Global Warming

[BigRedBuster]

Here is for the most part my biggest problem with what you are saying sd....

 

I am perfectly fine with the US and Europe leading in this effort. Like you said...if we don't then who will?

 

BUT, this is what the effort basically has been up till now. We put more and more regulations on American businesses but don't demand anything from the businesses they compete with globally. This puts our industries in a very bad situation. On the good side, we are reducing emissions. On the bad side, a lot of those emissions are reduced because the industries have left the country to exist in countries without those regulations and then they import back into the US the products to the people who have lost their jobs. THEN....the big bad business is looked at as horrible because they did what was needed to survive.

On the flip side, I have promoted that we continue to improve the US. BUT...at the same time, we demand anything that is imported to the US to be manufactured to our level of regulations. That levels the playing field and eliminates a big reason why jobs leave this country. This can be done with employee regulations also.

[BigRedBuster]

strig- I am not against enforcing sensible regulations and taking care of the planet. My point is it cannot be the US or Europe alone trying to solve a global problem. We need to get places like China acting responsibly also. It seems that too many of the "solutions" dreamt up in Washington, while maybe small steps in the right direction, will place our business and industry at a global disadvantage. I think we can curtail treating it like an imminent emergency and have some hope that the natural progression towards lower emissions and better technology will begin to win the day. I don't think we have a big enough impact to make a significant difference timewise on the planet. Maybe ten or fifty years difference but certainly nothing noticeable compared to the timeline of people on the earth.

If the US and Europe don't lead, who will? You can't push change if you are unwilling to do what you are preaching. If we want China to improve then we need to be the standard that they aim for. It would be like a fat guy eating a plate of cheeseburgers while leading a discussion on weight loss and exercise.

 

Comparing any of our businesses to China's are pointless. As long as the people over there are willing to work long days for pocket change in conditions that have been illegal in the west for the better part of a century, Its apples to oranges.

also, we are america. what happened to american exceptionalism? to the US being leaders of the world? now we are children who say, 'if china does not have to, why should we?'

 

not to mention the future economic benefits of being leaders in this area.

Its a root cause of having business men becoming leaders, and a thinking that permeates everything that making the most money is the only thing that matters. Prior to, about the 80's, that was not the way we thought as a country. It was doing what is best for the whole, not just "I need to get mine, and F everyone else" Which is where we are now.

 

Not really.

[JJ Husker]

strig- I am not against enforcing sensible regulations and taking care of the planet. My point is it cannot be the US or Europe alone trying to solve a global problem. We need to get places like China acting responsibly also. It seems that too many of the "solutions" dreamt up in Washington, while maybe small steps in the right direction, will place our business and industry at a global disadvantage. I think we can curtail treating it like an imminent emergency and have some hope that the natural progression towards lower emissions and better technology will begin to win the day. I don't think we have a big enough impact to make a significant difference timewise on the planet. Maybe ten or fifty years difference but certainly nothing noticeable compared to the timeline of people on the earth.

Sounds like a lengthy excuse for inaction.

 

We can control our own behavior. Simply saying that others also pollute is not an excuse to do nothing.

Actually it seems like what should be an unneeded explanation of reality. I am not denying there is a problem that we can positiveley impact and I am not proposing we do nothing. What I am trying to say is that we have to make allowances for fiscal reality. Yes, humans have negatively impacted our environment. Yes, humans can make adjustments to slow or reverse the damage. But, I do not believe it is an eleventh hour emergency like many of the "sky is falling" global warming alarmists do. Keep increasing efficiency standards, keep striving for alternate energy sources, start and keep enforcing sensible regulations but we cannot adopt burdensome regulations and taxes upon our businesses that will place our business and economy in a global disadvantage. I know many people in this country feel the government can simply print more money, increase and extend unemployment benefits and basically take care of all our citizens without any negative repercussions but, that is not reality. That is some tree huggers utopia. There have to be reasonable and measured steps that we can take while also avoiding negative consequences. If we can't adopt rational policies that are livable short term and also effective long term, we're f'd already. Like most issues, it is in the middle area where the real solutions exist. Yes, there's a problem that needs attention but, treating it like a dire emergency that has to be immediately, completely, taken care of just causes too many people to tune it out. If the left would quit claiming the sky is falling, maybe the right would begin to acknowledge that some steps need to be begun. It's really no different than most all our problems.

