Made in U.S.A.

[Pete]

I relize that apple computer was an example.

Ships going back empty was meant as in .....a huge trade deficit and loosing jobs.

[xr7g428]

"If the product is stamped Made in the USA, then it must be at least 70% made here."

 

This statement is incorrect. For a product to made in the USA it has to be substantially all from the USA.

 

Here is a link to the government site that spells out the rules: FTC Made in USA rules

 

The Standard For Unqualified Made In USA Claims

What is the standard for a product to be called Made in USA without qualification?

 

For a product to be called Made in USA, or claimed to be of domestic origin without qualifications or limits on the claim, the product must be "all or virtually all" made in the U.S. The term "United States," as referred to in the Enforcement Policy Statement, includes the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories and possessions.

What does "all or virtually all" mean?

 

"All or virtually all" means that all significant parts and processing that go into the product must be of U.S. origin. That is, the product should contain no — or negligible — foreign content.

 

I am part owner of a manufacturing company that builds speaker enclosures. Although we use all other USA produced materials for our products we are currently using a Taiwanese manufactured terminal cup that costs us $0.39. According to the FTC, the best we can say about our product is that it is assembled in the USA from foreign and domestic product. Our competitors that only package products produced in China, are allowed to say exactly the same thing.

 

The rules as they now stand were intended to protect USA jobs. It is my opinion that the opposite is happening.

 

I would like to hear what you guys think about the rules: Is this good for America?

Edited June 8, 2011 by xr7g428

[akirby]

This statement is incorrect. For a product to made in the USA it has to be substantially all from the USA.

 

Here is a link to the government site that spells out the rules: FTC Made in USA rules

 

 

 

I am part owner of a manufacturing company that builds speaker enclosures. Although we use all other USA produced materials for our products we are currently using a Taiwanese manufactured terminal cup that costs us $0.39. According to the FTC, the best we can say about our product is that it is assembled in the USA from foreign and domestic product. Our competitors that only package products produced in China, are allowed to say exactly the same thing.

 

The rules as they now stand were intended to protect USA jobs. It is my opinion that the opposite is happening.

 

I would like to hear what you guys think about the rules: Is this good for America?

 

That would seem to fit the "negligible" part of the rule allowing you to claim Made in the U.S.A.

[xr7g428]

That would seem to fit the "negligible" part of the rule allowing you to claim Made in the U.S.A.

 

No, this was the ruling of the FTC with regard to our product. Negligible means so little as to be unrecognizable, and unidentifiable.. Like say one ingredient in the paint or maybe the solder.

 

Read the linked information if you do not understand the rulings. It really is that bad. The t-cup is less than 1% or the value of the product.

 

From the FTC site:

 

Example: A table lamp is assembled in the U.S. from American-made brass, an American-made Tiffany-style lampshade, and an imported base. The base accounts for a small percent of the total cost of making the lamp. An unqualified Made in USA claim is deceptive for two reasons: The base is not far enough removed in the manufacturing process from the finished product to be of little consequence and it is a significant part of the final product.

Edited June 9, 2011 by xr7g428

[RangerM]

I relize that apple computer was an example.

Ships going back empty was meant as in .....a huge trade deficit and loosing jobs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR_D3Q8To-s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0pl_FXt0eM

Edited June 9, 2011 by RangerM

[akirby]

No, this was the ruling of the FTC with regard to our product. Negligible means so little as to be unrecognizable, and unidentifiable.. Like say one ingredient in the paint or maybe the solder.

 

I didn't read the FTC site, just your quote. I have to say that's a ridiculous rule because it punishes people who are trying to do the right thing. It should be similar to cars where it's based on a percentage of the final product.

[RangerM]

Thanks for the link! The retailer Micro Center markets an in-house brand of desktop PCs called PowerSpec. These PCs are assembled in the U.S., too. I bought one with Linux installed for $200. It's a low-end model with a Celeron 430 CPU and 2 GB of RAM, but it performs quite well. "Microsoft-free" and "Apple-free" is the way to go for personal computing IMO, but for those who would like Windows PCs, the PowerSpec lineup also includes units with Windows 7 or XP Professional pre-installed.

Hadn't heard of them before. Always good to have another source. Thanks.

[retro-man]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gR_D3Q8To-s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0pl_FXt0eM

Let me just say this about the two clips:

1.) Friedman is love here with the formula and the theory. He manipulates the dry numbers as if the world were as simple as that: as if no other countries had any sort of protectionism, legalized or socially motivated, as if when this beautiful equalizing flow happens people in countries that start out more prosperous won't be impacted as they lose ground in "the great equalization" with countries that are less prosperous. And he smiles while he's talking, because he is so enamored of the elegance of the theory (and maybe pleased with how clever he is).

