« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Should Americans Boycott Chinese Products

By: Donald Ayotte (Diary)  |  August 7th, 2011 at 04:39 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Are Americans too timid to boycott products from Mainland China? I think not! Americans are reeling from economic disaster and the Chinese are scolding us like middle-school children.

America is the largest market for Chinese Products. In short, we are their biggest marks. People have told me that if Americans stopped buying Chinese products that Wal-Mart would come to a grinding halt. That’s not true, but they would have to reassess how they do business and perhaps, just perhaps, if Americans would stick to their guns on this issue, America might gain back some self-respect and also some world-respect.

C’mon America, freedom always comes at a price. It’s not free. Our forefathers paid the price for our right to have life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the least we can do is boycott products. It’s our turn to step up to the plate and take a swing.

The only language the Chinese will understand is a good kick to the rear-end, mainly right where the wallet lies.
When I went to Wal-mart yesterday, I went to buy some clothing products and when they were labeled, “made in China” I put them back on the shelve and bought some that were made here in the USA and other countries. IT’S A START. I WON’T BUY FROM THEM ANY LONGER!!

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • 1stRichard

    The wealth of this nation is dependent on supply and demand, simply changing the demand is not the solution. We should all know the restriction on oil drilling and coal by now but just as alarming are the basic minerals and elements, our basic supply is being choked to death by burdensome regulations, restrictions and taxes. We cannot become a supplier again without some big changes first. We are in such a mess that it is impossible to boycott products from China.

    • Menlo

      In terms of “burdensome regulations,” the threat of legal action is irrelevant simply considering the basic social, economic, and cultural demands in this country. Removing “burdensome” regulations and taxes will change nothing, especially considering they are generally crafted by the very businesses to be regulated! The only policy that would change anything would be to penalize the businesses owners and executives who actively choose China; and that would counter the primary interests both parties in Washington serve.

      As I show myself, it is possible to boycott things directly made in China. I’m fairly sure that was the intended message. However, at some point, you would get to a level of indirection that it would be impossible, probably even with significant trade restrictions and/or an absence of business regulations.

      • 1stRichard

        The alternative is to buy American but to do this there must be a supply and that supply is gone. If you boycott say a cleaner to buy made in USA you are still buying chemicals from China. I know because I am the one buying the stuff and I am the one putting made in USA on it. You can try to boycott but in the end it is not possible, you are still buying from China even if it may say made in USA.

        The solution to this is not more regulations giving the government more power, the same power the very businesses seek to control to their advantage. The solution is small government removing the regulation businesses seek to control to their advantage. How do you think we got in to this mess in the first place, if regulation was the solution then it should have worked a ling time ago.

        • Menlo

          Obviously, neither did Tbone below. I just finished saying that one CANNOT INDIRECTLY boycott China! It can be done directly in terms of a completed unit but not in terms of all the raw materials and components.

          I do make an exception for food as I will check the origin of ingredients of any food or medicine I take.

          Businesses do not lobby on behalf of policies that will hurt them, and they crafted most of their “regulations” today. Short of limiting their ability to do business with China, neither regulation nor deregulation will help. Basic American cultural and economic standards, apart from legal ones, would still give China the advantage.

          It’s not going to happen though because government no longer acts with the genuine intent to protect consumers or workers when it claims to regulate on their behalf.

          • 1stRichard

            Consumer demands the lowest possible cost and there is no alternative. You cannot shift over fifty percent of the US economy like that, buy this that costs more because that is made in. Even if you did all that would do is shift it to raw materials from China. Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.

            The only long term solution comes from open market solution that starts with supply. I know it is much more complicated but, supply and demand in short it is a set of skills divided many times from supply, something dug or grown where it is processed, transported to where it is exchanged, demand. The less you partake in this chain the less value you are not only as an individual but also as a nation and it all starts with supply. If this is choked here the path of lowest cost applies. You want to boycott China permanently then you must start here.

            Next part was originally proven here is the New England we had the highest skilled workers in the world. Combined with the upward mobility of free and open markets spurred innovation that out produced all other subsidized nations. We had the first car manufacturing factory in the nation, we had companies like Van Norman that proved to be the backbone of winning a World War and so much more. All that has now moved away and you can see what we are now, a nanny state. Therefore, here is the solution and how it can fail, to boycott China permanently in manufacturing. I have more of this in my diary…

          • Menlo

            I had trouble following the sentences in that first part. I can say that supply and demand only work if all else is equal. In this case, they are not. I can also acknowledge that my actions are not going to be enough to alter any current business practices, so I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

            Again, you will not change anything with less regulation, especially given the current set of regulations (that favor rather than hinder “special” corporations). The economic and cultural realities of this nation would have the same effect as the “burdensome” government regulation you blame. There is enough cost associated with basic safety, health, and employment expectations of people in this country. Those are costs consumers, business owners, and investors ought to be required to absorb as a cost of doing business in this country in the 21st century.

          • acat

            I, for instance, prefer to buy American (or allied) but do not make a fetish of it.

            Mew

      • Tbone

        has Chinese sourced parts.

  • aesthete

    It’s a free country (or it was at some point), and if that floats your boat, have at it. For myself, I’m not going to halve my standard of living just so that I can tweak the Chinese for no good reason. There’s no good freedom-oriented reason to do so; the Chinese certainly won’t get any more democratic if the liberal democracy that they were trading with becomes belligerent and cuts off ties.

    • Menlo

      Unless you are buying for resale, how could it not? Too many things made in China either are not safe, are fake, and/or will break apart a few minutes after purchase.

      It would seem to me that an American would boost his or her standard of living by eliminating things made in China.

      • JSobieski

        “Too many things made in China either are not safe, are fake, and/or will break apart a few minutes after purchase.”

        If a product is unsafe or breaks after a few minutes, the purchaser will not buy from that seller in the future. If Chinese products were that bad, there wouldn’t be any repeat business.

        I haven’t bought ANY product that fell apart a few minutes after purchase… from any country. China has a lot of weaknesses. Quality is one of them, but the quality differential is not nearly as extreme as you portray. “break apart a few minutes after”?

        I am no fan of China, and am confident that China will get old before it can get rich. The 1 child policy coupled with gender based abortions has created a serious obstacle for the Chinese. All that being said, the objectivity of your Chinese analysis is suspect.

        In addition to automotive components, I know that my lawn furniture (8 years old) was made in China. A lot of smart phones and shoes are made in China. All of the resulting end products are of sufficiently high quality.

        The case for boycotting goods from China is political, not economic. The case for boycotting goods from China can be made on trying to impact what China becomes, but it cannot be made on the basis of anything that they are doing to us.

        The economic case for a boycott is short sighted. For example, I Ford were to stop building some parts in China, the cost of automobiles in the US would increase, Ford would lose business, and American workers would lose their jobs. Our German and Japanese competitors are not going to boycott Chinese components.

        I am sympathetic for “pushing back” against China in certain ways. However, the idea that such actions would be economically beneficial to the nation at large is simply untrue. There would be an economic price to pay for whatever the political gain would be.

        • Donald Ayotte

          J Sobieski
          Your argument is relevant but it does not negate my ploy of taking the Chinese to task for believing that Americans are vulnerable to their sarcasm and ridicule because they hold our debt.
          They believe they aren’t vulnerable but they certainly are. We are their biggest customer. If we become their smallest customer, then we will hold the trump cards.
          Right now spades are the trumps suit and they hold the ace, king, queen, jack and ten.
          That can change in this world and change very quickly.

          • JSobieski

            Now, the average Chinese person on the street of Shanghai is a different story.

            Who cares if the Chinese make sarcastic comments? Seriously, we should make economic decisions based on what political leaders say? Do you think any consumer anywhere in the world is going to base their purchasing decisions on what Obama or Biden say?

            In terms of applying “leverage”–your solution is analogous to someone who is obese and wants to lose weight. Technically speaking, the quickest way to lose weight would be to cut off your legs. 20% weight loss in 5 minutes . . . but its still a counter-productive idea.

          • Donald Ayotte

            “In terms of applying

          • acat

            Simply put, how do you know where a manufacturer of anything more complex than a toaster sourced all their components?

            Did the rare earth magnet at the heart of the speaker in your Bose* radio come from China? They do mine more rare earth elements than anyone else, eh? Where on earth was the radio in your car made? Who made the digital clock in your kitchen stove? Who made the motor for the clock in your den? Where was the compressor for your air conditioner built?

            I do not disagree with your major hypothesis – China is getting a bit snarky. I do not think that a boycott will work – I remember boycotting Japanese goods back in the ’70s and that failed to have any impact. As Japan is a lot smaller than China, I expect this to have even less of an impact.

            That said, as I mentioned below, I’ll support U.S. based businesses or businesses in allied or nominally-allied countries over Chinese ones given a choice. If I don’t see a choice, then .. I’m buying Chinese-made.

            Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go listen to some Rush on my iPod.

            Mew

            * picking on Bose because they advertise (or did at one point) on Limbaugh.

          • JSobieski

            Hong Kong has no natural resources to speak of, yet it is one of the wealthiest places in the world. In 1945, it was dirt poor.

            What does Hong Kong do differently than everyone else in the world? FREE TRADE. They don’t waste time negotiating deals (with or without the add-on’s the D’s require). They just unilaterally said we won’t tax your imports regardless of whether you tax our exports to you.

            Toss in the rule law, water for 40 years, and you have a beacon for the world.

            Why do you care that the Chinese talk trash? The world is filled with trash talkers? Not sure how exactly the Chinese are treating as badly either–at least not terms of the words coming out of the mouths of their leaders.

            If you want factories to come back to the USA, the following is a good start:’
            (1) reform environmental laws so that plants can be built and energy purchased inexpensively
            (2) don’t subject US corporations to double taxation, reduce rates, and close loopholes

            This desire you have to bring China to its knees is kind of creepy. I am all for a change in government, but China is not a current enemy of the US. It is a rival.

            Being consumed with what a rival thinks of you is a weakness in and of itself that I find far more concerning than anything someone in Shanghai says.

          • Tbone

            for Double Digit IQs.

          • JSobieski

            It points to the arrogance of policy makers in thinking that the economy is something that can easily be understood, much less manipulated for political ends.

            The complexity of a basic #2 pencil is striking. Imagine a similar essay for an ipad or a car!

            http://www.thefreemanonline.org/featured/i-pencil/

          • acat

            I can see why Limbaugh would pick it, and enjoyed reading it for myself.

            While I consider myself an accomplished cat-of-all-trades, I could not make a pencil without relying on others … I haven’t learned half the skills necessary.

            Mew

          • JSobieski

            nt

          • JSobieski

            the best “solution” is to let him do it.

            China will get old before it gets rich, and its demographics are big problem. My solution is the most conservative of solutions—–no big collectivist action required. By the products that you want.

        • Menlo

          The problem is that you define “too much” as enough to change the decisions of the seller. That’s not good enough. I don’t know what the economic impacts would be (no one knows), and I honestly don’t care. Yes, one can make the case on the basis of too many things being unsafe, defective and fake. To me, it is “too many.”

          Of course if it could happen on a larger scale, I think there is a case to be made for hurting the American executives, investors, and/or business owners who take the active step to choose China for their company. I don’t predict the same negative “trickle down” effect others assume, but I still think it would be justified regardless.

    • Donald Ayotte

      Yesterday, when I went into Wal-mart to by hunting camouflage clothes, they were made in china and I went to a sporting goods store and for about the same price I bought the same stuff that was made in North America. The quality of what I bought was superior to the Chinese goods!!!
      If your argument is about taking a hit on your standard of living, that’s not even a viable argument. If you are just too lazy to shop around for products, i understand that.

      • JSobieski

        To make purchasing decisions based on finding the best product at the best price is a different frame of reference than making a purposeful effort to avoid Chinese products.

        Most people I know employ some variation of a “tie going to the runner” kind of rule when it comes to Chinese goods.

        If iphones and ipods were made in the US, the cost of those goods would double.Similar math exists for auto parts.

        • acat

          that there are things we just flat don’t make anymore. The category-killer iPod by Apple of California is … made in China. Just about all laptops are made in either China or Taiwan, and all of them have Chinese components.

          Even something as good-old-U.S.of A. as a John Deere tractor won’t start without a $5 plastic widget that’s .. made in China.

          I look for American-made hand and power tools. I’ll spend a buck or three more to buy a drill bit with the flag on the packaging. I look for Marathon and Exxon-Mobil when filling the tanks of my north american built Toyota vehicles. Why not Ford or Chrysler or GM? Japan is a more solid ally than the UAW.

          However. I don’t let “made in Pakistan” or “made in Honduras” or even “made in China” stop me from buying something if no other options present themselves.

          For the record, I avoid WalMart. Not because of Chinese imports, but because they scare me.

          Mew

          • Menlo

            The whole argument was anywhere but China, and I doubt the author meant to call for an indirect boycott as well.

            Of course I would still argue that no one in this country should be allowed to save money or make more money off of inhumane labor practices, even if it makes us all a lot poorer.

          • acat

            Would it come under the State Department? You know, the one that determines whether inhumane labor practices have gone into an object…

            The better question is whether the standard of living in the exporting country is better or worse for the export…. and in the case of China, they’ve started to bootstrap a domestic (Chinese, that is) middle class.

            We *want* that to happen, because without a middle class, they have no chance of throwing off communism, eh? Neither the very rich nor the very poor want to do away with the certainty that the socialist system brings…

            Mew

          • acat

            especially in comments from Donald like this one: (http://www.redstate.com/delawarewindjammer/2011/08/07/should-americans-boycott-chinese-products/#comment-219) …

            How else would you suggest I interpret “We’ve lost manufacturing” other than “we need to preserve American jobs and knowledge” …

            …and, by the way, it’s just a short hop from there to “look for the union label”.

            Mew

          • aesthete

            and a ban on trade with all nations that have such codified through law condemns the citizens of those countries to eternal poverty. What does a Chinese worker have to do with the fact that his government unjustly deprives him of liberty? How does it make sense to refuse to allow him to work for you as a result?

            Adopting such a standard would have allowed no trade between anyone, ever in the pre-industrial world, since the contractual and labor rights which existed were the exception, rather than the rule. I can’t guarantee that China will become more democratic as it continues to open up its economy to foreign influences, but I sure as heck have more evidence to back that assertion than anyone does to buttress arguments that hardship and a lack of trade are where democracy and liberty thrive.

          • Menlo

            I would support a policy that required American businesses to employ some basic labor standards in the factories from which they import. The conditions under which Americans once worked was deplorable, and, just like slavery, should not have ever been allowed.

            I still think there is room for improvement and would support for this country employment standards like those used by the Dutch.

            I am under no illusion the Chinese government would change its ways; I would argue that is a red herring.

          • acat

            Very low birth rates, lots of Dutch leaving Holland…

            One number I saw suggested that native Dutch in Rotterdam will be a minority by 2020, and that native Dutch will be a minority in Holland by 2030.

            I don’t say they’re doomed. I do question whether they’re that good a model.

            Again, you’re creating a large new bureaucracy to keep tabs on foreign manufactured goods, and increasing the cost to the U.S. consumer for a non-economic reason.

            Mew

          • Menlo

            There are many areas the government is justified to increase consumer costs for “non-economic” reasons.

            The Netherlands has a relatively decent economy with low unemployment and very happy people. They work on average 30 hours a week and have a sensible set of employment regulations.

          • acat

            (nothing further)

          • Tbone

            NFL exploiting illiterates for their physical labor?

        • Donald Ayotte

          You can believe that the Chinese know the markets as good as we do and they’re working them much better than we are.
          Our power lies in the fact that we are the largest consumer nation and all I’m suggesting is that we use that as a battering ram and shove it up the Chinese where the sun don’t shine.
          we can use our power as a consumer nation to regain the power we had as a manufacturing nation. We built America on being a nation of manufacturers and we’ve lost that.

          • acat

            What we’ve done is to analyze manufacturing and automate a lot more of it than most people understand.

            Plastic cups (made in the U.S. by Solo Cup, for instance) are quite literally untouched by human hands from moulding through packing. There may be a human or three watching the line, but nobody touches anything unless something goes very wrong.

            Should we ban this kind of automation? Insane, right?

            So is saying that we have to keep the job of watching a fully or nearly-fully automated production line in the U.S. Let’s, instead of insisting on bringing back a past that really wasn’t all that great, find better jobs for our people in the future. I predict a renaissance in hand-crafted heirloom-grade furniture, for instance…. can we train a generation of woodworkers?

            Mew

          • Donald Ayotte

            Nobody is insisting that we discard automated manufacturing. Those are the manufacturers that stayed in America because they don’t have high labor costs anyway and less shipping costs.
            The manufacturing jobs I’m talking about are the ones that take human labor and they have fled America in droves that remind me of the Canadian geese fleeing south for the winter.
            I don’t blame the American manufacturers. The unions want their workers to make more than $20.00 an hour assembling a product when China and Mexico will pay a fraction of that with no benefits.
            We thought that American unions would get the message and let the manufacturers make a little profit, but not the union bosses who have never lifted a hand to work themselves.
            We have many Americans who would love to have those jobs back whether they paid $10.00 an hour or not.

          • acat

            The steel mills in Gary, IN? Union scale, high material transport costs (across the Great Lakes) and EPA regulations did those in, not China.

            Petrochemical products as were manufactured in the Niagara Falls area and elsewhere on the east coast? Again, EPA regulations and union scale were their downfall.

            It seems that your beef isn’t with China, it’s with government red tape and union greed.

            Mew

          • aesthete

            “You can believe that the Chinese know the markets as good as we do and they

          • Donald Ayotte

            “Their IP and copyright are a shambles,”

            But their coffers are full, “of our money.” All I’m suggesting is buying products from other countries and spreading the wealth, while China take a beating for a while. I’ve started shopping around for quality products from other countries and product, “made in America.”
            I will only buy from China if I have to and that’s that.

          • acat

            So .. the best way to hurt China is happening right now in congress, no?

            Mew

        • Donald Ayotte

          I believe that we must protect America right now. Anybody that doesn’t think China has a financial and tactical advantage over the U.S. now, is delusional. I believe that being the consumers that we are, we can take that tactical and financial from them. Even a 25% drop in their sales in America of Chinese goods would start them moaning and groaning and 40% would probably cause them to threaten us.
          I’m not trying to cry “wolf” here but China presents and definite challenge to our Republic within 20 years. It’s our watch to keep the Republic that our forefathers gave us.

          • JSobieski

            We only purchase things from China where there is a relative competitive advantage for doing so. Thus your strategy involves self-inflicted wounds thoughout the US economy. Sounds like our democrat environmental policy to me.

            Most of Chinese exports to the US are in the form of components, so cost increases will filter throughout the economy and disadvantage our exports as well as our consumption.

            Remember the Japanese threat of the 1980s? Your Chinese threat will end up the same way, and for similar reasons.

            China has a lot of problems in the medium to long term.

          • snowshooze

            To balance the ledger?

          • JSobieski

            of why “balancing” the ledger matters? The reason why currency was invented is so that you don’t have to have “balanced” trade arrangements. Instead of bartering with my grocery story, I just pay the grocery story in currency. If I am not providing value to anyone else, I can’t buy anything at the store. So balance isn’t the issue.

            Top 10 US Exports to China

            America

          • snowshooze

            ( Aside of debt )
            Or anyone else.
            And you see what the manufacturing here is looking like, a higher percentage every day of import dependent products.
            There comes a point where you cut your own throat.I was reading while that circuit boards for defense department equipment were not available domestically.
            It is getting to the point where WE HAVE to go out to get even the basics.
            I watched in Anacortes as a Japanese ship would pull in, load with logs… run out past the three mile limit, come back, unload the lumber they sawed, grab another load of logs…. floating sawmill.
            69.7 Billion, I think that is the number Obama spent by lunch on Friday.
            Anyway, protectionism and isolationism isn’t sounding so bad.
            All I am hearing is that the government would collect tariffs, and somebody would have to pay more for their TV, a violation of their human rights. And that in no way affects the employment levels, which have nothing to do with the tax base.Nor the National debt…

          • Donald Ayotte

            I don’t suggest it for the long term but it would help us in the 100 yard dash to get our economy back on track.
            Oh heck! I forgot that we need Obama’s help to get the economy back on track and he’s too busy for that.
            Being a lily-livered rock star is hard work; no time for anything else; it’s too much work and can’t quite fit those vacations in!!

          • acat

            enriching only the government rather than looking at getting rid of the red tape and union foolishness that is preventing domestic competition?

            I find that … very wrongheaded, Donald.

            So far, much of what you’ve said here is very familiar – the same was said back in the ’70s about Japan and in the ’90s about Mexico. Even some of the old jokes are starting to circulate again. Wasn’t true then, isn’t true now.

            What’s broken is America. What was needed in the ’70s was Reagan, what was needed in the ’90s was Bush. This is no different.

            Perry/Pawlenty 2012

            Mew

          • Donald Ayotte

            commented earlier somewhere on this long thread that it was the unions and governmental red tape that drove the manufacturers out. But the government that we have now is advocating even bigger government.
            It seems to me that the Obama is attempting to eliminate the middle-class of America so we can be more easily controlled. That is difficult to say and it sounds like crying “wolf” one too many times.
            We need to focus all of our attention on the 2012 elections so we can replace the man at the top.

          • snowshooze

            But you know, since we have to have one… if we collected say 80% of government funding through tariffs…
            Or maybe we could just send our government off to China…that would straighten them out. They would be 50 years trying to get through the SWPP plan… the safety plan, the certified payroll, the insurance applications …and when they had to pay THEIR taxes… there would be tears.
            We have tariffs. On our own stuff, not theirs.

          • Tbone

            Because the government would take the tariff money to buy votes and the short term would turn into forever.

          • aesthete

            “get our economy back on track”? When has a tariff ever helped a nation get out of a recession or depression, rather than exacerbate it?

          • snowshooze

            I think we are on relatively new ground, speaking of percentages.
            How are we going to repatriate the money?
            What are we going to sell? Websites? Raw materials, and buy finished products? We did that once as I recall…but we weren’t a country. ’till just after that.

          • acat

            This is where all the Gold Standard guys lose their argument.

            A fiat dollar is worth only what you can get for it. No more. It’s not predicated on an ounce of gold or a “basket” of metals, or whatever. Pure fiat.

            Let Geitner print a bazillion of ‘em. Let the $100 be the new $1. Sure, it’ll suck for us .. pay won’t keep up with inflation for a time, but .. at the end, everyone who manages to scrimp and save and keep their mortgages will be paying back precious dollars with inflated ones… including our debt to China.

            Mew

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            We get the products, they get dollars, which does them no good if they just accumulate them in their pockets. To gain a benefit, they have to spend them on our products, which will benefit our more efficient industries. So we gain from their “dumping”.

            The proviso, of course, is that they are subsidizing below market prices rather than deceiving us on product quality (i.e. fraud). But today’s information dissemination abilities is the best in history, which means that we will quickly discover if they’re engaging in fraud.

            Now our budget deficit and national debt – that’s the totally opposite situation: our leaders’ irresponsible behavior regarding these are what endangers our freedom, not China’s products.

          • Donald Ayotte

            by the manipulation of their currency and the tariffs they impose on our products. So the law of comparative advantage that should work in China and the U.S.’s favor equally is negated by clever manipulation of their currency and high tariffs on our imported goods.
            In theory this should work unless one takes a closer look at the whole situation.

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            By their manipulations, China is tipping the balance against themselves and benefiting the U.S. more. They’re imposing higher costs on their citizens to benefit us. That’s a good deal from our viewpoint, I would think.

            As noted below, it’s our continuing need to borrow from China that is damaging us. That’s where we need to get our house in order.

            It’s great for us if they overvalue their currency, and their tariffs work to our advantage too.

          • Donald Ayotte

            “As noted below, it

          • snowshooze

            It still works just fine.
            When shall we start the tariffs?

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            Indeed, China is working from an history of empire building, but their historical methods, which essentially are mercantilist, are inferior to free market capitalism, which China is starting to recognize. So their trade methods hurt them more than us. But they are learning.

            The problem, which we agree to, is that we are acting to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, so to speak, by our getting increasingly into debt to them – although even there, they are enmeshed with our economic health, which is why they are endeavoring to limit their exposure to our debt.

            The operative word, is “increasingly” – particularly when this is due to anti-market and inefficient expenditures by our government.

            That is, it’s not so much our going into debt, but the misappropriation and misspending of the proceeds of our bond sales to China and other entities.

            The debt matter thus gets rather complicated from there, but the net is that the closer our economy is based on free trade and a domestic free market, the more their governmental manipulations hurt them, not us.

            Assuming, of course, that we can defend our property interests against unilateral seizure, should China wish to employ that age-old tool…

          • Donald Ayotte

            “Assuming, of course, that we can defend our property interests against unilateral seizure, should China wish to employ that age-old tool

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            What I mean by my title is that the so-called trade “deficit” is to our advantage when it results from China’s dumping/subsidizing their products at below-market prices. That is, this form of “deficit” is a plus, not a minus.

            The kind of deficit that is dangerous is our government spending more domestically than we take in from taxes, which means we need to borrow (via issuing bonds) from foreign countries. That is what imperils us because our credit worthiness eventually drops if we go on borrowing, which is exactly what we’re seeing with the S&P downgrade – and that will raise the cost of our borrowing, which is a big problem.

          • snowshooze

            If they spend those US dollars on grain, gold, lumber…in the sense of escaping the currency

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            (assuming they’re not buying them from us. If they are buying from us – and we’re not subsidizing our industries – then we benefit more).

            Which means the new owner of our dollars is in the same situation as China was. That is, we’re no worse off from that exchange.

          • acat

            It is, however, cheaper to perform certain economic activities offshore. Running a sawmill, as you point out, may run into environmental issues onshore, not to mention union issues. Still a few down by Longview, IIRC.

            The point is, protectionism is the wrong way to fight this. All it does is to fill government coffers and raise prices – it doesn’t create jobs nearly as well as getting rid of some red tape would.

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            Is impossible. They leak horribly. If the money even get’s to them…I think those coffers make a whooshing sound about like the commode.
            But would ya rather pay at the pump, or the toll bridge?
            Income tax, or tariff?.

          • acat

            I’d rather pay a fair price for the goods and services I want, and other than checking quality standards, leave the government out of it entirely!

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            Our domestic products come front loaded with all kinds of indirect costs of production. A lot are taxes, a lot has to do with the cost of administration in conforming to regulations, and insurance is an incredible hole in the boat. Workman’s comp for the Welders 25% of every payroll dollar, for roofers it is 50%
            It is there. The government is so deep into it, you can’t imagine.

          • acat

            Which is one reason why I’m saying a tariff is the wrong approach.

            Or, put another way, do you want the same guys who brought you those taxes and regulations deciding how much money you should make? Because – in effect – a tariff would make you beholden to them for your survival …

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            Somehow… that is how it is. And they get free access to our markets?
            We gotta pay everyone and their dog just to attempt to build something.
            They just build. And then they sell it to us.

            I am getting more protectionist by the minute.

          • aesthete

            “hey, let’s make the foreigners suffer along with us”, instead of, “hey, let’s stop nickel and diming ourselves to death!” The latter sounds a lot better, to me.

          • snowshooze

            We cannot compete under this government, this tax structure, these labor costs, these insurance costs and be on flat ground.
            Cutting government is not doing well so far. We are burdening our own with proxy tariffs.. and giving everyone else a free ride on our market.
            We will continue to bleed wealth through trade deficiency until we are so in debt that we drown.
            I’d sooner tariff the imports up whilst trying to cut our government down and put some Americans to work further cutting the social welfare costs. It just makes sense.
            Somebody want a cheap TV… move to China where you can get one with three months wages.

          • Donald Ayotte

            Tariffs on our goods isn’t the only advantage they have!
            They also manipulate their currency to their extreme advantage. America has done nothing to stop them.
            We also give millions and millions to countries who hate us and would seek to destroy us at our first sign of weakness.

          • snowshooze

            But it is fun. Anyway, yes, they tariff us, but we tariff ourselves.
            Not a tariff in technical terms, but it cost us more to bring a product from concept to reality than it does them. They have no workman’s compensation, they aren’t bled for permits and taxes at every turn, they get off scott free clear up to the final sale and stuff the money in their pocket. In China, if a company does well, do they pay more taxes???? Communist’s. Not much fear of that.
            So far as standard of living, I think I will want to keep mine.
            A bit more protectionism, and this computer right here might have been a Magnavox, or a Phillips.

          • Menlo

            Some Chinese companies find it cheaper to manufacture here than in China given the rising prices there.

            Also, for 15 grand, wealthy Chinese women can arrange to have their babies in California. That’s something $15K won’t buy in China.

            Nearly all government officials in both parties have been favoring China for at least a decade and probably since the days of Richard Nixon. I would not count on that to change.

      • aesthete

        almost all of which are significantly more inexpensive as a result of having been made in China. Many of the parts that I have purchased to fix my car were made in China, and were significantly cheaper than the alternative. There are, of course, many goods which the US, Germany or other western manufacturers specialize at producing: I am happy to support them with my money. I’m not made of money, though, and there has to be a reason for me to give up my standard of living — one more compelling than the fact that China’s government is miserable, given that those who would bear the costs of a boycott would be Chinese workers, rather than their government.

        I really just don’t understand the purpose of a boycott: if it is to push China to become more democratic/free, then it’s based on faulty logic, given that China ended the Cultural Revolution and moved towards more economic freedom precisely *because* of the opportunity for prosperity presented by Western markets. If it’s based on merchantilist notions of reclaiming “American manufacturing jobs”, it will not only be ineffective, but will also serve the American consumer poorly. I’m glad that your recommendations are purely voluntary, but I still fail to see how they help our situation in China, or provide us with leverage.

        • snowshooze

          If we can’t make the stuff ourselves, we probably don’t need it anyway… 20% tariff.. fine with me. What is the problem other than it is bad and evil and horrible and stuff?
          If we are in a popularity contest, we have a real problem anyway.
          I know, we would have to make lots of nasty things like car batteries and all the haz-mat stuff…bring it back…and there is nobody in their right mind who want’s to deal with EPA, DEC, OSHA and everyone that would converge on that one…

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            Me, I want lower taxes.

          • snowshooze

            And taxes are part of the reason we are importing, as well as regulations, which I noted.
            However, if we protect the market from imports, and exporting jobs, and money, and put our people to work where they aren’t spending their welfare and unemployment checks in China…( We al know that unemployment extensions create jobs… in China )
            Then I would like to think that we would be ahead in the long game.
            I am all for free market competition, but it isn’t much competition if the labor you are fighting is 1/5 of yours and they can ship across the oceans and still beat you nearly on that point alone. Add to that, no environmental regs, or safety, and we dirty stuff up by proxy.
            We export the pollution so there’s a big plus right there.
            Anyway, I guess I would rather lspend a dollar amongst my friends than a nickle amongst my enemies. My friends will buy my stuff too.
            My point… I think if we retain our wealth…

          • aesthete

            A tariff, however, forces your decision upon the rest of us, when we would have chosen otherwise — just like what ObamaCare does. That is the problem with a tariff or ban, and it is even more problematic when tariff and ban supporters won’t express their rationale for their preferred policies (and no, the fact that a foreigner is benefiting isn’t even close to sufficient reason).

          • snowshooze

            In the argument, is the standard of living, value of the currency and the export equation, now I have heard a weak dollar opens overseas markets as products become affordable.
            Does that not nearly amount to a tariff?
            We are certainly on the right track to correct that disparity.
            Anyway, I have seen direct competition between small shops such as mine and China in small lot custom machined parts and fabrications. As China is a Communist Nation, there isn’t much concern about the tax burden on the private company that I mentioned, or regulatory and labor costs..and it is hard to ignore the fact that we are borrowing quite a bit from communists.
            .
            Now, if you hada choice, and you had to pay taxes…which country would you prefer to pay them to, exactly?
            Anyway, that sounds silly…but I believe there is underlying merit.

          • acat

            A tariff prevents foreign goods from being sold here. So does a weak dollar.

            A tariff does not prevent foreign purchases of U.S.-made goods. A strong dollar does.

            They’re not at all the same.

            As for competition, there are always new challenges to businesses, unless they’re government-managed monopolies like electricity or water. Even then, we used to regard telephone as a similar service and .. look where it got us.

            My point is that just because the current challenge is getting undercut by China doesn’t mean we should raise taxes – it does mean you need to look at your business model and figure out how you can offer value-add services that Chinese shops can’t… just as AT&T had to figure out how to compete with cellular and Comcast eating their lunch.

            It’s not something a tariff is needed for – it’s just a part of doing business.

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            Limit our exports?

          • acat

            Our higher cost of production is a problem – one that could be addressed with a little judicious union-busting – but it’s important to note that we have know-how that no other country has.

            China, for example, is in the very *very* early stages of building an aviation industry. For the most part, they buy Boeing or Airbus or Tupolev.

            Mew

          • Menlo

            Americans are now manufacturing and exporting millions of chopsticks to the Chinese.

          • aesthete

            “If we can

          • snowshooze

            And there are aplenty things that we no longer make due to the affordability of imports. Do you have a solution for that one?
            Exaggerating a bit, I realize but I compete hard against my local competition. I bring savings to my customers. Nearly every good job is by competitive bid, low man wins, or sometimes loses…if he isn’t darned careful. So, if we move all manufacturing offshore, should we let the products back in for free?

          • acat

            Right now, IT jobs are among the better paying in this country.

            Why do you think we’re importing so many tech-sector workers?

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            You got me. Why ever we would need to import an IT worker is simply beyond the limits of my imagination. Maybe it is just the work ethic?
            Ah well…
            Possibly it is our College system. When I went to PCC to take a shop class.. they had other ideas. You should do this, do that degree this…
            Hey man, I came here to brush up on my vertical milling machine skills.. are you gonna sell me that?
            In the end, the answer was no.
            So maybe them imported IT guys are very sharp in their field, but haven’t spent their lives in a degree program. I dunno.

          • acat

            Having worked with many foreign nationals in my IT career, I can say you’re close – they learned a trade, it happens to be IT.

            The other part of it is cultural indoctrination – that is, their best and brightest come here, learn from us – not just school, lifestyle – and then go back home eventually, or emigrate here and become citizens.

            Win-win.

            Only works, though, if we have a good high-paying job track. Your track, machinist, used to be dominated by Germans and Polish, at least in my experience. Have you seen that as a problem?

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            A lotta pushbutton guys out there these days…
            But anymore, not so many that can step up to a manual machine and have any idea what to do.
            An automatic machine is not much good on one-offs and maintenance machine work.
            I have never been able to replace myself on the floor, and have pretty much given up on trying.
            I kinda transitioned away from that through welding and fabrication, to General Contractor…but still do a bit of machine shop stuff.
            I went from just myself to 15 employees… now back to just myself and hire for projects.
            Oh, I see…. the only problem is we have so many unemployed..and we send out for help???

          • acat

            Machinist, carpenter, writer, systems engineer, doctor …

            To your example, what caused you to lay off 15 people? Lack of projects, or did you keep getting underbid on projects by pushbutton and CAM shops?

            The reason we have so many unemployed is we’re trying to compete wrong. Think of it like an iron man competition. We won the running leg of the competition, but we’re still trying to run even though we’re on the cycling part.

            No business model is guaranteed; we used to know this, culturally, and be on the lookout for better mousetraps. Sometime between 1970 and now, we stopped looking and started demanding the government mandate that our current business model remain the same…

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            My worst year financially.. and the headaches, and trying to keep them busy… I do projects, not production. It isn’t ” Steady ” work.
            So, anymore, I do work with the UNION HALL..yikes.
            But only on outside projects. I’d guess my fully burdened employee hour is around $70.00 with all taxes, contribs..WC payroll..

          • acat

            a move toward small companies and sole proprietorships working together – if you’ll allow that a union stiff is his or her own sole proprietor – as a way to reduce expenses and increase the ability to compete, against both foreign and domestic competitors. Of course, that was a good decade back in a different venue.

            You make my point for me – what’s preventing any of the 15 guys you laid off from competing with you, other than skills? A tariff doesn’t give them skills, although some time in the Navy might.

            Mew

          • snowshooze

            As I recall, none of them showed any interest in signing a check…or pulling a mortgage on the house to swing a job.
            And of those that asked about starting a business, I always encouraged them.
            No, we cannot fight cheap labor, and zero regulation on flat ground.
            We can build non-radioactive cars though..;) I’d stay away from any new Toyota’s for the next half million years or so…

          • acat

            the Japanese, the Russians, the Japanese (again), the Germans, the Brits, and the Turks. And yet, we did. And we’re still here, with our constitution, while their governments have all been replaced. Sometimes more than once.

            I do not accept that we cannot fight on level ground.

            I do accept that we do not have level ground – but that’s due to unions and red tape, and should be solved by labor reform and government reform, not by increasing the number of thumbs on the scale.

            Mew

          • lineholder

            and I’ve no wish to taint the scales, not even in our own favor, acat, if it isn’t done on the up and up. It would only come unraveled at some point further down the road, causing us more problems then that it would be worth. Always does.

            But this may be a case when methods that we consider to be traditional, i.e. things that have worked in the past, may not work as well this time. I think that Snowshooze’s statement, that we are in new territory, is a valid one.

            Help me out here, okay? When you say government reform and labor reform, can you provide some specific examples?

          • acat

            in uncharted territory, but then I recall that every tomorrow is the undiscovered country, and that we live in a world with black swans. Unfortunately, this is not a simple “I’d cut X”, so I’m likely to ramble a bit.

            Let’s start with government reform. A friend pointed out, recently, that the Bush tax cuts put the government on an inevitable path to reduction, the only question was how much debt they’d pile on in the interim. There’s no way for the Dems to really undo the tax cuts, not with the economy being sour – the last major hike was Clinton’s during the dot-com bubble – so that means this was all inevitable… and the inevitable result is smaller government. Whether it’s leaner, more red-tape-free government is yet to be determined.

            Government adds very little value. I hesitate to say “no” value, because NASA produced quite a bit, once upon a time, and the USGS and weather service are still somewhat useful. However, for every agency that I’d keep, there’s at least three I’d cut.

            I don’t have a specific road map, but I’d recommend looking at – case by case – each Federal agency and, where there’s an overlap with the States, turn it into a block grant with a ten year sunset. Let the laboratories of democracy figure it out.

            Why, for instance, is licensing hazardous material truck drivers a Fed job? Why not let the States determine the standards and, if they want to act together, do so? Department of Transportation could be mostly done away with, the pieces that are still better done at the Fed level moved to either the Department of Defense or maybe Commerce. (since they’re mostly regulating commerce…) Dump Amtrak. More on that below.

            Why is there a FEMA and also an Illinois Emergency Management Agency? Can we not assume that, in the event of a disaster on a State border, that someone from Illinois could call someone from Indiana and coordinate? Dump FEMA, and above all else, privatize flood insurance!

            To anyone who says “that’ll add cost! redundancy! too many state employees!” I reply “I thought you wanted there to be more jobs”. Besides, as a State issue, each State can decide how to handle it… and some will find efficiencies. (my money is on Texas doing very well… make the punishment for non-compliance high enough and compliance looks a lot better!)

            On to labor reform. Unions may want to claim to be symbiotes, but they’re actually parasites. There are two types of unions, though – Trade unions, which grew out of guilds, serve a somewhat useful purpose. Labor unions do not, they exist purely to extort money from companies.

            Consider passenger rail systems. Used to be, back in the ’60s, dozens of regional rail lines in the country, the Southern Pacific, the ATSF, the Chicago and Northwestern… and they all had competing passenger service. There still *should* be competing passenger rail service. Union rules, though, kept raising the cost of providing the service, while at the same time rail had to compete with the new (at the time) airline service. Nixon created Amtrak as a dumping ground for the wreckage, and we’ve been shoveling money down that black hole ever since.

            Ever ride Amtrak? It’s .. interesting. Parts – the food and scenery – are excellent. The staff are even courteous. The rest seems stuck in some sort of time warp from 1974. Compartments are crampt and worn, fixtures are dated and while mostly workable, obviously could be improved – if somoene could find a way to profit by doing so.

            The railroads couldn’t re-negotiate their union contracts under Nixon, any more than Boeing can re-negotiate with the machinists union under Obama, and the result was bankrupcy or .. Amtrak. I predict that ACFSME and other government-labor-unions are headed in the same direction.

            If a company – or a municipality – cannot stay in business while paying union scale, is it better for them to go under, or to have the right to re-negotiate?

            There’s an apocryphal story from England where Rolls-Royce called all the union employees in and said “We have no jobs at 30L/hr, we have lots of jobs at 20L/hr. Your choice.” (i.e. you can take a 1/3 pay cut and keep your benefits and job, or you can leave)

            Any company or muni that tries to re-negotiate like that now will get picketed…. and I’m waiting for a union to try that in a second-amendment-rights castle-doctrine State … but if the alternative is bankrupcy and unemployment without benefits, there are a good number of employees who will take the cut, sell the jet skis, and keep working.

            The NLRB needs to be reformed or, better – just plain cut. Let the unions sue in court, paying trial lawyer fees, instead of through arbitration and a separate-but-inequal process established purely for their benefit. It’s a luxury we can no longer afford.

            As you can see, this isn’t so much a road map as a collection of thoughts… I do think we’re in new territory, and one way that’s true is that tax avoidance – offshore accounts, private gold stashes, paying under the table, etc. – are going to go up significantly.

            Even under the highest tax rates in our country’s history, the Carter era, government only took in around 18% of GDP. Obama wants 25%. Can’t happen, not possible. Again, the cost of compliance becomes lower than the cost of getting caught – cheat and stay in business or go bankrupt.

            The small business folk who can will take Snowshoozes’ approach and lay off the official workers, then hire “subcontractors” when they need help. Others – think convenience store/gas station owners – will go back to paying under the table.

            It’s going to be bad, but it won’t be bad indefinitely, and hitting out at China, who are going to be in much worse shape, is both fighting the wrong enemy and .. kind of pointless.

            Mew

          • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

            China is shooting themselves in the foot with their economic policies.

            When we complain about their dumping or their currency manipulations or threatening tariffs, we’re shooting ourselves in the feet.

            That is, the more our government tries to ‘help’ the more they’re rescuing China, not us.

            Your litany of misdirected governmental actions are good examples of our trying to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

            It is our government’s increasingly crowding out private capital and constraining free markets and artificially increasing their costs by regulating private companies to death is killing what has made our country the economic powerhouse we became and are rapidly tearing down our nation.

          • acat

            Over time, societies move from capitalism to communism. (Karl Marx)

            Our capitalist system is falling apart for many reasons… and it will end up a communist system if we do not reclaim it.

            Mew

          • lineholder

            The interpretation of government reform varies from person to person, I guess. I’d go after de-regulation as much as possible first. If that means eliminating entire departments from agencies, so be it. After that, if I thought we could find a way to interject cost-effectiveness and productivity into government functions, I’d pursue that change in mindset/behavior in a heartbeat. But I’ve given up hope that government will even comprehend what cost-efficient means, much less to live by it day after day. So I’d probably transfer as much as possible that could be contracted out to the private sector, knocking out cronyism in the process. Stop carrying something on the budget year after year when it is outdated and no longer necessary. Easier to get rid of something if it is in the private sector. Easier to update and modernize, too.

            Completely and totally overhaul any welfare type programs that remain. Redesign them to serve primarily short-term functions. Stop perpetuating generation after generation of welfare families.

            I want to see the NLRB rendered mute. I don’t particularly care how that happens as long it happens. We need survival in RTW states to thrive, not die. That’s our best hope of being able to compete internationally.

            I’d like to see us move as much as we can to the state level, including education.

            There are some agencies that I’d keep that other people probably would write off, but only with a far more limited role than they have now. For example, the CDC and epidemiology.

            As to small business owners, I suspect that sometime during the course of the next year, we’ll start seeing more of them moving towards job-sharing. Under Obamacare, they won’t face some of the regs for part-time employees that they would face for full-time employees. Completely legal. Wonder how that will impact overall federal taxes paid to the government? Increase or decrease? I think decrease.

            In all honesty, re: China, I think they have bigger fish to fry than us right now. Their one-child policy is coming back to bite them in the backside. Proverbial double-edged sword. Aging population. Export dependent economy. Younger generation choosing to go childless more than in recent generations. The US is just a fly in the ointment, so to speak. But they won’t look at it kindly if we default on our debts, and we shouldn’t expect them to do so either. Not a chance I’d underestimate them on this one, not given the circumstances they are facing.

          • acat

            China’s sunk, they just don’t know it yet.

            One small business owner I know has already asked his wife to take a sales role .. unpaid. His brother did the same. (they’re partners) The ladies, prior to this, had not worked in years but have good people skills. If the economy improves before the company goes under, they’ll get a bonus and retire. If the company goes under, they will try to collect their salaries before the other creditors get to the assets.

            As for the CDC, it belongs under the DoD, in my book. (grin) I see the DoD taking on a much more broad role – not just armed services, but a true defense-in-depth for our nation. In my book, they also get border patrol, air marshall service, and – if there’s no way to kill it – TSA. They’re smart enough to outsource it, I hope!

            Mew

          • Menlo

            The Belgians can make better chocolate.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    If you’re concerned that they’re artificially lowering their prices, that’s to our economic advantage to buy their products at the expense of China’s consumers. That is, China is taking money of out the pockets of their citizens and putting more money in our pockets to buy other goods and services.

    What’s your complaint about that?

    If you’re concerned about product quality, safety – the issue is disclosure, not a boycott. And in today’s world, information is much easier to disseminate.

    If you’re concerned about freedom, well we are in a global economy, and the best way in commerce to preserve our freedom is put our capital into those activities where we have a competitive advantage, especially when China is subsidizing our efforts.

  • Pingback: Google

  • Donald Ayotte

    I forgot to add that if Americans were to boycott Chinese products that both the Chinese and Wal-mart might learn a little humility. I doubt it but maybe!!

  • Menlo

    I would love nothing more than an embargo, but I don’t buy anything made in China. I do it for reasons of safety, human rights, and product reliability as well.

    I take it seriously enough with food that I don’t even buy enriched or fortified foods because the added vitamins are made in China. I wouldn’t take a medicine with Chinese-sourced ingredients to save my life.

    I don’t know what one does about municipal water suppliers when much of the fluoride the city poisons us with comes from China. I’ll only drink and cook with bottled distilled water, but it’s not like people have a choice. Same goes for the people of California, where the state had the Bay Bridge made in China.

    I stopped going to Wal-Mart when they put in McDonald’s restaurants as the odor of deep-fat-frying makes me ill. Good luck convincing the Wal-Creatures of that.

  • Donald Ayotte

    China doesn’t have the same safety standards that we have in America. People for the most part have become complacent sheep. The day before the vote on raising the debt ceiling, a correspondent questioned several people about what the vote in Congress would mean, and 4 out of 5 didn’t have a clue.

  • Donald Ayotte

    Wal-Mart can deal with anybody they want. All I

  • Menlo

    I would guess most people are aware that the nation lacks safety standards, but they either do not care, trust US government regulation, or underestimate the impact of such standards. They are also unaware of what all comes from China.

    How is anyone supposed to know what the vote in Congress means? Macroeconomics is a very difficult subject that few could be expected to understand. Because it is largely a study of politics, it is only made more confusing by hearing so many contradictory and politically-motivated statements.

  • lineholder

    You guys would get into this discussion while I’m on hiatus, right?

    Around my house, we shifted focus a few months ago to buy either American-made or assembled in the USA as much as we can. Why? Not because of a boycott against any other country. The reasons are purely ideological and somewhat sentimental on my part…because manufacturing was my first career love, and despite the odds that the manufacturing sector is up against, I believe in the people and the quality of work, and it’s more money back into our own economy.

    Plus, we buy local before we buy from major corporations. And I’ll buy from young Americans trying to become entrepreneurs (after making sure that they can present a legitimate argument for why I should purchase their product rather than just expecting me to buy it because it is made in the USA).

  • Donald Ayotte

    I’m suggesting that we buy American and quality products that are made in North America before buying from another continent.
    My logic is that I’ve almost always received great products from the USA made, Canadian Made and now Mexican made manufacturing.
    I’ve stated my reasons for boycotting Mainland Chinese products. We are the largest consumer nation; let’s use that power to derail the Chinese from their current position of sarcastic loaner and abuser.
    They are unloading inferior products on America and laughing at us as we seemingly snap them up and “deals.”
    They don’t respect us because we’ve let the position as “Top Dog,” globally slip though our fingers.
    Well, I’ve got news for them, we don’t have to buy their products. If we can get rid of Obama in 2012, we can give incentives to American manufacturers to bring back jobs to this country.

  • acat

    One I follow, with caveats. The knives in the kitchen are Cutco, with the exception of the ceramic-bladed one for apples and tomatoes – it’s Japanese.

    The car and truck, as I mentioned, are Toyota, but built here in the U.S. by non-UAW labor. (union label = economic skull-and-crossbones, far as I’m concerned)

    I just don’t see where turning this into anything other than a personal choice makes sense. Do nationwide boycotts like this work? Did “look for the union label” drive non-union manufacturing out?

    Hoping you’re back to full health soon!

    Mew

  • aesthete

    “They don

  • lineholder

    you may not like it very much.

    The best means we have to succeeding in the long run is for the manufacturing sector in our county to become competitive with other nations again, to the point that consumers choose to buy American-made goods over foreign goods. There are options that have never been tried that might open the doors to new opportunities. The biggest obstacle on that point is getting managers in the manufacturing sector out of the traditional manufacturing mindset.

    If we try to go about this by means of government intervention, we generate another bubble of our own making. Reduction of regulations that hinder manufacturing is one thing…providing government-backed incentives is another. I’m hoping that when you say “give incentives”, you mean via reduction and elimination of regulations.

    As to China laughing at us, that may be true. But I’m more inclined to think at this point that conservatives/Tea Party folks have more in common with the Chinese government than we might like to acknowledge, because they don’t trust the US government to use money wisely any more than we do.

    The Chinese government has a reputation for inhumane brutality, and I don’t deny that in the least. However, they have been willing to acknowledge that it they don’t want to run out of “somebody else’s money” they have to keep an infusion of new money coming into their nation. For this reason, they’ve accepted capitalism as a “necessary evil”, and through it has come better, more humane living conditions for their citizens.

    Think about the squalling and gnashing of teeth that we are getting so far from our progressives/socialists, those who are sold on socialistic policies to the very soul of their being, who apparently would rather see this entire nation go down in flames than to own up to the simple truth that capitalism can and does serve a positive purpose.

  • mrlord4459

    Your idea of buying American-purposely, as a matter of principle, and ignoring economic forces is as bad a policy as government price subsidies and supports. Anything not grounded in sound economics, relying on emotion or ideology is a failure.

    We cannot fly in the face of economic reality to do so imitates the socialist and communist mentality. Buy what you have to as a consumer of goods and services. Buy the best value.

    Having said that, our government has let us all down for years in its trade policy. All our “free trade” treaties and policies have been one sided. We are the most lucrative market in the world yet win no trade deals. We are the only nation that lets its economy support its diplomatic efforts not the other way around.

    I want an aggressive US favored trade policy. But not at the expense of economic principles. Let us fix things here-favor some business rather than call it evil rich. Let us get a government that stresses profits rather than jobs; and the jobs will come.

    Who would do business here, given the choice, with this clown in the White House running around slamming “the rich”, their “jets” and the like. Remember when he almost wrecked Las Vegas with his comments about conventions in 09? And did wreck the Gulf with his policies.

    Remember profits drive all economic growth. If it is very profitable to operate somewhere- they will.

  • lineholder

    if it is going to last any length of time. We have to stay away from generating any more bubbles that influence our economy. And we can’t afford to have government subsidize manufacturing either (which is a bee that the left has had in its bonnet during recent weeks).

    I may be too ideological on this one, for loyalty reasons, but I believe we have what it takes.

    As to my health, thanks for asking. Uphill battle for right now, but better odds than we thought a week ago.

  • acat

    The family I grew up in was anti-union and sort of isolationist. Anti-Japan, at least. (makes sense – several uncles fought in wwii) The union part was in reaction to corruption in the city of chicago, and reinforced by corruption in education.

    Creating that kind of a culture, where dad would say “I’ll pay another nickel for that one, I know they’re not unionized” or an uncle would say “I’ll pay an extra dollar for that, it’s made in the U.S.” will not be easy when most people have been conditioned to say “that’s cheapest, I’ll take it” without seeing why it’s cheapest.

    Mew

  • Donald Ayotte

    You’re right, I don’t trust this government to use money wisely because of their track record and it has nothing to do with the Tea Party. I believe that the private manufacturing sector should be given tax breaks and protection from unions to return to America so they can make a profit and provide jobs to the American people.
    The current government does not want a prosperous middle class that threatens their socialist ideas.
    To put it frankly, Obama has to go before anything can change. Their is also the fact that the Chinese government treats their population and labor force no better than slaves. The work conditions are inhumane except for a few jobs.

  • Donald Ayotte

    C’mon Aesthete

    We’ve just been downgraded to AA+ from AAA and and the Chinese are beating us half to death by dumping inferior goods on us and you think that we’re not losing status globally?
    Yes, we’re still powerful but there are very few world leaders that have any respect for Obama’s ability to run anything much less a hegemon such as the U.S.
    We don’t manufacture anything in America compared to what we did when I was growing up in the 50′s and 60′s. How long can we sustain our power when we are being outmaneuvered globally?

  • Menlo

    Emotion and/or ideology ARE economic forces. That’s what guides many people’s economic decisions and investments at the micro and macro levels. It has created entirely new markets in the economy and changed others. It is not possible to separate such forces from economics.

    You say to “buy the best value,” but different people value different things.

  • JSobieski

    But to purposely insert either into what is supposed to be an economic analysis transforms the analysis into something else.

    Life is more than economics, but when you act on the basis of non-economic rationales, there is a monetary price to pay.

    If you say that you don’t like China and that you don’t want to buy goods from them, I say God Bless America.

    If you say that boycotting Chinese goods would benefit the US economically, I say you are wrong.

    if you say that the economic cost to us as a society is worth the positive impact of a boycott on China would have on China, I say that you are wrong.

    China has a lot of problems, and there are a lot of good reasons to think that China is going to end up like a poorer version of Japan in the medium term future.

  • acat

    Writing, at the time, about the meatpacking industry in Chicago.

    What Sinclair totally missed is that, to the meatpackers, their lives were much better than would have been, had they not been working .. It is a matter of perspective.

    We cannot transform Chinese standards to match United States mores, and it’s xenophobic to not want to do business with them simply because their mores are different.

    If you don’t want to, that’s fine, but you’ve got to come up with better reasons than have been presented thus far.

    Mew

  • acat

    The one I’m sitting in right now was built in the ’40s. Lots of stone and concrete, and unless there’s a major incident or a developer decides he or she want to buy the lot it’s on, it’ll be standing after I’m dead.

    The building boom in China has largely been of inferior quality, and will not last.

    This is part of what is meant when we say China will get old before they get rich – they do not have wealth, other than I.O.U.s from us, and they have the sam kind of baby-boom population growing older (and requiring more care) that we’ve got .. only worse because they can’t marry off all their sons. (one-child)

    China is not a long-term threat. They could become a long-term trading partner, if handled properly.

    Mew

  • Menlo

    The only such “economic analysis” would amount to reporting statistics. There is no other way to take emotion and ideology out of the mix.

    I don’t know exactly what the future holds, but I do know that it will certainly not end up at all like Japan, if only because of unchangeable cultural differences.

    I agree that boycotting China won’t help China, though no one can know for sure what the long-term effects would be in this country. My argument is that it is worth it even if it has no positive impact on either China or this nation’s economy.

  • Donald Ayotte

    emotion and ideology along with a burning desire to see the country return to greatness. We are tired of our civil rights being regulated away by bureaucrats. The Tea Party has now been condemned by the VP as “Terrorists.”
    Here in Delaware we call ourselves “Patriots.” However, we need Biden back at his old job at the, “Milton DE Hot Air Balloon Festival,” blowing up the balloons.

    Nobody here is a terrorist Joe!!!!

  • acat

    The fight you seem to have here isn’t with China, it’s with our government.

    Let’s focus on the real problem, shall we?

    Mew