Ask the manufacturers:
More than 17 percent of those who answered said they would have to shut down their business because there is no way they could handle the kinds of increases being predicted.
The unscientific poll taken of Manufacturing & Technology eJournal readers from June 28th through July 1st drew 943 responses.
OTHER CHOICES INCLUDED:
Would raise the price of my product or service to customers (22 percent);
A combination of price increases, personnel cuts and reductions in pay and benefits (20 percent);
Switch to a 4-day workweek (15 percent);
Layoff workers (14.5 percent).
But hey, what do they know?
The media pays no penalty for lying to us. Hopefully the day is coming when the public will become aware and we will have a huge backlash against the media.
It is pure evil how the media can fog over the facts and spin so furiously in Obama’s favor.
Remember this in November 2010.
It seems that the backlash is starting. As at least some of the financial woes to the media are due to people turning off and unsubscribing in disgust.
That’s just an estimate, probably worse case.
Hope
Change
The media pays no penalty for lying to us.
That’s in part because the market for truth is so small. People do not want to hear the truth, they want to hear stuff that conforms with their belief systems and economic interests. And news reports are also coloured by the interests and opinions of journalists, editors, advertisers, shareholders, friendly politicians etc.
Markets will not lead to a press that tells the truth. Neither will government sponsored media. It’s a problem.
One thing they don’t know is how to conduct a poll. Where were options like “Will not have any effect” and “Will have only minor effect”?
This poll is like having an election with only Democrats on the ballot. No real choice, so the results are garbage.
I think that businessmen sometimes exaggerate the anticipated effects of environmental regulation. In 1971 the director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce warned that the Clean Air and Clean Water acts would cause the “collapse of entire industries.” In 1977 the Chamber said that clean air laws would “mandate undeveloped areas into eternal poverty.”
Instead, the U.S. became a leader in emissions control technology, which created jobs, and thousands of lives have been saved at very low cost by cleaner air.
I think that businessmen sometimes exaggerate the anticipated effects of environmental regulation. In 1971 the director of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce warned that the Clean Air and Clean Water acts would cause the “collapse of entire industries.” In 1977 the Chamber said that clean air laws would “mandate undeveloped areas into eternal poverty.”
I’d say, off hand, that the director of the US Chamber of Commerce was dead on. Good old fashion industry has dropped dramatically since those times. Regulation and labor costs are probably the largest two of many big costs of making things in the US. The second prediction doesn’t appear accurate in hindsight though. Some areas appear to be in indefinite poverty, but that seems more due to regional politics and getting the worst of economic and demographic changes over the past few decades.
Instead, the U.S. became a leader in emissions control technology, which created jobs, and thousands of lives have been saved at very low cost by cleaner air.
Sometimes your blinkers are a tad annoying. There’s no way more jobs were created by the need for emissions control technology than were destroyed by the regulation in the first place. Maybe the lives saved were worth the job loss, but it’s utterly foolish to point out a few jobs regained in a niche industry while ignoring the overall job loss.
The carbon tax cap&trade bill Waxman-Markey was expected to cost a lot of jobs, actually though – this was INTENDED. The idea was energy intensive (hence fuel consuming) industries would be forced to upgrade to new tech, or go out of business. Given most everyone who could upgrade with energy saving tech has done so by now – it means industries either jack up their prices to cover the extra taxes (and get priced out of the market), move out of country to avoid the US taxes, or go out of business.
Really, Obama and company don’t like industry. Its why the auto industry was abused so badly in Washington, but “green industries” (Stocks, banking, real-estate) were treated very sympathetically, and given staggering amounts of money. Washington folks, especially Obama folks talk glowingly about eliminating old polluting industries and replacing them with new green industries. Frankly I’d rather have aerospace and car industries, then wind turbine and banking.
Spain tried the “Green industry” trade off – and lost 3 jobs for every 1 they gained.