Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Maybe that's why BMW has a huge plant in South Carolina and VW is looking at North Carolina integrity vw: Made in America (http://www.integrityvw.com/2008/01/made-in-america.html - broken link)
Both right-to-work states.
But there are still cars (and lots of other good stuff) being made in Germany, no? Germany is the world's second-largest exporter.
If you want to postulate a cause-and-effect between unions and loss of manufacturing base, Germany seems to be a counterexample.
Common Ken You don't think regulatory cost like those incured by complying with regs from OSHA, EPA, NFPA, Renewable energy mandates etc etc. have an impact on the bottom line? While I agree labor may be the main cost driver the aformentioned do impact cost by a large margin.
So you think companies should be allowed to pollute the air, water, etc. and not suffer any consequences?
We'll be looking like China pretty soon if we removed environmental regulations.
What is so wrong with OSHA? Is there something so horrible about workers being safe on the job?
its not any ONE person (or parties)(or corporations) fault
but the problem stems from many points
USA has the 2nd highest corporat tax in the world
we lowered or eliminated most import tarrifs
we have high property taxes
many states taxes are excessively high
the cost of living in the USA
look at GE...headquartered in CT, but everything the make is made in mexico or maylasia
companies look at the overhead... if you need 100 factory workers to produce your product( manpower needed) would you rather spend the same money on 100 employees making $20/week($2000), or 20 employees making $20/hr($2000)...if the NEED is for 100 people., then the answer is obvious
its the same with property costs, while somethings (like resturants) are location, location, location,...factories and warehouses are not.. would you rather have a factory that is 20,000sf but costs you $5000/month in property taxes,,,or would you rather be in a different county/state/country where you can have a 200,000sf factory and pay $1000/month, (ie the reason why maky jobs are leaving the Northeast and moving to the southern states)
nafta/catfa/gatt/ofta have been a real killer on manufacturing in the USA
That's true.
The world is changing dramatically. This is an economic revolution every bit as significant as the Industrial Revolution was - and the line between 1st World and 3rd World is blurring significantly. This is a natural thing - a result of the rest of the world starting to catch up with the unnatural lead the US and Western Europe held for decades. It's all part of the world "homogenizing" and beginning to "level out" as those formerly dirt poor countries begin to strive towards the same "American Dream" standard of living that we've enjoyed.
I believe that in the long run it will be to EVERYONE'S advantage - but right now - as during the Industrial Revolution - there is economic pain for some folks (specifically US) to go through.
Ken
And "leveling out" generally means the high peaks have to be lowered as well as the low valleys rising up. Trying to protect that high standard of living for just one country doesn't seem a sensible response to the issue of globalization, IMO. It's like fighting the tide.
Sure they do - all those thing CONTRIBUTE - but in the final analysis it's the cost of LABOR - the HOURLY WAGE paid that is BY FAR the most important factor. ALL those other things you mentioned are far less important - and even if they were the same overseas as here it wouldn't stop the offshoring of jobs as long as the hourly wages were so much lower over there.
Ken
I would agree that the cheap labor in places like China and India is the biggest driving force, and unless we want to see wages drop by 1000% we will keep losing jobs. But, the never ending parade of new government regulations and mandates is playing a large part in this too.
i don't see how we can have "free trade" when some countries treat their workers like slaves, and the government purposely devalues their currency and pollute their land air and water to drive down the costs of their goods.
And "leveling out" generally means the high peaks have to be lowered as well as the low valleys rising up. Trying to protect that high standard of living for just one country doesn't seem a sensible response to the issue of globalization, IMO. It's like fighting the tide.
I agree. It's a losing battle.
What WILL fix the problem is THOSE other countries raising their standards of living to levels that are comparable to those in the US. As that happens THEIR labor costs will rise as well - reducing any incentive to ship jobs AWAY from HERE.
What is already happening in the field of computing for example is that IT jobs are ALREADY beginning to shift so that previously desirable locations for offshoring IT - such as India (which has seen rising wages for IT jobs) - are now starting to become a bit less "destinations of choice" and are instead being replaced by even lower wage nations such as Vietnam. Eventually what will happen is that nation by nation (and region by region) each part of the world will see IT'S TURN as a "destination of choice" for offshoring - and as those nation each raise their standard of living (and wages) they will in turn become replaced by another cheaper nation that has not yet gone through the transformation from 3rd World to 1st World status. Eventually Africa - currently a basketcase - will even go through this developmental cycle.
In the long run this will be best for EVERYONE - but right now it's painfull for those nations (such as the US) that have already become modern.
Sure they do - all those thing CONTRIBUTE - but in the final analysis it's the cost of LABOR - the HOURLY WAGE paid that is BY FAR the most important factor. ALL those other things you mentioned are far less important - and even if they were the same overseas as here it wouldn't stop the offshoring of jobs as long as the hourly wages were so much lower over there.
Ken
Re unions. We all learned about Norma Rae and the textile industry in NC.
In the early 70s the real Norma Rae was making $2.65 an hour folding towels at a time when the minimum wage was about $1.60. JP Stevens' mill ends up unionized. Wages and cost of doing business went up. Jobs went overseas. Mills closed.
Today, Roanoke Rapids, NC, has one of the highest unemployment rates in the state.
But Hollywood made a great movie about the triumph over the evil businessman, didn't they? Wonder why they never made a sequel to that one.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
You don't think regulatory cost like those incured by complying with regs from OSHA, EPA, NFPA, Renewable energy mandates etc etc. have an impact on the bottom line? While I agree labor may be the main cost driver the aformentioned do impact cost by a large margin.
