Skip to comments.Whirlpool Unveils Plans to Slash Workforce by 10% (another company closing an American plant)
Posted on 10/28/2011 4:43:31 AM PDT by tobyhill
Whirlpool Corp , the world's largest appliance maker, slashed its full-year profit forecast and said it would cut about 10 percent of its workforce in North America and Europe, to protect margins in a weak economic environment.
The maker of Maytag and KitchenAid appliances will cut more than 5,000 positions and said it would close down its plant in Fort Smith, Arkansas, and reduce its overall manufacturing capacity by about 6 million units.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxbusiness.com ...
The level of taxes, laws, and regulations are dramatically different between countries making free markets between them impossible. Our ship has a rudder and we should use it. Just letting the sea toss us around will lead to our destruction. What are your ideas?
I was not advocating for or against. Please do not transfer your misplaced anger to me. I have bigger fish to fry these days.
“A recent report has found that Ireland is the most profitable country in the world for U.S. corporations.
The report, which was recently published in the U.S. tax journal Tax Notes, found that profits made by U.S. companies in Ireland doubled from 1999 to 2002, while profits in the rest of Europe plunged. While Luxembourg showed greater profitability rates for U.S. corporations, Ireland has a much larger “real economy” and produced the greatest profitability.
The report found a huge shift in the movement of capital towards tax havens.
“ In low-tax Ireland, for instance, profits of subsidiaries of U.S. multinationals have doubled in four years, from $13.4 billion to $26.8 billion. Profits from operations of U.S. multinationals in no-tax Bermuda have tripled, from $8.5 billion to $25.2 billion. Not surprisingly, those two tax havens rank as the number one and number two locations in terms of profitability for U.S. corporations operating abroad - surpassing long-time leading investment partners like the United Kingdom,” the report stated.
The report, written by Martin Sullivan, a former U.S. Treasury Department international taxation specialist, found that U.S. multinationals made $2.01 profit in Ireland in 2001 for every $1 they made in 1999.
In Britain, U.S. multinational profits dropped sharply to 67 U.S. cents in 2002 for every $1 profit made in 1999. In Germany, profits fell even more, slipping to 46 cents in 2002 for every $1 made in 1999.
While U.S. corporations in Ireland were involved in real productivity and the country was only a “semi tax haven”, locations such as Bermuda”
Etc etc, Ireland does have a tax treaty with the US.
I gave examples of cases where strategic protection doesn't achieve its goal: but rather has achieved bad defense and bloated government.
I believe in fighting back when attacked. I was pointing out what Smith was actually saying in his point about retributive tariffs. He wasn't saying they're a good thing: he was saying that there's a place for them when someone slaps them on you so that *both sides return to a tariff-less state.*
Your industries are in an increasingly untenable position because your domestic socialists have made America a bad place for them to make money. You're not competing with slaves: you're competing with capitalists who aren't laboring under your self-imposed burdens.
You can remove those burdens and compete, you can move to other areas of competition or you can clap tariffs onto your fellow citizens to force them to do what you believe is the right thing.
Which one of these three sounds like the American thing to do?
It is the fact of the matter, mathematics used in economics is laughably unsound, as my Calculas major buddy said:
“Let’s see how many fundamental rules of math we can violate today”
I thought we were talking about S. Korean corporations paying income taxes to the U.S. Treasury. You shouldn’t be surprised that U.S. corporations try to escape one of the most oppressive income taxes in the developed world.
You cannot afford to fly your fighters because of the dole, NHS and the council houses.
The US needs to show the rest of the world what the cost of their defense is, by letting them defend themselves.
Did your buddy fail Calculus, Economics, or both?
No, we can’t afford to fly our fighters because they cost us as much as 16 space shuttles. They would have been cheaper if they’d been made out of Gold.
Whereas if we had brought F16s off the shelf we’d be doing a lot better.
Multi National companies do exactly this.
And if one tried intellectual honesty for a change, one will also acknowledge that the effective US corporation’s effective tax rate is 17%, the actual rate they pay, not the rate from the chart.
Tell me how you feel about it, unless of course “just ignore the - sign on the calculation” is fundamentally sound mathematics for you?
I see what you did there. Speaking of intellectual honesty, what about trying to change the subject from tariffs and duties to VAT's and income taxes, especially with a demonstrably false comment that S. Korean companies do not pay U.S. income taxes?
I’d rather have your buddy explain it to you . . . you didn’t get it the first time.
Oh good, you are going to try intellectual honesty for a change.
So do tell, what matters if SKorea puts VAT taxes on US goods when they simply sidestep the US taxes you were mentioning in the first place?
Indeed, the State system is a sign of the genius of your founders. Also: I agree that the US has a great deal to recommend itself to potential capital investors: power/transport infrastructure, political stability, the rule of law, proximity to end-users and so forth.
But of course tariffs set at the federal level hit all states equally. You can't escape them by going to Texas. Also: it's apparent that the US's internal advantages for capital are not currently out-balancing its many burdens.
A new President who (for instance) got rid of the EPA and promised to drill baby drill would solve a lot of your problems at a stroke.
Dodge dodge dodge, I thought you were going with intellectual honesty this time>?
Let’s advance this little chat, how about:
Is the goal of your economic view to see income prosperity throughout the income scales (ie wage growth) or is maximization of corporate value?
"We need to raise taxes on our corporations! Wait, our corporations try to avoid paying taxes! That's not fair, we need to raise them ever more! But wait, foreign corporations try to avoid paying taxes! Raise theirs even more also!"
What a curious way to change the subject, again.
Agreed, the EPA is choking business at all levels and effectively sealing out all but the wealthiest of corporations who can afford to pay to comply with often contradictory rules.
Also think Obamacare is simply murdering job creation, no wise businessmen or woman would dare to seriously expand to be stuck with massively expensive employees.
They will go with automation instead, this sort of thing only kills upward mobility and wage growth as automation requires huge capital investment that..only the largest corporations can afford.
It’s very foolish, but that is what happens when politics and economics mix.
Spoken by the King of Dodgeball?
How about engaging in that so hard to find, for you, intellectual honesty and answering the question posed?
Go cry to your mother. And reread #113.
Reduced to referencing my mother?
Sad really, I forgive you.
Destroying US industry is getting beat.
Destroying US industry is Obama.
Destroying US industry is the Democrat Party.
Destroying US industry is the EPA.
Destroying US industry is taxes.
Destroying US industry is regulations.
What are you saying in your post about buying a Jaguar?
Well, I guess it’s nice that you are free to buy a British car. Enjoy that freedom.
We certainly enjoy that freedom in reverse. The most popular car in Britain is the Ford Focus. We buy them because they are good cars, fit for service.
Ford gets its share of the UK market by competing (!) - not by getting Uncle Sugar to use the levers of subsidy and tariff. We in the UK get good cars and Ford get paid.
I’m not seeing why some people on FR have a problem with this apparently revolutionary idea. Nobody owes you a living: you get ahead by being better, faster or cheaper than the competition.
All of this reflexive recourse to tariffs sounds like the first instinct of a loser culture. Don’t be that country!
Ford has plants in the UK iirc?
Is that were those popular Focus’s are built?
They are almost certainly assembled here: finished cars make a poor export item (because you are shipping a great deal of fresh air). And also there’s the whole right-hand steering wheel issue.
I don’t believe we have tariffs to protect one set of shareholders over another (e.g. Jaguar over Ford) - though of course I may have missed some recent dumbass directive from Brussels. And of course we have our share of Global Warming R-Tards who want us to drive electric shoeboxes.
But in general car manufacturer capital seems to be treated well in the UK. For instance I believe Tata are investing bigtime.
Actual car-drivers are treated like garbage (our fuel tax is, what, three times yours?) but car plants seem to be doing well here.
As a business model, Ford found it more profitable to build in the UK, which is one of the thrusts of my line of thinking.
A tariff would merely make it more profitable to assemble cars in the UK rather then have them imported.
I know this is too late, but NEVER buy a fridge with an icemaker through the door. According to a friend of mine who ownes an appliance sales/service company(your local type appliance store) almost all problems , including FIRES, result from the icemaker.
The only icemaker you want is the kind that you need to open the door to get ice. ALL the ice/water through the door are problematic.
Also, the front load washing machines have mold and mildew problems from the fact that when the spin cycle ends there is always a small amount of water left in the bottom of the tub. My buddy convinced me to buy a Fisher-Paykel top loading washing machine last time. It has a direct drive motor under the tub(no belts). It spins the clothes at 10,000 rpms. When the clothes go in the dryer they are damp.
This results in less dryer time(less $). It also uses about half the water of the old machines. They are made in New Zealand.
The other thing he convinced me to buy was the KichtenAid dishwasher. I wanted to by a Bosch. He told me they are a pain in the neck to work on. They need to be pulled out and flipped over to perform any maintainence. The KitchenAid/Whirpools you just take off the panal on the fron bottom and eveything is right there.
After two of these kind, NO MORE, as you say they are trouble. This new one has the icemaker inside the freezer compartment, like I said it is a Plain Jane, no frills and cheaper.
I have a Bosch dishwasher, have had it for about 8 yrs now, no problems. I bought it because it had the stainless steel interior, I was tired of the other kind rusting. Also, there is no heater, the hot water and the stainless steel does the drying job and it gets very hot.
When I and if I ever have to purchase a Washer/Dryer, it will be the Fisher-Paykel. I was told it had very few moving parts to go wrong.
RE: Maytag, I purchased their free standing stove, with the two ovens, small one on top, large one on the bottom, they finally did away with that old pan/lid drawer and made something useful. I love this unit.
So here it is: yes, of course.
Sad at the level of discourse.
One may say “false choice” then again one is also ignoring the fact that has not happened under your paradigm, quite the opposite has occured.
The effect of that is place a pseudo marxist into political power and that trend will more then likely continue, in effect the reality of the policies one advocates will see that trend continue.
And you shouldn't be bothered at all if anyone notices that you think wage growth and growth in corporate value is an "either/or" proposition. That is an attitude more suited to the Occupy Wall Street Crowd.
Finally, "my paradigm" did not compel the government to force banks to make loans to people who couldn't afford them, though I'll grant you that "my paradigm" allows for investment banks to repackage those loans. Our economy is in a mess right now because people think they can get something from the government for nothing, and that description includes many of the protectionists on this thread.
They will go with automation instead...
Well, maybe in the foreign plant where they have already moved their manufacturing.
My business would simply come to an end without foreign imports, because our products are no longer manufactured in the the USA in any significant quantities. Therefore a higher tariff on, say Chinese goods would simply lead me and many other American small business owners to shut down. Manufacturers would take years to move production back on shore even if their costs suddenly went way up and the USA looked attractive again.
We made this mess over a long period of time, and it's going to take a long period of time to work our way back out of it. A trend toward less taxation and regulation in all forms would be better than trying to punish people and countries we are mad at in the short run.
They could just produce their products in the US?
As post #136 details, few corporations, domestic or foreign, paid taxes to begin with, I linked the article, per your request, on why coporations with potential tax liabilities use Ireland to avoid taxation.
And yes, your paradigm has led to declining wage growth and the bundles of loans (possible due to deregulation) were AAA rated (by ratings agencies who had no oversight) and then sold globally, on markets that did not exist prior to Globalisms emergence.
The very same globalism that one advocates for time after time, which is fine, but then one should also be willing to acknowledge it’s flaws.
I’ve never wrapped my mind around the fact that there are folks out there who think the government has screwed them over, and think that the government must save them.
Just how much money do you think making things in China saves? And do you really think that savings is passed on to the consumer and not the stock holder? The cost of labor is one of the smallest costs in manufacturing. The average cost of labor is 10% of the MSRP WORLDWIDE. So are the few pennies saved to the dollar really worth 9-10% structural unemployment?
A tariff is one of the easiest consumption taxes to avoid. All one has to do is stay out of ChinaMart.
Say, Johnny Reb, how come you never post in favor of slavery in China?
Why manufacturing anything in the USA would be un-American!!!
I guess that would be your department, since you are the Free Traitor. At least the ante bellum south plantation system was a domestic industry.
Damn, you guys are stupid. So Chinese slaves participate in "domestic industry," and it's ok?
But none of that matters, the free trade rape of the USA continues unabated, the only place that I see any resistance at all is on FR by a few true patriots and they get shouted down by bullies like you. Why so threatened? Where is the threat to your precious free trade system? A couple of posters on FR? Come on we are hitting a nerve aren't we.....
It is interesting the magnitude of the flak we few lovers of freedom and domestic strength in industry get from the gloBULList Free traitors..It would be comical if the stakes weren't so high.
< overused > Methinks thou dost protest too much. < /overused >
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.