The adventures of Mommy woman
Published on October 30, 2004 By JillUser In Politics
Isn't getting drugs from Canada actually outsourcing US pharmaceutical jobs?
Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Nov 01, 2004

1) Freedom of consumers to buy either American or foreign products
It's not that straight forward though is it?  It isn't a Canadian product since we are producing it, exporting it then we would be buying it back.  Does that make any sense?  If we want to retain our rights for freedom of speech and free commerce, why shouldn't we be willing to pay for it?

If we stop buying our drugs in the US, what will that do to drug companies here?  What will it mean for Canadian drug companies?  How will it affect prescription coverage for medical insurance? 

on Nov 01, 2004
It's not that straight forward though is it? It isn't a Canadian product since we are producing it, exporting it then we would be buying it back. Does that make any sense?
Since when does government or anyone else have to deem an economic decision "rational" to make it legal? It is a very strange argument for even a moderately free market person to make.

If we want to retain our rights for freedom of speech and free commerce, why shouldn't we be willing to pay for it?
So you are seriously arguing that I have to pay cash for someone else's free speech and commerce? I doubt that Phizer will support any laws that send their money to me so that I can advertise my point of view.

Sorry, but I'm just not buying this argument at all. There may be arguments for prohibiting imports of prescription drugs from Canada, but subversion of advertising just won't fly with this guy... Next thing you know, you will want an extra tax on generic products because they aren't properly paying for advertising either.
on Nov 01, 2004
Okay, obviously I am not getting a key point across here.  Individuals want the right to buy products from the most competitive source be it domestic or otherwise.  Why shouldn't companies have that same right when shopping for employees?
on Nov 02, 2004
Okay, obviously I am not getting a key point across here. Individuals want the right to buy products from the most competitive source be it domestic or otherwise. Why shouldn't companies have that same right when shopping for employees?


Because the playing field is not level. We are talking about non free market countries, that have an adjusted income of anywhere from $350 to $4000 a year. We can not live on that here, but they can there. I'm serious about this and so are economists all over the country. We need to stop this now before it is too late. I'm not a doomsayer by nature, but the effects of outsourcing will stager the great depression. Business leaders care about one thing, making money, not the welfare of the American worker, not the breadlines, not the poor and down trodden. That's not there concern. Their job is to make as much money for their company as they can within the rules. The government sets those rules. So, the question is what shouuld the rules be. The answer is NOT Simple. American Companies need to be competitive on the world market. But we can not forsake the american worker to do that.

We need to balance trade, AND put hard limits on outsourcing, tax companies that out source to maintain the tax base. Give tax breaks for jobs created in the states. We need to make sure that the countries getting our jobs have open trade with us, and purchase a good deal more of the products they produce for us.



Link

Link

Remember these two facts when thinking about outsourcing:

When companies started talking about NAFTA and Other foreign trade agreements they were talking about moving low paying jobs, overseas, and re-educating the American workers to move into higher paying jobs. The problem is that those higher paying jobs are now being offshored too. We are talking about the programmers, Analysts, Software Developers, Accountants: Mechanical, Electrical, and Civil Engineers, Research & Development, Lawyers. Anything we can do here can be done somewhere else cheaper. ANYTHING. Why because those countries do not have as high of a standard of living. They have Socialized Medicine; they have much lower housing costs. They don’t by 52 inch Wide Screen High Def TVs. They don’t buy 2 or 3 PCs for the house. They don’t buy $300 Cell phones, gourmet ketchup, designer Jeans. They don’t have 3 cars, 2 homes, or 4 TVs. Disposable income is what drives this economy. High paying jobs, and overtime are they key. Put Americans to work and they spend like crazy. An Indian worker making $12 dollars a day does not have the spending power of an American Worker making $12 an hour.

The average salary of the American worker who lost their job and re-entered the work place was 16% lower than before they lost their job. 7.3 Million American workers now hold more than one job that’s 5% of the work force. The Consumer Price Index rose 2.4% in the last year. The lower cost of production is not being passed on to the consumer. It’s going to high level executives, and golden parachutes. So I ask: where is the upside for the American worker? If we want to compete we need to LOWER the cost of living. I don’t know of anyway to do that, not with out destroying the free market system. When the High Tech and high wage jobs we were supposed to migrate to get outsourced what are we to turn to? Protectionism isn’t a dirty word, it’s just good economics.



2 Pages1 2