2012 Presidential Election Polls

[BigRedBuster]

Ending regulations will not bring manufacturing back to American soil. The only thing that will do that is wage equality. If I can pay a skilled worker 50 cents a day to make an iPod, why would I pay an American worker $160 a day?

 

This whole "regulations" thing is a boondoggle. It's coming from people who don't want the government watching them. The same kind of people who wrecked our economy a few years back, threatening another global market meltdown.

 

Sorry, ending regulations isn't the answer. Anyone telling you different is lying to you.

 

Wrong....

 

Yes, your wage issue is a real issue.

 

BUT, if I have a manufacturing plant that has to abide by very strict environmental regulations in the US which would greatly increase my costs, why wouldn't I build it in China where I don't have to worry about that at all and the government doesn't give a crap what I do unless the Olympics come to town and all they will have me do is close for a month?

 

And, I didn't say ending regulations is the answer. I said level the playing field.

 

I quoted you poorly, I'm sorry for that. And I didn't mean to imply that wage equality is the primary reason. Certainly regulations have a role to play. I just think the wage thing (and employee benefits, etc) is a larger slice of the pie.

 

The wage (and employee benefits) issue is a huge problem. But, I don't think people realize how big of an issue the other regulations are. My example of my raw material suppliers building plants in other countries is a prime example. That has nothing to do with wages. They WANT to build them here because there is a demand here and they can make better product here. BUT, environmental regulations (and I should include environmental groups fighting them) keeps them from doing it.

 

That is jobs right there that we should have here but they aren't for no reason other than political.

[BigRedBuster]

Not sure why that matters but I do ship some internationally.

Just noting that if you chose to manufacture in China and your primary market is the US . . . your shipping costs would probably go up. That'd partially offset (a small amount, I'm sure) the increased profits from cheaper materials and labor.

 

True....but, the chinese products are still being shipped here and sold at a cheaper price than I can even make them.

 

That wasn't a typo. They are being sold to the customer cheaper than I can make them.

[carlfense]

Not sure why that matters but I do ship some internationally.

Just noting that if you chose to manufacture in China and your primary market is the US . . . your shipping costs would probably go up. That'd partially offset (a small amount, I'm sure) the increased profits from cheaper materials and labor.

 

True....but, the chinese products are still being shipped here and sold at a cheaper price than I can even make them.

 

That wasn't a typo. They are being sold to the customer cheaper than I can make them.

That doesn't really surprise me. Maybe it should . . . but it doesn't.

[BigRedBuster]

Carl....

 

Here is a good example of what you are implying.

 

We tried bringing on a product line that compliments ours. We weren't going to manufacture it. We wanted to be a distributor of it and sell it along with our products. We reached a distribution agreement with a company that makes probably the top of the line products in that market.

 

They have both manufacturing here in the US and in China. Making the same product in China, I think was around 25-30% cheaper than in the US even after freight. This product is sold with maybe a 10% margin. So, simple math shows you that there was no way we could buy from the US manufacturing and make it work. Our supplier basically just used the US manufacturing for specialty products and orders they had to get out in a very short lead time. Probably 90% of their products were shipped from China in bulk.

[carlfense]

Carl....

 

Here is a good example of what you are implying.

 

We tried bringing on a product line that compliments ours. We weren't going to manufacture it. We wanted to be a distributor of it and sell it along with our products. We reached a distribution agreement with a company that makes probably the top of the line products in that market.

 

They have both manufacturing here in the US and in China. Making the same product in China, I think was around 25-30% cheaper than in the US even after freight. This product is sold with maybe a 10% margin. So, simple math shows you that there was no way we could buy from the US manufacturing and make it work. Our supplier basically just used the US manufacturing for specialty products and orders they had to get out in a very short lead time. Probably 90% of their products were shipped from China in bulk.

What was I implying? (Not a smart@$$ comment. . .)

[knapplc]

Making the same product in China, I think was around 25-30% cheaper than in the US even after freight.

 

Why? Which regulation jacks the US price up 25%-30%?

 

Wages make up a HUGE portion of that discrepancy. If it's all regulations, I would love to know which regulation(s) you're talking about.

[BigRedBuster]

Carl....

 

Here is a good example of what you are implying.

 

We tried bringing on a product line that compliments ours. We weren't going to manufacture it. We wanted to be a distributor of it and sell it along with our products. We reached a distribution agreement with a company that makes probably the top of the line products in that market.

 

They have both manufacturing here in the US and in China. Making the same product in China, I think was around 25-30% cheaper than in the US even after freight. This product is sold with maybe a 10% margin. So, simple math shows you that there was no way we could buy from the US manufacturing and make it work. Our supplier basically just used the US manufacturing for specialty products and orders they had to get out in a very short lead time. Probably 90% of their products were shipped from China in bulk.

What was I implying? (Not a smart@$$ comment. . .)

 

That was aimed at your comment about freight eating up at least some of the discrepancy. My point was that it doesn't do very much.

[carlfense]

Carl....

 

Here is a good example of what you are implying.

 

We tried bringing on a product line that compliments ours. We weren't going to manufacture it. We wanted to be a distributor of it and sell it along with our products. We reached a distribution agreement with a company that makes probably the top of the line products in that market.

 

They have both manufacturing here in the US and in China. Making the same product in China, I think was around 25-30% cheaper than in the US even after freight. This product is sold with maybe a 10% margin. So, simple math shows you that there was no way we could buy from the US manufacturing and make it work. Our supplier basically just used the US manufacturing for specialty products and orders they had to get out in a very short lead time. Probably 90% of their products were shipped from China in bulk.

