Unemployment Rate Clinton / Bush

[MonsterMark]

I stopped caring for the American manufacturing worker years ago when I hired 2 temps that tried to start a union and then got sued for sexual harrassment for things said between employees in the factory. Or maybe I stopped caring when I got sued for crabs because the employee said she contracted it off the toilet seat. I stopped caring everytime I had to deal with the EPA or OSHA or when I couldn't open our new factory because the men's and women's bathroom signs were 3 inches too high on the door therefore failing final inspection and were forced to wait an additional week for the inspector to return. I could go on for days on end why I stopped caring.

I stopped sourcing here because I was told I had to source elsewhere and come back with a lower price. So it was either work for free or lower my costs. If American consumers would prove there was demand for American products, retailers would carry them. Simple as that. They want to carry things that sell. If 2 frying pans are virtually identical and one is priced even marginally higher, the American consumer grabs the lower priced item. Usually that is NOT a Made in America product. That's the way it is.

 

[raVeneyes]

So it was either work for free or lower my costs.

So there *was* another option...you could have taken a pay cut and worked practically for free. Your whole managerial staff could have worked at reduced rates and thus saved your american manufacturing arm from certain doom, much as Japanese manufacturers did in the late 70s and 80s to provide extremely low cost goods with a similar salary range to the average worker...a mindset that proved to the Japanese working class that companies had their interests at heart and were willing to go the extra mile, so many of them when the even leaner times hit stayed on with their companies even though they weren't getting full rate.

Instead you decided that your bottom line was too important and that you were the most important employee of the company, regardless of how much money you'd earned in the past you needed to have more coming in...regardless of the fact that in your personal budget there was probably a lot more room to wiggle than in the budget of those beneath you...

The problem isn't retailers, the problem isn't workers, the problem is the heads of the corporations and the people who make decisions at the top. The leadership is what everyone follows. When times get hard and leaders start pointing fingers and searching around for other ways to get money without sacrificing their own bottom line, so will the workers and the retailers...

"The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence, regardless of their chosen field of endeavor."

- Vince Lombardi

 

[barry2952]

Brian,

I agree with your assessment completely but Raveneye sure makes you look like a hypocrite based on your earlier post. We should all buy American products but you sell imports. Go figure.

 

[fossten]

So there *was* another option...you could have taken a pay cut and worked practically for free. Your whole managerial staff could have worked at reduced rates and thus saved your american manufacturing arm from certain doom, much as Japanese manufacturers did in the late 70s and 80s to provide extremely low cost goods with a similar salary range to the average worker...a mindset that proved to the Japanese working class that companies had their interests at heart and were willing to go the extra mile, so many of them when the even leaner times hit stayed on with their companies even though they weren't getting full rate.

Instead you decided that your bottom line was too important and that you were the most important employee of the company, regardless of how much money you'd earned in the past you needed to have more coming in...regardless of the fact that in your personal budget there was probably a lot more room to wiggle than in the budget of those beneath you...

The problem isn't retailers, the problem isn't workers, the problem is the heads of the corporations and the people who make decisions at the top. The leadership is what everyone follows. When times get hard and leaders start pointing fingers and searching around for other ways to get money without sacrificing their own bottom line, so will the workers and the retailers...

"The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence, regardless of their chosen field of endeavor."

- Vince Lombardi

Careful, Raveneyes...don't go demonizing the desire to make a profit. That's un-American at the core.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to make money, get rich, pursue happiness. That's why people come to this country.

Don't forget that many corporations have a responsibility to the stockholders, and it's not just the CEO's paycheck at risk.

Personally, I can relate to Bryan's situation, because I have some personal experience with unions, and I can tell you that in this day and age, they are usually unnecessary and often harmful to a corporation and its employees.

 

[raVeneyes]

Careful, Raveneyes...don't go demonizing the desire to make a profit. That's un-American at the core.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to make money, get rich, pursue happiness. That's why people come to this country.

Don't forget that many corporations have a responsibility to the stockholders, and it's not just the CEO's paycheck at risk.

Personally, I can relate to Bryan's situation, because I have some personal experience with unions, and I can tell you that in this day and age, they are usually unnecessary and often harmful to a corporation and its employees.

