U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Wisconsin
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-25-2009, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Milwaukee
625 posts, read 974,479 times
Reputation: 806

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ccjarider View Post
I do a lot of business in and I travel to China many times each year. China is no longer the low cost manufacturer it was 10 or even 5 years ago.

Chinese gov't has no desire to continue to be world's low cost producer of consumer goods and now that all of world's businesses are located there, wages have been going up 20-30% per year. I know of no wage in the $.40/hour range. (Yes they are still much lower than West but it is changing.)

Further they are implementing more safety, worker regulations and environmental controls every year. As the Chinese middle class grows, there will be more demand for societal improvment. This will continue to drive up their cost structure.

The company I work for has pulled work back to Mexico from Asia. The combination of Asian costing and the increased shipping expenses make it cheaper to produce in Mexico than Asia.

No one should expect a $20 wage to put part A and B together anymore. It is not realistic. Times change and people need to reflect and keep themselves current with skills that an employer values.
If oil was to reach $150-200 a barrel this would wipe out any advantage China has in low wages. The cost of transportation becomes prohibitive and would eliminate any wage advantage. I guess if we want manufacturing jobs to return we should hope for high oil prices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-25-2009, 06:16 PM
 
4,465 posts, read 4,724,708 times
Reputation: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allan Trafton View Post
If oil was to reach $150-200 a barrel this would wipe out any advantage China has in low wages. The cost of transportation becomes prohibitive and would eliminate any wage advantage. I guess if we want manufacturing jobs to return we should hope for high oil prices.
To the contrary, a 60% tariff does the same thing.

And don't try using the disproven example of Hawley Smoot (Yeah, I'm a stickler on this it was originally called Hawley Smoot and over the years got inverted.) as a false boogieman:

First of the record does not support it causing the "Depression".

It was enacted in 1932; Depression began in '29. For the average person by about '27.

Secondly, once it was enacted wages rose and unemployment dropped!

Did Hawley Smoot cause these positive outcomes?

Of course, not!

FDR's New Deal did that.

But the take-away is that the tariff did not do harm, or slow the recovery.

It took a Congress obsessed with deficits in 1937 to do that!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-25-2009, 09:47 PM
 
Location: Portland OR
1,044 posts, read 1,434,718 times
Reputation: 935
Boy, GN spends a lot of time pontificating on web sites instead of providing a value to society. Anyone who thinks excessive gov't intrusion and taxation can solve some perceeved problem is totally whacked out.

Go back to school - whiner
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2009, 09:21 AM
 
4,465 posts, read 4,724,708 times
Reputation: 766
I suggest you review the History of the 1930's.



And cut the personal attacks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-27-2009, 04:58 PM
 
Location: Portland OR
1,044 posts, read 1,434,718 times
Reputation: 935
The history of the 30's proves exactly why you are wrong in analysis.


The New Deal helped reduce some harsh aspects of the Great Depression but it was World War II that made a real difference. As European nations went to war, American factories began to make war goods to sell.

After Pearl Harbor ten million American men went into the military opening up huge demand for workers to supply goods to war machine. Just like that, the Depression was over.

It is true however that war requires large deficit spending.

After the war most of the rest of the world was in ruins allowing the American economy to set the pace for the rest of the world. Further, the resulting aftermath of pent up private demand in the US insured that depression would not return. Gov't subsidized "make work" and tarrifs perhaps altered a few of the affects of depression but did not end it.
Anyway- back to topic, I spend several weeks a year all over Asia. I know you are wrong on many points you have offered here.


Have a great day!

Time to move on and end this thread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2009, 01:01 AM
 
Location: Midwest
5,088 posts, read 3,281,240 times
Reputation: 10418
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccjarider View Post
Boy, GN spends a lot of time pontificating on web sites instead of providing a value to society. Anyone who thinks excessive gov't intrusion and taxation can solve some perceeved problem is totally whacked out.

Go back to school - whiner
different opinions do not make one a whiner. unless a person has shared alot about what motivates them, i find its hard to judge what positive impact pple on this board are making, and what value they provide to society. i enjoy reading smart pples take on things here, and i appreciate the many helpful posters. but i dont care for the school yard name calling i see from time to time. good luck to us all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-28-2009, 10:59 AM
 
4,465 posts, read 4,724,708 times
Reputation: 766
Quote:
Originally Posted by ccjarider View Post
The history of the 30's proves exactly why you are wrong in analysis.


The New Deal helped reduce some harsh aspects of the Great Depression but it was World War II that made a real difference. As European nations went to war, American factories began to make war goods to sell.

After Pearl Harbor ten million American men went into the military opening up huge demand for workers to supply goods to war machine. Just like that, the Depression was over.

It is true however that war requires large deficit spending.

After the war most of the rest of the world was in ruins allowing the American economy to set the pace for the rest of the world. Further, the resulting aftermath of pent up private demand in the US insured that depression would not return. Gov't subsidized "make work" and tarrifs perhaps altered a few of the affects of depression but did not end it.
Anyway- back to topic, I spend several weeks a year all over Asia. I know you are wrong on many points you have offered here.


Have a great day!

Time to move on and end this thread.
Your point was that (in basic) government can't cure economic problems:

FDR's New Deal almost cut unemployment in 1/2 from it its 25% high in 1932, to something like 14% in 1935.
Then a 1936 election got a congress more concerned with deficits than unemployment, and it bwegan to climb again- though nowhere to the laissez-faire levels under Hoover.

