Boston Scientific Corp. said yesterday that it plans to eliminate 1,200 to 1,400 jobs worldwide during the next 2 1/2 years to free money for new investments, the Natick medical device maker’s second major round of cuts since last year.
The company would not say how many jobs will be lost in Massachusetts, where fewer than 2,000 of its 25,000 employees are based. In February 2010, Boston Scientific said it would pare 1,300 jobs worldwide, but similarly did not say where.
Yesterday’s move, a day after Boston Scientific disclosed it was investing $150 million and hiring 1,000 people in China, raised fears that the company will gradually shift more work to foreign sites with less government oversight and lower costs than the United States.One can argue that this was likely to occur without ObamaCare but there is significant suspicion that medical oversight, scrutiny, bureaucratic regulations, costs, taxes, etc., associated with ObamaCare are hastening these moves overseas. In fact, for some, it was predictable. Flashback: tax on medical devices is a jobs killer.
That much of the story was interesting. The paragraph that caught my attention, however, was this:
“I’ve asked for information on where they are cutting jobs,’’ said state Senator James B. Eldridge, an Acton Democrat.
“My sense is, sadly, that like many other American companies, they are shedding jobs in Massachusetts and adding jobs overseas,’’ Eldridge said. “And this is a company making greater profits, so it’s even more outrageous.’’This is evidence that Washington simply does not "get it."
Companies don't hang around just because their profits are growing. GE's profits are REALLY growing and they are moving their health care unit to China.
Companies are always looking for ways to make greater profits. And moving from a high-tax state like Massachusetts to China appears to be one way to make greater profits. The nation's economic adviser, as noted above, is doing just that.
Now for the connection to the Bakken. With the increased profits that "Big Oil" is making in general, and independents are making in the Bakken, there is increased talk of increased taxes on oil companies. In fact, President Obama consistently names three entities he wants to see taxed more: corporate jets (yes, that's hard to believe), oil companies (in general, he does not say "Big Oil"), and those making more than $250,000/year (which represents mostly small business which makes up major part of employment, along with medium-sized businesses, here in the US).
I don't have the link, and I may have misread it, or misunderstood, but scouring internet for news today, I read that oil companies will move elsewhere if they don't make 50% profit. I don't now what that means specifically, and I don't know what was meant by "profit," but the point was that oil companies will move their attention where business climates are more favorable.
Right now, there is a huge competition for resources (dollars, manpower, equipment) for drillers in the Bakken, the Niobrara, the Eagle Ford, the Marcellus, and now the Utica.
Just saying.
