Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 50
  1. #1
    Veteran InRareForm's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Post Count
    8,644

  2. #2
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    National Science Board Report: US Losing Research and Development Jobs To Asia



    The United States is losing ever more jobs and becoming ever less compe ive as our universities are cut back and companies move R&D jobs to Asia. We lost 687,000 high-tech manufacturing jobs lost since 2000. Universities cut back 20% on public research. 85% of growth in R&D employment by American companies occurred abroad.

    Jobs Lost

    Product Design and Development News: U.S. High-tech Jobs Lost as Technological Lead Shrinks

    The United States lost 28 percent of its high-technology manufacturing jobs over the last decade, as the nation’s rapidly shrinking lead in science and technology in the global marketplace was accompanied by a toll on U.S. high-tech jobs, according to a new study released today by the National Science Board (NSB), the policy making body for the National Science Foundation.

    One of the most dramatic signs of this trend was the loss of 687,000 high-technology manufacturing jobs since 2000. U.S. multinational corporations also created research and development (R&D) jobs overseas at an unprecedented rate. Meanwhile, China became the world leader in high-technology trade and, for the first time, Asia matched the United States in R&D investments.

    Companies Moving R&D

    WSJ: US Loses Out as R&D Shifts to Asia,

    The U.S. is rapidly losing high-technology jobs as American companies expand their research-and-development labs in China and elsewhere in Asia, the National Science Board said Tuesday.

    [. . .] Since 2004, about 85% of the growth in R&D workers employed by U.S.-based multinational companies has been abroad, according to the National Science Board, a policy-making arm of the National Science Foundation, a U.S. agency. U.S. companies generally aren't closing labs at home but rather focusing their expansion abroad. The overseas portion of their R&D employment grew to about 27% in 2009 from 16% in 2004, the report said.

    Universities Cutting Back, Too

    At the same time, budget cuts are forcing our Universities to cut back on R&D.

    The Chronicle of Higher Education: State Budget Cuts for Research Universities Imperil Compe iveness, Report Says

    States have cut funds for public research universities by 20 percent in constant dollars from 2002 to 2010, according to a report issued on Tuesday by the National Science Foundation.

    The report, "Science and Engineering Indicators: 2012," is a compendium almost 600 pages long of scientific trends in the United States and around the world. The agency releases such data every two years.

    The findings in this year's report demonstrate a continuing trend in scientific innovation. While countries like China and India have increased their spending on technology and education, the United States has found itself hamstrung by a weakened economy since 2008.

    Other Findings

    From the Product Design and Development News story,

    Other key findings in the report include:

    Three countries—the United States, China and Japan—were responsible for more than half of the world’s $1.28 trillion in R&D spending in 2009. (China overtook Japan during the last decade to become the second-largest R&D-performing nation.)
    Between 1999 and 2009, the United States’ share of R&D dropped from 38 percent to 31 percent; the EU’s share declined from 27 percent to 23 percent; and the Asian region grew from 24 percent to 32 percent.
    Many Asian countries have increased their investment in R&D relative to their GDP, with China almost tripling its R&D/GDP ratio since 1996. The United States’ R&D/GDP ratio recently has edged upward, while that of the EU has remained steady.
    The developed world’s lead in higher education has declined dramatically. In 2008, only 4 percent of the world’s engineering degrees were earned in the United States, while 56 percent were awarded in Asia, including one-third in China.
    The number of natural sciences and engineering doctorates awarded by Chinese universities has more than tripled since 2000. At 26,000 awarded in 2008, the number of these Chinese doctorates now exceeds the number earned in the United States. And, unlike in China, a large share of these U.S. doctoral degrees are awarded to foreign students. In 2009, 44 percent of the 24,700 U.S. natural sciences and engineering doctorates were awarded to temporary visa holders. Some 57 percent of engineering doctorates were awarded to foreign students.
    American industry, which historically has supported about 60 percent of U.S. R&D, reduced R&D funding by nearly 4 percent in 2009. (A rise in U.S. government R&D funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act partially offset the private-sector reduction.)
    Job losses from the 2007–2009 recession were less severe for science and engineering workers than for the U.S. workforce as a whole. In 2010, the median income for workers in science and engineering jobs ($73,290) was more than double the median income of all U.S. workers ($33,840).

