Too personal of a topic for most people. Personal views really hinder this type of discussion.

It's not just after WW2, Yes there was a boom, but NO they were not better then; then we are now. Jesus did you people live in the late 40s/50s? People didn't have anything. My Grandparents were all barely middle class if that. Worked hard for every dime they could muster. My parents were better off at around high middle class. My future is yet unknow, but i'm in the middle of middle class at 25 with a good future in plan... The Economy is GREAT! I don't why some fail to see that, or choose NOT to see it...

 

It has to do with a $7+Trillon dollar national debt, that my gradkids, grandkids will be paying off for a corporate/globalist war. To make sure companies like Haliburton can exploit the Iraqi oil. And a trade deficit of Trillions of $$. Millions of middle-class manufacturing jobs...GONE. Even our biggest companies on the verge of bankruptcy. Our borders being opened unequally to trade. We've became almost jaded to the point that when we hear of GM nixing 30,000 jobs, we're just indifferent, and cold.
We can't micro in on being lucky enough to be working in a job not yet affected, we should be sober and watching and talking to anyone who will listen, before our job is next. I make a decent living right now, but the '07 contract talks have me dusting off my resume, and checking out options...knowing it's just a matter of time.
If Globalization is to work, the WTO will need a counter-balance organization to keep them in check for human rights...you can't have a world economy without a world governing body...it's inevetible.

 

F-ing-A baby... THIS guy has his eyes focused in the right direction, and is seeing what some (most in fact) can not.
Nice Post

 

With all due respect...
The years following the war were tremendous economically for the US.
Soldiers came home with war-pay in their pockets, their wives had been working in factories making money, they wanted new cars, trucks, tractors, guns, clothes, shoes... you name it. Maybe your grandparents weren't fortunate enough to be a part of that, but by and large most Americans were. My grandparents didn't have a lot of money either, but they had jobs, food, a car, and clothes - which was more than they had during the depression of the 1930's, so in their eyes, things were looking MUCH better. Also, the "baby-boomer" phenomenon didn't occur because the nation was in a depression.

As far as your success and your future... I think it's great that you are doing well. That's the name of the game, you SHOULD be able to secure a nice job at fair wages, have a life, family, vacation from time to time, etc. That's the American dream... and it should happen, though it is happening less and less these days. Hopefully, you are saving a little money too - for a rainy day - and not spending everything you bring home. Great job, and kudos to you.

I too am doing very well - I have no immediate concerns for feeding my family or having a roof and clothes. But apparently, I am more concerned about my fellow American than you are. Despite my good fortune, I remain concerned about the future and condition of those who have been affected by our current state of economics. I know many people that are friends/relatives who have lost their jobs due to labor export. My wife's job (a production scheduler/product planner) went to Costa Rica after 13 years of excellent performance with Sara-Lee. There are a number of my coworkers who have been let go in the last 2 years - some have taken expatriation positions in Taiwan and China so they can hang on until retirement age. I have many friends who worked in the furniture and textile business that have seen their jobs go to China and Mexico. I love/care for these fellow citizens, and I have genuine concern for their well-being - there is NO WAY I can turn an ignorant cheek to these people, much less blame them for doing something wrong that caused them to lose their jobs, because they did nothing wrong.

To take it one step further, there are more job losses yet to come, because this movement of manufacturing jobs and labor-intensive work is nowhere near stopping. We need to look no further than Ford or GM's future plant closings to see that. There are many other domestic industries that are moving operations offshore besides the auto industry too. To think that your job is 100% secure, and that you will be able to work for the next 35 years to a secure retirement is a bit naive. Just because you have the tiger by the shorthairs right now doesn't mean he won't turn around and bite you later.

Example - I have a good friend here in my company who is an IT wizard... he is phenomenal with computers, our intranet, and networking. We had lunch about 4 weeks ago, and he informed me that our company gave him an ultimatum... he could relocate to our Shelby plant (a consolidation move), or take a severance package. Since his wife has a great job with American Express in Greensboro, he was reluctant to move 2hrs south. He started looking at IT jobs in this area, feeling sure he could find something - especially with our new Dell plant opening up nearby and lots of tech companies around Duke, Carolina, and NC State. To his dismay, he has discovered that over the last 2 years, the majority of IT jobs are being sourced to India, where they can secure M.S. and Ph. D. degreed computer skills for US$2-3/day. The market for good IT jobs here in our area is basically flat. He can find work, but it's field work and installation work, not creative, code-banging and problem-solving that Brent is good at and loves to do, and of course the pay is much less. He expressed his discontent that his field of choice - that was such a hot commodity when we were in college and had a guaranteed future because it was "computer-related" - has turned out to be a dying commodity here in the states, and he is reconsidering his options mid-way through his working career. We can see the same trend with IBM relocating thousands of jobs overseas, and others like Microsoft.

My point with this example... Don't think your job is safe. It might be today, but the landscape is changing so fast, there is no way you or anyone else can be sure what the job landscape will be in a few years. To this end, you better start making "just in case" backup plans ans start saving for the uncertainty of tomorrow. Likewise, you would do well to start supporting policy and interest in keeping jobs, plants, and commerce active here in the States, because it might just be your own job you are trying to save and you don't even know it.

[message intended with compassion, not with flames]

 

Very perceptive quote. GM and Ford have both outsourced the majority of their small parts and sub-assemblies to smaller businesses over the last few decades, which will reduce their percentage of GDP by company name.

Is there really any question about how deeply GM is tied in to massive chunks of the US economy? From trucking companies that deliver the vehicles, to paint and chemical suppliers, parts suppliers like Delphi and AC/Delco, Motor-Mite, upholstery producers, etc - not to mention the tooling companies that produce the line tooling, stamping, conveyor systems, etc for the plants every few years? It is beyond me how anyone can't see the depth of GM's fortune into our economy.

I too agree with the statement about American makers delivering the best performance bang for the buck. Until the imports made such huge inroads to our market (1970s-1980s), the competition was predominantly GM, Ford, and Mopar. They were all based in the US, all had to abide by the same laws, safety codes, environmental restrictions, labor laws, etc. They all were drawing from the same labor pool, material pool, and supply chains. They were all selling to the same markets here in America, with the same tax rates, shipping costs, fuel costs, and such. This was about as close to ideal capitalistic competition as it could get. The best car won... and they all had their turns on top of sales, performance, and style. As a result, we are 40 years down the road, and the classic American musclecars of those days are routinely commanding $100k at auctions today - meaning they are very desireable to those with the cash to afford them. Is this coincidental?
(Ironically, the Scirocco, Impulse, 240Z, and other performance imports that showed-up in the 1980s have long since died off, and their resale values are nothing like those of the IROC, Daytona, and GT's of the same year.)

Once our nation had to start competing with <basically> slave labor, comapnies that could dump used chemicals out their back door, companies that don't need safety interlocks on their machines, companies that can use hazardous materials without any safety policy, companies that simply fire an employee injured on the job because they are no longer productive, companies that pay a family up to US$18,000 for a person killed on the job and walk away, companies that don't offer any benefits, health care, retirement, or even a clean, well-lit, safe workplace - well, that is when things started to change. We started losing (economically). This is still happening today in overseas operations, and any American who is willing to buy a product from a company using these practices is supporting the process, and directly advertising to other companies that they should follow the same procedures with their product. I can't imagine anyone in America actually wanting to see these conditions in a plant here, nor can I see them wanting any person to work under such conditions anywhere else in the world, so my only conclusion can be that they either are not aware of what it is like in other countries, or they simply choose to ignore it. But, the bottom line is, our domestic companies are not competing against foreign companies on a level playing field, so they are moving to these other countries to try to level that field... well, in my eyes, just doing it because the other guy can do it doesn't make it right. This takes me back to my main contingency that globalism is not a good thing because it allows those with wealth to exploit poor people and poor lands for nothing more than added wealth.

PS - on 1fastdog's last comment about "non-domestics do not deliver"...
They are about to start delivering in a big way. Some of the cars slated from Hyundai, Kia, and Toyota are going to hit smack-dab on the middle of the traditional American ponycar market. The Tiburon is a good example of what's on the way. Mustang, Charger, and the next Camaro better be staying on the ball the next 5 years, or they are about to see a big drop in their market share and sales.

 

My appologies to Jason and Chris, I know this isn't the forum for this, BUT, if I read this kind of liberal, un-informed BS one more time, I'm going to explode.

Read these documents and tell me that "it's all about the oil"......geezus people, at least stay informed. We've been under attack since before 1961.

http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2001/issue4/jv5n4a3.htm

http://www.army.mil/terrorism/

http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/ter.../timeline.html

http://www.library.vanderbilt.edu/romans/terrorism.html

I won't debate you here due to this being the wrong place & time.....and I doubt that you'll change your mind anyway, but damn, at least try to see through your rose colored glasses.

 

Iraq has been attacking us since before 1961?

I would presume, but have no numbers with me, that people in the 50's were not as heavily in debt to finance their standard of living, and that is one of the key differences in the amount of "stuff" that they had, or didn't have.

 

Please people, there's more at stake here than Iraq alone....

 

THANK you sir. Well said.

I agree completely. Too many folks in the US today have NO perspective on how bad things have been in the past. My parents lived thru the Great Depression and WWII... both of which make today's problems look like childs-play in comparison. The US is doing GREAT today. SURE, there are problems (what else is new?). We will work thru them like we always have.

 

PLEASE!= Don't hijack this thread (pun intended) and turn it into terrorism and/or Iraq debate


The reality is that "Fair Trade" is and has never been 'fair'. Business always looks for unfair advantages to increase market share or increase profitability.

In today's reality with cheap DVD's, 500+ TV channels, internet, TIVO/DVR's ability to fast forward thru commercials, it's becoming harder and subsequently more expensive for a manufacturers to create awareness of their products and get the end consumer to buy their product and/or service. This huge upswing in marketing and advertising cost has forced companies to cut cost in other places and unfortunately that has resulted in manufacturing facitilies or service operations moving where labor is cheaper and/or taxes are less.

Back in the day there were only 3 major TV channels (ABC,NBC,CBS) and maybe to 2 national news papers it was significantly easier and cheaper to reach the consumer and therefore more money could be spent making the product itself.

 

Nice rolleyes. Your statement is correct but I think you have come to that conclusion for the wrong reasons.

Regarding the topic of this thread I disagree that marketing is a substantial problem leading to outsourcing or the great reduction in our manufacturing.

 

AGREED!

AGREED!

AGREED! (Though not sure this is a massive cause for offshore movements...)

Looking back through this thread so far, it appears that the person's perspective, depth of consideration, and time frame of concern are the criteria that determine their position and desired reaction to the situation at hand.

Some seem to write only about themselves and their situations, some write about what "was" yesterday and what "is" today, but say nothing about the future, and some write about only trade, only jobs, or only economics. It is how each of us views the big picture that tells the tale IMO. If I only look at going to WalMart to buy the cheapest DVD player I can get this aternoon - it's a no-brianer. If I consider the long-term effects of my whimsical purchase on future jobs, growth, expansion, economics, trade policy, etc, etc... the picture gets a whole lot different.

Maybe we are not so far apart on some of these views today, but every one of us has a different vision of what the situation is and will become.

Some things I can definitely insist upon though...
We can't trust "government" (either side, China or ours) to just make things work out, because they both lie to their populations, and they both have agendas that don't likely match the desires of their constituents either - this has been proven many times throughout the last few years.
We also can't just rely on big business leaders to do what's right because - as johnsocal stated above - they will do whatever it takes to maximize profits whether or not it's legal, ethical, or whatever.
So with governments ruled out, and business leaders ruled out as our stewards, that only leaves us - consumers - to do what is right. We must vote for what we believe, and our most audible vote comes in the form of our dollars spent on goods and services. We vote "for" or "against" economic and business policies with our wallet, and the votes are felt in corporate board rooms and in Washington DC.

So there's my final charge to you guys as consumers... do what you feel is right, but at least put some thought and consideration into what you do with your money before you go carefree into any store or dealership.
It's our nation... to grow and prosper, or to carelessly **** away... it's our choice.

 

GM spent $839,000,000 Million on advertising in 1986 but $3,997,400,000 Billion in 2004

Procter and Gamble spent $1,435,454,000 Billion in 1986 but spent $ 3,919,700,000 Billion in 2004

The list goes on and on but the one thing that becomes rather obvious is that GM is spending significantly more on advertising then they did back in the 1980’s. While today GM out spends P&G on advertising but back in 1986 P&G was outspending GM by almost 75%.

Source for 1986 #’s was from the Sept 1987 Issue of Advertising Age.

 

Bingo. That simple fact has been fueling this country's economic growth for over 150 years now. The huge increase in the standard of living since the beginning of the industrial revolution stems from the fact that humans are expensive, and so it's important to get the most productivity out of each and every person. That happens by increasing the amount of work each person can do via the adaptation of technology; a person can do a lot more work by programming a PLC than they can by driving in screws by hand, pouring castings, etc. I know we have a number of people here on this board that are in the manufacturing segment, and we have them to thank for nearly everything we lay our hands on.

Now, throw in a source of labor that's cheap (in the short term), and the system is disrupted. The Man has never been about long-term thinking, and so we're seeing a dramatic shift of attention overseas where people are willing to do a job for less - albeit with less efficiency. That sort of thing will eventually run out of steam, but at what cost? We'll have lost whatever technological improvements would have come about had we concentrated on making the most of our current situation, instead of running off to foreign lands.

In addition to losing the potential technology gains, we've also dumped trillions of dollars into a country that has explicitly stated an interest in challenging us in the military and economy battles of the 21st century, and we're buying products from people that may never return the favor.

But, hey, if you're an economist sitting up in an ivory tower, this whole deal is indeed a Very Good Thing, and I'm sure they have a large amount of interest in seeing that the whole affair keeps moving in the current direction.

 

The quote below really sums up the current view of China from a business point of view.

from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11043983/site/newsweek/

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4602126.stm

China is not as cheap as it use to be and many of the better Chinese partners are already spoken for which is making it harder and more expensive for US companies to start operations there. These factors are making China not as good as it use to be for exporting goods out, but many view China's homeland as a great rapidly growing oppportunity.