[sd'sker]

Here is for the most part my biggest problem with what you are saying sd....

 

I am perfectly fine with the US and Europe leading in this effort. Like you said...if we don't then who will?

 

BUT, this is what the effort basically has been up till now. We put more and more regulations on American businesses but don't demand anything from the businesses they compete with globally. This puts our industries in a very bad situation. On the good side, we are reducing emissions. On the bad side, a lot of those emissions are reduced because the industries have left the country to exist in countries without those regulations and then they import back into the US the products to the people who have lost their jobs. THEN....the big bad business is looked at as horrible because they did what was needed to survive.

On the flip side, I have promoted that we continue to improve the US. BUT...at the same time, we demand anything that is imported to the US to be manufactured to our level of regulations. That levels the playing field and eliminates a big reason why jobs leave this country. This can be done with employee regulations also.

i agree. and i do not know enough about business/environmental policy to really discuss this. however, i do believe there is middle ground and a way to both help the environment and not destroy american businesses. obviously, tax cuts could be a good incentive to offer.

[strigori]

strig- I am not against enforcing sensible regulations and taking care of the planet. My point is it cannot be the US or Europe alone trying to solve a global problem. We need to get places like China acting responsibly also. It seems that too many of the "solutions" dreamt up in Washington, while maybe small steps in the right direction, will place our business and industry at a global disadvantage. I think we can curtail treating it like an imminent emergency and have some hope that the natural progression towards lower emissions and better technology will begin to win the day. I don't think we have a big enough impact to make a significant difference timewise on the planet. Maybe ten or fifty years difference but certainly nothing noticeable compared to the timeline of people on the earth.

If the US and Europe don't lead, who will? You can't push change if you are unwilling to do what you are preaching. If we want China to improve then we need to be the standard that they aim for. It would be like a fat guy eating a plate of cheeseburgers while leading a discussion on weight loss and exercise.

 

Comparing any of our businesses to China's are pointless. As long as the people over there are willing to work long days for pocket change in conditions that have been illegal in the west for the better part of a century, Its apples to oranges.

also, we are america. what happened to american exceptionalism? to the US being leaders of the world? now we are children who say, 'if china does not have to, why should we?'

 

not to mention the future economic benefits of being leaders in this area.

Its a root cause of having business men becoming leaders, and a thinking that permeates everything that making the most money is the only thing that matters. Prior to, about the 80's, that was not the way we thought as a country. It was doing what is best for the whole, not just "I need to get mine, and F everyone else" Which is where we are now.

 

Not really.

Look at what has changed since the late 70's and early 80's. How many of the major nation changing projects do you think would have gotten done in the last 30 years? The interstate system? social security? Medicare? Any of the safety net programs? Businesses had pension plans. Businesses were loyal to good employees, and employees were loyal to good companies. There were considerations taken to do what was right over what they could get away with. There are parts of this country's way of thinking right now that needs to change.

[carlfense]

Yes, humans have negatively impacted our environment. Yes, humans can make adjustments to slow or reverse the damage.

Yes.

 

But, I do not believe it is an eleventh hour emergency like many of the "sky is falling" global warming alarmists do. Keep increasing efficiency standards, keep striving for alternate energy sources, start and keep enforcing sensible regulations but we cannot adopt burdensome regulations and taxes upon our businesses that will place our business and economy in a global disadvantage.

 

I know many people in this country feel the government can simply print more money, increase and extend unemployment benefits and basically take care of all our citizens without any negative repercussions but, that is not reality. That is some tree huggers utopia.

 

There have to be reasonable and measured steps that we can take while also avoiding negative consequences.

If the standard is "avoiding negative consequences" then every possible policy will fail. There will be negative consequences. That's inevitable. The previously mentioned asbestos mines suffered a financial catastrophe . . . and the world is a better place for it.

