« Starting 2nd week of Vegan eating... | Main | Sad Day for Democracy in Hillsborough County »
June 08, 2009
Consumer Commodities and the Chinese Economy
It's rather unfair to blame the Chinese for all the problem that the U.S. is having with products imported from overseas manufacturers. While it seems an egregious error in judgment to allow certain, decidedly unsafe products, we cannot solely blame this on the Chinese. Certainly, oversight may be there, but is it not also the job of the American government to verify and test the claims made by ANYONE about the safety and fitness for use of a particular product?
We as a country demand more and more cheap products and demand them in bulk to further mitigate cost. Accelerated production just begs poorer and poorer quality. Cost-cutting, lack of quality control, and inflated assurances of the safety of these products underlie the major problems we're having with these problems.
A solution to this problem? Let's get off the "cheap-as-we-can-possibly-get-it" express at the next stop. More expensive products? Sorry, that's an unfortunate by-product in the short term, but American workers will get higher wages, better care, The American dollar will rise in value, the standard of living will increase, tax revenues increase, and our economy slowly eases out of this slump.
Just food for thought.
June 8, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Yes, it's sad how the quest for the cheapest price has led to the de-industrialization of America. Heard the other day that a few critical components of our 'nuclear arsenal' are now made only by the Chinese.
Just finishing a book on the French and Indian War, and parallels are amazing. Britain wins the war and boots France out of the Ohio Valley and most of Canada, but its cost so cripples the economy that credit dries up, banks fail, and the government's response, to raise taxes on the Colonies, leads to the American Revolution. ("Oops - but it's great that we won the war.")
Posted by: Barry in Portland | Jun 12, 2009 11:35:38 AM
Very good points. I ran across some interesting points in some of the research that I did, but found it best to keep the post shorter and less rambling. Britain also had a tough economic time and still possibly could by shifting from a manufacturing to a service economy, which we as a nation simply can't afford to do.
Posted by: Aaron B. | Jun 12, 2009 12:16:16 PM
I was just discussing this situation with a gent at work today. During WWII, we retooled car factories to manufacture equipment needed for the war. As more and more of our manufacturing is shifted offshore, and more and more of even our materials production (steel, for example), we place our nation at ever-greater risk. This is just one facet of the problem.
So why isn't there screaming from the rooftops?
Well, the public companies at which I've worked were always focused intently on the next quarter's numbers. Such myopic management leads to a quest for better short-term bottom line at almost any long-term cost. If I am a C-level exec and can get a good stock price and exercise my options - or at least count on a golden parachute if I screw up - why should I care about the long-term issues? This is precisely what it seems like management was doing when I was at Enron.
For the worker bees, there are various factors at play, but I think 2 of the largest are: [1] media focus on such inane 'issues' as trying to prevent same-sex marriage (diversion of attention from REAL issues); and [2] personal need to focus energy on just making a living and coping with stagnant / dropping wages, and rising cost of necessities.
Just as one is counseled to diversify one's investments (if so fortunate as to have any), it makes sense to diversify our sources of necessities: more local production of food, energy, real goods, etc.
Some of the cost may initially be greater, but the long-term benefits - and the boost in national security - make it very much worthwhile.
Posted by: Joe Litton | Jun 15, 2009 5:41:41 PM
