11 ms·

Unless we want to turn a small part of America into a third-world country by suspending worker's rights, environmental protections and safety regulations, I don

Unless we want to turn a small part of America into a third-world country by suspending worker's rights, environmental protections and safety regulations, I don't think we could compete with these Asian countries. I also don't think we should. These jobs, well, suck. They are semi-skilled and are doomed to inevitable automation. The people who work these jobs are treated as chattel right now. When these people rise up and demand to be treated better forcing costs to rise, these jobs will move again to some other desperate country. If the first world wants to compete better, start certifying products as (human & environment) cruelty free. Label how many children were used to produce the product. Label how many years of life were robbed from people by working on the product because of chemicals. Stick an import tax on any place employing children or harming the global environment. Because straight nationalism isn't going to cut it.

milfot 15y ago
so perhaps the very best solution to stop the flow of jobs overseas is to start campaigning for Chinese work rights?
ZenPsycho 15y ago
If you had actually read the article, perhaps you would have added the immigration of all of Foxconn's employees into the U.S. Apple's complaints weren't about wages or regulations in the U.S. at all. The primary complaint was that there simply weren't enough people with the sufficient training to do these jobs in the U.S. the workers do not exist.
bandushrew 15y ago
The are not doomed to eventual automation, because the people who work these jobs have a huge advantage over the machines that might replace them: they are flexible in what they build, and easy to train. Robots have to take a huge leap forward before they can even come close to the flexibility offered by a person. People are flexible in what they build, they are flexible in how they build it, they are flexible in what job they do, and (depending on the contract) they can be dropped instantly where they are unnecessary. Compare that with a factory made of robots representing a large capital investment that could very quickly become out of date if you change your product slightly.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
astrange 15y ago
> Label how many children were used to produce the product. Exactly who is going to count this and not report back 0? Either because they resolved all the issues they found, because it's illegal, or because they're not going to admit to it, because it's illegal.
- Aloisius 15y ago
  Off the top of my head, everything in the US and countries with strong labor/environmental laws gets a US certified "cruelty free" sticker with little checkboxes under it that state that no child labor, etc. was used. No one else gets to have a label unless they pay to have their entire supply chain certified on a yearly basis. The absence of a label will be taken as the product did in fact use child labor, unsafe work environments, etc. just like the lack of an organic label is taken to mean that the farm uses pesticides when in fact, it could just be they couldn't afford certification.
- Natsu 15y ago
  Especially in a factory, you shouldn't trust anyone giving you numbers that are too good to be true. Sure, you can have automated processes that keep track of things, but if anything unexpected happens (which is common) and the processes change in ways the monitors don't expect, your numbers become meaningless.
- droithomme 15y ago
  You make a good point. Much "organic" produce in the US is now grown in China, particularly of processed ingredients. China is selling the certification, the food is grown in toxic soil with fertilizer and pesticide, then a gentleman signs off that it is organic and it can be sold in foreign markets for a premium to naive customers. Certifying that something is "child labor free" or "slavery free" is just as reliable.
hello_moto 15y ago
My boss, an old guy in his 50, scoffed the notion of "Made in Canada" (or "Made in USA"). He said that "Made in X" (CA/US, interchangeable) used to be good when they first came out. But quality drop significantly that they weren't any better than "Made in Y" (China, Philippine, Nepal, Srilanka). Even after you put those gory details, if the quality of the "better-morale" products suck, it won't matter much. I think we all (everyone in this world) know what it takes to make iPhone by now. But we're trained not to care any more. Good suggestion, but not sure the perception will change much.
- qdog 15y ago
  Anecdotal, I have had a few items made in China over the years I've replaced with USA made stuff that was much higher quality: my gas grill (going on 7 years of use, chinese one lasted 2 years) and some bakeware I recently bought. Some things are better from here, some aren't, but lately most of the items I buy from the US are usually higher quality, albeit often much more expensive.
  - hello_moto 15y ago
    It's not anecdotal and I agree with you: some things are better and some aren't. Perhaps there were a time in the past (of my boss's life) where made in USA weren't as good as it promised/advertised thus giving way to made in China.
    - qdog 15y ago
      When I grew up in the late 70's and the 80's, a lot of US made stuff seemed to be crap. I think that part or most of the stuff now made in the US is more quality, because it's much more difficult to make cheap stuff and compete with China.
- gonzo 15y ago
  I'm almost an old guy (50 in May), I'm the guy who makes the LEGO-compatible iPhone 4/4S and iPod Touch cases (www.smallworks.com) We recently moved the molds for these out of China, and back to the US, in order to save money. The production costs are nearly equivalent to those in China, and the 6 week 'float' of cash while the product is on the boat is a huge PITA. tl;dr: I think your boss is wrong.
mudil 15y ago
These are middle class jobs, not some sucky jobs. You are too comfortable where you are, hence you don't see other people's plight. Try to build a factory in the US. By the time all the environmental reviews and other regulations are observed, and law suits from Sierra Club and others are cleared, there is simply no way to build the factory! Hence no one builds them, hence ...a current Apple executive said. “The U.S. has stopped producing people with the skills we need.”
- angstrom 15y ago
  I know plenty of factories in the US. They're robotic. The US churns more product out now than it ever has, but it employs fewer and fewer people to do it. These are the productivity gains from 40 years of computerized automation taking its toll on the American worker. It's not a skills problem, it's much worse. If it's a skills problem the only solution is for humans to acquire the skill of working 24/7 performing repetitive tasks with a predictable maintenance schedule.
  - mudil 15y ago
    If you don't have factories, even robotic ones, you don't have engineers, middle management, suppliers, distributors, etc etc. And these are not sucky jobs.
    - angstrom 15y ago
      They're not, but the supply chains are already in place, which brings up the other elephant in the room. If labor isn't the issue pollution is. As EPA laws tightened China's lax oversight beckoned. It's not easy to find a place in the US that will look the other way and is located close to labor/transportation.
