Georgia Senate race

[littlelolligagged]

By some miraculous hitch, the race for the Georgia Senate seat that Saxby Chambliss is vacating is actually close. 6 months ago I thought it was a nonstarter, but Michelle Nunn is actually polling well against David Perdue. She's hardly ideal; she's far more conservative than I would like to see - but my reasonable side tells me that no Democrat would stand even the remotest chance if he or she were not.

What's been getting me, though, is how terrible the ads have been. Trashing each other seems to be the main focus of all the ads that are on television. The ads from the PACs on both sides are even worse.




And then there are things like this, just to mix it up.

And the worst of it is that to win one or the other needs to get over 50% of the vote, and it seems unlikely, so this will continue until January.

Why is it that our politicians are so quick to turn to the negative? It would be so refreshing to see someone say "[this] is what I believe, and [this] is what I hope to accomplish while in office" without the need to paint the opposition as unflatteringly as possible in the process.

[Lewkowski]

It always pains me to see people attacking "outsourcing."

Damn you evil company guy! How dare you make products and services cheaper and more efficient! How dare you help the world economy work more productively. YOU MONSTER!

Also Negative attack ads work... otherwise they wouldn't be used.

[Khendraja'aro]

Riiiiight. "More efficient".

Heh. There are quite a lot of German companies who are insourcing again because, while the foreign companies may have been cheaper, the efficiency wasn't quite as good as they hoped.

[RandBlade]

Riiiiight. "More efficient".

Heh. There are quite a lot of German companies who are insourcing again because, while the foreign companies may have been cheaper, the efficiency wasn't quite as good as they hoped.

If that's the case the companies will chose to do what is right. So its no big deal and has nothing to do with politicians.

[Khendraja'aro]

If that's the case the companies will chose to do what is right. So its no big deal and has nothing to do with politicians.

I wasn't making a political statement, Rand. I was replying to this thinking that magical fairies make outsourcing always the better solution.

Furthermore, I don't quite see why politicians should not be allowed to fight against outsourcing? After all, they're responsible for their voters and if those are out of a job due to outsourcing, why should they care about the company that outsourced said people?

See, that paragraph, that was a political statement. See the difference?

[RandBlade]

The thread was about the Georgia Senate race (hint is in the title) and thus political and outsourcing was brought in with the context of rival politicians, hence its worth responding as to whether its in the remit or not of politicians.

[Flixy]

I'd say it's the job of the politician to make his state attractive so companies want to be there, not to force companies already there to stay.

That said, considering everything is apparently okay to criticise your opponent with in your elections I can't say I'm surprised it's used, easy way to get to voters scared of losing their job. I guess the bright side is that it appears the attack is based on a truth, which isn't always the case

[littlelolligagged]

There have also been some arguments about whether politicians can be job creators at all,

I mean, I understand that a corporation exists to make profits for its shareholders. I find that objectionable, of course, but I'm not denying that this is the purpose. There are plenty of reasons for a corporation to go with outsourcing/offshoring - avoiding regulations, preferential tax rates, cheap labor...

It is my opinion that someone who is highly successful in this is the best person to be a government representative. Austerity fans probably feel differently, but that's why they won't be voting like I do.

I still find the negative ads from all the candidates and the PACs frustrating. They are both to blame, I'm not being partisan. There are similarly-toned ads for other races as well, there just aren't as many of them.

[Khendraja'aro]

The thread was about the Georgia Senate race (hint is in the title) and thus political and outsourcing was brought in with the context of rival politicians, hence its worth responding as to whether its in the remit or not of politicians.

Right, Rand. I mean, we know that economics is a pseudo-science at best but last I looked, it wasn't located under "political sciences".

[GGT]

....
What's been getting me, though, is how terrible the ads have been....

Negative ads aren't new, and they're not relegated to Georgia. (We have the same game going on in PA.)

But they do seem to have gotten worse since the Citizen's United decision....where any group can say anything and call it free/political speech, and voters don't really know "who" is paying for the ad, or what lobbyist group is "paying" for their preferred candidate.

[Lewkowski]

Riiiiight. "More efficient".

Heh. There are quite a lot of German companies who are insourcing again because, while the foreign companies may have been cheaper, the efficiency wasn't quite as good as they hoped.

Outsourcing doesn't mean more efficient ALL the time. People in business make mistakes, they are human. The data could be bad, the promises of the overseas location was over sold or a wide variety of other issues. And the market corrects itself. Not a problem at all - eventually the business will do what makes the most sense from a profit standpoint. (And yes factoring in quality, customer relations and employee morale are considered not just the raw $$).

But the political ad is going off the basis that ALL outsourcing is bad because "they took our jobs!" It works because so many people are ignorant on how the basic economics of comparative advantage works. They will bitch and moan about high prices for something and then demand politicians RAISE the prices higher by penalizing companies that outsource. Its moronic and depressing.

[Lewkowski]

Negative ads aren't new, and they're not relegated to Georgia. (We have the same game going on in PA.)

But they do seem to have gotten worse since the Citizen's United decision....where any group can say anything and call it free/political speech, and voters don't really know "who" is paying for the ad, or what lobbyist group is "paying" for their preferred candidate.

Yes how dare someone use their freedom of speech for political dissent! Of all the speech that the founder intended to protect, clearly political speech was of least concern.

[Loki]

Why is it that our politicians are so quick to turn to the negative? It would be so refreshing to see someone say "[this] is what I believe, and [this] is what I hope to accomplish while in office" without the need to paint the opposition as unflatteringly as possible in the process.

Because empirically speaking, it works. If there were more effective strategies, they'd be using them. Occasionally, a politician can succeed as a "maverick", but that's not really a replicable strategy.

