Still waiting for a response to the 300 resumés you sent out last month? Bad news: Some companies are ignoring all unemployed applicants.

In a current job posting on The People Place, a job recruiting website for the telecommunications, aerospace/defense and engineering industries, an anonymous electronics company in Angleton, Texas, advertises for a "Quality Engineer." Qualifications for the job are the usual: computer skills, oral and written communication skills, light to moderate lifting. But red print at the bottom of the ad says, "Client will not consider/review anyone NOT currently employed regardless of the reason."

In a nearly identical job posting for the same position on the Benchmark Electronics website, the red print is missing. But a human resources representative for the company confirmed to HuffPost that the The People Place ad accurately reflects the company's recruitment policies.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/04/disturbing-job-ads-the-un_n_600665.html

ferfux Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Client will not
> consider/review anyone NOT currently employed
> regardless of the reason."


Most companies practice this anyway, they're just not dumb enough to advertise it.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ferfux Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "Client will not
> > consider/review anyone NOT currently employed
> > regardless of the reason."
>
>
> Most companies practice this anyway, they're just
> not dumb enough to advertise it.

Very disturbing. Don't think this was always the case. I would think they are just trying to limit applicants or else they receive too many resumes to go through. I'm unemployed and have sent out a few hundred in the last year and a half. Meeper, how long have you been aware that this is SOP?

What the companies are looking for are people who want to work, not someone who will wait until they "find the right job". Many employers will toss applications when the person has sat around for a year or more just hitting the send button on resumes.

If I was doing the hiring I would also be curious as to why someone hasnt worked in a year or more. That someone takes a job below their qualifications reflects a person that has a desire to be employed regardless of the job.

Bash this post if you will but I have heard this from recruiters for several years.

Happens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What the companies are looking for are people who
> want to work, not someone who will wait until they
> "find the right job". Many employers will toss
> applications when the person has sat around for a
> year or more just hitting the send button on
> resumes.
>
> If I was doing the hiring I would also be curious
> as to why someone hasnt worked in a year or more.
> That someone takes a job below their
> qualifications reflects a person that has a desire
> to be employed regardless of the job.
>
> Bash this post if you will but I have heard this
> from recruiters for several years.

I'm sure not bashing this post, just concerned! I never thought in my life, that I'd be looking for a job, for over a year. I thought that only happened to less motivated people. I'm telling you, its rough out there. I had the same job for over 27 years.

Disturbing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Very disturbing. Don't think this was always the case. I would think they are just trying to limit applicants or else they receive too many resumes to go through. I'm unemployed and have sent out a few hundred in the last year and a half. Meeper, how long have you been aware that this is SOP?

Not really as a standard operating procedure, but alot of hiring managers will ignore resumes that have recent employment gaps. There's a perception that there is less risk involved if a candidate is currently employed. It's easier to sell to a client and it's easier to get legit references. Plus there's always uncertainty when it comes to someone's explanation of why they're unemployed or why they've been out of work for a period of time.

It's not really fair and it sucks for folks who've simply had bad luck. I think the company who put this in their ad doesn't want to be bombarded with hundreds of resumes and is looking to weed folks out from the get-go. But I think that their ad shows poor taste.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ferfux Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "Client will not
> > consider/review anyone NOT currently employed
> > regardless of the reason."
>
>
> Most companies practice this anyway, they're just
> not dumb enough to advertise it.

As a business owner, I would be more inclined to hire someone who is currently employed than someone who has been out of a job for an extended period of time. However, I think it is short-sighted for any employer to simply not consider anyone who is unemployed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

It is short sighted but it is a known fact employers use programs that filter out certain words on resumes. I know they will toss applications without reading them that reflect certain amounts of unemployed time.

Disturbing, You may want to consider even doing volunteer work to fill in the blanks. Especially the type that can be realted to the field of work you are seeking. Its also a good way to make contacts, which is how most people get hired these days.

I wish you luck.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As a business owner, I would be more inclined to
> hire someone who is currently employed than
> someone who has been out of a job for an extended
> period of time. However, I think it is
> short-sighted for any employer to simply not
> consider anyone who is unemployed.

I have to admit, that I would be reluctant to hire myself (older worker). I think the number of years with one employer is hurting me, but don't know how to get around that fact. Any thoughts?

Happens Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Disturbing, You may want to consider even doing
> volunteer work to fill in the blanks. Especially
> the type that can be realted to the field of work
> you are seeking. Its also a good way to make
> contacts, which is how most people get hired these
> days.
>
> I wish you luck.

Thanks, that is a great suggestion.

Disturbing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> I have to admit, that I would be reluctant to hire
> myself (older worker). I think the number of years
> with one employer is hurting me, but don't know
> how to get around that fact. Any thoughts?


I know many people in their late 40s and early 50s in this area who have lost their jobs over the past two years who have ended up becoming independent contractors. I don't know what your line of work is, but that seems to be an avenue for some people who can shop their expertise around to larger government contractors or firms that need certain expertise that they don't have in-house.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Although it sounds hopeless I hope you hang in there.

I recall the movie Up in the air and how they went around laying people off from various companies. The movie was too real for me as most the people being axed were around my age. When they came in the buildings the employees had the whos next look.

My company recently gave us a furlough until they could fix budget problems. It is scary not being paid and looking at your resume and thinking how can I compete at my age in this economy. I started taking some classes to update my skills but I will admit I felt conspicuous being the old guy sitting in the room. I never thought I would be doing it at my age.

Tim45 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
I started taking some classes to update my skills but I will
> admit I felt conspicuous being the old guy sitting
> in the room. I never thought I would be doing it
> at my age.

I've been doing the same with ACE classes (Fairfax County), it sure can't hurt. I'm glad I didn't see that movie, stressed enough. Good to hear your company got it's budget worked out. I'll repost when I get a job....hope that will be my final. Job, not post :)

If you go to USAJobs, a good number, if not most of those advertised positions are for internal applicants only. Of course they don't say this, but by Federal law they have to advertise every new job opening. It creates a large pool of people waiting in vain to hear about a job they had no chance of getting in the first place.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you go to USAJobs, a good number, if not most
> of those advertised positions are for internal
> applicants only. Of course they don't say this,
> but by Federal law they have to advertise every
> new job opening. It creates a large pool of people
> waiting in vain to hear about a job they had no
> chance of getting in the first place.

Boy, I'm really learning something here today. I've been through the "hoops" with USA jobs for hours on end. I'll keep that in mind, as some of the job app processes are very time consuming, and if you never had a chance in the first place, well, that's depressing. Hey, if you are lucky enough to have a job...keep it!

Disturbing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> Boy, I'm really learning something here today.
> I've been through the "hoops" with USA jobs for
> hours on end. I'll keep that in mind, as some of
> the job app processes are very time consuming, and
> if you never had a chance in the first place,
> well, that's depressing. Hey, if you are lucky
> enough to have a job...keep it!



It's not so much with the entry level positions, but where I worked when I was in the military, EVERY GS-9 and above position was created for someone already working in the government or getting out of the military soon. They had to post the position on the internet, but they already knew who was going to be hired.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/06/2010 03:02PM by eesh.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I know many people in their late 40s and early 50s
> in this area who have lost their jobs over the
> past two years who have ended up becoming
> independent contractors. I don't know what your
> line of work is, but that seems to be an avenue
> for some people who can shop their expertise
> around to larger government contractors or firms
> that need certain expertise that they don't have
> in-house.

Thanks, also an excellent suggestion, however my skillset is not unique enough.
Absolutely can see this for some people, probaby their best bet.

Tim45 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> My company recently gave us a furlough until they
> could fix budget problems. It is scary not being
> paid and looking at your resume and thinking how
> can I compete at my age in this economy. I started
> taking some classes to update my skills but I will
> admit I felt conspicuous being the old guy sitting
> in the room. I never thought I would be doing it
> at my age.

I was in my early 30s at the height of the tech bubble. You wouldn't believe how many companies thought I was too old at that age. It is ridiculous that employers don't give any consideration to experience. Younger workers are cheap. But they are usually clueless, too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

I am not sure the job picture will ever get any better, but I like to hope so. What does piss me off are companies getting tax breaks and government contracts that outsource the lower entry level jobs to overseas.

A good friend is the last person left in her office for doing billing and accounts. The rest of the staff, around 25 people, were laid off. The accounts and billing are now done in India. She coordinates it with them from here unless there is some kind of impasse but otherwise it is all over there.

While I believe in capitalism I also believe it is morally wrong to take government tax breaks and contracts while shipping jobs offshore.

Tim45 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> While I believe in capitalism I also believe it is
> morally wrong to take government tax breaks and
> contracts while shipping jobs offshore.


Morality has never had anything to do with capitalism and vice versa. Capitalism is about making a profit. The only way to keep government contracting jobs from going overseas is for the Federal government to require that those jobs are kept in the U.S. However, in order to do that, that means more cost to American taxpayers.

The truth is, American workers can no longer compete with the world when it comes to low-paying, low-skill jobs. And, in fact, many so-called "middle skill" positions are now more easily filled overseas.

The best way for America to create good quality jobs is to push for innovation in green technologies, stem cell research, advanced manufacturing, etc. That's one area I have been disappointed in with Obama. Why are we cutting jobs for rocket scientists while creating jobs for people to shovel gravel? Stupid.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

I agree, I just hate to see us at 10% unemployment and still shipping jobs out of the country. When I see companies get tax breaks and the profits dont go to help the country giving them the break in the first place. The tax breaks are at the cost of U S taxpayers. The loss of government revenue has to be made up somewhere.

Disturbing Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > As a business owner, I would be more inclined
> to
> > hire someone who is currently employed than
> > someone who has been out of a job for an
> extended
> > period of time. However, I think it is
> > short-sighted for any employer to simply not
> > consider anyone who is unemployed.
>
> I have to admit, that I would be reluctant to hire
> myself (older worker). I think the number of years
> with one employer is hurting me, but don't know
> how to get around that fact. Any thoughts?

List the time as "Self-Employed" and explain that you were working to expand some part-time work from home business or something along the lines of what you already have experience in. Like you were doing consulting.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

I used to be a big advocate of liberal economics (i.e. laissez-faire free markets) but seeing how it operates as an older (and somewhat wiser) person - I've swung the other way...I'm not a communist but I do believe in much stricter regulations of economy.

Left to their own - as WTL stated - a corporation operates to succeed - to succeed you must squeeze as much as you can for profit. With our current regulations there are no punishments for all these corporations to outsource to India where an office worker makes (and is very happy to be making) ~$50-75 a day. Whereas in the US that same worker would cost at least 3-5 times that p/day. What would you do if you were a company? You have 10,000 people you could be saving tens of millions a year by out-sourcing.

As for people not hiring those that are unemployed. I know this first hand. I was going to hire someone that looked fairly promising but was told by my higher up not to because he'd been laid off and therefore something must be wrong with that individual. Sucks because I know a lot of companies are bankrupt if you're laid off in this economy more often than not it's not because you're defective. But a lot of senior hiring managers don't see that and won't even look at your resume.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> List the time as "Self-Employed" and explain that
> you were working to expand some part-time work
> from home business... Like you were doing consulting

LOL, geee, never heard this one before ;)

Usually I ask if they can give me one of their current clients as a reference.

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tim45 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > While I believe in capitalism I also believe it
> is
> > morally wrong to take government tax breaks and
> > contracts while shipping jobs offshore.
>
>
> Morality has never had anything to do with
> capitalism and vice versa. Capitalism is about
> making a profit. The only way to keep government
> contracting jobs from going overseas is for the
> Federal government to require that those jobs are
> kept in the U.S. However, in order to do that,
> that means more cost to American taxpayers.
>
> The truth is, American workers can no longer
> compete with the world when it comes to
> low-paying, low-skill jobs. And, in fact, many
> so-called "middle skill" positions are now more
> easily filled overseas.
>
> The best way for America to create good quality
> jobs is to push for innovation in green
> technologies, stem cell research, advanced
> manufacturing, etc. That's one area I have been
> disappointed in with Obama. Why are we cutting
> jobs for rocket scientists while creating jobs for
> people to shovel gravel? Stupid.

WTL, are you really that naive? It sounds like you are old enough to understand reality better than just going "green jobs, blah blah blah" as if somehow that mantra will create jobs.

Look at Spain, who was doing the "green jobs" thing for years now. They have already shown that for all the green jobs created, they have lost something between 2-3 jobs in other positions. Not much of a winning strategy there.

China and India both are developing much better higher education centers and research facilities, and they both have such large populations that they can fill all the jobs in high tech from here to eternity. And therein lies the problem - it is just cheaper to hire workers in China and India, and have them do the work. Look at green jobs - where did the contracts go to buy wind turbines? China or Germany.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2009-10/huge-texas-wind-turbines-will-be-made-china

Sure, we have a few small businesses in the field, but China is like the Microsoft version of a manufacturing country. They can opt to build everything with generally the same quality but much cheaper than their competitors - and they do this on a regular basis to keep competition down in other nations.