No, I agree that there is nothing wrong with wanting to make money, but there is a short term outlook on making money (how much is my paycheck) and a long term outlook on making money (can I make this company viable for 100 years). Eventually every company if it can stay in business will make a profit and so will the stock holders and others...but being beholden to the stock holders isn't an excuse in my opinion...if you are beholden to stock holders then you have to SHOW them your plan will work...you have to sell it to them...and if they don't believe it then you are better off without them.

And no offense Brian, I am sure you made what at the time was the best decision for your company from your perspective, I'm just saying that using the example you're giving there are other perspectives and other ways of doing it.

 

[MonsterMark]

Brian,

I agree with your assessment completely but raVeneye sure makes you look like a hypocrite based on your earlier post. We should all buy American products but you sell imports. Go figure.

I am simply stating that the consumer is the problem, along with government regulation. Almost anything can now be made anywhere in the world. I can go on and on about sourcing but I won't waste everybody's time. The reality is the retailer and the consumer decides what products are on the shelves in America. Based on the purchasing habits of consumers, retailers carry those products. Most often than not it is the lowest priced item that is consumed.

I make every attempt to 'source' in the US. I led one industry in placing Made In USA on the package when no other manufacturer made a big deal out of it. We put a beautiful flag in the corner of the package. Sales increased. Then everybody that was manufacturing in the US followed suit.

I can 'source' item for 20-70% less overseas. I can buy tooling for 50% less overseas for the same chunk of metal with the same amount of cutting and grinding done to it. Why is that?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

raVeneyes has no idea what he is talking about. Obviously he has never called on a major US retailer. I do. That is what I do for a living. If a retailer wants and requires a lower price, you either, A, provide them the price, or B, go away.

raVeneyes has also probably never owned a business. I can tell that by his mindset. See, when you own a business, everything after ALL expenses is yours. You are asssuming all the risk with no guarantee of reward. One of my businesses had a big problem with consumables like toilet paper, pens and paper, aspirin, coffee, small boxes, you name it. I had to have a meeting with all the employees and diagram on a board Sales, Cost and Profits. I had to show them where MY money came from. I explained that everytime they took a roll of paper towel, they weren't stealing from the 'company', they were stealing from me, directly out of my pocket. Once they understood whose money they were actually stealing, the consumables declined dramatically. I even had more than a handful of people come up to me and apologize. Nobody got fired but it was just amazing how my employees and guys like RavenEyes go out and demonize employers. You Barry, of all people, should understand that.

These are beautiful passages from the mindset of a liberal. Notice the disdain for business. According to the left, business is only necessary to collect taxes from. Look at some of these...

"Instead you decided that your bottom line was too important and that you were the most important employee of the company, regardless of how much money you'd earned in the past you needed to have more coming in...regardless of the fact that in your personal budget there was probably a lot more room to wiggle than in the budget of those beneath you..."

Without a bottom line, there is no business. Business is not a game. Most companies do not function as Not-For-Profits. Liberals that form not-for-profits are the biggest hypocrites of them all. One thing my dad taught me about business. You can always work for free.

The problem isn't retailers, the problem isn't workers, the problem is the heads of the corporations and the people who make decisions at the top. The leadership is what everyone follows. When times get hard and leaders start pointing fingers and searching around for other ways to get money without sacrificing their own bottom line, so will the workers and the retailers...

Time to dismount your high horse. The engine of growth and employment in this country is 'small' business. Are you talking about 'small' business' or 'big business'? They function the same. They need to produce profits based on the needs of the people that own them.

One last thing. Just because you own a business doesn't mean you are entitled to make a profit. Do you realize that virtually every company in this country started out with only a couple of employees? Or did Bill Gates just one day open up a 500,000 sq ft manufacturing plant to make software?

 

[MonsterMark]

No, I agree that there is nothing wrong with wanting to make money, but there is a short term outlook on making money (how much is my paycheck) and a long term outlook on making money (can I make this company viable for 100 years). Eventually every company if it can stay in business will make a profit and so will the stock holders and others...but being beholden to the stock holders isn't an excuse in my opinion...if you are beholden to stock holders then you have to SHOW them your plan will work...you have to sell it to them...and if they don't believe it then you are better off without them.

hahaha. Please find me a few of these investors you are talking about. I want and NEED to meet them. Funny thing, in all my 20+ years in business, I have never found an investor willing to look past 5 years, much less one that might have to wait 100 years to see a return on their investment. Sorry, don't want to be cruel, but you are living in a dream world and Dorothy, this isn't Kansas anymore.

