Finally the truth starts to come out: job creation by US companies inside the US and outside the US

[Peter1x9]

http://news.yahoo.com/terrible-truth-rate-u-companies-taking-jobs-abroad-164028334.html


The jobs are going to the foreign affiliates of U.S. companies in far greater numbers than the jobs that are created for U.S. affiliates of U.S. companies. The proof of the pudding is in a chart below, recommended to Forbes by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, that is recognized as a fountain of research and ideas about entrepreneurship. The more the entrepreneurship, the more the jobs, the more the success of the U.S. economy.



Since 1982 the index of jobs going to the foreign affiliates of U.S. companies has risen some 80% from a low of 100 in 1982 to 180 currently. By comparison, the index of jobs at the U.S. affiliates of U.S. companies rose from 100 in 1982 to a peak of 130 in 2000--before the tech bubble and the housing bubble-- and in the last decade has fallen back to 110. This means the number of jobs created by US companies inside the nation has risen by only 10% over 30 years.




To summarize: The number of jobs created by US companies inside the nation has risen by only 10% over 30 years. The number of jobs created by US companies outside the nation has risen by 70% over the same 30 years.

[leveymg]

1. That one graph captures the entire problem with the American economy.

U.S.-based multinationals "take the money and run." And, nothing is done to stop it because both parties have been bought off.

Where does everyone think the Wall Street bail-out went?

[shanti]

18. didn't obama promise to stop this?

or was it just another campaign promise?

*crickets*

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Of course foreign job growth has been high...

along with foreign business growth.

How many of those foreign jobs are in all those new KFCs in China, or McDonalds in the Czech republic? How many were in GM or Ford plants overseas, making cars for local markets? US oil companies drilling in Indonesia or building refineries in Curacao?

The US is a mature market, and simply that job growth is, or was, higher in emerging markets like Viet Nam or Nigeria means nothing unless you can show that those jobs negatively affected US job growth.

[fasttense]

15. How many US cars does China buy?

Chinese buy a lot of cars but how many of them are made in the US or other countries? The answer is very few because: "under Chinese law, if imported parts make up more than 60% of the vehicle they are taxed at a rate equal to the tariff on an imported car - raising their tariff from 10-14% to the higher rate of 28%."

So the jobs are NOT moving to China because they buy more cars or they are an emerging market. They are moving to China because China puts a 28% tariff on all imported cars. If corporations make them in China, they don't have to pay the 28% tariff.

Many other countries have huge tariffs on US imported goods, though some countries call them value added taxes, they are still tariffs. It's just plain common sense to protect your local industries from cheap foreign dumping of goods. But the US does NOT put any tariffs on most imported crap. So, the jobs go to China to get cheap, cheap labor and the crap is sent over here to sell, tariff free or to sell in China with a low, low tariff. It has absolutely nothing to do with or if a market is mature or emerging.

Americans need to wake up a realize that some economists literally make up shit so they can justify rigged markets.

[Coyote_Bandit]

3. Why do we bother to call them US companies?

They are multi-national in all respects.

[truedelphi]

11. Exactly. And the Super Elite, and those who work for them, just assume that

We, the Middle Incomed, will suck it up and take the losses.

San francisco Chronicle had a lil blurb today that ssince the crash of the economy in fall 2008, each and every American has lost over $ 7K.

But I suspect that this "loss" has not reallya veraged out. SOme people are still working the job they had ten years ago, and might even be swinging a raise every other year or two.

But woe be tide to those who lost along the way. Be the loss one stemming from over-investment in the real estate bubble, a medical bankrupcy, etc - once you are on the skids inside this troubled economy, you probably will stay on the skids.

It is especially hard on people over 49 years of age who are unemployed. Why would a desirable emplyer hire someone who will bring up the cost of the insurance premiums?

Had we ever gotten Universal Single Payer Health Care, that situation would not exist, but of course, since the President is owned by the Big Banks and The Big Insurers, we did not have a shot at SPUHC.

[Dept of Beer]

4. Shameful.

[Supposn]

5. Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage.

Corporations have locations, not national allegiances.
 
Warren Buffett’s to significantly reduce USA’s trade deficit.

It is not our global trade but our trade deficits’ that are a
significant net detriment to our economy.  Trade deficits’
amount of detriment to their nations’ GDPs are significantly
larger than the deficits themselves.
 
I’m a proponent of a proposal to reduce USA’s trade deficit of
goods that was first introduced to the Senate in 2006.  This
simple concept is not simplistic and is worthy of
consideration. 

The basic concept is for exporters who choose to pay the
federal fees to acquire transferable IMPORT Certificates for
the assessed value of their goods leaving the USA. Importers
would be required to surrender IMPORT Certificates for the
assessed value of their goods entering the USA. Surrendered
certificates are cancelled.
This may seem as a boon to exporters of USA goods but it’s
actually an indirect but effective export subsidy and the
trade proposal’s entirely funded by U.S. purchasers of foreign
goods.

The version of this trade policy I advocate would exclude
values of specifically listed scarce or precious minerals
integral to goods from goods assessed values.
This trade policy would significantly decrease USA’s trade
deficit of goods and increase the aggregate sum of USA’s
imports plus exports and our GDP more than otherwise.  The GDP
bolsters the median wage.

Wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but
every day of every year they’re dependent upon their U.S.
wages.  Regardless of how small the additions to imports’
prices due to Import Certificates, (unlike tariffs) USA’s
assessed imports could never exceed that of our exports.  U.S.
wage earners can have cheap (but not the absolute cheapest)
imported goods.  We cannot afford the absolute cheapest. 
  
 Refer to: www.USA-Trade-n.Blogspot.com ,
              
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import_Certificates
or Google:  Wikipedia, import certificates 
Respectfully, Supposn

[tortoise1956]

6. Has anybody else here done their homework?

To summarize: The number of jobs created by US companies inside the nation has risen by only 10% over 30 years. The number of jobs created by US companies outside the nation has risen by 70% over the same 30 years.

That statement is complete B.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the nonfarm labor force rose from 91.5 million workers in the fourth quarter of 1980 to 153.4 million workers in July 2011. See the two attached links:

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1981/02/art1full.pdf

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

A perusal of these links show that nonfarm employment has increased by approximately 62 million. That is NOT a 10% change. It's more like 67%.

I have no idea what "index" this story is talking about, but it has no basis in reality...

[progree]

9. Thanks for pointing out. Corrected version....

The original posting failed to summarize correctly:

Poster's Summary: To summarize: The number of jobs created by US companies inside the nation has risen by only 10% over 30 years. The number of jobs created by US companies outside the nation has risen by 70% over the same 30 years.

(Also the last sentence before the "To summarize" made the same error).

The corrected summary (consistent with the rest of the article) is:

To summarize: The number of jobs created by US companies with foreign affilliates inside the nation has risen by only 10% over 30 years. The number of jobs created by US companies with foreign affilliates outside the nation has risen by 70% over the same 30 years.

[tortoise1956]

10. That makes sense

Thanks for pointing out the statement in the article. I completely missed the section identifying the TYPE of company, concentrating instead on the numbers. Now it makes more sense.

Too bad you didn't bring it up earlier, it would have saved me an hour of web surfing!

[fasttense]

16. Non-farm payroll is all jobs. It's not just corporations with foreign offices.

The non-farm payroll counts private business, small new business, self employed, McJobs and everything. The post includes just corporations or multi-nationals. The businesses that get the biggest tax breaks.

[ForwardSocialism]

7. hm

The image/graph appears to be a little deceptive..

[tortoise1956]

8. that's what I thought...

So I went and did some research. Took about an hour to chase it down, but it was clear that someone misrepresented the facts.

Now the question is - what would they gain by doing that?

[dallasknight]

12. american jobs

I will tell you why jobs are going overseas instead of staying here in this country; as a business owner myself, I find it has come to a point of what kind of return do I want on my money. Over the years government has added more and more regulations, rules, taxes, and now mandatory health care in 2014. Since there is a better return on my money if I move my business to this other country that I have chosen because of the benefits. This is the bottom line its my money, my business, and I will not share my profits, because if my business fails no one else will pay the debts. I created this company to make money, no other reason.

[progree]

14. I agree its them thar guvmint-luvin libtards and their worker safety and environmental whacko regs

as a business owner myself ... Over the years government has added more and more regulations, rules, taxes, and now mandatory health care in 2014.... I created this company to make money, no other reason.

Yup. I just hate them thar worker safety regulations -- the guvmint made me spend all kinds of money after a couple of my workers got chewed up by the machinery. And then there is this stream that runs through my property -- MY property -- that we used to dump our waste into. Some environmentalist whackos from the EPA told me it was toxic, I said that's just baloney to scare granny, and besides the stream is running through MY property. Anyway now we have to pay midnight haulers to dump it miles away.

And the idea that my workers should be healthy, like over thar in Canada and Europe, what an outrage! Or that I should have to compete with companies that care for their workers' health! Of course the libtards keep saying that we could relieve employers from the burden of health care by a socialized medicine scheme called "single payer", but that would further destroy our glorious free market system. Can't have none of that, not here in 'merica.

[fasttense]

17. Well I feel real sorry for you.

The only reason you work is to make money. That is very sad. I started farming not just to make money but to help the environment, improve the land I own and to provide healthy good quality food without pesticides and poisons. I chose farming because I like it. If I fail and don't make a huge profit, I'll have spent my life doing something I value. If you fail you'll have spent your life miserable.

You have every right to move your dull money making business. Good luck finding a country without regulations. You think regulations are bad here? Try China. You can move your business but you have absolutely no right to sell your crap here in the US. Make your crap by giving the Chinese jobs, that's just fine. Just don't expect to sell it here. Sell it in China.

[golfguru]

13. The Indians have a big advantage over American workers

They are graduating more engineers and scientists.
They can speak English.
They work hard.
Their colleges are harder to get through.
(I know, I have degrees from India & USA)
They have almost 4 times people we have here.
And most of all their wages are much lower.
(is the main reason I am here for 40 years).

So there is no surprise job growth for middle class will be better in countries such as India, China, Brazil. Eventually their wages will catch up and their advantage will diminish.