We have a problem with labor (and some supply) costs (look at what they are paying all the folks with active security clearances - it is at least double the going rate for a non-cleared position. This also extends into manufacturing - every time we try to setup any kind of "factory" it is inevitable that a union will attempt to, or be formed. It isn't that the workers have unfair wages, or lack of insurance - the law sees to that. No, it is that they want to be paid the equivalent money to do low skill jobs that someone is paid with advanced degrees. And also get the equivalent benefits. That is the kind of thing that hurts capitalism - especially when you are competing with countries that have other labor standards. That doesn't mean we should pay slave wages for our workers, but certainly there can be a more equitable, competitive pay for assembly line workers that doesn't mean they have to lead impoverished lives. That would allow for the growth of our industries manufacturing industries again - in whatever area - and be competitive. Even selling to ourselves - it is ridiculous that it was cheaper to buy steel made in China and shipped here from overseas, then it was to make it in our own backyard.

Yeah and sorry, but if we have to import all our raw materials for whatever it is we produce, we are beholden to world markets to set our low end pricing. If we are unwilling to use our natural resources to support our industrial base we really have little to complain about when our costs shoot through the roof due to supply shortages - especially when that commodity would be available in the US but "off limits" due to environmental concerns. That same holds true for the price of energy - if we keep following policies that allow for electric prices to go UP - then it doesn't matter if we have green cars or not. You will be paying to heat your homes, or maybe recharge your electric, no emission, car that there will be no way to change the long term trends.

The issue is much more "Gray" than just "create green jobs, stem cell research, blather". And yeah, too bad the Democrats, int heir zeal to push stimulus funding, forgot to push for all that huh?

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >
> > List the time as "Self-Employed" and explain
> that
> > you were working to expand some part-time work
> > from home business... Like you were doing
> consulting
>
> LOL, geee, never heard this one before ;)
>
> Usually I ask if they can give me one of their
> current clients as a reference.

Yes - but at least it sounds better than unemployed - and if you actually did any work during that time it allows you list what you charged as an hourly rate during the time. In the computer field it is easier obviously, but it works.

I remember going through applicants, and while the employment gaps would bother me, it never excluded someone from my consideration. The problem you have today is it has become more and more impersonal to apply for jobs, and people will not think twice to exclude a resume. It is also worthwhile (especially during times like this) to check on your friends and such, remind them you are out of work, and if they see a job they can refer you for, please do. The likelihood is in this market, you will have to settle for a lower paying job - probably a much lower paying job. Unfortunately.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

RV-

The only one here who is naive is you. I'm not talking about that "Cash for Caulkers" bullshit. I'm talking about real alternative energy. Hydrogen fuel cells, for instance. Developing technology nobody else has and that everyone wants.

Europe doesn't have any oil. Neither does Japan. But everyone has hydrogen. If we can develop and license the technology for hydrogen fuel cells, we can end our reliance on foreign oil and profit from our technology.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> employment gaps would bother me, it never excluded
> someone from my consideration.

Me neither. One of the best people I ever hired was an older woman who retired in her fifties for a few years, and then decided she wanted to work again. It would've been a *shame* to ignore her because of the 2-3 year gap on her resume.

But that being said, one of the biggest disasters I ever hired was someone who had been without a job for a few months. Only time I've ever had to fire someone in their first month on the job.


> check on your friends and such, remind them you
> are out of work, and if they see a job they can
> refer you for, please do.

That's good advice the OP should follow. Every job I've had since college I got because I knew someone who already worked there.

TheMeeper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> > check on your friends and such, remind them you
> > are out of work, and if they see a job they can
> > refer you for, please do.
>
> That's good advice the OP should follow. Every
> job I've had since college I got because I knew
> someone who already worked there.


Same here. It's all about relationships.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RV-
>
> The only one here who is naive is you. I'm not
> talking about that "Cash for Caulkers" bullshit.
> I'm talking about real alternative energy.
> Hydrogen fuel cells, for instance. Developing
> technology nobody else has and that everyone
> wants.
>
> Europe doesn't have any oil. Neither does Japan.
> But everyone has hydrogen. If we can develop and
> license the technology for hydrogen fuel cells, we
> can end our reliance on foreign oil and profit
> from our technology.

Like that has ever stopped China from adopting our technology and doing it better then we can.

Naive.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

WTL - all that pie in the sky sounds great. It makes for great political points in making it sound like something really great. The reality is it does not change the underlying problems we are dealing with - namely pushing for more and more importation of raw materials in the name of environmentalism (not that we don't need to be better stewards - just not naive) and also labor costs. We can't even make products in our country that are competitively priced INSIDE OUR OWN BORDERS.

