the nation's middle class is at risk

Therealbrighteyes · 01-25-2012, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by that_girl

Everything said last night was so common sense and sooooo last year. The fact that things are being said now makes me wanna say, "Well, duh!"

He HAS to reiterate it since the other side is campaigning on it and nobody is saying "Yeah, yeah...been there done that".

Therealbrighteyes · 01-25-2012, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Runs like Dog

Wouldn't it be ironic if in 30 years all the call centers are in the
US? Because that's likely to happen.

Not a chance. No way are we ambitious enough to learn Mandarin or Punjabi.

sigma1299 · 01-25-2012, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Therealbrighteyes

Not a chance. No way are we ambitious enough to learn Mandarin or Punjabi.

THAT made me laugh.

The thing I found most laughable in the SOTU address was all the references to making everyone (specifically big corps, banks, wall street, millionaires) "play by the same rules" - presumably the same rules that the average American plays by and I'm all for that. BUT the group that needs to be at the head of that line - the people who need to be the very first to "play by the same rules" are..... CONGRESS!! Who exempt themselves from most of the legislation they pass. If the next law passed was that members of congress had to abide by the laws they passed you'd see a dramatic change in legislation.

Runs like Dog · 01-25-2012, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gonefishin

Runs like a dog

You are looking at this threw the lense of a corporation. I just think if Americans took home their gross pay vs thier net, it would change the landscape.

If Apple wants to continue to import thier finished product from China let them. The difference will be the Apple finished product will be taxed at the cash register "national sales tax"
At least at this point The United States is collecting some tax from Chinese cheap labor.
I just think a national sales tax is the way to go.

But the fact is that iPhones only have a labor component in the cost of under 10%. (Similarly cars in the US or anywhere only have an 8 or 9% labor component.) So wherever you move the labor to, in this case Chinese iPhones, even if you moved the factory to Nevada the net difference in the cost of the until is $18-$40 depending on how you calculate the value add. iPhones are HIGHLY price elastic and if you increased the consumer price $18-40 it would have almost no effect on demand. So the question is, why wouldn't China do that? Because the logistics chain costs a hell of a lot more than the labor.

And that wouldn't change no matter where the final assembly took place. An American iPhone factory would have to accommodate MUCH higher logistics chain costs on top of that elastic $18-40. If costs go up say a hundred dollars or more then you start seeing significant demand erosion.

If I were Apple I'd eat the tariff because it's probably cheaper. If the government put a 200% tax on them then that would cause lobbyists to descend on Washington like locusts.