Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China Trade: Myths vs. Reality
Townhall.com ^ | December 21, 2011 | Walter E. Williams

Posted on 12/21/2011 4:37:03 AM PST by Kaslin

Republicans and Democrats, liberals as well as conservatives, have bought into anti-Chinese trade demagoguery. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested that tariffs against China are a "key part of our 'Make It in America' agenda." During his 2010 campaign, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., called his tea party-backed Republican challenger, Sharron Angle, "a foreign worker's best friend." In a recent news conference, President Barack Obama gave his support to the anti-China campaign, declaring that China "has been very aggressive in gaming the trading system to its advantage," adding that "we can and should take action against countries that are keeping their currencies undervalued ... (and) that, above all, means China."

Republican 2012 presidential candidates have jumped on the anti-China bandwagon. Mitt Romney wrote: "If I am fortunate enough to be elected president, I will work to fundamentally alter our economic relationship with China. ... I will begin on Day One by designating China as the currency manipulator it is." Former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., was even more challenging, saying, "I want to go to war with China."

Let's look at the magnitude of our trade with China. An excellent place to start is a recent publication (8/8/2011) by Galina Hale and Bart Hobijn, two economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, titled "The U.S. Content of 'Made in China.'" One of the several questions they ask is: What is the fraction of U.S. consumer spending for goods made in China? Their data sources are the U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis.

Hale and Hobijn find that the vast majority of goods and services sold in the United States are produced here. In 2010, total imports were about 16 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, and of that, 2.5 percent came from China. A total of 88.5 percent of U.S. consumer spending is on items made in the United States, the bulk of which are domestically produced services -- such as medical care, housing, transportation, etc. -- which make up about two-thirds of spending. Chinese goods account for 2.7 percent of U.S. personal consumption expenditures, about one-quarter of the 11.5 percent foreign share. Chinese imported goods consist mainly of furniture and household equipment; other durables; and clothing and shoes. In the clothing and shoes category, 35.6 percent of U.S. consumer purchases in 2010 were items with the "Made in China" label.

Much of what China sells us has considerable "local content." Hale and Hobijn give the example of sneakers that might sell for $70. They point out that most of that price goes for transportation in the U.S., rent for the store where they are sold, profits for shareholders of the U.S. retailer, and marketing costs, which include the salaries, wages and benefits paid to the U.S. workers and managers responsible for getting sneakers to consumers. On average, 55 cents of every dollar spent on goods made in China goes for marketing services produced in the U.S.

Going hand in hand with today's trade demagoguery is talk about decline in U.S. manufacturing. For the year 2008, the Federal Reserve estimated that the value of U.S. manufacturing output was about $3.7 trillion. If the U.S. manufacturing sector were a separate economy -- with its own GDP -- it would be tied with Germany as the world's fourth-richest economy. Today's manufacturing worker is so productive that the value of his average output is $234,220, three times higher than it was in 1980 and twice as high as it was in 1990. That means more can be produced with fewer workers, resulting in a precipitous fall in manufacturing jobs, from 19.5 million jobs in 1979 to a little more than 10 million today.

The bottom line is that we Americans are allowing ourselves to be suckered into believing that China is the source of our unemployment problems when the true culprit is Congress and the White House.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: china; democrats; freetrade; jobsandeconomy; scc
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

1 posted on 12/21/2011 4:37:07 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I remember the good old days, when cozying up to the Commies was a bad thing.


2 posted on 12/21/2011 4:39:41 AM PST by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
anti-Chinese trade demagoguery

B.S.

It's not anti-Chinese, and it's not demagoguery. It's patriotism. America first.

3 posted on 12/21/2011 4:42:51 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The bottom line is that we Americans are allowing ourselves to be suckered into believing that China is the source of our unemployment problems when the true culprit is Congress and the White House.

Ding ding. Misguided protectionists making boogeymen out of free trade are only distracting from the real problem.

4 posted on 12/21/2011 4:49:32 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty

Wrong.


5 posted on 12/21/2011 4:50:31 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty

The very word “protectionist” is a boogeyman.

