11.02.06
Profitably Made in the U.S.A.
Upon reviewing the four articles, it seems that all four companies have different reasons to stay within the U.S., though a few have some similarities. Bobcat and Schantz, for instance, both have local farm-raised workers and deep community roots that certainly help to keep them right where they are. Schantz’s organs and the orthapedic screw companies in Warsaw both require the hub of specialized labor, which they both have plenty of. The Warsaw companies, however, could probably move and still retain their quality, but they simply have no reason to, with profit margins hitting at least 70%. Viking has a Dell-style made-to-order business model, but while Dell is shipping its parts all over Asia, Viking makes it all right at home. This can probably be easily explained, as ovens aren’t nearly as complex or easy to ship as laptops. Imagine trying to get oven parts from country to country. Each company has their reasons, but I really can’t see anything across the board except that it’s simply more profitable to stay in the U.S., be it for specialization, shipping costs, or customer satisfaction and loyalty.
Concerning Our Freedom
Have you ever heard of the John Warner Defense Authorization Act? Neither have I. It apparently recieved no media coverage and I had to dig to find an official record of it. There are a few interesting tidbits buried deep within there, such as Section 1042:
“Revises federal provisions allowing the President to utilize the Armed Forces in connection with interference with federal and state law to allow the President to employ the Armed Forces and National Guard in federal service to restore public order in cases of natural disaster, epidemic or other public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or domestic violence. Requires the President to notify Congress within 14 days of the exercise of such authority. Authorizes the President, when exercising such authority, to direct the Secretary to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons affected by the situation.”
It also makes changes to the Insurrection Act, and as the lone dissenting Senator Leahy (D-VT) puts it:
“The changes to the Insurrection Act will allow the President to use the military, including the National Guard, to carry out law enforcement activities without the consent of a governor. When the Insurrection Act is invoked posse comitatus does not apply. Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy, and it is for that reason that the Insurrection Act has only been invoked on three — three — in recent history. The implications of changing the Act are enormous, but this change was just slipped in the defense bill as a rider with little study. Other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals.”
Short version: as of October 17th, the president can declare a public emergency and deploy troops within the United States to take direct control over National Guards without the consent of their governors in order to suppress loosely defined public disorder. How could this pass with so little Congressional disagreement and just blow by the media, and the American people, completely unnoticed? I’m not sure if the actual law troubles me more than that fact.
10.31.06
Burning Money
This doesn’t relate to globalization, but it does infuriate me. And this is a blog, after all, thus I should post everything which infuriates me.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-30-abstinence-message_x.htm
Now it’s bad enough that the federal government feels that it has the right to dictate anyone’s sex life, and even worse to spend millions of taxpayer dollars to enforce that message. But to spend that money on an idealistic campaign that has been proven completely ineffective is just irresponsible. If the government must be involved with sex, they should at least be spending money teaching people how to be safe. Our money is being wasted on teaching ignorance.
