Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

‘Made In China’ Accounts For Less Than 3 Percent Of American Personal Consumption Expenditures

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 07:22 AM
Original message
‘Made In China’ Accounts For Less Than 3 Percent Of American Personal Consumption Expenditures
From Yglesias:


A very interesting analysis by Galina Hale and Bart Hobijn of the San Francisco Fed concludes that very little of American personal consumption spending actually ends up in China. When Americans go buy stuff, they’re overwhelmingly buying things that are made in America:



In part, this reflects the fact that 67 percent of spending is on services rather than goods, and services are 96 percent made in the USA. But even durable goods, which only account for about 10 percent of total spending, are mostly made in America — 66.6 percent to 12 percent for China with the rest coming from the rest of the world. In fact the only category of spending in which Made in the USA doesn’t account for the majority is clothing and shoes. What’s more, even a lot of the spending on imported goods actually reflects the cost of shipping them around the United States:

Table 1 shows that, of the 11.5% of U.S. consumer spending that goes for goods and services produced abroad, 7.3% reflects the cost of imports. The remaining 4.2% goes for U.S. transportation, wholesale, and retail activities. Thus, 36% of the price U.S. consumers pay for imported goods actually goes to U.S. companies and workers.

This U.S. fraction is much higher for imports from China. Whereas goods labeled “Made in China” make up 2.7% of U.S. consumer spending, only 1.2% actually reflects the cost of the imported goods. Thus, on average, of every dollar spent on an item labeled “Made in China,” 55 cents go for services produced in the United States. In other words, the U.S. content of “Made in China” is about 55%. The fact that the U.S. content of Chinese goods is much higher than for imports as a whole is mainly due to higher retail and wholesale margins on consumer electronics and clothing than on most other goods and services.


The table from the study:



Basically, we're buying clothing and household appliances from China. It's also interesting to me that 88% of our energy is domestic.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PoliticAverse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
1. 88% of energy ? That number needs to be explained further...
For example gasoline and fuel oil made at a plant in the US that comes from foreign
oil would be counted as "Made in USA" ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. That's a good question, and remember it's by price not by joule
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 08:00 AM by Recursion
Fossil fuels are a somewhat cheap way to easily transport a moderate amount of joules. Domestic energy would include all of our nuclear plants, domestic fossil, as I read it the refining part of domestically refined foreign fossils, renewables, and of course ethanol (which is huge). It could also reflect the fact that domestic energy is more expensive than we might think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
exboyfil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. I would assume that the analysis would have taken
domestic content into consideration. At first I had a tough time buying this analysis, but consider that we run a $400B trade deficit. Our total GDP is $14T. That works out to be 3% of the total GDP. That is a first pass consideration, and I would like to read the full report including all assumptions that went into it.

Something to think about though. Assuming a $500K/revenue per employee still means the deficit implies that 800,000 manufacturing jobs are done off shore.

Also the analysis does not consider foreign workers (both documented and undocumented). That number won't be huge, but it also represents potential jobs for U.S. workers.

As far as energy goes, it is probably pretty close. Our entire electric grid is almost entirely domestically produced. We mostly import a raw material that gets processed in this country. One website says that $3.80/gall gasoline that 65% of the cost is oil, 14% is refining, 10% is marketing/distribution, and 11% is taxes. About 50% of oil is imported. http://www.oag.state.va.us/Consumer%20Protection/Gasoline_Education.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_the_United_States
About 40% of total energy use is from oil about 20% of that total is foreign content. That works out to be about 8% of total energy usage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
2. Hmmm...
...will have to look at this. Bookmarking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Cooked numbers obviously
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Why is that "obvious"? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
N7Shepard Donating Member (191 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. You've got to be kidding. Go in any auto parts store and buy any
auto part.

It will be made in China. The rare case it will be made in Mexico or a third world country other than China. In extremely rare cases, made in USA or Canada. Same goes for virtually all tools. Yet transportation = minimal made in China? I don't buy it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. And?
What percentage of your spending is on auto parts, clothing, and household appliances?

Which data are wrong: BLS, trade, or census?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
N7Shepard Donating Member (191 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. It says 1.2% of transportation costs are auto parts
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 08:17 AM by N7Shepard
You think between vehicle purchases, gasoline, and air travel that only 1.2% is spent on parts? Keep in mind some of those "made in china" parts are on cars straight from the factory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #8
15. 1% sounds a little high but when you factor in aircraft I could believe that
I certainly don't spend anywhere near 1% of my total car budget on parts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
N7Shepard Donating Member (191 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #15
42. Where do you think aircraft parts are made?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
N7Shepard Donating Member (191 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #42
43. Oh and I spend a LOT more than 1% on parts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #5
20. They refer to it as "Goods and Services"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Sorry, did you post the wrong table?
What about that table makes the 3% figure look too low?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #23
178. 60% of the Value of All Goods sold in the U.S. are Imported


Today, an “American” car sold in Chicago may have rolled off an assembly line in Tennessee with parts made in a dozen different countries. Last year, some 60 percent of the value of goods sold in the U.S. was imported. That's up from 14 percent in 1980 and 8 percent in 1960, based on the government's gross domestic product data.

So what does it mean to be "Made in America"?

A product has to be “all or virtually all” produced in the United States (or one of its territories or protectorates) to stamp "Made in America" on its packaging or advertising, according to Federal Trade Commission regulations. Among its various mandates, the FTC is charged with policing false or misleading claims about products sold in the U.S.

The basic premise is fairly simple: A product that is "Made in America" has to be assembled, and most of the cost of making the product incurred, in the United States. But that’s where things start to get a little tricky. (And that’s why it takes 40 pages to explain the rules.)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35821593/ns/business-us_business/t/made-america-rules-are-complex-confusing/#.TkLDZmF4K3U

60 FUCKING PERCENT of ALL VALUE of Goods Sold in America are IMPORTED



Fuck Free Traitors



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #178
181. Yes, the table says that.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 01:00 PM by Recursion
Why are you angrily pointing to something the chart I posted said? We spend 30% of our money on goods, 60% of which are imported (which comes to about 18% of our total expenses being on imported goods).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #181
189. "Made in China" implies Goods
so its premise was intended to distort the truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #189
190. Of course our imports will almost entirely be goods
It's funny that the only people who seem to think this means "3% of goods are from China" are ones who are angry about this.

The OP is pretty damn clear: 3% of US personal consumer spending is on imported goods. That's all it says and anything else you've imagined into that is not my fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #190
191. What methodology accounts for outsourced IT, Call Centers
by US Firms

and No the headline you posted implies "Imported Goods"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #191
192. Not if you can read English
Where do you get the idea that "personal consumer spending" is equal to "goods"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #192
193. "Made in China" - your posted headline
that is where everyone replying to your thread got the idea you were talking about GOODS

You came here to DU to post obviously flawed arguments in support of Corporations - your not going to gather a lot of support. I'm probably 1 of the few that do not have you on my ignore list already
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #193
194. What would be a better way to say it?
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 02:13 PM by Recursion
Edit: first version was too dickish.

"Goods made in China account for less than 3% of American personal consumer expenditures"

Can you find a less "misleading" in your opinion sentence to express that fact?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sammytko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
9. Now that I think of it - its possible
Its not as if I'm out there buying clothes and shoes everyd day, but I do buy food and utilities and other services constantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. Especially when you consider the reason we buy from China: it's cheap
One of the reasons we can spend more on services is that we are spending far less on durables than we used to, because we can get much cheaper durables from overseas. Basically, this has been the primary pro-trade argument for the past few decades. The cheap durables take up a high percentage of shelf space but, because they're cheap, a comparatively low percentage of spending.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
11. Ms. Hale and Mr. Hobijn seem to have excluded nearly everything sold at Wal*Mart and Home Depot
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 08:23 AM by leveymg
Guess they don't mow their own lawn or wash their own clothes, and have a service to do that for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. It's not as if everything sold in Home Depot and Wal Mart is from China
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 08:35 AM by Recursion
In fact, Wal Mart is the largest wholesale private sector purchaser of US-made goods (at least, that was true in 2009). Not to mention the fact that the US still manufactures more by both price and tonnage than China.

Nor is it the case that Americans spend a large amount of their non-food budget at Wal Mart or Home Depot (with people buying groceries at Wal Mart, they may be spending a lot of their money there, but then again very little food in Wal Mart comes from China).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #14
37. It's not as if most of it isn't made in China.
And, a very large percentage of non-furniture household goods are purchased from these two very Republican, very anti-union chains.

America would be infinitely better off without them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #37
58. What percentage *BY COST* is made in China?
I know 70% of the SKUs in Wal Mart are imported from China, I've never seen anyone work out what percent of sales they represent. I'd like to see that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #58
64. That's a distinction without a difference, unless you're a Wal*Mart stockholder
The wholesale cost versus revenues margin is predictably somewhere between 50 and 85 percent by sales. By cost, one would have to analyze the average retail markup at Wal*Mart. Any idea what that is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #64
68. No, it's exactly not -- the fact that I can now get a cheap microwave
means I can take that money I saved and go down to Manny & Olga's to buy a pizza. That's the whole point, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #68
71. It also means that your neighbor who worked in the US plant just got foreclosed, which
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 10:19 AM by leveymg
devalues your house. So, no, when you include overall costs, you are poorer (and now add 22% per year, compounded, to the cost of the microwave because your disposable income is less) as you've had to go further into debt to buy the microwave that was made in China and sold at Wal*Mart, with 80% of the profits redistributed upwards to Wall Street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #14
141. Checking Wal-Mart's Shelves for American-made goods
Wal-Mart may claim greater sales of Made-in-USA products, but it's only because people are buying little other than food in such a tight economy.


Checking Wal-Mart's Shelves for American-made goods- via Manufacture This


HOUSEHOLD GOODS AND APPLIANCES

Napkins, Wal-mart brand ,USA
Wisk laundry detergent, USA
Clorox Bleach, USA
Paper Shredder, China
Avery Labels all, Mexico
Dell Computers, Mexico and China
HP Computers, China
Steam Iron, eight models from $9.00 to $49.98, all made in China
Microwaves, nine models, China and Malaysia
Rubbermaid Storage bins, USA
Igloo Ice Chest, USA
Clock Radio, five models all from China
Paula Deen Cookware, Indonesia and China
Jack Lalanne Power Juicer, China


HOMEWARE

All bed sheets, India
Bed Pillows, China (some were outer shell made in China and filled in USA)
Memory foam bed topper, USA
All Blankets, China
16 assorted table lamps, China

SHOES

Men’s rubber muck boots, China
Dr. Scholl’s men’s dress shoes, China
Ozark Trail Boots, China
Faded Glory shoes (Wal-mart brand), China

CLOTHING

N.F.L. Licensed New England Patriot’s shirt, Nicaragua
M.L.B. Licensed Red Sox’s boys pajama set , China
N.F.L. Licensed Tom Brady Jersey, Guatemala
NASCAR Licensed Logo, and Driver shirts, Mexico
Wrangler Jeans, Mexico
Rustler Jeans, Mexico
Faded Glory Jeans, China

ASSORTED

Turtle wax car products, USA waxes, cleaners, polishes
Baby Medicine Dispenser, China
Infant Nasal aspirator, China
Playtex Binky, China
Casco child car seat, USA
Graco Child car seat, China



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
12. Interesting numbers. Someone's bound to say that they
were falsified, but won't provide any evidence of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. kinda like the folks that claim we lost 100% of our manufacturing sector.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
25. The persistence of that belief is amazing
I've shown people BLS data that show we still have a larger manufacturing sector than China and been accused of printing up a phony report.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #13
57. No, we only lost half of it. That means half those jobs are gone, and many
haven't been replaced by comparable paying service or technology sector occupations.

No, it's not a cataclysm, just a catastrophe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #57
88. it's a serious problem, but when people inject hyperbole into the discussion it muddies the waters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
16. that's awfully hard to believe
clothing and household appliances? And food? I see plenty of that from Mexico. And bicycles. And computers. And toys. (all from China)

But I see the point about services. A huge portion of what I spend probably goes to utility bills - internet, phone, water, sewer, garbage, electric and gas. That's probably a bigger part of my consumer spending than the rest of my non-food expenses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:41 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. exboyfil's post above makes a lot of sense: 14T GDP, 400B trade deficit
That's in the ballpark of 3%; if our non-China imports roughly equal our exports (which again seems like at least a reasonable ballpark), then there's nothing on its face impossible about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
19. Made in USA from parts imported from China = 5.9%
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 08:57 AM by NNN0LHI
What exactly does that mean?

Does that mean all the parts are sent here and assembled?

Or does that mean they ship the stuff in with one screw missing that an American worker puts in and then they are allowed to say the gizmo was Made In USA?

Just exactly how does this operate? What are the parameters and who does the monitoring?

And another question. Does using American prisoners for assembly count as being Made In America? Bet it does.

The article doesn't say. Does anyone know?

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. Actually it's 0.7% made in US from parts imported from China
5.9% is made in US from parts imported from countries other than China.

And the category encompasses the spectrum between both scenarios. I don't think anybody tracks the distribution within that spectrum, and given what a small sliver of spending we're talking about I doubt it matters enough to study closely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. Had trouble reading the pie graph this morning due to blurry eyes this morning
Thank you for the correction.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. No worries; I do it a lot
I do understand the criticisms of the "Made in USA" rubric, but even screwing together a bunch of Chinese-made parts is a job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. You know how liberal the "Made in USA" sticker is
If the majority of value is added in the United States they can claim it is made in the USA.

Put it in a box and mark it up 300% = Made in USA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
27. Charts, Schmarts. Neo-Lib policies and free trade have done untold DAMAGE to this nation.
Attempt to undermine the impact all you want. Come to Northeast Ohio, the midwest, the Plains. I'm watching the cities die right before my eyes. I'm watching the emptied factories turn into useless hulks with weeded-up parking lots where men and women used to earn a decent living. I'm watching secondary businesses close as a result of our industrial and automotive sector leaving. We see every DAY how the low-paying, weak-benefit service economy has replaced living wage jobs; and IN those retail/service stores, finding a product made in America is akin to a haystack needle.

Those unemployment numbers are loaded with people who have been and will continue to be left behind due to Reaganomic economic policy; it's absolutely no fault of their own that this is happening.

This is the choice of greedy owners and greedier shareholders creating a two-class society. No one thought to replace the outgoing careers with something sustainable and frankly, all evidence seems to point to no one caring or thinking of that aspect either, which comes off as stunning to me. Or not.

Neo-liberal crapitalism IS NOT SUSTAINABLE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. Spoken like a climate change denier
"The facts don't back me up so I'm going to make fun of anyone presenting data and appeal to people's emotions."

Which jobs that were done in Northeast Ohio are now being done in China? They still don't do much heavy manufacturing over there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #29
35. Peruse my journals. You'll see facts and charts.
Zero job growth in 10 years. Periods of 37 and 29 months of no manufacturing jobs gained. That's your great globalization at work, there. I love how you so brilliantly and smugly call people liars. I guess this is all one big hallucination I'm seeing.

Right in the city I used to live is a dead Ford plant that moved to cheaper shores. Nearby is a dead LTV plant that went bankrupt, yet its CEOs made off with close to 1 million in exit pay. Closer still is Republic Steel . . formerly USX Kobe . . . formerly US Steel. All of these workers either had to relocate, become jobless, become homeless or take a 35-50% pay cut in the service sector.

But hey, glad you seem to be able to cheerlead job loss when it isn't you. What compassion you guys have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #35
128. 5.5 million manufacturing jobs in past decade
We’ve shed 50,000 factories and 5.5 million manufacturing jobs over the past decade.

Interactive Manufacturing Jobs Lost By State Map:

http://www.americanmanufacturing.org/in-your-state
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mainer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
28. The Chinese are a growing consumer market
and their consumption of US goods may soon exceed our consumption of Chinese goods. So before we talk about restrictions against future trade, we need to consider what it will do to our businesses here.

US consumers just aren't spending much money these days. A recent analysis I read showed that Brazil and China are surging consumer markets, and that's why many US companies are relocating there -- to serve the markets that are actually buying their products.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #28
31. A steel company I used to do tech work for got some huge contracts from China
They would salvage US steel, re-cast it, and sell it to Chinese construction companies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
30. Huge problems with this "feel good" exercise in deflection & distortion by reframing
Personal consumption is merely a measure of goods and services targeted toward individuals and consumed by individuals. It first includes all things from oil to phone service to movies.

The issue is manufacturing and textiles. The old backbone of American Labor.

Additionally "Personal" consumption does nothing to measure the devastation wrought on "Industry".

And finally "China" is not the be all and end all, merely the largest of those numerous corners of the Earth where American jobs have been moved to - sometimes at a Dollar-A-Day.

The more I think of the Bullshit found in that study of Nothing, the angrier I get.


Smoke & Mirrors, and cheap psuedo-science transformed into the newest opiate for the masses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. Why does a table of data make you angry?
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 09:23 AM by Recursion
The point of the table is that we aren't spending a lot of our money on goods made in China. We could cut off all trade with China and our jobs situation would not significantly improve (and could well get worse, since we're still exporting to them).

If the goods we buy from China used to represent a lot of US jobs, then we were paying a whole lot more for stuff then than we are now, money which is now freed up to be spent on locally-offered services.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. Smoke & Mirrors, and cheap psuedo-science transformed into the newest opiate for the masses.
Because Personal consumption is merely a measure of goods and services targeted toward individuals and consumed by individuals. It includes all things from oil to phone service to movies.

The issue is manufacturing and textiles. The old backbone of American Labor.

Additionally "Personal" consumption does nothing to measure the devastation wrought on "Industry".

And finally "China" is not the be all and end all, merely the largest of those numerous corners of the Earth where American jobs have been moved to - sometimes at a Dollar-A-Day.

The more I think of the Bullshit found in that study of Nothing, the angrier I get.

Smoke & Mirrors, and cheap psuedo-science transformed into the newest opiate for the masses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #34
52. Let me do a better job of making your argument. You can add the numbers
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 09:57 AM by Recursion
Saying "smoke and mirrors" doesn't mean anything.

So, here is something you might say; please fill in the numbers if they agree with your ultimate point (hint: find the numbers first)

Here goes:

"While that may be interesting about consumer spending, that's only __% of the GDP. We also have to consider industrial spending, which is __% of the GDP, __% of which is on manufactured goods.

Furthermore, while at in 1997 __% of industrial goods were domestic, while in 2010 only __% were, with __% coming from China. This represents a $__ redirection of US industrial spending (in real dollars). Industrial procurement of services has in the same period only increased by $__, meaning there is a $__ gap being realized as profits (or non-Chinese goods imported)."

There. Fill in the numbers. Much more effective than saying "smoke and mirrors" and "pseudoscience" over and over again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #52
63. Cherry-pickers do NOT have my respect. My stated point was Ind Consumption & Non China Prod.
You only embarrass yourself by being so obvious.

You, and the paper itself, remind me of nothing so much as an old farm auctioneer taking bids from the chandelier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. Spot On
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 09:24 AM by FreakinDJ
Sick of Free Traders coming on here with "Cooked Numbers"

The same fucking people applauded and endorsed the 2004 Housing Market
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #33
39. Free-Traitors, I call them.
"Please guys, think reasonably! What if Heritage and Cato ARE right? What if our economy IS fair? What if our hatred towards the practices of the greedy rich IS overblown? What if the worker's plights in this country IS all their fault? Maybe globalization IS the answer to all of our problems! You just gotta BELIEVE that the higher-paying jobs are going to arrive as a result of this consumer economy any day now!"

:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. Yep ignore the fact Galina Hale writes research papers for Hong Kong
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #41
47. God forbid!
So is she misquoting BLS, Census, or the trade figures? You're claiming she's lying about one, which is it? Why don't you trot out the actual numbers and show us where she's wrong? She must obviously be wrong, since she's written research papers "for Hong Kong".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #47
76. FUCK Free Traders
its going to take more then 15 minutes to Debunk this latest pile of spew and in the end this will prove who you really support
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #39
115. "Free-Traitors" is good framing!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
36. 88% of our energy is "Made in USA"? Phoney-baloney numbers, probably cooked by CATO
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #36
44. Evidence, please?
88% of the cost of our energy going to the US sounds reasonable. Why doesn't it to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #44
48. "In 2010 the United States imported 11.8 million barrels per day (MMbd) of crude oil..."
In 2010 the United States imported 11.8 million barrels per day (MMbd) of crude oil and refined petroleum products."

http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/foreign_oil_dependence.cfm



Today, oil meets 37 percent of US energy demand , with 71 percent directed to fuels used in transportation – gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. Another 23 percent is used in industry and manufacturing, 6 percent is used in the commercial and residential sectors, and 1 percent is used to generate electricity. Petroleum is the main mover of our nation’s commerce and its use for transportation has made our world more intimate. It is the transportation fuel, as almost all of our nation’s transportation is dependent upon its concentrated liquid form.

Today, the EIA estimates U.S. proven oil reserves to be about 21 billion barrels. States leading American oil production are, in order of their volume: Texas, Alaska, California, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Louisiana. However, these States produce less oil than that in the Federal offshore.

Unfortunately, the U.S. has become increasingly dependent on foreign oil to meet its growing energy needs. Major sources of imported oil are Canada, Mexico, and OPEC, including 15 percent coming from the Persian Gulf.

http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/energy-overview/petroleum-oil/


:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #48
54. Which was refined here. Most of the cost of gas is in refining and transportation
Again, we're talking cost here.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #54
60. Wrong. Crude oil is ~ $80/barrel today. Unleaded is (wholesale price) $2.70/gallon
There are 42 gallons in a barrel of oil. If you do the math, you'll find that crude oil is $1.90 or so a gallon, vs. refined gas at $2.70.

So your numbers are wrong. AGAIN. Most of the cost of a gallon of gas goes to the raw materials. :hi:

http://money.cnn.com/data/commodities/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #60
65. 42 gallons of oil do not produce 42 gallons of gasoline
Nice try, though
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #65
69. Agreed! The "impurities" removed in the refining process are also very valuable, and represent
an addition stream of revenues for the refiners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #65
70. It doesn't help you. 126 gal oil begats 84 gas and 42 heating oil after crack. We also import Gas
and export distillates.


Sorry but oil money is a net loser for the USA. Weird that anyone would try to say otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #70
77. I wasn't saying we're making money off of oil
I'm saying a lot of the money we're wasting goes to US companies.

More to the point, I'm saying the fact that we're importing about half of our oil isn't keeping us from keeping 88% of our energy expenses in the US.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #77
80. Your argument makes no sense. The 88% is UNDOUBTEDLY predicated on the use of COAL to heat homes
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 10:31 AM by Romulox
and produce electricity as part of our "energy use" equation. More than half the fuel we use to power our vehicles is imported. Full stop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #80
83. Duh. Of course it is. Along with NG and some ethanol
Those are the biggest chunks of our domestic energy expenses. I've never seen so many people very angrily telling me that what I'm saying is true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #83
95. Right. You could've articulated that point. If you had *wanted to*.
You just didn't *want to*.

This is infantile.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #95
101. The fact that people saw red and didn't bother to read isn't my fault
I said in the OP I found it interesting that 88% of our energy expenses are domestic. People jumped the gun and seemed to think that means "we get 88% of our gas from domestic supplies" or something like that, which isn't the fault of my alleged inarticulateness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #70
79. You obviously don't have a clue do you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #79
86. Are you trying to tell me that my industry standard crack is in error?
There is nothing wrong with quoting a standard back of the envelope crack spread in this context.


Granted, when I traded several million barrels of oil a day across the crack using Pascal spreads I often tweaked my ratio's - but you seem to have a bone to pick with my levels.


Is it my failure to account for Rho or regional/seasonal variations in the crack?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #86
107. You missed the "Reformate Memo"
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:07 AM by FreakinDJ
By law US refineries have been required to use reformete process to extract toxins for almost 20 years. Hydro - meaning water H2O as in Hydrotreating Diesel, Jet, Gasoline by injecting water into oil. The resulting process releases H2S & SO4 which is purified and reinjected into heavy carbon molecules (Coke, Bulk Oil Sludge) which allows them to extract "Hydrocarbons". The reformate process combines simple low octane hydrocarbons to form more complex "High Octane Hydrocarbons"

When you total the volume output of today's modern refinery, those that have fully capitalized their reformate process, will output over 50 gallons of product for every 42 gallon barrel of oil. That is Gas, Lube Oil, Diesel, Jet Fuel, Sulfur, Naphtha combined

This is the OLD process



Which excludes much of the "Reformate Process" - exclude Asphalt, Coke, and Fuel Oil. Those are now all Hi-Carbon feed for the reformate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #107
118. See: www.bloomberg.com /apps/quote ?ticker=CRK321M1:IND
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=CRK321M1:IND


Check that quote. It's the industry standard crack I used above.


The Oil Industry that drives it and the Financial Industry that supports it, as well as the Information Industry that references it ... seem to think it has relevance.


As did I when I quoted it in an internet discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #118
136. "Crack Spread" is Price not Volume
and that is why a $3 quart of lube oil is referred to as "High Value Product"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #136
150. It's the price of "THE VOLUME" of product. In this case, 126 gal oil = 84 gas and 42 heating oil
Why in the world are you arguing against the proven reality of the Industry quoted formula that 3 barrels of Crude contains 2 of Gasoline and 1 of distillates (Heating oil/Kerosene/Jet fuel/Diesel etc)


It just is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #150
156. probably because I work in the industry
why has diesel prices increased, why have home heating oil prices increased, how many refineries waste money by outputting Asphalt, Coke, Bulk Oil - only the under capitalized independents.

Look take your Google Search Intelligence and peddle it else where - you don't know what your talking about and only deserve the IGNORE Button
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #156
159. I do too. You're clueless. You're arguing that the most widely quoted Industry Metric doesn't exist.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:18 PM by nomb
And yes, I do know why Diesel prices have increased - or more correctly why Diesel now trades at a different level in relationship to Gasoline.


Short answer, we have decreased in recent years (twice now) the sulphur content allowed for highway use.

This first increases the refining cost - but most importantly it makes our excess Diesel exportable to Europe.


Europe has long exported their excess Gasoline to the US, the Europeans refine primarily for heavy distillates and throw off more Gasoline than needed. The US problem for much of the year was the opposite.

For years the Gasoline tankers returned to Europe empty, they now go back with Diesel. However, our Diesel is not up to standard and must be blended into Euro diesel.


So we have A. Higher relative refining costs and B. Greater demand by opening up an export market for a product (Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel) that we did not previously make or consume.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #159
174. Bye Now - All DUers - IGNORE BUTTON recomended
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #174
175. I'll guess most will read the thread and base their reaction to your rant on the facts. n't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #174
179. BTW, You opened this thread with "You obviously don't have a clue" - ahhh, the irony.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:55 PM by nomb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #65
78. Ya nice Try Free Trade Liar
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 10:30 AM by FreakinDJ
a 42 gal barrel of oil produces OVER 50 gallons of finished product

Years and years of working in oil refineries compared to your "Internet Experience" demonstrates you have NO CLUE what you are talking about

Thanks for playing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #78
81. Actually it produces about 20 gallons of gas
Which by your numbers means a wholesale gallon at $2.70 includes $3.80 worth of product.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #81
94. AGAIN with the EPIC FAIL
you have NO CLUE and your coming here professing to be an "Economic Expert"

BTW: your talking Natural Distillate Process, which BY LAW has only been the 1st step process for 20 years now.

Fully aware Petrochemical Engineering would fly astronomically over your realm of understanding try "Internet Researching" Reformate Process vs: Coke Cracking

42 gal barrel of Oil produces over 50 gal of output product
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #94
98. Oh yeah, I've professed to be an "economic expert" all the time!
:eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #98
117. You sure have vigorously defended this report
without researching any other possibilities.

Sure by "Crude Numbers" GDP vs: Imports it looks correct, but as with every thing else those same numbers are very deceiving. For every dollar in Manufacturing outsourced, when you combine support companies, and secondary spending, your losing almost $2 from the US economy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #117
121. And you're completely ignoring where that money goes now
I agree completely that a dollar spent on a US-manufactured good has a ton of momentum, which is why I try to buy US goods when I can. But you are simply ignoring what I also do with the money that I'm not spending now that I can get a cheaper DVD player or whatever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #36
137. Not that it means anything one way or other but Recursion lives in DC....
joined in 2006 and lists DC as where he/she is from. Could just be a statistician that works for the Govt..or maybe lobbyist, op...whatever.

But, that's neither here nor there.. Just an observation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #137
152. Well someone has to "inoculate" the Party regulars to the internal takeover of RW voter push buttons
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #152
155. By broaching the subject it becomes acceptable - and we all just civilly "agree to disagree"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #137
161. Good lord
Yes, everyone who lives in this city is a mindless hack. It's not like I've foregone opportunities to make a lot of money and worked in the public and nonprofit sectors my whole adult life or anything. FOAD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #161
177. In may be best NOT to gloat about never working in the private sector while supporting FREE TRADE! !
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:53 PM by nomb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
True Earthling Donating Member (373 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #36
195. When you add up domestic oil, hydro, nat gas, coal etc. it could be plausible
Not sure how they got their numbers but if you take energy in general it may be true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
38. 74% of Motor Vehicle "spending" on made in USA?
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 09:52 AM by Ganja Ninja
This is bullshit. There is no way that is true.

And it's not. Seems the government counts anything made in North America as American and also calls anything with 70% domestic parts American.

http://www.chicagofed.org/digital_assets/publications/chicago_fed_letter/2007/cfloctober2007_243.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #38
45. 74% *of US consumer spending* on motor vehicles
not "74% of vehicles"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #45
50. They're counting buying an import at a US dealer as "US spending", then.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #50
56. Sigh. Some of it.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 10:00 AM by Recursion
The money the dealer gets minus the money he paid to Toyota. This really isn't that hard.

(Also, please keep in mind we buy basically no cars from China.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #56
62. Listen, just argue that "it's worth it!" to jettison working people if that's what you *really* mean
This lying with numbers act isn't going well for you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #62
66. Sigh
Whatever. If you'd rather pretend I don't care about working people, if that makes keeping your views consistent easier, go for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #66
72. LOL. When you try to argue that water ain't wet, the onus is on YOU.
What a terrible shame that others just don't accept without comment your arguments. :cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #66
73. I don't agree that jobs serving coffee replace jobs building tool and dies, autos, electric motors
or even bridges.


And yes, we now have our multi-million dollar bridges outsourced to China.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #73
103. Well, in a very literal sense they have replaced them
In that a lot of people who used to build cars now serve coffee. I disagree with you on cause and effect -- our broadly shared postwar prosperity wasn't "brought down" suddenly by free trade; trade policy is an attempt (and in many cases a bad attempt) to manage an already-happening and pretty much unavoidable global leveling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #103
110. The problem is that we don't have enough coffee jobs for the skilled machinists moved overseas n/t
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:07 AM by nomb
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #110
112. No, we don't, and we need to make more
We are still the worlds top manufacturing country, and will be for some time. And we can do a lot to add even more to that sector, but the simple fact is with world transportation and communication being what they are we will never have the share of manufacturing we did in the past.

We can wish things were otherwise. I do. But we aren't going to keep making durables that we then sell to the world at the level we did a generation ago (at least, not without lowering our standard of living to the level of the developing world). This isn't the fault of "free trade". This is the fault of humans wanting cheap stuff. Trade barriers will hit foreign workers and domestic consumers before they ever hit companies. And people will still shop at Wal Mart.

Our economy has been moving towards a more service-heavy model since the 1970s. I think as a party and a nation we've kept our head in the sand and pretended that one way or another we can go back for long enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #112
160. More coffee serving jobs are never going to correct for the inability of the US worker to live on $1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dreamer Tatum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
40. Boy, it sure does sting some people when confronted with FACTS, huh?
This chart is entirely consistent with every (highly unempirical) observation made by people perusing retail outlets.

The largest shares of Chinese origin are for those things that can be most readily found by walking through a
Wal-Mart (which 99.9999999 of DUers swear they never enter, of course).

If it makes the deniers feel any better, the percentages are a little misleading. If you strip out services, which
are American-made by fiat, you get a much higher Made in China percentage.

But services ARE made in America, and clearly we consume more services than we do goods. So if you have a burning need
for your sneakers to be made in America, please continue to caterwaul. Otherwise STFU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #40
46. Deleted message
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:57 AM
Original message
Um, no. Since "services" aren't (by definition) "goods", they aren't "made" *anywhere*
If you have to redefine the meaning of common words to make your case, your argument is faltering! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dreamer Tatum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
82. If you have a fetish for goods you can hold in your hand, I can't help you.

But the stuff people here hold the nearest and dearest (healthcare and other services), well, like it or not, those are services.

