"Brenda Ann" wrote in message ...

"Jeff" wrote in message
news:3S6Me.255098$_o.133794@attbi_s71...

"David" wrote in message
...


It used to be that American companies were in business so that
American people could make a living while the business owners made a
tidy little profit for themselves.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Never had any economics 101 have you?? US corps.
have NEVER been in the business of providing jobs. They have been
in business to make a profit to keep their stockholders happy. Which
gets harder to do as time goes on from competition. Back in the 50s
and 60s their simply wasnt much competition because overseas countries
hadnt really industrialized much yet. Starting with the 70s things chaged,
3rd world countries started industrializing and making the same products
for cheaper.

Economics 102:

If US corporations do not hire US workers, and continue to move those jobs
overseas, eventually they will lose all those profits they had hoped to
gain. This because those workers who either no longer have jobs at all, or
have jobs at Burger King or 7-11, can no longer afford to buy the products
of said corporations. Add to this that the rest of the world will not be
able to afford them, either, since the wages they pay their overseas workers
are not sufficient to support the market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It still boils down to keeping the stockholders happy and
investing. If you lose that battle, there is no company to worry
about. This is what happened to the steel industry in the mid- late
70's. The US companies were prdominatley using old antiquated
non efficient bessomer type kilns from the 30s and the Japanese
built brand new computer controlled electric foundries that could
melt 20-30 tons of steel in 30 minutes. US investors lost confidence
and moved there money elesewhere and the results are history.
Which scenerio is worse??