That's your last post, unless you can be civil, use facts and make your case by them. This site is fact based. We debate, but we sure do not insult people. You can be respectful, use tables, statistics and spreadsheets to make your argument or you can go elsewhere. This ain't Redstate.
OPIC is only directed to “consider” the possible adverse effect of the investment upon the balance of payments of the United States
The OPIC 2006 Development Report states that for its investment of $2.85 billion, roughly 2,767 jobs were created in the U.S.[10] However, there is scant information as to how OPIC arrived at that number other than its explanation that it drew on company information regarding expected initial and ongoing procurement and uses multipliers to determine direct and indirect employment created. As to job loss, there is no information other than the bald assertion that none of the 2006 projects are expected to result in job losses in the U.S.
Secondly, hmmm....well, trying to claim that the free trade deal with Columbia is something we are afraid of....
hmmm....who is the one resorting to emotions and attacks instead of the projected statistics. Or are the trade deficit numbers too much to cope with?
Let's see, so how much investment did OPIC put into China? They are still classified as an EE, yet about to supersede the United States Economically.
The entire threat that if Americans don't agree to give away their prosperity, magically those other nations will cause trouble or in other words, Americans are supposed to sit by while our jobs, our financial security is given away by some wrong headed foreign policy agenda is beyond stuck on stupid, it's simply a lie by the results.
My favorite is you ignore the testimony from 2007.
July 30 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve extended its emergency lending programs to Wall Street firms through January after policy makers judged that markets are still too weak to go without a backstop from the central bank.
The banks would be quickly moving to separate those marked losses away from the main commercial banking. But they're not. Something tells me, when this bomb goes off, that ultimately the government will do this. The losses have to be unwind some how for these concerns to continue.
It would be useful first, if you stopped using data that is more than a decade old to justify your predjudice here. Ralph Nader in '96? Ralph Nader on anything?
And your charges otherwise are stale as they are refuted. OPIC doesn't give subsidized loans to your self styled multinationals out to sell off the US economy, or play a role contrary to the interests of US workers or the national interest. As my previous post notes, Congress has provided detailed instructions on the types of projects OPIC can support, specifically to provide for public comment and environmental and worker rights impacts. Its not zero sum as you suggest.
But more broadly, your basic point is faulty If you bothered to look, you'd see that 87% of OPIC's business in FY 2006 was with SMEs (that's small and medium enterprises in case you didn't know). It was 80% in 2007. Are these folks exploiting workers and selling off the American economy too?
Nice non sequitur on Detroit by the way. Investment there would be a good thing, but it wasn't what OPIC was created for. OPIC was chartered to mobilize and facilitate the participation of US private capital and skills in the economic of social develoment of less developed countries.
Maybe the governor could be helpful in directing help to Detroit or perhaps a direct appeal to the Mayor, when he's not otherwise focused on his building legal woes.
Nice faulty reasoning on the Bernie Sanders quote and domestic job support. It fails to take into account OPIC's primary mission. Over its history, OPIC has supported over $177 billion in US investment overseas. That has resulted in $73 billion in US exports overseas and the support of 271,000 jobs. Pretty good, but looking to its mission of supporting economic development overseas, OPIC projects have created 800,000 jobs in the countries where it supports projects.
Since your using a lot of quotes, check out material provided by OPIC critic Tom Coburn,"CBO estimates that, in total, this bill will result in a net decrease of discretionary spending because OPIC profits are higher than its administrative costs."
Soft power engagement in the world is essential. Private sector led assistance is more effective and transparent. Tied with standards on worker rights and the environment it adds value beyond just the project.
As a nation, we can crawl in a hole and hide. Terrified of Free Trade Agreements like the one with Colombia, which ironically, only benefits US exportes but that America Firsters insist will harm American workers and the economy.
If not this, then what? USAID funneling unaccounted billions out the door? Multilaterals that even more unaccounted for? Or do we just let the developing world stew in their hopelessness until the next rabble flies into a building.
