I just wonder, is this an issue upon which liberals and conservatives can agee?

[usmc1]

Union Sundown: The Corporate Elite Takes Off its Mask
Written by Chris Floyd
Friday, 13 October 2006

Nothing encapsulates the obscene and depraved mindset that drives the corporate elite – and their avid partners in government – than the first two paragraphs of this straightforward New York Times business story:

China is planning to adopt a new law that seeks to crack down on sweatshops and protect workers’ rights by giving labor unions real power for the first time since it introduced market forces in the 1980s.

The move, which underscores the government’s growing concern about the widening income gap and threats of social unrest, is setting off a battle with American and other foreign corporations that have lobbied against it by hinting that they may build fewer factories here.

Read that again. Let it soak in. The corporate elite are threatening to lash out because China is considering a few very belated and, as the story makes clear, most likely ineffective steps to provide a modicum of protection for its working people, many of whom labor in conditions of near-slavery in order to stuff the bellies and the wallets of foreign fat-cats. The elite are saying – openly, brazenly – that they might choke off economic growth in China if they can't keep paying peon wages to defenseless people in hell-hole conditions.

Otherwise, the clear implication is that they will look elsewhere for drones to exploit. Hey, maybe Burma is ready for an "economic miracle?" Or North Korea? We could trade their nuke program for Wal-Mart sweatshops and Goodyear plantations, give a nice slice to Kim and let the good times roll.

This is the true face of "globalization" – predatory elites moving relentlessly, remorselessly around the world, swooping in wherever they're allowed to put profits over people, to treat human beings like so much meat to be chewed up and discarded, then moving on when there's the slightest hint of measure that might impact their already unfathomable riches by some infinitesimal degree. This is the true and ugly face of greed that lies behind the grinning masks of the great and good as they slap backs at Davos or grin for the cameras at G8 summits.

The slobbering, mindless greed of elites has been with us since time immemorial, of course – but it's usually dressed up in some kind of rhetorical finery, cast as "a rising tide that lifts all boats," the engine of prosperity for all, an "invisible hand" directing everything toward the common good, and so on. What's remarkable here is that our modern-day elites no longer bother with such pretenses. They are admirably blunt: "Protection for workers? Screw that, Chinaman. We'll take our money elsewhere."

They have already practiced this principle on a savage level in the United States, where whole cities have been gutted by the flight of manufacturing – and all the countless businesses attendant on it – to foreign climes, where workers aren't so uppity, demanding a living wage, safe conditions, human dignity and all that crybaby garbage.

They've been assisted in this at every turn by the thoroughly bipartisan assistance of the American political establishment, which for decades has been systematically dismantling the labor protections that once provided the working people of the United States with an unprecedented level of prosperity, growth and aspiration. (And just last week, the Bush Regime came in with yet another hammer blow, a new measure that will strip millions of people – including health care workers – of the right to organize.)

There have been no penalties – legal, financial or political – for companies that used the public infrastructure -- roads, utilities, police, education, etc. – provided by American taxpayers then abandoned the workers and the cities that sustained them in search of even-greater profits elsewhere. No penalties for companies which continue to feed on the American infrastructure but hide their profits in off-shore shell operations, refusing to pay their share of the taxes to maintain and improve that infrastructure. No penalties for slashing or destroying the pensions of life-long employees, for awarding themselves gargantuan bonuses, like bejeweled potentates of old, while turfing out workers and shutting down factories and stores. No penalties for creating the greatest, most punishing wealth disparities in American society since the days of the robber barons.

This too is the reality behind Davos, behind G8 – and behind the phalanx of unctuous, friendly faces beaming out from the podium at every national political convention: the ruination of America's working people for the profit of a very few – for the connected and the corrupt.

China has been their darling, despite its massive political repression – no, because of its massive political repression, which keeps workers docile. But any move by Beijing (and the new measure is still in draft form) to upset the golden applecart of slave-like labor will be punished by the corporate elite, just as they have punished, smeared, destroyed or marginalized anyone standing up for working people in the United States.

[usmc1]

Union Sundown: The Corporate Elite Takes Off its Mask
Written by Chris Floyd
Friday, 13 October 2006

Nothing encapsulates the obscene and depraved mindset that drives the corporate elite – and their avid partners in government – than the first two paragraphs of this straightforward New York Times business story:

China is planning to adopt a new law that seeks to crack down on sweatshops and protect workers’ rights by giving labor unions real power for the first time since it introduced market forces in the 1980s.

The move, which underscores the government’s growing concern about the widening income gap and threats of social unrest, is setting off a battle with American and other foreign corporations that have lobbied against it by hinting that they may build fewer factories here.

Read that again. Let it soak in. The corporate elite are threatening to lash out because China is considering a few very belated and, as the story makes clear, most likely ineffective steps to provide a modicum of protection for its working people, many of whom labor in conditions of near-slavery in order to stuff the bellies and the wallets of foreign fat-cats. The elite are saying – openly, brazenly – that they might choke off economic growth in China if they can't keep paying peon wages to defenseless people in hell-hole conditions.

Otherwise, the clear implication is that they will look elsewhere for drones to exploit. Hey, maybe Burma is ready for an "economic miracle?" Or North Korea? We could trade their nuke program for Wal-Mart sweatshops and Goodyear plantations, give a nice slice to Kim and let the good times roll.

This is the true face of "globalization" – predatory elites moving relentlessly, remorselessly around the world, swooping in wherever they're allowed to put profits over people, to treat human beings like so much meat to be chewed up and discarded, then moving on when there's the slightest hint of measure that might impact their already unfathomable riches by some infinitesimal degree. This is the true and ugly face of greed that lies behind the grinning masks of the great and good as they slap backs at Davos or grin for the cameras at G8 summits.

The slobbering, mindless greed of elites has been with us since time immemorial, of course – but it's usually dressed up in some kind of rhetorical finery, cast as "a rising tide that lifts all boats," the engine of prosperity for all, an "invisible hand" directing everything toward the common good, and so on. What's remarkable here is that our modern-day elites no longer bother with such pretenses. They are admirably blunt: "Protection for workers? Screw that, Chinaman. We'll take our money elsewhere."

They have already practiced this principle on a savage level in the United States, where whole cities have been gutted by the flight of manufacturing – and all the countless businesses attendant on it – to foreign climes, where workers aren't so uppity, demanding a living wage, safe conditions, human dignity and all that crybaby garbage.

They've been assisted in this at every turn by the thoroughly bipartisan assistance of the American political establishment, which for decades has been systematically dismantling the labor protections that once provided the working people of the United States with an unprecedented level of prosperity, growth and aspiration. (And just last week, the Bush Regime came in with yet another hammer blow, a new measure that will strip millions of people – including health care workers – of the right to organize.)

There have been no penalties – legal, financial or political – for companies that used the public infrastructure -- roads, utilities, police, education, etc. – provided by American taxpayers then abandoned the workers and the cities that sustained them in search of even-greater profits elsewhere. No penalties for companies which continue to feed on the American infrastructure but hide their profits in off-shore shell operations, refusing to pay their share of the taxes to maintain and improve that infrastructure. No penalties for slashing or destroying the pensions of life-long employees, for awarding themselves gargantuan bonuses, like bejeweled potentates of old, while turfing out workers and shutting down factories and stores. No penalties for creating the greatest, most punishing wealth disparities in American society since the days of the robber barons.

This too is the reality behind Davos, behind G8 – and behind the phalanx of unctuous, friendly faces beaming out from the podium at every national political convention: the ruination of America's working people for the profit of a very few – for the connected and the corrupt.

China has been their darling, despite its massive political repression – no, because of its massive political repression, which keeps workers docile. But any move by Beijing (and the new measure is still in draft form) to upset the golden applecart of slave-like labor will be punished by the corporate elite, just as they have punished, smeared, destroyed or marginalized anyone standing up for working people in the United States.

[nunne]

Cleary this is a very biased article from a publication that has a self-interest in what is being said. That, however, does not make it any less true! Nor does it diminish the facts that are related. I think it is a suject that needs to have more spotlight on it, but you won't see anything more on it from the national media.

Have you also noticed that towns in Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania, and California have passed ordinances which would fine landowners who rent to illegal immigrants? Similar laws which might fine or otherwise punish businesses which hire illegal immigrants at below minimum wage are never a part of the consideration, or, if they are, they are never voted on.

If you want to stem the flow of illegals, require mininmum wages to be paid to all employees. Who opposes such a law? Businesses, of course.

The raising of questions of unfair employment practices, while laudable in China, needs to be as vigorously challenged in this country. I hope the Democrats will get on with it.

