PDA

View Full Version : Jobs moving out of China, some even coming back to the US



Grand Master Melon
8th July 2010, 09:59 PM
By ELAINE KURTENBACH, AP Business Writer Elaine Kurtenbach, Ap Business Writer – 38 mins ago
SHANGHAI – Factory workers demanding better wages and working conditions are hastening the eventual end of an era of cheap costs that helped make southern coastal China the world's factory floor.

A series of strikes over the past two months have been a rude wakeup call for the many foreign companies that depend on China's low costs to compete overseas, from makers of Christmas trees to manufacturers of gadgets like the iPad.

Where once low-tech factories and scant wages were welcomed in a China eager to escape isolation and poverty, workers are now demanding a bigger share of the profits. The government, meanwhile, is pushing foreign companies to make investments in areas it believes will create greater wealth for China, like high technology.

Many companies are striving to stay profitable by shifting factories to cheaper areas farther inland or to other developing countries, and a few are even resuming production in the West.

"China is going to go through a very dramatic period. The big companies are starting to exit. We all see the writing on the wall," said Rick Goodwin, a China trade veteran of 22 years, whose company links foreign buyers with Chinese suppliers.

"I have 15 major clients. My job is to give the best advice I can give. I tell it like it is. I tell them, put your helmet on, it's going to get ugly," said Goodwin, who says dissatisfied workers and hard-to-predict exchange rates are his top worries.

Beijing's decision to stop tethering the Chinese currency to the U.S. dollar, allowing it to appreciate and thus boosting costs in yuan, has multiplied the uncertainty for companies already struggling with meager profit margins.

In an about-face mocked on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," Wham-O, the company that created the Hula-Hoop and Slip 'n Slide, decided to bring half of its Frisbee production and some production of its other products back to the U.S.

At the other end of the scale, some in research-intensive sectors such as pharmaceutical, biotech and other life sciences companies are also reconsidering China for a range of reasons, including costs and incentives being offered in other countries.

"Life sciences companies have shifted some production back to the U.S. from China. In some cases, the U.S. was becoming cheaper," said Sean Correll, director of consulting services for Burlington, Mass.-based Emptoris.


Read the rest of the story here (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100709/ap_on_bi_ge/as_china_cheap_no_more;_ylt=ArEk6FuKiukQvzPqQo.Wni is0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNxMW9kMDFwBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNz A5L2FzX2NoaW5hX2NoZWFwX25vX21vcmUEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBv cHVsYXIEY3BvcwM3BHBvcwM0BHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW 5faGVhZGxpbmVfbGlzdARzbGsDY29tcGFuaWVzYnJh)

Skirnir
8th July 2010, 10:12 PM
The argument for rising costs presupposes linear accounting. A classic example of this states that if a market is $1M and it is taxed at 10%, it will yield $100K in tax; the $1M will invariably shrink upon taxation. Thus, if workers keep demanding higher wages, manufacturing may shift to to the hinterlands such as Henan province where wages are lower; the worst that will come would be the cost of relocation. Also, if the workers petitioning for higher wages find themselves out of a job, their tunes may change.

Additionally, Beijing first and foremost seeks stability to keep civil unrest minimal. An increase in labour costs in yuan terms may be met with a yuan devaluation to keep itself competitive. Most likely, this may be used to compliment China's policy of acquiring raw materials: sell yuan, buy dollars, use dollars to buy things.

wildcard
8th July 2010, 10:17 PM
China will be the treadmill for the next 50 years at least. It ain't going nowhere.

Phoenix
9th July 2010, 02:11 PM
Most production should be back in the US, even if it costs thrice as much!

Skirnir
9th July 2010, 06:16 PM
First, there is nothing sacred about manufacturing, unless of course one is a politician campaigning. It is amusing how many seek to do some sort of shamanistic ritual to hasten the industrial gods' return from smelling the fragrant roses in the Orient.

Second, recall Bastiat's 'The Fallacies of Protection'. I shall paraphrase:

Let us say I have $15K and seek to purchase, for whatever reason, an amount of iron which can be delivered to my warehouse for $10K incl. s/h. I take delivery and have $5K remaining so that I may improve my lot, either by saving it, putting it into my business, or doing something else which is productive. The mine from which I purchased it must sell at $10K on account of competition from China.

If the tariff was increased to 50%, the $10K becomes $15K and I am left with nothing after concluding the purchase. If I look to the domestic market, the price will invariably rise to $15K on account of the reduced competition, as if I sought to import the iron from China, I would pay $15K either way. I am deprived of $5K and it is transferred to the owner of the mine, who then can use the additional $5K to improve his lot.

In one scenario, I have $5K at my disposal, in another, the mine-owner has $5K at his. This is a net loss for the country considering the cost of maintaining this 50% tariff in the form of legions of bureaucrats, inspectors, etc. paid for in tax who would otherwise be creating wealth in the private sector instead of consuming it in the public sector.

On a similar note, consider the Candlemakers' Petition wherein it is proposed to cover the sun to 'protect' the candle-makers from solar competition in the business of lighting. Though it is a parody of the argument for protectionist tariffs, it leads to the argument against the proposed tariff upon oranges imported from Portugal: because nature has endowed Portugal with a competitive advantage in growing oranges which enables it to produce them at half-price, it is silly to levy a tariff upon without twice as quickly levying a tariff upon the light given by the sun at no price.

Likewise unto Chinese products: the low cost of Chinese labour is like the sunlight (or about 80% similar I suppose), and many in this country have reaped the benefits of the low prices as a result. As a result, even the poor afford things previously out of reach, like dishwashers, air conditioners, microwaves, etc.

