NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Besides, I
don't patronize Wal-Mart

Which is precisely why I recommended you "exchange" the Big Tackle purchase
at Wal-Mart...so you could "get one over on them".


As for it being "too Republican"...I'd suggest that neither party has a
monopoly on the art of flim-flam.



Ahh. Wal-Mart...winning friends for the United States everywhere...

Chinese Workers Pay for Wal-Mart's Low Prices
Retailer Squeezes Its Asian Suppliers to Cut Costs

By Peter S. Goodman and Philip P. Pan
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, February 8, 2004; Page A01

SHENZHEN, China -- Inside the factory, amid clattering machinery and
clouds of sawdust, men without earplugs or protective goggles feed wood
into screaming electric saws, making cabinets for stereo speakers. Women
hunch over worktables, many hands bandaged and few covered by gloves,
pressing transistors into circuit boards.

*Most of the 2,100 workers here are poor migrants from the countryside
who have come to this industrial hub in southern China for jobs that pay
about $120 a month. A sign on the wall reminds them of their
expendability in a nation with hundreds of millions of surplus workers:
"If you don't work hard today, tomorrow you'll have to try hard to look
for a job."*

(You'll see those same signs soon in American businesses...wanna bet? - HK)


The calculations driving production here at Shenzhen Baoan Fenda
Industrial Co. are no different from those governing global capitalism
in general -- make more for less -- but it is applied with particular
vigor on this shop floor. Sixty percent of the stereos coming off the
line are for one customer: Wal-Mart Stores Inc., whose mastery at
squeezing savings from its supply chain made it the world's largest company.

"The profit is really small," said Surely Huang, a factory engineer,
speaking of the 350,000 stereos that Fenda agreed in March to supply to
the retailer for $30 to $40 each. Huang said they sell for $50 in the
United States. "We have to constantly cut costs to satisfy Wal-Mart."

Yet this factory and thousands of others along China's east coast have
decided, with China's leaders, that the deal is worth the price.
Wal-Mart provides access to vastly more store shelves than they could
ever reach by themselves, a way to build a brand from Fort Worth to
Frankfurt. Meeting Wal-Mart's strict requirements could improve the
factory's efficiency and make it easier to land contracts from other
major retailers.

As capital scours the globe for cheaper and more malleable workers, and
as poor countries seek multinational companies to provide jobs, lift
production and open export markets, Wal-Mart and China have forged
themselves into the ultimate joint venture, their symbiosis influencing
the terms of labor and consumption the world over.

With sales of more than $245 billion a year, Wal-Mart is the largest
retailer in the United States, still the ultimate consumer market. China
is the most populous country, with 1.3 billion people, most still poor
enough to willingly move hundreds of miles from home for jobs that would
be shunned by anyone with better prospects. The Communist Party
government has become perhaps the world's greatest facilitator of
capitalist production, beckoning multinational giants with tax-free
zones and harsh punishment for anyone with designs on organizing a labor
movement.

More than 80 percent of the 6,000 factories in Wal-Mart's worldwide
database of suppliers are in China. Wal-Mart estimates it spent $15
billion on Chinese-made products last year, accounting for nearly
one-eighth of all Chinese exports to the United States. If the company
that Sam Walton built with his "Made in America" ad campaign were itself
a separate nation, it would rank as China's fifth-largest export market,
ahead of Germany and Britain.

Back in its home market, Wal-Mart's vast appetite for Chinese imports
has placed it at the center of a sharp debate over whether the influx of
low-cost products from China is good for Americans.

Domestic manufacturers, labor groups and some politicians point to
China's record trade surplus with the United States, estimated to have
totaled $120 billion last year, and accuse Beijing of manipulating its
currency, condoning the exploitation of its workers and competing
unfairly, resulting in the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs.

But Chinese officials counter that nearly two-thirds of the country's
exports are shipped from factories wholly or jointly owned by foreign
investors, with Wal-Mart often cited as the prime example, supplying
Americans with a steady flow of low-cost, high-quality goods.

With its near-religious devotion to the pursuit of "everyday low
prices," Wal-Mart illustrates why U.S.-based multinationals with
operations here have not joined in the chorus for protectionism.

"For the benefit of the consumer, we should buy merchandise where we get
the best value," said Andrew Tsuei, managing director of Wal-Mart's
global procurement center in Shenzhen.

Joe Hatfield, president of Wal-Mart's Asia operations, noted that many
of the goods his company buys in China -- toys, furniture, textiles and
holiday ornaments -- have mostly not been made in the United States for
years. The Bush administration has pressed China to increase the value
of its currency, which some argue makes China's goods unfairly cheap on
world markets. Hatfield rolled his eyes.

"That would be a travesty to do to the consumer in the United States,"
he said. "You do that and the cost of living is going to go up."
'Better Than Nothing'

For Wal-Mart and other multinational companies doing business in China,
a stable currency, political peace and a compliant workforce are nearly
as important as low costs.

"There might be places in other parts of the world where you can buy
cheaper, but can you get [the product] on the ship?" Tsuei said. "If we
have to look at a country that's not politically stable, you might not
get your order on time. If you deal in a country where the currency
fluctuates, everyday there is a lot of risk. China happens to have the
right mix."

Labor activists in China and abroad say that mix includes the ruling
party's ban on independent trade unions -- workers may join only the
party-run union -- as well as courts and regulatory agencies controlled
by local party officials who are often willing to overlook labor
violations to appease businesses that can be milked for taxes, fees and
bribes.

The activists argue that as Wal-Mart pits suppliers against one another
and squeezes them for the lowest price, the workers suffer.

"Wal-Mart pressures the factory to cut its price, and the factory
responds with longer hours or lower pay," said a Chinese labor official,
who declined to be named for fear of punishment. "And the workers have
no options."

In the city of Dongguan in southern Guangdong province, where Wal-Mart
suppliers are concentrated, a 27-year-old worker who gave her name as
Miss Qin complained that she can rarely afford meat with her
$75-per-month wages at Kaida Toy Co. "Every day we eat vegetables,
mostly we eat vegetables," she said, leaning over a plate of fried
carrots in a dingy restaurant.

Qin helps make plastic toy trains for Wal-Mart, but says she cannot
afford to buy toys for her 9-year-old son. "In four years, they haven't
increased the salary," she said.

Kong Xianghong, the No. 2 official for the party-run union in Guangdong
province, acknowledged that low wages, long hours and poor conditions
are common in factories that supply Wal-Mart and other U.S.-based
corporations.

"It's better than nothing," he said. "Labor protections, working
conditions and wages are related to a country's level of economic
development. Of course, we want better labor protections, but we can't
afford it. We need the jobs. We need to guarantee people can eat."

Still, Kong said, the party-controlled union has been frustrated that
Wal-Mart has refused for three years to allow it to set up branches in
the 31 Wal-Mart stores in China -- even though he has assured the
company that the union wouldn't help workers struggle for better pay.
Wal-Mart has also fought efforts to unionize its U.S. stores.
Low Prices, High Cost

Wal-Mart's China headquarters is a monument to its frugality -- a low
building covered in white tile. The linoleum conference table is
pockmarked with gaps where the plywood shows through. Tea is served in
plastic cups. In Hatfield's office, where he presides over Wal-Mart's
Asia operations, the rusty window frame is open, the sound of car horns
washing in from the street.

Wal-Mart portrays itself as a force for good in China. The company says
it enforces labor standards for its suppliers and insists that they
comply with Chinese law.

"We look at safety. We look at health, and this comes with a cost. We
ensure people get paid above minimum wage. They have to have fire
extinguishers, fire exits," Tsuei said. "There are people out there who
cannot have those things and offer a lower price. We do not do business
with those people."

Wal-Mart employs 100 auditors who annually inspect every supplier's
factory. Last year, the company suspended deals with about 400
suppliers, primarily for exceeding limits on overtime, Tsuei said.
Another 72 factories were blacklisted permanently last year, he said,
almost all for employing children under China's legal working age of 16.

But Wal-Mart does not conduct regular inspections of smaller factories
that sell goods to the company through middlemen. Nor does it inspect
all its suppliers' subcontractors or the Chinese manufacturing
operations of U.S. suppliers such as Mattel Inc. and Dell Inc.

"The inspection system is not effective," said Li Qiang, a labor
organizer who has been in contact with workers at more than a dozen
factories that supply Wal-Mart, and who worked in one himself before
leaving China three years ago. "The factories are usually notified in
advance, and they often prepare by cleaning up, creating fake time
sheets and briefing workers on what to say."

Li said these factories often require employees to work as many as 80
hours per week during the busy season for $75 to $110 per month,
violating Chinese labor laws. If Wal-Mart really wanted to monitor
conditions among its suppliers, Li said, it could do so with surprise
visits, longer inspections and independent auditors. "But if they did
that, prices would definitely go up," he said.
Suppliers Find a Big Market

Wal-Mart is such a big player in China that it does not have to go
looking for suppliers; the suppliers come to them, jamming a reception
area at the procurement center.

Yu Xiaoma of Guangzhou Kangaroo Leathers Co., which makes handbags and
wallets for Wal-Mart and other multinationals, said: "You can't make
much money from Wal-Mart. They demand the lowest, lowest price."

Amy Gu, vice manager for exports for Goodbaby Corp., which makes baby
strollers near Shanghai, said the company sometimes takes orders to
supply Wal-Mart at or below cost through a partnership with a Canadian
distributor, Dorel Industries Inc. "Dorel will tell us, 'Well, Wal-Mart
has given us this price, we need a factory cost of this much,' " Gu
said. "And we have to find a way to deliver it."

Wal-Mart says such arrangements benefit both sides. Hatfield said the
company has made distribution more efficient and fair by cutting out
middlemen and resisting corruption. In a country where transportation
remains unreliable, Wal-Mart's distribution network has given
manufacturers access to customers around the country and the world.

He touted the case of a Guangdong factory that began supplying Wal-Mart
stores in Shenzhen with a drink made of milk and egg yolk, delivering
25,000 units the first month.. It proved popular. By September, Wal-Mart
was shipping 1 million units a month across southern China.

"They can just drop it at our distribution center and we take care of
the rest," Hatfield said. "Now it's a national brand."

Yet those who run the factory that produces the drink, Weijiasi Food &
Beverage Co., say they haven't yet shared in the success.

"In the beginning, we made money," said a manager reached by telephone,
who gave his name as Mr. Li.

"But when Wal-Mart started to launch nationwide distribution, they
pressured us for a special price at below our cost. Now, we're losing
money on every box, while Wal-Mart is making more money."

--
Email sent to is never read.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
WaIIy wrote:

them...

I'll find the link, but here's the On Sun, 08 Feb 2004 14:33:23 GMT,
"NOYB" wrote:


"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
rthlink.net...
Do you have a link to his affiliation with those extremists? I'd like
to
email
it back to text:

Soros is not the only billionaire Democrat financier. Peter Lewis,
chairman of the aptly named Progressive auto-insurance company appears
to be matching Soros dollar for dollar. Lewis recently pledged $10
million to Americans Coming Together and matched a $2.5 million Soros
pledge to the far-left group MoveOn.org.

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1039408/posts


To the usual crowd of right-wing idiots here, the American Red Cross is
a communist front organization.

Hey! I like the Red Cross. Every year around Christmas time, I get a half
dozen new patients who break a tooth or pull a crown out with one of the
Tootsie Rolls they hand out.

How's this?

Mr. Lewis,
I just read that you pledged $1.5MM to moveon.org. I realize that everyone is
entitled to lend their support to any cause they choose, but are you sure it is
in the best interest of your company, customers, and stockholders to align
yourself with an organization whose platform is simply "anyone but President
Bush"? How would you feel about the money you spent if, God forbid, Al Sharpton
would win? Someone in your position should certainly have the intellect to back
a particular candidate for their particular platform rather than throwing a
million and a half dollars at a left-wing "organization" that will do the
thinking for you.

I look forward to your response.

Regards,
Dan Krueger

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote:


"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
arthlink.net...

Do you have a link to his affiliation with those extremists? I'd like

to

email

it back to them...

I'll find the link, but here's the text:

"Billionaires Join Soros to Defeat Bush
George Soros says he would pony up his $7 billion fortune if it could

defeat

George Bush this November.

Soros has already donated tens of millions to groups like MoveOn.org and
left-wing "527s" to defeat Bush.

But Soros is not the only billionaire who has a passionate hatred for

George

Bush.

MoveOn recently reported that Peter B. Lewis, chairman of Progressive

Corp.,

has already given $1.5 million to the group.

Lewis is so anxious to help MoveOn he now promises to match the amount
contributed to MoveOn by any contributor, 50 cents for each dollar

donated

up to $20,000. "



Ahhh. Good for Lewis. And at least it is personal, not business.



Lewis represents a corporation on the NYSE and he's held accountable to the
stockholders. His choice to openly oppose Bush will have a negative impact
on his company...both in the near-term, and, especially if Bush is
reelected.

Dan Krueger wrote in message hlink.net...
How's this?

Mr. Lewis,
I just read that you pledged $1.5MM to moveon.org. I realize that everyone is
entitled to lend their support to any cause they choose, but are you sure it is
in the best interest of your company, customers, and stockholders to align
yourself with an organization whose platform is simply "anyone but President
Bush"? How would you feel about the money you spent if, God forbid, Al Sharpton
would win? Someone in your position should certainly have the intellect to back
a particular candidate for their particular platform rather than throwing a
million and a half dollars at a left-wing "organization" that will do the
thinking for you.

I look forward to your response.

Regards,
Dan Krueger


The people at his company should certainly get a laugh out of it! The
response will likely be something like, How do I know that what Bush
will do in the future will be in the best interest of my company,
customers, and stockholders? His track record should speak for itself.

"NOYB" wrote in message om...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Reuters, however, doesn't close its reports with requests that
readers support a particular candidate, nor does it flash ads on its
site for Rush or the pack of neonazis on Fox.

Which makes Reuters all the more dangerous. At least Newsmax has a
"disclaimer". ;-)


Heheh. I am certain that a day of fishing with you would result in both
of us getting in a lot of trouble.

Who has the Slammer 560s for $110? I'd be interested in the price for
the smalleet models...

They didn't list the smaller models on their website., but I'd call and ask.
Here's the link:
http://www.bigtackle.com/Scripts/pro...?idproduct=148

You could always buy the 460 for $110.95, and take it back to a local
(blank)-Mart to "exchange" for a 260. ;-)

(blank)=Sport, Wal, K, etc.

Ah, the great mantra of the right, screw anybody you can. No conscience.

"basskisser" wrote in message
m...
"NOYB" wrote in message
om...
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Reuters, however, doesn't close its reports with requests that
readers support a particular candidate, nor does it flash ads on
its
site for Rush or the pack of neonazis on Fox.

Which makes Reuters all the more dangerous. At least Newsmax has a
"disclaimer". ;-)


Heheh. I am certain that a day of fishing with you would result in
both
of us getting in a lot of trouble.

Who has the Slammer 560s for $110? I'd be interested in the price for
the smalleet models...

They didn't list the smaller models on their website., but I'd call and
ask.
Here's the link:
http://www.bigtackle.com/Scripts/pro...?idproduct=148

You could always buy the 460 for $110.95, and take it back to a local
(blank)-Mart to "exchange" for a 260. ;-)

(blank)=Sport, Wal, K, etc.

Ah, the great mantra of the right, screw anybody you can. No conscience.


Ah, the great inability of basskisser to recognize the ;-) at the end of a
sentence. No brain.

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 20:54:27 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

Dan Krueger wrote:

How's this?

Mr. Lewis,
I just read that you pledged $1.5MM to moveon.org. I realize that everyone is
entitled to lend their support to any cause they choose, but are you sure it is
in the best interest of your company, customers, and stockholders to align
yourself with an organization whose platform is simply "anyone but President
Bush"? How would you feel about the money you spent if, God forbid, Al Sharpton
would win? Someone in your position should certainly have the intellect to back
a particular candidate for their particular platform rather than throwing a
million and a half dollars at a left-wing "organization" that will do the
thinking for you.

I look forward to your response.

Regards,
Dan Krueger

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote:


"Dan Krueger" wrote in message
.earthlink.net...

Do you have a link to his affiliation with those extremists? I'd like

to

email

it back to them...

I'll find the link, but here's the text:

"Billionaires Join Soros to Defeat Bush
George Soros says he would pony up his $7 billion fortune if it could

defeat

George Bush this November.

Soros has already donated tens of millions to groups like MoveOn.org and
left-wing "527s" to defeat Bush.

But Soros is not the only billionaire who has a passionate hatred for

George

Bush.

MoveOn recently reported that Peter B. Lewis, chairman of Progressive

Corp.,

has already given $1.5 million to the group.

Lewis is so anxious to help MoveOn he now promises to match the amount
contributed to MoveOn by any contributor, 50 cents for each dollar

donated

up to $20,000. "



Ahhh. Good for Lewis. And at least it is personal, not business.



Lewis represents a corporation on the NYSE and he's held accountable to the
stockholders. His choice to openly oppose Bush will have a negative impact
on his company...both in the near-term, and, especially if Bush is
reelected.


Silly hypothetical. Of all the guys running, Sharpton had the slimmest
chance, no chance at all, actually, and, in fact, from the beginning
stated his goal was to have a voice at the convention.

Of the guys other than Sharpton, the possibles were Gephardt, Dean,
Edwards, Lieberman, Clark, Kerry.

*Any* of those would be better than Bush. Any of them.







-
Email sent to is never read.

Damn, Harry, do you mean my vote for Al Sharpton, today, doesn't meet
with your approval?

John H

On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

Im confused,
Exactly how did the Rebuplocrats and other political Gegy Birds get involved
in this discussion?
"Capt Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Hi All,
After a throughly incompetent investigation by the local constabulary, I
took the list of missing items to the insurance comapny. Here are the
results:

Generator: 2 years old, depreciated 60% Cost 1900.00
Paid 900.00
GPS 18 Months Old. depreciated 12% Cost 799.00
703.12
GPS Cartographic chip not covered Cost 125.00
Fishing Poles not covered Cost
90.00
Binox depreciated %75 Cost 299.00
99.60
tools not covered Cost
159.00
Magnagrille not covered Cost
179.00
Magnagrille mount not covered Cost 45.00
TV-DVD player Depreciated 75% Cost 399.00
99.75

Total Loss
3995.00 Insurance Payment 1802.47

Net Loss 2192.53

Moral, Check your insurance policy to determine what is covered and what
is
not!

Capt.
Your thread has been hijacked by rec.scuba. :-)
Paul

"Capt Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
link.net...
Im confused,
Exactly how did the Rebuplocrats and other political Gegy Birds get
involved
in this discussion?
"Capt Frank Hopkins" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Hi All,
After a throughly incompetent investigation by the local constabulary, I
took the list of missing items to the insurance comapny. Here are the
results:

Generator: 2 years old, depreciated 60% Cost 1900.00
Paid 900.00
GPS 18 Months Old. depreciated 12% Cost 799.00
703.12
GPS Cartographic chip not covered Cost 125.00
Fishing Poles not covered Cost
90.00
Binox depreciated %75 Cost
299.00
99.60
tools not covered Cost
159.00
Magnagrille not covered Cost
179.00
Magnagrille mount not covered Cost 45.00
TV-DVD player Depreciated 75% Cost 399.00
99.75

Total Loss
3995.00 Insurance Payment 1802.47

Net Loss 2192.53

Moral, Check your insurance policy to determine what is covered and what
is
not!