Posts
German-based DHL announced a deal that could result in 8,200 lost jobs in Wilmington, Ohio. And McCain did in fact oppose an amendment that would have kept DHL from buying Wilmington-based Airborne Express. . . .This is how Democratic Party and labor union goons exploit fear and economic ignorance, and except for banning international trade, I don't know what could ever satisfy them.
[T]he Teamsters union praised the merger at the time, saying that it would lead to more jobs. And at first, more jobs indeed followed.
The ads also imply that the DHL merger is a direct cause of the job losses in Ohio, which we find to be both unlikely and unsubstantiated. Airborne Express had laid off 2,000 employees before the merger, and analysts at the time said that the struggling carrier would need to make expensive investments in its international infrastructure to remain competitive. . . .
The AFL-CIO mailer is the most explicit, saying that "McCain helped cut a deal that sent over 8,000 jobs to a foreign-owned company." Obama's television ad, which began airing on Aug. 14, charges that "John McCain helped pave the way for foreign-owned DHL to take over an American shipping company."
If U.S. companies invest overseas, that's "off-shoring," and is supposedly bad for American workers. but if foreign companies invest in the U.S., that's a foreign "takeover," and is supposedly bad for U.S. workers.
Airborne Express was experiencing hard times, and had already cut 2,000 jobs. So the company sells out to a German competitor, DHL. The hard times continue, however, and so another round of layoffs is necessary.
The DHL buyout did not cause the layoffs in Ohio. DHL inherited the problems at Airborne Express when it bought the company, and the layoffs are the result of those problems, which pre-existed the DHL buyout.
To blame the "foreign-owned company" is ridiculous, and to blame McCain for opposing an amendment that would have blocked the buyout is lunacy. There wouldn't even be an America without investment by "foreign-owned companies"!
Hello? It was investment by British and Dutch capitalists that funded the original colonial ventures in what is now the United States. Foreign capital helped build the railroads that spanned a continent. The United States has always welcomed foreign investment, because foreign investment is a very good thing.
Ever since the 1970s, the Left has been demonizing foreign investors -- especially Arabs and Japanese -- who are supposedly buying up everything in America as part of some shadowy takeover scheme. This is ignorant nonsense, anti-economic gibberish.
When foreigners invest their money in U.S. businesses, this is a vote of confidence in America's prospects for economic growth. Capital investment creates jobs.
If, in this one instance, the DHL buyout of Airborne Express has been followed by layoffs, it does not follow that the buyout caused the layoffs. This is the logical fallacy known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc.
So why is it "hate" when Americans complain about an illegal influx of poor Mexican workers, yet it's not "hate" when Democrats demonize the legal business activity of rich German investors? Why is dishonest fear-mongering about foreign capitalists not stigmatized as xenophobia?
Because the Left controls the terms of debate, that's why. They are permitted to spread harmful anti-economic ideas and even to promote fear of foreigners, so long as it helps elect Democrats. But don't you for a minute think their opponents enjoy any such privilege.
UPDATE: Ahem.
My Mother worked at Airborne Express for a number of years and now works for DHL. She is a Teamster and knows well all the BS the unionized employees get away with due to the protection of the union. Often she complains that she gets additional work from her Boss b/c he knows she will do it, while her coworkers won't get extra work b/c they refuse. This is a perfect example how merit does not factor at all in moving up the ladder in a unionized work place. If you can stick it out long enough, you will get rise in seniority and that is how one advances. Furthermore, it is too difficult for rotten employees to be fired b/c the union always files a grievance resulting in rehiring the poor employee. Thus, a typical manager who has to deal with these incompetent children usually leaves within 9 months due to transfer or quitting. A huge factor, if not the primary reason, of DHL's plight, is the drag on productivity the Teamsters impose.
ReplyDelete