I notice so-called free trade Williams also uses a lot of inflammatory rhetoric.

A lot like the way gays name call those who are against their lifestyle.

“homophobe”, is used much the same way “protectionist” is. To squelch discussion of real issues, and make anyone who disagrees with your lifestyle choice, the issue.

In this case, that lifestyle choice is firing Americans and sending our jobs to a communist nation.

Not a lifestyle I aspire to.

Just saying.


6 posted on 12/21/2011 4:56:51 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Nah. If US manufacturers didn’t have the life choked out of them by insane tax rates, senseless regulatory burdens, and gangster labor unions, then we wouldn’t have to rely on China so much. Free trade isn’t the enemy here.


7 posted on 12/21/2011 4:59:25 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Former Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., was even more challenging, saying, "I want to go to war with China."

Dr. Williams, that is informative.

I had no idea Santorum was pro-America in regards to trade. I believe I just found a new candidate to support. Thank you.

SANTORUM 2012


8 posted on 12/21/2011 5:04:12 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Protectionism is just another tool for statists to monopolize their power. Demonizing free trade is just a means to distract people from the reality that the statists themselves are the problem.


9 posted on 12/21/2011 5:04:20 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
Protectionism is just another tool for statists to monopolize their power. Demonizing free trade is just a means to distract people from the reality that the statists themselves are the problem.

Free trade is just another tool for globalists to fire as many Americans as possible and weaken our nation.

Two can play that rhetorical game.
10 posted on 12/21/2011 5:08:16 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
A total of 88.5 percent of U.S. consumer spending is on items made in the United States, the bulk of which are domestically produced services -- such as medical care, housing, transportation, etc.

Williams now considers services "items". He's stretching it quite a bit as usual.

11 posted on 12/21/2011 5:08:22 AM PST by raybbr (People who still support Obama are either a Marxist or a moron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Today's manufacturing worker is so productive that the value of his average output is $234,220...

While he gets paid about a fifth of that.

12 posted on 12/21/2011 5:09:31 AM PST by raybbr (People who still support Obama are either a Marxist or a moron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
Wrong.

You really need to back that up with some facts. Prove your case.

13 posted on 12/21/2011 5:15:38 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
A quarter TRILLION dollars a year bilateral trade deficit is a lot of facts.

SANTORUM 2012


14 posted on 12/21/2011 5:19:27 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Williams now considers services "items". He's stretching it quite a bit as usual.

That's true but there is still an important message in the claim. The message: The clear trend in American consumption is away from manufactured goods and toward services. How much are you spending on TV and Internet connections for example. Those are services not manufactured goods but are, in my case, a better way to spend my bucks compared to buying more "stuff".

Why is this important: Because it is very difficult to offshore services. The Chinese are not going to go into the ISP business in the U.S. Shoes, clothes, some electronics yes. But not services.

15 posted on 12/21/2011 5:23:06 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
A quarter TRILLION dollars a year bilateral trade deficit is a lot of facts.

$250 billion is Chump Change to Obama. We are about to borrow half that much to finance the SS shortfall for another year. And compare that to the $3700 billion in U.S. manufactured output.

Keep things in perspective and consider the advantages to the U.S. in having a cheap source of manufactured goods. You can always shop at Nordstrom's for clothing but I will tell you there are a lot gals picking out their clothes these days from the racks at Walmart. I think they have every right to do so.

16 posted on 12/21/2011 5:28:41 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
With all due respect to you, and all due respect to Obama...

(that's not saying the respect due the two of you is similar) :D

When Obama spends $250 billion dollars, it doesn't go to build up the PLA. Which we had better start paying attention to.

The world does not revolve around Ayn Rand.

The world revolves around factories, and military power.

SANTORUM 2012


17 posted on 12/21/2011 5:33:10 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; calcowgirl; Gilbo_3; NFHale; ...
RE :"Hale and Hobijn find that the vast majority of goods and services sold in the United States are produced here. In 2010, total imports were about 16 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, and of that, 2.5 percent came from China. A total of 88.5 percent of U.S. consumer spending is on items made in the United States, the bulk of which are domestically produced services -- such as medical care, housing, transportation, etc. -- which make up about two-thirds of spending. Chinese goods account for 2.7 percent of U.S. personal consumption expenditures, about one-quarter of the 11.5 percent foreign share. Chinese imported goods consist mainly of furniture and household equipment; other durables; and clothing and shoes. In the clothing and shoes category, 35.6 percent of U.S. consumer purchases in 2010 were items with the "Made in China" label.
Going hand in hand with today's trade demagoguery is talk about decline in U.S. manufacturing. For the year 2008, the Federal Reserve estimated that the value of U.S. manufacturing output was about $3.7 trillion. If the U.S. manufacturing sector were a separate economy -- with its own GDP -- it would be tied with Germany as the world's fourth-richest economy. Today's manufacturing worker is so productive that the value of his average output is $234,220, three times higher than it was in 1980 and twice as high as it was in 1990. That means more can be produced with fewer workers, resulting in a precipitous fall in manufacturing jobs, from 19.5 million jobs in 1979 to a little more than 10 million today.
"

This last point is the most important, that US manufacturers can produce more and more with less labor and that trend will continue as time goes on. Our best future will being able to export products (like energy) and services to other countries and less and less workers will be needed regardless.

I am amazed that kids out of college say we shouldnt drill our own oil because it might be sold to those in other countries. Clueless!

18 posted on 12/21/2011 5:54:12 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
That's true but there is still an important message in the claim. The message: The clear trend in American consumption is away from manufactured goods and toward services.

True. But, isn't wealth measured in tangible assets? Can we really have a prosperous and sustainable economy based on services? That's sort of like looking forward to profit from the multiple sale of derivatives, isn't it?

The Chinese are not going to go into the ISP business in the U.S.

Why not? What's to stop them?

19 posted on 12/21/2011 5:55:57 AM PST by raybbr (People who still support Obama are either a Marxist or a moron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
Can we really have a prosperous and sustainable economy based on services?

Not completely of course but Americans are choosing to cut down on "stuff" and increase spending on services. It's their choice. It's mostly not forced with Obamacare and healthcare in general not quite meeting that criteria.

I'm just observing the trend not trying to justify it. It just seems that I buy more books that are ones and zeros (not much manufacturing content there) and less of the manufactured printed versions. That moves bucks from manufacturing to services but I still read the same content. And furthermore, that example clearly shows how it is easy to mix up services and manufactured goods. The distinctions in some cases are being blurred.

20 posted on 12/21/2011 6:04:58 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
True. But, isn't wealth measured in tangible assets? Can we really have a prosperous and sustainable economy based on services? That's sort of like looking forward to profit from the multiple sale of derivatives, isn't it?

No, wealthy needn't be solely derived from outputting tangible assets. If you provide services, information, ideas, etc. that someone else deems valuable and is willing to pay for, then that's obviously a means to obtain wealth.

21 posted on 12/21/2011 6:06:35 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; Wolfie; Cringing Negativism Network; Utmost Certainty; raybbr; InterceptPoint; ...
The message: The clear trend in American consumption is away from manufactured goods and toward services. How much are you spending on TV and Internet connections for example.

Excellent point for the "Patriotic Protectionists" here decrying the "Free Traitors" to explain.

They all have satellite or cable TV or something like it.

Cable box/sat receiver are probably $100 in components....designed by Intel and Broadcom and Freescale in California and Texas and Oregon. 70% of the component values are in the R&D and sales portion. Asian manufacturing gets about 3% margin of profit on assembly and manufacturing.

Say they can make 50% of the content in a receiver box and only end up with a dollar or two out of the $100 for that box, while Intel and Freescale will get treble or 10x that in domestic profit just selling a single chip into the design.

And yet, after you buy the "chinese" hardware for a pittance, you'll still end up paying $50-100+ PER MONTH to the anti-capitalist, anti-American Hollywood content providers!.

It was not even possible to consider such a consumer model in the 50's, 60's or even early 70's.

Anyway, you can't make a clear cut case that it benefits one side or the other completely. You can't even say that it's parasitic one way or the other instead of symbiotic.

And I damn sure don't see any "Patriotic Protectionists" giving up their big screen Dish-TV.

Why is it better for a kid in Oakland to have a dead-end job making TV's or assembling cable boxes* than it is for him to have a job unloading cargo containers containing cable boxes designed by six engineers in Oregon?

*And until you fix the EPA/OSHA/EEOC nonsense, you can't even begin to consider having a plastic manufacturing plant for him to work in.

22 posted on 12/21/2011 6:19:13 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
I'm just observing the trend not trying to justify it. It just seems that I buy more books that are ones and zeros (not much manufacturing content there) and less of the manufactured printed versions. That moves bucks from manufacturing to services but I still read the same content. And furthermore, that example clearly shows how it is easy to mix up services and manufactured goods. The distinctions in some cases are being blurred.

Yup, astute observation. Some of the observed shift away from manufacturing can be attributed to changes in technology.

Similarly worth considering, is that much of the manufacturing processes are automated now and not as labor-intensive as they used to be. The gains in productivity are so large that you simply don't need as many workers to carry out the same tasks. This parallels what occurred in agriculture, which is what employed most people 200+ years ago. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, there was a shift away from agricultural employment to manufacturing over the decades. Nowadays, agriculture only makes up a minor fraction of the labor market.

23 posted on 12/21/2011 6:21:36 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
I'm just observing the trend not trying to justify it. It just seems that I buy more books that are ones and zeros (not much manufacturing content there) and less of the manufactured printed versions. That moves bucks from manufacturing to services but I still read the same content. And furthermore, that example clearly shows how it is easy to mix up services and manufactured goods. The distinctions in some cases are being blurred.

Yup, astute observation. Some of the observed shift away from manufacturing can be attributed to changes in technology.

Similarly worth considering, is that much of the manufacturing processes are automated now and not as labor-intensive as they used to be. The gains in productivity are so large that you simply don't need as many workers to carry out the same tasks. This parallels what occurred in agriculture, which is what employed most people 200+ years ago. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution, there was a shift away from agricultural employment to manufacturing over the decades. Nowadays, agriculture only makes up a minor fraction of the labor market.

24 posted on 12/21/2011 6:24:55 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
Nah. If US manufacturers didn’t have the life choked out of them by insane tax rates, senseless regulatory burdens, and gangster labor unions, then we wouldn’t have to rely on China so much. Free trade isn’t the enemy here.

You've been brainwashed. Private sector union participation is at 7% of the total workforce and declining. That is a good thing. However it has nothing to do with off shoring. The jobs that what to China were almost exclusively non-union.

25 posted on 12/21/2011 6:29:42 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Cable box/sat receiver are probably $100 in components....designed by Intel and Broadcom and Freescale in California and Texas and Oregon. 70% of the component values are in the R&D and sales portion. Asian manufacturing gets about 3% margin of profit on assembly and manufacturing.

You don't think we are also outsourcing all those "design" jobs as quick as the pink slips can be filled out?...

There is a massive amount of denial in these parts. Never seen so many conservatives, so utterly wrong about something important, in my life. It's like mass hypnosis. "Free Trade" pod people.

26 posted on 12/21/2011 6:31:08 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Asian manufacturing gets about 3% margin of profit on assembly and manufacturing.

So in a global conflict where the ChiComs are the enemy, think taiwan, what are these manufactures in China going to produce? Weapons to kill Americans that's what. That American owned factory will be confiscated and turned into a munitions factory in a millisecond.

27 posted on 12/21/2011 6:33:14 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
The gains in productivity are so large that you simply don't need as many workers to carry out the same tasks. This parallels what occurred in agriculture, which is what employed most people 200+ years ago.

This point is continuously overlooked by all of those who worry themselves to death about the loss of "manufacturing jobs". It's not jobs we're after, it's output. Build me a machine that will totally automate building a car without human intervention and the price of cars will plummet. Now build me a machine that builds those machines, also without human intervention. That will cause massive unemployment in the automobile sector. But is that a bad thing? If anyone thinks so they should go to Washington DC and get loan to start up a buggy whip factory that will employ thousands of members of the Buggy Whip Workers Union.