[LamontCranston]

If this sort of thing bothers you -- and it does bother me -- don't spend another nickel in Target stores.

Walk through and take a look. All the merchandise is from overseas, mostly Asia.

Don't pay the low prices, don't create a demand, don't support it and say so.

Same goes for all that college athletic apparel. It's made in sweatshops in Mexico.

Here's a challenge. Look around and find American make clothing. Come back here and post the name of the store. I'll buy something from them. So will others.

This is something YOU, dear reader, can change. In economic matters of supply and demand, those big companies follow YOUR lead.

So lead. Don't feed the beast. It'll starve and die.

[Unwired]

http://www.americanapparel.net/

Read descriptions of what they're about (http://www.americanapparel.net/mission/) and how they operate (http://www.americanapparel.net/mission/vertical.html).



UW

[usmc1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nunne:
Cleary this is a very biased article from a publication that has a self-interest in what is being said. That, however, does not make it any less true! Nor does it diminish the facts that are related. I think it is a suject that needs to have more spotlight on it, but you won't see anything more on it from the national media.

Have you also noticed that towns in Georgia, Texas, Pennsylvania, and California have passed ordinances which would fine landowners who rent to illegal immigrants? Similar laws which might fine or otherwise punish businesses which hire illegal immigrants at below minimum wage are never a part of the consideration, or, if they are, they are never voted on.

If you want to stem the flow of illegals, require mininmum wages to be paid to all employees. Who opposes such a law? Businesses, of course.

The raising of questions of unfair employment practices, while laudable in China, needs to be as vigorously challenged in this country. I hope the Democrats will get on with it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Help me out here. What in the article leads you to say that it is "very biased." And, Please, what specifically is that bias that you see?

Also, please, tell me werein is the self-interest of the publication in the article?

Thank you.

[Bob S.]

usmc:What in the article leads you to say that it is "very biased."

What about the article is not biased save for the second two paragraphs?

Some biased phrases:
obscene and depraved mindset that drives the corporate elite

The corporate elite

many of whom labor in conditions of near-slavery in order to stuff the bellies and the wallets of foreign fat-cats.

if they can't keep paying peon wages to defenseless people in hell-hole conditions.

predatory elites moving relentlessly, remorselessly around the world, swooping in wherever they're allowed to put profits over people, to treat human beings like so much meat to be chewed up and discarded, then moving on when there's the slightest hint of measure that might impact their already unfathomable riches by some infinitesimal degree.

usmc, you are smart. I know that you can tell the difference between reported articles and editorial articles. This is a biased editorial.

I read the full article at the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/business/worldbusiness/13sweat.html?ex=1318392000&en=004ae914c77ca2c1&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) (may be time sensitive) and found more reasons other than businesses not wanting to protect their workers.

I am all for workers' rights. I wish they could all acquire health care, safe conditions, workable wages, rest/lunch breaks, etc. However, corporations also have the right to leave areas where expenses will get too high--not that it will happen in China, but then, look at more of their objections.

Bob S.

[Baron Lake]

Bob S:

"I'm all for workers' rights...However..."

Ok, maybe not ALL. Mostly? Some? a little bit? As long as corporate profits are not affected.

These companys aren't multinational because they think the term looks good on their letterhead. And they certainly aren't all about making life better for Third Worlders (although that's acceptable as long as it doesn't get out of hand).

b.l.

[Baron Lake]

Oh yeah, the topic. Keep looking. This "issue" ain't it.
b.l.

[nimrod]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
Don't pay the low prices, don't create a demand, don't support it and say so. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
The only problem with this is the people who cannot afford to shop any where else but Walmart and Target because of the wages they are paid by places like Walmart, Target, and any McJob that only pays min. wage with no health care plans.

[nunne]

I say it is biased because it is from a union publication. The self-interest is in protection for laborers in America. But as I said, that doesn't alter the truth of the matter. btw, I'm not in a union (I am in a professional occupation), but I have long felt that unions are a vital part of protecting American rights and liberties. Without unions, there would be no middle class, and without a middle class, we would have no freedoms.

[usmc1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nunne:
I say it is biased because it is from a union publication. The self-interest is in protection for laborers in America. But as I said, that doesn't alter the truth of the matter. btw, I'm not in a union (I am in a professional occupation), but I have long felt that unions are a vital part of protecting American rights and liberties. Without unions, there would be no middle class, and without a middle class, we would have no freedoms. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just FYI, it is not just Unions who are being shafted without benefit of KY. I read recently that one of the big three auto automakers is notifying its white-collar retirees that they will no longer be provided the drug and health care-benefits that were part of their retirement packages.

[usmc1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
usmc:What in the article leads you to say that it is "very biased."

What about the article is not biased save for the second two paragraphs?

Some biased phrases:
obscene and depraved mindset that drives the corporate elite

The corporate elite

many of whom labor in conditions of near-slavery in order to stuff the bellies and the wallets of foreign fat-cats.

if they can't keep paying peon wages to defenseless people in hell-hole conditions.

predatory elites moving relentlessly, remorselessly around the world, swooping in wherever they're allowed to put profits over people, to treat human beings like so much meat to be chewed up and discarded, then moving on when there's the slightest hint of measure that might impact their already unfathomable riches by some infinitesimal degree.

usmc, you are smart. I know that you can tell the difference between reported articles and editorial articles. This is a biased editorial.

I read the full article at the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/business/worldbusiness/13sweat.html?ex=1318392000&en=004ae914c77ca2c1&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) (may be time sensitive) and found more reasons other than businesses not wanting to protect their workers.

I am all for workers' rights. I wish they could all acquire health care, safe conditions, workable wages, rest/lunch breaks, etc. However, corporations also have the right to leave areas where expenses will get too high--not that it will happen in China, but then, look at more of their objections.

Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, let's say corporations have the "right to leave areas where expenses will get too high". But, having done that they should also lose the prtections, tax-breaks afforded them as US businesses, let them move their headquarters and families to Beijing or Bangledore.

[LamontCranston]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The only problem with this is the people who cannot afford to shop any where else but Walmart and Target because of the wages they are paid by places like Walmart, Target, and any McJob that only pays min. wage with no health care plans. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> This might be a bit controversial, but many people are paid low wages because they settle for them. Low income does not mean disadvantaged.

America (and many other places) is still the land of opportunity. Often the difference between wealth and poverty is desire and will.

I don't shop at these places, I don't care that I pay a bit more elsewhere.

[nimrod]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
This might be a bit controversial, but many people are paid low wages because they settle for them. Low income does not mean disadvantaged.

America (and many other places) is still the land of opportunity. Often the difference between wealth and poverty is desire and will.

I don't shop at these places, I don't care that I pay a bit more elsewhere. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I understand what you are saying, but there are cases in which someone as the will and desire for more, but it just does not happen for them for some reason. I worked for a supermarket and was in a union, and I was paid well for what I did and had benefits, but I was only schedualed twenty four hours a week, so my pay at the end of the week was little more than min. wage at forty hours a week, the only plus was the medical benefits that were assured through the union. I worked hard and desired more within my profession and deserved it, but I did not achieve it.

When it comes to Walmart they promise you more then the story changes after you are hired.

Yes the opportunities are out there, but that does not mean that everyone can or will benefit from them.

One last item, stick to your convictions not to shop at those stores. http://oakhurstonline.com/icon/applause.gif I do not know how much it will help solve any of the problems but I do admire your desire for change.

[LamontCranston]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I worked for a supermarket and was in a union, and I was paid well for what I did and had benefits, but I was only schedualed twenty four hours a week, so my pay at the end of the week was little more than min. wage at forty hours a week, </div></BLOCKQUOTE> This here is something more along the thread topic. This is an example of corporate executives creating an environment for them, not the employee.

This is also an example of an issue where Republicans (or at least me) think government has a purpose: looking out for the individual.

Why weren't you scheduled for more hours? That's a shame and it prevents opportunity and talent from flourishing.

When I was a teen -- and before the age of super supermarkets -- we had a local grocer who hired 16 & 17 year olds, but at a wage lower than minimum wage for "trial and training".

Guess what? Very few people made it past the training period without being let go. Adults noticed the pattern and blew the whistle on the guy. It's a Dept. of Labor violation.

This part of the issue is also something we can work to solve here and now. When higher institutions (like the NY Times, state/federal gov't, big business) point overseas to something beyond control, they are really diverting your attention.

Keep it focused here in our own neighborhoods. Don't buy goods and services produced with cheap labor.

The best illegal immigrant program I can think of is this.. if the lettuce farmers are bringing in and paying illigals instead of using local labor at a competitive wage, then stop buying lettuce on a large scale, and say why.