I wasn't making a political statement, Rand. I was replying to this thinking that magical fairies make outsourcing always the better solution.

Furthermore, I don't quite see why politicians should not be allowed to fight against outsourcing? After all, they're responsible for their voters and if those are out of a job due to outsourcing, why should they care about the company that outsourced said people?

See, that paragraph, that was a political statement. See the difference?

Unless there's a giant factory that's going to get closed down in their district, it's incredibly unlikely that there will be a net loss of jobs in their district due to outsourcing. It's the left's version of fearmongering.

[Steely Glint]

If there were more effective strategies, they'd be using them.

What makes you say this?

[Loki]

Politicians aren't as stupid as you think. The ones that win do a pretty damn good job of using data and research to help themselves win (or at least their handlers do).

[Khendraja'aro]

Unless there's a giant factory that's going to get closed down in their district, it's incredibly unlikely that there will be a net loss of jobs in their district due to outsourcing. It's the left's version of fearmongering.

Right. And for that we only have your "Because I say so!"

[Loki]

Try searching for research on the subject not sponsored by some interest group. Outsourcing produces a net gain in jobs. Is it always effective? Of course not. That's not how economies work. But even when it's ineffective, it frequently simply does nothing (good or bad).

[Khendraja'aro]

Why on earth should I do your job for you? You're stating some bullshit and expect me to counter your argument even when it still only consists of hot air?

You've pulled this stunt way more times than I can count. Put up or shut up.

[Loki]

Some brief summaries:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freee.../03/offshoring

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0416150121.htm

I don't quite get the logical appeal of the outsourcing bogeyman. Forget the specific form of outsourcing we see today. Do you really think that shifting some production functions to actors who have a comparative advantage in performing those functions is going to hurt the economy? If you're going to answer yes, do think what this means for specialization, which is what the modern economy is based on.

[Khendraja'aro]

Some brief summaries:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freee.../03/offshoring

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0416150121.htm

I don't quite get the logical appeal of the outsourcing bogeyman. Forget the specific form of outsourcing we see today. Do you really think that shifting some production functions to actors who have a comparative advantage in performing those functions is going to hurt the economy? If you're going to answer yes, do think what this means for specialization, which is what the modern economy is based on.

Those are your words:

[...]Outsourcing produces a net gain in jobs.[...]

And this is from your second link:

"The potential job loss, though different among industries, is not as large as feared," said Chang. An annual loss of 100,000 service jobs is about 0.1 percent of total employment, according to studies.

So, not a "net gain" after all. And then there's this:

The statistics and percentages, however, do little to ease the hardships of displaced workers and their families. Yet Chang says a review of the research literature reveals that about two-thirds of displaced workers are reemployed within two years.
One study showed about half of those reemployed ended up with jobs that paid roughly as much or more than their previous positions, while the other half experienced wage cuts of 15 percent or more. Another study found that more than 75 percent of service workers who lost their jobs due to offshoring found new jobs within six months. The median wage of those reemployed, however, was 11 percemt below their previous wage.

It's nice that there are new jobs created sometime maybe in the distant future. Doesn't help those guys now, however.

Not to mention the psychological impact: You're creating workers with no loyalty to the company they work in, zero willigness to help their coworkers as they are now their competitors and quite a slew of other problems.

[Lewkowski]

Arguments against outsourcing aren't really dissimilar to arguments against technology that automates and gets rids of jobs. Do you want governments to stop that too?

[earthJoker]

First someone may explain to me how you want to 'stop outsourcing' or 'stop automation'. How would a local government even stop a company to start a business somewhere else.

[Lewkowski]

First someone may explain to me how you want to 'stop outsourcing' or 'stop automation'. How would a local government even stop a company to start a business somewhere else.

Punitive tax measures, tariffs and outright legal barriers.

[earthJoker]

That will drive away companies even faster.

[RandBlade]

Right, Rand. I mean, we know that economics is a pseudo-science at best but last I looked, it wasn't located under "political sciences".

No shit Sherlock. It's a social science, not a pseudo-science and nobody said it was political. This thread, the OP videos and the politicians are all political though

That will drive away companies even faster.

Hence why its a dumb idea. Its what the left want though, nobody ever accused the left of having smart economics. Or smarts.

[earthJoker]

Hence why its a dumb idea. Its what the left want though, nobody ever accused the left of having smart economics. Or smarts.

Nah, it is not the same thing to say that something is a bad idea or that something is impossible. Hitting myself in the face with a hammer is a bad idea, it isn't impossible though. Now you could argue that impossible ideas are a subgroup of bad ideas, and I would maybe agree in that, but that wasn't my point in my first post.

[Ominous Gamer]

This is bad? Have you seen the florida governor race? They are taking out ads that are attacking the other for their attack ads. Its like a sitcom, miss the first ad and the rest make no sense.

The current governor delayed a debate over a fan, yeah like a 4 year old.

The other guy used to be a republican, so he is rather conservative, but as you said, in this fucked up bible belt thats the only way a democrat is getting anywhere.

[Khendraja'aro]

No shit Sherlock. It's a social science, not a pseudo-science and nobody said it was political. This thread, the OP videos and the politicians are all political though

They are? Wait, so you are the one who decides which goes where and no one else gets a say? That will make world-wide decisions so much easier: Just ask Rand. He has all the answers and everyone else is simply wrong.

I wonder why the links Loki postet didn't fall under "political science"...

[littlelolligagged]

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/24/politi...gia/index.html

[RandBlade]

They are? Wait, so you are the one who decides which goes where and no one else gets a say? That will make world-wide decisions so much easier: Just ask Rand. He has all the answers and everyone else is simply wrong.

I wonder why the links Loki postet didn't fall under "political science"...

Quit being a troll.