My doctor isn't Chinese. Nor is his receptionist, the nurse, the lab tech, the business office personnel...(are you seeing my point? Probably not).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #82
92. They teach this in Economics (and Property) 101.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 10:43 AM by Romulox
I won't apologize for knowing the meanings of common words. Will you apologize for not making use of any number of free online dictionaries? :silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
49. Why is it that this looks like a typical RW think tank propaganda piece?
Probably the whole "don't worry about offshoring to China anymore cause it's all a hallucination" meme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dreamer Tatum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #49
87. Because you checked your critical thinking skills at the door. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
51. This is a great case of lying with numbers.
Housing, transportation, and medical care will always be "made in USA." That's 96% of 66.9% which should never be factored into this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #51
55. "Housing, transportation, and medical care will always be "made in USA." That's 96% of 66.9% "
Your point was so good, I had to quote it in my subject line. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dreamer Tatum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:37 AM
Response to Reply #55
85. Suddenly people who build homes, move people around, and provide healthcare
are less worthy than people who make stuff that most DUers regard as cheap, worthless shit anyway.

Wow.

I mean, honestly, when our rubber dog shit is made in China, what American can sleep at night? Johns Hopkins
and MIT may be turning out the world's finest minds in medicine and engineering, but good god man, what
about the rubber dog shit?

Who will make the rubber dog shit?

Where has our rubber dog shit gone?

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #85
93. If you seek to measure the impact of jobs lost - it's wrong to average back in the bulk of jobs that
If you seek to measure the impact of jobs lost - it's wrong to average back in the bulk of jobs that are immovable.

We might as well factor in government jobs. It's just as irrelevant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dreamer Tatum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #93
96. I made that point a while back, which you fail to acknowledge.
Read it yet again: strip out services, and Made in China is much more significant on a percentage
basis.

I am not sure why or how that is unclear to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #93
102. Wheat-threshers were angry when combines were invented, too
The fact that we've had a certain sector in the past doesn't guarantee us it for the future, and it doesn't even mean we should go out of our way to preserve it. (It also doesn't mean we shouldn't.)

There seems to be this assumption that even without "free trade", those jobs would still not have disappeared. I disagree with that -- they would have still disappeared, and we'd be paying more for our shirts and sneakers. Trade policy is an attempt (and a pretty badly-designed attempt in a lot of cases) to manage changes that are going to happen whether we have that policy or not.

Even if we hadn't passed NAFTA, we would still be dumping subsidized corn on the Mexican market. NAFTA was a (bad) attempt to impose some order on that process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #102
104. I'm sorry, but did they gain market share by undercutting on labor inputs or by building better with
I'm sorry, but did they gain market share by undercutting on labor inputs or by building better with the same labor inputs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #104
105. Who is "they" in this case? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #105
123. It was your example - Wheat Threshers destroyed by Combines. I'll let you diagram your sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #123
126. Wheat threshers did neither
They had a pretty constant market share for millenia and lost it to technology. And rioted about it. Guess where the term "Luddite" comes from?

They had an economic role that history made no longer viable. So did some subsectors of American manufacturing. We need to spend more energy creating an economy those people can have a place in again than we do lamenting the fact that those days are gone. Trade policy can be a part of that but I think we on the left in general overestimate how important it is -- we can't make Indonesia suddenly raise its standard of living high enough that labor-heavy manufacturing in the US is competitive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #126
139. So - you're equating "technology" to what, Free Trade? Why? Just because it destroys jobs? One is ..
One is Free Trade - the other is FAIR Trade.


Learn the difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #139
145. I know the difference, and I get 75% of my calories from farmers markets
I brought up technology because the expansion of trade in the past 4 decades is... wait for it... the result of technology. Offshoring happened before any free trade deals. Policy didn't cause this, and it can't fix it, though we can have a smarter and better policy than we do, particularly as regards labor and the environment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #145
157. Dance around it all you want. Jobs lost through Free Trade to wages below US subsidence are NOT the
Dance around it all you want. Jobs lost through Free Trade to wages below US subsidence are NOT the same as those lost to technology.


Your Threshers gave way to Combines is a ridiculous excuse to laud US workers replaced by $1 a day overseas slave labor.


Free Trade is not the same as FAIR Trade. Learn the Difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #157
162. I'm not lauding anything
I have no idea why you think that.

I've stated that the replacement happens, it happens regardless of trade policy, and there's nothing the government can do to keep it from happening.

Jobs lost through Free Trade to wages below US subsidence are NOT the same as those lost to technology.

True; the jobs lost to technology don't benefit anybody while jobs sent overseas at least benefit people overseas.

Free Trade is not the same as FAIR Trade. Learn the Difference.

Your problem is that you're so defensive about this subject you haven't bothered to realize I don't support "free trade". Relax and actually read what I'm saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #162
165. It does NOT "happen regardless of trade policy". BS It is Trade Policy that DRIVES it and REQUIRES i
Bang the drum for FAIR Trade and I'll follow.


But unfettered FREE Trade? FU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #165
166. That's just not true
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:29 PM by Recursion
Offshoring started in the 70s and has only grown since. The "free trade" agreements we entered into were just a (misguided and badly broken) attempt to regulate what was already happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #166
169. So agreements to allow in goods made below US cost have no impact? Seriously? n't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #169
172. People were complaining about cheap Taiwanese crap in the 60s
And once again you're completely ignoring what I said. I said growth of manufacturing in asia and contraction of manufacturing in the US was happening before we signed any trade deals and would have continued to happen without any trade deals. I didn't say they have "no impact", I said they're not the cause.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #126
153. The problem with that is .. .
. . . the advocates of neo-liberal economics have no interest in planning a future for those that are left behind. They feel it's completely up to the individual/worker to get smarter and figure out what jobs/careers will be in our future. Once they get the training, they continue to move goalposts (see: most offshored/inshored white collar work) and put the worker on a never-ending carrot-chase until they're carted out on a gurney from their cube . . . if they're lucky enough to get one in old age.

Not a very well-thought out plan unless you're the one doin' the screwin'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #153
163. Yeah, the whole "training" thing was crap and pissed me off
If we were creating an economy that the displaced workers had a role in, we wouldn't need to scramble to train them; they could find training for something enough people wanted them to do.

What's funny is people have looked at this thread and think I support free trade (that's a good one) rather than view it as an inevitable evil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
53. That's a pretty deceptive graph - first, 67% is "services"...
so most of it is not "goods" already, then they break down more or less Chinese stuff into three carefully defined different slices, so they're all very small.

Its the kind of thing that most people will read quickly and get completely the wrong impression from, and that's probably the intent - basically propaganda.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #53
59. Right, and most of our spending is on "services"
The durables that we used to spend a lot of money on we now get a majority or plurality of from China, at much cheaper prices, which lets us spend more money on services.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #59
61. Which are, by very definition, *not "goods"*. Which is why your OP is so misleading.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #61
67. WTF are you even talking about? I never mentioned "goods"
The OP was about US personal consumption.

Where do you see "goods" there? Can you help me out?

The whole point is that we're spending less on goods, and more on services, than we used to and a large reason for that is trade.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #67
74. "Imports" are generally understood to involve "goods".
"Goods" and "Services" are conceptually distinct categories of economic activity.

If you aren't familiar with these categories of classification, then you are certainly not qualified to give a lecture on economics.

"The whole point is that we're spending less on goods, and more on services"

Precisely. And you are trying to argue that this is a beneficial thing for Americans. So just come out and argue that! By making what is, at its essence, a dishonest argument predicated on the misuse (or perhaps misunderstanding) of basic words like "goods" and "services", then people shut down and will not listen any further.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #74
84. Have to call you on a bit of bullshit there
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 10:34 AM by Recursion
And you are trying to argue that this is a beneficial thing for Americans.

Bullshit. I'm pointing out it's one part of the whole picture.

Anyways, the point of the OP is that about 3% of personal consumption is going to goods made in China. This seems to piss people off, but nobody has actually pointed out anything showing it is not the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #84
89. Nonsense that you are "just reporting" this from a position of neutrality
You are advocating for neoliberal economics. I'd respect you a whole hell of lot more if you admitted that, or even really understood it yourself.

You don't even have a grasp of the basic terminology of the discussion (e.g. "goods" vs. "services") and you pretend to lecture on the subject? Do yourself a favor: fire up the google, do a few basic keyword searches, and LEARN something first, give your "lesson" second.

Otherwise, you simply strengthen the other sides' argument when your half-thought-out posts are so easily swatted down. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #89
99. The hell I am
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:24 AM by Recursion
You are advocating for neoliberal economics.

Bullshit. Totally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #74
90. +2 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #67
75. Just the little part of the paper you quoted mentions "Goods" 9 times. Go read it, it's there. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Romulox Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #75
91. Um, WELCOME to DU!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
97. Why single out China? Add up all the other little slices.nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #97
100. Ask the damn study authors
I think it's interesting that we focus on China rather than, say, Ireland, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #100
106. He was asking those that seek to propagate and support the idea that $1 a day labor does not matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #106
109. That labor matters a lot to someone whose option is $0.25 a day labor
Or subsistence farming. It matters hugely to the rapidly growing Chinese middle class.

Cause and effect. We're seeing job growth in poorer countries and job retraction here because we stopped being the world's economic hegemon, not the other way around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #109
111. In that case, why don't send all our government back-office, IRS call center jobs, etc, overseas?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #111
116. That's almost all services, which haven't offshored as well as people hoped
The rush of the early oughts to move client-facing jobs overseas is receding, and a lot of those call centers are moving back to the US. It was tried; it didn't offer the savings that offshoring manufacturing did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shagbark Hickory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #100
143. Or Canada. Nary a peep "aboot" canada
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
108. I refuse to believe this propaganda
Less food and energy, how much of our food is coming from China. Look at the packages, when it says distributed by, ask yourself where does it come from, and when you call, they won't reveal where it comes from.


Horseshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #108
113. BLS, Commerce, or Census is lying if this is bullshit. Which one is it? (nt)
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:11 AM by Recursion
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #113
120. How about the choice you fail to list: poor narrow facts become big obvious truth via numbertwisting
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #120
122. What "big obvious truth" do you imagine I claimed?
All I did, again, was point out this study showing that 3% of personal consumption went to goods made in China. That's all. If you're reading some sort of policy suggestion into that, you're imagining it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #122
124. You argue that .25 a day work is beneficial to those competing w/US, that FreeTrade is minor in impa
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:30 AM by nomb
You argue that .25 a day work is beneficial to those competing w/US, that FreeTrade is minor in impact, etc..


In essence - you quite clearly come from a position that has no problem impoverishing the American Worker to spread the wealth and resources the America may have, in your eyes, so greedily raped the world of.

You are a Free Trader from the far left.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #124
130. False
You argue that .25 a day work is beneficial to those competing w/US

False. I said $1 a day work is better for that worker than $0.25 a day work is.

that FreeTrade is minor in impact

I argued trade policy is minor in impact compared to the job relocations that will happen whether we have that policy or not. It's not as if we passed NAFTA and suddenly a bunch of companies realized there is cheaper labor overseas -- it was already happening, and would have continued.

you quite clearly come from a position that has no problem impoverishing the American Worker to spread the wealth and resources the America may have

You quite clearly aren't reading me, because the basis of my argument is that this is going to happen no matter what our trade policy is, and you're pretending that isn't what I'm saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #130
132. Yes, you did say that the $1 a day from the old US workers job was better than the .25 a day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #132
138. It's not "their" job
We don't have some existential right to manufacture all durable goods in the world and sell them to everyone else.

And anyways, to reiterate, my point is that this leveling was happening regardless of trade policy and focusing on that as a panacea isn't a good idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #138
146. It used to be. There's a world of importance between Free Trade and FAIR Trade. Learn the difference
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #113
131. I don't give a fuck, I refuse to believe it, keep defending them
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:40 AM by DainBramaged
Washngton DC huh, ok now I understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:12 AM
Response to Original message
114. Really? Go to Walmart and start picking up items til you find one made in America. YouTube it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #114
119. Well, in a super Walmart it would be easy: go to the meat aisle.
In fact, Walmart's adding groceries has bumped up non-import sales in Walmart to a majority. Remember, we're still the 900 pound gorilla of agriculture (and our farms have wreaked tons more havoc on Mexico than Mexican factories ever wreaked on us), even if we're only a 700 pound gorilla of manufacturing now.

I'm pretty sure the toilet paper I bought yesterday (from Target, not Walmart, since the DC Walmart hasn't opened and I doubt I will go there once it does) is made in the USA, but I'll check tonight to make sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #119
133. Are you a lobbyist or work for a think tank? Just curious.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:43 AM by DainBramaged
Because you have certainly jumped into this thread guns blazing to defend this study.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #133
140. Umm... did you read how quickly everybody called me a liar for posting it?
I responded to a massive and rapid wave of anger at having posted a damn table.

I have a non-policy job for a think tank, but not one that deals with trade, if that counts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DainBramaged Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #140
144. Then our business here is done, farewell
you work for 'them'. That's all I have to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #144
147. We're consumer advocates, DB
It's a small non-profit far from K street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #119
196. Food doesn't count! Go pick up a hundred items at Walmart and see where they are made
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #196
198. Walmart food might count
I can see workers constructing the meat sold at Wallmart. Food sold anywhere else wouldn't count but I believe the "food" sold at Wallmart is manufactured. What kind of parts, chicken parts, parts is parts...

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #196
199. Why does my largest budget item not count? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #199
200. Because that's not the issue the country is addressing when we talk about the outsourcing of
manufacturing jobs.

However, all items imported from other countries should have a tariff that makes the American made item able to compete with the foreign goods.

Free trade is neither.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roxiejules Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #114
148. Manufacturing Assoc. did that and found mostly imports
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DefenseLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
125. Great, we aren't importing houses from China
In fact 100% of the houses built in the U.S.A. are built in the U.S.A! What an insightful graph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #125
129. We do however now build Government funded $7.2B bridges in China - for San Francisco.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:38 AM by nomb
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html?pagewanted=all


"more than two dozen giant steel modules — each with a roadbed segment about half the size of a football field — will be loaded onto a huge ship and transported 6,500 miles to Oakland."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #129
134. Do Bridge Builders make good Barrista's? Anyone in SF been served by one? Or are those jobs taken?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #125
142. We also imported toxic "Dry Board/Sheetrock" from China installed in homes during Housing Boom.
It was installed in many homes in FLA, VA and a few other states. There were lawsuits about it.

I suppose one could say we couldn't make enough here to supply the damand of the Boom...or one could say that builders could get it cheaper and made more profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
127. It's not the percentage that counts.
What matters is the number of jobs lost to China and elsewhere over the past few decades compared to the number of Americans unemployed today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #127
135. That one's hard to figure out
First off, companies rarely simply pick up stakes and move an industrial process overseas. They start a factory in, say, China while their US factories are still running, and over time more and more industrial processes get moved overseas. Were those jobs "naturally" American? Would they have stayed in the US without the Chinese factory? Or would the US factory just have produced less? We don't know.

Somebody upthread posted a table showing a 2 million net-job loss for the US from trade with China (3 million lost and 1 million created). We have something like 22 million unemployed or marginally employed adults in the US. Teasing out where those job losses vs. cheaper goods vs. expanded service sector vs. overall growth contribute to it is non-trivial.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #135
149. Another big part of the picture is
automation and computerization displacing workers over the past 20-30 years, but that's another chapter...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #149
151. Very true, but it's tied up in this
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 11:59 AM by Recursion
A lot of this offshoring only became possible when the plants themselves got to certain levels of automation. One of the reasons you didn't see much offshoring in the 60s is the technology of the time didn't make doing it any cheaper. The technology of the 80s and 90s did, which is why it started to move then -- before we started signing on to trade deals, which -- though often ill-advised in practice -- we shouldn't forget were meant as a way to get more exports out of the international trade that was already hitting our manufacturing sector. And, in fact, our exports have shot up over the past two decades.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #151
168. I'd say it was mostly because of cheap labor.
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 01:05 PM by moondust
The first casualties of cheap overseas labor I personally recall were the steel mills in what has been known for the past 30-40 years as the "Rust Belt." From Wiki on US Steel:

"After 1970 the company could no longer compete effectively with low-wage producers elsewhere."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_modern_steel_industry

That seems to be the central theme of the race to the bottom.

Adding to the cheap labor incentive in underdeveloped countries was the continued development of cheaper, faster transportation/shipping and global communications, facilitating massive globalization.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tawadi Donating Member (631 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
154. I must be buying the entire 3% then
Practically everything go to buy has "Made in China" on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #154
164. How much of your money do you spend on stuff?
I mean, on actual physical things you buy in a store? (Other than food, which is mostly domestic.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Taverner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
158. Let's take a T-Shirt for instance.
"Made in Guatemala" - then an American silk screener puts a picture of Justin Bieber on it.

Suddenly, it's made in America...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ItNerd4life Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
167. This chart is a lie. Take out services and to get the true picture.
Services are not imported and are not used for personal consumption. Services are labor, goods are material items.

It's typical of people pushing an agenda, they manipulate things until they get the results they want.

The chart is a fact, as opposed to a true fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:32 PM
Response to Reply #167
170. I don't spend most of my money on goods. Do you?
I honestly have no idea how typical that is, but (discounting food) I rarely by "stuff" and spend most of my money on services. Why should we ignore the largest sector of the economy?

And why are people acting like the article claimed "3% of goods come from China" when it pretty clearly says "3% of personal consumption is on goods from China"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #167
176. +10000 67% of spending is on services; U.S. corps make ~ 60% of goods sold in us; China produces ~
42% of the 40% imported
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jtuck004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
171. "...very little of American personal consumption spending actually ends up in China... "
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 12:34 PM by jtuck004
Yet after doing business with us for 20 years or so, we have a $14 trillion debt, 24 million people are seeking full-time employment, 45 million are on food stamps, 50 million without health insurance, millions of homes sitting foreclosed on with a minimum of another 5 in the pipeline (all I suspect exacerbated by tax policy that favors the wealthy)...

(breathe)

and China has at least a $2 trillion surplus.

That 3% of expenditures sure adds up.

I would like to see that chart for 1960 to 2011, one of those interactive jobs with a slider along the bottom that change the date while the pie slices change shape.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #171
173. China buys our debt to make their exports to us cheaper
Holding dollar-denominated bonds keeps the Yuan cheaper than it "should" be, which means the plastic Chinese crap in Walmart is cheaper than it "should" be.

That said, we have a $400 billion dollar trade deficit, a lot of it to China... but in the context of a $14 trillion dollar GDP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #173
180. No. We give them Dollars. Dollars must be spent in the US or traded to someone. Bonds are Storage.
They have no choice.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #173
182. They are not, as you say, doing us a favor. n't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #182
183. Exactly
They're trying to export more to us, and one of the ways they do that is keeping their currency undervalued.

Incidentally, that shows how silly the idea of some sort of Chinese "margin call" is, since holding our debt is just about the only way they can keep their exports rising. However, if they're serious about trying to head off inflation, that could pose a problem in terms of finding bond buyers (probably not, though).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #183
184. What does this have to do with US Jobs or your point that China has a inconsequentially small effect
?


Or just more misdirection to cloud the arena?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #184
185. Since I never made that "point" I don't need to defend it
Edited on Wed Aug-10-11 01:13 PM by Recursion
That's not what I said, and I'm kind of tired of showing you, over and over again, that I'm not saying what you are angrily convinced I'm saying.

What the value of the Yuan has to do with US jobs is pretty clear: it encourages imports and discourages exports, which is not good for US jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #185
186. It's not the Yuan that allows goods from cheap labor to flood the US - it's USA LAWS & Regulations
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #186
187. Yes, I'm aware you're passionately convinced of that (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomb Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #187
188. "What the value of the Yuan has to do with US jobs is pretty clear:" You said it.- I blamed LAWS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrScorpio Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-10-11 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
197. Is the US Chamber of Commerce propaganda?
Sure smells like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC