Responding to your post (the other person's claim is too generic to respond), when you say the difference is substantial, what specifically are you referring to?
Responding to your post (the other person's claim is too generic to respond), when you say the difference is substantial, what specifically are you referring to?
Unions have nothing to do with the issue at hand. To think that somehow, anything the American workforce can or can't do to compete with sweatshops is laughable, and an argument for the feeble-minded.
The reality is that we cannot compete with the low costs. What we can do is enact laws or reform the tax code to provide a disincentive as I outlined earlier.
Upon reading this, you can go back to being told what to think by the right wing.
Unions have nothing to do with the issue at hand. To think that somehow, anything the American workforce can or can't do to compete with sweatshops is laughable, and an argument for the feeble-minded.
The reality is that we cannot compete with the low costs. What we can do is enact laws or reform the tax code to provide a disincentive as I outlined earlier.
Upon reading this, you can go back to being told what to think by the right wing.
With some items, absolutely. With others, labor is actually cheaper in the US where we have machines producing the item as opposed to persons (although I suppose it is possible that the machines might be more costly in terms of labor than a 7 year old child from India).
But in certain items, the cost is in the fabric/material. My Italian suits are a prime example. Yes, handmade, but so are US brands like Chaps. The 120's cashmere is the cost on those items.
With some items, absolutely. With others, labor is actually cheaper in the US where we have machines producing the item as opposed to persons (although I suppose it is possible that the machines might be more costly in terms of labor than a 7 year old child from India).
But in certain items, the cost is in the fabric/material. My Italian suits are a prime example. Yes, handmade, but so are US brands like Chaps. The 120's cashmere is the cost on those items.
With some items, absolutely. With others, labor is actually cheaper in the US where we have machines producing the item as opposed to persons (although I suppose it is possible that the machines might be more costly in terms of labor than a 7 year old child from India).
But in certain items, the cost is in the fabric/material. My Italian suits are a prime example. Yes, handmade, but so are US brands like Chaps. The 120's cashmere is the cost on those items.
Yes---true---also other places are getting machines now to keep up. Still makes labor the huge difference maker.
Always nice to see a sharp dresser!
With some items, absolutely. With others, labor is actually cheaper in the US where we have machines producing the item as opposed to persons (although I suppose it is possible that the machines might be more costly in terms of labor than a 7 year old child from India).
But in certain items, the cost is in the fabric/material. My Italian suits are a prime example. Yes, handmade, but so are US brands like Chaps. The 120's cashmere is the cost on those items.
Yes---true---also other places are getting machines now to keep up. Still makes labor the huge difference maker.
Always nice to see a sharp dresser!
Unions have nothing to do with the issue at hand. To think that somehow, anything the American workforce can or can't do to compete with sweatshops is laughable, and an argument for the feeble-minded.
The reality is that we cannot compete with the low costs. What we can do is enact laws or reform the tax code to provide a disincentive as I outlined earlier.
Upon reading this, you can go back to being told what to think by the right wing.
Unions have nothing to do with the issue at hand. To think that somehow, anything the American workforce can or can't do to compete with sweatshops is laughable, and an argument for the feeble-minded.
The reality is that we cannot compete with the low costs. What we can do is enact laws or reform the tax code to provide a disincentive as I outlined earlier.
Upon reading this, you can go back to being told what to think by the right wing.
It seems one issue with the credit is if a company is starting a new factory it would almost encourage them to start it in a third world country. Then move it here to get the incentive. Another is the trickeration with showing relocation costs at two different companies as a closing versus a start-up or opening of a new plant.
Part of the problem is we also should be happy with cheaper products here. Too many people long for the days of yore. We are not really a country that produces goods as much anymore. Service and higher level jobs now are the thing. People do not want to update their skill set. Just as years back most were ag-based etc. Times change.
It seems one issue with the credit is if a company is starting a new factory it would almost encourage them to start it in a third world country. Then move it here to get the incentive. Another is the trickeration with showing relocation costs at two different companies as a closing versus a start-up or opening of a new plant.
Part of the problem is we also should be happy with cheaper products here. Too many people long for the days of yore. We are not really a country that produces goods as much anymore. Service and higher level jobs now are the thing. People do not want to update their skill set. Just as years back most were ag-based etc. Times change.
But in certain items, the cost is in the fabric/material. My Italian suits are a prime example. Yes, handmade, but so are US brands like Chaps. The 120's cashmere is the cost on those items.
But in certain items, the cost is in the fabric/material. My Italian suits are a prime example. Yes, handmade, but so are US brands like Chaps. The 120's cashmere is the cost on those items.
I would add to this that we have become an instant gratification society. We want ours and we want it now. We no longer care about future generations as much as previous generations did. Therefore, we don't consider how our actions will affect the jobs in the future for our kids. All we want is our salary increase now, etc.
I would add to this that we have become an instant gratification society. We want ours and we want it now. We no longer care about future generations as much as previous generations did. Therefore, we don't consider how our actions will affect the jobs in the future for our kids. All we want is our salary increase now, etc.
Responding to your post (the other person's claim is too generic to respond), when you say the difference is substantial, what specifically are you referring to?
Responding to your post (the other person's claim is too generic to respond), when you say the difference is substantial, what specifically are you referring to?
As for the t-shirt example, it goes back to my point, Is Walmart going to sell that shirt for the same price as an American made shirt, or reduce profits knowing that they will lose if they are competing against American made products for the same price.
As for Iphones, I doubt it would change the overall cost. We all know that these companies make their money on selling the plans. My Iphone was essentially $0 when I upgraded and ordered the new plan. I expect that the results would be similar and my reasoning is the cost comparison against other phones and in other countries.
I do think you would find things like TVs to be more expensive. I am not sure that is such a bad thing that American families are limited to two TVs as opposed to six.
As for the t-shirt example, it goes back to my point, Is Walmart going to sell that shirt for the same price as an American made shirt, or reduce profits knowing that they will lose if they are competing against American made products for the same price.
As for Iphones, I doubt it would change the overall cost. We all know that these companies make their money on selling the plans. My Iphone was essentially $0 when I upgraded and ordered the new plan. I expect that the results would be similar and my reasoning is the cost comparison against other phones and in other countries.
I do think you would find things like TVs to be more expensive. I am not sure that is such a bad thing that American families are limited to two TVs as opposed to six.
As for the t-shirt example, it goes back to my point, Is Walmart going to sell that shirt for the same price as an American made shirt, or reduce profits knowing that they will lose if they are competing against American made products for the same price.
As for Iphones, I doubt it would change the overall cost. We all know that these companies make their money on selling the plans. My Iphone was essentially $0 when I upgraded and ordered the new plan. I expect that the results would be similar and my reasoning is the cost comparison against other phones and in other countries.
I do think you would find things like TVs to be more expensive. I am not sure that is such a bad thing that American families are limited to two TVs as opposed to six.
I acknowledged your point. I just think a price increase for general public and/or a reduce in profit for corps-- a bad combination for any politician to act.
As for the t-shirt example, it goes back to my point, Is Walmart going to sell that shirt for the same price as an American made shirt, or reduce profits knowing that they will lose if they are competing against American made products for the same price.
As for Iphones, I doubt it would change the overall cost. We all know that these companies make their money on selling the plans. My Iphone was essentially $0 when I upgraded and ordered the new plan. I expect that the results would be similar and my reasoning is the cost comparison against other phones and in other countries.
I do think you would find things like TVs to be more expensive. I am not sure that is such a bad thing that American families are limited to two TVs as opposed to six.
I acknowledged your point. I just think a price increase for general public and/or a reduce in profit for corps-- a bad combination for any politician to act.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.