Thus, I inquire: what is so sacred about the fruits of one type of labour that it must be 'protected' to the great detriment of the fruits of all others'? As said above, nothing, thus I dismiss protectionism as an ideology not rooted in sound economics.

Trinity
9th July 2010, 07:38 PM
Additionally, Beijing first and foremost seeks stability to keep civil unrest minimal. An increase in labour costs in yuan terms may be met with a yuan devaluation to keep itself competitive. Most likely, this may be used to compliment China's policy of acquiring raw materials: sell yuan, buy dollars, use dollars to buy things.


Disagree Skirnir, IMHO. The Chinese will be letting their currency rise (as they have recently stated), will be promoting internal growth, and will slowly start using their mass of foreign fiat reserves to obtain real things world wide.

Phoenix
9th July 2010, 09:35 PM
As said above, nothing, thus I dismiss protectionism as an ideology not rooted in sound economics.


So-called "protectionism" is patriotism.

Autarchy is the only solution to America's economic problems. Was it Ponce who said "no exports = no recovery"?

"Sound economics," sans human beings, is called "globalism." We must include Americans in the equation, unless we don't give a damn about what happens to our country.

Skirnir
9th July 2010, 10:24 PM
As said above, nothing, thus I dismiss protectionism as an ideology not rooted in sound economics.


So-called "protectionism" is patriotism.

Autarchy is the only solution to America's economic problems. Was it Ponce who said "no exports = no recovery"?

"Sound economics," sans human beings, is called "globalism." We must include Americans in the equation, unless we don't give a damn about what happens to our country.


Seeing as not providing explanations is now in fashion, when in Rome...

So called 'protectionism' is poverty.

Minimarchy is the only solution to America's economic problems. Was it Lord Acton who said that power corrupts?

"Sound economics" sans human beings is nothing because economic theory is predicated upon human action. We must include the world in the equation, unless we don't give a damn about what happens to our country.

Phoenix
9th July 2010, 10:27 PM
We must include the world in the equation, unless we don't give a damn about what happens to our country.


America First, the world, second.

Autarchy means we produce everything we can HERE, and barter for everything else.

Skirnir
9th July 2010, 10:32 PM
We must include the world in the equation, unless we don't give a damn about what happens to our country.


America First, the world, second.

Autarchy means we produce everything we can HERE, and barter for everything else.


Thank you for the slogan and definition. In exchange, I present you with this quote:

“In every country it always is and must be the interest of the great body of the people to buy whatever they want of those who sell it cheapest...The proposition is so very manifest...that it seems ridiculous to take any pains to prove it; nor could it ever have been called in question, had not the interested sophistry of merchants and manufacturers confounded the common-sense of mankind.”
-Adam Smith via Henry Hazlitt's 'Economics in One Lesson'

Phoenix
9th July 2010, 11:25 PM
We must include the world in the equation, unless we don't give a damn about what happens to our country.


America First, the world, second.

Autarchy means we produce everything we can HERE, and barter for everything else.


Thank you for the slogan and definition. In exchange, I present you with this quote:

“In every country it always is and must be the interest of the great body of the people to buy whatever they want of those who sell it cheapest...The proposition is so very manifest...that it seems ridiculous to take any pains to prove it; nor could it ever have been called in question, had not the interested sophistry of merchants and manufacturers confounded the common-sense of mankind.”
-Adam Smith via Henry Hazlitt's 'Economics in One Lesson'


If one wants universal slavery, a "global economy" is the way to go.

Gypsybiker45
10th July 2010, 03:58 AM
anyone here read the responses to this article on Yahoo? one idiot responded "I hope they just move the production to Vietnam or Cambodia,so we can still get things cheap at Wal Mart" ...sad part was he really meant it.

Spectrism
10th July 2010, 05:03 AM
It seems that some do not understand the nature of political (and therefore military) interaction with economic health. When China was given free money and their free labor became the promised land for (first) greedy business managers and (secondly) those who fought for survival, the hardware of manufacturing fled to China. With it went technology, engineering support, infrastructure.

Amerika has become a hollow land of insurance and fast food. Let's all sell each other insurance and burgers while we buy the junk made in China that poisons us and loads our landfills. We can claim we are rich because we have a new trinket that will last 6 months before we throw it away to buy a new one. Meanwhile, China steals our technology and destroys our engineering base. They kill our motivation to invent new products which they copy without regard to intellectual rights.

China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.

Look at these population numbers:

0-14 years: 17.9% (male 128,363,812/female 109,917,641)
15-64 years: 73.4% (male 501,987,034/female 474,871,442)
65 years and over: 8.6% (male 55,287,997/female 59,713,369) (2010 est.)

What is not so obvious with this wide age range is the 200 million men 16-30 years old, who will have no mates. Now, just what do you think they will do with these drones?

woodman
10th July 2010, 05:19 AM
Although I understand the arguement against protectionism, there is far more to this shift of manufacturing than is seen at a glance. The jobs moved from the US are going places where standards are far lower and human misery is far higher. In the US we have many laws and regulations which add cost to manufacturing. Some are good and some are way overboard and merely serve to enrich the beast.

I doubt it could be effectively argued that degredation of the air and water are worth the cost of cheap products from China and Mexico. In light of the terrible polution and resulting deaths and disease and lower quality of life ensuing, aren't these products costing us all far more than they would if they were made here? It is typical short sighted and greedy worship of "profit at any price". Who is really profiting? My wages are far lower now because the higher paying jobs have gone to China. No benefit there. I'd rather make decent wages and be able to afford things that cost more but are made by well paid workers.

Add to this, the fact that no insurance is required and everything has been set up to streamline profits, artificially creating an atmoshphere for the sucking off of wealth from the western world. It is not free trade. If it were I'd have no problem with it. It is a complete artifice, a form of warfare against decent standards for working people. The war is by the elite against you and I.

oldmansmith
10th July 2010, 05:20 AM
China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.



I've been saying this for 20+ years. I hope that we are both wrong but I doubt it.

woodman
10th July 2010, 05:33 AM
China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.



I've been saying this for 20+ years. I hope that we are both wrong but I doubt it.


I used to think this too. I now question China's ability to fight a prolonged and profound war. They have had a one child policy in place since the 70's I believe. When the body bags start coming home and parents are bereft of their only son, the will to fight will shrivel up. Maybe I am not seeing the whole picture but this is how it appears to me.

Spectrism
10th July 2010, 05:47 AM
China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.



I've been saying this for 20+ years. I hope that we are both wrong but I doubt it.


I used to think this too. I now question China's ability to fight a prolonged and profound war. They have had a one child policy in place since the 70's I believe. When the body bags start coming home and parents are bereft of their only son, the will to fight will shrivel up. Maybe I am not seeing the whole picture but this is how it appears to me.


There won't be any body bags coming home and there will be no civil courtesy of informing next-of-kin about the tens of thousands sacrificed. The very threat of uprising will make the regime more controlling and isolating. The machine is greased with the bodies of its subjects. If we are fortunate, we have 2 years left before it gets super nasty.

Skirnir
10th July 2010, 12:23 PM
Although I understand the arguement against protectionism, there is far more to this shift of manufacturing than is seen at a glance. The jobs moved from the US are going places where standards are far lower and human misery is far higher. In the US we have many laws and regulations which add cost to manufacturing. Some are good and some are way overboard and merely serve to enrich the beast.

Industrialisation in the west likewise occurred where standards were about as low as China, and just as miserable. That is not a cogent argument against industrialisation.


I doubt it could be effectively argued that degredation of the air and water are worth the cost of cheap products from China and Mexico. In light of the terrible polution and resulting deaths and disease and lower quality of life ensuing, aren't these products costing us all far more than they would if they were made here? It is typical short sighted and greedy worship of "profit at any price". Who is really profiting? My wages are far lower now because the higher paying jobs have gone to China. No benefit there. I'd rather make decent wages and be able to afford things that cost more but are made by well paid workers.

Better that the air be degraded there than here.

As for wages, they have not gotten lower, just stagnated. This stagnation started while China was a basket-case, so it is safe to say that there are factors in play besides Chinese exports.


Add to this, the fact that no insurance is required and everything has been set up to streamline profits, artificially creating an atmoshphere for the sucking off of wealth from the western world. It is not free trade. If it were I'd have no problem with it. It is a complete artifice, a form of warfare against decent standards for working people. The war is by the elite against you and I.

An atmosphere that sucks wealth...I have never heard of that. I have, however, heard of ways government destroys wealth through regulations which hinder the free market, such as labour law, nutty environmental regulations, unfavourable taxation, and other assorted red tape.

Again, it appears you are more than willing to sacrifice the fruits of the labour of some unto others. It is a collectivist re-arrangement of wealth and nothing more, and that is an anathema unto me.


It seems that some do not understand the nature of political (and therefore military) interaction with economic health. When China was given free money and their free labor became the promised land for (first) greedy business managers and (secondly) those who fought for survival, the hardware of manufacturing fled to China. With it went technology, engineering support, infrastructure.

Free money and free labour? It may be inexpensive, but free it is not. It became the promised land because capital flows where it is most welcome, and it decided to go east.

That said, your argument presupposes a false zero-sum game: if jobs are created somewhere, they are not necessarily destroyed somewhere else. Markets do not exist in a vacuum.


Amerika has become a hollow land of insurance and fast food. Let's all sell each other insurance and burgers while we buy the junk made in China that poisons us and loads our landfills. We can claim we are rich because we have a new trinket that will last 6 months before we throw it away to buy a new one. Meanwhile, China steals our technology and destroys our engineering base. They kill our motivation to invent new products which they copy without regard to intellectual rights.

The days of China exporting happy meal toys are waning; many of the things China exports will not be found in landfills any time soon. Additionally, competition does not destroy 'motivation to create new products', and there are many more engineers in the United States than in China.


China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.

They are a strong country surrounded by weak neighbours; one would think if they were belligerent that they would strike by now. Additionally, on a gross, much less per capita basis, military spending is much lower than that of the United States. Instead, China is more interested in trade than anything else as seen by its activities in Africa, Burma, and Mongolia.

Look at these population numbers:


0-14 years: 17.9% (male 128,363,812/female 109,917,641)
15-64 years: 73.4% (male 501,987,034/female 474,871,442)
65 years and over: 8.6% (male 55,287,997/female 59,713,369) (2010 est.)

What is not so obvious with this wide age range is the 200 million men 16-30 years old, who will have no mates. Now, just what do you think they will do with these drones?

The dearth is 20 million, not 200 million, and it is a demographic problem that will have to be addressed. That said, that means the least-competitive 16% will not have a good chance for reproduction which will likely improve the genetic stock.



All of that said, my TI89 was made in Taiwan and died last week after ten years of function. I would not have been able to afford it had it been made domestically by some unionised cabal regulated by an overbearing regime and whose facilities were subject to more esoteric rules than there are seconds in a day. 大中國產業萬歲

Phoenix
10th July 2010, 01:27 PM
We as Americans have chosen to buy Chinese products at a lower cost which further spurred investors to send jobs overseas as capitalism knows no loyalty to national borders.


Find an American-made clock. I could not, at any price.

Made in America v. Made in China was never a choice given us.

Phoenix
10th July 2010, 01:29 PM
there are many more engineers in the United States than in China.


I highly doubt that. The era of a Science-Literate America is over. China is six times the population here, and they're far more interested in real sciences.

gunDriller
10th July 2010, 01:48 PM
anyone here read the responses to this article on Yahoo? one idiot responded "I hope they just move the production to Vietnam or Cambodia,so we can still get things cheap at Wal Mart" ...sad part was he really meant it.


i started in Silicon Valley when there was still a lot of local manufacturing.

that's one of the things that gives me faith about re-building America's manufacturing - we did it before, so I think we can do it again.

but there are a lot of structural & systemic problems that keep manufacturing out of the US. i think some of them are valid. e.g., Irvine CA didn't want TDI (where the 'I' stands for iso-cyanate) in their community, so they sort of shut down Clark surfboard foam in 2005. I say "sort of" because Clark chose to shut down his business - but it was because of the environmental laws.

given that he was making over a million blanks a year & selling them for $200+ each, it was fairly significant, in the surf industry.

anyway, a lot of the stuff people want involves pollution in its manufacturing - and people understandably don't want the pollution, but they want the jobs.

as long as California surfers insist on poly foam or epoxy boards, instead of just being happy with wood boards that can be manufactured without a lot of pollution - those surfboard manufacturing jobs stay offshore.

so consumer preferences can have a big impact on where something is manufactured.


the thing i like about manufacturing is, i think there is some kind of intangible but real benefit that comes from people making stuff with their own 2 hands.

those manufacturing jobs also created ways for people without college degrees to get good jobs.

Henry Ford understood this. he tried to price his cars so that his workers could afford them.

Skirnir
10th July 2010, 02:00 PM
there are many more engineers in the United States than in China.


I highly doubt that. The era of a Science-Literate America is over. China is six times the population here, and they're far more interested in real sciences.


I was using old data, so I rescind the remark. That said, the US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its retarded, 19th-century education system, not the Chinese education system.

As a side note, the decline in educational standards and the subsidisation of college education have diminished the prospects of those without diplomas as those with diplomas are considered better-qualified.

Phoenix
10th July 2010, 02:05 PM
That said, the US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its retarded, 19th-century education system, not the Chinese education system.


The US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its RETARDED CITIZENS, not the school system.

America grew into a technocratic empire in the first half of the 20th century, using scientists who were educated in a "19th century" system.

Skirnir
10th July 2010, 06:10 PM
That said, the US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its retarded, 19th-century education system, not the Chinese education system.


The US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its RETARDED CITIZENS, not the school system.

America grew into a technocratic empire in the first half of the 20th century, using scientists who were educated in a "19th century" system.


As if a 19th century education system is suitable for 21th century purposes.

That said, I present data to the contrary:
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/6727/1276652872605.png

Book
10th July 2010, 06:17 PM
The US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its RETARDED CITIZENS, not the school system.



http://cdn.davesdaily.com/pictures/92-stupidkid.jpg

The school can't be blamed for this American retard...lol.

:D

Phoenix
10th July 2010, 06:18 PM
That said, the US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its retarded, 19th-century education system, not the Chinese education system.


The US' lack of scientific literacy is brought about by its RETARDED CITIZENS, not the school system.

America grew into a technocratic empire in the first half of the 20th century, using scientists who were educated in a "19th century" system.


As if a 19th century education system is suitable for 21th century purposes.


The STUDENTS, not the teachers nor the system itself, are the core of the problem. The best teacher cannot teach a moron to be a genius. The best teacher cannot teach an obstinate barbarian to be a human being. However, a determined young man or woman can learn to be an engineer, even a doctor, if the will is there. A country boy can learn to be a "gentleman" if he truly desires it.

I "experienced" public skool, and excelled in learning despite the handicaps that the system imposes.




That said, I present data to the contrary:
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/6727/1276652872605.png



You shall receive no arguments from me about that.

The Imperial States of America are done for. We're a dying empire, with a population, not a People, just like in the latter days of Rome.

A People makes a Nation. We are no longer a People, and soon, we will no longer be anything resembling a nation, either.

Skirnir
10th July 2010, 06:21 PM
I would not want to be part of a people anyway; I consider myself an isolate as my interests and mores are diametrically opposed to most others'.

Phoenix
10th July 2010, 06:31 PM
I would not want to be part of a people anyway; I consider myself an isolate as my interests and mores are diametrically opposed to most others'.


You sound like someone who is extremely intelligent with an inability to tolerate stupidity. Ever been considered for being an Aspie? (someone with Asperger's Syndrome)

Often times, I feel all alone in the world, just God who understands me. I am very well loved by my wife, kids, and parents, but sometimes I still feel distant from them, not because of anything they or I have done or not done.

Skirnir
10th July 2010, 06:46 PM
I would not want to be part of a people anyway; I consider myself an isolate as my interests and mores are diametrically opposed to most others'.


You sound like someone who is extremely intelligent with an inability to tolerate stupidity. Ever been considered for being an Aspie? (someone with Asperger's Syndrome)

Often times, I feel all alone in the world, just God who understands me. I am very well loved by my wife, kids, and parents, but sometimes I still feel distant from them, not because of anything they or I have done or not done.


As to whether the possibility of being diagnosed in the autism spectrum was raised, that has occurred. In the strict sense, questions surrounding mental health may be considered loaded questions in which cases an answer in the affirmative would be a blatant admission, and one in the negative would be construed as denial.

Tolerating stupidity is one thing that I do quite well face-to-face; I just feign interest, send off the appropriate cues to lull the dimwit into false amenability, and be done with the interaction at the earliest acceptable opportunity. It does not happen that often since there are only about four people with whom I interact, and they are not predisposed to idiocy.

Spectrism
11th July 2010, 08:41 AM
Although I understand the arguement against protectionism, there is far more to this shift of manufacturing than is seen at a glance. The jobs moved from the US are going places where standards are far lower and human misery is far higher. In the US we have many laws and regulations which add cost to manufacturing. Some are good and some are way overboard and merely serve to enrich the beast.

Industrialisation in the west likewise occurred where standards were about as low as China, and just as miserable. That is not a cogent argument against industrialisation.

What we learned the hard way has been GIVEN to the Chinese for free. We learned that heavy metals are toxic. We learned that coal fired plants emit mercury and need to be scrubbed. We learned that pouring poison into rivers does not make it go away. We learned that putting poison in foods will kill people... well... maybe we didn't learn that one.

You falsely presume that we need to accord them some decades-long learning curve to pollute and kill because we had a learning curve too.




I doubt it could be effectively argued that degredation of the air and water are worth the cost of cheap products from China and Mexico. In light of the terrible polution and resulting deaths and disease and lower quality of life ensuing, aren't these products costing us all far more than they would if they were made here? It is typical short sighted and greedy worship of "profit at any price". Who is really profiting? My wages are far lower now because the higher paying jobs have gone to China. No benefit there. I'd rather make decent wages and be able to afford things that cost more but are made by well paid workers.

Better that the air be degraded there than here.

Uhhh... last time I checked, there was no boundary on the air keeping Chinese air in China. Same with water.




Add to this, the fact that no insurance is required and everything has been set up to streamline profits, artificially creating an atmoshphere for the sucking off of wealth from the western world. It is not free trade. If it were I'd have no problem with it. It is a complete artifice, a form of warfare against decent standards for working people. The war is by the elite against you and I.

An atmosphere that sucks wealth...I have never heard of that. I have, however, heard of ways government destroys wealth through regulations which hinder the free market, such as labour law, nutty environmental regulations, unfavourable taxation, and other assorted red tape.

You must not be familiar with any history. The IMF was the first candystore that came into China and gave them MONEY to buy their manufacturing base. They established an infrastructure and began a clever campaign to gobble up every major manufacturing gig. They SUCKED the wealth of other nations both monetarily and technologically.





It seems that some do not understand the nature of political (and therefore military) interaction with economic health. When China was given free money and their free labor became the promised land for (first) greedy business managers and (secondly) those who fought for survival, the hardware of manufacturing fled to China. With it went technology, engineering support, infrastructure.

Free money and free labour? It may be inexpensive, but free it is not. It became the promised land because capital flows where it is most welcome, and it decided to go east.

That said, your argument presupposes a false zero-sum game: if jobs are created somewhere, they are not necessarily destroyed somewhere else. Markets do not exist in a vacuum.

You did not see how China was funded. It was GIVEN to them. They were a basket case- and still largely are. But this machine is still a growing threat. They DID use slave labor and they DID get free money. Capital and manufacturing went there by greed, deception and then desperation & fear.

I presuppose nothing in my argument. I SAW what happened. The manufacturing hollowed out amerikan work and put a blight on engineering, material support, transportation, and all the other support industries no longer needed. I SAW engineering jobs vanish. I SAW factories closed up, leaving empty hulks of vacant buildings.




Amerika has become a hollow land of insurance and fast food. Let's all sell each other insurance and burgers while we buy the junk made in China that poisons us and loads our landfills. We can claim we are rich because we have a new trinket that will last 6 months before we throw it away to buy a new one. Meanwhile, China steals our technology and destroys our engineering base. They kill our motivation to invent new products which they copy without regard to intellectual rights.

The days of China exporting happy meal toys are waning; many of the things China exports will not be found in landfills any time soon. Additionally, competition does not destroy 'motivation to create new products', and there are many more engineers in the United States than in China.

Really? How do you arrive at that? Trinkets from China are still poisonous pieces of crap. I am so disgusted when I need to find a quality product and only have the piece of shyt from China that breaks on first use.

There is no competition to this. I watched how the Chinese work in big marketplaces. First, they offer a manufacturer a cheaper raw material. It is shipped in cheaper than any other source can provide, subsidized by the Chinese govt. Next they offer a refined version of this- cheaper than the manufacturer can produce... again, subsidized by the Chinese govt. Then they offer to manufacture or provide manufacturing services for them. Once they corner the market and the previous infrastructure of manufacturing is gone, the govt subsidy goes away and prices crank up. There is no fair competition.




China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.

They are a strong country surrounded by weak neighbours; one would think if they were belligerent that they would strike by now. Additionally, on a gross, much less per capita basis, military spending is much lower than that of the United States. Instead, China is more interested in trade than anything else as seen by its activities in Africa, Burma, and Mongolia.

One should think. They are not ready to fight the world. They are still growing their internal market. China is not just interested in "trade" if you really look at their activities. They are CORNERING the raw materials markets.






Look at these population numbers:


0-14 years: 17.9% (male 128,363,812/female 109,917,641)
15-64 years: 73.4% (male 501,987,034/female 474,871,442)
65 years and over: 8.6% (male 55,287,997/female 59,713,369) (2010 est.)

What is not so obvious with this wide age range is the 200 million men 16-30 years old, who will have no mates. Now, just what do you think they will do with these drones?

