XPost: misc.consumers, alt.consumers 
 From: margawal@rajjihana.in 
  
 Jerry  wrote in 
 news:er56vvs5hhiirt7trojj2b7gnqsprpg9ia@4ax.com: 
  
 > On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:30:28 -0500, Patrick Coghlan 
 >  wrote: 
 > 
 >>Most people don't care where things are made so, as soon as one 
 >>company started moving production to China, everybody got into the act 
 >>so they could remain competitive. 
 >> 
 > 
 > What do you mean by "remain competitive"? Some company makes a shoe 
 > and sells it for $80. Their business managers whine that they can't 
 > "remain competitive" and stay in business, so they move the operation 
 > to some third world country where they get their shoes made by child 
 > labor and costs are pennies on the dollar. Then, what do you suppose 
 > the price of the new imported shoe is? Right, it's still $80!  No, 
 > it's not "remain competitive" but profiteering. 
  
  
  
 I must agree with you. It's called profiteering indeed - plus GREED. 
 Profit margins for US corporations boosted at least 20 times for 
 exploiting the cheap labor in China. Not just shoes but many other items 
 are in the same price scheme. The bottom line is the consumers DO NOT 
 benefit from having products made in China. On the contrary, the US 
 consumers are hurting in many ways. Among them are a real threat of the 
 domestic economic downfall and having to use inferior quality products 
 that have the appearance of good ones. 
  
 Another clear benefit to the US corporations is that they would not have 
 to deal with strict environmental laws in China. And this saves them a 
 bundle. The real cost will be paid by the Chinese people themselves in 
 the long run. Does any one still remember the Union Carbide "accident" 
 in Bhopal, India some years ago? Hummm, greed and profiteering resemble 
 acts of terrorism, don't they? 
  
 More on this at: http://www.csrwire.com/article.cgi/2289.html 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)