GE-Headquarters-moving-China

[DOGS THAT BARK]

--from the dynamic duo of Immelt and O

GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, The Head Of Obama's Jobs Council, Is Moving ...

<BUTTON class=vspib></BUTTON>
<CITE>theeconomiccollapseblog.com/.../ge-ceo-jeffrey-immelt-the-head-of-obama...</CITE>
3 hours ago ? Jeffrey Immelt, the head of Barack Obama's highly touted Jobs Council, is moving even more GE infrastructure to China.




http://seekingalpha.com


General Electric Co.?s (GE) healthcare unit, the world?s biggest maker of medical imaging machines, is moving the headquarters of its 115-year-old X-ray business to Beijing.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Change you can believe in--
opcorn2

Would expect Wisconsin workforce to get hit harder than most over this move.

 

[StevieD]

--from the dynamic duo of Immelt and O

GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, The Head Of Obama's Jobs Council, Is Moving ...

<BUTTON class=vspib></BUTTON>
<CITE>theeconomiccollapseblog.com/.../ge-ceo-jeffrey-immelt-the-head-of-obama...</CITE>
3 hours ago ? Jeffrey Immelt, the head of Barack Obama's highly touted Jobs Council, is moving even more GE infrastructure to China.




http://seekingalpha.com


General Electric Co.?s (GE) healthcare unit, the world?s biggest maker of medical imaging machines, is moving the headquarters of its 115-year-old X-ray business to Beijing.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Change you can believe in--
opcorn2

Would expect Wisconsin workforce to get hit harder than most over this move.

What a disgrace!

 

[BobbyBlueChip]

I thought wisconsin was open for business ?

 

[The Sponge]

I thought wisconsin was open for business ?

well the tourist shops are making a killing.

 

[Chadman]

Why specifically did you post this Wayne? To try to tie Obama and a company moving part of its operation overseas? I think it's terrible that another company is moving operations overseas - I've had a problem with it for a long time, not just one that you can highlight for a rip on Obama.

Funny, one company that has a supporter of Obama, and it's worth posting. How about all the other companies that did this under Bush - when his practices and policies made this easier and was actually undertaken by companies Cheney was closely involved with?

Before somebody blasts me about blaming Bush - I didn't start this commentary. I think it's common knowledge that the Bush administration supported corporate America and rewrote policy to benefit that group. All the while, watching money and revenue move offshore and overseas to avoid taxation. Maybe if we had not ENCOURAGED that under Bush for 8 years, our debt wouldn't be so high? How much revenue have we lost because of those policies of allowing this to go on?

 

[Skulnik]

Why specifically did you post this Wayne? To try to tie Obama and a company moving part of its operation overseas? I think it's terrible that another company is moving operations overseas - I've had a problem with it for a long time, not just one that you can highlight for a rip on Obama.

Funny, one company that has a supporter of Obama, and it's worth posting. How about all the other companies that did this under Bush - when his practices and policies made this easier and was actually undertaken by companies Cheney was closely involved with?

Before somebody blasts me about blaming Bush - I didn't start this commentary. I think it's common knowledge that the Bush administration supported corporate America and rewrote policy to benefit that group. All the while, watching money and revenue move offshore and overseas to avoid taxation. Maybe if we had not ENCOURAGED that under Bush for 8 years, our debt wouldn't be so high? How much revenue have we lost because of those policies of allowing this to go on?

Jeffrey Immelt, the head of Barack Obama's highly touted Jobs Council, is moving even more GE infrastructure to China.

:nono: :facepalm:

 

[ssd]

Chadman,
as Skul posted, did you realize this? Do as I say and not as I do?

 

[Mags]

I thought wisconsin was open for business ?

Bobby:

Your slap at WI really has no merit here. It would if GE was moving to IL (or another state it views as a better place to do business than WI). But it is a good reflection on the Obama presidency.

I think this is a better example of how tough it is to do business in our overregulated America today. Obama has passed a ton of regulation in the past 2.5 years that has made it more expensive, more difficult, and provided more uncertainty to the business sector - the best example being the Obamacare law, which most businesses don't like and over 50% of Americans don't care for.

It's hard to compete with countries like China, whose wages, etc are not driven up by unrealistic union demands.

Its tough - I know a couple of guys at GE who are being given the choice to move to China, or not have a job anymore. 1 of them is actually considering it. Not an easy thing, to be sure.

 

[StevieD]

Bobby:

Your slap at WI really has no merit here. It would if GE was moving to IL (or another state it views as a better place to do business than WI). But it is a good reflection on the Obama presidency.

I think this is a better example of how tough it is to do business in our overregulated America today. Obama has passed a ton of regulation in the past 2.5 years that has made it more expensive, more difficult, and provided more uncertainty to the business sector - the best example being the Obamacare law, which most businesses don't like and over 50% of Americans don't care for.

It's hard to compete with countries like China, whose wages, etc are not driven up by unrealistic union demands.

Its tough - I know a couple of guys at GE who are being given the choice to move to China, or not have a job anymore. 1 of them is actually considering it. Not an easy thing, to be sure.

Mags, could you explain Obama care for me and what the alternative is. I know the Republicans weakened it but what is it that you do not like?

And do you think American workers should be paid on the same scale as China and third world countries that Corporate America is also sending our jobs?

 

[Chadman]

Chadman,
as Skul posted, did you realize this? Do as I say and not as I do?

Yes, I realize(d) that. I know Immelt and GE are targets for anything related to big business and Obama - my point was, the only time Wayne or any conservatives post ANYthing about ANYthing remotely negative about big business, jobs, overseas, tax payments, etc., it is G.E.-related. But it's never mentioned if this is a real concern for him/them. If it doesn't bother you - the action itself - then say so. But to ONLY call out Immelt and G.E. to jab at Obama, then that's kind of weak, IMO. Expected, but weak. Happy to see Wayne or other conservatives being against this - along with ALL THE OTHER COMPANIES that are doing it. I am, always have been.

Companies that take advantage of doing business here, reaping any benefits they can here, and take a big part of the official offices to other countries to avoid tax responsibilities. I think it's wrong when G.E. does it - and all the other companies that do it.

 

[The Sponge]

And do you think American workers should be paid on the same scale as China and third world countries that Corporate America is also sending our jobs?

Of course he does as long as it isn't him.

 

[Chadman]

For the record, ssd, if Skulnik posts something, I won't see it unless someone quotes him. I've had him on ignore for a long time now. I have an account with YouTube, so I don't need to see what he posts - I can find his "comments" there if I need to (which I don't).

 

[Mags]

Mags, could you explain Obama care for me and what the alternative is. I know the Republicans weakened it but what is it that you do not like?

And do you think American workers should be paid on the same scale as China and third world countries that Corporate America is also sending our jobs?

Stevie - there is so much to explain about Obamacare. In a nutshell, I don't think the government should dicate prices of products, choice of products, and amounts that companies are allowed to spend on overhead and profit. But I'm a free market guy. You could take any product/service and decrease the price by telling them that only 15% could go for advertising/salaries/overhead and profit. Of course, 99% of the companies in our country would go under immediately if done so. Automakers for one. Microsoft for another (profit margin of like 35%). All clothes companies. Most food stores.

The government is deciding what health products should be offered - for example, HSA's which have been shown to lower health care costs and incent people to make wise consumer choices in health care are being outlawed, as they will not fit one of the defined allowable coverages by Obama. Many coverage mandates - which are driven by special interest groups - are being added - which just adds to the cost for everyone.

There is so much more there - while the bill itself is only 2700 pages (sarcasm), the amount of regulation that comes with it is already numbering in the millions of pages. Complying with this comes with a cost. Of course, companies can't pay for this, with only 15% towards admin. More and more companies will go out of business (some have already). We will be left with no choice in coverage - just BCBS in each state.

Even the automakers are not immune. Obama is forcing them to change what type of cars they make, and what mileage standards they get. That is rediculous. That should be up to the American consumer. If the demand is high for electric cars, the automakers will build them. If people want high powered Corvette's, they won't be able to buy them due to fuel effeciency. I would imagine that NASCAR will cease as we know it under these new regulations, as none of those cars meet the standards (and it wouldn't be fair to carve out those cars if we are all stuck with Prius's).

Just way too much regulation. Let the market decide. Our gas prices are cheap compared to other countries. If gas got up to, say $10 a gallon, I'm sure there would be incentive to make electric cars. But if others want to pay $10/g and drive a car that is actually fun to drive, that should be their perrogative. Soon we will all be driving little shit boxes of cars that go 0-60 in like 5 minutes.

American workers should be paid whatever they are worth. And that is based on their skill set and demand in the labor markets, not based on archaic union contracts. If a guy is worth $1M a year, more power to him. If a guy is only worth $10K a year, then he has a choice to find a different job. If he has no skills, then it is on him. It is pretty simple really.

 

[StevieD]

Stevie - there is so much to explain about Obamacare. In a nutshell, I don't think the government should dicate prices of products, choice of products, and amounts that companies are allowed to spend on overhead and profit. But I'm a free market guy. You could take any product/service and decrease the price by telling them that only 15% could go for advertising/salaries/overhead and profit. Of course, 99% of the companies in our country would go under immediately if done so. Automakers for one. Microsoft for another (profit margin of like 35%). All clothes companies. Most food stores.

The government is deciding what health products should be offered - for example, HSA's which have been shown to lower health care costs and incent people to make wise consumer choices in health care are being outlawed, as they will not fit one of the defined allowable coverages by Obama. Many coverage mandates - which are driven by special interest groups - are being added - which just adds to the cost for everyone.

There is so much more there - while the bill itself is only 2700 pages (sarcasm), the amount of regulation that comes with it is already numbering in the millions of pages. Complying with this comes with a cost. Of course, companies can't pay for this, with only 15% towards admin. More and more companies will go out of business (some have already). We will be left with no choice in coverage - just BCBS in each state.

Even the automakers are not immune. Obama is forcing them to change what type of cars they make, and what mileage standards they get. That is rediculous. That should be up to the American consumer. If the demand is high for electric cars, the automakers will build them. If people want high powered Corvette's, they won't be able to buy them due to fuel effeciency. I would imagine that NASCAR will cease as we know it under these new regulations, as none of those cars meet the standards (and it wouldn't be fair to carve out those cars if we are all stuck with Prius's).

Just way too much regulation. Let the market decide. Our gas prices are cheap compared to other countries. If gas got up to, say $10 a gallon, I'm sure there would be incentive to make electric cars. But if others want to pay $10/g and drive a car that is actually fun to drive, that should be their perrogative. Soon we will all be driving little shit boxes of cars that go 0-60 in like 5 minutes.

American workers should be paid whatever they are worth. And that is based on their skill set and demand in the labor markets, not based on archaic union contracts. If a guy is worth $1M a year, more power to him. If a guy is only worth $10K a year, then he has a choice to find a different job. If he has no skills, then it is on him. It is pretty simple really.

Mags, we are not too distant in our thinking. I also believe in the Free Market. Not sure that what we have is a free market though. Too much manipulation. Too much of a redistribution of wealth to the overly rich in the last 10 to 20 years.
If a union guy is being paid 30 bucks an hour than that is what the company must have felt he was worth when they negotiated the contract.
You can't ship the jobs out of the country and drive up unemployment and the say this widget maker is only worth 5 bucks an hour because you have unemployed guys will to do the work for that because it is either that or be homeless.
This whole thing is a move to crush the middle class.
My brother in law is a drunk. He got into a company and he did well because he was in with the right crowd. Finally the booze over took him. He couldn't make it to work. His wife was fed up and aboutto throw him out. He got put through a rehab program, paid for by the company, got two years off with full pay and benefits to clean himself up. Then he was allowed to go back to his previous position.
I don't think they do that for the guy making the widgets.
Here is the thing. They deduct all that from their earnings and it is me that pays for it while they send my job out of the country!

 

[Mags]

If a union guy is being paid 30 bucks an hour than that is what the company must have felt he was worth when they negotiated the contract.

Totally agree if it is a non-public union. As most realize, in the public arena, union contracts are not negotiated - they are given as a quid pro quo for elections. So, in many cases, the public employees are not worth what they receive due to this corrupted process. But in private industry - sure - I can buy that argument

You can't ship the jobs out of the country and drive up unemployment and the say this widget maker is only worth 5 bucks an hour because you have unemployed guys will to do the work for that because it is either that or be homeless.
This whole thing is a move to crush the middle class.

I understand your point - but this is a tough one. Let's assume that the Chinaman is making $5 an hour, and the US union worker would be making $30/hour for the same work. Depending on the product, this could result in a large price increase (or an overpriced current product). So, to support those folks, many people have to pay a much higher cost for that good.

It is really not much different that Obamacare. They mandated that companies get 15% to pay for profits/salaries/benefits/agent commissions, etc. Now sure, you can take costs out of the system and reduce quality/choice (which it will). But then also you have to lay people off and increase unemployment. I guess if it is ok to do so in the healthcare sector, then I'm fine with it in the union sector too. And certainly should occur in the government sector.

The benefit is lower product prices for consumers for many goods. The downside is that there will be fewer consumers to buy products, due to not having jobs.

Which is why government regulation, overall, is a very bad thing - except for a few limited circumstances.

My brother in law is a drunk. He got into a company and he did well because he was in with the right crowd. Finally the booze over took him. He couldn't make it to work. His wife was fed up and aboutto throw him out. He got put through a rehab program, paid for by the company, got two years off with full pay and benefits to clean himself up. Then he was allowed to go back to his previous position.
I don't think they do that for the guy making the widgets.
Here is the thing. They deduct all that from their earnings and it is me that pays for it while they send my job out of the country!

Curious - was that a union position? I would think very few private companies would put up with that behavior, although there may be some exceptions. Needless to say, you BIL is a very lucky guy!

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Why specifically did you post this Wayne? To try to tie Obama and a company moving part of its operation overseas? I think it's terrible that another company is moving operations overseas - I've had a problem with it for a long time, not just one that you can highlight for a rip on Obama.

Funny, one company that has a supporter of Obama, and it's worth posting. How about all the other companies that did this under Bush - when his practices and policies made this easier and was actually undertaken by companies Cheney was closely involved with?

Before somebody blasts me about blaming Bush - I didn't start this commentary. I think it's common knowledge that the Bush administration supported corporate America and rewrote policy to benefit that group. All the while, watching money and revenue move offshore and overseas to avoid taxation. Maybe if we had not ENCOURAGED that under Bush for 8 years, our debt wouldn't be so high? How much revenue have we lost because of those policies of allowing this to go on?

Just elablorating on the "yes we can/hope and change/era of responsibilty eyt themes
--in hopes some don't bite on same grift/rhetoric again in 2012.

i think we have a few conversions already--most of those left will never change regardless what happen (the Marion Barry syndrome):lol:

 

[Trench]

--from the dynamic duo of Immelt and O

GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, The Head Of Obama's Jobs Council, Is Moving ...

Change you can believe in--
opcorn2

How ironic you're posting links to articles quoting source material posted on the Huffington Post.

Broadening your horizons, Dogs? :shrug: :142smilie

Btw, Dogs... I'm not a fan of Immelt, but we ALL know if he were a member of a Republican cabinet, you and Mags would be on your knees bowing to his every move.

 

[Trench]

Mags... do you think American workers should be paid on the same scale as China and third world countries that Corporate America is also sending our jobs?

Of course that what he thinks, Stevie. It should be obvious to anyone who's read his posts over the past 6 months. But I know your question was rhetorical.

 

[Skulnik]

For the record, ssd, if Skulnik posts something, I won't see it unless someone quotes him. I've had him on ignore for a long time now. I have an account with YouTube, so I don't need to see what he posts - I can find his "comments" there if I need to (which I don't).

For the RECORD, i'm not a BIG PUSS that can't handle a P/C LIBERAL, I don't have anyone on IGNORE.


:00x13 :00x13 :00x13 :00x13 :00x13 :00x13