news.google.com

Brick by brick, American business loses edge

Jeffrey Anderson THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Since its founding in 1912, Summitville Tiles has been a proud family
company with a legacy of service to the government.

F.H. "Pete" Johnson, the company's founder and a World War I veteran,
stood proudly by the company's motto, "American Made, American Owned"
- and true to his word, Summitville tiles cover the roof of the White
House and the floors of Washington, D.C., Metro stations.

Today, Mr. Johnson's grandson, David Johnson, wonders whether that
legacy has any value. Last year, his company had high expectations of
landing a subcontract to provide brick for a school to be built at a
U.S. Army base. Despite competitive prices and federal laws intended
to support American manufacturers - not to mention common sense, Mr.
Johnson thinks, given the nation's poor economy - his company lost out
to a German competitor.

The loss will be felt beyond Summitville Tiles' bottom line and could
have dire effects on the already depressed region in southeastern Ohio
that is clinging to economic life.

Equally troubling, when Summitville challenged the selection process,
Mr. Johnson encountered a wall of silence, bureaucratic confusion and
disturbing signs of contract-fixing within the U.S. Army that rewards
a foreign company over a domestic one.

The $250,000 subcontract for an elementary-middle school project at
Fort Bragg in Fayetteville, N.C., has since caught the attention of
lawmakers from Ohio, who are concerned that the Army has no say over
hundreds of millions of dollars in military subcontracts. The Defense
Department's office of inspector general already has opened an
administrative investigation into the selection process.

Two Democratic congressmen from Ohio, Rep. Charlie Wilson, whose
district includes Summitville, and Rep. John Boccieri, along with
Reps. Jim Jordan and Bob Latta, Ohio Republicans, wrote to Secretary
of the Army John McHugh in late November and asked for an explanation
of "the Army's decision to overlook a domestic manufacturer and the
failure to support the American economy."

A month later, an Army official responded that the Army "does not have
privity of contract with subcontractors or a subcontractor contract
award." The official added that the German company was exempt from the
Buy American Act, which protects U.S. manufacturers from foreign
competitors because of a World Trade Organization pact to stimulate
foreign trade.

After a closed-door Capitol Hill meeting in January with high-ranking
Army officials, Mr. Wilson appeared unassuaged. "I still strongly
believe that the Army should be better about ensuring that American
companies are given a fair shake," the congressman said in a
statement. "This experience with Summitville Tiles has reinforced my
strong belief that American companies should be supported at all
levels of federal contracting.

"I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that we have
better oversight of such contracts in the future," he pledged.

That may come too late for Summitville Tiles. Mr. Johnson was forced
to lay off 22 more workers in an ever-shrinking manufacturing belt. In
recent years, his work force has shrunk from 750 to 150 - all while
his global competitors skirt the Buy American Act in the wake of a
crippling recession.

"This is another example of why American manufacturing is dying on the
vine," Mr. Johnson said.

A bright spot

With military base realignment and consolidation throughout the
country, new construction is a potential bright spot for some builders
and manufacturers. In the Fort Bragg region alone, officials expect to
spend $274 million over the next several years just to build schools,
according to the Army's comprehensive growth plan.

However, Ohio lost almost a half-million jobs between 2000 and 2009 -
a recession driven primarily by manufacturing losses, said George
Zeller, a Cleveland-based economic research analyst.

In an election year, with congressional seats at stake and a steady
erosion of manufacturing jobs, Mr. Johnson is wondering whether
lawmakers will press the Army for oversight of the subcontracting
process.

"These jobs are not coming back," he said. "We don't just send out a
memo, either. We go into the factory and explain what is happening,
like a family at the kitchen table. It's painful to look into people's
eyes."

Although the school at Fort Bragg was not going to make or break
Summitville, Mr. Johnson said it would have helped stop the bleeding.

"When folks are down, I'd think the military in particular would want
to help American companies," he said.

In July, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers awarded the $39 million Fort
Bragg school construction contract to Balfour Beatty Construction, a
subsidiary of a British engineering firm of the same name. The firm
has more than $16 billion in annual revenue.

Balfour Beatty has excelled in winning military contracts.

From 2000 to 2008, the Defense Department awarded the company more
than $185 million in contracts, according to federal government
records. In October, the firm announced an award of military
construction projects totaling $449 million.