    What To Do?

    The Obama Administration has been working to address some of these trends, for example by setting up a cabinet-level Office of Manufacturing Policy. To improve our position they could take more action against trade law violations and currency manipulation, address tax policies that encourage companies to move manufacturing jobs out of the country and renegotiate badly-designed trade treaties.

    The Alliance for American Manufacturing offers a number of concrete steps for reversing these trends, including,

    Establish a manufacturing investment facility to leverage private capital for domestic manufacturing
    Expand and make permanent clean energy manufacturing tax credits and industrial energy ef?ciency grants to allow America to lead on green job creation
    Refocus on technical and vocational education, providing a seamless program that bridges high school and post-secondary education to produce the next generation of highly skilled manufacturing workers
    Penalize and deter mercantilist nations such as China that manipulate their exchange rates and implement non-tariff barriers to gain an unfair trade advantage
    Make permanent the research and development tax credit and enhance it to incentivize commercialization and production in America
    Focus federal investments in new technology and workforce training on promoting regional clusters of innovation, learning and production

    Meanwhile, conservatives oppose a national industrial policy, oppose restructuring our trade deals, oppose increased funding for our universities, oppose changes to tax policies to incentivize returning manufacturing to the US, oppose paying good wages here to bring researchers here, oppose national policies helping companies become more compe ive internationally and oppose border tariffs to compensate for advantages gained from environmental degradation and poor human rights practices.

    Other countries take this seriously. From the Chronicle of Higher Education story,

    While spending on research and development has increased globally over the past decade, such expenditures in the United States fell from 38 percent of the worldwide total to 31 percent. In comparison, China's R&D spending increased from 22 percent as recently as 2007 to 28 percent in 2009.

    From the Product Design and Development News story,

    Dr. José-Marie Griffiths, chairman of the NSB committee that oversees production of the report, “Other nations clearly recognize the economic and social benefits of investing in R&D and education, and they are challenging the United States’ leadership position. We’re seeing the result in the very real, and substantial, loss of good jobs.”

    www.truthout.org

  3. #3
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    The State of Our Disunion: A Globalizing Private Sector, A Government Overwhelmed by Corporate Money



    Who should have the primary strategic responsibility for making American workers globally compe ive – the private sector or government? This will be a defining issue in the 2012 campaign.

    In his State of the Union address, President Obama will make the case that government has a vital role. His Republican rivals disagree. Mitt Romney charges the President is putting “free enterprise on trial,” while Newt Gingrich merely fulminates about “liberal elites.”

    American business won’t and can’t lead the way to more and better jobs in the United States. First, the private sector is increasingly global, with less and less stake in America. Second, it’s driven by the necessity of creating profits, not better jobs.

    The National Science Foundation has just released its biennial report on global investment in science, engineering and technology. The NSF warns that the United States is quickly losing ground to Asia, especially to China. America’s share of global R&D spending is tumbling. In the decade to 2009, it dropped from 38 percent to 31 percent, while Asia’s share rose from 24 to 35 percent.

    One big reason: According to the NSF, American firms nearly doubled their R&D investment in Asia over these years, to over $7.5 billion.

    GE recently announced a $500 million expansion of its R&D facilities in China. The firm has already invested $2 billion.

    GE’s CEO Jeffrey Immelt chairs Obama’s council on work and compe iveness. I’d wager that as an American citizen, Immelt is concerned about working Americans. But as CEO of GE, Immelt’s job is to be concerned about GE’s shareholders. They aren’t the same.

    GE has also been creating more jobs outside the United States than in it. A decade ago, fewer than half of GE’s employees were non-American; today, 54 percent are.

    This is all good for GE and its shareholders, but it’s not necessarily good for America or American workers. The Commerce Department says U.S. based global corporations added 2.4 million workers abroad in first decade of 21st century, while cutting their US workforce by 2.9 million.

    According to the New York Times, Apple Computer employs 43,000 people in the United States but contracts with over 700,000 workers abroad. It makes iPhones in China not only because of low wages there but also the ease and speed with which its Chinese contractor can mobilize their workers – from company dormitories at almost any hour of the day or night.

