If you need a good laugh to start your day.....

[bornaneer]

PORTLAND, Ore. — President Obama plans to campaign for a Pacific free-trade zone on Friday by visiting the headquarters of Nike, where executives will announce that they will create 10,000 jobs in the United States if the accord is approved. Nike for years has been used as a case study by opponents of trade liberalization for its reliance on low-wage workers in Asia
In addition to 10,000 new manufacturing and engineering jobs, the company predicted that the trade pact would create thousands of construction jobs and up to 40,000 indirect jobs with suppliers and service companies over 10 years. Only a small fraction of Nike’s current work force is in the United States. While the company employs about 26,000 people in America, its contract factories overseas employ about one million people, roughly a third of them in Vietnam. Labor activists have long complained that wages are low and that worker rights are routinely violated in such countries.


Nike is going to create over 50,000 NEW AMERICAN jobs? Sure they are, FOOLS.

 

[moe]

PORTLAND, Ore. — President Obama plans to campaign for a Pacific free-trade zone on Friday by visiting the headquarters of Nike, where executives will announce that they will create 10,000 jobs in the United States if the accord is approved. Nike for years has been used as a case study by opponents of trade liberalization for its reliance on low-wage workers in Asia
In addition to 10,000 new manufacturing and engineering jobs, the company predicted that the trade pact would create thousands of construction jobs and up to 40,000 indirect jobs with suppliers and service companies over 10 years. Only a small fraction of Nike’s current work force is in the United States. While the company employs about 26,000 people in America, its contract factories overseas employ about one million people, roughly a third of them in Vietnam. Labor activists have long complained that wages are low and that worker rights are routinely violated in such countries.


Nike is going to create over 50,000 NEW AMERICAN jobs? Sure they are, FOOLS.

The statement is maybe a little misleading if you don't read it carefully. It states that Nike would create 10,000 jobs. It then states that the trade pact (not Nike) would create thousands of construction jobs and up to 40,000 indirect jobs. Obviously "up to" includes any total < 40,000. So Nike is guaranteeing 10,000 jobs and making a prediction about general job growth associated with the pact. I guess we'll see if they honor their hiring guarantee (10k) if the trade pact gets approved.

 

[bornaneer]

The statement is maybe a little misleading if you don't read it carefully. It states that Nike would create 10,000 jobs. It then states that the trade pact (not Nike) would create thousands of construction jobs and up to 40,000 indirect jobs. Obviously "up to" includes any total < 40,000. So Nike is guaranteeing 10,000 jobs and making a prediction about general job growth associated with the pact. I guess we'll see if they honor their hiring guarantee (10k) if the trade pact gets approved.

"Nike epitomizes why disastrous unfettered free-trade policies during the past four decades have failed American workers, eroded our manufacturing base and increased income and wealth inequality in this country," Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who recently launched a campaign for the Democratic 2016 presidential nomination, wrote to Obama in a letter this week.
Sanders wrote that the deal would "do nothing to encourage Nike to create one manufacturing job in this country. It would simply make Nike more money and increase the compensation packages of its executives."

I'm not a big fan of Sanders, but is is correct about this.

 

[moe]

"Nike epitomizes why disastrous unfettered free-trade policies during the past four decades have failed American workers, eroded our manufacturing base and increased income and wealth inequality in this country," Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who recently launched a campaign for the Democratic 2016 presidential nomination, wrote to Obama in a letter this week.
Sanders wrote that the deal would "do nothing to encourage Nike to create one manufacturing job in this country. It would simply make Nike more money and increase the compensation packages of its executives."

I'm not a big fan of Sanders, but is is correct about this.

As I haven't read the cliff notes of the proposed trade pact, I can't really comment. Obviously you've evaluated the proposed trade pact and its potential impacts.

 

[bornaneer]

As I haven't read the cliff notes of the proposed trade pact, I can't really comment. Obviously you've evaluated the proposed trade pact and its potential impacts.

No, I did not evaluate to trade pact. But at first glance and looking at the opposition to this claim, I am very skeptical of the job projections. Do you have any concerns?

 

[moe]

No, I did not evaluate to trade pact. But at first glance and looking at the opposition to this claim, I am very skeptical of the job projections. Do you have any concerns?

As I haven't read the cliff notes of the proposed trade pact, I can't really comment.

 

[bornaneer]

Got it......... Didn't think you would.

 

[JLW71073]

Got it......... Didn't think you would.

[roll]

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Here's my problem with companies like Nike. They sell a pair of shoes for $100 (thereabouts). They have a couple of dollars in materials, they have a couple of dollars in labor and the rest is profit. I would rather see them pay a couple of dollars for materials, about 40 dollars for labor and about 40 dollars for profit (hypothetical scenario for a given pair of shoes). The only "leverage" the average person has to influence change is not purchasing these products, and I admit, I'm guilty of buying their products. There are very little goods that are actually manufactured/produced in the US today.

 

[moe]

Got it......... Didn't think you would.

You admit you know nothing of the proposed trade pact but don't let that stop you from having an opinion on it or being unable to understand my post. You're not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Here's my problem with companies like Nike. They sell a pair of shoes for $100 (thereabouts). They have a couple of dollars in materials, they have a couple of dollars in labor and the rest is profit. I would rather see them pay a couple of dollars for materials, about 40 dollars for labor and about 40 dollars for profit (hypothetical scenario for a given pair of shoes).

Here's my problem with people like you and that is your imperfect understanding of business operations.

Yea, I mean there isn't anything tied up in company overhead, transpacific shipping, packaging, distribution, Management Reserve, transcontinental shipping, US shipping and distribution, advertising (Those athletes do that for the free shoes amiright?), and about 100 other indirect costs. They might make a dollar on a pair of shoes (I would doubt that much). The make their money in volume.

So, you want to use US workers, your $100 shoes now become $300 shoes, or they put less money towards IRAD and advertising and then run the risk of shrinking sales and profit margins and falling below the break even line.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

They might make a dollar on a pair of shoes (I would doubt that much). The make their money in volume.

So, you want to use US workers, your $100 shoes now become $300 shoes, or they put less money towards IRAD and advertising and then run the risk of shrinking sales and profit margins and falling below the break even line.

Respectfully disagree with you on the profit margin on a pair of shoes. It would make you sick if you knew how much profit is made on typical goods and products compared to all other costs for that product. They could cut profits substantially to pay for higher labor costs and still keep the cost of those shoes at 100 dollars. That's not the American, Capitalistic way though.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Respectfully disagree with you on the profit margin on a pair of shoes. It would make you sick if you knew how much profit is made on typical goods and products compared to all other costs for that product. They could cut profits substantially to pay for higher labor costs and still keep the cost of those shoes at 100 dollars. That's not the American, Capitalistic way though.

You are confirming for me that you know very little about business. Those profits pay for IRAD, capital improvements/investments/replenishments etc.

And yea, it's not like I have 112 people and a $100 million dollar + budget I'm responsible for in a manufacturing, service, and logistics industry. What the hell would I know about it?

 

[dave]

Respectfully disagree with you on the profit margin on a pair of shoes. It would make you sick if you knew how much profit is made on typical goods and products compared to all other costs for that product. They could cut profits substantially to pay for higher labor costs and still keep the cost of those shoes at 100 dollars. That's not the American, Capitalistic way though.

And guess who would be the first to complain when all these companies do this and your 401k turns to dung.

 

[bornaneer]

You admit you know nothing of the proposed trade pact but don't let that stop you from having an opinion on it or being unable to understand my post. You're not the sharpest tool in the shed are you?

Where did you come up that I was unable to understand your post? I said I GOT YOUR REPLY and made the comment that I did not think you would have comments about the deal. I NEVER admitted I knew NOTHING about the deal. Are you so STUPID that you don't know the difference between "did not evaluate" and knew nothing about the deal". Let me answer for you. You are indeed that STUPID. I played you like the fool you are. LMAO....