And yes, it took WWII to end the Depression. But what was WWII- a major government spending program which was funded as the New Deal was not.

As far as tariffs, in the US they date from 1790- The Hamilton Plan, which protected industry from foreign competition. This was the economic program for the US (and it generated almost 1/3 our governmental revenue in the period.

However, as I'm sure you know, in 1946 we signed on to a "new" idea that had been en vogue in the UK for almost a century- GATT (The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades)- an idea based on 18th century Econ-type David Ricardo (no relation to Ricky) that said production would flow to the most advantageous spots. Dave was thinking in terms of natural resources, etc. But since he had been farting dust for over a century when we signed on to GATT in 1946, he was sorta out of the loop as far as transportation and scocietal development on a global basis had been proceeding.

Under GATT nothing changed- at first- WWII had destroyed factories overseas, and anyway our tariffs were still high. However, by the late 60's that was changing. We had helped (via the Marshall Plan) rebuild Europe, and the Asian nations were rapidly industrializing.

We had also been lowering our tariffs- far more than our foreign competetors- during said period. The result of this has been called "The Great U-Turn", which is the title of a book by a couple of Harvard Economists, Barry Bluestone and Bennett Harrison. They relate how the US Government decided that it would be best for our economy to void the deal between labor and management that had been in effect here since 1946.

By 1973, in the Tokyo Round of GATT, we eliminated our tariffs from being ANY factor, and became "free traders". At that point began our great de-industrialization, which saw (and continues to see) ALL industrial jobs offshore for cheap labor.
The funny thing was just as we did this, our competetors began raising both tariffs, and creating laws to bar American products. Take Harley Davidson cycles, for example: We finally negioated with the Japanese (in the early 90's) to lower their tariffs on Harleys.
So what did our free trade pals do? Promptly passed a law that forbade importation of motorcycles which produced a noise level at precisely the decible level Harleys make.

Coinkydink, huh?

A guy (SMU Economist named Ravi Batra) who was a former free trader, saw what was happening and in the mid-1990's changed his evil ways. He discovered in the econ data a disturbing fact that could not be happening in the US (as it had never happened previously)- yet was:

Real Wages, the ONLY source of money for 80% of Americans had fallen by 25% since 1973. He deduced the obvious: "Industry, not trade, determines a country's wealth." And that Free trade policy had exported our industrial base, replacing it with lower paying service sector jobs- MCjobs as they are known.

So, Batra correctly deduced that free trade would kill the US economy.

Not because they did it better overseas, but because they could do it cheaper. And that was only because they paid workers at far lower wage rates. So, David Ricardo's ideas were not the factor controlling where production was set-up:
Algebra I was. Wigets (an econ term for any good) made at cents per hour would always cost less than those made at dollars per hour.
So to be competitive, the lesson was clear: We would also have to pay our workers in "cents per hour", not dollars.
And we are well on the way......

Batra's book about this came out in 1995, just as NAFTA was being debated in Congress. The reaction by the economic community was to howl, to "Question my {Batra's} patriotism".

They had to do that as it was the only avenue open to them. The facts which Batra used came from the same facts they themselves used, so they could not impune his sources.
So, they and the media- which is a funny thing: at the time 60% of Americans as a whole were anti-NAFTA, 95% of editorial writers and pundits were pro-NAFTA- ignored Batra and his ideas sumed up in his 1995 book, a NYT bestseller, called "The Myth of Free Trade."

I suggest you or anyone interested read the ideas and predictions in this 1995 book, and compare them to the jive you hear on CNBC, CNN or any other media outlet (we could diverge into the media and Akre v Fox News, a 2003 case out of Fla Appelate Court (2nd District), but that's a major sub-topic to this), and see which side has been proven correct by the passage of time; see which argument better describes today's US economy.

It's well worth the time.

Last edited by Geechie North; 08-28-2009 at 11:15 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2009, 12:15 PM
 
Location: 112 Ocean Avenue
5,706 posts, read 4,867,146 times
Reputation: 8669
Looks like the 2nd vote was all but squashed by Mercury. I get the distinct feeling they're glad to be leaving. When all is said and done, they'll probably be in China like so many others.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-30-2009, 10:15 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
8,771 posts, read 6,775,455 times
Reputation: 2539
Rumor in Oklahoma has it that downtown Okahoma City may try to steal Mercury's hq from Fond du Lac. Stillwater, about 65 miles from OKC, wouldn't like it either. Related commentary at: Could Downtown OKC Target Mercury Marine?

Meanwhile, county leaders in Fond du Lac are thinking about imposing a county sales tax to form the basis for an incentive plan to entice Mercury to stay in Fond du Lac.

Last edited by StillwaterTownie; 08-30-2009 at 10:26 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-02-2009, 08:03 AM
 
48 posts, read 114,543 times
Reputation: 39
Default No guts!

Lets see, your sitting in your cubicle and the guy next to you gets called into the bosses office and is told that his job has just been outsourced. On top of that, he has to train by phone his counterpart in India. Wow!
Now if you and your fellow employess had any guts, you would all walk into the bosses office and tell him, that if so and so loses his job because of outsourcing, your all going to walk out immeadiately.
No, not you and the rest, you just bow your heads and thank god it isn't you. Well, next week it will be you.
The mercury people are to be commended for their stance. Thank god some people have the guts to tell these greedy employers to go to h....l.
The least we can do is BOYCOTT MERCURY PRODUCTS! NO SALES, NO COMPANY, NO GREED!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Wisconsin
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top