And there is always plenty of work to do somewhere. If the government would just get out the way those seeking work would find those jobs that really need to be done. We don't need as many people making buggy whips these days and we don't need as many working in manufacturing. So are we out of work? I don't think so.

28 posted on 12/21/2011 6:33:53 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: central_va

+1

Reality bump.

Conservatives used to understand obvious stuff like that.

What happened??


29 posted on 12/21/2011 6:35:05 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
Build me a machine that will totally automate building a car without human intervention and the price of cars will plummet.

The issue isn't the "machine" per say, IT'S WHERE THE "MACHINE" IS LOCATED.

30 posted on 12/21/2011 6:36:44 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: central_va
what are these manufactures in China going to produce? Weapons to kill Americans that's what. That American owned factory will be confiscated and turned into a munitions factory in a millisecond.

LOL. A cable box has zero overlap with AK47 tooling. And before you get your Star Trek fantasies out, a consumer grade satellite TV receiver does you no good trying to build aerospace/military avionics, unless they want 100% failure rate in the field.

31 posted on 12/21/2011 6:43:57 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: central_va
The issue isn't the "machine" per say, IT'S WHERE THE "MACHINE" IS LOCATED.

Well, if it was my machine I would pick some nice safe right to work state and build me a factory. Sending it to China would be just crazy. This machine needs first class engineering and software support.

32 posted on 12/21/2011 6:45:09 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty; hedgetrimmer
Cable box/sat receiver are probably $100 in components....designed by Intel and Broadcom and Freescale in California and Texas and Oregon. 70% of the component values are in the R&D and sales portion. Asian manufacturing gets about 3% margin of profit on assembly and manufacturing.

Pure sophistry. Three percent margin? The manufacturers all moved to China for 3%? Who are you trying to fool?

Seventy percent of the cost of making millions of boxes is in R&D. This is absurd.

Making these points while debating rational people is a waste of time. Fools might believe this, though.

33 posted on 12/21/2011 6:49:50 AM PST by raybbr (People who still support Obama are either a Marxist or a moron.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
You don't think we are also outsourcing all those "design" jobs as quick as the pink slips can be filled out?...


Sure, where it makes sense. And it doesn't have anything to do with "Trade Policy."

You used to be able to count on IP protection in the US as a reason to keep the engineering jobs here. Now there's so much litigation and patent trolls, it's not necessarily so.

There is a massive amount of denial in these parts. Never seen so many conservatives, so utterly wrong about something important, in my life. It's like mass hypnosis. "Patriotic Protectionist" pod people. (Mine has better alliteration than yours!)

It's like 17th century doctors demanding more leeches for the dying patient.

We can agree that the patient is in trouble. But bleeding him out ain't gonna help things.

34 posted on 12/21/2011 6:51:06 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Been to a hardware store in the last decade?

We've sent all our hand tool manufacturing to China also.

Think about hammers. Lug wrenches. Screwdrivers. Awls. Pliers. Saws. Files. Rasps. All those hardened iron manufactured goods made in factories now in China. Then think about an AK-47.

Don't think there's any overlap?

You're sleeping.

SANTORUM 2012


35 posted on 12/21/2011 6:52:48 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
LOL. A cable box has zero overlap with AK47 tooling. And before you get your Star Trek fantasies out, a consumer grade satellite TV receiver does you no good trying to build aerospace/military avionics, unless they want 100% failure rate in the field.

YOU are ignorant at best. Here is an example of a benign factory turned into a deadly production facility. A christmas light factory was converted into a proximity fuze production facility during WWII

First large scale production of tubes for the new fuzes[1] was at a General Electric plant in Cleveland, Ohio formerly used for manufacture of Christmas-tree lamps. Fuze assembly was completed at General Electric plants in Schenectady, New York and Bridgeport, Connecticut.[10]

Keep LOL-ing the joke is on us.

36 posted on 12/21/2011 6:53:08 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
"Free trade" is the equivalent of booting the patient out in the nearest jungle, with the explanation that competition with the bears and lions, will make the patient stronger, thus the patient will recover.

The patient is being eaten.

SANTORUM 2012


37 posted on 12/21/2011 6:55:36 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
RE :”Anyway, you can't make a clear cut case that it benefits one side or the other completely. You can't even say that it's parasitic one way or the other instead of symbiotic. And I damn sure don't see any “Patriotic Protectionists” giving up their big screen Dish-TV.
Why is it better for a kid in Oakland to have a dead-end job making TV’s or assembling cable boxes* than it is for him to have a job unloading cargo containers containing cable boxes designed by six engineers in Oregon?

Good points.

Even if the assembling cable box jobs were considered better than unloading boxes jobs, I seriously doubt that starting a trade war with China and other low wage developing countries is going to help us here, when what we need to do is increase exports. But trade wars is the type of Trump-like election nonsense we hear, rather than serious proposals to increase exports.

RE :And until you fix the EPA/OSHA/EEOC nonsense, you can't even begin to consider having a plastic manufacturing plant for him to work in

While Obama and Democrats talk jobs,jobs,jobs they still treat employers like it's privilege to hire a worker.

38 posted on 12/21/2011 6:57:37 AM PST by sickoflibs (You MUST support the lesser of two RINOs or we all die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: central_va
"Proximity fuse" and "light bulb."

"Supersonic inertial guidance system" and "cable box."

I'm not trying to browbeat you, but you really need to understand the g-shock requirements, radiation hardening and thermal packaging issues to name a very few problems before you get carried away with your argument.

A WWII era proximity fuse on a bomb is a subsonic toy compared to modern military technology in a supersonic Chinese cruise missile or ICBM....which they build now in dedicated factories without any help from us.

Using consumer-grade technology from Intel or Broadcom in Chinese military equipment would make it completely useless as soon as they launched it at 100G's. Do you understand that?

39 posted on 12/21/2011 7:02:17 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Private sector union participation is at 7% of the total workforce and declining.

Yes, but I wonder how much of the manufacturing sector in specific is unionized.

Further, the mere threat of unionization itself is something that manufacturers are harassed with—for instance, look at what happened recently with Boeing vs. the NLRB. It's yet another risk that has to be factored into a firm's business calculus whenever they make decisions about where to establish new facilities, etc. And I'm sure quite a few have decided it's simply not worth it and that they'd be better off constructing their plants elsewhere.

So yes, like I said, gangster unions + insane tax rates + crushing regulatory burdens (especially the EPA) make for a decidedly unfriendly business climate in the USA, even moreso for manufacturers IMO.

40 posted on 12/21/2011 7:05:54 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
Free trade" is the equivalent of booting the patient out in the nearest jungle, with the explanation that competition with the bears and lions, will make the patient stronger, thus the patient will recover. The patient is being eaten.

Aha. Now we're having fun with analogies!

Protectionists want to make the patient a bubble boy then? Afraid that he'll catch a disease or eaten by the asian tiger if he sets foot in the front yard? Ooops. But the bubble boy has to import the plastic for his bubble because mommy won't let him build a plastic factory...too dangerous!

41 posted on 12/21/2011 7:08:42 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

“protectionist” again.

“protectionist”. It’s the new “homophobe”.


42 posted on 12/21/2011 7:09:43 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine
Using consumer-grade technology from Intel or Broadcom in Chinese military equipment would make it completely useless as soon as they launched it at 100G's. Do you understand that?

The point is the production facility doesn't do design work, I am an Electrical Engineer by training and education. So don't go there.

Here is the point for those with half a brain(unlike you it seems) I could convert a Chinese electronic toy factory , retool and retrain, into a electronics warfare production factory faster than you can build one from scratch in Arkansas.

43 posted on 12/21/2011 7:12:35 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
This point is continuously overlooked by all of those who worry themselves to death about the loss of "manufacturing jobs". It's not jobs we're after, it's output. Build me a machine that will totally automate building a car without human intervention and the price of cars will plummet. Now build me a machine that builds those machines, also without human intervention. That will cause massive unemployment in the automobile sector. But is that a bad thing? If anyone thinks so they should go to Washington DC and get loan to start up a buggy whip factory that will employ thousands of members of the Buggy Whip Workers Union.

Exactly.

And there is always plenty of work to do somewhere. If the government would just get out the way those seeking work would find those jobs that really need to be done. We don't need as many people making buggy whips these days and we don't need as many working in manufacturing. So are we out of work? I don't think so.

Yes. Humans are quite ingenious at coming up with new forms of work for themselves, as new kinds of products and services are constantly being invented or improved upon. So long as the government stays out of the way and lets entrepreneurs do their thing, we won't be running out of jobs anytime soon. The record of economic history is a demonstrable testament to this.

44 posted on 12/21/2011 7:14:21 AM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
You're sleeping.

All products that are currently being invented, are immediately sent to China to be produced.

No benefit for America. None.

SANTORUM 2012


45 posted on 12/21/2011 7:16:01 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Free Trade is a religion, no amount of common sense or facts will change these zealots. Scratch under the surface and most Free Traitors are also open border zealots too.


46 posted on 12/21/2011 7:16:04 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
LOL. Yeah. All those chinese awls and electric flyswatters at Harbor Freight are going to knock down our limited F22 fleet.

We have listed the countries with most arms-producing companies as per below. Weaponry and military production and exports are amongst the top three most profiting industries for in world, while the top 10 most arms manufacturing companies are either American or European.

Note: arms sales are listed in US Dollars.

1. Boeing – United States of America

($28,050,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

 

Boeing F-15 Eagle

2. Northrop Grunmman – United States of America

($27,590,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

3. Lockheed Martin – United States of America

($26,460,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

Apache Helicoptors

4. BAE Systems – United Kingdom

($23,230,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

 

Tanks Gun Salute

5. Raytheon – United States of America

(19,800,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

6. General Dynamics – United States of America

($16,570,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

7. Finmeccanica – Italy

(9,800,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

8. EADS – Europe

($9,580,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

 

EADS CASA Transporter C295

9. L-3 Communications – United States of America

($8,970,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)

10. Thales – France

($8,940,000,000 in military equipment sales annually)


Harbor Freight Tools
Type Private
Industry Retail
Founded Los Angeles, California (1968)
Founder(s) Allan Smidt
Headquarters Calabasas, California
Number of locations 330
Area served USA
Key people Eric Smidt (Chairman & CEO)
Robert Rene (COO)
Products Tools
Revenue increase US$1.5 billion (2010)[1]
Employees 8000
Website www.harborfreight.com blog.harborfreight.com

Harbor Freight Tools is an American privately held company that runs a chain of discount tool retail stores. The company was founded in 1968 by Allan Smidt, primarily selling through its mail order catalog, which still exists today. The Calabasas, California based company offers a large variety of tools through its Web site, mail order catalog, and retail stores. Harbor Freight was one of the largest employers in Ventura County until their relocation to Calabasas, CA. It also previously owned and operated former online retailer OneStopGardens.com.http://www.top10stop.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/EADS-CASA-C295.jpg

47 posted on 12/21/2011 7:19:51 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
Yes, but I wonder how much of the manufacturing sector in specific is unionized

Stop wondering here is your answer.

2008, only one in 10 union members worked in manufacturing, down from nearly three in 10 in 1983. Five in 10 union workers were in the public sector last year, and the remaining four out of 10 were in the private sector outside manufacturing, according to the CEPR.

48 posted on 12/21/2011 7:21:11 AM PST by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network
All those hardened iron [sic] manufactured goods made in factories now in China.

That you don't seem to know the difference between "iron" and "steel" tells us much of what we need to know about why modern Americans are having trouble competing in the world.

49 posted on 12/21/2011 7:23:35 AM PST by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: central_va

You need to explain why an auto manufacturer chooses to locate in Alabama, Mississippi, Alabama, or Tennessee over Illinois, Michigan, or Ohio.


50 posted on 12/21/2011 7:27:04 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-74 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson