Deere announces layoffs

RoyJackson · Jun 19, 2002

"Every casting had "Japan" cast into it. "

Yeah, Harley buys a lot of their components!
However, they're doubling the size of their plant in York, PA (was talk for years that they were going to close it). I expect more components to be manufactured there. I'd like to get in there...would hate to work union though, but there'd be no option.
But as far as components..I interviewed at one company a few months back that made valves (as in "intake" and "exhaust"). This was in central PA. They made for the usual US companies (mostly small engine manufacturers). However, they also made them for Honda (which didn't surprise me) and Kawasaki (which did..I don't believe Kawasaki has any facilities in the US or Canada.

"They have a loyal customer base"

Very true!!! That "outlaw" image is really popular, not only in this country, but in Europe and Japan as well. That's an image thing...just as BMW was in the '80's. If the "image" goes out of style...well, that'd probably be the end of Harley.

You know, I know I've been putting unions down quite a bit. Their original purpose was good and just. There just seems to be no incentive for the union worker to be productive. However, the recent Enron scandal does exemplify the greed of upper management. When the CEO and his henchmen walk off with tens of millions while the troops (and stockholders) lose darn near everything...that is criminal. If I were the HMIC, I'd behead everyone of those guys and put their heads on pikes (as an example to other greedy a__holes).

livincountry · Jun 19, 2002

I work in the custom mold manufacturing business. Our sales dropped in half comparing the year 2000 to the year 2001. We've made major adjustments and will survive (we hope). Like many products, our prices are driven by labor rates and countries like China are eating away at the core of this country. They have access to the same machinery we have but their labor rate is a small fraction of ours. Then take into account the government subsidies compared to our system of the government regulating & taxing us to death. With all this being said we in the USA have a different mentality than other countries and we will survive. Japan is going on ten years of recession. China is a third world country and is competing based on shear the shear volume of their workforce. They are not more efficient or more determined. I agree that Walmart & similar retailers have done more to hurt this country than China or all the rest. They no longer say they support US suppliers like they used to. Now the little sword wielding bandit in the Walmart commercial cuts US jobs as he slashes prices. Couple that with CEO's wanting obscene bonuses and here we are today! We'll survive because we have a certain spark found no where else and it confounds other countries.

rdln · Jun 19, 2002

Love your comments Roy, but you forgot an F (HMFIC).

I drive my wife crazy when we go clothes shopping. It is getting tougher to find USA made clothes, the last suit I bought was from JCPenneys after shopping 4 other stores. And that attitude is applied to just about anything else I buy.

I would love to buy my wife a Chevy Suburban but cant ignore the fact that they are assembled in mexico.

It is all about profit. If that suburban was assembled in the US it would not be priced any higher.

I bought my farm in 92 and when I realized I needed and wanted a tractor I considered a Ford 8n but convinced myself I wanted a 4wd diesel and the only choice under 40hp was japanese.
BTW of all the things on that tractor I found a selonoid made right here in Michigan.

Steelfan · Jun 19, 2002

Roy, I'm not sure why this post caused such a discussion. It very plain, and simple. American Workers are losing jobs to another country. When a community like the one mentioned by CowboyDoc does their part by telling that company what they think of these jobs lost, I support them. We can argue till we are blue in the face about buying stuff from another country, but we all do it. I just wouldn't want to be one of those people , that lost their jobs. How many of you want your job to just go away, and end up in Mexico? Bottom line I don't, and I can't believe any of you do either. That's my $.02. Kent

MrP · Jun 19, 2002

It is all about profit. If that suburban was assembled in the US it would not be priced any higher.

How can you say that? With Union Labor Rates 10x that of Mexican labor. The SUV would probably cost about 10% more.

MReeter · Jun 19, 2002

There seems to be a little more incentive for Companies to take their business South.

Much lower Corp. taxes,cheaper utilities,no Inviromental laws,just dump the toxic by- products in the nearest ditch or canal.

Thanks to NAFTA,very little import tax,and yes,cheap labor.People forced to work 12-16 hour days,6-7 days a week,of all ages.

Looks to me like a perfect business climate for the Big Corps. to have a great bottom line...Yes,it is all about profit.As said before,if this keeps up,who is going to buy their products?

The average working class is the one who pays the bulk of the taxes and spends hard earned money on commodities such as a new Tractor or new vehicle.Maybe even go as far as buying or building a home.

wroughtn_harv · Jun 20, 2002

Morning Kent, my wife wants to know if your wife likes her new greenhouse. /w3tcompact/icons/grin.gif

It very plain, and simple. American Workers are losing jobs to another country.

I can't really see it like that. What I see is an industry is being antiquated plain and simple. Bottom line there is little difference between jobs lost to automation than to foreign factorys. You wouldn't insist that we subsidize an inefficient industry unless you were bottom surfing for votes would you?

It is harder when you know the person being let go because the company has decided amputation is better than suicide. I have a future son in law that works for Worldcom. I might have an apprentice whether I want one or not.

Now it would be better for the local economy to keep Worldcom up and at it like it was before. But I don't see it happening. And it wouldn't be right. Sorta like keeping open a military base because it's the only source of work for an area.

I don't like plastic fence. I think it's garish and it will fail just a little later than wood. At least wood develops character over time. You can't say that for plastic.

But if I had a conventional fence company I would be investing in equipment to handle plastic fencing or be facing losing business in the future. Maybe even losing my business entirely because I haven't kept up with trends and modernization of society and their preferences.

Would it be right for the locals to pick up the load of carrying me just cause I insisted upon staying just the way I want to instead of doing what I should?

livincountry · Jun 20, 2002

Looks like Mexico is affected by countries with LOWER wage rates!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14093-2002Jun19.html

Hillbilly · Jun 20, 2002

Agreed!!!!!!!!

ejb · Jun 20, 2002

>>With increases in productivity, the need for semi-skilled employees drops.

It is a race to the bottom imo. Think about the few billion people in CHina who would be more than happy to work for a few dollars a day. With the race towards globalisation, these billion people are the employee's of the future that american workers are going to have to compete with.

Even if one manufactuurer takes and stand and keeps all his high paying jobs here, it unlikley all his/her competitors will and when the competitors are then able to undercut you on price, very very few loyal customers will continue to "buy american" when it hits them in the pocketbook directly.

On a smaller, more local scale, (but a perfect analogy) look at the very many people on this very forum who will drive from dealer to dealer to dealer (and shop internet dealers) to pinch every nickel of profit out of the dealer they ultimately purchase from. Even if it means less money/profit/jobs to the dealer in their own local neighborhood. If one can't see anything wrong with that practice, one can't legitamately criticize big companies from basically doing the same thing on a larger scale.

All one (collectively) needs to do is look in the mirror to see where the problem lies.

cowboydoc · Jun 20, 2002

I think what we need to look at for a bottom line is who in the heck is going to be able to afford to buy their $20k plus tractors and $10k plus lawnmowers? You keep sending good paying mfg. jobs out of the country and their comes a point when it will fail. I know there are alot smarter economists on this site than myself but we used to do scenarios like this when I was in school. You erode a country's mfg. base and the country will slowly crumble. Our biggest fear should be if, heaven forbid, we were ever in a war again we would have ablsolutely no mfg. base and by the time we got one going again we would probably be speaking Chinese or something. It will bite us in the butt one day whether we want to believe it or not.

ejb · Jun 20, 2002

I agree completely. but what is the solution? People demand low prices and are willing to shop those that give the lowest prices (look at how walmart has grown so far so fast).

You can't build a wall around the country and force people to buy american, so I am open to ideas?...besides each individual person deciding for themselves that they are willing to pay more to buy "local", I don't see any laws that could be passed or rules that could be made that will stem the tide...

rdln · Jun 20, 2002

Well, I dont know when but at one point Suburban production moved from the US to mexico. Do you think GM lowered the price because of the money that they saved.

RoyJackson · Jun 20, 2002

"I don't see any laws that could be passed or rules that could be made that will stem the tide... "

As I mentioned in my post, one potential answer is tariffs. As they Federal Gov't is supposed to be paid for by tariffs, this could be a win-win situation: the government would have to reduce it's size (get rid of the damfool Dept.of Education!!!), industry would have more incentive to keep jobs within this country. The Feds have a lousy track record when it comes to managing the economy by law...tariffs would make it a lot tougher to keep spending beyond it's means.

A big problem with globalization is that it's "levels" the wage differences world wide. That means for us to compete, we have to reduce our standard of living dramatically. Who wants that to happen? Or to see your kids at the poverty level (reducing the wages don't always result in lowering prices and the cost of living). When you average the $15.00/hr a US worker makes with that $0.15/hour a Thailander earns...that comes to 7.55/hour. Can a person make a living on that?

I hear these idiots in Washington say "do it for the children..." (mostly when they're talking about gun control, BTW). Well, putting tariffs back in place is one way to "help the children".

Remember, folks...this is really simplifying a very complex concern. As time goes by, some industries will disappear (when's the last time you saw a Help Wanted ad for a cooper?). Others may arise to take their places. The problems we're discussing will happen. As a nation, we've got to determine if those problems will happen here or another country.

looch · Jun 20, 2002

Ok, ready for this? Here's how I see it:

My wife and I are pretty much in agreement that this planet is doomed. Money - everybody wants it. There isn't enough integrity left at the corporate level to pull the planet out of this environmental nose dive. I do not consider myself a tree hugger. I do firmly believe though, that humans take the earth for granted.

