Fruit of the Loom to close Jamestown plant, lay off all 600 workers

Daedalus

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.

because screw america, right?

i'm glad i don't use their products, otherwise, i'd hafta be pissed at having to find a new brand...

No, what he is saying is the pragmatic real life situation. We, as a nation, are one of the most unfriendly to business out there. When we create it difficult for a company to be profitable here, they go elsewhere. This is an economic fact.

reply to post by coastlinekid


Never said the end result was rainbows and sunshine.

reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse

Says you...

I forgot, are you on the board of directors??? DO you hold large amounts of stock???

My guess would be no. So.......you really don't have a say in it.

reply to post by beezzer


Ahhhh, Warren Buffet. The darling of the Dems and Progressives everywhere.

While he earns huge payoffs, all he has to do is say something like "well, it's just not fair that you are poor", and he is welcomed with open arms and skinny jeans.

reply to post by jimmyx


Yep, because we are still having to deal with Mas'tas and slaves in the cotton fields of the dirty south.

Bud, here is a clue. It's 2014. There is no longer slavery of the "black man". Race pimping should be left to Sharpton and Jackson. And finally, I do believe you have exceeded your allotment of the "race cards" for this year. You should either find a new debate tactic or send some money to the Rainbow Push Collation to replenish your stock.

Count me unaware that any undies were still made in the US, I assumed it was all made somewhere overseas now. I feel awful for the people at that factory, FotL can't possible be hurting that bad for profits, are they? This is a really crappy thing to do to the employees in this economy.

tovenar
4. My spouse is beginning to sew more and more of our clothes herself. High end goods are cost prohibitive, due to the price of nice looking materials. She actually looked at making me a suit! It would have cost what a cheap one off the rack costs at a warehouse. On the other hand, she made me my camo hunting 'scrubs', for about half of retail. She already makes our pajamas and children's clothes (where the highest mark-up is).

I hope your wife's got sewing talent! I grew up with my mom sewing about half of my brothers' & my clothes. Which is fine and dandy, she wasn't bad with the sewing machine, it was the patterns that she sucked with. She wouldn't tailor anything for the wearer, so we ended up with shirts that were either too tight in the armpits, had necklines that were tight, or had hems that were too short. We weren't overweight kids, the patterns' measurements seemed to vary slightly from one to the next, and she never took that into consideration. And she also had a penchant for the cheapest possible fabrics out there, everything she made iiiiitched. In the end, she wasted a lot of money because nothing fit right and it was simply awful fabric on the skin, no one wanted to wear anything she made.

framedragged

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.

"No you don't understand, it was too expensive to keep paying them this livable wage! The only sustainable way we can stay in business is to ship the jobs to overseas to borderline slaves at slave wages. I mean sure, there's millions and millions of dollars worth of slack in the executives paychecks, but the company can actually afford to pay those (far above living) wages. It's the living wages that they can't afford!"

True, no one and nothing has any obligation to not screw over the people around them.

But when they do screw people over for their own benefit, I feel quite obligated to call them out on being so (cuss)-ey.

Shrug. Be careful what you wish for, because you may get it.

Progressives demand all of the time laws and regulations that restrict business because "evil corporations are all corporationy."

Well, you got it. We have one of the highest corporate tax in the world, myriad of regulations and compliance costs, legal costs because "sue dem evil corporations," EEOC, EPA, OSHA, FDA, etc, etc, --mountains of bloated bureaucracies that make every single item more expensive, unions, and now government mandated healthcare.

All of those "social justice" things you progressives demand makes owning and operating a business more difficult and more unsustainable. You get what you want but then bitch when business moves out?

Want to exploit workers in Honduras for profit? No problem, pay 60% annual overseas job tax and we'll call it even.

Visitor2012
Want to exploit workers in Honduras for profit? No problem, pay 60% annual overseas job tax and we'll call it even.

edit on 13-4-2014 by Visitor2012 because: (no reason given)

And so then the company just leaves the US altogether; this would drop their income tax by 15% right off the bat. And I guarantee you they are not making a 7% profit on each pair of underwear they sell in the US. So they probably ALREADY COULD HAVE doubled their profits by declaring themselves a foreign company before now. (and will almost certainly do so. Walgreens is about to do the same thing...)

****

The reason that the owners are a necessary evil is because it is the owner who takes the actual risk.

The worker who punches a time-clock isn't taking a risk. You're not gonna lose your life-savings, or your retirement, while you are on the clock at the company. If you get injured, you can sue the owner.

The owner could lose everything. He cannot sue anybody else if things go badly. If the underpants don't sell, he could lose his entire investment. If a worker, a customer, or a vendor sues him, they could get all of the owner's money, all of his assets, and maybe even his personal property as well. His family could end up homeless if he loses everything at the business.

So the owner takes the risk.

You have to have an economic system that pays someone to take a risk, or manage that risk on behalf of someone else. One of the actual (rather than perceived) failures of communism is that it never rewards anyone for taking a risk. So nobody every willingly risks ANYTHING.

Historically, America was an economic powerhouse because of free enterprise, and the way the American system allowed risk-takers to reap the reward of their own gambles in the market place.

So when you say "tax anyone who is successful," you need to realize that you are saying "deprive them of more the rewards they'd otherwise have gotten for taking a risk."



So, if you confiscate the rewards owed to the risk-takers, how do you plan to have innovation in your nation?

Mamatus
reply to post by BattleStarGal

 

Bummer! I have worn USA made undies for a long time as I try to buy as much as possible from US manufactures.

Hey Warren if you are listening, just want you to know you just lost a customer. My junk swings in Red, White and Blue only.

You think a multi billionaire such as Warren Buffet is going to care where you buy your pants? Really?

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.

No, no. According to this theory a company is supposed to keep all jobs it has ever created forever, endure higher prices of production, become uncompetitive, then go bankrupt and lose everything, including the 600 jobs, plus all the others it has created, plus all stockholder equity, and erase its presence on Earth.

THAT'S the American Way!

reply to post by schuyler


Well personally, I started my company last year so I could employee people, and be forced to provide them health insurance and everything else.

I didn't start it to make an income myself by investing 4 hours every day from 8 till midnight, and 12 hours Saturday all the while working a day job from 6am till 3pm and getting 5 hours of sleep a night. And having my brother put up $20k of his own money to fund us for the starting capital.


Nope, all just to provide jobs and feel good doing it.

reply to post by tovenar

And so then the company just leaves the US altogether

Then I would hope I would be of sound mind enough to say 'GOOD RIDDANCE!'

Let the rodents scurry away.

Visitor2012
reply to post by tovenar

 

And so then the company just leaves the US altogether

Then I would hope I would be of sound mind enough to say 'GOOD RIDDANCE!'

Let the rodents scurry away.

edit on 14-4-2014 by Visitor2012 because: (no reason given)

So, your goal is fewer American jobs? Mission Accomplished, then. Precisely what the FoTL folks were doing anyway.



So you won't buy FoTL now that they are made overseas? What 'american underpants' will you buy instead? Or will you buy some Chinese made panties, so you can punish FoTL for not being American any more???

tovenar


So, your goal is fewer American jobs? Mission Accomplished, then. Precisely what the FoTL folks were doing anyway.



So you won't buy FoTL now that they are made overseas? What 'american underpants' will you buy instead? Or will you buy some Chinese made panties, so you can punish FoTL for not being American any more???

We need to set our standards much higher than that. My goal would be to provide an option for any US-headquartered corporation that attempts to exploit slave workers in other countries by destroying the local economies, dumping the American worker and joining the economic gangb%#g in China or wherever else.

Either, those in charge (including all the Wall Street benefactors) be arrested and the corporation given a 100-year probation. OR the corporation pay a 60% tax.......no a 120% tax to strangle their business into the grave and kick their arse's out of the Country. We already prosecute people who run sweat shops in the US, no different than someone trying to use an offshore one.

Yes, it equals more unemployment, for a little while BUT new LEGITIMATE businesses will quickly and EAGERLY fill the demand. Legitimate as in, not employing human slaves. So my stance is 'Pay up and get out' or "You're under arrest! Put your hands above your head". A bit extreme perhaps, unpractical maybe, but our children's children would thank us.

reply to post by Visitor2012

So basically to sum up your response, Freedom is tossed out for those you don't agree with.

Visitor2012
reply to post by tovenar

 

And so then the company just leaves the US altogether

Then I would hope I would be of sound mind enough to say 'GOOD RIDDANCE!'

Let the rodents scurry away.

edit on 14-4-2014 by Visitor2012 because: (no reason given)

And this is why there are no jobs. The US has the largest corporate tax in the world. We have mountains of litigation and regulation. Then people wonder why business moves somewhere else.

Some people hate business, corporations large and small, profit, capitalism, and free enterprise so much they demand taxation and regulation to destroy what they hate, then have the temerity to be pissed when the jobs move elsewhere. You reap what you sew.

macman
reply to post by Visitor2012

 

So basically to sum up your response, Freedom is tossed out for those you don't agree with.

Using Slave labor to run your business should be illegal across the board. That's what I am saying. And any corporation that dumps American workers to exploit slave salaries in 3rd world countries, should be shut down or kicked out. That's all I'm concerned about.

reply to post by Nyiah


My mother used to sew our school clothes.
She used to buy the fabric off of the discount pile.
I was so sick of looking like, somewhere, a Volkswagen had lost it's seat covers.
Thank god my Father believed that a good pair of Levis was a perfect present for Xmas or birthdays.

reply to post by Visitor2012

Our freedoms don't transcend to other countries.


So again, the Freedoms we have should only apply to those that you agree with.