 |
And it builds muscles, carrying the toys Yuppies play with all day long... |
Posted on 06/02/2007 6:11:50 AM PDT by USconvoy.com
With the loss of another 4,700 jobs in May 2007, the U.S. textile and apparel manufacturing sector now has lost 1,001,100 jobs – a 65 percent loss of employment in the industry – since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in January 1994. Despite these losses, the sector continues to employ 547,800 according to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Breaking down the numbers, the U.S. textile industry lost 360,600 jobs (52 percent employment loss) and the U.S. apparel industry another 640,500 jobs (75 percent employment loss) over this period.
"The loss of one million jobs is an outrage. It drives home the point that the current U.S. trade policy has failed and must be changed now. An uncontrolled flood of imports, often heavily subsidized, is crippling the U.S. textile industry," said American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition Executive Director Auggie Tantillo.
“The loss of these one million jobs also negatively impacts America’s national security, as textiles and apparel products are vital the U.S. military. Moreover, the damage happening to the textile industry also is occurring in other manufacturing sectors critical to our military industrial base,” continued Tantillo.
Textile and apparel jobs losses in key states since 1994 are as follows: • Alabama -- 60,800 losses • California -- 38,900 losses • Georgia -- 77,355 losses • New York -- 80,550 losses • North Carolina -- 193,000 losses • South Carolina -- 90,211 losses • Virginia -- 43,685 losses Read more here American Manufacturing Trade Action Coalition Or here USconvoy.com
(Excerpt) Read more at fibre2fashion.com ...
Yet today’s paper headlines, “Job growth boosts economy.” Of course the increase in jobs is in the “services” industry — the economy is good apparently because so many illegals are finding jobs “Americans won’t do.” Nevertheless, to our superiors this is reassuring enough for the Dow Jones to rise 40 points. That our economy is based on illegals performing “service” jobs at the expense of real bread and butter jobs is alarming.
I blame unions for textile jobs declining, not NAFTA. Last I heard Bush was in NC retraining these workers to be nurses.
I am not sure how apt of a comparison that is since the "buggy whip" is not much in use these days, but there is more clothing, carpet, and other textile materials in use than ever before.
In contrast, Japan, also a high wage country, is still maintaining a textile industry (although it too has seen some erosion, it's not of the massive percentages that our textile industries have seen.)
Yup. If NAFTA had not been approved, all those jobs would still be there 13 years later.
China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia (none of which are included in NAFTA) would have had no impact on textile manufacturing in USA. Businesses are presently leaving Mexico for these countries, as labor costs too much in Mexico.
For this article to make any sense at all, over 1M (due to lower productivity) jobs in the textile industry would have had to be created in Mexico. I seriously doubt that is the case.
Good news is those businesses are no longer hiring Illegals.
Now if the anti-business conservatives can get rid of the rest of those labor intensive businesses...
Pray for W and Our Troops
The “service industry” is extremely diverse. It’s not all lawn care and burger flipping.
I’m in a service industry and I do quite well, thank you.
Yep....... the sailing boat industry of the past like the Mayflower builders are extinct for their original purposes, Studebaker/Conastoga wagons are mostly for show only, buggy whips aren’t in great demand either,... etc. etc. etc.....
The world changes and evolves, becomes closer together with new inventions/modes of tranportation, communication, production, etc. thus we will never be a static country or world, like it or not. For if we are then standing still is essentially falling behind. jmo....
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t16.htm
Most "service industries" do not pay dramatically less than most factory jobs. In particular please note the very low wages paid by "textile" and "apparel" factories, the exact jobs this article decries the loss of. They are esssentially identical to the wages paid by the dreaded "leisure" service industry, the lowest in the service category.
Average hourly wage in manufacturing: $17.17.
Average hourly wage in service industries: $16.92.
That’s $10 a week, not exactly the end of the world.
Manufacturing comes out a good deal better on weekly wages, but that is largely because so many service workers do so part time.
For those not able to figure it out textile imports from Mexico have dropped by 20.6 percent since 2005. Note that neither China nor India are are covered by NAFTA.
Our unemployment rate, btw, is 4.5 percent -- which is quite good.
Note that jobs are up by 157,000 and so is productivity.
Granted wage increases may not be keeping pace with inflation but that has more to do with stupid energy policy (not drilling for oil, using corn for car fuel) and ironically refusing to embrace NAFTA (restricting sugar imports)
I agree!
It would certainly be more useful than an implicit accusation of fallacious reasoning.
|
And it builds muscles, carrying the toys Yuppies play with all day long... |
Do you really think this is about protecting union jobs?
Are you saying you can't prove a logical fallacy as in "you can't prove a negative," or are you saying you can't prove something *is* a logical fallacy?
Does anyone wish to comment on post 32 and 33?
What exactly is your rationale for the belief that replacing textile and apparel manufacturing jobs with service jobs is a disaster?
And what does it say when tomato farmers in Sarasota Florida have to plow under their crop because they can't compete with Mexican tomatos?
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.