It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
charlyv
As a consumer, you do the only thing that can possibly hurt them. Firmly commit to never buy their products again.
If there were any solidarity in this, it would be a totally different economic situation in this country.
andy1972
Maybe he should move the plant to Arizona and fill it with 600 illegal Mexicans..it's the same as opening it in Honduras and you don't have to wait for the items to come before you ship them out..
macman
reply to post by BattleStarGal
What's the problem here?
A company is moving operations to a place where it costs less to make something than it does here in the US.
A company is supposed to make money, not be there to provide jobs.
Mamatus
I just sent an email off to Fruit of the Loom letting them know they lost a loyal customer - Now while it won't save the jobs or change a darn thing at least a voice was heard.
Contact Fruit of the Loom
UnBreakable
macman
reply to post by BattleStarGal
What's the problem here?
A company is moving operations to a place where it costs less to make something than it does here in the US.
A company is supposed to make money, not be there to provide jobs.
That's true. That's the American way nowadays. What's another 600 to the 50 million plus on the welfare/foodstamp dole. Hey, like Mittens said, corporations are people too.
For years, GE outsourced manufacturing of the water heater to a company in China. In 2009, GE did the math and, considering rising wages overseas as well as climbing transportation costs, decided to bring production back to the U.S.
Why do U.S. companies relocate their plants overseas, thereby abolishing U.S. jobs?
(a) they can hire workers at very low wages (such as 30 cents an hour in China).
(b) the companies don't have to pay any employee benefits.
(c) they don't have to comply with safety and environmental regulations.
(d) they don't have to pay foreign taxes when they export their products back to us.
The correct answer is all of the above. The U.S. cannot require foreign governments to impose a minimum wage or safety regulations, or pay employee benefits. But the U.S. can and should do something about (d), the huge tax-rebate racket that lures U.S. companies to lay off American workers and set up shop in foreign countries.
Corporations located in the United States pay big U.S. corporate income and property taxes. It does a lot for their bottom line when they move to a foreign tax-free utopia.
Foreign governments do tax corporations, but if the company exports its products to the U.S. (or other countries), the foreign government rebates (forgives) the tax. That creates an irresistible magnet to attract U.S. companies to transfer their plants to a land where they can avoid most of both countries' taxes.
It's no wonder that DaimlerChrysler will soon start building cars in China to ship back and sell in the U.S. under Chrysler names such as Dodge and Jeep. This decision means that 11,000 manufacturing jobs and 2,000 white-collar jobs will be eliminated over the next 24 months.
The SUV assembly plant in Newark, Delaware will be closed. The Warren, Michigan truck plant and the St. Louis County, Missouri assembly plants will each lose one of two shifts.
The combination of avoiding U.S. corporate taxes and having Chinese taxes rebated (forgiven) will help DaimlerChrysler to sell new cars in the United States much cheaper than any it can manufacture in Detroit.
This racket should be prohibited because it is a huge subsidy, but world trade agreements have peculiarly defined subsidy to exclude tax rebates to exporters by calling it a rebate of the Value Added Tax (VAT). They get by with this subterfuge because that term is not understood by most Americans.
One of the many ways the United States is different from nearly all other countries is the system of taxation. The U.S. imposes taxes on our income (we pay taxes on what we earn), whereas 157 other countries impose taxes on consumption (they pay taxes on what they buy) and call that tax a VAT.
The VAT system not only operates as a bribe to induce U.S. plants to move overseas, but it is also a scheme to prevent U.S. products from being competitively sold in foreign countries. Here is how the racket works.
When a U.S. product, such as an automobile, arrives at another country's port, the foreign government slaps on a VAT import tax that is a percentage of the price of the U.S. product, the transportation cost to get it to the foreign country, and the tariff that the foreign country charges.
For 40 years, the U.S. has been signing trade agreements that were supposed to reduce or eliminate tariffs and thereby promote free trade. European countries sanctimoniously proclaim that they are reducing their tariffs, but in fact they replaced their tariffs with a steadily increasing VAT.
In 1968, the average tariff rate collected by European Union countries was 10.4%, and the average VAT rate was 13.44%, making a trade barrier against U.S. goods of 23.84%. By 2006, the average tariff rate declined to 4.4%, but the average VAT rate climbed to 19.36%, making the trade barrier against U.S. products 23.76%.
Foreign countries simply substituted high VAT rates for high tariff rates, thereby maintaining their border barriers against competition from U.S. goods. The result is that most foreign countries still have de facto tariffs against us that are as high or higher than their tariffs of 40 years ago.
Of course, this racket is flagrantly contrary to the announced goal of free-trade agreements. But don't look for any relief from the World Trade Organization because the WTO consistently rules against us.
Foreign governments' use of the VAT has inflicted U.S. industry with monumental costs, increasing every year, and reaching $327 billion in 2006. That's the sum of the VAT rebates paid to companies that ship foreign-made products to the U.S., plus the VAT taxes paid by U.S. companies for the privilege of selling their products in foreign countries.
The current system is not the result of the free market or free trade, but the failure of our government to expose and counter the dishonest practices of our trading competitors. After 40 years of tolerating this ripoff, we want to hear from national leaders who will demand a new strategy and a level playing field.
jimmyx
a plantation owner in the old south was suppose to make money too. the slaves got their room and board, and food and water....what else did they need? it's these pesky American workers that won't work for 2 dollars an hour, they are the problem. geez, why are people so upset with the company?....this is what you are saying?
andy1972
Maybe he should move the plant to Arizona and fill it with 600 illegal Mexicans..it's the same as opening it in Honduras and you don't have to wait for the items to come before you ship them out..
Night Star
tinner07
reply to post by macman
What's the problem here?
A company is moving operations to a place where it costs less to make something than it does here in the US.
A company is supposed to make money, not be there to provide jobs.
You are right. but it is our right to say FU to that company and spend our money elsewhere. Just as I am sure somebody out there would do your job for less money, why don't you offer up that suggestion to your superiors? all in the name of company profit
Back before I was disabled, the last job that I had closed down and moved South to save money. These people make billions of dollars and have companies all over the world. There is making a lot of money and then there is greed. So many lives were affected negatively and many suffered because of this.
musicismagic
andy1972
Maybe he should move the plant to Arizona and fill it with 600 illegal Mexicans..it's the same as opening it in Honduras and you don't have to wait for the items to come before you ship them out..
But don't US labor laws protect illegal Mexican labours in America?