The lettuce farmers will be out of business and others will see and learn from what happened.

The reason we hear it's "agriculture workers" and not lettuce farmers, or even which brand of lettuce, is because the Lettuce Farmers of America lobby donates money to political campaigns. That's a shame too.

So they'll spend more of my money to build a freakin' fence across the desert.

What's a fence got to do with economics of supply and demand, profit margins and the cost of labor? Nothing, but it looks like the pols did something, when they actually did nothing.

THAT'S why the Republicans lost in the election. Stupid. And I can see it.

[Bob S.]

B.L.:"Ok, maybe not ALL. Mostly? Some? a little bit? As long as corporate profits are not affected."

There is a big difference in advocating for workers' rights and advocating for businesses to stay in a certain area no matter the economic consequences.

When the people are working, they should all be afforded the best working conditions and the best benefits possible. But the businesses must also make their own decisions about where the best, most advantageous area where their business should be located. A while back here in Norfolk, the Ford plant announced it was closing. They had the right to do that as they had other, more profitable plants to make the trucks.

Bob S.

[Naturist Mark]

America has lost millions of high paying industrial jobs over the last 2 decades, only to be replaced with low paying service jobs.

Those jobs weren't lost because American workers can't do the job well - they can. They didn't lose the jobs because they couldn't do the jobs economically - American workers have the highest productivity in the world. They lost the jobs because economic bottom feeding offers short term windfall profits that are more attractive than long term growth and stability. The savings in productive labor costs does not go to overall lower prices or to shareholders - most goes to exorbitant executive compensation - the wage ratio (http://www.epinet.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snapshots_20060627) between the lowest and highest wages paid in American corporations has never been greater - and is higher than anywhere else in the world.

The whole point of the 'free trade' system as now practiced is to reduce labor costs according to the Iron Law of Wages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_wages). The worldwide destruction of the middle class is the goal.

What happens when there is no longer a middle class to drive consumer demand? The entire world will become Mexico.

-Mark

[Sanslines]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The savings in productive labor costs does not go to overall lower prices or to shareholders - most goes to exorbitant executive compensation - the wage ratio between the lowest and highest wages paid in American corporations has never been greater - and is higher than anywhere else in the world. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is very true and the ratio will only increase as there seems to be no way to control the enormous wages that are paid to corporate executives and professional athletes.

[Sanslines]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Keep it focused here in our own neighborhoods. Don't buy goods and services produced with cheap labor. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunately the majority of people will not care about cheap labor and will continue to shop at Wal Mart, Dollar Stores, and other sources of goods made with cheap labor. Most of what is manufactured today comes from China and people will not give up shopping.

[maliakei]

Check out this website on American Products and Services - Made in America

http://www.madeinusa.org/

_________________________

MAD IN AMERICA??

Subject: Job Layoffs in America

Regarding job layoffs in the U.S. Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6 a.m. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG). He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA). After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) and continued his search for a good paying AMERICAN JOB. At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in.....AMERICA.....

Keep this circulating.....

[usmc1]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by maliakei:
Check out this website on American Products and Services - Made in America

http://www.madeinusa.org/

_________________________

MAD IN AMERICA??

Subject: Job Layoffs in America

Regarding job layoffs in the U.S. Joe Smith started the day early having set his alarm clock (MADE IN JAPAN) for 6 a.m. While his coffeepot (MADE IN CHINA) was perking, he shaved with his electric razor (MADE IN HONG KONG). He put on a dress shirt (MADE IN SRI LANKA), designer jeans (MADE IN SINGAPORE) and tennis shoes (MADE IN KOREA). After cooking his breakfast in his new electric skillet (MADE IN INDIA) he sat down with his calculator MADE IN MEXICO) to see how much he could spend today. After setting his watch (MADE IN TAIWAN) to the radio (MADE IN INDIA) he got in his car (MADE IN GERMANY) and continued his search for a good paying AMERICAN JOB. At the end of yet another discouraging and fruitless day, Joe decided to relax for a while. He put on his sandals (MADE IN BRAZIL) poured himself a glass of wine (MADE IN FRANCE) and turned on his TV (MADE IN INDONESIA), and then wondered why he can't find a good paying job in.....AMERICA.....

Keep this circulating..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, that and this too.

A friend took a trip to Russia recently and brought back, as gift for me, a tee-shirt she purchased in Finland. It was Fruit of the Loom (American Brand) and was made in Sri Lanka.