    An Apple executive says “We don’t have an obligation to solve America’s problems. Our only obligation is making the best product possible.” He might have added “and showing a big enough profits to continually increase our share price.”

    Most executives of American companies agree. If they can make it best and cheapest in China, or anywhere else, that’s where it will be made. Don’t blame them. That’s what they’re getting paid to do.

    What they want in America is lower corporate taxes, less regulation, and fewer unionized workers. But none of these will bring good jobs to America. These steps may lower the costs of production here, but global companies can always find even lower costs abroad.

    Global corporations — wherever they’re based — will create good jobs for Americans only if Americans are productive enough to summon them. Problem is, a large and growing portion of our workforce isn’t equipped to be productive.

    Put simply, American workers are hobbled by deteriorating schools, unaffordable college tuitions, decaying infrastructure, and declining basic R&D. All of this is putting us on a glide path toward even lousier jobs and lower wages.

    Get it? The strategic responsibility for making Americans more globally compe ive can’t be centered in the private sector because the private sector is rapidly going global, and it’s designed to make profits rather than good jobs. The core responsibility has to be in government because government is supposed to be looking out for the public, and investing in public schools, colleges, infrastructure, and basic R&D.

    But here’s the political problem. American firms have huge clout in Washington. They maintain legions of lobbyists and are pouring boatloads of money into political campaigns. After the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United decision, there’s no limit.

    Who represents the American workforce? Organized labor represents fewer than 7 percent of private-sector workers and has all it can do to protect a dwindling number of unionized jobs.

    Republicans like it this way, and for three decades have been trying to convince average working Americans government is their enemy. Yet corporate America isn’t their friend. Without bold government action on behalf of our workforce, good American jobs will continue to disappear.

    www.truthout.org

    =============

    I'm sure Fox Repug Network is giving the topics in this thread repeated-ad-nauseam priority.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Emblematic of 1 Percenters, Cooper Tire Punk’d Workers

    Four years ago, Cooper Tire told its workers they’d have to sacrifice to save the company. With a straight face, Cooper executives said it was essential for the corporation’s survival that workers take tens of millions in pay and benefit cuts.

    The workers understood the link between their livelihoods long term and Cooper’s success. Dedicated and loyal, they accepted the cutbacks. Soon afterward, city and state officials granted Cooper millions in subsidies.

    Management didn’t share in the workers’ and taxpayers’ pain, though. The top dogs rewarded themselves with millions in pay increases and a shiny new corporate jet.

    Cooper punk’d the workers and taxpayers.

    This isn’t an aberration. It’s a pattern. Corporate executives, the 1 percenters, slash workers’ wages, then give themselves big bonuses. CEOs tell mayors and governors their businesses are in such dire shape that they may close or move offshore. Government officials dutifully shovel truckloads of taxpayer cash into CEO hands, then the CEOs grant themselves more perks. The television show Punk’d, in which actor Aston Kutcher humiliates famous people, took a five-year hiatus. The 1 percenters gave workers and taxpayers no such break. Punking the 99 percent for profit has only escalated.

    http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/...aign=alternet#

    Class Warfare: The Employer Class waging scorched-earth war on the Employee Class, and ing local taxpayers.

  5. #5
    Veteran vy65's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Post Count
    8,916
    Yo, B, did you bother reading the article?

  6. #6
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    I read about half of it, got the big picture, just part of the overall context of globalzied UCA and its investors seeking exclusively its own benefit while goosing the 99% with the "magic hand".

    Absolute proof of WHY UCA pushed so hard for "globalization" these past 30 years, while Human-Americans paid little attention until it was too damn late. There's no stopping globalization, anyway, nor stopping/penalizing China for holding its currency 30% below natural exchange rate.

  7. #7
    Veteran vy65's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Post Count
    8,916
    I read about half of it, got the big picture, just part of the overall context of globalzied UCA and its investors seeking exclusively its own benefit while goosing the 99% with the "magic hand".
    Where's that part of the article?

    Absolute proof of WHY UCA pushed so hard for "globalization" these past 30 years, while Human-Americans paid little attention until it was too damn late. There's no stopping globalization, anyway, nor stopping/penalizing China for holding its currency 30% below natural exchange rate.
    Why's that relevant to the article?

