Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

barchart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 527 posts

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#501

Post by triceratops »

tharkun__ wrote: post #477
triceratops wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can't use Canada as OHIP et. al. don't cover much and the same employer tied insurance scheme as in the US exists and is necessary False. From what I know, only prescription drugs, dental, and vision are not covered. And since Americans frequently drive to Canada to buy prescription drugs, we can assume that's not as big a burden as in the US. But hospital stays, surgeries, lab testing, imaging, doctor visits, vacc…

Fair enough, I guess I got carried away given the private insurance has to cover drugs, which would otherwise be covered by the provincial insurance (like OHIP), if you have it. Private insurance also can cover a higher percentage, i.e. provincial plans do not always cover 100% of everything. Also, Health Care Spending accounts are in many cases part of private insurances and can be used to cover things that provinci…

> provincial plans do not always cover 100% of everything

Like what?

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#502

Post by NoMoreNicksLeft »

terminalshort wrote: post #476
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All those computers in the data center are just as much products as anything else. Sure, and if they were cranked out of American factories, that'd be awesome. But since they're shipped across the Pacific on a boat, they're not really the kind of products that help. >If you don't like the apps, by all means don't buy them. If apps are all we get out of doubling power production, then I'll do one better and we'll jus…

Of course. It's ok to double power production for things you want, but not for things other people want.

> It's ok to double power production for things you want,

For things that strengthen our country's economy, and provides a future for Americans, sure.

For some internationally-owned corporate conglomerates to churn out more brainwashing software garbage, no, I don't think me or other voters should give any support for that.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#503

Post by tracker1 »

Hikikomori wrote: post #472
tracker1 wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should realize that the Trump tariffs are about opening negotiations from a position of strength and not a final position... Plenty of countries have negotiated more favorable tariff positions.

And what did you gain exactly?

Tax revenue. The nation is tens of trillions in debt with a multi-trillion per year deficit. Tariffs are proportional to spending, and encourage domestic production and security.

There have been several favorable trade deals as well as several announcements for new production facilities in the US... this may cost more than imports, but there's something to be said for domestic security in terms of access, especially in the likes of a global pandemic or war.

I'm not suggesting it's a perfect solution, or situation, only in that it isn't exactly an idea completely without merit and just blindly applied at random.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#504

Post by tracker1 »

mindslight wrote: post #484
tracker1 wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think if the wealth class wants to avoid communism and heads on pikes in the longer run, they should absolutely start to be more concerned with community and move beyond the tunnel blinders of the next quarter over long term stability. This goes for govt doing anything but working to ensure domestic production and dual/multi sourcing of essential infrastructure.

As long as the ownership class can continue tricking half the population into directing their lust for violence towards scapegoats like illegal immigrants, there's very little reason for them to change course. The remaining half of the population then gets most of their energy used up defending against "culture war" bullshit, with many even going on the aggressive there because it's one of the few types of allowable…

Illegal immigration isn't just a scapegoat... it's a large impact on social welfare spending, infrastructure costs and housing availability. Especially when considering an increase of over 5% of the population in under 5 years without an accompanying growth in production and wealth generation in general relative to inflation.

There are limits on migration for a reason... that doesn't even consider the impacts on the larger society by weakening social cohesion.

Even then, there's plenty of indication of movement from those who want a Communist society... you only need to look at the NYC election, and the Venezuela protests to see that. Without a longer term consideration for society as part of where business/corporations operate, you will only see more drift in that direction.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#505

Post by dylan604 »

runako wrote: post #482
dylan604 wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really sure how you come to the conclusion that I was under the notion that nobody is working. Union membership has been in decline for decades. Labor jobs have been leaving the country for decades. Bring back the labor jobs that the unions represent and the union membership will go back up as well. The labor jobs that still remain are what's left of the union membership.

> Bring back the labor jobs that the unions represent Please research which are the largest unions in the US. I'm curious why union representation would work for labor jobs, but not for the millions of jobs* represented by unions now. * These are all "labor jobs," because otherwise you're not talking about a job

Most people referring to "labor jobs" are manual labor and not some laborious butt in a chair behind a keyboard banging code all day. While there are unions for the tech industry, the entertainment industry, and other non-labor industries, labor is pretty well understood in its meaning even if you don't understand it.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#506

Post by tharkun__ »

triceratops wrote: post #501
tharkun__ wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough, I guess I got carried away given the private insurance has to cover drugs, which would otherwise be covered by the provincial insurance (like OHIP), if you have it. Private insurance also can cover a higher percentage, i.e. provincial plans do not always cover 100% of everything. Also, Health Care Spending accounts are in many cases part of private insurances and can be used to cover things that provinci…

> provincial plans do not always cover 100% of everything Like what?

Since we were using OHIP as an example: https://www.ontario.ca/page/get-coverage-prescription-drugs#... and following.

The first info about what's not covered for example is concerning diabetes. There's a limit to the number of test strips for example. I'm no diabetic, so I don't know if these numbers are "enough" or not but there is an actual limit. It also then states:

    Syringes, lancets, glucometers and other diabetic supplies are not covered by the ODB program.
If you're a senior with "too much income" you also have co-pays/deductibles, meaning the coverage is less than 100% of the cost of the drug:

    A single person aged 65 years or older with a yearly income above $25,000 after deductions pays:

    the first $100 of total prescription costs each program year (August 1 to July 31 the following year)
        this is called the deductible and is paid down when you fill your prescriptions
    after paying the deductible, up to $6.11 for each prescription, filled or refilled
        this amount is called the co-payment
This: https://www.vivahealthpharmacy.com/private-insurance-vs-ohip... too.

I'll stop here but I'm sure this is both similar in other provinces and/or other limits may apply in specific cases.

Just to be clear: I'm not saying the OHIP / other Canadian insurance programs aren't great overall in comparison to the US. But neither they nor I suppose Germany's "full coverage" actually are in all real world cases.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#507

Post by Hikikomori »

tracker1 wrote: post #503
Hikikomori wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what did you gain exactly?

Tax revenue. The nation is tens of trillions in debt with a multi-trillion per year deficit. Tariffs are proportional to spending, and encourage domestic production and security. There have been several favorable trade deals as well as several announcements for new production facilities in the US... this may cost more than imports, but there's something to be said for domestic security in terms of access, especially…

You're description matches a well planned and communicated slow increase of tariffs targeting specific products or industries so companies have time to adjust (newsflash, US was already doing this). Trump used blanket tariffs as a hammer to extort other countries, but its not like we want to buy your shitty cars anyway. Most of these facilities already existed or were planned. hint: most foreign brands were building their cars in US already.

If the economy is doing so well because of these tariffs why are they hiding numbers?

Its not even the first time US tried tariffs like these, it didn't go well then but Trump talks about like it was a golden age.

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#508

Post by runako »

dylan604 wrote: post #505
runako wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bring back the labor jobs that the unions represent Please research which are the largest unions in the US. I'm curious why union representation would work for labor jobs, but not for the millions of jobs* represented by unions now. * These are all "labor jobs," because otherwise you're not talking about a job

Most people referring to "labor jobs" are manual labor and not some laborious butt in a chair behind a keyboard banging code all day. While there are unions for the tech industry, the entertainment industry, and other non-labor industries, labor is pretty well understood in its meaning even if you don't understand it.

You're missing a giant class of workers. Janitors, retail employees, warehouse employees, home health workers, physical therapists, etc. And jobs in retail, food prep, hospitality (certainly the folks who clean hotel rooms would be surprised to find out they are not engaged in "labor jobs".)

Might be an interesting exercise to consider why you consider those jobs as not being "labor jobs."

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#509

Post by mindslight »

tracker1 wrote: post #504
mindslight wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as the ownership class can continue tricking half the population into directing their lust for violence towards scapegoats like illegal immigrants, there's very little reason for them to change course. The remaining half of the population then gets most of their energy used up defending against "culture war" bullshit, with many even going on the aggressive there because it's one of the few types of allowable…

Illegal immigration isn't just a scapegoat... it's a large impact on social welfare spending, infrastructure costs and housing availability. Especially when considering an increase of over 5% of the population in under 5 years without an accompanying growth in production and wealth generation in general relative to inflation. There are limits on migration for a reason... that doesn't even consider the impacts on the…

Sure, it's not just a scapegoat. I'm actually pretty ambivalent about the immigration issue itself [0]. But it is still a scapegoat - the people who were violently angry about economic disenfranchisement (due to overfinancialization and massively monetary inflation) are currently all-in on cheering for the New York financial con artist for performatively going after those scapegoats while making the real problems worse, right? That right there is the pressure valve popping off, and even if the tribal buntings change and those people go back to seeing the system as their enemy in ten years, history shows they will just get hoodwinked again.

If this tiny movement towards "communism" amounts to anything of note in 20 years, I will be surprised. The pattern I've seen is that even if the current push is headed by idealistic leaders who don't give in to self-interested expedience (ie corruption), the next crop won't be. And the corporatist structure has been very good at neutralizing any real reforms, especially in the US.

[0] given equity with things like people who have been here for quite some time - those are undocumented Americans. For comparison, adverse possession, by which you can gain exclusive title to a piece of real estate by breaking the law usually only requires a few decades

Re: Jensen: 'We've done our country a great disservice' by offshoring

#510

Post by tracker1 »

Hikikomori wrote: post #507
tracker1 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tax revenue. The nation is tens of trillions in debt with a multi-trillion per year deficit. Tariffs are proportional to spending, and encourage domestic production and security. There have been several favorable trade deals as well as several announcements for new production facilities in the US... this may cost more than imports, but there's something to be said for domestic security in terms of access, especially…

You're description matches a well planned and communicated slow increase of tariffs targeting specific products or industries so companies have time to adjust (newsflash, US was already doing this). Trump used blanket tariffs as a hammer to extort other countries, but its not like we want to buy your shitty cars anyway. Most of these facilities already existed or were planned. hint: most foreign brands were building…

The US seemed to get through the industrial revolution mostly with tariffs over income tax revenue which was extremely limited early after enacted.
Post reply on HN