Dan: I really don’t want to make a big deal about calling you out on the “Walmart greeter” claim. Let’s just let it go. You’re not going to be able prove it, and it’s really not a suitable topic for this forum.
I’ll be happy to debate labor law and issues surrounding free trade wit you in GD. In fact, I’m sure we’ve done that in the past.
Really, are you that literal minded? No, I don’t think that all displaced workers became WalMart greeters. Many got other jobs, and in the cite you obviously don’t like (but offer nothing in return) you see that displaced workers more often than not got lower paying jobs.
ETA: and is the best response you have that data ending in Jan 2010 is out if date?
Indeed, I have experienced the difference between the way layoffs are handled on the two sides of the Atlantic first hand.
I happen to work for a multi-national company based in the Netherlands, with offices around the world. I am in California.
About two years ago the company announced significant layoffs around the world.
In the U.S. offices, there was minimal paperwork involved. Not much advance notice was required – they told you you were gone, what the severance was, and that was it. Fortunately for me, I wasn’t laid off.
In Europe it was a very different story. Lots of advance notice was needed, the company had to have meetings with representatives of the workers to discuss who was going to be let got and exactly what their severance was. It was a long, involved process that took months. However, in the end the company did reduce its employment by the numbers it wanted.
No, I’m not. Please see post #30.
Why should I offer a cite? I’m not the guy making the claim. A
I didn’t say anything about it being out of date. I said it was from an extremely atypical time for the US economy. But that was only part of the problem. Your cite concerns all employees, including salaried employees-- not factory workers displaced due to outsourcing.
I’m not disputing that many factory workers have been displaced, and had to take lower paying jobs. What is not clear to me is whether those jobs can be saved without making things worse for everyone else. If we’re going to have free trade, which almost all economists agree is best, you generally can’t save low skilled factory jobs in high wage countries. It just doesn’t work.
Now, you might argue that we need better policies to help workers who lose their jobs. And that’s a fine topic for GD.
Since the market price for a chocolate bar hasn’t changed, why would Hershey lower their prices? You’re not going to see savings if one company moves the production of such a common, replaceable consumer product. If chocolate bar manufacture was entirely outsourced somehere REALLY cheap maybe over time you’d see a drop in prices.
I don’t have the numbers handy but I’ve read more than a few sources that stated that, adjusted for inflation, clothing is much, much cheaper than it used to be. For the hell of it I Googled up some old Sears catalogues, typed the prices of stuff into an inflation calculator, and was pretty shocked at how high some of the prices were - a sweater that would cost $50 today was over $120 in adjusted dollars, cheap off-brand shoes for brand name prices, stuff like that. It’s not a scientific study by any means, but my honest impression is that clothing is less expensive now and, contrary to common complaint, not really any worse in quality.
No, I sometimes buy old clothing and I have a friend who dresses in 1940’s stuff. Todays stuff is clearly lower quality.
Lets look at shoes- they are made to be tossed, not repaired. I have a pair of Heschungs and a pair of Aldens both from the early 1950’s, they are both still nice and wearable, even though I have just recently had to repair the Heschungs, and the Aldens needed to be re-soled.
I have other friends who are clothing Laurels from the SCA, and they also say that clothing quality has gone way down from the middle of the Century.
OTOH, if it’s cheap enough, you can afford to buy and toss.
That thumping sound you hear is me whapping my head on my desk.
Surely you realize that clothes that survive 60 years are not an accurate representation of the normal quality of clothes, since, of course, all the lousy clothes of the 1940’s don’t exist anymore?
Part of the problem is how people perceive things in the past compared to today.
One of my favorite examples of this is:
• 50 years ago, a new house might cost $25,000
• Today, that same house would cost $250,000, 10 times as much, due to inflation.
• 50 years ago, a middle-class family might earn $5000 a year
• Today, that same family would earn $50,000, 10 times as much, due to inflation.
• 50 years ago, a new car might cost $2,000
• Today, that same car would cost $20,000, 10 times as much, due to inflation.
• 50 years ago, a gallon of gas might cost $0.30
• Today, that same gallon of gas would cost $3.00, 10 times as much, due to Bush and Cheney being in CAHOOTS with their BUDDIES in the OIL INDUSTRY!1!!1!
:rolleyes:
The economy, and job displacements in different industries, is a moving target.
Leaving aside the ethics of moving manufacturing jobs offshore, if it were not a net benefit to the company, it would not be attractive. If enough jobs get outsourced, and too many workers in this country are idled, unable to afford the products and services provided by the companies involved, the lack of demand will, to a certain extent, become a self-regulating governor on the economy.
For the government, or any entity, really, to attempt to artificially control the economy, is futile and ill-advised. We cannot know enough to anticipate the unintended consequences of that level of interference, and I, for one, would seriously worry if the government had the kind of power it would take to control the economy to suit its political agenda.
Levis used to cost a fortune! I’m quite sure, adjusted for inflation, that Levi jeans cost less than half what they used to. I’m going to try looking for a cite.
Levis used to outlast Wranglers at least two to one. That’s why my mom would let me get one pair of Levis and one shirt instead of a pair of Wranglers and two shirts. Levis lasted long enough for me to have a “secret” pair hidden away, which were never washed. Any other guys remember that style, from the 50s? Pendelton shirts worn as jackets and shiny, unwashed Levis. Pendeltons also lasted forever.
From my own personal experience, I know that many components made in the Far East (not only China, but also Taiwan, Indonesia, Korea, and other places) costs far less than those manufactured in the US. These are, by and large, not consumer end-use items, but parts that will be assembled into a final product. Go to a site like www.alibaba.com , then choose an item and compare to the cost by manufacturers in the US.
There are drawbacks. They often require huge minimum orders. If you don’t buy their off-the-shelf parts, but want changes, it can be a real Pain in the Neck. Parts might go out of production without notice (unless you’re a major purchaser). But if you want to buy huge quantities of what they have, without substitutions or changes, their prices are hard to beat.
I don’t like this any more than you do. Numbers don’t tell the entire story, and such wholesale transport of manufacturing elsewhere doesn’t merely “take away the disagreeable work” and give lower prices, but fundamentally injures our ability to produce at all and compete. And, as my own experience informs me, it’s frequently difficult to get exactly what you do want. But it is undoubtedly less expensive for a range of products.
I have about the same opinion of world trade that Gandhi had of Western Civilization.
So first you say that Levis cost the same as they used to. Then when I say they probably don’t, you answer that they don’t last as long. So which is it?
I’m wearing a pair right now that I’ve had for maybe 10 years.
I don’t recall saying either of those things. I haven’t bought any for years.
I’m talking about Levi’s jeans, not any of the other products which I’ve never owned.
Thereby implying Levi Strauss are producing the jeans at a lower cost, and selling them at the same price. (Like Hershey.)
Thereby implying that Levi jeans don’t last as long as they used to.
Leaffan, you’ve got to be kidding!
You deserve a rolleyes, but I’m too kind. 
Well thanks, I guess. Maybe I’m just having a bad day, but I don’t see what part of your posts I’m misinterpreting. No need to explain really. Sorry if I’m not getting something.