  8. #8
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Apple benefit from no tariffs on goods researched/built/imported from China, the key result of "free market" globalization.

    Trying to read this stuff in isolation, ie, without context, keeps you stupid and confused.

  9. #9
    Veteran vy65's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Post Count
    8,916
    Apple benefit from no tariffs on goods researched/built/imported from China, the key result of "free market" globalization.

    Trying to read this stuff in isolation, ie, without context, keeps you stupid and confused.
    For someone who (admittedly, lol) read only half of the article, I think you need to seriously reassess who's looking stupid and confused right now.

  10. #10
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536

  11. #11
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Hmmm. Asians work harder and for less money. No brainer for Apple. We could move all those jobs here if Americans are willing to pay 3K for their iPads.

  12. #12
    Displaced 101A's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    7,711
    The OP takes a critical tone toward the US - blaming us for not churning out the right number of appropriately skilled employees; but uses as its main production differentiation a world in which thousands of employees live in dorms, and can be called in at a (literally) moments notice to work long shifts to get otherwise impossible tasks done. The only real parallel I could draw to that in this country would be the military (which I guess, being communist, all citizens of china have that type of relationship with their government).

    For an article about where the middle class has gone - it hasn't gone to China; those jobs are decidedly not U.S. standard Middle Class. It's better than what they've had over there, but by our standards; it's forced labor exploitation.

    The scary part of this is that I always assumed that breaking the back of the American consumer would have a self-leveling effect: as the middle class shrank, and couldn't buy as much, jobs would return here (Henry Ford's epiphany revisited). However, it appears, based on quotes from Apple corporate, that there are plenty of consumers in other places taking our place. It might be too late for tariffs, frankly. Apple would just let the U.S. consumer (who could afford it), pay those, while making the bulk of their profit other places. Further class stratification might be, as B points out, inevitable; at least until workers around the World ALL demand a decent wage/living condition - relatively not that far in the future in China, but centuries before the World runs out of exploitable man power.

  13. #13
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    Hmmm. Asians work harder and for less money. No brainer for Apple. We could move all those jobs here if Americans are willing to pay 3K for their iPads.
    Where did you get the 3K number?

  14. #14
    Displaced 101A's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Post Count
    7,711
    I'm also thinking the factory next to factory dynamic at play in China, and described in the OP, is now environmentally (from a regulatory standpoint) impossible in this country.

  15. #15
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Where did you get the 3K number?

    Your ass

  16. #16
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    So you just made it up?

  17. #17
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    So you just made it up?
    Well, it would obviously cost a lot more if made in America. That was the point.

  18. #18
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    So you just made it up?
    Realistically, he is probably low. The I-Pad is supposedly a labor intensive item. Compare the $17 a day/12 hour day wage mentioned in the OP article with $35 an hour X 1.5 after 8 hours basic union wage in the US.

  19. #19
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    Well, it would obviously cost a lot more if made in America. That was the point.
    You just made up that number.

    That's the point.

    Realistically, he is probably low. The I-Pad is supposedly a labor intensive item. Compare the $17 a day/12 hour day wage mentioned in the OP article with $35 an hour X 1.5 after 8 hours basic union wage in the US.
    The labor cost is addressed in the article and it is far lower than you might think. I realize there are other costs.

  20. #20
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    You just made up that number.

    That's the point.

    If you know exactly how much it would be if it were made in the US, feel free to post that number and show all of your work.

  21. #21
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    Don't blame Apple. Blame our tax system, regulations, politicians, etc.

    Where are tariffs when you need them?

  22. #22
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,765
    lol indignant non-readers

  23. #23
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    154,406
    If you know exactly how much it would be if it were made in the US, feel free to post that number and show all of your work.
    You're the one who made up a specific number, posted it and didn't show any work.

  24. #24
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    44,134
    lol indignant non-readers
    I'm certainly not indignant. I think Foxconn is an amazing business model...damn...can you IMAGINE 230,000 people working in one facility? Thats almost 1/3 the population of Austin...

  25. #25
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    113,765
    I wasn't addressing you, Sir

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •