Xref: utzoo sci.electronics:2713 comp.arch:4273
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!purdue!gatech!gitpyr!ccasttd
From: ccasttd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Thomas M. Dixon Jr.)
Newsgroups: sci.electronics,comp.arch
Subject: Re: GATT declares U.S. - Japan chip pact illegal
Message-ID: <5333@pyr.gatech.EDU>
Date: 6 Apr 88 20:06:59 GMT
References: <2441@unicus.UUCP> <1259@hubcap.UUCP> <228@dkstar.UUCP>
Reply-To: ccasttd@pyr.UUCP (Thomas M. Dixon Jr.)
Distribution: na
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
Lines: 96
Summary: Is the US ready to part of the world economy?

In article <228@dkstar.UUCP> jdb@dkstar.UUCP (Jon Bennett {WB8UXA}) writes:
>>...  Hmmm, we seem to be running out of industries.  Oh well, as
>>long as we consumers are getting cheap products, no problem.  Ooops, we seem
>>to be losing jobs and can't afford these products anymore, how'd that happen?
>
>	Yes, let's talk about how that happened.  
>
>	Why is it that with all of our fantastic technology, we cannot
>	compete with the Koread textile industry.... Cost of goods.
>	Japanese / Korean cars... Cost of goods.
>	Asian computers... Cost of goods.
>	Why do the goods cost so much?  You said it... Labor. (Taxes as well)

How about environmental protection?  In the US, to set up and maintain a   
manufacturing plant cost significantly more then it does in Japan or Korea.
Why?  Because here in America, we give a sh*t about the environment and the
future of this planet.  This is large reason even American based companies
are moving their production facilities overseas.

>	but mostly labor.  Don't mention the fact that because of the
>	falling value of the dollar in the world market the Japanese car
>	workers make MORE $$$ on a normalized scale than the American worker
>	but look at the volume of work DONE.
>
>	I submit that: Two Car plants, one American, and the other is
>	Japanese/Korean/...  Same number of workers, same price per
>	worker.  At the days end, the Forign plant will have produced 
>	more and better cars.  Therefor, the cost of the labor for each
>	car PRODUCED is more.  The price is only a consequence.  The problem
>	is productivity.  

Now here is a point that I must agree with you on.  American workers must
learn to work harder and better for less if they want jobs at all.  But why  
should they work long hours of precise labor just to make about as much as
they would make from the Government if they were on unemployment?
I submit that in the US, we have a much greater view of what minimum standard
any person should have to endure before they qualify for aid from the welfare
state.

>
>	Now, let's talk about the "Buy American" fad.  What is this?
>	Because of the fact that I cannot afford to buy a poor car for
>	a lot of money, when I go car shopping I look for the best car
>	for the least mony.  Regardless(sp) of its country of
>	origen.  (Well this is mostly true.  After owning a 74 and a
>	78 Ford, I wont be going back there to get d*cked again.  And 

I have been driving an 83 escort since 83 and have little or no trouble with
it.  I know for the Ford of the seventies (the Fix Or Repair Daily/Found on
Road Dead days) but if you look, due to the prospect of having to face foriegn
industry, Ford, GM and many other American producers have raised their quality
of goods.  Haven't you heard of the new emphasis on quality sweeping through
American industry today?

>	with the way that GM dropped the Fiero, I know that no matter 
>	what I buy from GM, eather the 4cly will creat engine fires
>	(Fiero) or the engine will self-destruct (every new V6 I have
>	know anyone to own) or the car will be abandoned by Gm, no I
>	wont be going there eather.  And Chrysler should not be in
>	business, after all what happened to the "FREE" market where
>	the Govt. does not intervine?)  Anyway, I cannot afford to
>	pay a lot of money so an overpaid auto-worker can get his
>	lot of money. 
>	Is your blood pressure going up?
>
>	The bottom line is that the US manufacturers are facing a world
>	market now, where other countries have the technology to compete
>	with us and we have an ARTIFICALLY high standard of living.  The
>	cost of us producing something is not in line with its VALUE on
>	the world market.  
>

Do we really want to be a part of the "World Economy"?  I would like to think
of that.  If the US becomes part of the world economy, we all become members.
That means that after everything equalizes out, the average salary in the US
will be a lot closer to the world average.  And that ain't much, I'll tell you.

To survive in the world economy, we will need to:
     1. Take major cuts in our standard of living and opinion of life.
        Are you ready to house your entire living family?  I'll not.

     2. Give up the restatints which cost our industry so much.  Now personally
        I like to be able to drink water and not have to worry about purifying
        the air I breathe.  

     3. Give up welfare.  We can't afford it.  When you are making 10K a year
        instead of 40-50, you won't be so relaxed about the jones next door
        living off your taxes.  I don't think most of us are ready to coldly
        watch people die in the street because they can't get a job and 
        welfare is broke.

So before you proudly say, "Its time to face the world economy"  think about
what it'll be like riding a bike to work because you can't afford gas.

Tom Dixon
A brutal realist.