From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: DOES AMERICA SAY YES TO JAPAN? - Off track!!
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 20:13:53 GMT

In article <23078@venera.isi.edu> jlacoss@paddington.isi.edu (Jeff LaCoss) writes:
>> dhesi@cirrus.com (Rahul Dhesi) writes:
>>In <1992Dec15.214210.19181@oakhill.sps.mot.com>
>>rvkl60@aus18a25.sps.mot.com (Tom Mathes) writes:
>>
>>>Let's get this discussion back on the REAL message of the
>>>original post: the Japanese coordinated attack on industry
>>                   ^alleged
>
> You aren't watching "Frontline" on PBS. Or reading any newspaper
>business section. "Alleged" is quite incorrect.  "Proved" is closer to
>the mark.

I weep for a generation that gets its "facts" from TV. Doesn't anyone READ,
anymore?

> As PBS has shown in reruns over the last few nights, the Japanese
>used illegal trade practices to capture the market and pay for the
>production-engineering of their products. Production engineering costs
>a LOT.

"Illegal"? Which ones?

> THEIR government allowed THEIR industries to place an economic burden
>on THEIR consumers to subsidize predatory pricing, or "dumping."

Our government would allow it as well; it's called "market value".

>People in the US (and hence most of the chicken-shits in government)
>would never stand for being screwed so business could wax fat. Dumping
>is illegal in the US. US courts have ruled that TVs, DRAMs, and VCRs
>have been dumped in order to kill US competition.

They've also ruled such things against US manufacturers.

>>Do you know when the US will get back on track?  When it stops blaming
>>Japan.
>
> YOHO!
> There IS something to be said for the statement about "blaming."
> What's needed is to stop the bitching, pull in the collective belt,
>get down to competing on a LEVEL FIELD, and kick 'em in the ass.
>
> However, the US continues to just point the finger. Me, I would have
>cut their economic nuts off. I still would:
> - 15% tariff on all consumer entertainment electronics. Being able to
>   buy cheap new VCRs isn't really that important considering
>	- how many people are unemployed
>	- how many working people are on a survival basis in the US
> - have an industrial policy: use the bucks to fund consumer-product
>   R&D just the way good ol' MITI does.

This is SHEER BRILLIANCE. What are you proposing; that we set up a system like
the Japanese have, resulting in the 'screw the consumer' mentality you decry?
That we emulate Japan, a nation with a banking problem TWICE our PROJECTED
S&L and BANKING problems COMBINED? (in an economy half our size?) This doesn't
even make BAD sense. (And doesn't even address the question of giving MORE
authority to a government, ours, for which you clearly have no respect when it
comes to dealing with economic problems.)

> The judgement against Japan for dumping TVs was NOT collected by the
>government and the US TV industry did not thereby recoup its' losses.
>As a result, the US TV industry bit the big one and the "cheaper and
>better" Japanese TVs became the "only" TVs. The continued transfer of
>profits from the US to Japan, plus their domestic subsidies, funded
>the development of new products, which in turn crushed the US consumer
>electronics industry.

Didn't help that our electronics industry a) sold all their Japanese subsid-
iaries and b) ignored the technologies that the Japanese were using.

>>The US owes Japan a lot.  Why do Americans buy Japanese products?
>
> We helped them rebuild after the war, we've been their defense for
>nearly 50 years, we've funded their rise to domination of the world
>electronics market. Nope, the US doesn't owe Japan jack-shit.

We don't owe them anything. Neither do they owe us. Let us hope that we 
recognize where our mutual interests lay.

> Americans probably buy most Japanese products because there no longer
>is any choice. TV? VCR? CD? STEREO? Are there any of these made in the
>US?
>  No.

Uh, yes.

>>Because they are inexpensive and work well.  This means that consumers
>
> Over the last 10 years, I've had 4 19" TVs:
> - Sony. Tube blew after coming out of warranty. Died after 4 years.
> - NEC. Stopped showing blue after a year. Died after 2 years use.
> - Panasonic. Died in 2 years.
> - RCA. Still working after a year.

$250 Hitachi, 19", bought 8 years ago. Still works great.

> That Sony was pretty expensive - the top of the line at the time. The
>NEC was about $40 cheaper than the equivalent (near-top 19") Sony. The
>Panasonic was pretty cheap, but died fast.  The RCA was the cheapest;
>I don't hold out much hope. Maybe I'm just lucky.
>
> I had a $350 Sony CD with just 70-80 hours on it over a couple years
>- it croaked. No suprise that I don't buy Sony any more.

Neither do I; their quality control is terrible.

> TVs et. al. are designed to be cheap to manufacture, cheap to sell,
>and reliable enough to get a couple years beyond warranty so people
>can't bitch. (Cars are more of the same.)

Are US goods (esp cars) different? Wasn't that EXACT complaint one of the 
reasons people STOPPED buying American goods?

> These things are NOT cheap to fix. Is this substantial progress for
>consumers?
> When I was a kid, we had a Packard Bell that worked for over 10 years
>before the first tube blew. I was 12-13 when that happened - I took
>all the tubes to the local supermarket, found the bad one on the
>tester, and had the thing working again in a couple hours. I didn't
>know anything about TVs except it was probably bad practice to mess
>inside while they were running.
> Yeah, TVs provide better pictures now, but they're designed with too
>little margin to really last.

Strange, then, that the consumer found the transistorized TVs preferable to
the much larger tube models, is it not?

>>in the US have to spend less to buy the same thing, or they can spend
>>the same and get better quality.  This means that consumers in the US
>>have more money to invest, and they can invest more in industry in
>>their own country.  The low price of Japanese products HELPS consumers
>>in the US spend less and save and invest more.
>
> Yes, but...
> - the PROFITS (wealth) created by the products leave the US
> - jobs that manufacture goods generally pay better than jobs that
>   sell or distribute goods

Actually, they do not. They DO require less education, enabling you to gainfully
employ a segment of your population that is less educated.

> That's part of the reason why there is less actual wealth in the US
>to invest. (I don't defend the shitty savings rate of Americans,
>although there is more than a casual relationship between small (or
>no) paychecks and savings.)

How, then, do you explain the fact that the US STILL has the highest per capita
income in the world? We do NOT have the highest saving rate.

>>And they would have a LOT to save and invest if they were not paying
>>around 60% of their earnings in taxes.  THAT is a real problem.
>
> Well, yes, we DO pay a lot in taxes. There are problems to be fixed
>by making hard choices.
>
> Invest? Look at the moral abuses of the investment tax credit and
>you'll see that isn't what US business does with money. Save? People
>with crappy service-industry jobs can't save much - they're usually
>just over the subsistence level. Most of the over-paid folks that I
>know are even now more concerned with flaunting it than saving it.

How is this Japan's fault?

> If you're saying that lower taxes will lead to investment that works
>it's way down the economic chain, I'll puke in my hat. That crap has
>had 2 tries and put us in the shit each time.

I see. so HIGHER taxes are the answer, right? OK, but YOU first.

-- 
Disclaimer - Oh come on! You didn't think I was serious, did you?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan