Cheap chinese made, maybe not anymore.

[greg lindsey]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Compan...5.html?x=0just read this, thought i would share it. sorry I guess the link didnt work.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Compan...67795.html?x=0

[Greg Peterson]

Don't see this as bad news.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I will remind everyone that this thread will be watched closely and politics...yes international politics are not allowed per the TOSs.

[Montgomery Scott]

Anyone with half a brain saw this as a historical inevitability. The endless cycle of companies moving to the cheapest labor countries until the cost of labor increases too much and on to the next country.

Eventually economies will balance and it will be better for everyone, in theory at least.

[Greg Peterson]

Sounds like the Chinese communist regime will be tested. Let the workers strike or force them back to the factory.

I guess the US isn't the only place where corporations have to deal with those pesky, greedy workers.

[greg lindsey]

I didnt put this up as a polotical statement, I was thinking more on the lines of material cost for most of us, in the awards and engraving side have a increases, I tought this may shed a little light on to what was happening. If wanting to bring jobs back to the USA was a political statement... then God Bless America and put us back to work.

[Brian Elfert]

There are still plenty of other countries to be exploited for cheap labor. Manufacturing will just move to other countries if China gets too expensive.

What I don't understand is how a manufacturer can build a plant costing millions, run it for 5 to 10 years, close it, and build another plant in some other country.

[Rod Sheridan]

There are still plenty of other countries to be exploited for cheap labor. Manufacturing will just move to other countries if China gets too expensive.

What I don't understand is how a manufacturer can build a plant costing millions, run it for 5 to 10 years, close it, and build another plant in some other country.

That's not hard to understand Brian, the millions the corporation spends to build the plant are a small sum compared to the hundreds of millions they save by having the plant in that location.

If markets change, they build a new plant in a new area to once again spend millions, and save hundreds of millions.

As individuals we tend to have a misplaced regard for buildings. A corporation regards a building as a line item on a spreadsheet, nothing more.

Regards, Rod.

[David Weaver]

A buddy of mine who sources heavy castings (i mean, like stuff that's 25 tons, not stuff that's 250 pounds), etc, said that they are seeing a shift to cheaper places than china for the castings. The article mentions vietnam, and that's what he mentioned - they're going to vietnam for more stuff where cheap is important and quality isn't quite so much so.

[Curt Harms]

but part of the reason Japan, Germany and countries whose infrastructure was destroyed during WWII have prospered is they have modern plants and infrastructure. The U.S. has been using a lot of plants etc. built for the war effort and have become badly outmoded. They've been abandoned as jobs moved elsewhere. Being abandoned as obsolete is far preferable to being bombed IMO.

The question becomes will there be investment to rebuild the U.S. industrial base? There almost certainly won't be hordes of assembly line workers. There probably will be hordes of automation and robots. I was reading a web site regarding steel production and labor hrs. per ton of steel has dropped 90% since WWII. To have the same number of steel production jobs we'd have to produce 10 times as much steel. That obviously ain't happening. In 1950 you'd have lines of skilled people standing at mostly manual machine tools. Today you have 1 or 2 people tending CNC machines doing the same job. The only constant is change.

[Butch Edwards]

it' will definately affect prices shown on newer tools, should that happen(higher wages)..like previous statedm, it was inevitable, as humans are humans, and when they see how much more $$ they can make(because other industrial countries pay a higher wage) they're on it like a Hobo on a pork chop....

get yer gear now,fellows...

[Michael Weber]

it' will definately affect prices shown on newer tools, should that happen(higher wages)..like previous statedm, it was inevitable, as humans are humans, and when they see how much more $$ they can make(because other industrial countries pay a higher wage) they're on it like a Hobo on a pork chop....

get yer gear now,fellows...

Hobo on a pork chop thanks for making me smile

[Pat Germain]

A corporation regards a building as a line item on a spreadsheet, nothing more.

Right you are, Rod. Here in Colorado Springs, Intel built a GINORMOUS campus in 2001. They completely abandonded it a couple of years ago and moved the entire operation to (drumroll...) Vietnam!

Last I heard, my local city government was looking at taking over the campus. I think they'd have a hard time filling it. Like I said, it's GINORMOUS!

Everyone wonders why so many strip malls in town sit empty while corporations build new strip malls. It's a minor expense which they view as necessary to be in the right part of town with the right floor plan at the right time.

[Matt Meiser]

What I don't understand is how a manufacturer can build a plant costing millions, run it for 5 to 10 years, close it, and build another plant in some other country.

They don't even have to build it in another country. Its commonplace for auto suppliers to build a single-product plant near an auto assembly plant, run it for a few years while they have a contract to produce that part, and then if they don't get the contract at the next renewal they close it.

And before anyone blames the American automakers for this practice it happens with the Japanese manufacturers too.

[Matt Meiser]

Everyone wonders why so many strip malls in town sit empty while corporations build new strip malls. It's a minor expense which they view as necessary to be in the right part of town with the right floor plan at the right time.

My theory on that: if its a greenfield site is to start requiring the owner put up a bond covering the cost of remediating the site to greenfield if the property goes vacant for more than x months within y years. So say Big-Box-Mart builds a store so you make them put up a bond guranteeing its use for 20 years. If 5 years later they build a Super-Big-Box-Mart across the street and the old Big-Box-Mart isn't repurposed within say 12 months, they have to tear it down and remediate the site. Leave it up to the marketplace to decide if the new tenant/owner has to put up the bond for the remaining 15 years or if Big Box Co has to keep it in place for the full 20 years. Then to encourage re-use or redevelopment of >20 year old properties, waive the requirement for re-use and maybe only require 50% for brownfield redevelopment.