Made in America

[psijac]

I am willing to spend more only on products with a perceivable increase in quality

[The Annoyed Man]

It's like Reagan said. Government is not the solution to the problem. Government is the problem.

I would say more of the problem is that our continued system of only two parties has reduced political discourse to arbitrary team cheering and completely eliminated nuance from general political discussion or opinion.

Because your quote if taken to its ultimate conclusion is current day Somalia and a return to feudal warlordism, which is what happens basically everywhere in the absence of government.

Sorry but I'm not drinking that koolaid.

A meaningless quip that essentially proves my point.

Actually it says that your opinion is worth ignoring.

Boys, boys, boys.......

In the context that Reagan said that, it meant that a large, intrusive, government is the problem, not the solution; but Reagan was not philosophically against the existence of government. He would not have participated in the political process as an elected official if he thought that. Neither were the Founders against the existence of government. They believed that government was absolutely necessary, which is supported in their writings; but that for it to be just and function properly with respect to the rights of man, it had to be constructed a certain way.

Does anybody care to refute the founders? Their ideas and sacrifices are what protect your gunrights. If they thought that NO government was the solution, they wouldn't have set one up. Unless you claim to be an anarchist—a political philosophy for the brutish—then you have to admit that some government is a good and necessary thing. People merely differ in the degree to which they believe it ought to direct their lives.

[boba]

Boys, boys, boys.......

HE started it!

In the context that Reagan said that, it meant that a large, intrusive, government is the problem, not the solution; but Reagan was not philosophically against the existence of government. He would not have participated in the political process as an elected official if he thought that.

In the context of this discussion it seems a similar meaning was intended. Excessive government intervention in business has made American companies less competitive, not more. Some examples are burdensome rules and regulations, anti-competitive price ceilings and floors, subsidies and bailouts for companies that should be allowed to fail, and other actions that impede American companies' ability to compete in a global marketplace. Never mind tax policies that penalize small business.

I applaud forum members who refused to follow the red herring equating laissez-faire capitalism with anarchy.

[wharvey]

Another big problem in the U.S. is the greed of some companies and the over reliance on market analyst. Back in 82 I worked for a large company that had record profits for 4 years running. The last year I worked for them their analysts predicted another record year estimating an increase of over 20%. The company did have another record year but it was only 7% over the previous year.

I'd think most companies would have been happy with yet another record year but not these people. They figured that they had actually lost money since the increase wasn't as large as predicted. As a result they had massive layoffs. Their competitors loved it and had more great years. This group of misfits lost much of their market share. Many companies now think that way and move. Workers do price themselves out of jobs and government intrusions are a big problem but don't just blame our economy on those factors. Now a CEO gets a pimple on his rear stock prices go down and people get out sourced.

[RoyGBiv]

Another big problem in the U.S. is the greed of some companies and the over reliance on market analyst. Back in 82 I worked for a large company that had record profits for 4 years running. The last year I worked for them their analysts predicted another record year estimating an increase of over 20%. The company did have another record year but it was only 7% over the previous year.

I'd think most companies would have been happy with yet another record year but not these people. They figured that they had actually lost money since the increase wasn't as large as predicted. As a result they had massive layoffs. Their competitors loved it and had more great years. This group of misfits lost much of their market share. Many companies now think that way and move. Workers do price themselves out of jobs and government intrusions are a big problem but don't just blame our economy on those factors. Now a CEO gets a pimple on his rear stock prices go down and people get out sourced.

The part about their competitors swooping in and taking advantage of the mistake......
That's the part that needs to happen, but doesn't when the government gets too involved.

This is the way it's supposed to work... Shareholders get hit when the people running the companies they've invested in make mistakes. This is a GOOD thing. If a person don't have the stomach for it, they should be investing solely in Treasuries and AAA-Rated fixed income. Being the beneficiary of government benevolence makes you fat, lazy and inefficient. Every day companies stock value gets creamed for superficial reasons. Good management will know how to ride out the storm most times. Bad management will find ever more clever ways to destroy shareholder value and put people out of work. This is not a problem for government to "solve". It is the result of an efficient marketplace doing its job. Governmental "intervention" makes such swings less predictable, more unfair to the efficient survivors (perhaps even destroying the "better" company that is not able to access the government teat) and their investors, and generally acts to extend if not exacerbate the problem. [/offtopic]

[apostate]

I saw an entry on Larry Correia's blog and immediately thought of this discussion.

Despite all of this nonsense your kind has thrown at us, American business keeps on trudging along, being the best creator of wealth in the history of the world, and you have the audacity to say we’re soft? Everything this nation has ever accomplished has been in spite of your kind, you self-righteous academic narrcisst, not because of you.

http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/2011/ ... were-soft/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Monker10]

I always have heard that new balance shoes were made in american. In fact I believe I even saw a show on the discovery channel touting the companies pride that they are an American company and made by American workers. In fact I have had several pairs of their shoes and love them. They came out with a new model called the minims, which I loved the design and decided to buy a pair. I went to the shoe store and read the label and it read made in Indonesia. This shocked me but I though maybe it's only this model since it's unique so I read the labels of all the other shoes and they all said made in china. Needless to say I didn't buy the shoes after all. Made in American now seems more of a marketing ploy now.

[TLE2]

We live in a global economy. If you're talking about isolationism, I'm not for that, because it won't work.

Yes, I would buy a true American made product if the quality/price was comparable. Would I go out of my way to buy "American"? Unfortunately "no".

Problem is not much is really "made in America". We lost our competitive edge in raw materials, sub-assemblies are made overseas or in Mexico and then assembled into the final product here. Fords and Chevy cars are American marks but are not more American made than Toyota's assembled in the US.

