Professor Mark J. Perry's Blog for Economics and Finance
Posted 8:53 AM Post Link
Links to this post
Hmmm, as usual if one looks into why companies move to offshore facilities its usually due to federal government interference in the marketplace...Most U.S. candymakers must buy their sugar from domestic growers. And through government price supports and import quotas, U.S. sugar costs twice as much as it does on the world market...
Which periodical will end up reporting on Newsweek going out of business rather than being printed overseas? They have about three readers left on a good day with the wind behind them.
Could another famous USA brand start leaving the country?From the Chicago Breaking Business News: Caterpillar: Health care bill would cost it $100M'Caterpillar, the world's largest construction machinery manufacturer by sales, said it's particularly opposed to provisions in the bill that would expand Medicare taxes and mandate insurance coverage. The legislation would require nearly all companies to provide health insurance for their employees or face large fines. The Peoria-based company said these provisions would increase its insurance costs by at least 20 percent, or more than $100 million, just in the first year of the health-care overhaul program.'...
A million years ago, OK 1977, I'm 16 and live in Montreal, the Government has just changed to the Parti Quebecois -- seeking independence from Quebec has taken power. On day, we are playing a game of b-ball, after the game I take his t-shirt by mistake, and note that the label says "Made in Ontario" -- the enemy! The punch line: The t-shirt's has a big Parti Quebecois logo on the back and in the front says: Vive le Quebec Libre (Free Quebec from Canada). My friend had bought the t-shirt from the party, they sourced the cheapest available cotton t-shirt from Ontario (you see irony in political parties was not borne yesterday).Brands may be iconic, but brands say nothing about the product you are buying today, just about the history of that product.Finally, my friend never again wore that t-shirt, but 30 years on its still good for a joke on Saturday night.
The banning the importation of non-American made flags really bothers me. The government banning my consumption of a good that does not negatively harm others is a very troubling premise. It would be banned only because the Senator doesn't feel that it is "right" for me to consume that good.
The banning the importation of non-American made flags really bothers me.No problem with that.Hmmm, as usual if one looks into why companies move to offshore facilities its usually due to federal government interference in the marketplace...Could another famous USA brand start leaving the country?You forget that the US can pursue anyone, anywhere. Perhaps they should start doing so.
@ Sethstorm -Why does the government have a right to restrict my ability to purchase a good that does not negatively affect others? I understand the government restricting me from purchasing weapons grade plutonium - I don't understand the government restricting me from buying a piece of cloth.
Yet another FACTLESS statement by none other than the sethstorm: "You forget that the US can pursue anyone, anywhere. Perhaps they should start doing so"...Yeah, I noticed how Halliburton was quaking in their collective boots...
juandos,Do I understand you correctly? US firms are moving to from the USA to China in order to have less interference from government. US firms transplanted to China are free to buy raw materials from anywhere they like with less government interference than if they had stayed in the USA.If I understand you correctly, one of us does not understand China. I am voting for you.
GW SouthWhy does the government have a right to restrict my ability to purchase a good that does not negatively affect others?United States Constitution Article I Section 8 The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;To borrow money on the credit of the United States;To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
@ Anonymous Precisely. The constitution says that the government can impose tariffs, duties, etc. The constitution does not say that the government can ban me from purchasing an article from another country. The government can raise tariffs to %10000 percent, but nowhere does the constitution say that the government can prohibit me from buying the good, no matter what the cost.
"If I understand you correctly, one of us does not understand China. I am voting for you"...Well we both know that China is hardly a paradise, right anon @ 3/19/2010 11:48 PM?Still consider the economic atmosphere in this country and what its degenerating to...Two examples that are small ones but indicative the direction we as a country have let things slide...IRS visits Sacramento carwash in pursuit of 4 centsBarton, Boehner Proposal to Halt EPA Ruling on CO2Now I ask you, is this any way to run a circus?
Factory relocation, job loss and know-how transfer is a global problem. All over the world factories are moved to "low-cost" countries. There is a site - http://www.productfrom.com - where you can check country of origin of different products (electronics, computers, audio, TV, other). If you compare 10 items - more than 5 of them are made in China, and other 3 of them are manufactured in China's neighbourhood.
This comment has been removed by the author.
US firms are moving to from the USA to China in order to have less interference from being called to account for their actions.Better to expand such accountability to remove regulatory arbitrage.Still consider the economic atmosphere in this country and what its degenerating to...Perhaps if offshoring wasn't used as a way to get around US workers, then you might have a point. It circumvents the normal market forces, favoring those beyond the US's control (or beyond the control of US citizens).If you want to defend the use of less-than-free countries that dump junk and currency, fine. Just don't call yourself a US citizen or a citizen of any First World nation.
GW SouthThe power to “regulate commerce with foreign nations” means congress can prohibit you from buying the good. President Reagan,on October 29, 1987, issued Executive Order 12613 imposing an import embargo on Iranian-origin goods and services.
Post a Comment
Create a Link
Dr. Mark J. Perry is a professor of economics and finance in the School of Management at the Flint campus of the University of Michigan.
Perry holds two graduate degrees in economics (M.A. and Ph.D.) from George Mason University near Washington, D.C. In addition, he holds an MBA degree in finance from the Curtis L. Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. In addition to a faculty appointment at the University of Michigan-Flint, Perry is also a visiting scholar at The American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.
View my complete profile