It is sad when China can produce almost anything of an electronic nature that we can, or even building materials and raw resources - and it is cheaper to ship that crap over here in container ships, and still manage to sell it here lower than we can produce it ourselves. Which is why so many of our business and manufacturing jobs either got moved overseas, or no longer exist.

Inevitably either they will steal the process, or manufacturing design, and make it themselves. Or one of our own companies will ship the jobs over there because it will be cheaper - again. Back to square one.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

"Pie in the sky" my ass. Japan was doing to us in the 80s what China is doing now. Yet we have led the world in IT development for 30 years. China isn't beating Google or Apple or Microsoft on anything in terms of intellectual development. The high paying jobs that will stay in the U.S. come from R&D and innovation. The U.S. can't compete against the world in terms of cheap labor because there will always be someplace with cheaper labor. We need smarter labor and innovation to create jobs here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "Pie in the sky" my ass. Japan was doing to us in
> the 80s what China is doing now. Yet we have led
> the world in IT development for 30 years. China
> isn't beating Google or Apple or Microsoft on
> anything in terms of intellectual development. The
> high paying jobs that will stay in the U.S. come
> from R&D and innovation. The U.S. can't compete
> against the world in terms of cheap labor because
> there will always be someplace with cheaper labor.
> We need smarter labor and innovation to create
> jobs here.

WTL - even by your own statement what you are saying makes no sense. Yes, in the 80s the Japanese were flooding us with cheap products (and they still do that today - although their labor costs have caught up with them). In that time we have had more manufacturing disappear - even though some of the auto makers opened a plant here and there to make cars and trucks it never replaced the ones we lost. Now the Chinese are doing it - with a much larger population, access to raw materials, and little competition. Maybe in a few years India could do something. What is our greatest innovation lately? NASA (cutting back) - Financial Industry (in ruins) - etc... South Korea and other countries are doing MOST of the cutting edge research - look at the super collider that we allowed to be stopped in the US and instead built in Europe. Sure, we have some research universities doing work in collaborative projects - but we have seen most of our high end jobs turned into service sector jobs in this country in recent years, and that pace is not declining. What has accelerated is Fed hiring - which does nothing to bollster the economy, as it produces nothing.

High paying jobs sounds wonderful - BS if they are going to appear in any great numbers to offset any of what we have discussed here. There just isn't enough high tech to go around outside the defense and space industries - one of which we are downsizing, and the other we are heavily outsourcing.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2010 11:30AM by Registered Voter.

My statement makes perfect sense. We can't compete with the world when it comes to low-wage, low-skill jobs. What we need is to promote innovation (which we aren't currently doing).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

My experience is companies will ship jobs overseas and save bucks. Yet I dont see the reduction in cost to U S consumers when the product is delivered.

The moral issue I have is to ax U S citizens on one hand and taking a tax break with the other. You shouldnt be able to have it both ways.

Tim45 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My experience is companies will ship jobs overseas
> and save bucks. Yet I dont see the reduction in
> cost to U S consumers when the product is
> delivered.
>
> The moral issue I have is to ax U S citizens on
> one hand and taking a tax break with the other.
> You shouldnt be able to have it both ways.

Yes, the fact that they can move the manufacturing overseas to reduce labor costs and avoid taxes is a problem. The thing is, let's say they put in rules stipulating you have to pay taxes in the US on the overseas operations anyway - then the entire company will relocate. These guys hire accountants to figure out what their biggest cost saving will be under all scenarios - so there is only so much they can do to stop them shipping jobs out. Companies are good at avoiding taxes (especially large ones with manufacturing) and will eventually figure out the most cost effective way to avoid paying them - even if it means incorporating elsewhere. It sounds all good to say "Raise taxes on those damn corporations!!" - the only problem being (as we have seen) that those companies will either relocate to avoid the taxes, or go out of business. Unfortunately as individual tax payers, we are the ones stuck with it, as it is much harder for us to avoid paying taxes - other than State income, which is usually offset by higher sales taxes.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Taxes are a pretty minor consideration when you can pay someone in some Third World country $7 a day versus $20/hr in the U.S. You could cut taxes in the U.S. to zero and not avoid jobs going overseas.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Taxes are a pretty minor consideration when you
> can pay someone in some Third World country $7 a
> day versus $20/hr in the U.S. You could cut taxes
> in the U.S. to zero and not avoid jobs going
> overseas.

True - but it all adds up, and all those issues come into play when these guys decide where and how to operate and incorporate. And if we put in place higher tariffs, it just blows the lid off costs in all sectors - which none of us can afford right now.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University