2.) The other guy - again, in love with the sterile theory and blind to the human implications - makes exactly the case that I have made on here many times: he says (paraphrasing) "Why shouldn't we want to export our pollution to other countries?" He doesn't get it: a.) There is no such thing as exporting your pollution. b.) Responsible and ethical people pay for what they want, whether it be a chunk of steel, or clean air and drinkable water. The "externalizing" of costs is maybe the most unethical thing that business does. But those costs, whether it be in the price of the goods, or the destruction of somebody's environment on the other side of the globe, still have to be paid by somebody. The steel guy is a very unethical man.

Edited June 10, 2011 by retro-man

[retro-man]

And, I have here a confession to make - rather sheepishly.

 

I find myself in the position of being no longer able, or perhaps willing, to put my money where my mouth is: I sold my Thunderbird a couple days ago to a nice retired man (speaking of externalizing costs.......). I drove it for 143,000 or so miles. As far as I know the engine is absolutely fine. I told him about the recurring cooling system problems. He himself detected the fact that the transmission doesn't shift as fast as it used to. I hope he gets better service out of it than I did. As some will have inferred form my posts, I am in straitened circumstances - unemployment in my profession is probably near 40%, Jack diddley squat is being built in the US currently..... I have some work, but it is a struggle to put together a decent scope and then to get paid anything for it. Anyway, I could not keep the T-Bird with the threat of the engine or transmission (a $7,900 part) going out sometime. As it was, every time I went to the mechanic great big greasy wads of $100s would just fly out of my pocket. $1,500.00 just a couple of weeks ago for another cooling system issue (the water pump impeller had shattered and a fragment lodged in the thermostat - one of hundreds of variations on the same story with that car), and replacement of a "coil pack" (in the olden times we used to call them spark plugs and they cost $3. These cost 3 hundred. And the car has 8 of them. For awhile I started compiling a spreadsheet. My last entry was in September of 2009 - 1 year and 9 months ago. At that point, I had paid $11,600.00 in out of pocket repair costs over the 7-1/2 years I had owned the car. Not including stuff covered under warranty. Not including regular maintenance. Just stuff breaking. Rear Wheel bearings out at 30k miles, then again at 70, front wheel bearings at 60k miles, and the cooling system: sensors, control modules (several times), mixing valves, water pump, hydraulic fan motor (a $975 part), similar issues with the climate control, jamming CD player (3 or 4 times), brakes, air conditioner, valve cover gaskets, rear differential. And another $7,100 in regular maintenance. Ah, memories.

 

I ended up buying a lightly used (15k miles) Nissan Versa. 6-spd. manual, no power windows, no power door locks. I do like the simplicity. I think it's made in Mexico actually - like my old Escort Wagon. I just couldn't bring myself to buy another Ford just yet - even though I do identify myself as a "Ford man". You know, I had to do that Thunderbird - it was a midlife crisis - but it was truly a financially ruinous car to own. If I hadn't spent 2-1/2 years on the waiting list while they kept botching the launch, and if I hadn't wanted it so bad, I probably could have returned it under the lemon law while it was still under 30k miles...... it was beautiful to look at though.

Edited June 10, 2011 by retro-man

[RangerM]

Let me just say this about the two clips:

1.) Friedman is love here with the formula and the theory. He manipulates the dry numbers as if the world were as simple as that: as if no other countries had any sort of protectionism, legalized or socially motivated, as if when this beautiful equalizing flow happens people in countries that start out more prosperous won't be impacted as they lose ground in "the great equalization" with countries that are less prosperous. And he smiles while he's talking, because he is so enamored of the elegance of the theory (and maybe pleased with how clever he is).

2.) The other guy - again, in love with the sterile theory and blind to the human implications - makes exactly the case that I have made on here many times: he says (paraphrasing) "Why shouldn't we want to export our pollution to other countries?" He doesn't get it: a.) There is no such thing as exporting your pollution. b.) Responsible and ethical people pay for what they want, whether it be a chunk of steel, or clean air and drinkable water. The "externalizing" of costs is maybe the most unethical thing that business does. But those costs, whether it be in the price of the goods, or the destruction of somebody's environment on the other side of the globe, still have to be paid by somebody. The steel guy is a very unethical man.

You heard certain things Retro, but missed others.

 

The question is, "does foreign trade" or "free trade" lose American jobs? As was pointed out in the presentation, yes. In certain industries that are unable to compete with foreign producers (for reasons of taxes, environmental law, whatever), there will be jobs lost. There is no doubt about this.

 

But this is not the end of the story as many portray the issue.

 

Once those dollars are sent to Japan/China/etc, they are only good if they can find other people willing to trade those same dollars for their goods or services. In other words, if the money stays in Japan/China, it is worthless to them (since their population uses Yuan/Yen/etc). And Japanese/Chinese producers cannot keep producing if the only thing they have to pay their own employees/subcontractors is foreign currency. Eventually, those dollars we sent them must return to America in order for the people who received them as payment to derive any benefit. The only way for that to happen is if they buy our goods, services, or (as is often pointed out in the case of China) our debt.

 

In other words, the net effect (overall) of foreign trade on total employment in the U.S. is zero. But, it's the vocal group of steelworkers/autoworkers that is shown on the evening news, and NOT the other Americans who benefitted from cheaper prices of foreign goods, and the newly created jobs exporting products that we're better at producing.

Edited June 10, 2011 by RangerM

[RangerM]

I ended up buying a lightly used (15k miles) Nissan Versa. 6-spd. manual, no power windows, no power door locks. I do like the simplicity. I think it's made in Mexico actually - like my old Escort Wagon. I just couldn't bring myself to buy another Ford just yet - even though I do identify myself as a "Ford man". You know, I had to do that Thunderbird - it was a midlife crisis - but it was truly a financially ruinous car to own. If I hadn't spent 2-1/2 years on the waiting list while they kept botching the launch, and if I hadn't wanted it so bad, I probably could have returned it under the lemon law while it was still under 30k miles...... it was beautiful to look at though.

You made the best choice for you, Retro. Once the economy turns around under a different administration (I just had to say that, didn't I? :poke: ) you'll get back on your feet, and you'll purchase something else. Maybe another Ford?

 

It's far better for you and Ford (believe it or not), that you be on sound economic footing. The economic activity you generate will enable someone else to buy a Ford.

Edited June 10, 2011 by RangerM

[aneekr]

And, I have here a confession to make - rather sheepishly...

You absolutely made the right decision. Your anecdote about selling the T-Bird and replacing it with a Nissan Versa is a classic example of the economic concept "consumer surplus".

[xargos]

The computer was one example, but you do have the ability to purchase a computer built in the USA if you choose. Here is the website: http://www.computersmadeinusa.com/. If enough people choose to buy them, they will expand and hire more people. Demand will almost always precede supply. (I would leave out the "almost" in that statement, but I'm sure someone could think of a contrary example)

 

 

Assembled in the USA, yes. I hope you don't think those most of the parts in those came from the USA, though, because they definitely did not. We don't manufacture them here anymore.

 

You made the best choice for you, Retro. Once the economy turns around under a different administration (I just had to say that, didn't I? :poke: ) you'll get back on your feet, and you'll purchase something else. Maybe another Ford?

 

Don't forget for one second which administration this country was under when the worst of this mess started. I'll give you a hint: it was before Obama and after Clinton. That's a solid fact. We were all there when it happened.

[RangerM]

Assembled in the USA, yes. I hope you don't think those most of the parts in those came from the USA, though, because they definitely did not. We don't manufacture them here anymore.

And most anything made with rubber originated in Malaysia. Just because the raw materials (or parts) didn't come from the USA doesn't mean the USA doesn't derive value from it. What money you saved purchasing your Japanese-manufactured Yaris, is presumably being spent on other things in Massachusetts.

Don't forget for one second which administration this country was under when the worst of this mess started. I'll give you a hint: it was before Obama and after Clinton. That's a solid fact. We were all there when it happened.

How can we forget? (it's not like we aren't reminded over and over and....) But, it's been two years since the recession officially ended, yet here we are....still spinning our economic wheels in a ditch. At some point, everyone has to recognize futility.

Edited June 10, 2011 by RangerM

[retro-man]

Once the economy turns around under a different administration

You think Nader will run again? :poke:

 

ps Thank you all for your restraint not flaming me about the Versa.

Edited June 10, 2011 by retro-man

[twintornados]

You know, I had to do that Thunderbird - it was a midlife crisis - but it was truly a financially ruinous car to own. If I hadn't spent 2-1/2 years on the waiting list while they kept botching the launch, and if I hadn't wanted it so bad, I probably could have returned it under the lemon law while it was still under 30k miles...... it was beautiful to look at though.

Therein lies the problem...I am sure the nice gentleman you sold the T-Bird to will enjoy it thoroughly...despite its nagging problems.....you will hate the Versa every day....and it is your penance for being such a self-centered jack-wagon because you knew what you were doing and why, yet you chose to go down that path anyway...I still like your postings...but now must put them in the context of "Nissan Versa owner"

[RangerM]

You think Nader will run again? :poke:

{in my best Bugs Bunny voice} MMmmmm, could be. (I walked into that one )

ps Thank you all for your restraint not flaming me about the Versa.

 

Not sure why anyone would flame you for the Versa. It's far more important that you remain a producer in society, which not only benefits you, but America (and by extension Ford).

 

If economizing and buying a Versa allows you to further your business endeaver, then as you become more successful, so will your success be spread among others; and someday you may even buy another Ford.

 

For example, my company just spent about $40K on a new F350. If we hadn't been successful, that would not have been possible. Success begets success.

 

That said, are you familiar with Og Mandino?

Edited June 11, 2011 by RangerM