craig@unicus.UUCP (Craig D. Hubley) (03/28/88)
The price-fixing deal that the U.S. forced on Japan to keep its own chip
manufacturers (TI and Micron) in business, that has forced chip prices to
four times their level (here, at least!) of ten months ago, has been
declared illegal by GATT, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs,
the international body governing world trade. The gist of it is that
the pact has forced chip prices up, and supplies down, in Europe and Canada.
The complete text of the Financial Times article has been posted to comp.misc
I apologize for the massive cross-posting (usually the mark of a flame :-)),
but microcomputer and electronics consumers should be aware of this, the
last paragraph of the article:
``According to trade diplomats in Geneva, the U.S. is pressing Japan not to
abandon the semiconductor deal. It has suggested that by abandoning one
or two of its elements the Japanese could change their monitoring from the
coherent system the GATT panel found objectionable.''
If you work in computer or perhipheral manufacturing, software, retailing, or
are just a consumer, you should probably write your congresscritter right now
in support of the ruling. This pact is crippling all of these industries, as
I'm sure I don't have to tell anyone. In an election year, they may prove
to be subject to pressure, especially *presidential candidates*. Just how
many high-tech votes are there ? Not to mention, with code-cracking hackers
and electronic photo-retouching and other high-tech sabotage, would you want
them voting against you ? Emphasize your campaign computer cracking skills.
1/2 :-)
Save the whales. Scrap the pact. Yay GATT.
Craig Hubley, Unicus Corporation, Toronto, Ont.
craig@Unicus.COM (Internet)
{uunet!mnetor, utzoo!utcsri}!unicus!craig (dumb uucp)
mnetor!unicus!craig@uunet.uu.net (dumb arpa)rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) (03/31/88)
In article <2441@unicus.UUCP>, craig@unicus.UUCP (Craig D. Hubley) writes: > > The price-fixing deal that the U.S. forced on Japan to keep its own chip > manufacturers (TI and Micron) in business, that has forced chip prices to > four times their level (here, at least!) of ten months ago, has been > declared illegal by GATT, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, > the international body governing world trade. The gist of it is that > the pact has forced chip prices up, and supplies down, in Europe and Canada. > > If you work in computer or perhipheral manufacturing, software, retailing, or > are just a consumer, you should probably write your congresscritter right now > in support of the ruling. This pact is crippling all of these industries, as > I'm sure I don't have to tell anyone. In an election year, they may prove > to be subject to pressure, especially *presidential candidates*. Just how > many high-tech votes are there ? Not to mention, with code-cracking hackers > and electronic photo-retouching and other high-tech sabotage, would you want > them voting against you ? Emphasize your campaign computer cracking skills. > 1/2 :-) > > Save the whales. Scrap the pact. Yay GATT. > > Craig Hubley, Unicus Corporation, Toronto, Ont. Ok, I'm not an economic or political expert (or an expert of any kind :-) but I think that even if this pact isn't the best solution, something has to be done to protect US manufacturers, and I don't think that just scrapping the pact is a solution. Japanese and other asian chip producers can currently produce chips at prices significantly less than US producers, and US producers are having a hard time competing. This is just great for consumers and computer and perhipheral manufacturers, but if it keeps up, US chip producers will have to move to something else or fold. Many people I know say that the Japanese are obviously doing something right, and if US producers can't do the same then they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some would say that they should get out. Ok, so we lose the IC industry, big deal. In the southeast the textile industry (which is the south's major industry) is taking a beating from Korean imports. If they can't compete, let them fold. Everyone knows that the US car manufactures are having touble competing with Japanese imports and therefore make poorer quality cars. Well, if they can't hack it, they should get out too. Asian computer and perhipheral manufacturers are already beginning to overtake the market. Bye bye US manufacturers. 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? Also I seem to remember reading in NewsWeek that last spring, Japanese companies were accused of dumping chips on the US market at prices lower than it cost the companies to produce them. The only reason that I've ever heard for this kind of illegal activity is to eliminate compitition. I've also read that the Japanese economy and infrastructure is stacked highly against imports, and that US imports that should be cheaper than Japanese products end up being much more expensive by the time they get to the comsumer. I sorry I got up on my soapbox, but you should be grateful I didn't get into my speech on taxes. Rich Champeaux Clemson University
sarrel@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Marc Sarrel) (03/31/88)
[Well stated arguments concerning foriegn trade deleted] While I agree with you that the Asian countries have a cheaper labor force and that their economies are sometimes stacked against imports (especially Japan's), I cannot agree that that is the whole problem. Ask not what they are doing that is underhanded, as what we are doing that is wrong (so that we can correct it). I generally do not favor protectionist policies. Take the automobile industry as an example. In the begining, the Japanese gained a foothold because their cars were cheaper than American built ones. Then, we fell further behind during the energy crisis because our cars were less fuel efficient. Over the years, Japanese cars have become more luxurious, until now they rival some American Cars in that regard. However, with the rising Yen, those cars have become more expensive. But, because of the image that the American car buyer has of Japanese quality, Japanese cars still sell well. (However, I think this is changing.) Basically, there are two differences between "us" and "them" that are important here. First, the Japanese seem to be more responsive to changes in the market, and they seem to be able to change quicker. This is not a function of worker's salaries. Second, and more important, the Japanese as a society seem more willing to support the long-term technological research that is needed to make products in a more efficient manner (or at all, in some cases such as VCRs). (You should watch a tape of the NOVA that was on last night about superconductors, they made some good points about this.) We Americans seem to do better at inventing new things, but the Japanese are better at spending the time needed to develop these ideas into marketable products. Again, this has nothing to do with worker's salaries. I could go on about the problem of the Japanese owning businesses in this country. There is also the problem of worker education (or lack thereof). These are problems that need to be addressed, but they are peripheral to this discussion. It all boils down to this: In order that both societies should prosper, we need to become more like the Japanese and the Japanese need to become more like us. We need to fund that long-term development research, make sure that our work force is better educated (to keep up with changing technology in the workplace). And, American consumers have to change their attitude about foriegn products. (A little attitude change is better than a lot of trade legislation.) (Presumably a change is attitude will bring about a change is behaviour. ie: we'll buy more domestic goods.) American companies overseas should know more about those markets. Trying to sell the Japanese a product that sells well in this country without modification is often a fatal mistake. The Japanese, on the other hand, should change their behaviour about imports. They _should_ open up their markets to foriengers. (On the other hand, American companies should learn about the sometimes baffling Japanese system of business dealings, after all, they had to learn ours to be a success here.) The bottom line is that pointing the finger at Japan and crying foul is incorrect, useless and possibly fatal. 'nuff said -- Marc Sarrel The Ohio State University 611 Harely Dr #1 Department of Computer and Information Science Columbus, OH 43202-1835 sarrel@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Disclaimer: Hey, what do I know? I'm only a grad student.
esf00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Elliott S. Frank) (03/31/88)
In article <1259@hubcap.UUCP> rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) writes: >In article <2441@unicus.UUCP>, craig@unicus.UUCP (Craig D. Hubley) writes: >> >> The price-fixing deal that the U.S. forced on Japan to keep its own chip >> manufacturers (TI and Micron) in business, that has forced chip prices to >> four times their level (here, at least!) of ten months ago, has been >> declared illegal by GATT, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, >> the international body governing world trade. The gist of it is that >> the pact has forced chip prices up, and supplies down, in Europe and Canada. > Japanese and other asian chip producers can currently produce chips at >prices significantly less than US producers, and US producers are having a >hard time competing. ... In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian >countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US >producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some >would say that they should get out. > > Also I seem to remember reading in NewsWeek that last spring, Japanese >companies were accused of dumping chips on the US market at prices lower >than it cost the companies to produce them. You seem to have slept through Economics 101, unlike the Japanese chip manufacturers. One, the labor content in manufacturing a chip is very close to zero. Two, the development costs to produce a chip are astronomical (ask Intel how many buildings full of engineers it takes to produce something as successful as the '386!). Three, the cost of a new chip line is now > $100 million, reducing the ease of entry. Classical oligopoly theory says that you should price at your *variable* cost of production. (Silicon, chemicals, and electricity!) This will give you maximum market share. THEN you can recover your sunk costs. The Japanese just did what we told them to do in school. If you don't like the results, do something about the economics. >>>Followups have been directed to a more appropriate forum. -- Elliott Frank ...!{hplabs,ames,sun}!amdahl!esf00 (408) 746-6384 or ....!{bnrmtv,drivax,hoptoad}!amdahl!esf00 [the above opinions are strictly mine, if anyone's.] [the above signature may or may not be repeated, depending upon some inscrutable property of the mailer-of-the-week.]
wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu (Thomas Wolf) (03/31/88)
In article <1259@hubcap.UUCP> rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) writes: >[deleted text] >obviously doing something right, and if US producers can't do the same then >they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian >countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US >producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some >would say that they should get out. Ok, so we lose the IC industry, big deal. >In the southeast the textile industry (which is the south's major >industry) is taking a beating from Korean imports. If they can't compete, >let them fold. Everyone knows that the US car manufactures are having touble >competing with Japanese imports and therefore make poorer quality cars. Well, >if they can't hack it, they should get out too. Asian computer and perhipheral >manufacturers are already beginning to overtake the market. Bye bye US >manufacturers. 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? That's just it. American companies which cannot compete in the world markets SHOULD go out of business. In the short term, it may seem that we're getting the "raw" end of the deal, but in the long term (given a free-market) it will all even out -- after all, we're buying these Japanese/Korean/Taiwaneese goods with American dollars and this paper is only as good as the country that backs it. If this country became as poor as you seem to predict (and those nations would stand by and do nothing), they would end up holding worthless currency. In addition, as the standard of living in those Importing nations rises, so will the demand for higher salaries. Those same nations will end up in the same boat as the U.S. -- trying to compete with nations that can manufacture goods cheaper. I too am no expert on economic affairs, but I can see no good coming from ANY governmental interference with this Free Enterprise System. One need only look into the recent past to see that governmental intervention did more damage than good. Of course, all the above are my own opinions/ramblings on the subject and may or may not resemble coherent thought :-) Tom Wolf ARPA (I think): tw@cscosl.ncsu.edu or wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu
mash@mips.COM (John Mashey) (03/31/88)
In article <9252@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> sarrel@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Marc Sarrel) writes: >.... Trying to sell the Japanese >a product that sells well in this country without modification is often >a fatal mistake.... >The bottom line is that pointing the finger at Japan and crying foul is >incorrect, useless and possibly fatal. As some book on this topic said: The people who tell you it's impossible to sell in Japan: a) Are threatened here b) Tried it there an failed [sometimes due to the protectionism, and sometimes not understanding the market there]. c) Are doing good business in Japan, and have no particular reason to wish for more competition there. -- -john mashey DISCLAIMER: <generic disclaimer, I speak for me only, etc> UUCP: {ames,decwrl,prls,pyramid}!mips!mash OR mash@mips.com DDD: 408-991-0253 or 408-720-1700, x253 USPS: MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086
dbjag@io.UUCP (David Benjamin) (03/31/88)
NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNNNNN OO OO !!! NNNNNN OO OO !!! NNNNNN OO OO !!! NN NNN OO OO !!! NN NNN OO OO !!! NN NNN OO OO !!! NN NNN OO OO NN NNN OO OO NN NNN OO OO NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!! DO NOT, I REPEAT, DO NOT CONTINUE THIS CROSSPOSTING POLITICAL EXCHANGE!!!! ^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^ Its an open ended issue subject to many passionate responses. I DON'T WANT TO WADE THROUGH IT!!!! DON'T EVEN START!!! MOVE IT TO /dev/null!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!! -- ------------------------------------------------------------ -- Dave Benjamin -- ..!mit-eddie!ileaf!dbjag -- Interleaf -- ------------------------------------------------------------
seorcutt@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Sam (not Samantha) Orcutt) (04/01/88)
In article <1641@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>, wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu (Thomas Wolf) writes: > That's just it. American companies which cannot compete in the world markets > SHOULD go out of business. In the short term, it may seem that we're getting > the "raw" end of the deal, but in the long term (given a free-market) it will ^^^^^^^^^^^ > [deleted text] > I too am no expert on economic affairs, but I can see no good coming from > ANY governmental interference with this Free Enterprise System. One need ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There is a basic assumption made in this response that I think is invalid. Namely, that this is a free market. My understanding is that this is about as far from the truth as possible. Consider the following basic scenario: 1. The Japanese government selects some new industry that they want to develop. 2. A number of start-up companies are established within Japan. In order to allow these companies to get a foot-hold in the market place they are given massive economic support from the government in the forms of tax incentives, import tariffs, price support, etc. 3. This gives these companies a built-in competitive advantage in the global market-place. Using this "unfair" advantage, they are able to undercut the competition and force them out of business. 4. Now that they are the "only" player in the game, the Japanese can raise prices to whatever they want and you have little choice but to pay it. The money made from these now secure ventures can be used to build up the next industry the government wants to develop. I understand that this is part of an "official" Japanese national policy rather than some deep, dark secret that only the intellectual elite of the economic community are aware of. That's a basic problem with the free market theories; all the players in the market have to leave the market alone and there is always somebody who doesn't want to play by those rules. And if the dissenter is big enough then the whole ball game goes out the window. Disclaimer: My extensive economic knowledge comes from having worked as a stock clerk in a grocery store during Junior High. -- .signature! .signature!! I don't need no steenking .signature!!!
dave@sdeggo.UUCP (David L. Smith) (04/01/88)
In article <1259@hubcap.UUCP>, rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) writes: > Japanese and other asian chip producers can currently produce chips at > prices significantly less than US producers, and US producers are having a > hard time competing. This is just great for consumers and computer and > perhipheral manufacturers, but if it keeps up, US chip producers will have to > move to something else or fold. Many people I know say that the Japanese are > obviously doing something right, and if US producers can't do the same then > they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian > countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US > producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some > would say that they should get out. Ok, so we lose the IC industry, big deal. Half of the problem is that American industry refuses to compete! According to a recent article I read, the US semi-conductor manufacturers have already abandoned the 256K and the 1M markets. They're targeting the 4M market now, and what do you want to be that they will botch it, just like they did with the 1M market. Protectionism is not a solution. Protecting the semi-conductor makers hurts US computer makers, who _are_ still competitive on an international scale. A similar situation is occuring in the steel market. US steel manufacturers are being protected with trade barriers, etc. The US mini-mills (which produce custom items from pig iron, not iron ore) were competitive, but are now being forced out of the market because their raw materials are more expensive. Other manufacturers dependent on steel are also having a difficult time, not only due to the expense, but because American manufacturers cannot keep up with demand! The US cannot compete at all levels. Jobs which pay low wages are not acceptable to American workers. Jobs which can realistically pay high wages ($20/hour to put cars together is _not_ realistic) require high skill levels. Therefore, what we must concentrate on is industries which require these high skill levels. It's either that, or accept a lower standard of living, but we'd better figure out which we'll accept while we still have an economy. -- David L. Smith {sdcsvax!jack,ihnp4!jack, hp-sdd!crash, pyramid, uport}!sdeggo!dave sdeggo!dave@amos.ling.edu Sinners can repent, but stupid is forever.
lharris@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Leonard Harris) (04/01/88)
This is exactly what the US chip manufacturers want you to think! There are only 2 major ram manufacturers in the states, neither can keep up with demand and they are definately NOT losing money on rams. Instead, they have created a spot market because they can't supply the demand for ram, and would rather make less and charge what the market will bear - rather than make lots with a small profit/chip. This is NOT protecting US industry - it is destroying the much larger number of electronics firms that must buy chips from a couple of companies. (Do I hear price fixing?, antitrust? ....) /leonard
strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) (04/02/88)
>they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian >countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US >producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some >would say that they should get out. Ok, so we lose the IC industry, big deal. Labor costs are a negligible factor in the cost of semiconductors; they are produced by automatic machinery. A much better gauge is the yield: US manufacturers have notoriously poor yields compared with the Japanese, and our cost of manufacture reflects this fact. Besides, the Japanese get closer to three-fourths of American salaries, not one-half. > Also I seem to remember reading in NewsWeek that last spring, Japanese >companies were accused of dumping chips on the US market at prices lower >than it cost the companies to produce them. The operative word here is "accused". The Japanese have never admitted selling for less than cost. Perhaps less than we think it should have cost them.:-) Besides, all manufacturers sell for less than cost from time to time. They call it promotion or "building market share". It is a perfectly honorable way of doing business when entering a new market, or when new competitors enter your established market. The first production run of any product, be it a car or a semiconductor, invariably cost several times its selling price. If the price actually covered the cost of production, production would never start. -- Norm (strong@tc.fluke.com)
radford@calgary.UUCP (Radford Neal) (04/02/88)
