On 30 Oct 2002 at 18:52, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Americans (and Brits for that matter) may be benefiting from > globalisation of this type (eg cheaper clothes); however, you/we are > also losing out big time: when company CEOs decide to relocate to > Malaysia or Thailand (in order that the company can make even bigger > profits so the bosses can afford a bigger house in the > Hamptons/Totteridge and Whetstone),
There are also a lot of stock holders who benefit when that happens - not just the CEO's. In the U.S. almost 50% of American households hold some kind of equities. (I still find it funny that very few people here cared about CEO behavior or compensation when the market was soaring.) > > > One other thing: "Made In America" may be a legend that's fading, but > it still has a strong symbolic clout. Certainly one of the mega > clothing manufactureres thought it was important enough to hatch an > extraordinary scam to mislead people into thinking that their products > were indeed made in the USA. I don't remember the details, but it was > reported in the Observer here, and I think Naomi Klein also mentions > it in No Logo. It went something like this: > > The company (let's call them Nidigap) bought an island somewhere in > the Pacific Ocean, built a factory on it and imported loads of drone > workers from the Far East to do the usual intensive/sweatshop thang. > To all intents and purposes, the factory may as well have been on the > outskirts of Manila. But Nidigap were able to put "Made in the USA" > on the labels because they had bought the island, and, like, they're > American, so, well, that's alright then. > > I apologise for being so hazy on the specifics, but the bare bones of > this are true, even though it looks like something you'd read about in > The Onion. Are you talking about the Saipan thing with Tommy Hilfiger and the Gap? Stanley, Honda and Rand are among many others that have falsely made the "Made in USA" claim. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1999/9901/musasweep6.htm I'm not saying that the label has no value; I just don't think it should carry as much weight in this new world we live in. According to the FCC, you can only make that claim if "all or virtually all" of the product was indeed made in the U.S.A. When you consider the imported goods that are used in products that are made here, it rules out quite a lot (including components of the U.S. military defense system). So in pursuit of "made in the U.S.A.," do we turn our backs on our import partners and return to isolationism? According to news sources referenced by the FCC, Americans became more sensitive to "made in USA" claims and were more interested in buying American- made goods. http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/alerts/usabalrt.htm My own personal thinking actually went in the opposite direction, away from insularity. > > There are plenty of people who believe globalisation is good for > everyone. I don't buy it (so to speak). > Industrialization wasn't good for everyone. Nor was the agrarian age. I don't believe globalisation is either. I just think we have to face the fact that we are in it and I don't see how we can turn back. Brenda n.p.: Buffy on FX (Did I just write that?! We all have to have our guilty pleasures. <g> ) -------------------------------------------- "Radio has no future" - Lord Kelvin, 1897
