Third Party & Independents Archives

Stimulus Package "Buy American" Provision is Short-Sighted

l have to admit, I’m concerned about this “Buy American” clause in this latest stimulus package signed just this week. It is backwards, clearly designed to undermine previous efforts to improve trade, and will undoubtedly come back to haunt us.

China View

I'm amazed at how short-sighted our leaders are. Can they not understand that we lead the free world? Others follow our examples good and bad so is this the kind of path we want other nations to take? How can we continue to meet our trade requirements if we are to "Buy American"? The two are interdependent and cannot both coexist. If other countries follow suit - and they will, our exports will drop certainly and then I'll never see those billions of dollars we gave to GM and Chrysler because they will never recover. China was one of GM's few bright spots and most assuredly would lead to their recovery. But that won't happen if China decides to only buy China-made products. Worse yet, if they refuse to export goods to the US, then even I won't be able to buy Chinese manufactured goods that are allegedly American (like the American Flag I bought in 2007 - yep, made in China). Not to mention the millions of people who shop at places like Wal-Mart. If China stops or slows down exports to the US prices will go up even at Wal-Mart, which is one more squeeze on the American consumer.

Hopefully this provision is nothing more than an empty clause that is too impractical to actually implement. But I doubt steel and iron workers' unions will allow for such lax oversight.

Just to keep this in perspective - we export too. A lot. Sacrificing the jobs of exporters and importers for the sake of keeping other Americans working is counterproductive. American workers at American companies aren't somehow more American, more deserving, than Americans who operate an international export or import business. We need those markets overseas open and willing to purchase our products for us all to prosper.

This is one thing I can hang over Congress. The President clearly didn't want such provisions.

Posted by Christopher Tracy at February 16, 2009 6:31 AM
Comments
Comment #275587

I think you should take a moment and catch your breath. First and foremost, the buy-American provision will not stop people from buying China’s goods. Secondly, what would be the point of a stimulus where much of the money flows out to China and other countries almost immediately?

Lastly, you are aware that Xinhua is China’s State News agency, right?

The truth is, China has no problem with it’s own protectionism, its currency manipulation, or anything else like that. They just have a problem with American dollars going through American pockets first.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at February 16, 2009 9:54 AM
Comment #275588

Congress, short-sighted?
Imagine that.

How about Congress voting on a 1100+ page BILL that few read, gives $50 Million dollars to the Endowment of the Art, Millions to buy condoms, $650 Million for digital TV converter boxes, $600 Million for the federal government to buy new cars, etc., etc., etc. ?

By the way, Germany has more exports than the U.S.
So does China.
Global competition is stronger than ever.
The U.S. is the biggest importer on the planet.
U.S. exports have been decreasing for years, while imports have been growing.
Greed runs through all of it and the FOR-SALE Congress.
Yet, most Americans continue to reward Congress with 85%-to-90% re-election rates (despite dismal 9%-to-18% approval ratings), because too many voters love THEIR party more than their country … at least until that becomes too painful.

This is one thing I can hang over Congress.
One thing?

Congress’ dirty deeds would fill volumes.
However, most voters (of the 50%-to-60% that even bother to vote at all) reward Congress for it, so it naturally only gets worse and worse … at least until that finally becomes too painful, which may not be too many years away.

The $10.8 Trillion National Debt per-capita is 62% more than the previous record-high in year 1945 after World War II, and that does not even include the $12.8 Trillion borrowed and spent from Social Security, leaving it pay-as-you-go, with a 77 Million baby-boomer bubble approaching.
The $67 Trillion nation-wide debt (that’s current debt; not future debt plus future interest) has never been large in magnitude, as a percentage of GDP, and per-capita (i.e. $220,000 per person on average).

There are a LOT of things Congress could do to stop hammering most Americans, but Congress refuses to stop those abuses because Congress is FOR-SALE, as evidenced by the 99.7% of all 200 Million eligible voters who are vastly out-spent by a very tiny 0.3% of the wealthiest voters who make 83% of all federal campaign donations of $200 or more.

Voters will have to learn the hard and painful way (again).
Perhaps when enough Americans are bankrupt, jobless, homeless, and hungry, they will question 85%-to-90% re-election rates for their FOR-SALE Congress, and perhaps do what most unhappy voters did in year 1933 when they voted-out 206 (of 533) members of Congress. Of course, even in 1933, it was too late to avoid another decade of the Great Depression, but later is better than never.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful.


Posted by: d.a.n at February 16, 2009 10:08 AM
Comment #275591

I’ve not heard a thing about ‘buy American’ in the bill the Pres. will sign. But, be assured, if there is something in there it will be watered down with legalease to the point of being ineffective. Nations and WTO regulators threatened law suits from day 1 relative to ‘buy Am.’ I suspect E-verify has suffered the same fate. Won’t know until the Lou Dobb’s show this evening. I fail to understand why trade and protectionism can’t oo-exist. Seems we did very well from WWII to the 80’s using co-existing policies. I distinctly remember Ike pushing a ‘buy American’ policy. I seem to recall, under Kennedy, that servicemen overseas could only spend so much US currency per month or something like that. I know for a fact that we did better in those years than we have since Regan and the era of ‘Greed is Fashionable’.
As for the GM thing; you can kiss your $B’s goodbye there Chris. GM took the bailout to pay off employees, sale of their legacy equipment and shutter their plants. I fail to understand why, since GM is doing well on the international scene, the corp. can pay to close their plants down. Why does the US taxpayer need to help them sail to China? It’s not a real brain twister Chris to realize that no US manufacturer can long compete against products made by the cheapest labor in the world. If you figure out how to do that you should let Obama know so he can work up a job training course or two for that venture.
As an aside – from a yahoo article: Prices for milk now are about half what it costs farmers to produce the staple, and consumer prices are falling. Unless the market can be bolstered, industry officials project that more than 1.5 million of the nation’s 9.3 million milking cows could be slaughtered this year as dairy operators look to cut costs and generate cash.
“This could destroy our dairy infrastructure,” said Mike Marsh, CEO of the United Western Dairymen trade association.
Three months ago, mature milkers would sell for $2,500 to another dairy, but with nobody buying, dairymen are selling them on the beef market for only $1,100 each.

I suspect, once China learns how to grow cows, the US dairy market might come under more pressure yet.
Somehow, I don’t feel bad that you would no longer be able to buy your Am. flag from China. And, the idea that China wouldn’t sell to us if we opted for fair trade instead of free trade - I guess they would bring Africa on line as a trading partner if we drop out.
But, you’ve no reason to worry. As long as our government is operated as a subsidiary of big business free trade is IN and ‘Buy American’ is OUT.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 16, 2009 10:25 AM
Comment #275599


The damage has already been done and the buy American provisions are a day late and a dollar short. Where can I buy an American made TV?

Posted by: jlw at February 16, 2009 1:11 PM
Comment #275600

Why buy American was one of the few good ideas that President Regan had in the 1980’s I have to wonder if the American Commerce and Industry could deliver the products, goods, and services required by the average American today. For with all the job loss in America and factories moving their operartion overseas I fear the day when Americans will face a shortage of toilet paper because America does not have enough Paper Mills within our borders.

So why President Obama must walk a thin line in helping promote American Commerce and Industry to the Global Economy, I hope that he will use his powers as President of the United States of America to show the World Leaders why it is in their Inherent Best Interest to forward the idea that Every Nation should be able to supply their Citiens Basic Needs within their own borders.

For why the importing and exporting sectors around the world may take a hit, as a matter of Individual National Security IMHO every Government nd Society should work on being able to have their Citizens Self-Sufficient by the 22nd Century to prevent an unstablized economy.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 16, 2009 1:23 PM
Comment #275627

How about saving jobs by enforcing e-Verify ?

Hmmmm … guess that would make too much sense.

Congress pulled it from the Stimulus BILL and probably plans to let it expire next month.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect (and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful).

Posted by: d.a.n at February 16, 2009 7:49 PM
Comment #275634

SD
Well said.

CT
Every great country MUST have a steel industry. Its time to rebuild ours and this measure will help. As others have pointed out China does not play on a level playing field. If they object to this then they should show their sincerity by letting the Yuan float. Its bad enough that one cannot buy a pair of socks made in the US. We should at least be able to buy domestic rebar and bolts.

Posted by: bills at February 16, 2009 10:59 PM
Comment #275637

Apparently, my point got lost… So, let me clarify.

True, people will continue to buy goods from China, but my point had nothing to do with demand. My point was that if China retaliates and curtails or stops exporting to the US, then thousands of American workers will be out of work (in other words, American consumers couldn’t buy Chinese products if they wanted to). The goods may be from China but more often then not it is an American selling those goods to other Americans.

It is also true that China already practices protectionism. However over the past 2 decades they have opened up a bit. Not as much as we’d like of course, but they have started to loosen up. Trade protection on our part will undo whatever gains we have seen in China and elsewhere.

And this isn’t just about China, it applies to other well developed economies - Japan, Britain, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, etc… If they all put up trade barriers we will all suffer.

As for the 1950s, there was indeed a push to “Buy American” but that was a completely different time and doesn’t compare to the current situation. The current recession is much more reminiscent of the 1930s - post stock-market crash. And this “buy American” clause is more like the protectionist act called the Smoot-Hawley Act of 1930, which was in response to the then-recent stock market crash of 1929. Not only did economists hate it (over 1,000 signed a petition against it), not only did it lead to trade wars with our friends, but it ultimately failed miserably to turn the economy around or get people back to work. And of course what followed was the Great Depression.

Can buy American co-exist with global free-trade? Only if it is allowed to naturally occur - in other words if we have no trade barriers or incentives to buy American, but the people decide to buy American anyway. But do you honestly think that will happen? Not in this lifetime. Goods from Asia are too cheap for an American to pass up.

The point about the flag was simply this - how do you really know what is built in America and what is not? “Made in America” doesn’t mean what it did in 1950. Generally in the 50’s if it said “Made in America” then the product and all of the components were created in the USA. In this day and age “Made in the USA” simply means it was assembled in the USA in whole or in part, but all of the parts could have come from all over the world. In other words, “Buying American” employs the same number of Americans as does buying imports (in some cases). I used the flag to make the point that you’d think that of all the things that would be made in the USA it would be the American flag. Unfortunately the one I bought, wasn’t made here.

Finally, yes I realize Xinhua is the official State newspaper for the Chinese government. That’s precisely why I read and used it as a reference. This story articulates China’s view and if they are concerned our economic policy, we should all be watching/reading Xinhua because it will be the best link into what the government will likely do in response.

Besides - how many other independent Chinese news organizations are there? If you have one I should read, please share.

Thanks for the comments and keep ‘em coming!

Posted by: Christopher Tracy at February 16, 2009 11:27 PM
Comment #275638

bills,

I firmly agree we need a steel industry among other vital resource industries. And you are correct it should be rebuilt not only for the jobs that are created but for National Security. It is refining and manufacturing plants that will keep our military strong should we go to war.

We are now a global economy - like or not. What we do affects what others do which affects us in turn. The number of jobs saved with such a clause will be offset by the number of jobs lost in industries that export goods and services.

We have to think bigger picture.

Posted by: Christopher Tracy at February 16, 2009 11:37 PM
Comment #275641

Christopher,
Why I do not advocate that the American Consumer or Small Business Owner declare war and stop purchasing products, goods, and services from China or other nations. I do believe that when it comes to Americas’ Local, State, and Federal Government spending Taxpayers Money that every effort is made to ensure that Americas’ Commerce and Industruies can supply it in house. For just as Germany and Japan found out in the 20th Century the lack of manufacturing and resources lead to their downfall. So Americans in the 21st Century realize that why China may have better ginger growing wild than can be harvested localy. Comparing that to Americans ability to supply “We the People” with the Basic Products, Goods, and Services needed by our government and citizens is more an Issue of National Security than Wall Streets claim to Greed. Because why the Bulls and Bears would have a feast over the idea that America had a shortage of toilet paper, seeing that some of the parts for our military and infrastructure must be built outside our borders. Buy American takes on a whole new meaning of providing for the Common Good and Defense of “We the People” of the United States of America.

For can you see the day when no American could wipe their butt because China refused to sell us toilet pare? Or hoe about mot being able to use a piece of military Equipment because the EU would not sell us the $2.00 item needed to repair a part the American Commerce and Industry Complex cannot build. Care to be the Messenger on that news being delivered to the White House Press Corp?

So why buy American may have had a good meaning under President Regan in the 1980’s, I hope that My Democratic and Republican Citizens and Elected officials of the 21st Century will look ahead and use the provision wisely as they work out the details of a national and global economic policy that will allow their children to buy the best Wild Ginger in China, the Fruits of the Lslands, and Silk from Japan while still protecting their guaranteed civil and constitutional rights to be self-suficient.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 17, 2009 4:30 AM
Comment #275643

American TV companies exist:

http://www.hdtv-news.co.uk/2007/08/06/olevia-537h-hdtv/

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10799.cfm

Manufacturing may occur out of the country, but profits are made by a US company.

Posted by: gergle at February 17, 2009 4:55 AM
Comment #275646

gergle,
Why I hope that you are not compraing TVs with the Basis Needs of an American, it does happen to be one of the Industries Americans gave up so that the Global Economy could grow. However, with the introduction of the computer and the advances of the monitors I wonder if the Global Manufactures of TVs are going to be around much longer. So why U.S. Companies may still make a small profit from selling TV’s manufactured overseas. Knowing that our military is relentant on certain display devices I wonder how long it before the U.S. Companies can supply our military with the wireless display monitors they require.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 17, 2009 6:18 AM
Comment #275647

CT
I was in the Bay area of California before the huge bridge retrofits started. A friend of mine and Democratic Assemblywoman got a requirement passed to require that US steel be used in the projects. You should have heard the screams from the Republicans. The steel would have cost more than Chinese steel but the big point they made was that much fabricated would require a new steel mill. Sounded good to me. Eventually the Dem governor vetoed the measure as a GATT violation. Point is we do not have much of a steel industry left to protect and that is one area we should protect and expand for the reasons you stated. Protectionism has a mixed record, much of it negative but protectionism BUILT American agriculture that now feeds much of the world.
Just for fun. Iwas also in the Bay Area when the Oakland port took delivery of three massive cranes. They were so big they had to wait for low tide to get them under the Golden Gate Bridge. After they got to port the Chinese sent a slew of technicians to set them up. The Longshoremen said no way. Those are dock cranes and that is our work. The eventual settlement was that the Chinese techs could do the work but they damned well better get paid West Coast Logshoremans wages and yes we are going to check. I’ll bet there were some a lot of Chinamen with big smiles on their faces when the boss was’nt looking.

Posted by: bills at February 17, 2009 7:34 AM
Comment #275660

bills said ,”Every great country MUST have a steel industry. It’s time to rebuild ours and this measure will help.”’ And i agree we need to make what we use but what are they going to fire those hundreds of giant Furnaces with Coal or natural gas? It’s a dirty process and i hate being the devils advocate ,That was a big part of killing off the industries in the 1970s was EPA regulations the scrubbers and converters and filters was in it’s infancy , I seen that in southern california with Kaiser steel fontana in the late 1970s they spent millions to install the Emission devices and they kept breaking down and eventually they closed there doors and many thousand were out of work and it happened across the whole country and being in the metal Industries myself you couldn’t find a piece of sheet metal that said USA on it for a long period in the late 1970s , We have the technology to burn clean today but not the means to sequester the co2 cheaply.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at February 17, 2009 11:00 AM
Comment #275663

The U.S. should impose tarrifs on imports equal to the tarrifs that foreign nations place on our exports.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect, and re-elect, and re-elect, and re-elect , … , at least until that finally becomes too painful.

Posted by: d.a.n at February 17, 2009 11:28 AM
Comment #275664

Totally with you BillS!
Buy American!

Posted by: kctim at February 17, 2009 12:01 PM
Comment #275673

Protectionist policies: Russia is protecting it’s used car market through high tariff’s. Tariff’s pending for the steel industries of Brazil and the Phillipines. French are heavily subsidizing their auto industry Germany offers special loans to German banks which the government partially owns. The Spanish and Swedes are subsidizing their companies. British banking has quitely told their employees not to invest abroad.
The klepto-plutocracy put in a nonsensical ‘Buy American’ clause ‘as long as no trade laws are broken’, guaranteeing that every contract will be accompanied by much lawyerease.

I mentioned the 57 trade deficits and VAT from WWII still in place for the EU and China. With the US too fearful to even suggest China devalue the Yuan I suspect we will only get some change from Obama and the duopoly, and not needed reform.

Otherwise, Ramos and Compean are finally home with their families. Phoenix is #2 in the world for kidnapping, 1400 last year. 20 beheaded in Mex. last month. Over 1M gang members in us plying the drug trade. 122k illegals crossed in Tx. in 06 and only 30k since much of the fence has been installed. FBI sez 40-60% of drugs coming through Tx. 1 in 5 illegals traffic’d come through Tx. 80% are women and many forced into the sex trade. 15k are traffic’d each yr. A new Predator ‘B’ will patrol the Can. border and be based in N. Dakota. Can fly at 500,000 ft.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.
Each stimulus job to cost $1/4M.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 17, 2009 8:54 PM
Comment #275680

””“And i agree we need to make what we use but what are they going to fire those hundreds of giant Furnaces with Coal or natural gas?”“” Might be worth looking into Biodiesel from Algae or other More carbon Neutral Forms of Bio stocks. Right.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at February 18, 2009 12:34 AM
Comment #275713


I like d.a.n.’s approach. We can switch from free trade, which it is not, to fair and balanced trade. Don’t you just love these folks that suggest the reasoning behind globalization is to ‘bring millions out of poverty’? Being done through the ‘goodness of our hearts’. Fer example: big oil has been pumping in Bolivia for years. You would think their generosity would be seen throughout the country. Not. When is the last time you recall a hospital or a grainery or food processing plant donated to Africa or SA. Maybe some government to government bucks that usually end up in a Swiss bank. A few condoms maybe. Many countries around the world are decrying globalization. What little industry they had has relocated to a place of cheaper labor. Why not a fair trade policy? Country to country agreements that you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours. Agreements that take into account human rights, human dignity, fair wages, child labor laws, sweatshops, etc. Let’s develop trade with nations without the ‘get rich quik’ schemes. Likewise, be supportive of developing countries only to the extent they want development. Be respectful of their cultures, traditions and not try to force unwanted Western modicums. Where necessary, use tariffs or some similar balancing method to ensure each country receives a fair shake. While this is not clean and streamlined for international businesses that’s fine. Streamlining trade for the business folks is not the goal of fair and balanced trade.
However, you won’t get fair trade from the duopoly. Reform, through a 3rd Party is required, is required before you can expect a fair and balanced trade policy. Insert the rest of usual spiel here.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 18, 2009 5:14 PM
Comment #275722

I don’t think the outcome of this legislative provision is knowable at all at this time. Much will depend on how it is implemented, if at all save for some token gesture.

