« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

WILL THE REAL OUTSOURCER STAND UP?

Now, we know why Barack Obama falsely accuses his opponent of outsourcing. That’s the best way to conceal his own record. He appointed Jeffrey Immelt “Jobs Czar” and said, “The General Electric Company’s President understood how to compete in the global economy“.

The New York Times confirmed that Immelt’s leadership earned G.E. billions of dollars here and by outsourcing American jobs overseas but paid absolutely no income taxes. That, plus the fact Immelt was a loyal supporter and campaign contributor eminently qualified him to be an Administration appointee.

To create American Jobs and tax-free income, General Electric moved their X-Ray Division factory from Wisconsin to China and India was selected for a new $500 million Solar Panel plant. It was hoped Americans would ignore the fact that working in the Job Czar’s new factories would require passports.

Outsourcing includes both jobs and American wealth. When taxpayers must now pay millions of dollars to use Russia’s Soyez Space Capsule to ferry our astronauts to and from the International Space Station we constructed, its outsourcing, disgraceful and a national embarrassment.

When American taxpayers must pay interest on loans from China because the Obama Administration has been irresponsible with a failed economy, out of control spending and huge deficits that’s outsourcing to finance debt and is disgusting.

Next time we hear someone called an outsourcer by the President’s re-election team be aware that no one does it better than Barack Obama.

COMMENTS

  • dragan

    What is wrong in outsourcing if you strongly believe that outsourcing creates more benefits (not jobs) for us. Why should Romney run away from being called an outsourcer when he has actually created more benefits ? Are we trying to say that by calling Obama, the outsourcer in Chief, we are saying that he created more benefits than Romney did ?

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      when he paid GM to build factories in Brazil.

      • dragan

        All I am trying to understand is this

        Free trade with outsourcing is generally believe to bring in more benefits to the economy even though there might be loss of jobs. If this is true, then why would it matter who outsourced more ?

        By calling Obama outsourcer in chief, are we not giving him cedit for bringing him more benefits ? By Romney staying away from being called an outsourcer, isnt he abandoning the benefits he created for the economy ?

        This election cycle seems confusing. Right is left, up is down etc..

        • Vegas_Rick

          Is Romney’s company may have outsourced some jobs, but they were done with private money. The Dear Leader is sending OUR TAX MONEY from the stimulus to places like Mexico, China and Sweden.

          I don’t care what is done with investors money, unless I’m one of the investors. Since I am one of the 50% who still pays income taxes in this country, I AM an investor in Obama’s clean energy schemes. And I don’t like my money thrown away to benefit some liberal donor.

        • APA Guy

          …though Outsourcer-in-chief is appropriate as well.

        • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

          sending my tax dollars to Finland to fund an electric car nobody wants and then calling it stimulus is quite another thing.

      • tnfriendofcoal101368

        That is an extra benefit. 5.7 million Americans on unemployment 6 months or longer…Barack Obama – the “benefits” President.

  • rightlane1111

    What do I mean? When he closed all the border stations and refused to protect and guard our borders, he’s let every person in that could take a potential job from AN AMERICAN.

    That’s your out sourcer and nobody and say anything about that.

  • rightlane1111

    using Chinese workers. Who gave them the contract?

    • acat

      where’s the problem?

      If you don’t want Chinese (or other foreign) companies competing for government contracts, then you need to change the rules of procurement …. I don’t see the problem.

      What I do see is the U.S. companies that bid being either inefficient, incompetent, or the Chinese not adhering to standards …

      Mew

      • Vegas_Rick

        In times like these, the dollars and the jobs should stay here. I’ll wager that the American companies were hampered by the Davis-Bacon prevailing wage restrictions.

        This is a perfect example of the problem of trying to protect union workers from the marketplace. Those union iron workers got the shaft anyway.

  • rightlane1111

    San Francisco…Pelosi’s district. I do believe that there MUST be American companies that can compete. What I wonder is…are there two different sets of requirements, i.e., American companies must hire union employees…Chinese cut a different deal.

    Although…that was not the case when a foreign company offered to help clean up the Gulf and Obama refused.

    Anyway…this gets to me because there are soooo many people REALLY out of work (not Obama’s math). OK…so it’s cheaper…or it looks to be so on the surface…but what about revenues into this country. Do Chinese workers pay into our government or their own…I think I already know the answer.

    • acat

      but the question really is which level of government signed the contract, and what rules they follow.

      Is this a Federal project, a State project using Federal dollars, or something else? The devil, to quote Ross Perot, is in the details.

      Mew

  • Pingback: Alexis Fyler

  • Pingback: Shandra Sago