Jump to content

what does "crafted in USA" mean?


Krazybob

Recommended Posts

  • Members

I don't. I mean there is no good long term reason to artificially protect a local economy in a global system.

 

+1

 

It's the reality we need to face, and embrace, as well as we can.

 

I'm not entitled to my job, and I don't expect, nor want, the government or the consumer to ensure my opportunities. Why should they? Because I'm an American? Because my father had it better?

 

I offer my skills to the market, and the market tells me what those skills are worth. If some kid in India can do my job as well as I can for 1/3 my salary, why shouldn't the market choose him over me?

 

Is there ANY other viable solution? Anyone? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

That's a loaded question - you're asking someone to ascribe a single root cause to a very complex matrix.


Of course no economist would do that.

 

Of course not. Let me rephrase.

 

Do any economists out there believe that outsourcing is one potential factor resulting in a net loss of jobs? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

+1


It's the reality we need to face, and embrace, as well as we can.


I'm not entitled to my job, and I don't expect, nor want, the government or the consumer to ensure my opportunities. Why should they? Because I'm an American? Because my father had it better?


I offer my skills to the market, and the market tells me what those skills are worth. If some kid in India can do my job as well as I can for 1/3 my salary, why shouldn't the market choose him over me?


Is there ANY other viable solution? Anyone?
:confused:

 

Perfectly said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I offer my skills to the market, and the market tells me what those skills are worth.


If some kid in India can do my job as well as I can for 1/3 my salary, why shouldn't the market choose him over me?

I hope that happens to you someday, and you lose your {censored}ing house and everything you've worked for. :mad:

 

I'm sorry but i just don't relate to that kind of masochism - it's time to ask what your country can do for you; you pay taxes, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

My American dream doesn't require my employer to guarantee my job and benefits for my lifetime.

 

 

Nor the government. I think you hit on something when you mentioned "entitlement." I believe this great country was built on reaping what you've sown. Legal immigrants still give us this example today. From what I've seen, their work ethic is far different from my colleagues. It looks very much like what I've read about in history books of past generations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I hope that happens to you someday, and you lose your {censored}ing house and everything you've worked for.
:mad:


I'm sorry but i just don't relate to that kind of masochism - it's time to ask what your country can do for you; you pay taxes, right?

 

OK, so you're a resentful asshole. Not the first time you've flown off the handle and gotten personal (takes one to know one :D).

 

Don't hate the player. Hate the game. Good luck. :wave:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

:facepalm:

Yeah, what of it?

 

I've been through this situation myself, have you?

 

Didn't think so.....

 

I've seen entire I.T departments laid bare, replaced by barely competent Indian workers, all of whom have subsidized degrees from schools like IIT.

 

I've endured 2+ years of un-employment, working as an independent contractor and paying my family's medical expenses out of pocket.

 

So roll your {censored}ing eyes all you want - when someone steals your boots, you tend to get a little pissed at silver spoon assholes telling you to pull yourself up by your bootstraps.

 

I've given a lot to this country...as taxpayer's we all have.

 

"Secure the General Welfare" obviously means nothing when you are not in any economic danger.

 

Like I said, I hope that he is victimized by the next round of down-sizing; someone is going to be and it might as well be the smug one who thinks he is above it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

OK, so you're a resentful asshole. Not the first time you've flown off the handle and gotten personal (takes one to know one
:D
).


Don't hate the player. Hate the game. Good luck.
:wave:

 

I don't need your {censored}ing luck, thank you very much.

 

Like I said - wait until YOU are downsized by some foreign asshole and then you get on here with your right wing bootstrap rhetoric.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

I hope that happens to you someday, and you lose your {censored}ing house and everything you've worked for.
:mad:

I'm sorry but i just don't relate to that kind of masochism - it's time to ask what your country can do for you; you pay taxes, right?

 

 

This was totally uncalled for. And not the least bit surprising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

I don't need your {censored}ing luck, thank you very much.


Like I said - wait until YOU are downsized by some foreign asshole and then you get on here with your right wing bootstrap rhetoric.

 

 

You just called bbl a right-winger???? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

 

I've been downsized. Twice. I've struggled to get a decent job since April of 2006.

 

I don't expect the government to protect my job. I'd appreciate it if they didn't get in my way, but I sure as hell don't expect them to "fix" anything for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

 

Like I said, I hope that he is victimized by the next round of down-sizing; someone is going to be and it might as well be the smug one who thinks he is above it all.

 

 

You have serious reading comprehension problems that are well documented across your posting history. Let me point out the severe mistake you making here, bbl does not think he is above it all. Nor do I. That's the entire point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/22/amr-manufacturing-nafta-oped-cx_kom_0423amr.html

 

The Real Threat To U.S. Manufacturing

 

Forget the old factory. Soon, hardy workers in overalls punching in at the factory will no longer exist in our global economy. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, total manufacturing employment in the United States was down to 15.3 million in 2007 from 15.6 million in 2006 and 18.9 million in 2000. Where does it all end? Very close to zero.

 

The majority of jobs that manufacturing unions are trying to preserve will no longer exist. This doesn't mean manufacturing jobs will go away completely. Instead, there will be a different type of job with very few workers on the factory floor painstakingly assembling products. Twenty-first century manufacturing is about an automated, integrated manufacturing process. Manufacturing automation will take over one manual task after another--first in the United States, then China and then eventually everywhere.

 

I recently had a chance to listen to Rockwell Automation's (nyse: ROK - news - people ) leadership team describe its plans for factory automation technology. This company, along with big-name rivals like Siemens (nyse: SI - news - people ) and GE Fanuc, builds the robotic machinery and control systems that allow factories to operate at massive levels not only of volume, but precision and flexibility. A rough estimate of annual productivity gains achieved with these robots ranges from 3% to 10% per year plus an additional 2% to 4% in extended supply chain gains. The implication is clear: Old-fashioned factory work need not be done by people.

 

For supply-chain professionals and manufacturing engineers, decisions about jobs are all part of an equation, and the math often says robots are better than people. Where cheap labor offers a lower cost, jobs are created, but this changes as wages rise and technology replaces manual work. This dynamic holds true from Japan and Korea to China and Eastern Europe, all of which have seen huge capital investment gradually replace workers.

 

The sad thing is that this type of job is exactly what the big unions focused on protecting during the two generations after World War II. These are the "good" manufacturing jobs that politicos moon over when stumping in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan. But union membership in manufacturing is only 1.7 million people, or 11% of the manufacturing workforce. This is down from 2.8 million people, or 14.9% of manufacturing employment in 2000 and miles below the glory days of the 1960s when strikes at U.S. Steel (nyse: X - news - people ) could cripple the economy.

 

The myth these unions perpetuate is that they work for fairness. Instead, they are political bodies interested more in votes than wage increases. That's why they are evaporating anywhere competition can reach them, much like we are seeing in the automotive industry. Attacks on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) are not about economics, but about preserving an impossible ideal by eliminating competition.

 

Where will all the people work? How about health care, which employs 14.6 million, or finance, which employs 8.9 million, or even information, which employs 3.2 million? According to CareerBuilder.com, the hottest growing sectors right now are in education, energy, the environmental sector, health care and security.

 

A poignant and telling example of how this plays out passes before my eyes each day as I drive past a building that 10 years ago was a sleepy General Motors (nyse: GM - news - people ) training facility. Today, it houses hundreds of employees of the local Fox television affiliate. Let's keep in mind that America's nationwide unemployment is still only about 5%. The jobs are there.

 

Equally telling is the kind of factory that not only still exists in America but is growing. Drive through the South, and you'll see shiny new factories everywhere. In Greenville, S.C., BMW has a bustling plant and recently announced plans to hire another 500 workers. Nearby, a state-of-the-art Michelin (other-otc: MGDDF.PK - news - people ) operation pulls in engineering, sales and supply-chain talent to join the cluster of automotive experts in the region. The entire area has seen great prosperity due to the BMW plant. The difference is not really foreign ownership, or even non-union workforces, but rather strength in the face of competition. There is no need for protectionist policies when manufacturing sees itself as part of a global value chain.

 

Few American companies have proved this principle more convincingly than Caterpillar (nyse: CAT - news - people ). One of the iconic manufacturing names in American corporate history, Caterpillar, based deep in the heartland, was a union stronghold. Facing a mortal challenge almost two decades ago, the company confronted its union issue and built a future based on open competition inextricably linked to globalization.

 

Each year, Caterpillar exports some $10.5 billion worth of machinery built in its Peoria, Ill., plant. Its global product supports 48,000 jobs domestically, and that number is growing. When Caterpillar built facilities in China, it didn't send U.S. jobs overseas. It actually increased its U.S. exports to China 40% and created 5,000 new jobs in the United States. U.S. trade agreements with Chile and Australia have yielded similar successes.