- UK-Al05 15y ago
  In the UK these are defiantly not classed as middle class jobs. Heck teachers are only JUST about considered lower middle class in the UK. Working on the shop floor is not a nice job. Humans are just not designed for fitting one component for 8 hours a day with little variation. It's one the great tricks america has done, almost everyone thinks they're middle class. In the UK i'm not even sure i'm middle class.
angstrom 15y ago
Foxconn already mentioned last summer the days are numbered for these jobs. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/01/us-foxconn-robots-idUSTRE77016B20110801 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/01/us-foxconn-robots-... The only benefit of the workers was their ability to be quickly reconfigured with rudimentary training and strict scheduling. A robotic assembly line with the same just-in-time reconfiguration is superior for obvious reasons. We've reached peak oil, peak children, and now it's probably time to consider the effects of peak labor.
- ippisl 15y ago
  But they talked about a huge number of robots , something that might double or triple current robotics industry out of the blue. Seems too big. Another explanation is that it's just a scare tactic to subdue workers. looking at their past behavior, this makes more sense.
chadmalik 15y ago
Agreed and there is a solution here: the United States needs to stop being hypocritical about workers rights by maintaining dual standards for US and foreign based workers. There needs to be an import BAN on products created with slave labor and/or destructive environmental practices, period. We need to start outlaw this practice, and start prosecuting executives who outsource their production to countries where workers are slaves and the environment is being trashed. We are the biggest market by FAR and taking this step would be tantamount to the British Empire's banning of slavery during its heyday. Instead of a race to the bottom, this step would start a race to the top. Companies that want to sell products into the world's largest consumer market would need to produce products ethically, otherwise they'd forfeit a HUGE amount of sales. This would have the added benefit of helping US workers who work under far more ethical labor and environmental standards become competitive. I challenge anyone to argue FOR slave labor and destroying the environment just so they can buy a new model smartphone every year. We overconsumer consumer gadgets anyway.
tobias3 15y ago
And they add only 2% value to an iPad: http://www.economist.com/node/21543174 http://www.economist.com/node/21543174 Those are not the jobs you want.
diogenescynic 15y ago
The Economist pegs the iPhone component cost at $178 and that Foxconn's margin at $7/iPhone: http://www.economist.com/node/21525685 http://www.economist.com/node/21525685 Most of the iPhone components don't come from China, they come from Korea, Taiwan, and actually even Italy and Texas: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-57344151-17/iphone-ipad-processor-made-by-samsung-in-texas-report-says/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-57344151-17/iphone-ipad-pr... From another article: The total component cost of an iPhone in 2009 was $172.46. Workers in China assemble the iPhone, but because their wages are low the assembly cost per phone (labeled manufacturing costs in the table below) is quite small, only $6.50 a phone. The total production cost per phone is $178.96: http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/12/29/the-innovation-trap-how-the-iphone-isnt-saving-america/ http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/12/29/the-innovati... >"If iPhones were assembled in the US the total assembly cost would rise to US$68 and total manufacturing cost would be pushed to approximately US$240. Selling iPhones assembled by US workers at US$500 per unit would still leave a 50% profit margin for Apple": http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-the-american-economy/#ixzz1k8KI625q http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-th... However, I think it's fair to conclude: Slicing the iPhone in this way, we can see that the real value of the iPhone isn’t in the manufacturing process at all, but lies in its design and the development of its components. And by owning the technology and design, the U.S. also gains in global trade, even though the iPhone isn’t manufactured in America: http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-the-american-economy/#ixzz1k8LwWTMQ http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-th...
- tobylane 15y ago
  I don't like their assumption of 50% profit margin (including nothing but hardware). They have the manufacturing cost and the retail cost, why not use the american manufacturing cost to think up a real retail price?
  - molmalo 15y ago
    Why ? Because, as the article states: Companies have closed major facilities in the United States to reopen in China. By way of explanation, executives say they are competing with Apple for shareholders. If they cannot rival Apple’s growth and profit margins, they won’t survive. They don't care about workers, they care about shareholders. If Apple says to its shareholder "We'll earn 30% less next quarter, but we'll create 30000 new jobs in the US!" how do you think the market would react ? They'd sell like crazy! The share price would plummet. No one wants to loose money.
ChrisNorstrom 15y ago
There was another article on Foxconn that was really good. The working conditions are absolute SHIT. No exaggeration. Despite being shit, the abuse at the factories is still better than a life of poverty. To you and I Chinese workers are treated like shit, but to them, it's better than before. And that's when it really hit me. As human beings, we like to climb UP, but not down, we like to ADD but not take away. We want MORE but never LESS. And as soon as a country stablizes and steps on it's feet, it's growth stops. There's no one to take advantage of. Everone has climbed up. And business is all about taking advantage of someone. This is a re-occuring theme in history. I think this is what Americans need to understand the most. China is the new America (in it's younger years, pollution, slaves, child labor, no rights, but lots of growth and opportunity), America is the new Europe. One day, everyone reading this will be dead, but rest assured China too, will stablize, be free, and then it will be Africa's turn.
- kooshball 15y ago
  I agree with this exactly. There's another article that I can't seem to find that talks about this exact process. It takes time for a country the size of China to grow. People's living condition doesnt just suddently get better. I see people complain about the working conditions when they're living in the US in their single family homes with 2 cars in the garage with boat loads of disposable incomes. They just dont understand the alternative of these giant factories is just no work or even worse jobs. Overtime, when these unskills people becomes more skills at what they do, they will have more options and things will naturally get better.
- teyc 15y ago
  You better tell that to Alex Ortiz http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/nyregion/shopping-for-christmas-gifts-while-most-are-asleep.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/nyregion/shopping-for-chri... who worked two jobs to make ends meet. That sounds like 16 hour shifts to me.