 

Like most issues, it is in the middle area where the real solutions exist. Yes, there's a problem that needs attention but, treating it like a dire emergency that has to be immediately, completely, taken care of just causes too many people to tune it out. If the left would quit claiming the sky is falling, maybe the right would begin to acknowledge that some steps need to be begun. It's really no different than most all our problems.

Ah, yes. If the people advocating for change would just admit that the problem really isn't that serious then the polluters would gladly take a financial hit.

 

[JJ Husker]

You missed it by "that" much (holds up thumb and forefinger with quarter inch gap).

 

It's not the polluters per se that I'm interested in preventing a financial hit on. Rather the majority of Americans, employees, etc. who would be the ones paying the price as our economy tanks further and more manufacturing jobs leave our country. If we don't begin figuring out how to employ our people and become a provider of goods to the rest of the world, we will never be afforded the opportunity to lead the world in these noble quests. If you are not strong it is hard to lead. I simply believe we are not currently in any position to adopt any job killing policies. 1- because it wouldn't be prudent and 2- because I don't believe we will reach any consensus in our current state of affairs. Notice, I didn't say because it is a bad idea rather, because it isn't currently realistic and short term I believe we have bigger fish to fry.

[strigori]

You missed it by "that" much (holds up thumb and forefinger with quarter inch gap).

 

It's not the polluters per se that I'm interested in preventing a financial hit on. Rather the majority of Americans, employees, etc. who would be the ones paying the price as our economy tanks further and more manufacturing jobs leave our country. If we don't begin figuring out how to employ our people and become a provider of goods to the rest of the world, we will never be afforded the opportunity to lead the world in these noble quests. If you are not strong it is hard to lead. I simply believe we are not currently in any position to adopt any job killing policies. 1- because it wouldn't be prudent and 2- because I don't believe we will reach any consensus in our current state of affairs. Notice, I didn't say because it is a bad idea rather, because it isn't currently realistic and short term I believe we have bigger fish to fry.

You seem to be missing the point by 'that much'

 

We are not, and will not be competitive in the industries you are talking about until one of two things happen.

 

1 - China, Indonesia and the like start working for actual wages and not pennies an hour.

or

2 - We go back to paying our workers pennies an hour.

 

The more realistic option for increasing manufacturing in this country is simply for people to demand it, and speak with their wallets. Buy American made, even if it costs a bit more.

[JJ Husker]

Strig- that is just more of the same unrealistic view. We cannot depend on our fellow Americans to choose of their own volition to buy US made goods that will cost them more. If that were the case Walmart wouldn't be the behemoth it is and mom &pops stores would still be thriving. However, I do like the thought but we will have to adopt higher tariffs and the taxes and those cheaper imported goods to force them onto the same playing field as our manufacturers. I would not be opposed to that in the least and I happen to believe that needs to happen. Instead of putting our businesses at a bigger disadvantage, why don't we put that burden on those who want to import into the US? Then we can adopt all the regulations we want. Last I knew we were still the largest consumer nation on the planet and we still import more than we export. Seems to me like we could levy tariffs on anything where we are at a disadvantage and there isn't much the rest of the world could do but cry about it. Probably help solve our unemployment woes as well.

[strigori]

I'm not opposed to tariffs.

 

I think another way is to brutally punish 'American' companies who move their production overseas and then re-import the items that used to be made here. And by punish I mean tax the living hell out of them so it is no longer financially beneficial to do business that way.

 

But I think there is a higher demand for American made goods than you might think. When ABC News does their features on Made in America, the business the feature had an immediate sales boom. For one, I'm much more prone to buy an item that was well made in the US over something cheaper made in China that I will have to replace in a year.

[gobiggergoredder]

 

The more realistic option for increasing manufacturing in this country is simply for people to demand it, and speak with their wallets. Buy American made, even if it costs a bit more.

 

It's not a fair playing field. I have worked for two companies that have manufactured items in direct competition with Chinese made goods. We have been sold out by pro Chinese politicians and lobbyists.

 

Buy American would work, but we are not producing what we use to. As you stated in a later post, tariffs are a solution. I happen to believe that they are the only solution.

[BigRedBuster]

I'm not opposed to tariffs.

 

I think another way is to brutally punish 'American' companies who move their production overseas and then re-import the items that used to be made here. And by punish I mean tax the living hell out of them so it is no longer financially beneficial to do business that way.

 

But I think there is a higher demand for American made goods than you might think. When ABC News does their features on Made in America, the business the feature had an immediate sales boom. For one, I'm much more prone to buy an item that was well made in the US over something cheaper made in China that I will have to replace in a year.

 

 

Punishing companies that are doing what they need to do to survive is not the answer.

 

Our company tried getting into a certain market with a product about 8 years ago. We have always advertised that our products were American made. So, we wanted this product American made also. The problem??? Imported products from China were literally 20-30% less. So, we would be selling to our distributors at around the cost of what their competitor was selling the same product for to the end user. Our distributors would talk till they were blue in the face about ours was American made and theirs was imported and in general, the public didn't give a flying rip. When you are buying something for your home from one of our contractors and it's $4,000 and you can buy something that looks almost exactly the same from another contractor for $3200, The American made product loses.

 

What you have to do is level the playing field. The above example was a true life example. The imported product wasn't from a company that had manufacturing here and then moved it to China. It was a Chinese company that was importing it. Soooo....the supplier we were buying from ended up having to move their manufacturing to China to compete. They literally couldn't sell enough to be profitable making it in the US. We have since exited that market because we have no desire to deal with imported products.

 

What you have to do is some how make the Chinese products play by the same rules.

[gobiggergoredder]

I'm not opposed to tariffs.

 

I think another way is to brutally punish 'American' companies who move their production overseas and then re-import the items that used to be made here. And by punish I mean tax the living hell out of them so it is no longer financially beneficial to do business that way.

 

But I think there is a higher demand for American made goods than you might think. When ABC News does their features on Made in America, the business the feature had an immediate sales boom. For one, I'm much more prone to buy an item that was well made in the US over something cheaper made in China that I will have to replace in a year.

 

 

Punishing companies that are doing what they need to do to survive is not the answer.

 

Our company tried getting into a certain market with a product about 8 years ago. We have always advertised that our products were American made. So, we wanted this product American made also. The problem??? Imported products from China were literally 20-30% less. So, we would be selling to our distributors at around the cost of what their competitor was selling the same product for to the end user. Our distributors would talk till they were blue in the face about ours was American made and theirs was imported and in general, the public didn't give a flying rip. When you are buying something for your home from one of our contractors and it's $4,000 and you can buy something that looks almost exactly the same from another contractor for $3200, The American made product loses.

 

What you have to do is level the playing field. The above example was a true life example. The imported product wasn't from a company that had manufacturing here and then moved it to China. It was a Chinese company that was importing it. Soooo....the supplier we were buying from ended up having to move their manufacturing to China to compete. They literally couldn't sell enough to be profitable making it in the US. We have since exited that market because we have no desire to deal with imported products.

 

What you have to do is some how make the Chinese products play by the same rules.

This is exactly right. I have heard multiple stories of companies that have just a few options:

1. Hang on as long as you can.
   
2. Move your manufacturing operations to China.
   
3. Close or exit market.
   

I've read many of your posts about manufacturing BigRedBuster. Many have theories while the rest of us have lived it.

[carlfense]

What you have to do is some how make the Chinese products play by the same rules.

How?

[BigRedBuster]

What you have to do is some how make the Chinese products play by the same rules.

How?

 

Make imports abide by the same laws we do. Brazil has very high tariffs on products being imported that directly compete with an industry in their country. I'm not specifically for a blanket high tariff. But, is there a way to put a high tariff on a product being produced in a factory that doesn't abide by our environmental laws? Is there a way to put a tariff on a products that are not produced with employees not making our minimum wage?

 

Pardon me if I have described this before on here. Can't remember if I did here or on the last board I was at.

 

I know of a product that is illegal to produce in the US with lead in it. BUT, it can be produced in China and imported with lead in it and sold. How? Because the law says it simply can't be produced here with lead. BUT, it can be SOLD here with lead.

 

In this particular product, lead is a much less expensive ingredient than what is used here in the US.

 

This is just in one industry I know of. What other industries are out there that are the same way?