Sale of Duluth-based Cirrus to Chinese company is complete
June 28, 2011 at 4:40 am in Duluth News Tribune
Cirrus President and CEO Brent Wouters has said the sale will have no immediate impact on Cirrus’ operations in Duluth, other than to better provide capital for the company. Continue Reading
Shame! Another part of our culture turned over to them, B/4 we all know it, this entire country will be owned and operated by the Chinese, W2G good ole US of A
Hot debate. What do you think?
24 
21
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
16 
33
Goodbye Cirrus. The handwriting is on the wall regardless of what lip service is being offered.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
38 
14
Did anyone notice two words,immediate and imminent, in this article ? In advertising we used to call words like those “weasel words” since they can have various meanings and there is no standard to define them by. Immediate and/or imminent can mean today, next week, next year, never, 25 years from now or tomorrow. Those two words are what will give them their way out when changes are made in the not to distant future.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
3
This is what happens in free markets. Power structures are allowed to buy and sell assets with absolutely no regulation. This is exactly what all of you free-trade, right wing capitalists asked for.
But hey, better red than dead right?
Hot debate. What do you think?
29 
27
I was coming here to comment on the exact same thing. Republicans are all about letting the free market control itself without government intervention and regulations. Then, the inevitable happens and a company is sold to a communist country. So then what happens? Our Republican congressman is furious and demands a huge government investigation and does everything in his power to stop the free market sale of Cirrus. It’s hypocritical on so many levels.
Hot debate. What do you think?
30 
29
When I was still in college, I asked my macroeconomics professor about our government’s debt to countries like China and the devaluation of our fiat currency. I think the exact question I asked was, “Are we screwed?” My professor just laughed and said, “No, we’re not screwed.” He then went on to explain how Chinese companies will simply start buying up domestic companies to make up for the difference. Not even 2 years later, and this process has already begun.
Hot debate. What do you think?
17 
14
Too bad you had your head in the sand, this didn’t just happen in the last two years, this has been going on for the last twenty years, everyone liked the ‘free ride’ at the check-out counter with those cheap prices. Now it is oour turn to pay.
Like or Dislike:
20 
9
Wow, it sure helps to go through life with blinders doesn’t it. First you give all your money to the Chinese when you buy their ‘goods’, then our government gives all our taxes to the Chinese when they spend 700 billion to ‘bail-out’ a faltering economy, they get that money by selling treasury and savings bonds on the world market, the Chinese buy them with the money they just got from us! That money is getting worn out from going from one pocket to the other over in China, now we work for them! But in the mean time our home industries can’t sell their goods because all the whiners want the cheapest price and only buy Chinese stuff. Simple, very simmple, play the ‘blame game’ all you want, we have met the enemy and it is “us”!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
6
abomination, it seems that your argument is, “we bought their crap, and now we have to pay… it’s our fault.” While there’s a degree of truth to that, you don’t address WHY we are buying their crap.
In the 70s and 80s, Nixon and Reagan opened trade with China, making it legal for major corporations (the rich) to open up tons of factories overseas. This, in effect, killed off the U.S. manufacturing sector by sending tens of millions of U.S. jobs to countries like China. Since the 1970s, the average U.S. worker has seen their real income actually DROP. At the same time, U.S. markets are being flooded with cheap Chinese goods. With a system like this, what did you think was going to happen?
Like or Dislike:
15 
8
While I regret that this sale is happening……I don’t think Cravaack asking for a review of the sale on the grounds of making sure none of the technology has direct military application rises to the level as you stated of the congressman being furious, demanding a huge government investitation and doing everything in his power to stop the free market sale of Cirrus.
I think you’re overstated the issue with more than a bit of dramatic license. You sure make it sound exciting though !
Like or Dislike:
17 
10
This is what happens when you buy a foreign car (or one built by a foreign company, Toyoto and Subaru come to mind). And everytime you buy goods from K-Mart, Wal-Mart and most other big chains, you send your money and profits from the sale over-seas, to China, now they have all the Capital, Americans must crawl to them and beg for a loan. You might remember when Father Perkovich on the Range sounded the alarm when the Chinese bought a mine up there. The Unions wanted ‘their jobs’ so badly they would have sold out to the devil himself. We call this “Greed”, it will happen when people ‘want more and cheaper’, it has more to do with greed than lack of regulation.
Like or Dislike:
16 
10
Good thing the president bailed out the banks and the auto industry or they would be Chinese also!
Like or Dislike:
20 
8
I don’t understand why everyone is getting so upset about a Bahraini corporation merging with a Chinese company. Are the Bahraini’s that much better owners than the Chinese?
Like or Dislike:
16 
7
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
6 
18
我认为它他妈的 … … å¸é©´èƒ½åŠ›ã€‚
Like or Dislike:
12 
12
Capital knows no national boundaries. Who care where the capital comes from. If we can’t out work the Chinese we don’t deserve our benefits.
I believe unless our Federal Government doesn’t sabotages us we CAN out work the Chinese.
Like or Dislike:
16 
8
One on one, we could outwork the Chinese. But you forget that for what one American worker is paid, the Chinese can pay five or more of theirs. And since they have almost no labor laws, they can work those people 16+ hours a day, 7 days a week.
Like or Dislike:
13 
9
You are working from stereotypes and ancient history. You are not describing the emerging Chinese economy.
Like or Dislike:
14 
10
You want us to “out work” the Chinese?! Great idea! Let’s see if we can out work slaves! Brilliant!
Like or Dislike:
9 
13
We have more mexicans than they do in China. We would eventually win the labor war, even with their 70 squillion population.
Like or Dislike:
9 
13
Nations do not become wealthy through slave labor. They become wealthy through innovation and capital investment. That is what the Chinese are doing. That is what the US Government is thwarting through their anti-wealth policies.
Lighten the dead weight of Federal Tax and regulation and we would bury the Chinese and everyone else with our productivity.
Like or Dislike:
17 
10
And don’t buy this BS about “deregulation”. Last year complying with just Federal regulations cost us $1.75 trillion.
http://mnprager.wordpress.com/2011/04/21/regulations-price-tag-for-compliance-cost-1750000000000/
Like or Dislike:
15 
7
There is another thing that isn’t regulated in the Asian market. Child labor. Just one more thing that big business couldn’t get away with in the US, but is more than happy to have overseas. As long as the profits from oversea manufacturing is even a little higher than what it would be with domestic manufacturing, this will continue.
If the profit margin wasn’t high enough to cover the cost of shipping finished goods from overseas, tell me, just why would big business continue to use oversea manufacturing?
Meanwhile, we get to deal with melamine in baby formula, pet food, lead in infant toys, etc.
Like or Dislike:
7 
11
Did I argue we should eliminate EVERY SINGLE Federal regulation?
We could slash 3/4 of the regulation and NO ONE would notice a thing except that the economy would boom.
We are in fact going in the opposite direction. The estimated cost of complying with the proposed EPA regulations is more then $8-11 billion.
Like or Dislike:
15 
9
Arguing that complying with regulations is expensive is meaningless unless we factor in the benefits attained. Many regulations simply shift the costs of a given activity to the actor, rather than society at large. For example, requiring coal burning utilities to mitigate arsenic, lead, sulphur dioxide etc. has a cost, but not regulating has a cost too. The regulation assigns the cost to producer (which passes it to those using the product) rather than leaving it as an external cost borne by those who are disproportionately impacted with health effects, or natural resources damaged. Other regulations promote societal goals, such as equal access to public accomodations by the disabled, that the free market itself would not accomplish.
I highly doubt that 3/4th of regulations are unnecessary. Deregulating the investment banks turned out to be not so good. Remarkably, even with the last round of wall street reforms, derivatives and default swaps still aren’t regulated or even carry disclosure requirements.
The generalization that regulation is bad is generally wrong. Be specific in which regulations should be repealed. If politicians were specific, rather than just generalizing that regulation is bad, I bet this mantra would quickly dissolve.
Like or Dislike:
6 
8
***** . Be specific in which regulations should be repealed. ***
You can’t be serious. Where the HECK do you want to start?
•The Federal Register stands at an all-time record-high 81,405 pages.
•In 2010, federal agencies issued 3,573 final rules.
•Of the 4,225 rules now in the regulatory pipeline, 224 are “economically significant†meaning they wield at least $100 million in economic impact — this is an increase of 22 percent over 2009′s 184 rules.
(From my link)
Like or Dislike:
15 
7
The number of pages in the Federal Register is your measure of the necessity or lack thereof for regulations?? One should naturally expect more pages as our economy and society have grown in complexity. We didn’t need regulations for fiber optic cable networks not so long ago. Now we do.
Yes. Be specific. Seriously. The number of pages is meaningless. Are you against regulation of food safety? Drug effectiveness? Ground water purity? Be specific. Which ones are too many?
Like or Dislike:
6 
14
We are walking across sand that is burning our feet. You demand I show you the grain that is causing me distress.
Like or Dislike:
14 
5
If only 75% of that sand is burning your feet, it behooves you to identify the 25% of sand that doesn’t burn. The problem, David, is that you actually believe the right-wing propaganda machine. They keep repeating “deregulation will help the economy, deregulation will add jobs, deregulate, deregulate, deregulate” and you actually believe it!
Yet, as mentioned earlier, there are many examples of how deregulation can hurt our economy too. For example, if you deregulate the mines and then our waters become contaminated, that would hurt the fishing and boating industry, it would increase the costs of water treatment, and more people would likely end up in the hospital who are on Medicare/caid. Economists call these extra costs “externalities”, and they can become much more expensive than the regulation itself.
Like or Dislike:
6 
8
Start here:
http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=&q=outrageous+federal+regulations&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=
Like or Dislike:
9 
4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
5 
15
Thumbs down me all you want. In my opinion, everybody is economically liberal to some degree. It’s just that some people, like yourself, won’t realize it until somebody wealthier than you wants to take over the land in your area. That’s why even socially conservative places, like Duluth and the Iron Range, are still staunchly Democratic. The mines were always switching hands, from company to company, and none of the owners were ever vested in the communities themselves. The people started realizing that all of these companies just came to take their resources and leave nothing behind except a hole in the ground (literally).
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The United States has gone downhill.
No foriegn country or individual should be allowed to buy property(Land) or businesses within the United States.
Like or Dislike:
6 
4
Merv Furgler said: On June 28, 2011 at 1:37 PM
This is what happens in free markets. Power structures are allowed to buy and sell assets with absolutely no regulation. This is exactly what all of you free-trade, right wing capitalists asked for.
But hey, better red than dead right?
Hey Merv Furgler..
Do you consider Bill Clinton a “free trade right wing capitalist”?
I seem to recall he signed NAFTA into law…
North American Free trade organization.
Hey..sorry if that goes against your theory about free trade and democrat populism …you know…dems are always for the working man….right?
I wonder what the SEIU thinks about Nafta?
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
Oh Merv Fergler..
I might add one more comment about Democrat populism…and the myth that they are for the “working man”
Its estimated that 13 -20 MILLION illegal aliens are here in North America, ostensibly doing “jobs that Americans won’t do”
Surely..all those eager workers must be working cheap..or they wouldn’t be here….that situation must depress the wages in many trades, especially construction trades.
Now…three guesses which president and his attorney general are ignoring laws already on the books…and choosing federal litigation against stricter laws concering illegal immigration?
Yet..the democrats still persist in getting votes based on their “looking out for working families”.
Keep drinking the Kool-aid…..
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
Arnold, you assume that I am fooled by the two-party system. I am not. I am well aware that the Democratic Party is neither liberal nor progressive. Why is that? Because, in order to compete in elections, Democrats must raise funds from big banks and corporations…. the same agencies that Democrats are supposed to denounce. I am well aware of this.
So, what am I supposed to do? Vote Democrat and hope something will change? No. Vote Republican, even though they openly support almost everything I am opposed to? Haha, no! Vote 3rd party? Fat chance.
The problem is that people, including most of you on this forum, think that the government can fix itself “if we can just get the right people in office.” I don’t care what side of the aisle you’re on, this is a false hope. The government’s only function is to preserve the status quo. It is my opinion that there can never be a true and honest “workers party”, because the state only serves those in power (i.e., property owners, banking cartels, multinational corporations, etc).
So yes, Arnold, Clinton was a free-trade capitalist. Every president in recent history has been. That is why I can only LOL when you suggest that I’m a democrat. Us REAL “progressives” are well aware that Obama and the Democrats are frauds. Why else would their public opinion ratings be so low? Because more people are turning Republican?! HA! Wrong. It’s because more people are waking up to the puppet show in Washington, and we realize that, deep down, both parties share a similar overall agenda when it comes to the U.S.’s role in the world.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The recent article about Cirrus supplying training aircraft to the U S Air Force Academy creates an interesting side topic. The US is buying aircraft from a foreign owned company for it’s military pilots to train in.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Just one more reason why we’re shut down…
Like or Dislike:
0 
0