Once a general contractor was hired for the Fort Bragg project, Mr.
Johnson said, the Army "preselected" his German competitor to provide
brick for the school.

Had 'no role'

Army officials contend they had "no role in the selection of
contractors or materials," said Fort Bragg Garrison public affairs
officer Thomas D. McCollum. "That belongs to the Army Corps of
Engineers."

Not so, countered Louis J. Moore, chief of the regional contracting
center for the Army Corps of Engineers in Savannah, Ga. He said the
general contractor chooses subcontractors and materials.

"Every general contractor has their own way of doing it," Mr. Moore
said.

Officials at the Department of Defense Education Activity Fund, which
provides funding for school construction on military bases from its
$1.8 billion annual budget, pointed to Fort Bragg: "The local
installation has the final say on those matters," Kevin Kelly, chief
of financial operations, said of the selection of building materials.

Complying with specifications issued by the Army Corps of Engineers,
Balfour Beatty solicited bids last fall for a brick veneer wall system
for the Fort Bragg school from a number of companies, said Balfour
Senior Vice President Kent Long.

Mr. Long said many factors come into play in choosing a vendor: price
of materials, availability, conformity with Army standards. A key
factor at Fort Bragg, he said, was that one of Summitville's
competitors, Feldhaus Klinker, a German company, supplied brick for
two other projects under way at the base.

"We certainly could've used other brick," he said. "But [Feldhaus] has
already been used, so the benefit is, you don't have to go through the
approval process again."

Such decisions can be cost-effective, but it remains unclear whether
that was the case at Fort Bragg.

"If we arbitrarily gave out price information, it could stir up a
hornet's nest," Mr. Long said in declining to disclose competing bids.

In November, he said, his team met at Fort Bragg with officials from
the Army, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Defense Department, and
the group decided to go with Feldhaus. Afterward, according to
multiple sources, Balfour's architect, Cathy Roche, of the Orlando,
Fla., firm Schenkel Shultz, told a Summitville sales representative
that Feldhaus was "preselected."

The problem, Mr. Johnson said, is that Summitville had not yet quoted
its price.

Ms. Roche referred questions to her firm, which referred questions to
Balfour Beatty.

The Washington Times reviewed numerous documents and written
communications and interviewed multiple parties involved in the
selection process. The documents show that in early December, after
Feldhaus was selected as the brick veneer supplier, Balfour Beatty
project manager Dave Goltz issued a purchase order and told a
Summitville sales representative that Summitville's price was $3 per
square foot higher than Feldhaus' for 100,000 square feet of brick.

However, a quotation from Summitville's distributor, Harwood Brick, a
Florida company, shows that Summitville priced its brick at $4.58 per
square foot. That would put the German bid at $1.58 per square foot,
Mr. Johnson said.

"With costs of shipping across the Atlantic Ocean and transportation
to the site, that simply is not possible," he said.

Frozen out

Harwood never quoted Summitville's price to Balfour Beatty either, he
added. More troubling, Mr. Johnson said, is that Summitville suspects
that the domestic distributor of Feldhaus brick had something to do
with freezing out Summitville.

"We believe that Fort Bragg has been misled by those representing the
German [company]," he wrote to Ohio's congressional delegation in
November.

Feldhaus is distributed exclusively in the United States by United
Wall Systems of Greenville, S.C. Brian Drummond, president of United
Wall, did not return calls.

Although Mr. Long maintained that Balfour Beatty relied on brick wall
construction firms to solicit brick prices, Mr. Johnson contended that
those firms also never conveyed his actual price to Balfour Beatty.

"We included a brick estimate in our overall price," said Roger Webb,
chief operating officer for Florida brick installer Tilt-Con, noting
that his company estimated the cost of brick at $5 to $8 per square
foot.

"Maybe Balfour Beatty got [Summitville's] price from the distributor,"
said Brent Long, of Charlotte, N.C.-based Choate Construction, which
won the subcontract to install the German brick.

Brent Long of Choate and Kent Long of Balfour Beatty are twin
brothers.

In early December, Summitville Tiles filed a formal complaint with the
Defense Department's office of inspector general claiming a "no-bid"
contract award. Gary M. Comerford, a spokesman for the inspector
general's office, confirmed recently that an administrative
investigation is under way. The office's policy is to decline to
comment on such matters until resolved, he said.

On Jan. 12, Mr. Johnson received a letter from Mr. Moore of the Army
Corps of Engineers, explaining that "Balfour decided to procure the
brick directly from Feldhaus in order to improve its ability to meet
the construction schedule."

Mr. Long of Choate Construction, however, said the brick does not need
to be delivered "until spring at the earliest, because of delays due
to wetlands issues." Mr. Johnson replied that Summitville could have
delivered the brick by now with no problem. "We have a whole new
product line - it's 'shovel-ready,' " he said.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, Ohio Democrat, declined to comment, although his
office said it was looking into the subcontractor issue and that the
senator had concerns with World Trade Organization procurement rules.

A spokesman for Sen. George V. Voinovich, Ohio Republican, said his
boss does not get involved with individual procurement matters.
Although the office regretted that Summitville was not selected, he
said, "if any [federal regulations] were violated, we hope [the
Defense Department] will address the issue through proper channels."

On Feb 15, 11:29*pm, Mike wrote:
news.google.com

Brick by brick, American business loses edge

Jeffrey Anderson THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Since its founding in 1912, Summitville Tiles has been a proud family
company with a legacy of service to the government.

F.H. "Pete" Johnson, the company's founder and a World War I veteran,
stood proudly by the company's motto, "American Made, American Owned"
- and true to his word, Summitville tiles cover the roof of the White
House and the floors of Washington, D.C., Metro stations.

Today, Mr. Johnson's grandson, David Johnson, wonders whether that
legacy has any value. Last year, his company had high expectations of
landing a subcontract to provide brick for a school to be built at a
U.S. Army base. Despite competitive prices and federal laws intended
to support American manufacturers - not to mention common sense, Mr.
Johnson thinks, given the nation's poor economy - his company lost out
to a German competitor.

The loss will be felt beyond Summitville Tiles' bottom line and could
have dire effects on the already depressed region in southeastern Ohio
that is clinging to economic life.

Equally troubling, when Summitville challenged the selection process,
Mr. Johnson encountered a wall of silence, bureaucratic confusion and
disturbing signs of contract-fixing within the U.S. Army that rewards
a foreign company over a domestic one.

The $250,000 subcontract for an elementary-middle school project at
Fort Bragg in Fayetteville, N.C., has since caught the attention of
lawmakers from Ohio, who are concerned that the Army has no say over
hundreds of millions of dollars in military subcontracts. The Defense
Department's office of inspector general already has opened an
administrative investigation into the selection process.

Two Democratic congressmen from Ohio, Rep. Charlie Wilson, whose
district includes Summitville, and Rep. John Boccieri, along with
Reps. Jim Jordan and Bob Latta, Ohio Republicans, wrote to Secretary
of the Army John McHugh in late November and asked for an explanation
of "the Army's decision to overlook a domestic manufacturer and the
failure to support the American economy."

A month later, an Army official responded that the Army "does not have
privity of contract with subcontractors or a subcontractor contract
award." The official added that the German company was exempt from the
Buy American Act, which protects U.S. manufacturers from foreign
competitors because of a World Trade Organization pact to stimulate
foreign trade.

After a closed-door Capitol Hill meeting in January with high-ranking
Army officials, Mr. Wilson appeared unassuaged. "I still strongly
believe that the Army should be better about ensuring that American
companies are given a fair shake," the congressman said in a
statement. "This experience with Summitville Tiles has reinforced my
strong belief that American companies should be supported at all
levels of federal contracting.

"I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that we have
better oversight of such contracts in the future," he pledged.

That may come too late for Summitville Tiles. Mr. Johnson was forced
to lay off 22 more workers in an ever-shrinking manufacturing belt. In
recent years, his work force has shrunk from 750 to 150 - all while
his global competitors skirt the Buy American Act in the wake of a
crippling recession.

"This is another example of why American manufacturing is dying on the
vine," Mr. Johnson said.

A bright spot

With military base realignment and consolidation throughout the
country, new construction is a potential bright spot for some builders
and manufacturers. In the Fort Bragg region alone, officials expect to
spend $274 million over the next several years just to build schools,
according to the Army's comprehensive growth plan.

However, Ohio lost almost a half-million jobs between 2000 and 2009 -
a recession driven primarily by manufacturing losses, said George
Zeller, a Cleveland-based economic research analyst.