The dearth is 20 million, not 200 million, and it is a demographic problem that will have to be addressed. That said, that means the least-competitive 16% will not have a good chance for reproduction which will likely improve the genetic stock.

I had a hard time finding anything reliable on this. The only hard statistics I saw were ages 15-64 where there was a 30million difference between male / female population. The key age is 16-30 where this number is greatly increased due to the one-child policy.



All of that said, my TI89 was made in Taiwan and died last week after ten years of function. I would not have been able to afford it had it been made domestically by some unionised cabal regulated by an overbearing regime and whose facilities were subject to more esoteric rules than there are seconds in a day. 大中國產業萬歲

Errr... Taiwan is not China.... at least not the "People's" Republic.... not yet. The thugs that ruined this country do include the mafias running the unions.

MNeagle
11th July 2010, 08:56 AM
You'd probably find an American made clock in an antique store.

gunDriller
11th July 2010, 10:07 AM
I would not want to be part of a people anyway; I consider myself an isolate as my interests and mores are diametrically opposed to most others'.


You sound like someone who is extremely intelligent with an inability to tolerate stupidity. Ever been considered for being an Aspie? (someone with Asperger's Syndrome)

Often times, I feel all alone in the world, just God who understands me. I am very well loved by my wife, kids, and parents, but sometimes I still feel distant from them, not because of anything they or I have done or not done.


i have some of the symptoms of Aspie's.

to me it seems like, in the US, when people smile in public, it is often because they want to sell you something.

especially when a salesperson smiles at me - i don't return the smile.

they say that is one of the symptoms of autism, not responding to the facial expressions of the people around you.

Skirnir
11th July 2010, 10:22 AM
Although I understand the arguement against protectionism, there is far more to this shift of manufacturing than is seen at a glance. The jobs moved from the US are going places where standards are far lower and human misery is far higher. In the US we have many laws and regulations which add cost to manufacturing. Some are good and some are way overboard and merely serve to enrich the beast.

Industrialisation in the west likewise occurred where standards were about as low as China, and just as miserable. That is not a cogent argument against industrialisation.

What we learned the hard way has been given to the Chinese for free. We learned that heavy metals are toxic. We learned that coal fired plants emit mercury and need to be scrubbed. We learned that pouring poison into rivers does not make it go away. We learned that putting poison in foods will kill people... well... maybe we didn't learn that one.

You falsely presume that we need to accord them some decades-long learning curve to pollute and kill because we had a learning curve too.

First, knowledge is not given, it is learned. Second, I made no such presumption, I merely stated that low standards, misery, etc. is not a cogent argument against industrialisation.




I doubt it could be effectively argued that degredation of the air and water are worth the cost of cheap products from China and Mexico. In light of the terrible polution and resulting deaths and disease and lower quality of life ensuing, aren't these products costing us all far more than they would if they were made here? It is typical short sighted and greedy worship of "profit at any price". Who is really profiting? My wages are far lower now because the higher paying jobs have gone to China. No benefit there. I'd rather make decent wages and be able to afford things that cost more but are made by well paid workers.

Better that the air be degraded there than here.

Uhhh... last time I checked, there was no boundary on the air keeping Chinese air in China. Same with water.

That is true. That said, pollutants are dispersed in the atmosphere, it is not as if the smokestacks are popping out here.




Add to this, the fact that no insurance is required and everything has been set up to streamline profits, artificially creating an atmoshphere for the sucking off of wealth from the western world. It is not free trade. If it were I'd have no problem with it. It is a complete artifice, a form of warfare against decent standards for working people. The war is by the elite against you and I.

An atmosphere that sucks wealth...I have never heard of that. I have, however, heard of ways government destroys wealth through regulations which hinder the free market, such as labour law, nutty environmental regulations, unfavourable taxation, and other assorted red tape.

You must not be familiar with any history. The IMF was the first candystore that came into China and gave them money to buy their manufacturing base. They established an infrastructure and began a clever campaign to gobble up every major manufacturing gig. They sucked the wealth of other nations both monetarily and technologically.

Oh? Last I checked, the IMF gave loans, not grants. That is not to say certain countries default. That said, you have likewise fallen for the zero-sum fallacy. Again, wealth was not moved, rather, it was created in one place and destroyed in another as a result of two separate things. If you are talking about the flight of capital, the US received twice as much FDI than China so that is false.




It seems that some do not understand the nature of political (and therefore military) interaction with economic health. When China was given free money and their free labor became the promised land for (first) greedy business managers and (secondly) those who fought for survival, the hardware of manufacturing fled to China. With it went technology, engineering support, infrastructure.

Free money and free labour? It may be inexpensive, but free it is not. It became the promised land because capital flows where it is most welcome, and it decided to go east.

That said, your argument presupposes a false zero-sum game: if jobs are created somewhere, they are not necessarily destroyed somewhere else. Markets do not exist in a vacuum.

You did not see how China was funded. It was given to them. They were a basket case- and still largely are. But this machine is still a growing threat. They did use slave labor and they did get free money. Capital and manufacturing went there by greed, deception and then desperation & fear.

I presuppose nothing in my argument. I saw what happened. The manufacturing hollowed out amerikan (sic) work and put a blight on engineering, material support, transportation, and all the other support industries no longer needed. I saw engineering jobs vanish. I saw factories closed up, leaving empty hulks of vacant buildings.

Again, the IMF gives loans, not gifts, and the zero-sum nonsense is false. The factories hollowed out not because new ones opened abroad, they closed because of domestic stupidity. Additionally, though your observations may be valid, the attribution of cause is false. As for slave labour and subsidies, they pale in comparison to the corporate welfare in the United States, and its use of prison labour. If these subsidies were anomalous, you may have a point, but it is de-rigeur in the industrialised world.




Amerika has become a hollow land of insurance and fast food. Let's all sell each other insurance and burgers while we buy the junk made in China that poisons us and loads our landfills. We can claim we are rich because we have a new trinket that will last 6 months before we throw it away to buy a new one. Meanwhile, China steals our technology and destroys our engineering base. They kill our motivation to invent new products which they copy without regard to intellectual rights.

The days of China exporting happy meal toys are waning; many of the things China exports will not be found in landfills any time soon. Additionally, competition does not destroy 'motivation to create new products', and there are many more engineers in the United States than in China.

Really? How do you arrive at that? Trinkets from China are still poisonous pieces of crap. I am so disgusted when I need to find a quality product and only have the piece of shyt from China that breaks on first use.

There is no competition to this. I watched how the Chinese work in big marketplaces. First, they offer a manufacturer a cheaper raw material. It is shipped in cheaper than any other source can provide, subsidized by the Chinese govt. Next they offer a refined version of this- cheaper than the manufacturer can produce... again, subsidized by the Chinese govt. Then they offer to manufacture or provide manufacturing services for them. Once they corner the market and the previous infrastructure of manufacturing is gone, the govt subsidy goes away and prices crank up. There is no fair competition.

That is funny, I have yet to purchase a poisonous piece of crap, or anything that turned out to be of poor quality, that was made in China. That said, there is nothing that prevents further competition when prices crank up again; the reason that the US cannot compete is because of the aforementioned competitive disadvantages being imposed by its government.




China is also a military force with growing beligerent mentality. The manufacturing base provides them the engine to grow their military and they will seek to control the world. War with them is inevitable.

They are a strong country surrounded by weak neighbours; one would think if they were belligerent that they would strike by now. Additionally, on a gross, much less per capita basis, military spending is much lower than that of the United States. Instead, China is more interested in trade than anything else as seen by its activities in Africa, Burma, and Mongolia.

One should think. They are not ready to fight the world. They are still growing their internal market. China is not just interested in "trade" if you really look at their activities. They are cornering the raw materials markets.

The only market they even appear to be cornering is the rare earth metals, and only because the metals themselves lie within Chinese borders.

It is my contention that manufacturing will return to the United States under a regime of 0% tariffs, and a repeal of 99,9% of regulations upon labour, business and industry.

Just to put this protectionist nonsense out of its misery, let us say that tariffs were increased to punitive levels which made it practical for all domestic consumption to be manufactured within the country. That does not stop China from sending their exports elsewhere; 83% already do. China will point, laugh, and maybe wipe its bum with some of your worthless bonds before dumping them onto the market, but I digress. What this tariff will do is increase prices in the United States to astronomical levels while diminishing the demand for labour as demand for products decrease. The equilibrium will be a smaller, not larger manufacturing base and higher unemployment. This does not take into account retaliatory tariffs being enacted as a result, by the way; look at how well the protectionist Smoot–Hawley tariff worked?

That said, if you are so concerned about foreign competition, why not look at Canada, Mexico, Japan, and Germany?

I am not going to carry this on ad-infinitum as it is becoming unwieldy and not worth my time as it is unlikely anyone will be persuading anyone else, so I will begone after this post.

EE_
11th July 2010, 11:12 AM
Jobs will be coming back to the US, Chinese style
http://www.snowscut.com/Images/chinese-factory-worker.jpg
It's already being prepared.
Business is being structured like in China
In the construction industry all the larger companies are forcing employees to Tai Chi type excercises before allowed to go to work.
http://images.china.cn/images1/200710/407623.jpg
A California law in effect has made it mandatory to provide chilled water to all workers and an appointed person is to sound an audible device every 30 minutes to tell employees to drink water.
Personal safety devices and the paperwork are completely out of control to protect insurance companies.
The workers are being conditioned to be ruled.

When the great war begins next year, fear will strike US citizens like never before, forcing them to turn to government in what will be the final grab for total control over the people.
All people will work for the Israeli controlled government at a slave wage or else they will be shipped to containment camps or worse.

We will once again produce American made products...we just won't be able to afford them.

sunshine05
11th July 2010, 11:31 AM
This is not rocket science. We as Americans have chosen to buy Chinese products at a lower cost which further spurred investors to send jobs overseas as capitalism knows no loyalty to national borders. In the short term, it looked like a nice deal but in the end we have slit our own throats.

The manufacturing base can only return if we stop buying Chinese made products and produce those goods here. This will of course will be (initially) at a higher buying cost and lower wages paid to the workers here to compete with China. But in the long term, that will be the only way to loosen the noose which we have tied around our necks.

A nation of consumers are consuming their own doom. Wal-Mart has become the main vehicle of that path. Hard times are coming either way. It would be best if we chose to swallow the jagged pill which allows us to return to manufacturing as opposed to swallowing the soft pill which spells our downfall.


Part of the problem is the EPA put such tight restrictions on manufacturers that many were forced to make things in China just to survive. Now we are at the point where we have no choice but to buy things from China because there is not always a US made alternative. A few years ago I tried to buy only US or even only things not made in China and it was impossible. I don't see manufacturing coming back here ever.

I don't know if any of you follow Reinhardt (enterprisecorruption.com) but he has some interesting thoughts recently about China and how they are benefiting from the wars we are waging on Iraq and Afghanistan. If you do some searches you will see that it's China who is investing in Iraq, not us. We have no interest in investing there. They are getting all the oil contracts. They also are investing in a huge multi-billion dollar railroad into Afghanistan (a modern silkroad strategy). All the cheap Chinese goods will be able to go there now and Reinhardt thinks this is why we are in both places. Because many of the US based companies manufacturing is in China so they will benefit from this. I think he may be right.

Spectrism
11th July 2010, 11:37 AM
First, knowledge is not given, it is learned. Second, I made no such presumption, I merely stated that low standards, misery, etc. is not a cogent argument against industrialisation.

There was NO argument against industrialisation. Do you ever have communication problems? Knowledge IS given. We have schools teaching to GIVE knowledge. There are spies from most countries to steal knowledge. Learning is just the absorption of the knowledge. Knowledge can be bought & sold, given and received, offered and ignored. You like ignoring knowledge.



That said, pollutants are dispersed in the atmosphere, it is not as if the smokestacks are popping out here.

Tons of mercury come out of Chinese coal-fired power plants every year and settle into the waters of the seas. Like mercury in your fish?





Oh? Last I checked, the IMF gave loans, not grants. That is not to say certain countries default. That said, you have likewise fallen for the zero-sum fallacy. Again, wealth was not moved, rather, it was created in one place and destroyed in another as a result of two separate things. If you are talking about the flight of capital, the US received twice as much FDI than China so that is false.

If I give you a loan of $50billion for 1% interest and you buy my treasury bill with that loan yielding 3% interest, what is your net? When an evil usurper is used to plunder my wealth, I don't consider this a zero sum transaction. I call it theft!



Again, the IMF gives loans, not gifts, and the zero-sum nonsense is false. The factories hollowed out not because new ones opened abroad, they closed because of domestic stupidity. Additionally, though your observations may be valid, the attribution of cause is false. As for slave labour and subsidies, they pale in comparison to the corporate welfare in the United States, and its use of prison labour. If these subsidies were anomalous, you may have a point, but it is de-rigeur in the industrialised world.

Yoe dude... what planet are you on? Prison labor in the US??? LOL... are you smokin dope? You cannot be in Amerika. You must be watchin old chain gang movies. Also, you seem completely oblivious to the political and religious prisoners in China and North Korea. You show your ignorance blatantly.






That is funny, I have yet to purchase a poisonous piece of crap, or anything that turned out to be of poor quality, that was made in China. That said, there is nothing that prevents further competition when prices crank up again; the reason that the US cannot compete is because of the aforementioned competitive disadvantages being imposed by its government.

Wow... you are completely clueless. There is not a week that goes by when I have some piece of garbage from China that just pisses me off. You must not be in AMerika. Cadmium children's jewelry is one instance. Melamine in pet foods. Toxic sheetrock bankrupting builders and homeowners. Tools that are made of cheap steel and bend- like screw drivers/ pliers/ cork screws / knives... all crap. Radioactive kitchen utencils (and who knows how many other things untested!). Stuff from China is not only crap- it is dangerous crap.





The only market they even appear to be cornering is the rare earth metals, and only because the metals themselves lie within Chinese borders.

LOL... how about copper, oil, aluminum, iron.... just look at what they are buying. What do you think they are doing in Africa and Afghanistan?




It is my contention that manufacturing will return to the United States under a regime of 0% tariffs, and a repeal of 99,9% of regulations upon labour, business and industry.

Dream on.




Just to put this protectionist nonsense out of its misery, let us say that tariffs were increased to punitive levels which made it practical for all domestic consumption to be manufactured within the country. That does not stop China from sending their exports elsewhere; 83% already do. China will point, laugh, and maybe wipe its bum with some of your worthless bonds before dumping them onto the market, but I digress. What this tariff will do is increase prices in the United States to astronomical levels while diminishing the demand for labour as demand for products decrease. The equilibrium will be a smaller, not larger manufacturing base and higher unemployment. This does not take into account retaliatory tariffs being enacted as a result, by the way; look at how well the protectionist Smoot–Hawley tariff worked?

The globalist design is to destroy Ameika so I have no illusions about Amerika becoming an improved place. It is all downhill from here and the world will fall too. Amerika already lost its chance to protect its industries and the rulers sold out the people. When Amerikans eat a bowl of rice and a toxic fish head for dinner, then the world will be equal. The Chinese are still obeying their masters and will do so until they are destroyed. The only laughing will be done by their masters and that will be short-lived as my Master will be here soon. You will see me with Him as you try to cover your eyes from His blinding light. We shall see who is laughing then.


You sound like my old friend Saki. Are you Osaka?

Phoenix
11th July 2010, 02:29 PM
Part of the problem is the EPA put such tight restrictions on manufacturers that many were forced to make things in China just to survive.


No one was "forced" to make things in China. The Corporatists wanted to make more MONEY so they shifted over to China, rather than use best manufacturing practices and top-quality components that, unfortunately, do cost more money.

Hence, we now receive from China...

Untold amount of toys made with lead: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/19/business/worldbusiness/19toys.html

Deadly pet food with plasticizers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_pet_food_recalls

And even RADIOACTIVE KITCHEN UTENSILS: http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/43576

You can piss & moan about environmental regulations, but this is what you get without them.

Spectrism
11th July 2010, 04:24 PM
Anyone who claims it is fair competition has no clue. I saw stuff coming in from China as "finished" product cheaper than locals could get raw materials for. The Chinese govt subsidized these and does so until the market is cornered. Once competitors are put out of business, prices go up.

Phoenix
11th July 2010, 05:30 PM
The Chinese govt subsidized these and does so until the market is cornered.


The radioactive raw materials, like the Cobalt-60 they put in EKCO-brand cheese graters, is "cheaper than free" (it costs more to dispose of it properly than just make it into consumer goods and send them to America).