As I have said before, buying American, to be truly effective, must be a consumer up effort, not a government down advocacy. I doubt this provision will have any significant impact at all on our economy when all is said and done.

Most other nations engage in similar nationalistic consumer advocacy in one form or another and to varying degrees of economic self-help ranging from NONE to measurable.

The concept raises rhetorical concerns, but, the implementation would have to have significant impact on foreign economies before creating and significant or measurable backlash against the U.S. I just don’t see the provisions in this bill, combined with Executive Branch reluctance toward broad implementation, having that much of an effect here or in other nations.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 18, 2009 7:11 PM
Comment #275803

On trade, Obama stuck to his pledge to eventually seek changes in the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement to increase enforcement of labor and environmental standards — but said he intended to do so in a way “that is not disruptive to the extraordinarily important trade relationships that exist between the United States and Canada.”

Harper said he might be willing to negotiate, but not by “opening the whole NAFTA and unraveling what is a very complex agreement.”

He sounded a similar warning on a “Buy American” clause that Congress added to the $787 billion economic stimulus package. The provision’s passage fits into a larger fear among free-trading Canadians that America is cultivating a protectionist streak as its economy tanks and hemorrhages jobs.

“We expect the United States to adhere to its international obligations,” Harper said. “I can’t emphasize how important it is that we do that.”
TOLD HIM!

Posted by: Rodney Brown at February 19, 2009 8:39 PM
Comment #275833

I work for a government contractor as a contracts manager, and this clause is nothing new. The Buy American Act was passed in 1933 US Code 41 10 a-d (I think) and stipulates that when using federal money, you must purchase american made goods. Agencies must report on their spending in terms of United States manufactured items vs. manufactured outside the United States every year. The provision in the bill is just politics.

Posted by: CB at February 20, 2009 8:53 PM
Comment #275842

CB, I believe you are correct but it just depends of which contract you speak. Otherwise, how do we end up buying Chinese Xray equipment for the port of LA? About to purchase a fleet of helicopters for the White House from foreign entity? And the Supertanker contract that recently got turned around, I think? IMO it’s called intellectual dishonesty. Or, I could fall back to my conspiracy about us having two goverments. A legal one and an NAU one. Notice how Obama uttered he would like to renogotiate NAFTA. Then went to Can. and said he might do it later but outside of renogotiation. And, how Congress put ‘Buy American’ in the bill but watered it down to uselessness. And, how easily they skirted E-verify for the bill even though the bill was suposed to become law in March. Notice that Clinton brought up human rights with China some years back but this trip she did everything but dance on the tables for them. Intellectual dishonesty IMO.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 20, 2009 10:33 PM
Comment #275890

Energy Independence is a BUY AMERICAN policy.

How many of you critics of the Buy American concept are opposed to American Energy Independence? What is energy independence other than a refusal to buy energy from any other nations in the future? It is a Buy American policy.

Posted by: David R. Remer at February 21, 2009 9:22 PM
Comment #275904

Roy,
Before you blast the Establishment for buying X-ray machines from China you might want to find a true American Manufacture of the same product. Odds are you won’t and that is a shame because I believe that a MRI machine would of been a better purchase.

And as far as Congress watering down the Buy American Clause I do believe that the last thing “We the People” need to start is a Global Import/Export War. So why I have to respect our Community Elders Wisdom on the subject. I hope you realize that by them leaving that clause in the Act that they give the American Small Business Owner a very sharp edge in bidding with the Federal Enities involved in running the programs. For when you add in Shipping and Handling Charges I do believe that less than a 100 miles will win out over paying for the products and goods to be sent half way around the world.

For will it be a start of a New Day in Washington or will the Status Quo have to be brought before the Public Whipping Post in order for the Change voted on by “We the People” to happen Peacefully?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 22, 2009 11:47 AM
Comment #275925

Won’t work Henry. I recently posted that a US plyboard mfctr can ship trees to China, have them cut, dried, laminated and sized into plywood, ship them back to the US where the mfctr glues on the external laminates and sell each piece for $20 more than a similara piece mfctrd in the US.
On the radar thing, doesn’t seem a problem at all. Something like a 100mev pulsed RF system with some good software imaging algorithms would be adequate. I think SRI and others would have that on the shelf. Maybe they’ve gone to China too, dunno.

That’s just the way it is.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Riy Ellis at February 22, 2009 6:16 PM
Comment #275956

Roy,
Rerun your numbers at fuel prices hitting $150.00 plus a barrel. Why? Global Economic Meltdown! Hence, the reason Congress, President Bush, and the World Bank had to act and why now the Oil Companies stand to lose millions if not billions in 2009 and 2010 in the Market. Just look at what happened to the cost of Goods and Transportation in the few months that oil was above a $100.00 a barrel.

Care to wager on what would happen if the Establishment doubled the cost of oil tomorrow? Remember, the true cost vs. the Idiot price tag made to look good to the market?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 23, 2009 2:40 AM
Comment #276045

Agree Henry. At some point the plywood thing would come unglued (small pun). I keep reminding folks that I suggested the big 3 wanted the bailout to high tail it to China and shutter their factories. Now I see Crysler is cooking a deal for a buyout by China. Maybe the foreign automakers will pick up whatever GM leaves after bankruptcy. Ford may stand to fight a while longer. BUT, no US manufacturer will long stand when competing their products against those products produced by the world’s cheapest labor.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 23, 2009 9:41 PM
Comment #276058

Roy,
Why Americans will have to deal with the Import/Export Issues for years to come, the fact that Our Elected Officials in Government and the Private Sector have used the last 30 years to expand and enlarge the production of Goods and Services beyond the wildest imagination of the Youth of the 60’s and Silver Spoons IMHO is part of the Economic and Financial Meltdown that “We the People” face today.

For why I do not have any insight or special skills to say that the Detriot Bad Boys wanted the bailout money so that they could withstand Americas’ and Humanity refusal in 2008 to do away with the gasoline cars and trucks of the 20th Century. I can see that Americas’ Democratic and Republican Civil, Political, and Religious Leaders placed into the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 the words Energy Efficient instead of the words Enrgy Independent being asked for by President Obama and American Barons like Mr. T. Boone Pickens.

Nevertheless, limited to My Personal Opinion I am of the Idelogy that Americas’ Elected Officials in Washington are dealing with the fact that why Ford and GM already hold the technology to build an Electric Vehicle powered with Natural Gas that will offer its owner the ability to sell any excess electricity to the National Power Grid. However, knowing the “Seen” and “Unseen” advantages and disadvantages of allowing the American Transportation Industry to move forward in the current “Political Fog” of the National and Global Market. Americas’ Elders and Powers-that-Be are working with their International Partners to find the best solution forward. And if that takes spending the Treasury of We the People to avoid another political firestrom ravaging the Land than in the Long Term is it not in the Inherent Best Interest of “We the Corporation” to keep Americas’ Industry afloat until the Scholars of Detroit and their Foriegn Counterparts build the types of vehicles desired by the Small Business Owner and Consumer.

For can you provide me a detailed blueprint on how to build a Bio-Mass Electric Car powered by Man=nade Wind that can reduce and/or eliminate the need for bridges, roads, and highways knowing that Grandma will still not allow Man have a car that flys. For why a Zero Weight 100% Traction Electric Vehicle is possible given the technology of Man today, given the 17 year plus protection of any such invention I have to wonder if any Automobile Manufacture in the World could compete on a Level Playing Field if Americas’ Elected Officials was to allow only one Societal Baron to take advantage in the Race to make America and Humanity Independent from Oil in the 21st Century.

For do “We the People” have the Government we deserve or the Government we need?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 24, 2009 2:16 AM
Comment #276081

Henry, yes, government straddles the road of progress in all things. In this Democracy government is the gatekeeper. For a societal barron to open a gate he first needs to make a payment or two to the keeper of a particular gate. Right now big oil is paid in full with the gatekeepers. Now, big oil doesn’t mind the use of some natural gas as big oil owns the gas as well. Still, they would have liked to keep natural gas off the market for another 20-30 years or for as long as they can pump oil from the rest of the world. By doing so the price of natural gas would be way higher and they would have delayed alternative energy for another 20-30 years as well.
There is a group threatening some action against the system. www.newamericanteaparty.com. They sound serious and probably worth checking it out.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 24, 2009 10:34 AM
Comment #276160

Roy,
Why big oil IMHO is one of the Gatekeepers of Society and some citizens may wish that Big Oil could rule the world for the next 20-40 years. I do believe that President Obama and American Barons like Mr. T. Boone Pickens has stop that Public Debate from happening. For why Natural Gas will provide a Bidge for the Oil Companies over the next several years to maintain a Management and Labor workforce. I do see the Renewable Energy Companies of the 21st Century taking away the Oil Companies Management and Labor workforce in the next 20-40 years through better pay and working conditions.

The question is can America have the Government that will be a Fair Parent in keeping the Gateways safe from Fools like me?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 24, 2009 7:08 PM
Comment #276286

Right Henry. Just think if we had a government that didn’t interfere in the world of R&D where we might be today. Instead, the government picks the winners and losers (currently the ethanol gang) based thereby crowding out or stifling real progress. The winners, currently Lockheed, can continuously go over budget on nearly every contract but not a problem. Fair competition? Hardly. The Pres’s contract for a fleet of 28 copters has doubled now to $11.2B. Leaves a copter costing more than AirForce One.

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 26, 2009 4:56 PM
Comment #276314

Roy,
If it was not for the Government interfering with R&D I fear the only thing Man would create is ways to destory himself. And why Congress cannot pick winners and losers, they can establish the conditions that will allow certain groups to advance more quickly. For take the new Lockheed chopter for the President. Designed and Created under the Bush Administration, I wonder how many new systems were developed that may or may not be needed to transport the President, but was found interesting.

Hence, why the government may never see one of these $11.2 billion chopters and shouldn’t IMHO. I wonder what the next round of R%D will provide for the Private Chopter Industry. Could we see a new model that could cut down a tree with a laser and hual it out of the middle of the woods?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 27, 2009 12:09 AM
Comment #276375

Kind of an expensive logging machine Henry. Or do we just write off the $11.2B taxpayer funds to, say, timber industry R&D. A great wealth of new technology has come thru DARPA and the NASA, at great expense to the taxpayer. But, with Russia and China rattling their rockets we have little choice other than improving the management of such resources. Likewise, to have warfighting products developed outside the US is highly undesirable. So easy to load up firm ware with bugs targeting security, destruction or slight error. The US military industrial complex is a great conondrum. Fresh out of WWII, in the 50’s Eisenhower (Ike) warned us it would be a problem.
Today, nearly ever major contract is badly overun in cost. Just part of the duopoly and the klepto-plutocracy serving as our government.

Otherwise, we have the government we deseerve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 27, 2009 8:58 PM
Comment #276376

Another comment Henry. The troops are taking the IED hardened military vehicles to Afghanistan and sinking them up to the door handles in mud. Probably cost us some more $T’s to track them or use 4’ wide tires, etc.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at February 27, 2009 9:01 PM
Comment #276391

Roy,
Why you are probably right about the logging machine being to expensive. I wonder what that same machine would look like as a military space craft. Next Logical Step or a Pipe Dream?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at February 28, 2009 3:32 AM
Comment #276603

Henry, I watched cspan’s coverage of a meeting of senior level folks discussing green energy development. Some interesting points:
T. Boone says there is enough natural gas to power heavy equipment for 20-30 years. He says the oil producers have to have $70-75/bbl to break even and in two years we will see $140/bbl.

Infrastructure cost to build out for out total energy needs = $750B, the amount we spend in one year for oil

S&T problems: Technology to step up and step down high levels >756KVA DC. Switching technology whereby demand switching can be effected every 100ms based on cloud cover, air currents, etc. Need standards for transformers to talk to each other. Technology needed to store and release electricity in some form

Need to Plan, Fund, and Site for the new electrical grid. Est. cost is $1M/mi for grid. 300KMW waiting on the grid now.

Two solar-thermal contracts have been awarded in Calif. One for 1.3GW and one for 1.GW. Plans are to pu 200-400MW solar plants in the desert.
20% from wind by 2030
10% from solar by 2020
Law of the Sea Treaty (?) will double gov owned area.
Long range goal is to make every home an energy producer as well as a user.
Sounds good Henry, but, oh, the politics!!

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 2, 2009 6:25 PM
Comment #276609

Roy,
Education, Education, Education! The Ultimate Political Weapon if America can find a Know-Nothing Party to replace the No-Nothing Leadership of the Loyal Opposition.

For why President Obama and Mr. Pickens is encouraging the development of commercially produced renewable energy to replace the foreign oil the American Consumer and Small Business Owner is paying for. IMHO, Americans could and should support a Political Party that is willing to educate their members on the advantages of becoming Individually Energy Self-Sifficient using the same technology.

For although it would cause a political fire between the Conservative and Liberal Movements in America, I do believe that if a Proper Political Agenda was to be formed by an Independent Movement throughout the Land America can become Energy Independent from “We the Corporation” in a manner that enhances the Debate of Labor and Management.

But, oh the power of the Know-Nothing Party.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 2, 2009 8:21 PM
Comment #276672

Henry, we need to ask ourselves why the U.S. worker is not better educated. First, check out this link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20090303/bs_bw/feb2009tc20090228990934

Here is a short excerpt from that link:

“Nearly a third of the Chinese returnees and a fifth of the Indians came to the U.S. on student visas. A fifth of the Chinese and nearly half of the Indians entered on temporary work visas (such as the H-1B). The strongest factor that brought them to the U.S. was professional and educational development opportunities.”

It seems the US has supported and educated most of the world’s ‘skilled’ folks. People in my state, Virginia, with 4.0 GPA’s are consistently turned down by the four major universities in the state.

Well, if a government is trying to destroy a segment of people, working class US workers, that is exactly how they would do it. Reduce educational opportunities for US workers, increase them for foreign students, send US manufacturing overseas, reduce job opportunities for the US worker by hiring cheap foreign skilled workers, and import cheap immigrant labor. Does that sound like a perfect storm or what?

If we could get the government off our backs we might fair better at getting educated Henry.

What we are going through right now is sorta like a controlled burn. On the other side of this recession/depression the US worker is expected to be on parity, or near parity with the cheapes labor in world. This will enable the US to begin competing again in certain kinds of markets.

I think the Klepto-Plutocracy has used globalization to roll the US back to the 50’s-60’s relative to wages and fiat money. US wages were simply to high to allow for competition in a global economy and the ponzi money scheme was close to reaching a crashing point. And, in so doing, they plan to leave the wealthy folks unimparied or unscathed by the whole thing. Fancy that!

Do you think their plan will work Henry?

Otherwise, we have the government we deserve.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 3, 2009 4:25 PM
Comment #276692

Henry, just saw a news reel on a new all electric car coming out of Calif. Very nice, sporty looking vehicle that is selling for $109k. Named the Tesla, it was turned down by FordMoCo a few years back. Production sold through the end of this year. Mfctr expects to produce a sedan for about half that price next year. Mfctr says silicon valley is alive and well. Just need government to get out

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 3, 2009 7:00 PM
Comment #276753

Roy,
Why Ford and GM have fought the electric car for the last 100 years I do believe that they are going to find that it will be their savior in the next 100 years. However, I do see where a Thrid Political Party could make great headway in the business community by gathering the Investors together that will purchase the factories shut down by Ford and GM in America over the last few years for the purpose of mass producing Electric/Natural Gas Vehicles.

True, the Democatic and Republican Leaders would cry as they stand to lose public opinion and power over the Energy Debate.

True, Foreign Governments and Automakers would cry as they stand to watch their manufacters lose even more sales in the market.

Nevertheless, as a statement to the Children of the 21st Century that they do have a Political Leader and Party that is willing to listen and do what is necessary to ensure an Energy Independent America if only the Youth of America has the Courage and Conviction to stand up to Daddy Warbucks.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 4, 2009 11:20 AM
Comment #276843

Henry, maybe the manufacturer of this “tesla” will purchase some of the failing automakers. However, China has over $2B in sovereign funds and likely to hit 500-600B in a couple of years. They are the winners here. They will cherry pick a few failed US businesses and GM will fer shure go to China. Lobbyist have been working on weakening patent laws for years and it is likely anything developed in the US from this point on will be produced, within a very short time, in China/India.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 5, 2009 9:03 AM
Comment #276938

Roy,
Why it in in our Inherent Best Interest to work with China and India on the development of Consumer Goods and Services I do understand your concern about weakening the patient laws; however, as I pointed out to Common Man the argument of a Lifetime, 17 years, or Micro-second Right to any invention is controled by Domain and I’m stopped at that point.

Nevertheless, I could see where the American Small business Owner and Consumer could profit from the ability of Commerce and Industry to quickly copy a good Green Product and bring it to Market. For limited by their Individual Resources do “We the People” want to wait 20 years for a product to become cheap enough to consume because of limited production capacity or do “We the People” find the Good so important to raising the Standard of Living of Our Citizens that “Just Compensation” will be given by Congress and the Courts?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 6, 2009 1:31 AM
Comment #277151

Henry, We have operated under the premisis that protecting intellectual and other property rights is the most fair way in which to treat folks who develop new products. We can either stick with it or change it, but to have folks ripping off patented products or legally stealing them is not good for the patent holder or the consumer.
What I don’t like is Congress making winners and losers by changing the rules of the patent game for those folks willing to buy their government officials to get that perk.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 9, 2009 10:25 AM
Comment #277269

Roy,
Why I agree with your Ideology I find it hard to prove in History. Because why the Establishment may mean well I find time and time again where the development of a product has ben exploited by others. In fact, a quick look at China or the Internet and one can easily find out why Congress needs to do something about the Rules of Patent.

Now exactly how “We the People” should change the rules of the game to stop people from exploiting another persons idea and/or patent is best left up to those citizens more knowledgeable than I; however, I am worried that we will always be stuck with the fact that some citizens will always be tempted to exploit others in order to make a Profit.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at March 10, 2009 3:40 AM
Comment #277441

Agree Henry. Seems patents are necessary to protect material and intellectual property. Some things probably wouldn’t get invented if the inventor couldn’t control enough market share to make it worth his investment. However, US and foreign lobbyist have chipped away at patent law diminishing its effectiveness in many areas. And, neither do I have a solution. I do know I don’t like the idea of the big pharmas buying government to obtain extended patent rights for this or that drug.

Posted by: Roy Ellis at March 11, 2009 4:42 PM
Comment #314761

How is it related to libido? As mentioned in above paragraph, the pituitary glands are responsible for the release of various hormones such as the sexual hormones. These are broadly referred to as androgens. They include the estrogen and testosterone.Estrogen is really a hormone that is responsible for female sexual functions. In younger girls, it is responsible for the development of sexual characteristic such as development of breasts and hips. In adult women, it’s responsible for development of female sexual organs such as thickening of the vaginal wall and secretion of vaginal fluids.

Posted by: Jaqueline Scalisi at December 8, 2010 6:31 PM
Post a comment