|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171
Legend
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,171 |
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Paul-Otellini-Obama-semiconductor,11158.html
Intel's Paul Otellini predicts that the "next big thing" won't happen in the States unless government policies change.
Monday night Intel CEO Paul Otellini warned government officials that the U.S. will face a huge tech decline if government policies are not altered. In fact, the "next big thing" won't be invented here in the States, and jobs will be created outside our borders.
The warning was part of his observations about the Obama administration and the nation's economy during dinner at the Technology Policy Institute's Aspen Forum. He took aim at the U.S. legal environment, claiming that its become so hostile to business that there could be "an inevitable erosion and shift of wealth, much like we're seeing today in Europe--this is the bitter truth."
He went on to criticize the administration's Keynesian policy of economic stimulus and its inability to understand the concept of creating new jobs. "They're in a 'Do' loop right now trying to figure out what the answer is," Otellini told the audience.
"I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States," Otellini said. He also added that the majority of his costs were taxes and regulations not imposed in other countries. If the rates matched those with the rest of the world, outside corporations would have more of an incentive to invest in the U.S.
Former HP CEO and current Republican Senate candidate Carly Fiorina pointed out just a day prior that corporate tax rates are the second highest in the world. Fiorina also said that government policies are pushing jobs overseas rather than making U.S. companies more competitive against international rivals.
Bottom line, if politicians don't cut business taxes, people will not invest in the United States. "They'll invest elsewhere," Otellini said.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 293
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 293 |
It doesn't help that our gov't is spending Trillions and don't care about the little people, We are going to have to find someone with a brain to vote in. Congress is full of idiots.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,480 |
Amazing! You mean if taxes are cut for businesses they might consider building stuff here?!? Never!  And I agree that the next big thing will probably not happen here - likely China or India at this point.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
I don't think they care about any level of people, except the ones that can fork the cash to get them elected. Wonder what Intel's got up their sleeve,...the next "new, big" thing ? Bet it's a travel transporter, like in The Fly. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
He took aim at the U.S. legal environment, claiming that its become so hostile to business that there could be "an inevitable erosion and shift of wealth, much like we're seeing today in Europe--this is the bitter truth."
I had to laugh at this part.. it's NOT the bitter truth... it's THE OBJECTIVE. Shift wealth like Europe. He makes it sound like that is an unexpected byproduct of what the government is doing.. that is THE POINT to what the government is doing.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
"I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States," Otellini said. He also added that the majority of his costs were taxes and regulations not imposed in other countries.
Well, guess what. I happen to work in a semiconductor manufacturing facility and this simply isn't true. It DOES cost a lot more to run a plant here than in some other (SE Asian) countries, and environmental regulations are one of the costs, but the biggest cost difference is EMPLOYEE SALARIES. I work at the only American semiconductor plant for a company which has about 15 fabrication plants and is headquartered in Asia. We constantly see a breakdown of operating costs (including depreciation) and the biggest difference between our plant and HQ plants is employee compensation. By FAR the biggest cost in general is the tools and that dwarfs the costs of everything else.
As far as the environmental regulations go... semiconductor mfg plants deal with just about the nastiest chemicals we know of. The EPA has 400 chemicals listed as hazardous waste. A semiconductor manufacturing plant uses 108 of them. Some of the highlights:
Sulfuric Acid
Hydrochloric Acid
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Hydrofluoric Acid
Silane
Peroxide // SC1
Acetone
ClF3
...
Obviously I'm not going to type out all 108, but you get the idea. Some of these companies in their plants outside the US have little to no regulation on how they dump this stuff... or they have "regulations" with regulators who can be easily bought. Be GLAD the regulations are tight, because you don't want any of this creeping into your drinking water... or your beef supply... or in the air.
This guy obviously has a motive to complain about regulations because he operates a company who has costs associated with those regulations. We pay the costs associated with those regulations, we pay the "inflated" American salaries, and surprise, surprise, we're still wildly profitable. A year ago my company had only their second layoff in their 13-year existence. They've already re-hired half those people. Headquarters approved a multi-billion dollar expansion just months ago for our factory. Even in this economic downturn, with this repressive, over-reaching government, we're doing quite well. The difference is that this dude is beholden to his shareholders and needs to do everything he can to meet earnings estimates. If he would just make sure his factory ran properly, he'd be fine. We are.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
I think he was referring to start-up and building costs, not operating costs.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,431 |
No offense intended Steve but you work IN a plant you don't RUN one so I doubt that you know just what getting one started from the ground up entails .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 2,224 |
Quote:
No offense intended Steve but you work IN a plant you don't RUN one so I doubt that you know just what getting one started from the ground up entails .