 

Protectionism is rising as the economy falters and politics takes center stage. As companies like Caterpillar and BMW show, however, there is not necessarily a link between free trade and job losses. The threat to our traditional manufacturing employment base comes not from Mexico, or even China, but from a volatile mix of technology whose productivity beats human labor and unions who think more like political parties than economic agents.

 

All the ingredients are there for Americans willing to learn and change. NAFTA has nothing to do with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Hey, if you get laid off because shareholders demand value, and that value is to be found by moving the manufacturing plant to another country........ Well,

that's what we get for playing the stock game. It bothers me that gambling on financial futures is considered our nations business, especially when it seems to be quite disconnected at times, from the reality involved in those businesses.

It's gambling. Maybe not even gambling (given that casino games have an element of chance, and are not affected by opinion or "analysts recommendations").

The specific examples I have in mind are a few years ago when Apple, I think in October, announced that because of the runaway popularity of the ipod, announced that they would not be able to keep up with demand. Their stock went down. (!?)

The more recent one was this week when the florida newspaper republished an article from 2002 about UAL going bankrupt, and caused the exchange to halt trading on their stock after the price collapsed. (?!)

Until publicly traded corporations are made to have some other imperative besides raising the stock price, this will continue to be the case.

I'm sickened when I see a large (retail) corporation closing a location because it did not make *enough* money - say 4.7% vs 6.00% profits.

But that is what we have all bought into.

Cheers

C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

that's MR. {censored}in' old people to you.
:)

 

 

 

+1

 

And not to nit-pick .....but........mine is a "cake-hole".

 

Much spongier than a pie-hole (nothing against pie-holes) but with the promise of icing, festive lettering, and candles I just feel much better about myself if you tell me to "shut my {censored}ing cake-hole". :thu:

 

Its a self esteem thing.

 

Thanks!

 

PD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Hey, if you get laid off because shareholders demand value, and that value is to be found by moving the manufacturing plant to another country........ Well,

that's what we get for playing the stock game. It bothers me that gambling on financial futures is considered our nations business, especially when it seems to be quite disconnected at times, from the reality involved in those businesses.

It's gambling. Maybe not even gambling (given that casino games have an element of chance, and are not affected by opinion or "analysts recommendations").

The specific examples I have in mind are a few years ago when Apple, I think in October, announced that because of the runaway popularity of the ipod, announced that they would not be able to keep up with demand. Their stock went down. (!?)

The more recent one was this week when the florida newspaper republished an article from 2002 about UAL going bankrupt, and caused the exchange to halt trading on their stock after the price collapsed. (?!)

Until publicly traded corporations are made to have some other imperative besides raising the stock price, this will continue to be the case.

I'm sickened when I see a large (retail) corporation closing a location because it did not make *enough* money - say 4.7% vs 6.00% profits.

But that is what we have all bought into.

Cheers

C.

 

 

Let the speculators and managers who cater to them fail. They will over the long term. They always have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

 

Thirdly: This is a subject I have experience with. And obviously you do not.

There is no point in discussing this with you any further.

 

 

In other words, your ass is wet. If the link is invalid or outdated info, I invite updates or corrections. I haven't minsinterpreted what I linked, and I at least went to the trouble to look up the definition to answer the question. You have done nothing but accuse me of some vague problems you can't explain.

 

Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • CMS Author

 

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/22/amr-manufacturing-nafta-oped-cx_kom_0423amr.html


The Real Threat To U.S. Manufacturing.

 

 

Another union-buster who's more than happy to raise his share value by lowering wages. Go ask those working at that Cat plant where their wages and benefits are, compared with the plant that was closed and moved (the new favorite MO of corporate giants...shut the plant, and relocate to an economically depressed area willing to jump at the chance to offer tax incentives and low-wage workers without representation.)

 

Indeed, Cat is a shining example of {censored}ing over the worker:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CEEDD173CF931A15752C1A964958260

 

 

Back to the op-ed.

 

I do so love this gem:

"Where will all the people work? How about health care, which employs 14.6 million, or finance, which employs 8.9 million, or even information, which employs 3.2 million?"

 

Yeah, let's see how many people make the jump from manufacturing to a nursing position, or LOL.....finance. Good luck paying the mortgage for the 4 years it takes to get the degree...oh and then breaking into that field with ZERO job experience.

 

And information? He's got to be {censored}ing kidding. I've got 12 years experience in IT and am having a hard time finding anything, let alone at the salary I was making 3 years ago. Yeah buddy, you try it some time.

 

It's this out-of-touch attitude of "those willing to change" that really makes me wonder about these op-ed writers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...