Do you care where your tools are manufactured?

Page 3 of 16  
dpb wrote:

In other words you don't have any statement of principle from a non-Christian religion that is as clear and unambiguous as Pope Paul VI's "We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. "
--
--
--John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

" It is quite clear from a variety of sources that abortion has been severely disapproved of in the Buddhist tradition."
http://www.kusala.org/udharma/abortion.html
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John Horner wrote:

(a) That is not an official statement by any recognized spokesman for Buddhism and (b) the whole point of the document you linked is that abortion is _acceptable_ under Buddhism under some circumstances.
Regardless, it's an opinion by someone whose relationship to Buddhism is not at all clear.
--
--
--John
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Never said that. If you take the time to read what I wrote and try to comprehend it, you will see that the government nor the church matters to me in this case. You will also note that I did not say which side I'm on. None of your business, none of the government's business, nor is it the business of any religion.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

Why would one have to be a Christian to recognize that a life is being taken by the act of abortion?
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I picked up an elective (Sociology) for, what I thought, an easy credit. I found it incredibly fascinating, but didn't make a career out of it <G> I did latch on to a lot of really cool information which came out of some studies. In Papua New Guinea, they found several tribes (this would have been in the 1950's) who had had zero exposure to western ideas, had no exposure to Islam or any religion. They did understand the concept of lying, stealing, murder all that 'wrong' stuff. The fact that they did it anyway had nothing to do with the discovery. They knew it was wrong. They also knew to help somebody was right. So this whole 'murder-in-the-womb' concept would have even been wrong to those in the jungle. We KNOW what's right and wrong. Different religions have merely capitalised on the fear aspect of 'wrong'...that somehow you can 'pay off' your sins, bribe your gods. Fear moulding the masses....now where have I seen THAT demonstrated lately......
oops...jumps off soap-box (made in ROC)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

I object strongly to the use of force in this regard. What could be more anti-choice than forcing a woman to have an abortion? For some reason you keyed in on the word abortion in my post and missed the far more important word FORCED.
I don't buy the simple minded cultural relativism arguments at all. Some things are simply wrong. Infant sacrifice to appease the gods, for example. I could care less if a given culture has practiced it for thousands of years and if the practice is codified in law. It is still wrong. Ditto for slavery.
As far as China goes, the fact that something is lawful or unlawful doesn't have much moral standing at all. China has never had a democratic government and it's laws are enacted and enforced by a government which at it's root is a military dictatorship. Thus any argument for something being ok in the context of China because of China's laws of the moment has no principled foundation. You don't even know that a given law expresses the majority view of the "culture" because said law is enacted without any hint of even the consent of the majority.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I couldn't agree more. Where and who did the Chinese copy to produce cheap shit on a unlevel playing field! And we are allowing American business to sell our future down the drain for profits! How will our kids feel when the only jobs available here are at third world wages. American ingenuity created most of the products available and then were copied in "sweat shops" around the world. The Chinese have been buying American debt for years and as soon as we can't buy their products any longer they can trash the dollar and we will be in an endless economic tailspin that will make mexico look like the golden era! Keep on with that "couldn't care less" and drive more nails in the inevitable coffin. I would hate to admit I was that ill informed!!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Strong stuff, but right on.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I am retired earlier than I had wanted to be partly as a result of woodworking machinery moving to china.
About 350 very good, experienced, productive friends and collegues are similarly positioned or are working below their skill level as a result of moving product to China. These "greedy, slothful" individuals were making a pure killing at an average of $13.50 an hour with an average experience level of 25 years.
While working the transition of the product to china, I got to see first hand the differences in the component quality. I got to see cast iron that ranged from 145 to 225 brinnell hardness replace iron that ranged from 195 to 205. I got to see pilot lot after pilot lot that never was machined to statistical capability, and final the powers that be turn their heads and use it anyway. I got see literally every batch of finished product from China reworked before it could be distributed. I got to experience missed deliveries, emergency air freight shipments, orders constantly on quality hold, and these things added to the shipment costs, warranty costs that tripled, and the overhead required to" manage" chinese purchasing, I got to see that those anticipated "savings" never really materialized. Maybe some day.
Yesterday, I installed a kitchen sink and after spending the time to install the brand new strainer basket (from China) I got to take it back out because the threads were bad and would not hold the tailpiece nut. In my life seems like this is at least a weekly occurance on some defective chinese component. I'm slowly learning to test every brand new chinese component before I use it to save time. Now many times I buy it, open it in the store, test it and only leave the store with it if it is good. Saves the trip back.
You can probably guess where I stand on the matter. If I have a choice of a product that is made in the U.S. or any other country of origin that has proven quality, I'll buy it. Many times there is no choice.
I never had a problem with the Japanese grabbing market share in the automobile business. They did it the right way, that is they made a higher quality product and sold it at a fair price which resulted in value. That's not the case on most things from china.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I understand where you are coming from. The one sentence that really stick out is: "I got to see pilot lot after pilot lot that never was machined to statistical capability, and final the powers that be turn their heads and use it anyway." I have a problem with a company doing that.
I'd realy like to know the answers to so many questions when companies decide to go overseas. Profit, of course, is a big motivator, but there are many "what ifs".
The US built tools have to compete with other major brands, such as Jet and Grizzly. In the end, what is the real cost difference when you back out the emergency air shipments and re-work? What happens to the company reputation when quality drops? What happens if the US manufacturing is kept in place, but at a reduced capacity because some sales are lost to the cheaper competition? How many people are willing to spend $xxx more for brand D knowing they have superior quality of a machine built by experienced craftsmen?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Edwin Pawlowski wrote: ...

Not nearly enough, apparently...
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and that's where you are wrong. My business was growing at a reasonable rate each year. The operation was extraordinarily profitable from a return on sales and return on invested capital basis. The decision was made purely to try to squeeze out a little more profit.
I'm not going to quote direct figures but the volume of business is signifcantly off as a result of the strategy.
I think we may have discussed this before. Did the market demand the switch or did the corporate hacks just listen to their consultants and believe their BS about "conversion costs" etc? It was the latter not the former in my case. The customers for my product left *after* the move, not before.
There will always be a segment of the market that wants high quality and is willing to pay a reasonable amount more for that quality. If they can find it.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Frank Boettcher wrote: ...

Yes, but it's the size of that market that was under question here.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Your comment was "not nearly enough". The customer base for the product was steadily growing and the operation was quite profitable, more so than the other segment in the company that had always depended on imports and big box positioning. Under what criteria do you assign a "not nearly enough" definition to the size of that select customer base?
If you are right, with the strategy of consolidation and globalization now firmly in place, it should be growing even faster and even more profitable. Not so. Try shrinking and losing.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Frank Boettcher wrote:

Well, not having full access to the books nor having a seat on the board of directors, it's not quite possible to fully answer in detail for your specific former employer. The remark was, however, made as an overall generalization, not a specific case study.
There was also one very important additional word in the comment you have chosen to not quote and that was "apparently" which was simply a reflection of the reality of what was chosen to be done. If they were satisfied w/ the growth and size of the market one would presume the decision would have gone another direction.
I understand your position and sympathize but facts is facts on both sides of the equation. You see one set; it's pretty clear management saw another based on their actions.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So what part of my post do you disbelieve and need additional proof? I'm constrained from being able to offer it, just curious as to why you would question my credibility.

I see, however, you commented in a portion of the thread that was talking about woodworking machinery.

I have no idea what you just said.

Corporate leaders, who have not really done much but have fast tracked to the top, rarely have the insight to leave well enough alone when they have the "golden goose" They often want to kill it to get the "gold"

There are no facts on the Corporate hack side of the equation, only speculation. Sustained profitability and growth over a long period of time is a fact. A strategy of greed is not based on any fact whatsoever, just a gleem in ones eye. "if we can squeeze a little more out of this thing, our bonuses will be much larger". I'm sorry you can find sympathy in that attitude, it is one of the reasons they get away with it.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Frank Boettcher wrote:

I wasn't in the boardroom, were you? I understand you were on the factory floor and have a viewpoint of what you saw from there. I can't say I'm pleased w/ the decision either, simply that I have too little actual factual information to judge other than from the decision made apparently the markets and profitability weren't to the level desired so a decision was made to change.
Whether it will turn out to have the desired overall end effect isn't yet known for longterm even though certainly it isn't clear it has had the desired effect for the type of folks who tend to congregate here. What it will do for their overall market share, etc., is still to be determined.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, I was a vice president, a company officer fully exposed to all financial data specific to the company in all segments. The group and corporate financial information was available to anyone who asked for an annual report. There is nothing "secret" that happened in the boardroom that would negate the actual financial results of the specific company or my operation. It is as I described and I'm constrained by confidentiality agreements that outlive my employment from going into any more detail than that although they don't mean much at this point.
I understand you were on the

See above.
I can't

The operation met and far exceeded all the financial targets for growth, return on invested capital, cash flow, and return on sales when many operations in the corporation were not meeting them. See again the statement about unmitigated greed (and stupidity should be added). If that is not enough "factual" information, so be it.

You don't know about the concept of present value do you. At this point in history, the chances of it turning out with the desired overall end effect financially are zero. The group was sold at a deep discount (about $500 million) to sales volume after a number of break even years followed the disastrous strategy. So those corporate officers can *never* recoup what they have lost for the stockholders of the corporation. It's lost for good.
even though certainly it isn't clear it has had

What do you mean by that? The desired effect of the corporate hacks who initiated the strategy was to ruin the reputation of the brand and lose significant market share? That has already happened. And believe me when you have market share, it is a lot easier to keep it than it is to get it back. My career was devoted to keeping and growing it.
Frank
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Frank Boettcher wrote:
... snip

It's good to hear from someone with a close perspective of the situation.
... snip

Did the off-shoring decision occur before or after Pentair sold Delta?
--
If you're going to be dumb, you better be tough

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.