Will people pay for made in U.S.A.

[pscot]

Not so much:

As textile and apparel companies begin shifting more production to the United States, taking advantage of automation and other cost savings, a hard economic truth is emerging: Production of cheaper goods, for which consumers are looking for low prices, is by and large staying overseas, where manufacturers can find less expensive manufacturing. Even when consumers are confronted with the human costs of cheap production, like the factory collapse in Bangladesh that killed more than 1,000 garment workers, garment makers say, they show little inclination to pay more for clothes.

Essentially, to buy American is to pay a premium — a reality that is acting as a drag on the nascent manufacturing resurgence in textiles and apparel, while also forcing United States companies to focus their American-made efforts on higher-quality goods that fetch higher prices.

Last year, Dillard’s, the midtier department store, wanted to promote American-made clothing, according to Fessler USA, an apparel maker in eastern Pennsylvania. It turned to Fessler to produce tops. Theirs was a brief relationship. “Almost overnight, they called and said, ‘Made in America just doesn’t sell better than made in Asia, and you can’t beat the price,’ ” said Walter Meck, Fessler’s chief executive and principal owner.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/01/business/that-made-in-usa-premium.html?hp

[NYC_SKP]

1. Dillards and Fessler do not a case make. Talk about selective examples.

to the NY Times, I suppose it's mainstream but nobody shops at Dillards where I live, they're just overpriced wannabe something better than Macy's.

[xfundy]

2. In other words, the communists, with slave labor, win.

[LiberalArkie]

3. Apple is building the Mac Pro in Texas( I believe) and Foxconn is building an iPhone

plant in Pennsylvania.

[Flatpicker]

4. It's a nasty cycle

People want value for their limited funds so they shop where they can stretch their dollar.

If you raise the minimum wage, it may allow for American made goods to be viable.

[TexasProgresive]

5. When the majority of products were manufactured here

people had good paying jobs and so they could afford to pay a higher price for quality goods.

[Curmudgeoness]

6. That is the crux of the problem.

It is a catch 22. You stop manufacturing here, we lose the good paying jobs. With the loss of good paying jobs, people are forced to buy the lower priced merchandise.

I am not sure that we can ever go back now, though, since so few people seem to care about the job crisis here in the USA. When I look at the numbers of people who shop at Walmart, I figure that we don't have a chance to reverse the trend.

[BlueJazz]

7. Shop at WalMart....You'll be working there.

[pscot]

8. Conversely, if you work at Walmart

or earn equivalent wages you almost have to buy Chinese or Bangladeshi goods.

[seabeckind]

9. Loaded question and one that has many complications

The textile industry in the US is almost non-existent. There is no raw materials supply to speak of, no distribution system, no high-efficiency factories ready to take on the task. Ergo the cost is going to be much higher.

The question should be: Can the US produce a competitive product to the product currently produced in the 3rd world?

Answer: Not at this time. But...there is no way anyone could ever convince me that the elimination of the cost of transportation from the other side of the world would not be offset by our higher labor cost.

Next look at the subsidiary benefits of having American workers at a job and paying taxes versus out of work and not paying taxes.

This whole business is a bullshit argument made by those whose profit is dependent upon outsourcing. They don't give a dam about the employment of Americans and they don't give a dam about global macroeconomics. All they care about is their bottom line this month.

Level the field. Give us a true choice. Buyers in the retail market do not have true choice. They are given a catalog that has ONLY foreign suppliers.

Invest in our textile industry, our factories, and I can dam well guarantee you that we are competitive.

[msongs]

10. create a textile industry built on domestic hemp. no imports of it allowed nt

[seabeckind]

14. "no raw materials supply to speak of"

I realized I need a little clarification here.

It is true we have a raw materials supply for textiles in the US, as I point out below. The difficulty is that the materials flow is built upon exports. Our own industry has to bid against our own corporation to obtain that raw material.

It's not a level playing field. Rather than a policy that says that first right of refusal goes to a domestic American industry it is controlled by the corporation.

And oftentimes aided and abetted by those inserted by the corporation into our own political system. States competing with states to provide the cheapest labor, facilities, and raw materials to an entity that serves a different master with different goals than the welfare of our people.

Way past time to decide who really runs the place.

[aka-chmeee]

11. Actually, give retailers a chance and they will have you paying Made in USA prices for Made in China

products.

See: Sears and Craftsman tools which are now largely made in China.

[seabeckind]

12. Raw material exports

The US is ranked 3rd in the production of cotton in the world.

The US is the top exporter of cotton, primarily to Honduras.

So this question of whether Americans would buy an American textile gets complicated when considering the materials flow. We use our resources to produce a product that we then ship somewhere else where they turn it into a finished product and then ship it back.

That means the ONLY Americans benefitting from this process is the cotton conglomerate (can't call him a farmer cause that's another individual industry that we don't have any more), the transportation conglomerate (driven by an industry that doesn't provide much in the way of labor benefits), and the retailer (another group that squeezes labor).

Add in the tax "incentives" and corporate welfare and we, the people, are being squeezed a number of different ways. And I won't even mention the traders and wall street guys who gamble on it (wait, I just did) cause it just p'es me off even more.

So the answer to the question remains: Not at this time. Not until we move the emphasis away from the corporate arena and into the individual's arena. Not until we break this propaganda network that pretends that it's to our benefit to be given a break by the corporations.

[seabeckind]

13. Afterthought.

Much of the way our free market operates today is a result of the divestiture (please excuse my terminology because I'm not an econ nerd, just an observer) of the various sub-productions within corporations and the attempt to turn every core operation of the business into nothing more than a spreadsheet operation in its corporate headquarters and no operational connection to the business.

Kinda like when GM gets rid of its part subsidiaries and makes them compete with some other entity for its core product.

The result of the MBA mentality from the 80's.

Embodied in the idea presented long ago by an economic advisor to the pres who said that in running a business there's no difference between potato chips and computer chips.

All numbers. Bonehead math numbers.

Of course there are ramifications...primarily in the loss of quality of products. See Boeing.