Posted on 12/14/2002 10:22:42 AM PST by arete
ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- Charles Seitz remembers when Rochester was a bustling manufacturing town. Now, all the 58-year-old unemployed engineer sees is a landscape of empty buildings.
''There's nothing made here anymore,'' the former Eastman Kodak employee says, his eyes welling with tears as he talks about his struggle to find a new job. ''Wealth is really created by making things. I still adhere to that.''
It's a situation that's been playing out across the country for decades but has received increased attention in recent years.
Fifty years ago, a third of U.S. employees worked in factories, making everything from clothing to lipstick to cars. Today, a little more than one-tenth of the nation's 131 million workers are employed by manufacturing firms. Four-fifths are in services.
The decline in manufacturing jobs has swiftly accelerated since the beginning of 2000. Since then, more than 1.9 million factory jobs have been cut -- about 10% of the sector's workforce. During the same period, the number of jobs outside manufacturing has risen close to 2%.
Many of the factory jobs are being cut as companies respond to a sharp rise in global competition. Unable to raise prices -- and often forced to cut them -- companies must find any way they can to reduce costs and hang onto profits.
Jobs are increasingly being moved abroad as companies take advantage of lower labor costs and position themselves to sell products to a growing -- and promising -- market abroad. Economy.com, an economic consulting firm in West Chester, Pa., estimates 1.3 million manufacturing jobs have been moved abroad since the beginning of 1992 -- the bulk coming in the last three years. Most of those jobs have gone to Mexico and East Asia.
Last month, film giant Eastman Kodak -- the largest employer in Rochester and the central focus of the community since the company was founded by George Eastman in 1888 -- announced it was shutting down an area plant and laying off the 500 employees who make single-use, sometimes called ''throw-away,'' cameras. The work will now be done in China or Mexico, two countries where the company already has operations.
The movement of jobs to other countries angers Seitz the most.
''The United States got to where it is today by making things,'' he says. ''People are suffering, and communities are suffering.''
----------------------------
Right. George Bush did't have anything to do with his not being elected. It's everybody else's fault. Put up some more duds and blame the world for not supporting them.
LOL. I think not. What I'm saying is get the government out of the business of trying to pick winners and losers, and get them out of the business of propping up uncompetitive industries at my expense. It's precisely because you can't engineer society and the free market better than the free market can that we need to get them out of the business of trying. If you want to make tennis shoes, be my guest. Don't come crying and looking for special protection when you discover that you can't charge what Malaysian tennis shoe makers are charging - that's the way the free market works. If you can't compete on your own, get out and quit looking for handouts to prop you up. You've lost - go find something that you can compete in.
American society is not based on making the cheapest shoes. We have expenses and expectations in our society. We dont use slave labor. We dont have sweat shops filled with children. We have restrictions on dumping toxic waste in the oceans.
That changes over time. With Western-style capitalism comes Western-style values and mores. If you prefer buying from companies that maintain some minimal standards for their workers, or for their local environment, then by all means, vote with your dollars. That's what those anti-sweatshop campaigns on the college campuses are designed to do - get you to vote with your wallet. If they can't make any money because people are uncomfortable buying shoes made by slaves, they'll stop using slaves. That's how it works.
Heeh, the WTO doesnt level the playing field for the American worker or most small businesses. The WTO does not even begin to meet up with the expectation that Americans have for a free society.
The WTO isn't intended to make a free society, except maybe as a one-off. It makes for free trade - what you do with that free trade is up to you. Take a look at the cases the US has brought before the WTO sometime - you might be surprised at the sorts of businesses that are finding overseas opportunities as a result of it.
With the communists now able to point nuclear warheads at America it looks like we are the ones taking the poison pill.
They won't shoot unless we provoke them. They can't afford it - they need us as much as we need them. Right now, there are millions of Chinese making what is, by Chinese standards, a pretty decent living manufacturing stuff for us. How will their government explain things to them when their jobs all evaporate along with Los Angeles? How will they make things right for the millions of unemployed and pissed-off citizens they will face if they destroy us?
They won't attack us, any more than we'll attack them - we're both making too much money off of each other to do something stupid. Attacking us is suicidal for them, and they're quite smart enough to know it.
China is going to have to take one hell of a poison pill to make up for the massive failure of "free trade" at this point. The WTO wont change a thing and you know it.
And yet, the fact remains, we are richer now in real terms than we ever have been before. What failure?
So you can save a buck you sell your nations middle class...
Excuse me, but (1) my original post was not not limited to just tech jobs and I did not say OSHA was the only reason jobs are moving overseas. I cited OSHA as one example. You limited the discussion to tech jobs and I obliged. (2) What I posted shows that the tech industry is just as affected by OSHA regulation (overregulation in the case of paperwork reporting) as are other industries. I did support my position.
Did you see my point that 80% of OSHA fines are issued for paperwork-only violations not actual workplace safety issues and that five of the top 10 infractions have to do with paperwork?
Can I ask, are you familiar with such things as a hazardous substance survey or a Material Safety Data Sheet? From the last comment in your post it would seem you think these to types of documents are limited only to the very hazardous chemicals found in a high tech clean room and waffer chip manufacturing operations.
How are you so sure they will be pissed off?
Did your Chinese penpal tell you something to this effect?
Or is this just speculation on your part?
Wait, don't we have McDonalds in China?
Whew, now that problem is averted, can't we all just join hands and sing a nice, soulful round of "Cumbaya"?
No it is natural to protect our society. Restricting Americans while opening up our society to slave labor is pure redistributional economics.
I'm paying more for a hammer than I otherwise would because the hammer makers think it's "unfair" to charge what Chinese hammer makers charge. Frankly, I don't care. Make me a product worth buying, at a price worth paying, and I'll buy it.
I noticed you kinda tried to scoot around the little problem of slave labor and child sweat shops and a country that has a common term for work death and still runs communist gulags. Yah it is unfair that American society should be opened up to this and FORCED to compete against this while we still have our own society to maintain.
But nobody has the right to use the law to rob me by making me pay more than I otherwise would have to. That's a handout in my book, and the fact that it makes the hammer makers feel all warm and fuzzy doesn't change the fact that they expect to finance their lifestyle at my expense.
But I guess it is ok to use the law to rob America's industry. While we are forced to contribute to our society evidently others are not. Why shouldnt we make use of slave labor inside our country since it is acceptable outside? According to you our society is of no significance anyway.
AH, that's the rub. How can I always have a steady supply of dollars when I send more out than I receive? You see, sooner, or later - it catches up to you.
That's right. Except that trade barriers and tariffs, which is where these arguments invariably lead, are pure redistributional economics
First off, I said nothing about tariffs. I would only want the government to impose tariffs against a country that imposes tariffs on our products l- nothing more and nothing less. So forget tariffs. Not in my discussion.
Now I am talking about our federal government financing the exportation of jobs to other countries. That is not right and it is as destructive, if not more, than tariffs.
Now we once made hammers worth having at a good price - then someone decided they could make more money importing hammers cheaper and since they were 'cheap' as in quality, you would have to buy and buy - therefore built in repeat customers. Now most people do not have the foresight to realize they can pay $10 for a hammer that will last or they can pay 4$ for a hammer they will have to replace every 2 or 3 years. And if they buy the $10 hammer, their neighbor will have a job and will contribute to the overall standard of living of the entire country - the $4 does nothing but make some other country better and some importer richer. Now the maker of the good hammer is out of a job or is selling those cheap hammers at WalMart and the rest of us are picking up the slack and sending his kids to school and to college, etc. Also, if we have to keep buying cheap hammers, hammers is all we have. If we buy good products that last, then we can buy more products later. That's not warm and fuzzy, that is pure economics - not just immediate gratification economics.
I repeat if what you do for a living does not help pay for the costs of what we have in this country - you are getting a handout. YOu are getting welfare. YOu are living off the work of others. That is worse than a handout - a handout is voluntary - what you are getting is being taken forcibly from other working people.
you should look up David Ricardo and the Law of Comparative Advantage sometime.
WEll, the problem here is I have had the advantage of not reading anyone law of whatever. I have the advantage of seeing things in terms of common sense and what is good for America and its people. I don't need someone to interpret that for me. You see you cannot spend more than you make - just won't work. I learned that one I was about 5 years old. Oh, it will for some forever - because the government will always be there to take it away from the ones who do have some left. But soon even those won't have any money left, and where will you be?
They need us as much as we need them. Why would they screw up a system that's making us both rich?
This is not intended as an insult -" And there are fairies in the bottom of my garden and the moon is made of blue cheese."
I repeat everyone in the world is not just interested in making money - they want money for what it will accomplish for them. It will help spread their idealogy and bring them more power. And believe me, they won't always 'need' what we might have left - especially the way things are going.
If we opened up slavery in the US those same businesses would be made uncompetitive to anyone who didnt use slavery. So to simply say that the businesses are uncompetitive is a self assuming argument on your part. Why should someone be made a slave and be forced to make you a "cheaper" product at their expense?
It's precisely because you can't engineer society and the free market better than the free market can that we need to get them out of the business of trying.
The free market alone does not create or protect our society and to say that it does is a rejection of our constitutional form of govt. Do you realize that laws against slavery or toxic dumping are special protections in the world of the free market?
If you prefer buying from companies that maintain some minimal standards for their workers, or for their local environment, then by all means, vote with your dollars. That's what those anti-sweatshop campaigns on the college campuses are designed to do - get you to vote with your wallet. If they can't make any money because people are uncomfortable buying shoes made by slaves, they'll stop using slaves. That's how it works.
Rights are not dependant on or protected by votes or the market system. Is the slave going to vote with his dollars too? And as is naturally the case all too often, what if the stupid mob of peoples votes with their dollars for slavery?
The WTO isn't intended to make a free society, except maybe as a one-off. It makes for free trade -
No in fact the WTO is not creating free trade.
And yet, the fact remains, we are richer now in real terms than we ever have been before. What failure?
When communist china went from being stuck in the 1950's to a modern nuclear power by looting and stealing from America. That failure.
ok, so we buy our designed robos from china. can't we make textiles and furniture here? it would provide employment to aa and ba and employees to manage.
it would save transportation costs.
and, gosh! think how environmentally friendly! (/s)
Ah, but that is the rub grasshopper.
Why bring em back here when they are already there, bring em back here, you have to pay John or Jane Doe ten bucks an hour to oversee them. Plus medical, unemployment, ad infinitum.
Leave em over there and you pay two bucks an hour with housing, meals and medical care thrown in.
While transportation costs inflict a little damage to the bottom line, if there is no tariff to level this imbalance in labor costs, what is the incentive to put up with the political BS here?
Yep, everyone is going to get an MBA or Law Degree. It'll be fantastic.
And hey, if you can't manage that, the air-conditioned splendor of a $6.50 an hour cashier's job at the Wal-Mart beckons.
Besides, Americans don't want to get sweaty anymore and make twenty bucks an hour running a lathe.
Lathes are so passe, these days.
I mean they are so big and dirty and all, and what do we do about all those nasty old metal shavings. Yep let the dinks do those jobs.
We'll sell em insurance. Let's see two bucks an hour, twenty dollars a day, doesn't sound much of a revenue stream, good thing there are so many of them, we'll make it up in volume. ;^)
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.