That may be, but he has some idea what it takes. To be honest, it's probably about the same amount as the CEO of the company.
There are no sacred cows.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Steve you obviously know a heck of a lot more about it than I do and I don't doubt that Otellini probably has some other motivations.. but the guy is the CEO and has built the plants around the world so I'm not going to just accept that he's full of crap because you say he is... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
No offense intended Steve but you work IN a plant you don't RUN one so I doubt that you know just what getting one started from the ground up entails .
Actually, when I first started working here, the place I'm sitting right now was covered in grass. I know exactly what it takes to start one, thank you very much.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
I think he was referring to start-up and building costs, not operating costs.
Quote:
"I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States," Otellini said.
He doesn't even say over what length of time. Lifetime of a semicon fab is ~10 years.
Also, an i1950 immersion photo tool costs $45 million here or in Taiwan. It's only made by one company.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
Quote:
No offense intended Steve but you work IN a plant you don't RUN one so I doubt that you know just what getting one started from the ground up entails .
That may be, but he has some idea what it takes. To be honest, it's probably about the same amount as the CEO of the company.
I'm not trying to say the CEO doesn't know what he's talking about, I'm just saying that he's not being totally genuine and has a reason to not be. This guy just wants a tax break.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No offense intended Steve but you work IN a plant you don't RUN one so I doubt that you know just what getting one started from the ground up entails .
That may be, but he has some idea what it takes. To be honest, it's probably about the same amount as the CEO of the company.
I'm not trying to say the CEO doesn't know what he's talking about, I'm just saying that he's not being totally genuine and has a reason to not be. This guy just wants a tax break.
And what's wrong with a tax break?
Why do states.........AND cities, offer businesses tax breaks in order to get them to locate within their borders? Wanna know why? Because the state and/or city fully expect to recoup ALL of the break PLUS - based on the new jobs brought in/created.
Look at businesses that move out of high tax states - they do so.........because of the taxes. And the fully expect to recoup their moving/building costs due to the decrease in taxes.
Taxes are the devil. To an extent, they are a necessary devil - but when they get too high, they hinder everything they were supposed to help. Jobs included.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
And there then, the problem is, they pack up and move overseas,.... 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
I should not have been so flippant in saying he wants a tax break. He wants lower costs associated with governmental rules. Quote:
He also added that the majority of his costs were taxes and regulations not imposed in other countries.
Arch, my point was just that this is not true... that the biggest reason for the difference in cost is in salary. However, if this guy came out and said "I'm paying my people waaay too much and they're just going to have to suck it up and take a pay cut or I'm taking my factory to China" that wouldn't play out too well. As far as tax abatements go, my company received a lot of tax abatements to come here. Also, he was complaining about the costs regarding regulations, which is mostly due to containment and disposal of hazardous materials. Trust me... you WANT the companies to have to dispose of this stuff in a very careful manner. You don't have to be a treehugger to not want to get an HF burn... or have arsenic dumped into your rivers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Quote:
"I can tell you definitively that it costs $1 billion more per factory for me to build, equip, and operate a semiconductor manufacturing facility in the United States," Otellini said. He also added that the majority of his costs were taxes and regulations not imposed in other countries.
Well, guess what. I happen to work in a semiconductor manufacturing facility and this simply isn't true. It DOES cost a lot more to run a plant here than in some other (SE Asian) countries, and environmental regulations are one of the costs, but the biggest cost difference is EMPLOYEE SALARIES. I work at the only American semiconductor plant for a company which has about 15 fabrication plants and is headquartered in Asia. We constantly see a breakdown of operating costs (including depreciation) and the biggest difference between our plant and HQ plants is employee compensation. By FAR the biggest cost in general is the tools and that dwarfs the costs of everything else.
As far as the environmental regulations go... semiconductor mfg plants deal with just about the nastiest chemicals we know of. The EPA has 400 chemicals listed as hazardous waste. A semiconductor manufacturing plant uses 108 of them. Some of the highlights:
Sulfuric Acid
Hydrochloric Acid
Arsenic
Phosphorus
Hydrofluoric Acid
Silane
Peroxide // SC1
Acetone
ClF3
...
Obviously I'm not going to type out all 108, but you get the idea. Some of these companies in their plants outside the US have little to no regulation on how they dump this stuff... or they have "regulations" with regulators who can be easily bought. Be GLAD the regulations are tight, because you don't want any of this creeping into your drinking water... or your beef supply... or in the air.
This guy obviously has a motive to complain about regulations because he operates a company who has costs associated with those regulations. We pay the costs associated with those regulations, we pay the "inflated" American salaries, and surprise, surprise, we're still wildly profitable. A year ago my company had only their second layoff in their 13-year existence. They've already re-hired half those people. Headquarters approved a multi-billion dollar expansion just months ago for our factory. Even in this economic downturn, with this repressive, over-reaching government, we're doing quite well. The difference is that this dude is beholden to his shareholders and needs to do everything he can to meet earnings estimates. If he would just make sure his factory ran properly, he'd be fine. We are.
Another issue is that Intel operates a plant in California which is set to let AB32 start which makes it hard to put any MFG plant in Cali or run any.. all in the name of Global Warmi... I mean Climate Change..
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png) "Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753 |
How can I trust someone on his thoughts of running an economy when his company is doing layoffs every 6 or so months for years (going back to the Bush presidency)?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
How can I trust someone on his thoughts of running an economy when his company is doing layoffs every 6 or so months for years (going back to the Bush presidency)?
How can you trust 500 people in Washington to run an economy when the vast majority of them have NEVER run anything except a campaign?
But I will tell you this, the answer to your question is in the question itself... are you really expecting somebody to "run the economy"? You can't run an economy like you would a company or a family or a church or a campaign or any SINGLE ENTITY.. you do the best you can to establish a business friendly environment with some basic safeguards for the workers and then you get the hell out of the way and you let the economy run itself..... that's how you "run an economy".. only in the inflated ego ridden minds of politicians do they believe it is possible to RUN a national economy...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Along with that thought - I had a good 2 hour chat with a friend of mine. He started a job with a struggling company 2 years ago - things are turning for the good for them.
But, only after the waste was eliminated. They took 1 person from his salary of $86,000 down to $40,000.
He told me that when he started, the company was running at 40% of capacity - and anything over that resulted in poor quality - therefore, they let the 40% number be the max production.
I was dumbfounded - a company running at 40% of capacity - and that was their limit? He's a good guy - and things are changing, but, it reminded me of the gov't. and how it operates.
His company, prior to him being there, never had enough money, but they sure as hell wouldn't make cuts in expenditures.
Their sales have remained stagnant at about $5 million per year for the last 5 years (not a huge company, but compared to me it IS a huge company - but regardless..........)However, in the last 2 years, profitability is up. 26% profit. Not an increase of 26% - that's a profit margin of 26%.
How? By cutting waste. They even lost their largest customer......but they still make more than they did before.
It just reminded me of the government........never enough money - they always want more, yet they never look at things that can be cut without hurting the service they provide.
He even offered me a job - at a substantial pay raise from what I think I make. I said no.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,758 |
Quote:
Along with that thought - I had a good 2 hour chat with a friend of mine. He started a job with a struggling company 2 years ago - things are turning for the good for them.
But, only after the waste was eliminated. They took 1 person from his salary of $86,000 down to $40,000.
He told me that when he started, the company was running at 40% of capacity - and anything over that resulted in poor quality - therefore, they let the 40% number be the max production.
I was dumbfounded - a company running at 40% of capacity - and that was their limit? He's a good guy - and things are changing, but, it reminded me of the gov't. and how it operates.
His company, prior to him being there, never had enough money, but they sure as hell wouldn't make cuts in expenditures.
Their sales have remained stagnant at about $5 million per year for the last 5 years (not a huge company, but compared to me it IS a huge company - but regardless..........)However, in the last 2 years, profitability is up. 26% profit. Not an increase of 26% - that's a profit margin of 26%.
How? By cutting waste. They even lost their largest customer......but they still make more than they did before.
It just reminded me of the government........never enough money - they always want more, yet they never look at things that can be cut without hurting the service they provide.
He even offered me a job - at a substantial pay raise from what I think I make. I said no.
On the other hand though, some companies are getting rid of "waste" which isn't waste.. but just chopping off people to have less expenses ignoring the part that the parts they are chopping off important parts that are needed to maintain their customer base.. The remaining people left are left to scurry around to work to death to try to maintain the higher goals the company set after they chopped off a good chunk of the workforce.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 30,825 |
Quote:
Quote:
Along with that thought - I had a good 2 hour chat with a friend of mine. He started a job with a struggling company 2 years ago - things are turning for the good for them.
But, only after the waste was eliminated. They took 1 person from his salary of $86,000 down to $40,000.
He told me that when he started, the company was running at 40% of capacity - and anything over that resulted in poor quality - therefore, they let the 40% number be the max production.
I was dumbfounded - a company running at 40% of capacity - and that was their limit? He's a good guy - and things are changing, but, it reminded me of the gov't. and how it operates.
His company, prior to him being there, never had enough money, but they sure as hell wouldn't make cuts in expenditures.
Their sales have remained stagnant at about $5 million per year for the last 5 years (not a huge company, but compared to me it IS a huge company - but regardless..........)However, in the last 2 years, profitability is up. 26% profit. Not an increase of 26% - that's a profit margin of 26%.
How? By cutting waste. They even lost their largest customer......but they still make more than they did before.
It just reminded me of the government........never enough money - they always want more, yet they never look at things that can be cut without hurting the service they provide.
He even offered me a job - at a substantial pay raise from what I think I make. I said no.
On the other hand though, some companies are getting rid of "waste" which isn't waste.. but just chopping off people to have less expenses ignoring the part that the parts they are chopping off important parts that are needed to maintain their customer base.. The remaining people left are left to scurry around to work to death to try to maintain the higher goals the company set after they chopped off a good chunk of the workforce.
Perhaps - but I honestly don't think companies eliminate productive jobs/employees. I honestly don't see companies eliminating people that make the company money. You think that happens?
Yes - if someone is paid - say $30 an hour to run a stamping machine simply because the employee has been there for 30 years - yeah, I can see the company replacing that employee with someone that makes $10 an hour to do the same job. Not saying it's right - but I know it happens.
And the guy that was making $30 an hour - he was shopping at walmart so he could save $15 on a tv - just like the guy that's making $10 an hour.
See - everyone wants to make more in their job, but everyone wants to buy everything for less. Hence - China's economy growing, while ours shrinks.
Everyone - well, the few that work in this country - want more money, but they buy products made over seas.........hoping that their job won't go over "there".
Sorry folks - we can't have high wages in our jobs if we insist on buying foreign products.
What we CAN insist on is companies here in the states eliminating waste. AND, we need to insist that the gov't. do the same.
I'd love to be in charge of the gov't. checkbook. We'd see a crap load of "managers" getting the boot - cause most of them do nothing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
On the other hand though, some companies are getting rid of "waste" which isn't waste.. but just chopping off people to have less expenses ignoring the part that the parts they are chopping off important parts that are needed to maintain their customer base.. The remaining people left are left to scurry around to work to death to try to maintain the higher goals the company set after they chopped off a good chunk of the workforce.
Then those companies will fail.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
And the guy that was making $30 an hour - he was shopping at walmart so he could save $15 on a tv - just like the guy that's making $10 an hour.
See - everyone wants to make more in their job, but everyone wants to buy everything for less. Hence - China's economy growing, while ours shrinks.
Everyone - well, the few that work in this country - want more money, but they buy products made over seas.........hoping that their job won't go over "there"
Been preaching that for years, and while people seem to shake their heads in agreement, I see them lining up for the sale at Wal-Mart. 
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Economy slows to 1.6 percent as trade gap widens
By CHRISTOPHER S. RUGABER, AP
24 minutes ago
WASHINGTON — The economy grew at a much slower pace this spring than previously estimated, mostly due to the largest surge in imports in 26 years and a slower buildup in inventories.
The nation's gross domestic product — the broadest measure of the economy's output — grew at a 1.6 percent annual rate in the April-to-June period, the Commerce Department said Friday. That's down from an initial estimate of 2.4 percent last month and much slower than the first quarter's 3.7 percent pace. Many economists had expected a sharper drop.
The widening trade deficit subtracted nearly 3.4 percentage points from second quarter growth, the largest hit from a trade imbalance since 1947, the government said.
The report confirms the economy has lost significant momentum in recent months. Most analysts expect the nation's GDP will continue to grow at a similarly weak pace in the current July-to-September quarter and for the rest of this year.
The economy has grown for four straight quarters, but that growth has averaged only 2.9 percent, a weak pace after such a steep recession. The economy needs to expand at about 3 percent just to keep the unemployment rate, currently 9.5 percent, from rising.
Business investment in new machinery, computers and software drove much of the growth last quarter, increasing nearly 25 percent.
But much of that spending involved the purchase of imported goods. Imports surged 32.4 percent, the most since 1984. That overwhelmed a 9.1 percent increase in exports.
Consumers spent a bit more in the second quarter than previously estimated. Their spending rose at a 2 percent annual rate, slightly higher than the first quarter's 1.9 percent.
Economists expect many other supports for economic growth to fade. Federal government spending and the housing sector bolstered the economy last quarter, but housing has slumped again and will likely drag growth down in the third quarter. The impact of the federal government's $862 billion stimulus package is also projected to taper off this year.
There are few other signs of strength. Even business investment is expected to drop, as a report earlier this week showed that business orders for capital goods fell in July.
The government's GDP report measures the economy's output of goods and services and covers everything from autos to haircuts. Friday's report is the second of three estimates the government makes each quarter.LINK
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Quote:
mostly due to the largest surge in imports in 26 years and a slower buildup in inventories.
Yet we have no idea where some of our problems are,...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,572 |
Quote:
Quote:
And the guy that was making $30 an hour - he was shopping at walmart so he could save $15 on a tv - just like the guy that's making $10 an hour.
See - everyone wants to make more in their job, but everyone wants to buy everything for less. Hence - China's economy growing, while ours shrinks.
Everyone - well, the few that work in this country - want more money, but they buy products made over seas.........hoping that their job won't go over "there"
Been preaching that for years, and while people seem to shake their heads in agreement, I see them lining up for the sale at Wal-Mart.
Probably a good number Union members.
Look, it isn't Wal-Marts fault. Wal-Mart got what the masses wanted. Decent goods at great prices, but at the same time JC Penny, Sears, Ace Hardware, you name it did the same thing.
Face it, if you are in the market for a shovel, you don't care where it's made. You care about the price, and there is only so much value added a store can offer on such a item....and to be honest I wouldn't know the difference between a good shovel and a bad one as long as the bad one doesn't break after a few bucket's full of dirt.
The bottom line is this.....cheap labor wins out in the boardroom and at the cash register. It's easy to blame the CEO but everybody seems to ignore the consumer who pushed demand. CEO's aren't dumb. They stock what people demand.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
I think that's where some folks differ,...I would rather buy a shovel that broke after 28,345 heaps of dirt for two bucks more, made in America, than one imported that will go 35,095.
It's how you value who else you're valuing,....at least to me.
I shop Wal-Mart, and there are goods there made in America.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
So you'd rather buy a lesser product for more money?
Why?
What does that do for US manufacturers when they have to compete globally?
If they can sell crap here, that's all well and good .... but they won't sell anything overseas.
Good luck selling that idea to other consumers.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
I didn't know when the shovel was going to break,...my stance is, I want to buy American, and now we're at the point where it is impossible, yet wonder why our economy is tanked,....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
People don't want $15 brooms. A $10 bundle of dishcloths doesn't fit the budget. Increasingly disposable electronics (due to the rapid pace of improvements and developments) cannot be $2000 for the older technology. If prices don't "fit" then people extend the life of the products they use when possible.
There was a demand for less expensive goods, and companies moved to meet that demand.
Newer technologies, and newer manufacturing procedures make it less expensive to manufacture goods. This is true even at plants in the US. A car now takes less than half as many people to assemble as it did in the 80s. Jobs are lost as a result. Price increases are slowed, halted, or prices drop as companies are able to cut their labor costs. It's not all jobs moving elsewhere. I would guess that more jobs have been lost to increased productivity than to moving jobs overseas.
GM once employed about 60,000 people in the US. They are somewhere around 35,000 now, and want to get to about 30,000 within 5 years. (approximates, going by memory) They sell less than
They employ something like 300,000 people worldwide, and sell 9 million cars worldwide.
ALL auto manufacturers sold about 11 million vehicles in the US in 2009. Total, for everyone that sells cars in the US. GM sells almost that many vehicles worldwide by themself.
Their number 1 market is now China. Yes, GM sells more cars in China than they do in the US. In many ways, their worldwide operations allow them to continue their US operations. GM might survive without their US operations. They absolutely would not survive without their worldwide operations.
The US market has become glutted. Families own several cars. It is not uncommon for a family with 2 kids to own 3 or 4 cars. There are used cars galore on the market. If manufacturers had to compete solely in the US market, they would fail.
It is not easy to see manufacturing leave our shores ..... but in many ways this actually saves jobs. Manufacturers can afford to remain in business and employing people in the US by cutting costs and building some factories closer to their expanding markets. It has to happen, because the company itself will go out of business if it does not.
There is no easy answer. Would it be better if we had thousands of companies go out of business entirely because they could not make money in the US market alone, and could not compete in foreign markets? What about technological advances that cost jobs? There are so many factors that have gone into this equation that it's not as simple as "watching US jobs go overseas".
Let me ask you a few serious questions.
If all other factors remained the same, but GM (and other manufacturers) was forced to use only US labor and production in their vehicles, what do you think the impact on price would be?
What do you think that price impact would do to auto sales?
How many families would have 3 or 4 cars?
Is it likely that most families would do everything they can to extend the life of their vehicle rather than go out and buy a new car every 3 or 4 years?
How long would a company like GM be able to stay in business in a glutted market under these conditions?
What about other companies in a similar situation?
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
Said it too many times,...I don't know what those answers are, really don't care because I'll be long gone before they are answered, and, believe that as poorly run as our government is, there are way too many variables that come into play. I don't worry it all that much,...I buy American when I can, and where the market allows me at what I consider value. By the way, GM ain't on that list.  Appreciate the give and take on the discussion,...these problems are way too big to be solved here.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Vizio does a good job of having competitive American products in the discount line.
I bought a hammer at Home Depot a couple weeks ago for $22 because it was made in the US. The "Made in China" equivalent was $10. Ouch.
I tried to buy a level made in the US on a previous trip to Home Depot. There was one. It was made of wood and the level wasn't even level. Ouch again.
I almost always buy American when available, and am generally happy with the quality of the products. I do not shop at Wal-Mart because of their publicised pushing of their suppliers to produce their products in China to knock down the prices, sometimes under threat of pulling their items from the stores.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,149 |
It's all in what you consider "value." Unlike the broken shovel, that hammer will last a lifetime. The level sounds like a lemon. Home D is good about exchanges. That, or I would write a nice letter to the manufacturer and see what happens. It is truly amazing how much stuff, I mean the stuff you really want to count on, like Stanley and Crafstman, etc....is made over there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I think he more wants to quell the American investors on the fact that Intel has been slowly closing US fabs and moving them overseas. And, not just to Asia (for instance Ireland has an Intel fab).
I agree on the environmental regulations, they are very much needed for fabs.
And, salaries are definitely the largest factor in all of this, but he can't come out and say that from his position. However, it is even a larger issue with Intel fabs not only due to more employees making higher salaries, but also the additional processes they put in place.
My group was actually sold by Intel 4 years ago because Intel could not compete in the handheld marketplace because the cost-structure in Intel fabs is setup for their high-line processors and they do not have a 'cheaper' option for lower line processors (such as Xscale). It resulted in much higher costs associated for Xscale than industry equivalent products and a group that was bleeding money. Switch that fab to TSMC in Taiwan (which Intel refused to do) and the same group has become the highest revenue division (not most profitable yet though) at a $4bil/year company.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 895 |
Slashing jobs pays off... (CNN) -- A new report may add salt to the wounds of America's jobless. It seems many of their former bosses are profiting at their losses. According to the report "CEO Pay and the Great Recession," chief executive officers of the 50 firms that laid off the most workers since the start of the economic crisis earned nearly $12 million on average in 2009. That's 42 percent more than the average pay of CEOs at S&P 500 firms as a whole. "I think that really shows a really perverse incentive system in this country," said Sarah Anderson, lead author of the Institute for Policy Studies' 17th Annual Executive Compensation Survey. "You are handsomely rewarded for slashing jobs in the middle of the worst economic crisis in 80 years," she said. It did for Fred Hassan of Schering-Plough, the man the report dubbed last year's "Golden Parachuter." Hassan was the highest paid layoff leader, earning $50 million in 2009 while his firm merged with Merck and cut 16,000 workers. According to Anderson, "they're prioritizing CEO pay at the welfare of their workers". So how do they get away with it? Anderson said you have to look at the make-up of many companies' executive boards. She said they're often made up of CEOs and high level executives from other companies "who really don't want to question this ridiculous pay system we have in this country that continues to pay people these absurd amounts of money when they're really not performing well for their company or the overall economy." Another disconcerting finding of the report: 72 percent of layoff-leading firms announced mass layoffs while delivering positive earnings reports. Anderson explained layoffs are really driven by efforts "to boost short-term profits even higher and also just to continue to have such high CEO pay levels." She said these mass cuts are often bad for business over the long-term because they impact worker morale, which can lead to lower productivity. She said they also result in additional costs related to hiring and training new workers down the road. According to the report, there are some positive signs. The report gives high marks to two new rules adopted through the financial and health care reform bills. One requires that all firms report CEO-worker pay ratios. Another caps the tax deductibility of executive pay at health insurance companies. But, "I think that our policy-makers have a long way to go toward really reigning in the problem" Anderson said. "The problems are very evident in the findings of our report".
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
The report gives high marks to two new rules adopted through the financial and health care reform bills. One requires that all firms report CEO-worker pay ratios. Another caps the tax deductibility of executive pay at health insurance companies. But, "I think that our policy-makers have a long way to go toward really reigning in the problem" Anderson said. "The problems are very evident in the findings of our report".
Amen.. there is no way we can turn our economy around until the federal government takes greater control of executive compensation at private companies and puts rules in place to regulate how much a person can make at their private sector job. And further puts rules in place that tie executives hands behind their backs and force them to follow some government mandate about who, how, and when they need to hire and fire people..
For the love of God, with the depth of executive level business success that is roaming the halls of congress we must tap into it. These folks in congress can use their vast knowledge of what it takes to successfully run a business, to operate within a budget, to put the most qualified people in charge so they can do their job, to prioritize their mission like fixing the economy instead of worrying about steroids in baseball.. Isn't it clear to everybody that congress is best suited to enforce mandates on private business?
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,428 |
So ...... you say that like it's a bad thing or something ....... The problem regarding government is one of scale. Many economic problems are local in scale. 1 "centerpiece" business or industry leaves an area and that area is screwed for decades. This happens all over the country. Local problems are rarely solved at the federal level. They can't be. That's why we have the multiple levels of government. However, the federal government tries to step in and solve problems by giving localities money ... and then attaching strings that create more problems down the line. Look at programs like those designed to "save firemen and policemen's jobs" ....... Many of those give money to the locality. They dictate how many officers per citizen/square mile/ or other criteria the locality must have. So ..... a community that was going to lose 4 officers now faces a choice. They can take the funding, that will pay for approximately 4 poilice officers ...... but they have to add 4 officers to reach the criteria required by the federal funding mandate .... plus they have to somehow keep the 4 original officers employed and on the job. (and paid for .... somehow .....) Or they can turn down the funding ..... and somehow try to find the money elsewhere. In some cases, they can then get another grant or other form of short term funding that allows them to kick the issue down the road ....... say for 6-8 months ..... because "the economy will be better by then and we'll be able to afford it". Unfortunately, this often is not the case. Economies of different scale cannot be "fixed" at one level of government. The federal has the most money .... so they try .... but often fail. They wind up adding to the problems experienced by a lower level of government rather than helping. Government is not the solution to anything but a very small, limited, and clearly defined number of problems. The federal government is not the solution to anything except a very small subset of the overall very small, limited, and clearly defined number of problems initially defined as requiring a government solution. Unfortunately, this is not the way it is in practice, and the "top down" problem solving model had replaces the "Local first" model .... and one size fits all replaces common sense.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
Great post DC...LOL
It is not for government to shape society....it is for society to shape government.....
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Intel CEO: Things Need to Change
in the U.S.
|
|
