Thought for the day, April, 24

Ok, I see from yesterday's post that further explanation is required with regard to "cross-trickle" economics.

I maintain that an export, save for the food and medical requirements of the global neighborhood be treated as a luxury. Example: My country is ergonomically sensitive and advanced to a point where millions of new vehicles need to be retrofitted to the roads that we drive to satisfy our transportation requirements.


My whole country needs the next generation of cars and we simply can't produce them fast enough. This implies that my country's manufacturing sector is at full employment and it will be the case for years to come.


A foreign land wants to go to work for us. The quality and all other aspects, fair competition, fair labor laws and such are equal to that of our country.


I say , hell yeah we can hire them! All the requirements of this are met. The mother country and our workforce have been given "peoples lobbyist" treatment. We revisit this agreement in one year. If all holds the same, we remain at full employment and the demand is still needed, we renew our "temporary foreign worker lease."


Here is another scenario. Our country is humming along. Our auto companies feel that they can compete with autos in another country. Or the foreign country wants to hire "us" to fill a need. We remain at full employment, so the best scenario for the auto company is to set up shop across the border and make the cars in the country where the demand is.


This is quite acceptable to the ALP. It is an investment, an entrepreneurial venture is a healthy thing for a company to do, having met the requirements of the well being of the domestic workforce.


Where the ALP takes issue, is the foreign workers retaining jobs to produce (manufacture) goods which are consumed by us when we are NOT at full employment. The reasoning behind the foreign workforce is now, not about a fiduciary, "cross-trickle" economic theory, rather it is one about maximizing profit and essentially greed.


Sure there are some issues that need to be worked through, but there can be no doubt as to what the motivation is behind what the ALP is advocating...


Brother Brian has a great idea. I think we can put together a "flow chart" with some data and actual visual effect to show how "cross trickle economic theory" works.!!

My stance: ALP-ers are "peoples lobbyists." Cynicism aside, we really have got to come from there. If "cross trickle economics" is the backbone of our platform, then we shall build a charter on this as our premise. Without manufacturing, whether it cars, software components, shoes, garden tools....we would have no cross trickle economics. We must advocate a strong consumer/producer-business entity relationship. Where I see things, it is in the best interest of everyone.

It's why Henry Ford, pioneer of the modern automobile assembly line had a $5 workday in the early 1900's. It was so the people he hired could ultimately buy his stuff.!