 

[raVeneyes]

I am simply stating that the consumer is the problem, along with government regulation.

And I'm simply disagreeing with that whole idea. You are only looking at it from your perspective, and your perspective though right for you, is not right for the greater view of the economy....that's what's wrong with the economy...people thinking about themselves first and not about the grander scheme of things.

Almost anything can now be made anywhere in the world. I can go on and on about sourcing but I won't waste everybody's time.

How is it a waste of time? If everyone has an incorrect view of outsourcing please by all means enlighten us...

The reality is the retailer and the consumer decides what products are on the shelves in America. Based on the purchasing habits of consumers, retailers carry those products. Most often than not it is the lowest priced item that is consumed.

The reality is that the supplier determines what is on the shelves of American markets. If one supplier supplies it's products at a cheaper rate, than another, then the retailer will sell the item at a lower price. If there is a lower price, then the consumer will buy any item that fits within their budget, so if they see an advantage to a higher priced item then they will buy it....just as you noted with your example of putting "Made in the USA" on packaging it caused sales to go up...because consumers saw an advantage to buying it...they saw an increased value to the item and most likely it was priced similarly to the items not made in the USA. The consumer has very little control over the price that the manufacturer charges the retailer though...

Similarly the retailer has very little control over how much to charge the consumer since they usually just charge the same markup on everything, or charge the MSRP... The only way they do have control is to say "Hey...guys...your product is priced too high...we can't sell any of your units. Please lower the cost or we just can't buy from you anymore"

The manufacturer is the only one who can set item pricing on the grander scale, and when they set the price too high, for whatever reason, the sales go down.

Ford realized this back in the early 1900s and made sure to pay his employees at a rate that they'd be able to afford buying the product they make. He has some wacky ideas, but the basic principal is true...and when manufacturers start charging more than the employee can afford to buy a product, the manufacturer goes out of business.

I make every attempt to 'source' in the US. I led one industry in placing Made In USA on the package when no other manufacturer made a big deal out of it. We put a beautiful flag in the corner of the package. Sales increased. Then everybody that was manufacturing in the US followed suit.

I can 'source' item for 20-70% less overseas. I can buy tooling for 50% less overseas for the same chunk of metal with the same amount of cutting and grinding done to it. Why is that?

Because many overseas manufacturers have the advantage of cheap labor due to cheap living costs in their home bases. Instead of seeing this as a disadvantage we should be taking advantage of it. Buying products from over-seas isn't the way we can take advantage of it though. Setting up our own manufacturing systems over-seas doesn't seem to work either. There is some other way, and I'm not the genius to figure it out...but there's something we can do

raVeneyes has no idea what he is talking about. Obviously he has never called on a major US retailer. I do. That is what I do for a living. If a retailer wants and requires a lower price, you either, A, provide them the price, or B, go away.

I have called on major US retailers...and I've also been part of the buying decision as a retailer myself. Look at what I said above. Retailers don't decide what you charge, they just tell you when they can't sell your product...you either provide the lower priced product they need in order to be able to sell, or you go away... The decision is all yours as a manufacturer how you come about that lower price. If that means not earning any money yourself, then that's what you need to do. If that means firing all your employees and going out of business that's equivalent to going away, and what's the point of that?

raVeneyes has also probably never owned a business. I can tell that by his mindset.

Wrong buck-o....just wrong

See, when you own a business, everything after ALL expenses is yours. You are asssuming all the risk with no guarantee of reward.

I know that...and that's what I said before...you need to take the risk before you can take the reward. Too many american business men think that at some point they will be able to stop taking risks and reap all the reward they've built up...but that's never true in business...you will constantly be taking more and more risk...and at times you will gain rewards, but if you're the head of a business your job is never done. If you expect to stay in business you can't stop taking the risk.

One of my businesses had a big problem with consumables like toilet paper, pens and paper, aspirin, coffee, small boxes, you name it. I had to have a meeting with all the employees and diagram on a board Sales, Cost and Profits. I had to show them where MY money came from. I explained that everytime they took a roll of paper towel, they weren't stealing from the 'company', they were stealing from me, directly out of my pocket. Once they understood whose money they were actually stealing, the consumables declined dramatically. I even had more than a handful of people come up to me and apologize. Nobody got fired but it was just amazing how my employees and guys like RavenEyes go out and demonize employers. You Barry, of all people, should understand that.

I'm not demonizing anyone...if you feel guilty it is your own conscience talking...

I do like this little story though...it's a great example of personalizing business to workers and workers then making the business part of their lives. Many workers go to work everyday and think of it as just a paycheck. They don't equate their daily activities with their economic role. However when the companies they work for show them the part they play, often workers pick up the ball and provide a great deal more value.

The example I offered earlier about Japanese manufacturing in the late 70s early 80s is another good example of this.

These are beautiful passages from the mindset of a liberal. Notice the disdain for business. According to the left, business is only necessary to collect taxes from. Look at some of these...

I don't have any disdain for business. I only have disdain for business people who think that the economy revolves around them, and don't realize that they are just the end product of an economic glut. The first thing to go in a tightening economy is the middle men because they are for the most part useless. If the middle men don't look at their business model and find ways to cut down the amount they leach from the economy, they simply darwin themselves out of it.

Without a bottom line, there is no business.

Wrong... Business will keep on trucking whether you personally are earning a paycheck or not. If you manufacture widgets and someone comes along and makes them cheaper, either you find a way to make them cheaper too, or you darwin yourself out. If making them cheaper means taking a pay cut, then you should look at your own over bloated pay check first...not at those of the people you pay to do all the actual work.

Business is not a game. Most companies do not function as Not-For-Profits. Liberals that form not-for-profits are the biggest hypocrites of them all.

Care to qualify that one?

One thing my dad taught me about business. You can always work for free.

Exactly...and if you're a business owner that goes doubly so...

Time to dismount your high horse. The engine of growth and employment in this country is 'small' business. Are you talking about 'small' business' or 'big business'? They function the same. They need to produce profits based on the needs of the people that own them.

You're right both small and big business are functionally the same, but you're wrong about that function. Businesses are an economic device that consolidates the skills and capitol of people interested in a specific product. Businesses are not functional because of the needs of the people that own them...their function is to bring people together. At times businesses are very successful at doing that, and the ones doing all the organizing are paid well...other times the business is organized poorly and that's when those doing the organizing should be paid less...the organizers are the owners, and if you don't see that then you are blind.

One last thing. Just because you own a business doesn't mean you are entitled to make a profit. Do you realize that virtually every company in this country started out with only a couple of employees? Or did Bill Gates just one day open up a 500,000 sq ft manufacturing plant to make software?

EXACTLY! Just because you own a business does not mean you are entitled to a profit....

 

[fossten]

but being beholden to the stock holders isn't an excuse in my opinion...if you are beholden to stock holders then you have to SHOW them your plan will work...you have to sell it to them...and if they don't believe it then you are better off without them.

"DEE DEE DEE"

You just made an uninformed statement. Obviously you know very little about the stock market.

"Better off without stockholders???"

If they don't believe it then THEY SELL THEIR SHARES.

How does that work? How are you better off when your stock price goes down because your board of directors didn't keep the dividends coming, so the stockholders traded for more profitable stock? Hmmmm? Then your profits plummet as the market flees your stock, hurting revenues and causing you to have to downsize, laying off employees by the thousands and closing plants.

How is that "better off?"

Let's see who loses here:

Stockholders lose.
CEO gets fired, most likely.
Employees lose.
Government loses taxable revenue.

Hmm. You might want to think this through a little more.

 

[raVeneyes]

"DEE DEE DEE"

You just made an uninformed statement. Obviously you know very little about the stock market.

"Better off without stockholders???"

If they don't believe it then THEY SELL THEIR SHARES.

How does that work? How are you better off when your stock price goes down because your board of directors didn't keep the dividends coming, so the stockholders traded for more profitable stock? Hmmmm? Then your profits plummet as the market flees your stock, hurting revenues and causing you to have to downsize, laying off employees by the thousands and closing plants.

How is that "better off?"

Let's see who loses here:

Stockholders lose.
CEO gets fired, most likely.
Employees lose.
Government loses taxable revenue.

Hmm. You might want to think this through a little more.

When you sell stock in your company the hope is that like minded people will invest in it. If you're unable to sell your idea of the future of your company to the investors, then you are better off not having them investing in your company because they will be a negative influence on board meetings.

I'm not talking about the small investors, single shares and the like. I'm talking about large investors who influence your business plan and have a say in how you run the company.

What you're talking about is the effects of publicly traded stock and small investors...different subject entirely.