In article <1813@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, seorcutt@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Sam (not Samantha) Orcutt) writes: > 1. The Japanese government selects some new industry that they want > to develop. > > 2. A number of start-up companies are established within Japan. In > order to allow these companies to get a foot-hold in the market > place they are given massive economic support from the government > in the forms of tax incentives, import tariffs, price support, > etc. > > 3. This gives these companies a built-in competitive advantage in > the global market-place. Using this "unfair" advantage, they are > able to undercut the competition and force them out of business. > > 4. Now that they are the "only" player in the game, the Japanese can > raise prices to whatever they want and you have little choice but > to pay it. The money made from these now secure ventures can be > used to build up the next industry the government wants to > develop. > > I understand that this is part of an "official" Japanese national policy... The Japanese may indeed by trying this. They may indeed have accomplished steps (1), (2), and (3). But have you ever heard of them accomplishing step (4)? Do we now see $50,000 compact Japanese cars? Has the price of cameras shot up now that they are all made in Japan? I certainly haven't noticed this. The fact is that this strategy does not work. The money spent in step (2) cant' be recovered in step (4), especially if the world investment markets have an ounce of sense, and finance the preservation of some manufacturing capability elsewhere as a speculative investment. Protectionism seems to be based on an attitude of spiteful moral superiority. You want to punish those "unfair" Japanese despite the fact that the punishment hurts you just as much as them. Try thinking of the Japanese as a natural phenomenon. If vast reserves of oil were discovered in Vermont, would it be necessary to "protect" the rest of the US from this windfall? If the Japanese government chooses to tax their citizens to subsidize chip exports to the US, the effect is much the same. The rational thing to do is to exploit this idiotic Japanese policy for all it's worth - i.e. buy as many cheap chips as they'll sell. Radford Neal
markz@ssc.UUCP (Mark Zenier) (04/02/88)
In article <1813@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, seorcutt@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Sam (not Samantha) Orcutt) writes: > ... > 1. The Japanese government selects some new industry that they want > to develop. > > 2. A number of start-up companies are established within Japan. In > order to allow these companies to get a foot-hold in the market > place they are given massive economic support from the government > in the forms of tax incentives, import tariffs, price support, > etc. Little start up companies like NEC, Hitachi and Toshiba. FLAME ON The japanese advantage is BIG corporations that treat competition like a sumo wrestling match. The biggest guy in terms of fat or capital investment can push the smaller guys out of the ring. Combined with the social security system or lack thereof, capital is cheaper cause people save a lot of money in the bank. USA, inc. seems to treat competition like open range cattle ranching, If somebody is on this pasture, move somewhere else like insurance or real estate development. Its time to move this topic into some talk or soc newsgroup. Since I leave that stuff alone, anyone have any suggestions. Mark Zenier
campbell@maynard.BSW.COM (Larry Campbell) (04/03/88)
Let's clear one thing up here, foax (it sure would save time and aggravation
if people would check the facts before posting):
In article <1259@hubcap.UUCP> rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) writes:
<> ... Many people I know say that the Japanese are
<>obviously doing something right, and if US producers can't do the same then
<>they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian
<>countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US
<>producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some
<>would say that they should get out.
It was true at one time, but is no longer true, that Japanese labor is
cheaper than American labor. The recent strength of the yen has made
Japanese labor relatively _more_ expensive than American labor.
The real problem is the attention to quality in Japan, and the lack of such
attention here. As Demming taught the Japanese decades ago, and we slow
learners in the U.S. still can't get through our thick skulls:
It's _cheaper_ to do it right the first time!
Especially in extremely quality-sensitive industries like VLSI chips,
quality up front and throughout the process produces a _cheaper_ product.
Japan doesn't just produce more DRAMs per _dollar_, they produce more
DRAMs per _worker_.
And I won't even get into the issue of the quality of the labor force,
except to remind people that 20% of adult Americans are _illiterate_.
This is no way to run a high-tech society...
--
Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc.
Internet: campbell@maynard.bsw.com 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109
uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846davidg@janus.uucp (David Gaertner) (04/03/88)
In article <1068@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: >Let's clear one thing up here, foax (it sure would save time and aggravation >if people would check the facts before posting): > >In article <1259@hubcap.UUCP> rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) writes: ><> ... Many people I know say that the Japanese are ><>obviously doing something right, and if US producers can't do the same then ><>they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian ><>countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US ><>producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some ><>would say that they should get out. > >The real problem is the attention to quality in Japan, and the lack of such >attention here. As Demming taught the Japanese decades ago, and we slow >learners in the U.S. still can't get through our thick skulls: > > It's _cheaper_ to do it right the first time! > >Especially in extremely quality-sensitive industries like VLSI chips, >quality up front and throughout the process produces a _cheaper_ product. >Japan doesn't just produce more DRAMs per _dollar_, they produce more >DRAMs per _worker_. > >And I won't even get into the issue of the quality of the labor force, >except to remind people that 20% of adult Americans are _illiterate_. >This is no way to run a high-tech society... Right on! Many unions in many industries (not all, and not in all industries, though) do not ensure that their members are adequately trained to do the job the union hires them to do. The unions claim that apprenticeship is the way the new workers are taught. This apprenticeship method replaces trade schools used in Europe and Japan; the foreign workers are made to go to at least a couple of weeks of refresher training per year. American workers are instead informally trained and poorly trained, as can be seen by the huge problems with quality and cost- and time-overruns. Part of this is also managements' fault, in that they don't try to motivate the regular union workers. I've heard of union people coming on to a job to do some work without knowing anything about the entire project, e.g., electricians working on a garbage-burning power plant were under the impression that the plant was going to be burning chemical and nuclear waste! That's some motivation to do a good job! / / David Gaertner __/ __. , __o __/ ...ucbvax!janus!davidg, davidg@janus.berkeley.edu (_/_(_/|_\/ <__(_/_ Net: n. holes tied together with a string.