Made in Sri Lanka, sold in Finland, to group touring Russia and worn in America = Globilization.

The there's this. Went shopping for trousers the other day. My inseam is 31. I found 29, 30, 32 but no 31. 30 has me looking like uncle Rhubarb during high water, and 32 has the cuff dragging like a gangsta.

And I prefer trousers with cuffs, not pipestem, but try to find them.

All of which is to say that quality and style has diminished since everything has moved offshore.

I appreciate the links to "American" made, but suggest a word of caution. If they are made in sweatshops in an American territory or protectorate, such as say Saipan, they can carry a made in USA label.

[LamontCranston]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Unfortunately the majority of people will not care about cheap labor and will continue to shop at Wal Mart, Dollar Stores, and other sources of goods made with cheap labor. Most of what is manufactured today comes from China and people will not give up shopping. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Right Sans... but you and I aren't "most people." We are individuals free to choose.

One cannot complain about lower wages brought on by globalization AND shop at WalMart. It's like complaining about the leadership in Washington (or any other capital) but not voting in elections.

So don't feed the demand. Make a change. Your vote matters and your wallet matters.

[Sanslines]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Unfortunately the majority of people will not care about cheap labor and will continue to shop at Wal Mart, Dollar Stores, and other sources of goods made with cheap labor. Most of what is manufactured today comes from China and people will not give up shopping. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Right Sans... but you and I aren't "most people." We are individuals free to choose.

One cannot complain about lower wages brought on by globalization AND shop at WalMart. It's like complaining about the leadership in Washington (or any other capital) but not voting in elections.

So don't feed the demand. Make a change. Your vote matters and your wallet matters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Very true. Here is another story about domestic quality. About 4 years ago, I purchased a bag of American made Mortar Cement. I was building a pedestal for a furnace and experienced problems with the strength of the mortar cement. I had to redo this job a couple of times before I asked another individual (who worked in construction for 40 years) about his experiences with mortar cement. He mentioned that several years back, the proportion of portland cement that was used in the mortar cement mix was decreased, thereby reducing the strength of the mortar cement. His suggestion was to add pure portland cement to the mortar cement to bring the strength back to the level that it should be and once was. I did so and have never had a problem since. This is just one example that shows that domestic products have also been cheapened up (almost to the point where they are no longer usable). It is not just products and materials that are being produced offshore. We have our share of domestic junk too!

[missouriboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The whole point of the 'free trade' system as now practiced is to reduce labor costs according to the Iron Law of Wages. The worldwide destruction of the middle class is the goal.

What happens when there is no longer a middle class to drive consumer demand? The entire world will become Mexico.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Exactly. And the march toward that goal was kicked into high gear with the adoption of NAFTA (No American Factories Taking Applications) -- under Clinton! (I don't blame Clinton, but mention it to point out that it doesn't matter who the president is at the time the Globalists make their current demands. The president must comply because the status quo in America is: "We own this government, not the people, so you obey us OR ELSE!").

Remember when Ross Perot cautioned us about "That giant sucking sound"? He was right, and we're seeing the evidence now.

I see you put the term 'free trade' in quotes; I agree with that too, because if it really was free trade, it wouldn't need 8,000 pages of regulations to administer it, would it? And the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank, etc.

And the destruction of the middle class will return the world back to a two-class society: the haves and the have-nots, the rich and the poor. The middle class is by definition between those two, and is in fact the source of support for both of them! It was the advent of the middle class that lifted the whole world above its centuries of two-class misery, just in the last two hundred years, and now the upper-class somehow thinks it'll be an improvement to return there. Stupid! They are doomed to repeat the history that they ignore.

[Naturist Mark]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I see you put the term 'free trade' in quotes; I agree with that too, because if it really was free trade, it wouldn't need 8,000 pages of regulations to administer it, would it? And the WTO, the IMF, and the World Bank, etc. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I used to be strong supporter of 'free trade', in fact if you check the archives of this forum you should find some posts I made defending it. In the early years of NAFTA free trade DID work as advertised - President Clinton pursued side agreements with Mexico concerning environmental and labor rights so there wasn't a race to the bottom. NAFTA trade resulted in increased sales TO Mexico as well as FROM Mexico, along with increased cross border trade there were more jobs and higher wages on both sides of the border - that was what NAFTA was sold to us to do, and for a time it did. But today "free trade" is a race to the bottom.