milfot 15y ago

so perhaps the very best solution to stop the flow of jobs overseas is to start campaigning for Chinese work rights?

ZenPsycho 15y ago

If you had actually read the article, perhaps you would have added the immigration of all of Foxconn's employees into the U.S. Apple's complaints weren't about wages or regulations in the U.S. at all. The primary complaint was that there simply weren't enough people with the sufficient training to do these jobs in the U.S. the workers do not exist.

bandushrew 15y ago

The are not doomed to eventual automation, because the people who work these jobs have a huge advantage over the machines that might replace them: they are flexible in what they build, and easy to train. Robots have to take a huge leap forward before they can even come close to the flexibility offered by a person. People are flexible in what they build, they are flexible in how they build it, they are flexible in what job they do, and (depending on the contract) they can be dropped instantly where they are unnecessary. Compare that with a factory made of robots representing a large capital investment that could very quickly become out of date if you change your product slightly.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

astrange 15y ago

> Label how many children were used to produce the product. Exactly who is going to count this and not report back 0? Either because they resolved all the issues they found, because it's illegal, or because they're not going to admit to it, because it's illegal.

Aloisius 15y ago
Off the top of my head, everything in the US and countries with strong labor/environmental laws gets a US certified "cruelty free" sticker with little checkboxes under it that state that no child labor, etc. was used. No one else gets to have a label unless they pay to have their entire supply chain certified on a yearly basis. The absence of a label will be taken as the product did in fact use child labor, unsafe work environments, etc. just like the lack of an organic label is taken to mean that the farm uses pesticides when in fact, it could just be they couldn't afford certification.
Natsu 15y ago
Especially in a factory, you shouldn't trust anyone giving you numbers that are too good to be true. Sure, you can have automated processes that keep track of things, but if anything unexpected happens (which is common) and the processes change in ways the monitors don't expect, your numbers become meaningless.
droithomme 15y ago
You make a good point. Much "organic" produce in the US is now grown in China, particularly of processed ingredients. China is selling the certification, the food is grown in toxic soil with fertilizer and pesticide, then a gentleman signs off that it is organic and it can be sold in foreign markets for a premium to naive customers. Certifying that something is "child labor free" or "slavery free" is just as reliable.

hello_moto 15y ago

My boss, an old guy in his 50, scoffed the notion of "Made in Canada" (or "Made in USA"). He said that "Made in X" (CA/US, interchangeable) used to be good when they first came out. But quality drop significantly that they weren't any better than "Made in Y" (China, Philippine, Nepal, Srilanka). Even after you put those gory details, if the quality of the "better-morale" products suck, it won't matter much. I think we all (everyone in this world) know what it takes to make iPhone by now. But we're trained not to care any more. Good suggestion, but not sure the perception will change much.

qdog 15y ago
Anecdotal, I have had a few items made in China over the years I've replaced with USA made stuff that was much higher quality: my gas grill (going on 7 years of use, chinese one lasted 2 years) and some bakeware I recently bought. Some things are better from here, some aren't, but lately most of the items I buy from the US are usually higher quality, albeit often much more expensive.
- hello_moto 15y ago
  It's not anecdotal and I agree with you: some things are better and some aren't. Perhaps there were a time in the past (of my boss's life) where made in USA weren't as good as it promised/advertised thus giving way to made in China.
  - qdog 15y ago
    When I grew up in the late 70's and the 80's, a lot of US made stuff seemed to be crap. I think that part or most of the stuff now made in the US is more quality, because it's much more difficult to make cheap stuff and compete with China.
gonzo 15y ago
I'm almost an old guy (50 in May), I'm the guy who makes the LEGO-compatible iPhone 4/4S and iPod Touch cases (www.smallworks.com) We recently moved the molds for these out of China, and back to the US, in order to save money. The production costs are nearly equivalent to those in China, and the 6 week 'float' of cash while the product is on the boat is a huge PITA. tl;dr: I think your boss is wrong.

mudil 15y ago

These are middle class jobs, not some sucky jobs. You are too comfortable where you are, hence you don't see other people's plight. Try to build a factory in the US. By the time all the environmental reviews and other regulations are observed, and law suits from Sierra Club and others are cleared, there is simply no way to build the factory! Hence no one builds them, hence ...a current Apple executive said. “The U.S. has stopped producing people with the skills we need.”

angstrom 15y ago
I know plenty of factories in the US. They're robotic. The US churns more product out now than it ever has, but it employs fewer and fewer people to do it. These are the productivity gains from 40 years of computerized automation taking its toll on the American worker. It's not a skills problem, it's much worse. If it's a skills problem the only solution is for humans to acquire the skill of working 24/7 performing repetitive tasks with a predictable maintenance schedule.
- mudil 15y ago
  If you don't have factories, even robotic ones, you don't have engineers, middle management, suppliers, distributors, etc etc. And these are not sucky jobs.
  - angstrom 15y ago
    They're not, but the supply chains are already in place, which brings up the other elephant in the room. If labor isn't the issue pollution is. As EPA laws tightened China's lax oversight beckoned. It's not easy to find a place in the US that will look the other way and is located close to labor/transportation.
UK-Al05 15y ago
In the UK these are defiantly not classed as middle class jobs. Heck teachers are only JUST about considered lower middle class in the UK. Working on the shop floor is not a nice job. Humans are just not designed for fitting one component for 8 hours a day with little variation. It's one the great tricks america has done, almost everyone thinks they're middle class. In the UK i'm not even sure i'm middle class.

angstrom 15y ago

Foxconn already mentioned last summer the days are numbered for these jobs. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/01/us-foxconn-robots-idUSTRE77016B20110801 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/08/01/us-foxconn-robots-... The only benefit of the workers was their ability to be quickly reconfigured with rudimentary training and strict scheduling. A robotic assembly line with the same just-in-time reconfiguration is superior for obvious reasons. We've reached peak oil, peak children, and now it's probably time to consider the effects of peak labor.

ippisl 15y ago
But they talked about a huge number of robots , something that might double or triple current robotics industry out of the blue. Seems too big. Another explanation is that it's just a scare tactic to subdue workers. looking at their past behavior, this makes more sense.

chadmalik 15y ago

Agreed and there is a solution here: the United States needs to stop being hypocritical about workers rights by maintaining dual standards for US and foreign based workers. There needs to be an import BAN on products created with slave labor and/or destructive environmental practices, period. We need to start outlaw this practice, and start prosecuting executives who outsource their production to countries where workers are slaves and the environment is being trashed. We are the biggest market by FAR and taking this step would be tantamount to the British Empire's banning of slavery during its heyday. Instead of a race to the bottom, this step would start a race to the top. Companies that want to sell products into the world's largest consumer market would need to produce products ethically, otherwise they'd forfeit a HUGE amount of sales. This would have the added benefit of helping US workers who work under far more ethical labor and environmental standards become competitive. I challenge anyone to argue FOR slave labor and destroying the environment just so they can buy a new model smartphone every year. We overconsumer consumer gadgets anyway.

tobias3 15y ago

And they add only 2% value to an iPad: http://www.economist.com/node/21543174 http://www.economist.com/node/21543174 Those are not the jobs you want.

diogenescynic 15y ago

The Economist pegs the iPhone component cost at $178 and that Foxconn's margin at $7/iPhone: http://www.economist.com/node/21525685 http://www.economist.com/node/21525685 Most of the iPhone components don't come from China, they come from Korea, Taiwan, and actually even Italy and Texas: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-57344151-17/iphone-ipad-processor-made-by-samsung-in-texas-report-says/ http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-57344151-17/iphone-ipad-pr... From another article: The total component cost of an iPhone in 2009 was $172.46. Workers in China assemble the iPhone, but because their wages are low the assembly cost per phone (labeled manufacturing costs in the table below) is quite small, only $6.50 a phone. The total production cost per phone is $178.96: http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/12/29/the-innovation-trap-how-the-iphone-isnt-saving-america/ http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/12/29/the-innovati... >"If iPhones were assembled in the US the total assembly cost would rise to US$68 and total manufacturing cost would be pushed to approximately US$240. Selling iPhones assembled by US workers at US$500 per unit would still leave a 50% profit margin for Apple": http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-the-american-economy/#ixzz1k8KI625q http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-th... However, I think it's fair to conclude: Slicing the iPhone in this way, we can see that the real value of the iPhone isn’t in the manufacturing process at all, but lies in its design and the development of its components. And by owning the technology and design, the U.S. also gains in global trade, even though the iPhone isn’t manufactured in America: http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-the-american-economy/#ixzz1k8LwWTMQ http://business.time.com/2011/01/11/is-the-iphone-bad-for-th...

tobylane 15y ago
I don't like their assumption of 50% profit margin (including nothing but hardware). They have the manufacturing cost and the retail cost, why not use the american manufacturing cost to think up a real retail price?
- molmalo 15y ago
  Why ? Because, as the article states: Companies have closed major facilities in the United States to reopen in China. By way of explanation, executives say they are competing with Apple for shareholders. If they cannot rival Apple’s growth and profit margins, they won’t survive. They don't care about workers, they care about shareholders. If Apple says to its shareholder "We'll earn 30% less next quarter, but we'll create 30000 new jobs in the US!" how do you think the market would react ? They'd sell like crazy! The share price would plummet. No one wants to loose money.

ChrisNorstrom 15y ago

There was another article on Foxconn that was really good. The working conditions are absolute SHIT. No exaggeration. Despite being shit, the abuse at the factories is still better than a life of poverty. To you and I Chinese workers are treated like shit, but to them, it's better than before. And that's when it really hit me. As human beings, we like to climb UP, but not down, we like to ADD but not take away. We want MORE but never LESS. And as soon as a country stablizes and steps on it's feet, it's growth stops. There's no one to take advantage of. Everone has climbed up. And business is all about taking advantage of someone. This is a re-occuring theme in history. I think this is what Americans need to understand the most. China is the new America (in it's younger years, pollution, slaves, child labor, no rights, but lots of growth and opportunity), America is the new Europe. One day, everyone reading this will be dead, but rest assured China too, will stablize, be free, and then it will be Africa's turn.

kooshball 15y ago
I agree with this exactly. There's another article that I can't seem to find that talks about this exact process. It takes time for a country the size of China to grow. People's living condition doesnt just suddently get better. I see people complain about the working conditions when they're living in the US in their single family homes with 2 cars in the garage with boat loads of disposable incomes. They just dont understand the alternative of these giant factories is just no work or even worse jobs. Overtime, when these unskills people becomes more skills at what they do, they will have more options and things will naturally get better.
teyc 15y ago
You better tell that to Alex Ortiz http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/nyregion/shopping-for-christmas-gifts-while-most-are-asleep.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/23/nyregion/shopping-for-chri... who worked two jobs to make ends meet. That sounds like 16 hour shifts to me.