...."Why isn't daley sucking up to Schwinn to build a factory, do we need more stores to sell cheap crap?"

OK I was on another discussion and I'm wondering...

 

Is any one else bothered by the big deal made about wallmart coming to Chicago, when what we really need is GOOD long term jobs here....

 

Why isn't daley trying to bring back at least SOME manufacturing here? I mean with so many people unemployed the cost of labour MUST be down, I know Schwinn is nothing more than a name BUT there must be some companies that would be willing to try, also since the price of land is down....How about SRAM? they are headquartered here.

 

So are we just a bunch of blind sheep that want our kids to play with lead painted toys from China because they are a buck? Or is anyone willing to pay more to have a non lead painted toy?

 

Isn't there a big drywall company with offices here in Chicago ? Why did China drywall show up in the south east with mystery stuff in it that MAY be toxic ?

 

I just think it's time for a real change

Views: 394

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Rick norris on August 11, 2010 at 8:32am
I also am not trying to dismiss the importance of ANY job, we need retail, we need banking, we need yard workers, and of course doctors, lawers, teachers and so on.

I just think we DONT need MORE retail, I THINK (IMO) we need to add manufacturing to the list...and here we are falling short

heather stratton said:
I think Daley does, to some extent, want manufacturing jobs to move to Chicago. AFAIK, that's what the TIF industrial corridors are all about, specifically encouraging manufacturing (mostly light industry) in areas that aren't considered suitable for residential or retail development. They also offer job training, which leads to one problem with your proposal: many of the people who would have at one time been employed in manufacturing, have no relevant job skills to speak of. I think a valuable use of Chicago's money would be to offer vocational programs for non-college-track kids; as you rightly point out, not everyone is going to become a doctor, but that doesn't mean that they are unemployable.

Furthermore, there's no reason why working retail has to be shitty. My mom worked retail for the same company for almost 30 years-- they offered health insurance, a decent wage, and flexible scheduling and time off when my sister and I were little. They weren't even unionized, it was just a decent company to work for. Wal-Mart could be a good employer if they offered a living wage, health insurance, and advancement opportunities. Oh, and if they had avoided the whole sexist assholery bit. Since retail, by its very nature, can't be shipped out of the country, why not focus on the rights of current service industry workers?
Permalink Reply by Michael Perz on August 11, 2010 at 8:32am
For whatever it may be worth, the Economist recently featured an article about the current state of Chinese workers and their exponentially increasing buying power and standard of living. One of the figures cited was that of a $1K average annual savings per American household due to the availability of inexpensive goods from China.
Permalink Reply by Rick norris on August 11, 2010 at 8:40am
I don't think we need to stop cheap stuff from comming in, we do need to inspect and control it...thats another subject.

We need to INCREASE what we make here. We need to help manufacturing thats here to stay here (USA, and Chicago)

I get it "saves" us money....but really if wages are way down because less people are working wouldn't it be better to have things cost more if we earn more? Again I understand there will be a point of what is called diminishing returns (this might not be the best use of the term) as far as wage increases to price increases

To me it seems that we have reached a point that if it costs a few bucks to add more jobs and higher wages then it might be worth it.

Michael Perz said:
For whatever it may be worth, the Economist recently featured an article about the current state of Chinese workers and their exponentially increasing buying power and standard of living. One of the figures cited was that of a $1K average annual savings per American household due to the availability of inexpensive goods from China.
Permalink Reply by Martin Hazard on August 11, 2010 at 11:55am
On the history end, Pacific had also acquired Mongoose, another formerly well reguarded name, around the same time as Schwinn, and GT. After 2004 the Dorel Co. continued to use the Pacific name, though Dorel was on the packaging as well. Customers never would see the boxed bike. Further, Dorel/Pacific, acquired Cannondale in the last year or so and is now calling themselves "Cannondale Sports Group". The goal is to capitalize on the reputation of the most highly regarded brand they have swallowed up. They have hopelessly sullied up all the other brand names, since everyone has seen them at Wal-Mart. After Cannondale's acquisition, its production was moved overseas, like all the others. It was the last major bike company to maintain stateside production. Now their frames will now proudly bear a "Designed in the U.S.A." (not made)sticker, like all the rest. They should all really say "Made by Skilled Chinese Babys". :'-(

Tank-Ridin' Ryan said:
Schwinns are currently manufactured in China(surprise). According to wikipedia, "On September 11, 2001, Schwinn Company, its assets, and the rights to the brand, together with that of the GT Bicycle, was purchased at a bankruptcy auction by Pacific Cycle, a company previously known for mass-market brands owned by Wind Point Partners.[46] In 2004 Pacific Cycle was, in turn, acquired by Dorel Industries. Pacific and Dorel produced a series of low-cost bicycles built in Taiwan and the People's Republic of China, which were badged with the Schwinn nameplate and sold in large retail stores such as Wal-Mart, Target, and Costco."

Though the manual for my '07 Schwinn World DBX says Pacific Cycle on it.

H3N3 said:
Just wondering if you know the history of Schwinn.
It went bankrupt in the 80s, and an asian company (Chinese I think) bought the name-- they put their HQ in Colorado for imaging purposes . . . probably would not be the most likely company to want to move manufacturing to Chicago.
Permalink Reply by Primitive Don on August 11, 2010 at 11:55am
It costs somewhere between 50 and 100 times as much to pay workers in the United States than it does to pay workers in China. Plus, China has tied its currency to ours to make sure that it stays that way.

Companies are always trying to cut costs, and outsourcing to the least expensive nations has been the norm since the age of Bill Clinton. When we shop at Wal-Mart, Home Depot, or online, we are demanding the cheapest possible products, choosing the lowest price over any other factor. It's no wonder we manufacture very few tangible products in the U.S. anymore.

I'd love to bring manufacturing back to Chicago, but the reality is our costs and overhead are way too high for most manufacturing to be viable here. What manufacturing does happen in the U.S. is happening in small town industrial parks in low cost areas where the cost of living is low, taxes are low, incentives are high, and where unions do not exist.

If we want to return to manufacturing, we need to emulate the model of companies like Germany, who are providing technology and machinery needed in countries like China and India to spur development and growth. In the latest issue of Newsweek, it is reported that the German car company Audi is prosperous and growing, because they now sell more cars IN CHINA than they do in Europe. Germany's labor still costs more than in the United States.

If we want to return to manufacturing, let's make stuff they need in China, instead of the other way around.
Permalink Reply by Primitive Don on August 11, 2010 at 12:02pm
If we talk about Schwinn, realize Schwinn was outsourcing parts to European companies like Huret, Normandy, and Weinmann all the way back in the 60s. Realize they outsourced entire product lines to Panasonic in Japan as early as 1974 and to Giant in Taiwan in the early 80s. They moved their domestic production to Greenville, Mississippi in the 80s. It was hard to compete even then, even before business had become fully global.
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on August 11, 2010 at 1:07pm
I'm not going to read all of this but I will chime in on this much to the OP:

It does not sound, from what I have read, that you have a very deep depth of knowledge when it comes to manufacturing, labor or what makes an area attractive to manufactures.

The problem in Chicago, not to mention IL and the country as a whole, with attracting any kind of large scale manufacturing runs to a level so deep that simple tax breaks and trying to court manufactures with incentive package is not even going to be the tip of the iceberg here...
Permalink Reply by Vondo on August 11, 2010 at 3:29pm
This is brilliant insight! Why didn't anyone think of this sooner...

ERCHLVRSN said:
Better suggestion go to college, get a career not just a job...none of the jobs you mention have any long term benefit other than cheap employment to unskilled people, we have to many of these types already, along with a large immigration problem…all you’re doing is making coming here legally more attractive to the unskilled who have little if anything at all to offer this country...
Permalink Reply by milesperhour on August 11, 2010 at 3:53pm
The new movie studio being constructed by 16th and Western at the Ryerson Steel property is a great example of re-purposing old manufacturing plants and adding jobs. It will be the 2nd largest movie studio in the U.S. If the estimates in the article are correct, it's expected to create 6,000 jobs and the city benefits 2.5 times from all movie related expenditures. The article is from late last year, so if on track, construction should be complete in February.

http://www.ifpchicago.org/chicago-gets-80-million-studio-complex/
Permalink Reply by Doug Haynes on August 11, 2010 at 3:56pm
against my better judgment (I'm bored and out of town in a hotel...) I'm reading this thread and wonder if you have any familiarity with the type of job a large scale manufacturing plant provides.

Most of the jobs in a factory are low paying unskilled labor centered on repetitive tasks or material handling with a small minority of trades people maintaining the plant. Actual ratio varies depending on the specific process and facility but I have seen places that have 2-3 skilled trades people supporting 50-75 unskilled laborers who make next to nothing.

Rick norris said:
Why not try to attract manufacturing (generally good paying trade jobs)
Permalink Reply by milesperhour on August 11, 2010 at 4:17pm
I heard about it when it initially happened, but when I looked it up just now I couldn't find any new news articles. It makes me wonder if the deals went through. I own some property around there and watch desperately for any economic development. *crosses fingers*
Permalink Reply by milesperhour on August 11, 2010 at 4:30pm
Why are you opposed to service jobs? I think service jobs in that area would be great. It will also create a lot of union positions. I was surprised at the concessions they made to make Chicago one of the more "affordable" cities for filming. Chicago is notorious for high fees unions charges.

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service