General Question

dreamwolf's avatar

Why do Republicans support big business, tell Americans we have no jobs because of the Democrats, yet most businessman are "conservative" but ship American jobs overseas.

Asked by dreamwolf (3142 points ) August 19th, 2011

Why do Republicans support big business, tell Americans we have no jobs because of the Democrats, yet most businessman are “conservative” but ship American jobs overseas.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

12 Answers

marinelife's avatar

Ah, that is the question. Because Republicans are not really interested in jobs; they are interested in profit.

Qingu's avatar

It’s an article of faith among Republicans that the more money businesses and rich people have, the better off everyone will be, including workers.

Which is why workers are so well off now, what with the rich controlling the largest percentage of wealth since the Gilded Age of the 1920s and corporations sitting on record amounts of cash.

If this theory doesn’t match reality, it must be because of Democrats in office, high taxes, and government regulation. Because those things always explain everything that’s wrong with the economy.

Jaxk's avatar

Actually Republicans support business, big or small. Business men are conservative because they understand how to create wealth and jobs. Businesses also understand what kills jobs. The key thing to understand is that business, any business, thrives on growth. As the business grows it creates wealth for both the business and employees. And that growth also creates jobs. Democrats like to argue that business only cares about the next month or next quarter. That’s simply not true. Any good business is looking both at short term and long term growth. It’s simply good business to do so.

You need to understand why a corporation would send jobs over seas. It’s not cheap to do that. Businesses don’t do because they don’t like it here, or they just want to hurt the economy, that’s counter productive. They do it because we’ve made the environment here so costly that they can no longer compete. Salaries, are only a small part of that puzzle but unquestionably a part. Regulation is the biggest piece for many industries. If we don’t like having those dirty manufacturers in our country, we force them overseas. It’s hard to then complain that they’ve moved overseas.

dreamwolf's avatar

They do it because we’ve made the environment here so costly that they can no longer compete.***

So because the U.S.A. has much more strict regulations on the well beings of labor workers, it’s okay to have 3rd world countries to make wages at a fraction of what an American worker would make?
So in your argument, the clothing brand Ralph Lauren cannot have enough integrity to abide by U.S. law in order to have controlled working environments, so it’s okay that Ralph Lauren open up shop in Bangkok where “democrats” or U.S. government cannot intervene?

These are all good answers so far people keep it up. Sway me, I am a liberal.

@Qingu, great argument. So you’re saying, if U.S. receives cheap labor elsewhere, the rest of the U.S. can follow and therefore the U.S. will the rich nation atop of the globe?

YARNLADY's avatar

Sweeping generalizations do nothing to help our situation. Maybe it would be better to stick to specific issues that can be changed, both Republican and Democrat.

dreamwolf's avatar

@yarnlady this issue can be changed. if can be made then it can be broke, if it can be broke then it can be fixed.

YARNLADY's avatar

@dreamwolf Your question does not address a specific issue, but makes an unsupported generalization.

dreamwolf's avatar

Okay, first off you don’t write a sentence with a statement, and the next sentence starts with “but” followed by a negative statement. Two negatives in the English language for statements don’t work. Which part of the question do you think is not a specific issue? And I can list many a generalization of which companies have left the U.S., and list many Republicans who are blaming the debt problem on Democrats.

CaptainHarley's avatar

If you’re expecting people to be consistent, you’re going to be sadly disappointed.

dreamwolf's avatar

@CaptainHarley agreed, people as a species have so much variety and range. i guess we’ll fix what we can and leave the rest for disaster. it just sucks that my generation (born 1987) will know nothing but debt talk all through out our lives. maybe our grandkids will get it right, i know im going to vote socialist until we get out of debt. because if only a tiny bit of people are going to make 6 figures, my thinking is its better for 10 people to make 50,000 than 2 people making 100,000.

mattbrowne's avatar

Republicans seem to be less critical about the downsides of the shareholder value principle. What is the real number one purpose of companies (big business and small)?

Answer 1: Maximize short-term profit and return on equity?
Answer 2: Maximize customer value and ensure long-term viability of the company?

People who favor answer 2 see profit as a side effect instead of a primary goal. Very often the offshore option does not work in the long run. So instead of having a jobs going elsewhere discussion we need to have a discussion about the shareholder value principle.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther