Re: Time to drastically cut autoworker salaries, benefits

In article <pZKdnVymhdIjlfbeRVn-jA@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Johnson, PE wrote:

> China has advantages and disadvantages just like us. What is so bad
> about having a product developed here and then manufactured in China?
> It results in lower prices for the consumer.

Low quality, displacement of manufacturing, loss of ability to be
independent. And that doesn't even touch job loss.

You might think that just providing 'services' and making investment
money is enough... the real wealth will always be with the creation.

>>>> Who is talking protectionism?

>>> To keep manufacturing of many goods like textiles, toys, cheap
>>> electronics etc. will require protectionist policies.

>> No, it doesn't. It only requires those in charge of the companies to
>> choose differently.

> To choose to sell a product at a higher cost than your competitors?

Savings are not passed on. The market price is the market price. The so
called savings of china based manufacturing go to profit. I say so called
because there are other costs that are not considered which wipe out a
considerable portion of the gains.

> That is a sure fire way to go out of business.

There are other ways to reduce costs besides going to china and the 3rd
world for manufacturing.

> If it were a better business model for companies to manufacture
> their products here then they would.

You seem to think that 'better' is always chosen. Humans often do not
choose what is better. They do what is popular. They do what will get
them the best short term gain. 'better' overall has nothing to do with
the decision, that's the problem.

> Frankly, the public doesn't care where something is made.
> All they want is for a product to be a combination of the highest
> quality at the lowest price.

Just lowest price generally. The public seems to enjoy replacing things
frequently so long as the price is low. The fact that it would be cheaper
long term to buy a more expensive higher quality item doesn't register
with most people in the USA. And then when they lose their job to the
third world they complain without examining their own purchasing habbits.

>>> reason our standard of living is so high is because of cheap imports.

>> We could simply make things better so they last and are not disposable
>> crap for one. There are lots of ways to skin a cat.

> Anything electronic is going to be obsolete in short order.

Hmm... I am posting this remotely from a 1993 NextStation.

> It is the nature of the business. Who wants to hang on to a computer
> for five years? I don't.

I don't have a single box that is less than 5 years old.

> Who wants to keep the same car for ten years? I don't.

I have a car that is almost 9 years old and another that is 32 years old.

> Consumers want continually advancing products.

Advertising tells them they have to have the newest thing. Even though
the newest thing doesn't do much more if anything than what they already
have. I use things for a long time and make quantum leaps.

> The bulk of our
> economy is geared for this type of business model because it is what we
> are demanding and expect.

No, it's that way because that is how companies have made it because that
generates the greatest profit. It is incredibly wasteful and cannot be
sustained with continuing population growth.

>>> We don't "make nothing".
>>
>> The USA will soon be that way.

> I have way more faith in this country than you appear to have.

You are the one arguing for sending all manufacturing overseas. We will
end up making nothing eventually. I don't know why you babbled on about
economic flexibility, because that wasn't part of the statement. We will
eventually make nothing or next to nothing following these trends. True
it will probably bottom out somewhere, but the USA will become so
dependent upon other nations for even basic survival, we will be in load
of hurt.

>>> We create/design products

>> I don't think you grasp the volume of engineers graduating in India and
>> China alone.

> It isn't hard to grasp at all. It is an area we need to address as I
> stated earlier. Graduating more people in the tech fields should be a
> number one priority.

Why? There aren't going to be any jobs for them here under your model of
shifting manufacturing overseas. Companies realize the problems having
development teams thousands of miles from the factories and are solving
that problem by hiring engineers locally to do the product design and
development. Instead of training an expensive new engineer in the USA and
having the problems of being remote, they will use their existing
engineering staff to train the people they can hire locally.

>>> Just because a product is manufactured
>>> overseas doesn't mean it is conceived and engineered overseas.

>> Here's a clue for you, I am mechanical engineer. I've worked in product
>> design/development for the last 9 years. Products I have worked on have
>> been sold world wide. I am well aware of cultural differences,
>> manufacturing methods, etc and so forth. I am also aware of the US
>> corporations slowly replacing their US based engineering staff with much
>> cheaper engineering staff that lives where the factories are. They are
>> begining to realize that the constant travel back and forth is costly and
>> are growing their overseas design centers. US corporations are also
>> farming out more and more design work to companies in other parts of the
>> world. They are outsourcing the designs. ODM product.

> They are outsourcing more from a lack of qualified personnel than
> anything else.

BULL***. The last piece of consumer electronics I worked on had a good
hunk of the team downsized out of the company while more product got ODM'd.
They downsized the most verstile and qualified technical people and kept
the people that were best at doing ODM management type work.

> There are tens of thousands of jobs here in the
> Washington, DC area that go unfilled year after year and the number is
> growing. I am an engineer too and have seen salaries in the civil
> engineering fields raise almost 100% in the last 7-8 years.

Because you cannot outsource bridge building. The bridge, highway,
building, whatver has to be where it's used. It doesn't make sense to
hire an engineer in china in your field. In my field, product
development, it makes sense to get engineers in china knowledgable and
then trim down the US staff to bare bones. Manufacturing engineers, those
who work in the factories are useless thousands of miles from the
factory. They are all hired locally.

> The world is full of "the glass is half empty" and "the glass is half
> full" types of people. It is "the glass is half full" types that keep
> people employed. I do know that opportunities abound everywhere for
> people that care to open their minds and act on them.

You keep trying to introduce new arguements, I didn't say there weren't
new opertunities. Sure, I could become lots of things from an auto
mechanic to a stock trader, I could be a mortgage broker, I could sell
hot dogs, I could buy a subway franchise, I could start a grocery
store... This isn't about opertunities to make money in some other area.
It's about the consquences of losing the manufacturing base.

You think we need more technically literate people. Well, how are you
going to encourage kids to put in the effort to become engineers when the
bulk of it is going overseas.

> I'm not worried
> about China or any other country from an economic standpoint.

Short haul it's not a problem. Long haul, when we find we don't make much
of anything, it will be.

> If your
> company (or any company for that matter) can't remain flexible and
> creative then they will fall by the wayside, as it should be in a
> capitalistic economy. My advice is not to sit around and have a pity
> party for yourselves but adapt and overcome the problems facing you.

Nice try, but the fact remains without a manufacturing base we will be
screwed.

>> My former employer was having a good number of products ODM'd. The
>> development staffs were gone, just leaving a few project engineers to
>> make 'are you done yet' phone calls and the like.

> If this is a good business model for them then why complain about it?
> If it isn't then they will be put out of business by their competitors.
> Nothing stays the same in life and especially in business. Just
> because you don't like what they are doing doesn't make it wrong or bad
> for the rest of us.

You just don't see the problem with not making anything. By being
dependent upon other nations that aren't exactly friendly. It's a me
first, *** you world and when they can *** us over for their gain they
will. Plain and simple.
>>> There is a huge demand in this country for engineers and technicians.
>>
>> I haven't looked for a job in awhile, but I haven't seen anything like a
>> 'huge' demand.

> You need to get out more. In the Washington, DC area the demand for
> high tech employees is as good as it has ever been since I moved here in
> 1985. The unemployment rate is very low and the economic growth rates
> are through the roof. The is a housing shortage projection here over
> the next ten years is 200,000+ units.

What is made in washington DC? It's government buracrats.

>>> Any engineer that looses their job can have a new one in just a few
>>> days.

>> When I was downsized in 2002 it took 6 months. And there were a goodly
>> number of engineers out of work.

> A friend of mine decided to move from Washington, DC to South Carolina
> in August. By the middle of September he had been through several
> interviews and had 3-4 offers. He took one and moved their on October
> 1st. If I chose to go back to work for a consulting firm I could have a
> dozen offers in a weeks time. Maybe things aren't as good for the other
> engineering disciplines.

Like I told you before, bridge building can't be moved to china. I am in
product development. That's going overseas and you're being cheerleader
for it claiming that somehow it's not harming the job market for
engineers here in the USA as companies open design centers in bejing.

>>> It is a merging. They are contracted by USA companies to manufacture
>>> products designed here and they ship those products to us.

>> They hold considerable portions of the federal government debt. They have
>> a considerable portion of our manufacturing base. They have us by the
>> balls. They can wreck our economy practically on demand now and are only
>> getting stronger.

> Now if they could wreck us then they hurt themselves just as much if not
> more. Who is hurt more, the person that makes a loan and doesn't get
> paid back or the person that defaulted on the loan? I think both suffer
> nearly equally.

Depends on what your end goal is. If we view this as an economic war,
victory may require loses. It's especially easy when you don't have to
accountable to the people of the nation.
6~

>>> Truth is they need us as much as we need them.

>> That might be true if it was government that had to be accountable to the
>> people of the nation in some respect. But since China's government
>> doesn't, they don't need us as much as we need them.

> I disagree. They need our trade just as the rest of the world needs it.

At some point the USA won't be providing anything they need. Just a bunch
of greedy MBAs and lawyers and various layers of redunant management.

>>> They are trying to make money off us just like we are trying to make
>>> it off of them.

>> That's why they wanted the missile technology and the radation hardened
>> electronics..... because they are so friendly.

> And you don't think we are stealing technology from, and spying on, them
> and other countries? Let's not be too naive. ;)

Not talking stealling and spying. This stuff was outright sold. (some of
it illegally, but sold none the less)

>>>> We have illegal immigration because the powers that be want to use it to
>>>> drive down wages in the USA. A bunch of guys sitting in lawn chairs can
>>>> manage to close down the boarder, than the US military can certainly do
>>>> it.

>>> We have illegal immigration because Mexicans can't find gainful
>>> employment in their own country. I bet they would rather have a good
>>> paying job in Mexico than living here with no identity and minimal rights.

>> If they couldn't come here and displace people from their jobs by working
>> for less, then the question of their economy at home would be moot.

> The bulk of the work illegals perform are jobs nobody else wants. Do
> you want to pay $10 for a head of lettuce.

It moved beyond lettuce picking a long time ago. And if they didn't exist
there would be more mechanization, more automation to do those tasks. But
a supply of cheap labor keeps that from happening. Meanwhile what were
once good paying jobs that US citizens would do no longer pay that much.

> If it weren't for illegals
> in this area a house would cost 50% more and take twice as long to
> build.

Union rules are a problem. But cost 50% more? How, the cost of building
the house itself isn't the big part of it, the land is.

> The whole issue with illegals is not as simple as people make it
> out to be. Removing them from our country would send the economy into
> chaos.

You mean that companies need to have a way around the insane union rules,
minimum wage laws, and oppressive OSHA regs. Instead of having illegal
immigration so there are people that they don't have to follow the rules
for we could make the rules workable instead.

>> It will likely come to a head over taiwan.

> They want Taiwan for the same reason they wanted Hong Kong... economics.
> In some ways I see Taiwan as the equivalent of China letting Alaska
> become their own nation and then threatening us with military action if
> we attempt to bring them back into the union by force. I doubt we would
> like it either. IMO, sooner or later Taiwan will have to be reabsorbed
> by China.

And when China has the USA in such a bind they will take it. The USA
could then leave taiwan fend for itself or we can go to war. It's
lose-lose for the USA. China becomes top dog. And that's the end game.

>>> Give the Chinese some credit.

>> Have you done product development work for stuff made over there? I have.
>> They have to be watched and corrected at every turn to get anything
>> better than crap.

> Just like you would have to do with workers here in the states. ;)

Um no. If you'd done it, you'd know how foolish that statement is.

> The gun is at both our heads and both triggers are tied together.

No they aren't.

>>> Protectionism, in the end, only hurts the country that practices it.

>> I am not arguing for protectionism. I am arguing for responsible long
>> term decision making instead of closing factories for a illusionary
>> savings and a small temporary increase in stock price.

> IMO, the economic realities of today doesn't allow the same luxuries we
> experienced in the 1950s and 1960s. Business models have to be very
> reactive and less far sighted in order to compete in today's world. We
> have competition coming from all directions and in multiple forms. What
> works today may not be remotely feasible five or ten years down the road.

Again not arguing for being rigid and unchanging. Stop trying to put
words into my mouth, it's getting very annoying.


.