[GCFL-discuss] Made In Mexico

[gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net]

Nice reply, didn't I read that some jobs are coming back to the states. If
we listen to all of the nay sayers one would think that all of the jobs are
going overseas. Its not just the US that out sources work. I'm hearing that
even China is sending work out. We are a global economy and its going to get
bigger as time goes on.

Dave


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net>
To: "Shirley Heit" <sdmheit at verizon.net>
Cc: "Discussion of the Good, Clean Funnies List" <gcfl-discuss at gcfl.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 10:41 PM
Subject: Re: [GCFL-discuss] Made In Mexico


> Dear Jeff, and all,
>
> I don't know how to comment on a letter like this without engaging in
> political discussion. I will avoid saying anything about George W. Bush
> though, since he is not the topic of the original submission. (Besides,
> you all know what I think of him, and I know what most of you think of
> him, we've all opened our digital mouths on the subject).
>
> As far as I have read, the marriage of John Kerry and Theresa Heinz Kerry
> involved some complicated pre-nuptial agreements that kept him out of any
> real control of the business interests she inherited from her late
> husband. It could hardly have been otherwise with so much personal
> history and money at stake.
>
> After all, it was her first husband's FAMILY business (albeit writ
> corporately large) which she married into, and that she inherited. I
> expect their children, the Heinz children that is, the children of the
> former Republican senator from Pennsylvania, are going to ultimately
> inherit, not Kerry or the Kerry children.
>
> There are, of course, also stockholders outside the Heinz family to
> consider, and they have the right to sue the board of directors
> (including but not limited to Theresa Heinz Kerry) if it takes actions
> that diminish the value of their stock, no matter how benevolent the
> board's hypothetical intentions toward American workers may be.
>
> In my much younger days, it made moral sense to me to boycott everything
> made by exploitation of impoverished work forces, but MOST of what we
> need and want is made by impoverished and exploited workforces. You can't
> boycott it all without becoming a hermit living on grass. (And the cute
> coops charge more money than Wal-Mart, which we can only afford if we are
> lucky enough to have a high paying job, probably from some corporate
> exploiter, or a big stock portfolio).
>
> The reason to have government policies in matters like this is very
> simply to level the playing field. If one company does "the right thing"
> while another company does "the wrong thing," the first will go out of
> business and the second will see its stock go way up. So, until laws are
> in place to demand the same of all, the market will do what it does. That
> includes the corporate decisions of Heinz.
>
> I do think that the issue of exporting jobs is important, but I think the
> political rhetoric about it so far is trite. Donors to both major parties
> are exporting jobs, and neither party can simply outlaw the outsourcing.
> We need a strategy for building up production jobs in the U.S., in ways
> that can be sustained in a global market, so we don't become a hollow
> service and finance economy. We should be in a position to feed and
> clothe ourselves it the global economy falls apart for a time. We should
> be making real tangible things to sustain the service portion of our
> economy. That requires more complex thinking than an election campaign
> generally stimulates.
>
> A comforting thought: some of our greatest presidents are remembered for
> contributions that either were not campaign issues, or that they would
> not have dared to present to the voters. When Roosevelt was re-elected in
> 1940, American public opinion was overwhelmingly pacifist and
> isolationist. If Kennedy had run in 1960 on a platform of passing a
> comprehensive civil rights bill, he would have lost by a landslide. I
> have more confidence in Kerry's ability to handle the NEW challenges that
> the next four years will bring, and I have confidence that Edwards will
> provide a perspective that neither Kerry, Bush nor Cheney can offer --
> since all three are children of wealth and privilege, while Edwards is
> the son of a cotton mill worker from a small town in South Carolina. (But
> still, his rhetoric on outsourcing jobs isn't up to the complex task that
> will face our nation in the next decade. His heart is in the right place,
> which counts for something, his method needs more work).
>
> Siarlys
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> The best thing to hit the Internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
> Surf the Web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
> Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
> _______________________________________________
> GCFL-discuss mailing list
> GCFL-discuss at gcfl.net
> http://gcfl.net/mailman/listinfo/gcfl-discuss