From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Newsgroups: ba.general
Subject: Re: stupid consumers
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:41:44 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

eap@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello) writes:

>Let's also not forget that US companies are guilty of exploiting a
>foreign workforce which they perceive to be cheaper (maybe because of 
>lax safety standards in these countries).  This also takes jobs away
>from US workers.

Were it true that offshore labor were cheaper for US firms to use, it
would make them more competitive.  Failure to use this labor would
cause US companies to lose market share.  Are you in favor of that?

>Maybe US companies wouldn't need to do this if we weren't being attacked
>from across the pacific, and dumb americans falling for it.

Oh man.  To think I actually once wanted to attend Stanford's MBA program.

"Attacked from across the pacific [sic]"  "dumb americans [sic] falling
for it."  I suspect there's an editor's job at the SF Chronicle waiting
for you.

Exactly how are we being attacked?  By being offered superior goods of
higher quality than what's domestically available at competitive prices?
There exists an element of competition in any non-monolopolistic free
market economy (don't they talk about that at Stanford?); Nissan is
attacking Ford in much the way that Ford is attacking GM.

As far as consumers being dumb, your ignorance is quite visible on this
one.  The "dumb" consumers were the ones whose lax standards in the '50s
and '60s allowed their domestic suppliers to survive, indeed flourish,
by making shoddy, unimaginative goods that weren't built to last.  This
isn't just the carmakers, either -- most US manufacturers have historically
been driven by bean counters who seized upon the assembly line as a way
to maximize throughput, with quality a secondary consideration.

Happily, this is changing, partly because of the overseas "attack" you
decry, and partly because of the "dumb" consumers who now realize that
there is an alternative and who refuse to accept poor quality in their
durable good purchases anymore.

>Forty years
>ago, when people actually cared about this country, it would have been
>an outrage to buy a foreign car (as your first car). Now people think
>it's trendy or something. 

What a crock.  Forty years ago, it would have been an outrage to buy
a foreign car because it came from those Japs or Krauts who we whipped
up on in the Big One.  The American consumer was also quite short-sighted
in the '50s as well, and his ideas of an acceptable product matched
well with the domestic carmakers.

>If you don't like this country- leave- you're not wanted. 

Actually, it's ignorant jerks like you who aren't wanted.  But I won't
share in your arrogance to demand that you leave.

>And if you don't like our products, then go work in a country
>that you think is better. 

I hate to burst your bubble, but you are reciting the EXACT same 
mentality that pervaded Detroit 25 years ago.  Upper management would
not tolerate any notion that they weren't king of the hill, or that
a bit of introspection might be useful.  "Loss of market share?  What
are you talking about?!  I drove for twenty minutes through downtown
Detroit just this morning and didn't see a single VW!  Oh, in California?
They're a bunch of flakes anyway; I wouldn't worry about them."

And since you haven't figured it out on your own, let me tip you off
on the *real* difference between the Japanese consumer companies and
their US counterparts:  the Japanese are much, much more market-driven.
In simpler terms, they ask us what we want and then find a way to give
it to us.  US manufacturers have only recently discovered the value of
this (though there are notable exceptions like P&G, and look at their
success).

Is everyone at Stanford like you?



-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974
Xref: sparky ba.general:4077 misc.kids:24886 misc.legal:17945