Hi Jim.


>One simple example: Walmart, the world's biggest retail store chain, HAD a policy of "Made in the USA" for much of its stuff and fabric goods were prominent (in still being made in the U.S. at the time). I remind you that even at that time Walmart was biggest and reported huge profits. Then, for reasons only truly known to them (but I think profit is a fair assunption) they removed that policy, buying from anywhere (the lowest bidder I presume). Suddenly the cloth/garment manufacturers were all bankrupt throwing (hundreds of?) thousands out of work. Did the consumer have any say there?... and in sitautions like it?

Yes the consumer has a very simple and powerful say. They can simply choose not to buy stuff made outside their country of choice. Wal-Mart is driven by the profit motive, sure, but they have to deliver the goods that the consumer wants and at a price the consumer is prepared to pay. They are also driven by shareholders who want a return on their investments in their shares. Both the consumer and the investor is you-and-me, either directly or indirectly.


>Basically we buy what's available at the cheaper price for reasonable quality. I learned after 1 coloured shirt that cheap <> good (even though it looked great) when all my wash was pink from the burgundy shirt that was so cheap.

This is correct. Low cost producer does not equate to shoddy goods per se. Sometimes it does, of course, but that is not a defining characteristic because if it was no one would buy the stuff (more than once) and the problem would be solved. The truth is that the lower cost producing countries are producing goods at a price/quality ratio that consumers are happy to pay for.


>Pension funds... fast disappearing here (North America) and being found to be looted by corps anyway in many instances! But look at those that still exist. here the (province of Ontario) teachers have the largest pension fund in Canada.

Sorry Jim but pension funds, retirement funds, and other related funds are the biggest holders of stocks, bonds, and other investments in North America, probably the western world. You, me, and Joe Citizen are the owners of those stocks and the beneficiaries of those funds. The fact that there are some high-profile cases of miss-management and fraud does not detract from this generally correct statement.


>But teachers have virtually NO SAY in how that pension money is invested! They tried 5 years ago to undo a specific investment and were rebuked! No do you think that a teacher's pension fund's members REALLY want to have their money invested in steel mills in China or Korea if that means that the families of the children they are teaching (we have a few towns where steel is THE major employer) will lose their jobs? Same for a whole lot of other possible investments in industries that have relocated offshore.

I appreciate that any person when asked whether they want more pension vs. more jobs for their fellow citizens will choose the latter - when asked. But these same people choose to watch televisions manufactured in Korea, buy Nike shoes manufactured in a sweat shop in Manila, buy t-shirts manufactured in Thailand, etc. Why? Because its cheaper and acceptable, decent, or even good quality.

So the same person who "patriotically" buys a car made in his home country, because he wants to protect and save the car manufacturing jobs, is also the same guy buying televisions from Sony and contributing to the loss of jobs in the electronics industry. There are no innocents in this game.


>And then there is the stuff that you can't really tell where it's made. I often see "imported for company X" on stuff that I KNOW was once made in Canada or the U.S.

Same situation. When for example, a European buys BMW because its Made In Europe he drives away wearing jeans (or whatever) manufactured in India. He helps saves European car manufacturing jobs while helping to destroy the clothing industry jobs.


>I agree, by and large, but soon it's gonna reach the point that the brain-power will be dedicated to figuring ways to cheat/steal things rather than invent things. Not because there's nothing left to invent, but because with an ever-declining purchasing power there simply isn't enough money around to foster that kind of innovation. people will be too busy running between part-time service jobs to have any time at all for thinking!

This is not true at all. America became primarily a service industry country already more than 10 years ago when the GDP of the service industries surpassed the 50% mark. The wealth of the future will not be in the manufacturing of things, as Marshall McLuhan said (and prominent authors like Alvin Toffler repeated), but in the "transportation of information". What he was referring to was that ideas, imagination, brain-power, is where the real wealth of a nation will be derived from. And this is has clearly been borne out by industries like software, the Internet, medicines, healthcare, education, banking and other financial services, etc.


At the end of the day if a country wants to save their manufacturing jobs (not necessarily a good idea) then the solution is really simple. Only buy your countries stuff and refuse foreign imports. This in itself would, of course, cause all sorts of other problems, politically, economically, and socially. Like I said, its not a cut-and-dry situation where the low cost producing countries are to blame. They only produce what we want and do buy.

PS. Where was the keyboard that you are typing your reply on manufactured? Why did you buy it? Is it good quality/price? :) But you can develop some stuff on that thing (ideas) and create a new industry! Netscape et al did!!