now I'm 48 tbinking man was I dumb. :lol: I run a small retail business and thats all I know. I can say that 50 years are what I love to hire. Unlike a lot of 20 somethings they have a strong work ethic,they dont phone in sick every Saturday after payday or make 15 trips to the bathroom to use their cell. I think a more pertinent question is getting a job that pays enough and has good benefits? Going to colledge at 50 and fulfilling the obligations a lot of fifty year old folks normally have would be very difficult. It, a tough question that merits more then anti-union rhetoric and simplistic dont you have any guts kind of statements. I would hasten to add as well that that some of us are not American but wrestle with similar problems.
cheers
fred

I can definitely see what you're saying there!

 

[skybuster]

Why the hell not? Nobody is stopping you. This is America. Anything is possible, provided you take responsibility for yourself. Yeah, it is easier to take a defeatist attitude and blame somebody else.......

And since when is 50 years old considered retirement time? That is an outdated union fantasy. In my neck of the woods, this entitlement mentality has produced retirees (public and private) receiving fat pensions and bennies for longer periods of time than they spent actually working! That's why the rust belt economy went bankrupt and the states are in a financial mess with legacy costs.

That's hardly a defeatist attitude, it's just logical reasoning. I'm not saying that one should give up due to their age, it's just going to be much harder for them to try and get a job