01-12-2017, 04:27 PM
(01-10-2017, 06:36 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: So you don't know? Or just ignorant to the difference between SOURCING (which includes almost the entire apparel industry) and actually relocating jobs overseas (i.e. outsourcing)?
Trump's "outsourcing" is mostly private label business that is simply leveraging a brand name (basically what his hotel/real estate business has been the past 20 years). There's no jobs to "bring back" because he's not a manufacturer, he's a middle man just slapping a tag on an item produced by another company. Maybe there are instances where he's built an actual factory overseas, but I don't think those jobs would be a HUGE number.
Trump's business is the Trump brand. The majority of his business the past 20 years or so has been licensing his name. Wouldn't surprise me if he doesn't even actually buy and sell those clothing lines, but simply collects royalties for use of his name.
Let me see if I have your argument straight.
If Nabisco plans to build an Oreo plant in China to save money utilizing cheap foreign labor instead of US workers that is "SOURCING" because no jobs were relocated in order to "bring back" because Nabisco never planned to create those jobs in the US?
But, if Nabisco plans to build an Oreo plant in the US, but then determines it is more cost effective to build that plant in China instead that is "outsourcing" because Nabisco can "bring back" those jobs which were never created in the US anyway?
How is that different to the US worker who doesn't have a job because Nabisco is paying a Chinese worker less than they would a US employee to manufacturer Oreos for US consumers?
Oh, I get it now. If Van Heusen builds a sweat shop in Bangladesh employing 500 foreign workers making shirts for import into the US and slaps a Trump label on them that is called "SOURCING." Because Van Heusen never intended to employ 500 workers in the US.
But, if Van Heusen plans to build a sweat shop in NJ employing 500 US workers for sale in the US and slaps a Trump label on them, but then realizes it is cheaper to build the sweat shop in Bangladesh that is called outsourcing.
Wow, when the company never intended to create the jobs in the US for US workers that is so much ***** different to the unemployed US worker because there aren't any jobs to "bring back." And Nabisco Oreos are bad because they relocated jobs overseas so Nabisco needs to pay a tariff. While Trump labeled Van Heusen shirts are good because they located jobs overseas instead of relocated jobs overseas thus they shouldn't pay any tariff.
