Spehro Pefhany wrote:

On Sat, 05 Mar 2011 19:37:12 -0500, Spehro Pefhany
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Mar 2011 12:23:56 -0800, the renowned Rich Grise
wrote:

jim wrote:
TwoGuns wrote:

...
I guess it is cheaper to use expensive fuel
to send raw leather to China and use China's CHEAP LABOR and use some
more EXPENSIVE fuel to ship Chinese shoes back to America.

Yup!

You might consider that if the US
taxed fuel instead of labor
the equation might change a little

Oh, hardly. It costs pennies to move a $100 pair of shoes around the
world by sea. Current 'emergency' increases due to bunker fuel costs
are less than a nickel US per shoebox volume. Triple that ($200/barrel
oil?) and it's still nothing. At what level would it make a
difference? 5% of retail? That's gasoline at $100 a gallon or
something like that. Other things will die first.

Okay, here's a real spot price:
http://www.joc.com/maritime/containe...irst-time-year

Less than $2K ever-shrinking US dollars for a 40' container Hong Kong
to Los Angeles. Probably would hold 12,000-15,000 pairs of shoes, or
0.13-0.17/pair. Doesn't even make a dent in the sales tax at retail.


A shoe box is .25 cubic feet
There are 2500 cu ft in a container
That's 1000 boxes if packed full
Ocean voyage is the cheapest part of shipping
Costs in the neighborhood of $5 for shipping
from factory to store per pair of shoes