What does this have to do with moving a manufacturing facility out of the country?

I recently heard a brief book review on TV of Eco-Economy by Lester R. Brown. You can download the book for free <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.earth-policy.org/Books/Eco_contents.htm>here</A>. I haven't read it yet, but what I got from the review is in line with how I see things. I have always had a problem with the concept that some product that requires 10 times as much shipping and handling costs the same as something found locally. Well, this book confirms my suspicion that it doesn't cost the same. The problem is that damage to the environment is not considered in part of the equation.

So,

- the environmental issues and impossibilty of rectifying them under our current economic structure,
- the fact that the planet will not sustain our current population growth rate,
- people fighting with each other over religion,

all this and more, is why I have absolutely no desire to have offspring of my own. I know this must seem like a pretty bleak outlook, and I guess it is. Not to say I don't enjoy my life - I do. I just don't think what the future holds in store is something I want to expose my genes too.

Heck, for all I know, it may be people like me that will be our demise - realising that there's nothing I can do so I avoid procreating and just go on enjoying my life for what it is.

PitbullMidwest · Jun 20, 2002

Tarriffs NOT taxes would be a big step in the right direction. The American worker demands higher wages in a never ending struggle to pay his ever increasing taxes.

The first tarriffs established by Congress was on cotton bunting. The newly formed United States lacked the manufacturing ability to compete with English imports and to protect its own interests Congress acted accordingly. Harley benefited from the same thing when Congress passed tarriffs on imported cycles 700cc and larger in the mid 80's. I have read many economists that believe without the tarriff HD would not have survived.

As long as we have a Congress that cares more about the world economy than the United States' economy we will see every aspect of our manufacturing base wither and die.

Government should be paid for by those who wish to do business with us, not by the citizens. If relieved from their heavy tax load, there would be more disposable income which in turn would drive down prices on domestic products making foreign imports even less attractive.

wroughtn_harv · Jun 20, 2002

What I'm hoping for is the border between us and Mexico becoming truly open, both ways.

It's a crying shame that there is so much beautiful country and weather down there that can't be comfortably settled by norte americanos with some level of confidence.

The first group that would be assisted by such a situation of course would be norte americanos who would love to retire where the weather is great year round, the cost of living isn't prohibitive, and the cost of medicine and care is still semi affordable.

The second group would be the local economies because more of their citizens could live and work at home servicing the rico gringos.

Our own labor pool wouldn't be diluted by the influx of illegal and untrained competition from south of the border. Those who did come up north would be the skilled and semi skilled to compete with our skilled and semi skilled.

You have to keep in mind the rules on immigration labor are a compromise between organized labor and organized business to keep things as they are even if it isn't fair to anyone involved except big business and in the long run not fair to them.

If we had it where a laborer from Mexico could come into the states and compete on a level playing field with gringo labor then businesses that want dummys would have to pay more to both gringos and mexicanos. Right now they can keep the wages down because the mexicanos don't dare leave for fear of discovery as illegal. That keeps the wages down for the gringo too. But if the mexicano and the gringo had the same options then the company would have to pay more to keep any help.

So the system as it is keeps the cost of labor down by taking advantage of the illegal's fear.

Except for African Americans and Native Americans this persecution we're seeing of Mexicans has accompanied each and every ethnic group that has immigrated to this great country. But what each generation with it's resentment and persecution of the immigrants has failed to see is the immigrants take the lower status jobs. That in turn lifts up the group that had those jobs before.

We're a nation that's been built from the bottom up. It's been happening for two hundred plus years. It's what's made us what we are. The influx of the mexicanos is really no different than when the polish arrived or the irish or even the british.

I imagine the borders will be opened. And when it is there will be a large sucking sound. It will be U.S. citizens going where it doesn't get too hot or too cold and the people are friendly.

bgott · Jun 20, 2002

I have noticed a few posts advocating tariffs. I'm sure that a whole lot of you have a deeper knowledge of this than I have but I was under the impression that excessive tariffs and protectionism were a couple of the main causes of the Great Depression. Anyone care to expound on this?

RoyJackson · Jun 20, 2002

"...couple of the main causes of the Great Depression"

I don't believe tariffs had anything to do with causing the Depression (watch the History Channel for some interesting documentaries on this subject). Totally unregulated investments did (a lot of people buying stocks with very little money up front)...a long time recession (in Europe) stemming from WW I did. As far as tariffs...I suppose it's possible they may have had a causal effect on the duration of the Depression though.

PitbullMidwest · Jun 20, 2002

excessive tariffs and protectionism were a couple of the main causes of the Great Depression

The depression was caused, IMHO, by bankers trying to artifictually control the world's economy.