-Mark

[nimrod]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
This here is something more along the thread topic. This is an example of corporate executives creating an environment for them, not the employee.

Why weren't you scheduled for more hours? That's a shame and it prevents opportunity and talent from flourishing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It all comes down to bonuses. Managment is not in the union, they work for the company, the company offers bonuses to managers, the union does not.

I do not know the exact formula, but it works something like this. The manager has to put in a predicted profit for the month which is based on sales from previous months, and the same month in previous years(months with major holidays have more sales than months without) minus labor cost and shirnkage(items that come in dammaged and stolen items). This is where I am not sure how it works, if it is a percentage, or if it is calculated some other way, but if the actual profit is more than the predicted profit the manager will recieve a bonus at the end of the year for each month that the actual profit was more than the predicted profit. All the managers are supposed to figure the profits and then use a certain percentage to make the scheldual calculated on labor cost(different positions, and how long that position was held had different wages), but they will make the scheldual first giving each employee the minimum amount of hours that is in the union contract to retain benefits(when I was working it was 24 hours per week because in order to retain my benefits I needed 96 hours per month) then make a prediction off of those labor cost and add a little more because if the actual labor cost is less than what is allowed by the percentage of the profits it also adds to their bonus.

There are even some managers who will not fill the higher wage positions in order to keep their labor cost lower, which results in a higher bonus, but also problems with costomer service.

[LamontCranston]

Two things -- <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Remember when Ross Perot cautioned us about "That giant sucking sound"? He was right, and we're seeing the evidence now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> I voted for good ole Ross and I'm not sorry.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There are even some managers who will not fill the higher wage positions in order to keep their labor cost lower, which results in a higher bonus, but also problems with costomer service. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> But if they let you work a full week (and even paid you OT) while unloading the poor performers... guess what? Sales might very well go up! Customer service problems might go down! And the bonus remains intact!

Maybe cut you a stock plan so you begin to care too... and profit yourself.

Everyone wins... unless a few are short-sighted, near-term profit driven, can't motivate people, looking out for #1, management losers.

A friend of mine was let go last week. He's too expensive. They hired a replacement contractor of non-US citizenship who can't write a sentence or explain himself over the phone. Cheaper though. Those of us left behind will either pick up his slack or be penalized a year from now when quality suffers. Meanwhile, the vice presidents get to save money and report quarterly profits targets.

Everyone can see there's a problem, but the corporate mother ship is 1,000 miles away and the people making decisions are inaccessible.

I hate it.

[missouriboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I used to be strong supporter of 'free trade'... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>The problem is that 'free trade' isn't even really what it is. 'Free trade' is the government-speak euphemism for a tool by which to revert the world to a two-class system. The term was adopted by the ruling class to con the middle-class into oblivious acceptance. Which you evidently have come to realize by now, right?

Then there is the even further consideration that free trade is not what we really need -- rather, it is fair trade that the rulers should be striving for, as long as natural free exchange is going to be tinkered with. But no. It's human nature for a given faction of humanity to seek its own betterment, at the expense of the other factions. And this makes the top dogs get unreachably higher and higher, until the system collapses again, and must be started over. Can you say "Dark Ages" again?

The goal of the "New World Order" is a Global Plantation, whereby the elite will enjoy unprecedented luxury and supremacy over the commoners, and the workers. The preliminary method is to first consolidate the world into three major regions for a generation or so, before eventually ramping up to the ultimate One World Government.

Of the three regions, the European Union is already an accomplished fact, albeit perhaps not fully complete.

The similar "American Union" is well under way, what with NAFTA, the FTAA, the coming Trans Texas Corridor (NAFTA Superhighway), and the talk of replacing our various national currencies with a single "Amero" like the Euro. It's happening now, right under our noses, folks.

The third region is all of Asia, and is less further along, but is currently in the planning stages too.

National Sovereignty is to be scrapped for the administrative convenience of the plutocrats seeking to govern us all. And while this is happening, let's assist them by chasing all their false flags designed to focus our attention on partisan bickering, celebrity antics, and sports brats!

[LamontCranston]

Interesting you describe it this way, Mo-boy.

Back during the summer when wiretapping was all the rage, I spotted George Orwell's novel 1984 on a shelf at Barnes & Noble.

I bought it and read it. You should too.

The three government world union concept is in fact the society in Orwell's 1984.

There are a few other aspects in his society that have come to pass. Give it a read.

I'm not sure we're as close as it seems. The UK is still not part of the EU. I don't see China, Thailand ,and Japan agreeing on anything, even the weather. And the Trans-Texas pipeline thing will soon have a fence built across it's mid-section. Plus, you left out Russia, and the Mid East.

Read Orwell's 1984, though. It's quite good.

[nimrod]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
But if they let you work a full week (and even paid you OT) while unloading the poor performers... guess what? Sales might very well go up! Customer service problems might go down! And the bonus remains intact!

Maybe cut you a stock plan so you begin to care too... and profit yourself.

Everyone wins... unless a few are short-sighted, near-term profit driven, can't motivate people, looking out for #1, management losers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unfortunatly the company does not see it that way. There is also an unwriten rule of not letting employees achive a permement 40 hour a week status. I do not know if things have changed, but when I was working there in order to have a permement 40 hour a week status the manager would have to schedual a person for 40 hours a week for 16 weeks strait. That means that the manager could schedual a person for 30 hours a week, but ask them to stay and the person would acheive 40 hours in that week but because it was not scheldualed it does not count towards the 16 they would need.

The biggest problem there is in corporate America is greed. There are those out there that do care about the customer and their own employees, but they are few and far between.

[LamontCranston]

Sounds like you're up against a combination of money-driven senior managemnt, bloated union rules, and spine-lacking middle managers.

Microsoft had this problem a few years back. They had a practice of hiring "temp workers". Just like you say, they were paid hourly and just short of full-time status and therefore not eligible for benefits and profit sharing.

They sued and won. If you can prove its a pattern, the Dept of Labor is interested.

[missouriboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I'm not sure we're as close as it seems. The UK is still not part of the EU. I don't see China, Thailand ,and Japan agreeing... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>No, we're not down to counting the days yet. That's why I said the European Union wasn't even complete yet. These things take time, lots of time, because they have to sneak it in gradually. (Orwell saw it coming in 1948.) It's been in the making for well over 100 years so far; the 70-year attempt with 2-class Soviet Communism was too far, too fast, and it self-aborted. Remember, their goal was to spread it world-wide? The goal has not changed, only the strategy has.

I don't expect to ever see it completed, but our grandchildren might. Is that what we want for them? Is the answer to that question something liberals and conservatives can agree on?

[nimrod]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LamontCranston:
Sounds like you're up against a combination of money-driven senior managemnt, bloated union rules, and spine-lacking middle managers.

Microsoft had this problem a few years back. They had a practice of hiring "temp workers". Just like you say, they were paid hourly and just short of full-time status and therefore not eligible for benefits and profit sharing.

They sued and won. If you can prove its a pattern, the Dept of Labor is interested. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No longer, have not worked there for some time now, so I do not have to play their games any more.

Management allways works within the union contract so no one can be denied benefits, they just make sure that the employee is scheldualed the minimum hours posible for them to keep their benefits. The only way an employee could be schedualed less is if they sign a waver to have their hours cut, which students sometimes would.

[oldbob]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:

I read the full article at the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/business/worldbusiness/13sweat.html?ex=1318392000&en=004ae914c77ca2c1&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss) (may be time sensitive) and found more reasons other than businesses not wanting to protect their workers.



Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I too read the article in the New York Times. What worried me most is that China holds a large percentage of The United States' national debt. If manufacturers move their operations out of China, thereby reducing China's ability to buy U. S. government bonds, The U. S. could end up with some really big problems with continuing to fund our national debt.

And that brings up another thing that I think liberals and conservatives should agree on is if not a balanced budget, one that at least reduces the national debt.

Bob

[oldbob]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by missouriboy:

And the destruction of the middle class will return the world back to a two-class society: the haves and the have-nots, the rich and the poor. The middle class is by definition between those two, and is in fact the source of support for both of them! It was the advent of the middle class that lifted the whole world above its centuries of two-class misery, just in the last two hundred years, and now the upper-class somehow thinks it'll be an improvement to return there. Stupid! They are doomed to repeat the history that they ignore. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Eliminating the tax on stock dividends, reducing the capital gains tax, and most of all, eliminating the inheritance tax (it's not a death tax) contribute to the development of an aristocracy of wealth in this country. I think that we are going to continue to see a continuing concentration of wealth in this country into just a few families.

Bob

Bob