It's a blurred world. It's hard to buy things these days that can be fixed "with WD40 and a Crescent wrench" as the song "Made in America" says.

[RoyGBiv]

Here's an interesting analysis, published today...
Essentially, the argument here is that China is merely providing labor. The "trade deficit" with China would look MUCH different if the value of the finished goods was allocated among the various countries that supplied the components that wind up in those finished goods.

They give a good example with the iPad.... China make none of the components, they just provide the assembly. Why then do we assign 100% of the "trade deficit" value of an iPad to China.? If for example we assigned the value of the LCD to Taiwan, where the LCD is made, the trade deficit with China would look quite different..

US labor is in such a bind because the US GOVERNMENT is the biggest impediment to new job creation. YMMV

Punishing China no boon for U.S. manufacturing jobs

Published October 12, 2011

| Reuters

LONDON (Reuters) - For every Apple iPad sold in the United States, the U.S. trade deficit with China increases by about $275.

Yet by far the most value embedded in the device accrues to Apple and sustains thousands of well-paid design, software, management and marketing jobs in the United States.

By contrast, the value captured in China by the laborers who assemble Apple's products is a mere $10 or so, according to researchers led by Kenneth Kraemer of the University of California, Irvine, who crunched the data.

Viewed through this prism, offshore manufacturing of electronic products like the iPad is a solution, not a problem, for the United States, and seeking to punish China for its purportedly undervalued exchange rate is wide of the mark.

"Without China, Apple couldn't be so successful and Apple products wouldn't be so affordable," said Yao Shujie, professor of economics at the University of Nottingham in England.

In the case of the iPad, China is the final assembly point for components imported from a host of countries, including South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the European Union and the United States itself. There are no Chinese suppliers [inside] the iPad.

"China is sitting in the middle: It's processing goods for rich countries," said Yao. As such, he argued, it would be more accurate to allocate most of China's bilateral "iPad trade surplus" to those supplier countries.

Kraemer agreed that trade data can mislead as much as inform.

........ Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2 ... uring-jobs" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Another important point the article glosses over is...
Even if China policy changed, the US is far back in line for the jobs that would be created.
it's not just China that has cheap labor costs..... If we somehow manged to change policies and take jobs away from China, those jobs would go to India, Mexico, Cambodia, Indonesia, Vietnam and other places before they came back here. Reality is that the US labor force needs to focus on higher value-add jobs, because nobody, not you, not me, not an Asian or European customer, is going to pay $2500 for a US-made Visio TV that they can currently buy from a China factory for $800.

"Multinational firms that think currency appreciation is going to have a big effect on their export capacity from China to the United States are going to shift to other countries, not to the United States," he said.
....................
Jonathan Anderson, chief emerging-markets economist for UBS in Hong Kong, said U.S. and EU trade data showed that China's share of total low-end light manufacturing imports had peaked over the last 24 months and was now falling outright in the United States.

Gaining at China's expense were its even cheaper neighbors, including Vietnam, Bangladesh and Indonesia, as well as Mexico, Anderson said.

Strikingly, while overall U.S. imports of apparel and furniture have continued to increase over the past two years, domestic American production has plummeted. Foreigners have gained, not lost, market share.

Anderson said it made perfect sense that U.S. workers were not the beneficiaries of rising Chinese wages.

"If $300 per month for a 65-plus hour work week is too rich for, say, basic toy manufacturers, do they go to the U.S. and pay $1,200/month plus benefits for a 40-hour week at the minimum wage -- or do they go to Bangladesh or Cambodia, where workers put in Chinese-style hours for less than $100/month?" he wrote in a recent report.

[koolaid]

Part of the problem with sourcing China to assemble products like this is that they aren't exactly opposed to engaging in rampant IP theft and undercutting the people whose products they are building.

In the process of putting things together they gain the knowledge to do an end run around the people they are contracting for. This has happened in the computer industry in some cases already.

[boba]

With Jobs gone, maybe Mainland China will buy Apple's iP*d division like they bought Lenovo.

[RoyGBiv]

With Jobs gone, maybe Mainland China will buy Apple's iP*d division like they bought Lenovo.

I worked for IBM just prior to the Lenovo sale. I can say with certainty that Lenovo got little more than well-worn IP and the privledge of associating themselves with the Thinkpad brand. IBM just completely stunk (stank?) at the logistics required to deliver a configure to order computer.

IBM was happy to get rid of the sunset business. The associated jobs would have been gone regardless.

[RoyGBiv]

Part of the problem with sourcing China to assemble products like this is that they aren't exactly opposed to engaging in rampant IP theft and undercutting the people whose products they are building.

In the process of putting things together they gain the knowledge to do an end run around the people they are contracting for. This has happened in the computer industry in some cases already.

If any US IP holder can prove that accusation, they would easily be able to stop any violating products from entering the US (or Europe and much of Asia) market. It would be a relatively simple legal process. In fact, it's a technique that been employed by US firms manufacturing overseas to block their US-based competition from making goods in China (sorry.. not on topic)...

You're using the rampant copyright problem (a very valid knock on Asia in general, and China is no exception) to paint a broad stroke. Heresay.

I've been involved in high-tech technology transfer for some pretty big programs. Yes, we have definitely helped the Chinese (and many others with cheap labor) to become better at manufacturing and quality processes. I have not seen any IP theft in all my years in the business. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that the problem is not as rampant as rumors make out. Copyright violations notwithstanding.

[koolaid]

Sorry, maybe I wasn't entirely clear. That is only part of the issue I was trying to address.

Read this article which contains a great account of the Dell/Asus relationship for a better explanation of what I was getting at.

[tbrown]

You're using the rampant copyright problem (a very valid knock on Asia in general, and China is no exception) to paint a broad stroke. Heresay.

How is that heresy?