In an election year, with congressional seats at stake and a steady
erosion of manufacturing jobs, Mr. Johnson is wondering whether
lawmakers will press the Army for oversight of the subcontracting
process.

"These jobs are not coming back," he said. "We don't just send out a
memo, either. We go into the factory and explain what is happening,
like a family at the kitchen table. It's painful to look into people's
eyes."

Although the school at Fort Bragg was not going to make or break
Summitville, Mr. Johnson said it would have helped stop the bleeding.

"When folks are down, I'd think the military in particular would want
to help American companies," he said.

In July, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers awarded the $39 million Fort
Bragg school construction contract to Balfour Beatty Construction, a
subsidiary of a British engineering firm of the same name. The firm
has more than $16 billion in annual revenue.

Balfour Beatty has excelled in winning military contracts.

From 2000 to 2008, the Defense Department awarded the company more
than $185 million in contracts, according to federal government
records. In October, the firm announced an award of military
construction projects totaling $449 million.

Once a general contractor was hired for the Fort Bragg project, Mr.
Johnson said, the Army "preselected" his German competitor to provide
brick for the school.

Had 'no role'

Army officials contend they had "no role in the selection of
contractors or materials," said Fort Bragg Garrison public affairs
officer Thomas D. McCollum. "That belongs to the Army Corps of
Engineers."

Not so, countered Louis J. Moore, chief of the regional contracting
center for the Army Corps of Engineers in Savannah, Ga. He said the
general contractor chooses subcontractors and materials.

"Every general contractor has their own way of doing it," Mr. Moore
said.

Officials at the Department of Defense Education Activity Fund, which
provides funding for school construction on military bases from its
$1.8 billion annual budget, pointed to Fort Bragg: "The local
installation has the final say on those matters," Kevin Kelly, chief
of financial operations, said of the selection of building materials.

Complying with specifications issued by the Army Corps of Engineers,
Balfour Beatty solicited bids last fall for a brick veneer wall system
for the Fort Bragg school from a number of companies, said Balfour
Senior Vice President Kent Long.

Mr. Long said many factors come into play in choosing a vendor: price
of materials, availability, conformity with Army standards. A key
factor at Fort Bragg, he said, was that one of Summitville's
competitors, Feldhaus Klinker, a German company, supplied brick for
two other projects under way at the base.

"We certainly could've used other brick," he said. "But [Feldhaus] has
already been used, so the benefit is, you don't have to go through the
approval process again."

Such decisions can be cost-effective, but it remains unclear whether
that was the case at Fort Bragg.

"If we arbitrarily gave out price information, it could stir up a
hornet's nest," Mr. Long said in declining to disclose competing bids.

In November, he said, his team met at Fort Bragg with officials from
the Army, the Army Corps of Engineers and the Defense Department, and
the group decided to go with Feldhaus. Afterward, according to
multiple sources, Balfour's architect, Cathy Roche, of the Orlando,
Fla., firm Schenkel Shultz, told a Summitville sales representative
that Feldhaus was "preselected."

The problem, Mr. Johnson said, is that Summitville had not yet quoted
its price.

Ms. Roche referred questions to her firm, which referred questions to
Balfour Beatty.

The Washington Times reviewed numerous documents and written
communications and interviewed multiple parties involved in the
selection process. The documents show that in early December, after
Feldhaus was selected as the brick veneer supplier, Balfour Beatty
project manager Dave Goltz issued a purchase order and told a
Summitville sales representative that Summitville's price was $3 per
square foot higher than Feldhaus' for 100,000 square feet of brick.

However, a quotation from Summitville's distributor, Harwood Brick, a
Florida company, shows that Summitville priced its brick at $4.58 per
square foot. That would put the German bid at $1.58 per square foot,
Mr. Johnson said.

"With costs of shipping across the Atlantic Ocean and transportation
to the site, that simply is not possible," he said.

Frozen out

Harwood never quoted Summitville's price to Balfour Beatty either, he
added. More troubling, Mr. Johnson said, is that Summitville suspects
that the domestic distributor of Feldhaus brick had something to do
with freezing out Summitville.

"We believe that Fort Bragg has been misled by those representing the
German [company]," he wrote to Ohio's congressional delegation in
November.

Feldhaus is distributed exclusively in the United States by United
Wall Systems of Greenville, S.C. Brian Drummond, president of United
Wall, did not return calls.

Although Mr. Long maintained that Balfour Beatty relied on brick wall
construction firms to solicit brick prices, Mr. Johnson contended that
those firms also never conveyed his actual price to Balfour Beatty.

"We included a brick estimate in our overall price," said Roger Webb,
chief operating officer for Florida brick installer Tilt-Con, noting
that his company estimated the cost of brick at $5 to $8 per square
foot.

"Maybe Balfour Beatty got [Summitville's] price from the distributor,"
said Brent Long, of Charlotte, N.C.-based Choate Construction, which
won the subcontract to install the German brick.

Brent Long of Choate and Kent Long of Balfour Beatty are twin
brothers.

In early December, Summitville Tiles filed a formal complaint with the
Defense Department's office of inspector general claiming a "no-bid"
contract award. Gary M. Comerford, a spokesman for the inspector
general's office, confirmed recently that an administrative
investigation is under way. The office's policy is to decline to
comment on such matters until resolved, he said.

On Jan. 12, Mr. Johnson received a letter from Mr. Moore of the Army
Corps of Engineers, explaining that "Balfour decided to procure the
brick directly from Feldhaus in order to improve its ability to meet
the construction schedule."

Mr. Long of Choate Construction, however, said the brick does not need
to be delivered "until spring at the earliest, because of delays due
to wetlands issues." Mr. Johnson replied that Summitville could have
delivered the brick by now with no problem. "We have a whole new
product line - it's 'shovel-ready,' " he said.

Sen. Sherrod Brown, Ohio Democrat, declined to comment, although his
office said it was looking into the subcontractor issue and that the
senator had concerns with World Trade Organization procurement rules.

A spokesman for Sen. George V. Voinovich, Ohio Republican, said his
boss does not get involved with individual procurement matters.
Although the office regretted that Summitville was not selected, he
said, "if any [federal regulations] were violated, we hope [the
Defense Department] will address the issue through proper channels."

The military unfortunately has a very poor record of using common
sense when awarding contracts. I suspect kick backs as the obvious
reason.

On Feb 16, 1:29*am, Mike further .......

An awful long article about a $250,000 sub contract?
And if the 'brick facing' material is just part of that cost, say 60%
for example, that's around $150,000 worth of bricks?
If the US brick were 'truly' $3 per sq.ft more ................ then
that 150,000 would become somewhere in the region of $290,000 more!
Or around $435,000 for bricks alone?
The numbers don't make sense!
While agreeing that anything that is 'defence' (weapons) should be
home (or at least allied countries) provided/controlled, the USA also
has to be careful not to cut off trade contacts etc.
There are enough large and growing economies in this world now for
suppliers to sell elsewhere in the face of trade barriers, artificial
tariffs or subsidies. Canadian wood products being sold to China, for
example, when US housing down-turned!

On Feb 15, 11:29*pm, Mike wrote:
news.google.com

Brick by brick, American business loses edge

Yet another tale of an American company expecting handouts from the
government...

People this is called CAPITALISM. If you want to get the business
these days, you need to be able to do the job for less than the other
guy. Gone are the days of giving business to American companies simply
because they're American.

How sad is it that they got beat out by a German company? Germans
produce some of the highest quality, and consequently most expensive,
products out there... The fact that an American company can't even
undercut the Germans is a testament to the rampant greed in our
society.

Everybody's gotta have the clothes and the bling and the escalade and
the xbox and the flatscreen and the iphone... Those are things to
strive for, not inalienable rights... Companies just can't afford to
pay people that much to turn a wrench for 8 hours a day anymore, so
they send the work overseas where people appreciate a living wage
because it's more than they had.

On Feb 16, 1:05*pm, wrote:
On Feb 15, 11:29*pm, Mike wrote:

news.google.com

Brick by brick, American business loses edge

Yet another tale of an American company expecting handouts from the
government...

People this is called CAPITALISM. If you want to get the business
these days, you need to be able to do the job for less than the other
guy. Gone are the days of giving business to American companies simply
because they're American.

How sad is it that they got beat out by a German company? Germans
produce some of the highest quality, and consequently most expensive,
products out there... The fact that an American company can't even
undercut the Germans is a testament to the rampant greed in our
society.

Everybody's gotta have the clothes and the bling and the escalade and
the xbox and the flatscreen and the iphone... Those are things to
strive for, not inalienable rights... Companies just can't afford to
pay people that much to turn a wrench for 8 hours a day anymore, so
they send the work overseas where people appreciate a living wage
because it's more than they had.

BTW. Two very expensive and 'not cheap place' to do business, with
high salaries and extensive taxation to pay for various services
funded by their governments are Japan and Germany.
A fact that undercuts the 'cheap labour' (people working for one
dollar an hour etc.) argument that can be applied to goods from some
areas of the world.
In Sri lanka, say, where the women who pick tea earn less than two
dollars and day and that only when they actually work. Or Haiti where
there is little work and people try to live on a dollar a day or less!

On Feb 17, 12:33*am, terry wrote:
BTW. Two very expensive and 'not cheap place' to do business, with
high salaries and extensive taxation to pay for various services
funded by their governments are Japan and Germany.
A fact that *undercuts the 'cheap labour' (people working for one
dollar an hour etc.) argument that can be applied to goods from some
areas of the world.

Nobody is outsourcing to Japan or Germany. Japanese and German goods
are hardly cheap or of questionable quality. Japan and Germany are not
the "problem," and in fact they're in the same boat as the US.

In Sri lanka, say, where the women who pick tea earn less than two
dollars and day and that only when they actually work. Or Haiti where
there is little work and people try to live on a dollar a day or less!

Which would be a travesty if Sri Lanka and Haiti had the same standard
of living, the same costs of goods and services as the United States.

Fact of the matter is, if you're "only" earning a dollar a day in
Haiti, you're Mr. Gotrocks.

These Chinese people that are "only" earning a few dollars a day...
It's more money than they had before! For them it's a living wage,
with some disposable income to boot! Cell phones, digital cameras,
blue jeans and sneakers... They can afford that stuff now.

On 02/18/10 02:08 pm, wrote:

BTW. Two very expensive and 'not cheap place' to do business, with
high salaries and extensive taxation to pay for various services
funded by their governments are Japan and Germany.
A fact that undercuts the 'cheap labour' (people working for one
dollar an hour etc.) argument that can be applied to goods from some
areas of the world.

Nobody is outsourcing to Japan or Germany. Japanese and German goods
are hardly cheap or of questionable quality. Japan and Germany are not
the "problem," and in fact they're in the same boat as the US.

In Sri lanka, say, where the women who pick tea earn less than two
dollars and day and that only when they actually work. Or Haiti where
there is little work and people try to live on a dollar a day or less!

Which would be a travesty if Sri Lanka and Haiti had the same standard
of living, the same costs of goods and services as the United States.

Fact of the matter is, if you're "only" earning a dollar a day in
Haiti, you're Mr. Gotrocks.

These Chinese people that are "only" earning a few dollars a day...
It's more money than they had before! For them it's a living wage,
with some disposable income to boot! Cell phones, digital cameras,
blue jeans and sneakers... They can afford that stuff now.

Especially when they don't have to buy health insurance as well.

Perce

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:13:56 -0500, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 02/18/10 02:08 pm, wrote:

BTW. Two very expensive and 'not cheap place' to do business, with
high salaries and extensive taxation to pay for various services
funded by their governments are Japan and Germany.
A fact that undercuts the 'cheap labour' (people working for one
dollar an hour etc.) argument that can be applied to goods from some
areas of the world.

Nobody is outsourcing to Japan or Germany. Japanese and German goods
are hardly cheap or of questionable quality. Japan and Germany are not
the "problem," and in fact they're in the same boat as the US.

In Sri lanka, say, where the women who pick tea earn less than two
dollars and day and that only when they actually work. Or Haiti where
there is little work and people try to live on a dollar a day or less!

Which would be a travesty if Sri Lanka and Haiti had the same standard
of living, the same costs of goods and services as the United States.

Fact of the matter is, if you're "only" earning a dollar a day in
Haiti, you're Mr. Gotrocks.

These Chinese people that are "only" earning a few dollars a day...
It's more money than they had before! For them it's a living wage,
with some disposable income to boot! Cell phones, digital cameras,
blue jeans and sneakers... They can afford that stuff now.

Especially when they don't have to buy health insurance as well.

Great for business too! Run any process you want, put the waste in
the river. Don't worry about the worker's safety. Worker's get
sick or killed? Just replace them! Take advantage of cheap electricity from
the nearby coal plant running without scrubbers or any of that other
costly ****.

AZ Nomad wrote:
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:13:56 -0500, Percival P. Cassidy wrote:
On 02/18/10 02:08 pm, wrote:

BTW. Two very expensive and 'not cheap place' to do business, with
high salaries and extensive taxation to pay for various services
funded by their governments are Japan and Germany.
A fact that undercuts the 'cheap labour' (people working for one
dollar an hour etc.) argument that can be applied to goods from some
areas of the world.
Nobody is outsourcing to Japan or Germany. Japanese and German goods
are hardly cheap or of questionable quality. Japan and Germany are not
the "problem," and in fact they're in the same boat as the US.

In Sri lanka, say, where the women who pick tea earn less than two
dollars and day and that only when they actually work. Or Haiti where
there is little work and people try to live on a dollar a day or less!
Which would be a travesty if Sri Lanka and Haiti had the same standard
of living, the same costs of goods and services as the United States.

Fact of the matter is, if you're "only" earning a dollar a day in
Haiti, you're Mr. Gotrocks.

These Chinese people that are "only" earning a few dollars a day...
It's more money than they had before! For them it's a living wage,
with some disposable income to boot! Cell phones, digital cameras,
blue jeans and sneakers... They can afford that stuff now.

Especially when they don't have to buy health insurance as well.

Great for business too! Run any process you want, put the waste in
the river. Don't worry about the worker's safety. Worker's get
sick or killed? Just replace them! Take advantage of cheap electricity from
the nearby coal plant running without scrubbers or any of that other
costly ****.

Back in the bad old days of slavery, a slave wouldn't be sent out
to do a dangerous job, the slave owners would send an Irishman, he
wouldn't cost them any money to replace. Dang! Some of my ancestors
had it rough.

TDD

AZ Nomad wrote:
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 14:13:56 -0500, Percival P. Cassidy
wrote:
On 02/18/10 02:08 pm, wrote:

BTW. Two very expensive and 'not cheap place' to do business, with
high salaries and extensive taxation to pay for various services
funded by their governments are Japan and Germany.
A fact that undercuts the 'cheap labour' (people working for one
dollar an hour etc.) argument that can be applied to goods from
some areas of the world.

Nobody is outsourcing to Japan or Germany. Japanese and German goods
are hardly cheap or of questionable quality. Japan and Germany are
not the "problem," and in fact they're in the same boat as the US.

In Sri lanka, say, where the women who pick tea earn less than two
dollars and day and that only when they actually work. Or Haiti
where there is little work and people try to live on a dollar a
day or less!

Which would be a travesty if Sri Lanka and Haiti had the same
standard of living, the same costs of goods and services as the
United States.

Fact of the matter is, if you're "only" earning a dollar a day in
Haiti, you're Mr. Gotrocks.

These Chinese people that are "only" earning a few dollars a day...
It's more money than they had before! For them it's a living wage,
with some disposable income to boot! Cell phones, digital cameras,
blue jeans and sneakers... They can afford that stuff now.

Especially when they don't have to buy health insurance as well.

Great for business too! Run any process you want, put the waste in
the river. Don't worry about the worker's safety. Worker's get
sick or killed? Just replace them! Take advantage of cheap
electricity from
the nearby coal plant running without scrubbers or any of that other
costly ****.

Yes, you are right. This was the case, is the case but less likely to be the
case in the future. There is a lag phase between planning and completing
construction.

Several years back, I worked in Beijing helping to advise their city
engineers and consultants on infrastructure, water and wastewater, required
for the Olympics and beyond. At that time I was concerned about the limited
environmental and quality control being undertaken.

I recall giving a presentation to the senior staff which I ended by
emphasising the need for environmental and quality control and evidence of
monitoring. I was concerned that a key recommendation that I gave might be
ignored. My last slide in the presentation reminded them that China was now
part of the international market and that Walmart was opening a new store in
the city that weekend. They would demand evidence of consistent quality of
product.

Three years later, I was invited to give a presentation at an international
conference in Hangzhou where I met up purely by coincidence(?) with a US
consultant who had been appointed to take the work forward from my report.
His solution differed from mine but had a similar impact upon the
environment.

Pollution of rivers causing contamination of drinking water, (especially
when it affected international neighbours), contamination of milk products
with melamine and production of plasterboard destined for international
markets is having an impact upon future developments. But, don't expect
these initiatives to happen overnight!