Posted on 09/25/2003 9:21:58 AM PDT by Willie Green
For education and discussion only. Not for commercial use.
San Francisco blue jeans maker Levi Strauss & Co. said Thursday it would close its remaining North America manufacturing and finishing plants, firing nearly 2,000 employees in the process, or about 11 percent of its global workforce.
The news comes days after the company said it would cut bout 350 salaried jobs in the U.S., with about 300 additional jobs cut in Europe in an effort to reduce costs in the face of reduced product pricing.
In April 2002, Levi Strauss closed six of its eight U.S. manufacturing plants, including its oldest on Valencia Street in San Francisco. The closures pink slipped 3,300 employees, or 20 percent of Levi's worldwide workforce.
The sewing plants closed in three phases and included four in Texas, and one in Georgia.
During that 2002 round of closures, there were 100 layoffs in San Francisco, where Levi had made jeans in its Mission District facility since 1906. The closures were part of Levi's turnaround plan, which involves getting out of manufacturing to focus on marketing. The company has been losing sales and profits for half a decade and has shifted manufacturing to offshore contractors like many of its competitors.
The remaining two U.S. plants were in San Antonio Texas.
You evaded and obfuscated.
You don't get it and take sides with and against people.
When I see repetitous personal ad hominem attacks such as yours against the messenger when you can't civilly refute the message itself, yes I take sides. Get over it.
I have failed, thus. Let's move on.
You're welcome to post on any thread you chose, and likewise welcome to not post. If you wish to 'move on' you know where the next thread is.
Trust to do what? No company promises lifetime employment. Trust in what, exactly?
If you opened a textbook, you would learn that management is hired by the owners of the company to produce profit. Naturally, the managers must act within boundaries of law and current standards of civility. That's all. If the manager continues to employ a person that does not justify his keep, that manager does not perform the function he was hired to do.
Trust? Suppose I am really courteous and work on maintaining good relationships with my neighbors. I trust that, should I get laid off, my neighbor will start paying my mortgage. I am laid off, the neighbor does not pay my mortgage, and I get mad at him. You ask, why? I tell you, "I trusted him, and I worked hard at being a good neighbor."
I suppose you'd reply, "Yes, but the neighbor has no obligation to pay your mortgage even if you were honest and worked hard on your relationshipl; he is... a neighbor." In fact, you'd probably suspect that the person claiming that is not well, if you know what I mean, so idiotic and divorced from reality these statements are.
Well, we have a mass idiocy at hand.
But don't try to waive away the culpability of our business and economic leaders I do not know whom YOU mean by "economic leaders." The managers are doing their jobs, just like the rest of us that are hired to perform a specified function. THeir jobs includes buying as cheaply as possible the factors of production, whether domestically or elsewhere. That's what they do.
As I said earlier, it is up to us to be "cheap" enough to keep our jobs. We achieve that (i) either by agreeing to lower salaries or becoming more productive, and (ii) lowering the cost of the benefits package we typically DEMAND from the employers. (To achieve the second we urgently need a tort reform).
and instead blame FR posters who routinely do wish to discuss the real world problems caused by these leaders, The placement of blame from yourself to some "leaders" is precisely what I talked about. It is based on false perceptions and lack of knowledge, and is unethical.
Are you kidding, up to 75% of the responses on your typical free-trade thread are "socialist" in one form of another, in that the government is seen as the guarantor of high-paying jobs, through various forms of governmental intervention. And then you have:
What you fail to see is that the present path of outsourcing and offshoring leads not only to job loss but socio economic meltdown. Tariffs do not lead to socio economic meltdown. Chronic joblessness is what turns displaced workers into an underclass. Chronic joblessness turns good neighborhoods into bad. Chronic joblessness leads to the first signs of trouble; lots of idle young men hanging out on streetcorners at all hours.
The protective system of our day is conservative, while the free trade system is destructive. It breaks up old nationalities and pushes the antagonism of the proletariat and the bourgeoisie to the extreme point. In a word, the free trade system hastens the social revolution. It is in this revolutionary sense alone, gentlemen, that I vote in favor of free trade.
_____
What do you call that?
I haven't bought a pair of Levi's since then, even though they were my favorite blue jeans. Wranglers since then.
Not violate visa laws. Not misstate pension assets. Not misstate earnings. I won't even get into the Tyco's and Enron's. Not inflate the cost of living beyond real wages and the ability of two peoiple to put a roof over their heads and food on the table. Not distort the CPI to reduce cola's. To enforce existing laws. To not claim a recovery and jobs are just around the corner when they aren't. That would be a start.
You may argue that there is a recovery and jobs in this 2nd half. The facts are there have not been any for almost 3 years and minimally the public has been mislead (naively by some, maliciously by others) to wait while the economy worsens and their jobs leave. That's 3 years that could have been spent towards tort reform (for instance) you advocate, had an honest airing of these problems started 3 years ago instead of the incessant "next half recovery".
As I said earlier, it is up to us to be "cheap" enough to keep our jobs. We achieve that (i) either by agreeing to lower salaries or becoming more productive, and (ii) lowering the cost of the benefits package we typically DEMAND from the employers. (To achieve the second we urgently need a tort reform).
The worker does not have the flexibility to lower his wage below his contractual obligations to banks and governments. And it is a moot point when there is no job to which they can accept a lower wage.
And the point again was your castigation and ad hominem attacks against those who would bring these issues up.
My impression is that the lower pay jobs are the most vulnerable to government pushing more costs onto business and are the first to go as a result. So the single best thing government could do is to stop piling so many costs on business. Aside from that, I thought the big concern was the lack of higher paying jobs for skilled workers - engineers going unemployed etc.
And move to some, although unrelated, but preposterous stuff such as this:
The worker does not have the flexibility to lower his wage below his contractual obligations to banks and governments.
Have you heard of a workers ability to anticipate the future? save for the rainy day?
I guess not: daddy-government has to step in and protect the baby; mommy-CEO has to run the company into the ground but keep paying you whatever salary you already promised to banks.
Perhaps, if you do read a book, you'll learn what you advocate is PATERNALISTIC state. As I said, if you are a socialist, at least say so to yourself. In every post you are screaming at the top of your lungs that you are a socialist and you know nothing about how your own country works. You should: this is what made it great.
Have a nice day. Vote Green --- in Germany, please.
I'm not a capitalist either if I have to choose between my country and a dollar bill. Those who are capitalists first and Americans second are a lot of what's wrong with this country. I do not favor selling my country to the Chinese (or anyone else) at ANY price.
To hell with the dictators of China and their traitorous accomplices in the United States.
And you think that this is compatible with basic American values?
Thank you for your nice post.
The fact is the National Assn. of Manufacturers if VERY CONCERNED about this, as well they should be. Willie Green is not blowing smoke. He's in damn good company - nearly three million Americans thrown out of work in the past three years and NAM.
Are the Republican members of congress who recently wrote a letter of concern about this to President Bush also anti-capitalists in your book?
This country's ability to manufacture is being destroyed by turncoat globalists who have no regard for their countrymen.
After you pure capitalists, globalists and assorted traitors have gotten your way and American can't build tanks, ships, fighter airplanes etc, are you gonna expect the Chinese to build your armaments for you to protect your butt?
Pure capitalism is worship of the almighty dollar without regard to any other consideration including the rights and dignity of human beings.. Pure capitalism, in the past, gave us monopolies and ruthless suppression of hard-working people. Try it again and you'll bring revolution. History confirms it.
Many spend their entire lives doing just that:
They could retrain, but to what? Finance, IT, call centers, Mfg, textiles, lumber, assembly, all moving offshore.
Their current job, and their next job, has left the country. That is the difference between this economy and those which preceeded it. A difference you persist in ignoring because to address it requires recognizing how little the individual worker can do about it except vote and continue to look.
Perhaps, if you do read a book, you'll learn what you advocate is PATERNALISTIC state. As I said, if you are a socialist, at least say so to yourself. In every post you are screaming at the top of your lungs that you are a socialist and you know nothing about how your own country works.
And now the ad hominems start against me. You have failed to provide one shred of fact to support your complaints against why this thread was posted and who posted it, and so you resort to another straw man about my economic and political views.
You could not support your statistics for unemployment, nor post any news reports to support your claim that Willie Green or Arcadia selectively ignores good employment/employer news.
And so you crawl into that last refuge of the bankrupt argument, the ad-hominem attack. As other posters have pointed out, when you lose the argument you accuse the winner of being a socialist, and in your limited myopic intellect, think that you are fooling someone.
What I advocated was:
Not violate visa laws. Not misstate pension assets. Not misstate earnings. I won't even get into the Tyco's and Enron's. Not inflate the cost of living beyond real wages and the ability of two peoiple to put a roof over their heads and food on the table. Not distort the CPI to reduce cola's. To enforce existing laws. To not claim a recovery and jobs are just around the corner when they aren't. That would be a start.
Which adherence to law you label as PATERNALISTIC, and socialist. Stunning refutation.
Have a look at my two posts to TopQuark, please:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977616/posts?page=292#292>
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977616/posts?page=294#294>
Sorry.
Not at all: it is the measures they propose that are socialist. I am sorry you misunderstood me.
You are correct, of course, that Willie Green is in good company: a great number of people have never seen a serious downturn in the economy --- we did not have one in 20 years. The core stock market, although a bid down from its high, is also 12 TIMES higer than 20 years ago. We did not have a bear market until the burst of the bubble.
These circumstances made people feel as if they are entitled to have good times at all times. Coupled with poor education and indoctrination of hate to America, this also makes people to look to the government as a savior.
True, Willie Green is in good company. That's what worries me.
think that you are fooling someone. Of course not: you cannot fool a fool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.