lm@arizona.edu (Larry McVoy) (04/04/88)
In article <1519@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> radford@calgary.UUCP (Radford Neal) writes: >In article <1813@ihlpm.ATT.COM>, seorcutt@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Sam (not Samantha) Orcutt) writes: >> 4. Now that they are the "only" player in the game, the Japanese can >> raise prices to whatever they want and you have little choice but >> to pay it. The money made from these now secure ventures can be >The Japanese may indeed by trying this. They may indeed have accomplished >steps (1), (2), and (3). But have you ever heard of them accomplishing >step (4)? Do we now see $50,000 compact Japanese cars? Has the price of Have you tried to buy a Honda lately? Or how about an Acura? It isn't quite $50K. Yet. -- "These aren't my thoughts, they're my cat walking on the keyboard." Larry McVoy lm@arizona.edu or ...!{uwvax,sun}!arizona.edu!lm
tomwest@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Tom West) (04/04/88)
Sorry to burst balloons, but according to every article I have read in the last few months, Japanese labour costs are now *higher* than American costs on average (or Canadian :-)). This is partially due to the falling North American currencies. However, Japan happens to be tremendously efficient, and there isn't much that can be done about that. As far as "dumping" goes, friends who travel to Japan come back with techno-goods that (1) were far cheaper in Japan, (2) won't be available here for another few years. Digital tape is apparantly alive and well in Japan. think we'll see it here before 1990? Technology is alive, well and cheap. Unfortunately it is also a few thousand miles away :-). -- Tom West BITNET: tomwest@utorgpu.bitnet, tomwest@gpu.utcs.utoronto Internet: tomwest@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu UUCP: tomwest@utgpu utzoo, yetti, harpo, mnetor \ cbosgd, deepthot, utoronto - !utgpu!tomwest ihnp4, lsuc, sfmin, vnr-vpa /
strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) (04/04/88)
In article <1813@ihlpm.ATT.COM> seorcutt@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Sam (not Samantha) Orcutt) writes:
All sorts of stuff about how the Japanese cheat..deleted
The US is the most powerful country in the world
We have twice the people as the Japanese
We have twice the money of the Japanese
We have 10 times the land, and gobs of natural resources; The Japanese have
none.
Are you trying to tell me we can't compete with those people because
our economic system is inadequate to the task?
Are you trying to tell me the Japanese are inherently capable of more
than Americans; perhaps have some secret weapon?
Nonsense!
--
Norm (strong@tc.fluke.com)wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu (Thomas Wolf) (04/05/88)
In article <3297@fluke.COM> strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) writes: >In article <1813@ihlpm.ATT.COM> seorcutt@ihlpm.ATT.COM (Sam (not Samantha) Orcutt) writes: > > All sorts of stuff about how the Japanese cheat..deleted > [ All sorts of stuff about the US deleted ] > > Are you trying to tell me the Japanese are inherently capable of more >than Americans; perhaps have some secret weapon? > >Nonsense! > Yes, perhaps they do have some "secret" weapon: A better educational system! One might also say that research&development are more heavily funded in other countries (not just Japan.) When I say better educational system, I only mean to imply that the average worker in Japan/Europe is a more educated person than the average American worker. Tom Wolf ARPA (I think): tw@cscosl.ncsu.edu or wolf@csclea.ncsu.edu
ns@CAT.CMU.EDU (Nicholas Spies) (04/05/88)
In article <1658@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> wolf@csclea.UUCP (Thomas Wolf) writes: >Yes, perhaps they do have some "secret" weapon: A better educational system! Another secret weapon is the 3% ceiling on "defense" spending in Japan...while the US has been busy arming Iran, etc. etc. -- Nicholas Spies ns@cat.cmu.edu.arpa Center for Design of Educational Computing Carnegie Mellon University
jdb@dkstar.UUCP (Jon Bennett {WB8UXA}) (04/05/88)
In article <1259@hubcap.UUCP>, rchampe@hubcap.UUCP (Richard Champeaux) writes: >In article <2441@unicus.UUCP>, craig@unicus.UUCP (Craig D. Hubley) writes: >> >> The price-fixing deal that the U.S. forced on Japan to keep its own chip >> manufacturers (TI and Micron) in business, that has forced chip prices to >> four times their level (here, at least!) of ten months ago, has been >> declared illegal by GATT, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, > >be done to *PROTECT* US manufacturers, and I don't think that just scrapping why? What gives the American mfgrs. the "RIGHT?" to produce chips if they cannot sell them for the price of their competition? Why should I pay more for chips just so that these mfgrs can continue to inefficiently produce chips. I know, "Inefficently". Well if they were effecient, why are the prices so high? > Japanese and other asian chip producers can currently produce chips at >prices significantly less than US producers, and US producers are having a >hard time competing. >they should get out. In my opinion, I think that the fact that the asian >countries have a much cheaper labor force is a significant factor. US I agree, it is a significant factor. This is a lot of why the prices are so high. >producers obviously can't just cut their employees salaries in half, so some >Ok, so we lose the IC industry, big deal. >the textile industry is taking a beating from Korean imports. >the US car manufactures are having touble with Japanese imports and Don't forget the Korean cars (Hundy is #4 importer @ 4yrs here) >therefore make poorer quality cars. Well, >Asian computer and perhipheral manufacturers >manufacturers. 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) 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, 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 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. The reasons for this mis-alignment are many and I will reserve them for a later posting. This one is too long already. Jon -- No disclamer here. Jon "There, that oughta do it" Bennett This is my computer. jdb@dkstar.UUCP {decvax hplabs inhp4 linus rutgers seismo}!gatech!rebel!dkstar!jdb
ljdickey@water.waterloo.edu (Lee Dickey) (04/05/88)
This is an appeal to move this discussion out of six different news groups and into one. I suggest "misc.legal". The discussion has moved to a level that it has nothing *explicitly* to do with amiga, atari, ibm, mac, arch, etc. But it does have something to do with "legal" issues. Please. -- L. J. Dickey, Faculty of Mathematics, University of Waterloo. ljdickey@waterloo.edu ljdickey@WATDCS.UWaterloo.ca ljdickey@water.BITNET ljdickey@water.UUCP or ...!uunet!water!ljdickey
wada@homxa.UUCP (R.WADSACK) (04/05/88)
>The operative word here is "accused". The Japanese have never admitted >selling for less than cost. Perhaps less than we think it should have cost >them.:-) A few years ago there was an article in the Sunday Star-Ledger (of Newark, NJ). The story was a write-up of an interview with a high school foreign exchange student from Japan. There were the usual questions about how he liked his new school, the food, his new friends, etc., etc., etc. The reporter also asked him what was one of the most surprising things about this country. His answer -- how inexpensive the radios and cameras were here compared to Japan. Huh???? Yes, that's what he said. [Out of the mouths of babes ....] Ronald L. Wadsack AT&T Comm. & Info. Syst. homxa!wada
govett@avsd.UUCP (David Govett) (04/05/88)
> > The US is the most powerful country in the world > We have twice the people as the Japanese > We have twice the money of the Japanese > We have 10 times the land, and gobs of natural resources; The Japanese have > none. > Are you trying to tell me we can't compete with those people because > our economic system is inadequate to the task? > Are you trying to tell me the Japanese are inherently capable of more > than Americans; perhaps have some secret weapon? > The USSR has a bigger military than the US. Japan has a greater per-capita GNP than the US. The USSR is about 2.5 times as large as the US. PRC has about 4 times as many people as the US. South Africa and the USSR have more "natural resources" than the US. Japanese residential property is now worth more than twice as much as all the residential property in the US. Perhaps the most important natural resource is highly educated people with a strong work ethic and adaptability to change. (It also helps to have government-business cooperation and limited access to one's domestic markets.) Incidentally, the US is about 24 times the size of Japan, if memory serves. How much of this land we still own is uncertain, though.
govett@avsd.UUCP (David Govett) (04/06/88)
> > > > As far as "dumping" goes, friends who travel to Japan come back with > techno-goods that (1) were far cheaper in Japan, (2) won't be available > here for another few years. > This is not true. If you had ever travelled to Japan, you would know this to be untrue. One of the hottest topics in Japan now is how little Japanese goods cost abroad. Needless to say, the long-suffering Japanese consumer is not amused. Some Japanese importers recently got into trouble because they were importing Japanese goods that had been exported to the US, and then reselling them at about 60% the cost of the same unexported goods in Tokyo.
jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) (04/06/88)
This discussion is inappropriate for every single one of the six
groups it is cross-posted to! This may be a new record.
About a year ago, we created a group specifically to handle
controversial events in the news that spawn cross-posted discussions
like this. The group is called misc.headlines. (The name is
confusing, but discussions like this are perfect for it).
Please continue this discussion there, or in talk.politics.misc
if that's more appropriate.
--
- Joe Buck {uunet,ucbvax,sun,<smart-site>}!epimass.epi.com!jbuck
Old Internet mailers: jbuck%epimass.epi.com@uunet.uu.netgovett@avsd.UUCP (David Govett) (04/06/88)
> In article <1658@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu> wolf@csclea.UUCP (Thomas Wolf) writes: > >Yes, perhaps they do have some "secret" weapon: A better educational system! > > Another secret weapon is the 3% ceiling on "defense" spending in Japan...while > the US has been busy arming Iran, etc. etc. > > Make that 1% (vs. about 7% in the US). Japan slightly exceeded 1% recently. BTW, Japan has done far more than the US to strengthen Iran in the last decade. They can afford to since we are protecting the sea lanes for their oil from the gulf.
ccasttd@pyr.gatech.EDU (Thomas M. Dixon Jr.) (04/07/88)
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.
bnsokol@orchid.waterloo.edu (Brad Sokol) (04/07/88)
In article <3297@fluke.COM> strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) writes: >The US is the most powerful country in the world > >We have twice the people as the Japanese > >We have twice the money of the Japanese > >We have 10 times the land, and gobs of natural resources; The Japanese have >none. > > Are you trying to tell me we can't compete with those people because >our economic system is inadequate to the task? > > Are you trying to tell me the Japanese are inherently capable of more >than Americans; perhaps have some secret weapon? > >Nonsense! The Japanese are _currently_ capable of more than Americans (and Canadians) in general because they are willing to work harder, longer and better than us. >Norm (strong@tc.fluke.com) -- Brad Sokol, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada UUCP: {allegra,clyde,utzoo,decvax}!watmath!orchid!bnsokol BITNET: bnsokol@orchid.waterloo{.edu,.csnet,.cdn} Paradise is exactly like where you are right now only much, much better. - LA
zhahai@gaia.UUCP (Zhahai Stewart) (04/08/88)
The problem with the Free Enterprise Forever Without Government Interference
thing is that it has not worked. In practice, the US Industrial base was built
during the last century with the help of government tariffs (to protect our
fledgeling industries, including steel, from European competition) and subsidies
, for example, the railroads were considered essential to development, so the US
government gave away massive amounts of land in order to get people to build the
railroads. Likewise, Japan Inc has been beating us with a system which involves
much more Government intervention than ours does; they have cleverly used
trade barriers (as we did) to boost their industry. IT WORKED. The free
enterprise ideologues tend to ignore realities in favor of purity of thought.
On the other hand, the key to successful trade restrictions is using them
intelligently for a strategic purpose - this is what both the US in times past,
and Japan today have done. Simply imposing them to prop up a dying industry,
as opposed to supporting a new or revitalized industry, will not work in the
long run. So I am concerned that many calls for trade barriers will not be
used for any strategic goal, but just to delay and make worse the inevitable.
For example, the import car restrictions propped up the US auto industry, but
may not have had much impact on its overall competitiveness except to make it
more complacent. (Or maybe not - I am not an auto expert).
We are caught between the free enterprise ideologues (the voodoo economics which
claimed that we would have reduced the national debt by now rather than
increasing it), and the short-sighted protectionists who are trying to ignore
the market forces. What we need are people who recognize that both market
forces AND judicious government intervention have to work together for the
system to be competitive. The Japanese have that; to some degree, so do many
European countries, who have been doing well at trade with the US despite their
"socialized" economies (which the ideologues would tell us should make them
totally unable to compete with the US).
Oh, well - let's turn the conversation back over to the ideologues. I can only
hope that a few of them will be weaned from their pipe dreams and get back to
reality - to provide a realistic counterbalance to the non-strategic
protectionists. Shalom.
--
Zhahai Stewart
{hao | nbires}!gaia!zhahaiked@garnet.berkeley.edu (Charles Faulhaber) (04/08/88)
>Make that 1% (vs. about 7% in the US).
If the same accounting principles are applied to Japanese
defence expenditures as are applied to those in the US and Nato
countries, Japanese expenditures are 50-60% larger than usually
reported.
Earl H. Kinmonth
History Department
University of California, Davis
916-752-1636
cck@deneb.ucdavis.eduphil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) (04/08/88)
In article <5333@pyr.gatech.EDU> ccasttd@pyr.UUCP (Thomas M. Dixon Jr.) writes: >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. You're assuming that it's a win/lose game. That for others to do better, we have to do worse. But that is not so. The whole purpose of trade is for the people who do something best to be able to concentrate on it. How productive would you be if you had to build your own computer before you can program it? Sure I pay money to Compaq or whoever, but I get much more than my money's worth. When everything equalizes out, everyone should be much better off an an absolute scale. If the Japanese are better off on a relative scale because American don't work as hard, well that's life. -- I love my VT-320. I speak for myself, not the company. Phil Ngai, {ucbvax,decwrl,allegra}!amdcad!phil or phil@amd.com
frank@isrnix.UUCP (Frank Burleigh) (04/08/88)
In article <347@gaia.UUCP> zhahai@gaia.UUCP (Zhahai Stewart) writes: > >The problem with the Free Enterprise Forever Without Government Interference >thing is that it has not worked. [ ... ] > [ ... ] [well-planned tarrifs] WORKED. The free >enterprise ideologues tend to ignore realities in favor of purity of thought. i would argue that it's more repetition than thought; part of thought is an interogation of the extant world that can incorporate and explain the evidence of that world (if you'll forgive the positivist drippings...). >We are caught between the free enterprise ideologues [ ... ] > and the short-sighted protectionists who are trying to ignore >the market forces. What we need are people who recognize that both market >forces AND judicious government intervention have to work together for the >system to be competitive. The Japanese have that; to some degree, so do many >European countries, who have been doing well at trade with the US despite their >"socialized" economies (which the ideologues would tell us should make them >totally unable to compete with the US). > >Oh, well - let's turn the conversation back over to the ideologues. I can only >hope that a few of them will be weaned from their pipe dreams and get back to >reality - to provide a realistic counterbalance to the non-strategic >protectionists. Shalom. > >-- >Zhahai Stewart >{hao | nbires}!gaia!zhahai i thought this was one of the better postings i've seen on this matter. i especially appreciated its contact with the historical record. well done. [ps: the april 4 infoworld includes a blurb on the gatt decision. i don't have that in front of me, but my reading suggests the posting that spawned this discussion over-stated the decision; the agreement itself was not found prolematic, but only the implementation (by japan?) of one element of it. apologies if my ram has failed me.] -- Frank C. Burleigh Institute for Social Research - Indiana University - Bloomington, IN 47405 ihnp4!inuxc!isrnix!frank {pur-ee,kangaro,iuvax}!isrnix!frank
shino@motbos.UUCP (Rei Shinozuka MCD SE) (04/08/88)
In article <572@io.UUCP>, dbjag@io.UUCP (David Benjamin) writes:
*
* NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!!
* NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!!
* NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!! NNN NN OO OO !!!
* NNNNNN OO OO !!! NNNNNN OO OO !!! NNNNNN OO OO !!!
* NN NNN OO OO !!! NN NNN OO OO !!! NN NNN OO OO !!!
* NN NNN OO OO NN NNN OO OO NN NNN OO OO
* NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!! NN NN OOOOOO !!!
*
* DO NOT, I REPEAT, DO NOT CONTINUE THIS CROSSPOSTING POLITICAL EXCHANGE!!!!
* ^^^^^^^^^
* ^^^^^^^^^
*
* Its an open ended issue subject to many passionate responses. I DON'T WANT
* TO WADE THROUGH IT!!!! DON'T EVEN START!!! MOVE IT TO /dev/null!!
*
* AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!
*
* --
* ------------------------------------------------------------
* -- Dave Benjamin -- ..!mit-eddie!ileaf!dbjag -- Interleaf --
* ------------------------------------------------------------
His words were so eloquent I did not even attempt to improve on them.
Really, guys, this is almost as tiresome as the voting for
comp.sys.mac.canoperners. Why is it that those messages targeted for
the widest distribution are least interesting to any single newsgroup?
I was going to suggest to move it elsewhere, except that it looks like its
everywhere already.
-reinorm@mtgzy.UUCP (XMRN60000[bsm]-n.e.andrews) (04/09/88)
I suppose I'll get some flak for posting this response to the sci.electronics and comp.arch newsgroups, but in a sense it is justified that I post here. We in the electronic and computer industries have got to get smarter, and have to help other to get smarter, about the political and economic activity that affects our jobs, our businesses, our lives. Toward that end, I post the following observations: In article <21051@amdcad.AMD.COM>, phil@amdcad.AMD.COM (Phil Ngai) writes: > In article <5333@pyr.gatech.EDU> ccasttd@pyr.UUCP (Thomas M. Dixon Jr.) writes: > >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. > > You're assuming that it's a win/lose game. That for others to do better, > we have to do worse. But that is not so. The whole purpose of trade is > for the people who do something best to be able to concentrate on it. > > How productive would you be if you had to build your own computer > before you can program it? Sure I pay money to Compaq or whoever, but > I get much more than my money's worth. > > When everything equalizes out, everyone should be much better off an > an absolute scale. If the Japanese are better off on a relative scale > because American don't work as hard, well that's life. > > For many years the Japanese workers had a much higher per capita savings rate than American workers, perhaps triple. Although lately I think it has dropped off considerably. The disparity between US and Japanese savings rates may well have been because Japan did not spend heavily on national defense, while the US underwrote the defense costs for Europe, Japan, and others. The consequence of a higher savings rate is a higher availability of money for capital investment. Outmoded or obsolete machinery gets replaced much faster with the latest and greatest capital equipment. Labor has to compete more intensely with capital or production machinery such as robotics. The heavily taxed US economy also experienced several decades of inflation caused by government-sponsored expansion of the money supply. This high rate of inflation was also a dis-incentive for investment, especially in producers goods. The US economy has also been heavily regulated. Antitrust laws were written so as to protect established businesses. Tax laws were written to favor large scale integration which otherwise wouldn't be reasonable. Depreciation scales encouraged holding on to equipment that was not yet fully depreciated. Monopolies were granted thru special government regulations, favoring established power, transportation and communications businesses, and discouraging new entrants. Labor laws discouraged productivity. Management has also become short-sighted, expecting quick returns for quick fixes. Anti-business attitudes abound in the media for years. Some of it is justified, since the so-called capitalists aren't capitalists anymore. The mixed economy has favored fascists and socialists, leaving true laissez-faire or free market types to disappear. Corruption has been encouraged by allowing government to decide who gets to do what, and at what cost. It is time to put a stop to this. Attempts at political action are likely to work sporadically, and at great cost of effort. However political involvement appears necessary. Long term, there has to be a cultural change. People have to be willing to pay for success. Quick profits at the expense of long-range investment will have to stop. Paying for poor management has to stop. Subsidizing substandard workers and coddling unions has to stop. Welfare must be replaced by charity - tax theft for redistribution of income must stop. If American people fail to limit the power of their government, if they fail to reform their politics, business, and culture, the world is lost. Future generations (and soon to retire workers) will pay... And that applies to high-paid electronics and computer engineers, as well. Norm Andrews AT&T Information Systems Room MT-2C402 200 Laurel Avenue Middletown, New Jersey 07748 (201)957-5786 vax135!mtuxo!mtgzy!norm
wes@obie.UUCP (Barnacle Wes) (04/09/88)
In article <1563@homxa.UUCP>, wada@homxa.UUCP (R.WADSACK) writes: > A few years ago there was an article in the Sunday Star-Ledger > (of Newark, NJ). The story was a write-up of an interview with > a high school foreign exchange student from Japan. There were > the usual questions about how he liked his new school, the food, > his new friends, etc., etc., etc. > > The reporter also asked him what was one of the most surprising > things about this country. His answer -- how inexpensive the > radios and cameras were here compared to Japan. Huh???? A few years ago, I worked in a store, actually the "head" of a chain, that sold photo equipment, stereos, and had a (small) computer store. The usual policy of this company was that all equipment arrived at the Distribution Center in the main store, and was re-distributed to the individual stores. The DC recieved 7% over their wholesale price off the top of all equipment *except cameras*. The cameras were not marked up by the DC because cameras were typically sold at a 1-2% margin, and the stores could not be competitive with a 7% warehousing fee. The reasoning behind this pricing is if you buy a camera from them, you'll come back for lenses, filters, batteries, film, photo finishing, cases, etc... And *it works*! Of course, the markups on all these items were much higher - typically in the 50% range. On a side note, the most outrageous markup I've ever seen was also at this store. They sold a Bang & Olufsen turntable cartridge for a price that was $5 below the only other store in the area that sold it - about $130. Store cost on it was about $19. Good thing employees bought at cost, eh? -- /\ - "Against Stupidity, - {backbones}! /\/\ . /\ - The Gods Themselves - utah-cs!utah-gr! / \/ \/\/ \ - Contend in Vain." - uplherc!sp7040! / U i n T e c h \ - Schiller - obie!wes
wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu (Pierce T. Wetter) (04/11/88)
In article <131@obie.UUCP> wes@obie.UUCP (Barnacle Wes) writes: >In article <1563@homxa.UUCP>, wada@homxa.UUCP (R.WADSACK) writes: >> A few years ago there was an article in the Sunday Star-Ledger >> (of Newark, NJ). The story was a write-up of an interview with >> a high school foreign exchange student from Japan. There were >> the usual questions about how he liked his new school, the food, >> his new friends, etc., etc., etc. >> >> The reporter also asked him what was one of the most surprising >> things about this country. His answer -- how inexpensive the >> radios and cameras were here compared to Japan. Huh???? > Prices in Japan are typically higher then their U.S. prices. Japanese companies use the protected home market to finance their foreign markets. For instance a Nikon camera is about 50$ more in Japan then in the U.S. to get around "dumping" charges the two cameras have different "model" numbers, even though they're identical cameras. Maybe someday the U.S. will wake up and set trade barriers defined to be equivalent to precisly equivalent to the country of origins barriers to U.S. goods. That is, while Japan practices garbage like it has traditionally done (Tire Approval?) We do the same. They lower their barriers, we lower ours. Pierce WEtter According to the latest official figures, 43% of all statistics are totally worthless. -------------------------------------------- wetter@tybalt.caltech.edu --------------------------------------------