We need to help todays struggling countries to emerge as stable and growing partners. OPIC does that. It does it at no cost to taxpayers and with no harm to the US economy.
Wall Street investment banks (ex-Goldman and maybe also JP Morgan) are in deep doo doo. The entire Bush-boom was based on pretend-bucks showing up as credit that were never going to be paid back. Now it's time to pay the piper.
Where I've been calling BS is when people say the FDIC is insolvent. That case is "unproven" at least to use the Scottish term. More later.
This looks very, very, very bad. But maybe things have to got worse before they get better.
Polanyi and the Double movement spring to mind. How far can the market go to destroying the basic things that any society needs to survive before it generates a backlash against it?
I think the devil is in the details on this one. But I too wrote "don't panic" one on post in question because people were talking about pulling all of their money out.
That's kind of fun but one thing I want to see is some sort of government based VC (venture capital) that doesn't have miles of bureaucracy which they are notorious to do, invests in new ventures in the US. this of course would be a pig fest, but ya know if they model it off of many of the private VCs, well, something good should come out of a few of the ventures. Or there is the DARPA like models. The US has been very successful with organizations like DARPA, NASA and so on and we need some sort of more funding system like this. Now maybe you're chasing good money after bad in some of these corporations and you might be able to innovate them to oblivion, which would be a nice payback!
I believe the group this think tank has influence on are the Populist Dems, whatever that means. So, Byron Dorgan, Jim Webb, Peter DeFazio, McCaskill, Sherrod Brown and so on and I believe you could potentially include Populist Republicans (yes they exist!) (Chuck Grassley, I'd claim is in this category). But, overall the Populists or call them the true Progressives (toss in Bernie Sanders), are not in power. As you are probably aware the Hamilton Project aka Rubinomics, and Rubin clone, Jason Furman is the head of Obama's economic policy advisers.
So, in a nutshell and hopefully that's what makes this site cool, we have to push for policy that is the good stuff and really ignore the man in terms of personality. I mean McCain is a joke frankly on economics and seems hell bent on representing corporations at all costs but well, let's just say Obama hasn't been really touting policy like the above.
I'm not sure yet but in terms of elections, it seems highly probable that candidate Jeff Merkeley (Sen., D-OR) might be a Populist Dem.
The problem with the reasoning above is that there is no bubble to burst. The writers are applying western logic and thinking to Chinese environment, and arriving at the wrong result. Because of the many small companies, their flexibility, family and other support, and the absence of "Enron" type people, China is just quickly adapting, moving up or down the ladder as it survives. The only basics are getting food (Simplified)
Allow me to propose a radical solution. Many won't go for what I'm about to propose. It isn't the full answer, simply a hammer in an economic toolbox. Ok, well here goes, please hold the rotten tomatoes until I've said it. Why not form a department or some sort of government body that targets offshore parasites who've really abused the system, and simply put out an economic bounty in the sense of funding a rival. Say for example, a company that has for years gotten tax assistance and other such financial goodies from taxpayers suddenly decides to take it all offshore. Plant, office, the whole works is now beyond US borders. Ok, fine, they can have that, but we need a domestic answer to this now-foreign competitor. We should then offer an enterprise startup subsidy to have a US-based version of a company that left. Help it with grants, what have you in its early years, even a lucrative government contract. In return, all funds come with the stipulation that the work is to be done here in the US. At anytime the given business concern decides to move production overseas, it will be forced to return the money at a very high interest rate. Also, all government contracts will be made null and void, and if they are moving within their corporate calendar in which they are doing a project for the government, then any monies recieved shall be reimbursed back to the tax payer.
Sorry for the delay, kinda hectic here on the home front. I am really going to have to investigate this Horizon Project group. From what you've mentioned, has really piqued my interest. Regarding current policy, I suspect that despite what McCain may proclaim for our workforce, what one would see is basically a 2.0 of the current agenda. Now the Democrats, should Obama win, may do something. I say may, because as many on EP have basically said, the problem is so big it really is going to take much longer than a single presidential term. No, what is needed is a much more concentrated effort on Congress along with the Executive Branch to basically re-write from scratch our banking, labor and trade rules. The system now is simply too far gone. The United States will be the global economy's "sick man" for a long time to come.
Personally, I think we should have done it long ago
There should be *NO* reason why our money should be fleeing this country for foreign parts- not because of corporations moving headquarters overseas, not because of illegal immigrants sending money home, nothing.
I don't think would get past two cosponsors. That would really mess up their balance sheet. Plus, these days, frankly a US corporation can easily move it's headquarters elsewhere, say the Cayman Islands or Dubai and many have.
They are simply little sociopathic entities scouring the globe for profits. I mean seriously, they have no national loyalty. How to get national loyalty out of one is a very good question!
It seems that nation-states out jockey each other on who can bribe MNCs (multinational corporations) more with incentives, tax breaks and so on to move or not offshore outsource jobs or create jobs. Then, in other cases to make the sale, nations demand company x put x billion in offsets, i.e. jobs, investments, 3rd party contract to make the sale.
So, looking at this globally, you cannot just run businesses out of town and into the ground in so many words, at the same time, the United States should at least play the game to the level of the EU, China and Japan. As far as I know the United States has zero policy, plan for economic development in the national interest, i.e. for the good of the nation.
I mean other nations have all sorts of policies to keep jobs in their countries, to invest in their countries.
I really like the idea of a VAT/BAT because other nations already have this so it's legal under the WTO. Now abolish the WTO or no, this at least should be done, at least we should be on par with other nations in policy!
Why I like the Horizon project is how they analyze the motivations, financial incentives of multinational corporations and tweak policy accordingly.
If there is no financial incentive, well that corporation will not do it.
That's your last post, unless you can be civil, use facts and make your case by them. This site is fact based. We debate, but we sure do not insult people. You can be respectful, use tables, statistics and spreadsheets to make your argument or you can go elsewhere. This ain't Redstate.
Again, from AFL-CIO testimony:
Do you bother to think before write?
That was rhetorical.
OPIC isn't open in China. It hasn't been since 1989.
Ooops.
OPIC screens for the impact of its projects on the trade defict.
Ooops.Ooops.
In the case of you, Heritage and AFL, its not how much you know that troubles me. It's what you know that's simply not true.
There is no attack. We don't do attack here.
Secondly, hmmm....well, trying to claim that the free trade deal with Columbia is something we are afraid of....
hmmm....who is the one resorting to emotions and attacks instead of the projected statistics. Or are the trade deficit numbers too much to cope with?
Let's see, so how much investment did OPIC put into China? They are still classified as an EE, yet about to supersede the United States Economically.
The entire threat that if Americans don't agree to give away their prosperity, magically those other nations will cause trouble or in other words, Americans are supposed to sit by while our jobs, our financial security is given away by some wrong headed foreign policy agenda is beyond stuck on stupid, it's simply a lie by the results.
My favorite is you ignore the testimony from 2007.
From today's news.
The banks would be quickly moving to separate those marked losses away from the main commercial banking. But they're not. Something tells me, when this bomb goes off, that ultimately the government will do this. The losses have to be unwind some how for these concerns to continue.
So basically, I should be going long Puts on financials or the XLF with an expiry past November?
Such a mean and angry poster.
It would be useful first, if you stopped using data that is more than a decade old to justify your predjudice here. Ralph Nader in '96? Ralph Nader on anything?
And your charges otherwise are stale as they are refuted. OPIC doesn't give subsidized loans to your self styled multinationals out to sell off the US economy, or play a role contrary to the interests of US workers or the national interest. As my previous post notes, Congress has provided detailed instructions on the types of projects OPIC can support, specifically to provide for public comment and environmental and worker rights impacts. Its not zero sum as you suggest.
But more broadly, your basic point is faulty If you bothered to look, you'd see that 87% of OPIC's business in FY 2006 was with SMEs (that's small and medium enterprises in case you didn't know). It was 80% in 2007. Are these folks exploiting workers and selling off the American economy too?
Nice non sequitur on Detroit by the way. Investment there would be a good thing, but it wasn't what OPIC was created for. OPIC was chartered to mobilize and facilitate the participation of US private capital and skills in the economic of social develoment of less developed countries.
Maybe the governor could be helpful in directing help to Detroit or perhaps a direct appeal to the Mayor, when he's not otherwise focused on his building legal woes.
Nice faulty reasoning on the Bernie Sanders quote and domestic job support. It fails to take into account OPIC's primary mission. Over its history, OPIC has supported over $177 billion in US investment overseas. That has resulted in $73 billion in US exports overseas and the support of 271,000 jobs. Pretty good, but looking to its mission of supporting economic development overseas, OPIC projects have created 800,000 jobs in the countries where it supports projects.
Since your using a lot of quotes, check out material provided by OPIC critic Tom Coburn,"CBO estimates that, in total, this bill will result in a net decrease of discretionary spending because OPIC profits are higher than its administrative costs."
Soft power engagement in the world is essential. Private sector led assistance is more effective and transparent. Tied with standards on worker rights and the environment it adds value beyond just the project.
As a nation, we can crawl in a hole and hide. Terrified of Free Trade Agreements like the one with Colombia, which ironically, only benefits US exportes but that America Firsters insist will harm American workers and the economy.
If not this, then what? USAID funneling unaccounted billions out the door? Multilaterals that even more unaccounted for? Or do we just let the developing world stew in their hopelessness until the next rabble flies into a building.
We need to help todays struggling countries to emerge as stable and growing partners. OPIC does that. It does it at no cost to taxpayers and with no harm to the US economy.
Those are the facts.
Per your comment to my last one.
Wall Street investment banks (ex-Goldman and maybe also JP Morgan) are in deep doo doo. The entire Bush-boom was based on pretend-bucks showing up as credit that were never going to be paid back. Now it's time to pay the piper.
Where I've been calling BS is when people say the FDIC is insolvent. That case is "unproven" at least to use the Scottish term. More later.
I wrote up a post a while ago on derivatives. I wrote it to explain what the hell is going on for myself. It has some video tutorials in it here.
Oh shit.
This looks very, very, very bad. But maybe things have to got worse before they get better.
Polanyi and the Double movement spring to mind. How far can the market go to destroying the basic things that any society needs to survive before it generates a backlash against it?
I think the devil is in the details on this one. But I too wrote "don't panic" one on post in question because people were talking about pulling all of their money out.
It should give you a lot of material. ;-)
That's kind of fun but one thing I want to see is some sort of government based VC (venture capital) that doesn't have miles of bureaucracy which they are notorious to do, invests in new ventures in the US. this of course would be a pig fest, but ya know if they model it off of many of the private VCs, well, something good should come out of a few of the ventures. Or there is the DARPA like models. The US has been very successful with organizations like DARPA, NASA and so on and we need some sort of more funding system like this. Now maybe you're chasing good money after bad in some of these corporations and you might be able to innovate them to oblivion, which would be a nice payback!
I believe the group this think tank has influence on are the Populist Dems, whatever that means. So, Byron Dorgan, Jim Webb, Peter DeFazio, McCaskill, Sherrod Brown and so on and I believe you could potentially include Populist Republicans (yes they exist!) (Chuck Grassley, I'd claim is in this category). But, overall the Populists or call them the true Progressives (toss in Bernie Sanders), are not in power. As you are probably aware the Hamilton Project aka Rubinomics, and Rubin clone, Jason Furman is the head of Obama's economic policy advisers.
So, in a nutshell and hopefully that's what makes this site cool, we have to push for policy that is the good stuff and really ignore the man in terms of personality. I mean McCain is a joke frankly on economics and seems hell bent on representing corporations at all costs but well, let's just say Obama hasn't been really touting policy like the above.
I'm not sure yet but in terms of elections, it seems highly probable that candidate Jeff Merkeley (Sen., D-OR) might be a Populist Dem.
The problem with the reasoning above is that there is no bubble to burst. The writers are applying western logic and thinking to Chinese environment, and arriving at the wrong result. Because of the many small companies, their flexibility, family and other support, and the absence of "Enron" type people, China is just quickly adapting, moving up or down the ladder as it survives. The only basics are getting food (Simplified)
Rick Harris
Writer in HK
harriss.rick@gmail.com
Allow me to propose a radical solution. Many won't go for what I'm about to propose. It isn't the full answer, simply a hammer in an economic toolbox. Ok, well here goes, please hold the rotten tomatoes until I've said it. Why not form a department or some sort of government body that targets offshore parasites who've really abused the system, and simply put out an economic bounty in the sense of funding a rival. Say for example, a company that has for years gotten tax assistance and other such financial goodies from taxpayers suddenly decides to take it all offshore. Plant, office, the whole works is now beyond US borders. Ok, fine, they can have that, but we need a domestic answer to this now-foreign competitor. We should then offer an enterprise startup subsidy to have a US-based version of a company that left. Help it with grants, what have you in its early years, even a lucrative government contract. In return, all funds come with the stipulation that the work is to be done here in the US. At anytime the given business concern decides to move production overseas, it will be forced to return the money at a very high interest rate. Also, all government contracts will be made null and void, and if they are moving within their corporate calendar in which they are doing a project for the government, then any monies recieved shall be reimbursed back to the tax payer.
Sorry for the delay, kinda hectic here on the home front. I am really going to have to investigate this Horizon Project group. From what you've mentioned, has really piqued my interest. Regarding current policy, I suspect that despite what McCain may proclaim for our workforce, what one would see is basically a 2.0 of the current agenda. Now the Democrats, should Obama win, may do something. I say may, because as many on EP have basically said, the problem is so big it really is going to take much longer than a single presidential term. No, what is needed is a much more concentrated effort on Congress along with the Executive Branch to basically re-write from scratch our banking, labor and trade rules. The system now is simply too far gone. The United States will be the global economy's "sick man" for a long time to come.
How will Mom send me the bail money to get out of the Peruvian jail on vacation?
200% taxes on wire transfers.
Personally, I think we should have done it long ago
There should be *NO* reason why our money should be fleeing this country for foreign parts- not because of corporations moving headquarters overseas, not because of illegal immigrants sending money home, nothing.
I don't think would get past two cosponsors. That would really mess up their balance sheet. Plus, these days, frankly a US corporation can easily move it's headquarters elsewhere, say the Cayman Islands or Dubai and many have.
They are simply little sociopathic entities scouring the globe for profits. I mean seriously, they have no national loyalty. How to get national loyalty out of one is a very good question!
It seems that nation-states out jockey each other on who can bribe MNCs (multinational corporations) more with incentives, tax breaks and so on to move or not offshore outsource jobs or create jobs. Then, in other cases to make the sale, nations demand company x put x billion in offsets, i.e. jobs, investments, 3rd party contract to make the sale.
So, looking at this globally, you cannot just run businesses out of town and into the ground in so many words, at the same time, the United States should at least play the game to the level of the EU, China and Japan. As far as I know the United States has zero policy, plan for economic development in the national interest, i.e. for the good of the nation.
I mean other nations have all sorts of policies to keep jobs in their countries, to invest in their countries.
I really like the idea of a VAT/BAT because other nations already have this so it's legal under the WTO. Now abolish the WTO or no, this at least should be done, at least we should be on par with other nations in policy!
Why I like the Horizon project is how they analyze the motivations, financial incentives of multinational corporations and tweak policy accordingly.
If there is no financial incentive, well that corporation will not do it.
Pages