What was I implying? (Not a smart@$$ comment. . .)

 

That was aimed at your comment about freight eating up at least some of the discrepancy. My point was that it doesn't do very much.

Yeah . . . I tried to make that clear:

 

That'd partially offset (a small amount, I'm sure) the increased profits from cheaper materials and labor.

[BigRedBuster]

Great...I had a response all typed out and my browser crashed.

 

I'll try to do it again.

 

Wages = Like you said, they are a HUGE portion. I'm not arguing that it is. BUT, government regulations like minimum wages play a big part in that.

 

Environmental laws = This is with everything from my raw material suppliers to us. If our entire distribution chain doesn't have to give a crap about anything, it drops the cost. When my suppliers not only have to spend many millions of dollars to even start to build a plant and then have huge amounts of legal fees to fight environmental regulation and activist threats, that all add costs.

 

Employee safety regulations = These all add costs and China has very little of these.

 

I've already spoken about the lead as an ingredient issue.

 

The Chinese government isn't a regulation here in the US but it plays a big part in this. If all I had to do is break even and then the government would take care of me, I could sell at a much lower price.

 

I'm sure there are others I'm not thinking about.

 

Like I said, I'm not necessarily apposed to all of these but it causes us to not compete on a level playing field.

[knapplc]

Of the two examples you've given, Environmental and Employee Safety, which do you think should be eliminated by the U.S. to make them more competitive? Because I think both are utterly crucial to this society, and neither should be removed. I would agree with some tweaking of each, and changes with either as needed, but nothing wholesale, or drastic.

 

China and Russia are both ecological disaster areas. Russian pollution, whether it's nuclear, chemical, biochemical or whatever, could progress to the point that it affects us here in America, and the world in general. Unregulated dumping in Russia is a horrific problem, one that we cannot afford to emulate in America. And before you say it won't get to that point here, ask yourself why it won't? Because it sure won't be stopped by the EPA if Romney is elected - the EPA will be gone, defunded by his Republican cronies. China has areas of toxic disaster rivaling anything in the world. Again, very little government regulation breeds contempt for consequences, and you end up with the ecological trauma you find in countries like Russia and China. Those are not models for America - they're examples of what we should not do, ever.

 

As far as employee safety regulations.... I can't imagine any profit being more important than the employee who gets that profit for you. OSHA is one of the government's best agencies for the rights of Americans. Sure, like the EPA, there are abuses, waste, problems... but the alternative is worse. No regulation on how much you pay employees, how you treat them, the safety of their workplace, etc, means you throw workers back into the dark days of the early 20th century, The Jungle all over again. Anyone even suggesting that we eliminate government oversight of worker safety is nuts. Abuse is bad enough as it is.

 

If the playing field is not level, so be it. We don't need to rape the environment and plunder the lives of our workers to compete with the likes of China. We're better than that.

[ZRod]

Like I said, I'm not necessarily apposed to all of these but it causes us to not compete on a level playing field.

Which brings up the issue of tariffs. But then you place a greater burden on consumers and possibly irritate a government that holds a majority of our nation's debt. Seems like a real catch 22. And if pressure the government in China to set regulations then you still place the burden on the consumer here. So really the only solution would be to increase the US's efficiency, there by driving down costs.

[zoogs]

Our industry can make our products using lead as an ingredient much cheaper than we do. However, it is illegal for us to use lead because of environmental regulations. Ok...I agree with that regulation and am not against keeping it. HOWEVER.....the same products can be made in China WITH lead and imported into the US and sold to the public and nobody knows and the government doesn't care. That's because it is not illegal to SELL lead based products, it is just illegal to PRODUCE lead based products like ours in the US.

 

Hey, WHAT??? is this true?

[ZRod]

I'm not sure about that, because I know PS3's and XBox's have to be made without lead soldering (which shortens their life span and is a whole other issue) because they are classified as "toys". Maybe it's just different for the toy market, or maybe they do make them here. But my uneducated self doubts that.

[carlfense]

It looks like Obama is getting quite a convention bounce:

 

Conventions may put Obama in Front Runner Position: http://fivethirtyeig...nners-position/

 

Nate Silver Chance of Obama Victory: 79.8% (+6.7 since Sept. 1)

 

RCP General Election Average: Obama +1.6

 

 

We should have a better idea of how the size of the bounce by mid-week. 9 weeks to go. Romney needs to change the dynamics . . . we'll see what effects his ad buys have.

[Sub-Husker]

Wages = Like you said, they are a HUGE portion. I'm not arguing that it is. BUT, government regulations like minimum wages play a big part in that.

 

Environmental laws = This is with everything from my raw material suppliers to us. If our entire distribution chain doesn't have to give a crap about anything, it drops the cost. When my suppliers not only have to spend many millions of dollars to even start to build a plant and then have huge amounts of legal fees to fight environmental regulation and activist threats, that all add costs.

 

Employee safety regulations = These all add costs and China has very little of these.

 

I've already spoken about the lead as an ingredient issue.

 

The Chinese government isn't a regulation here in the US but it plays a big part in this. If all I had to do is break even and then the government would take care of me, I could sell at a much lower price.

 

I'm sure there are others I'm not thinking about.

 

Like I said, I'm not necessarily apposed to all of these but it causes us to not compete on a level playing field.

 

The cost of employer health care adds about $5 to $7 to the loaded cost of American labor. We are the only nation that saddles our domestic companies with that burden.