Ho Chi Chinaman makes $125 A Month

• Footwedge

  Here ya go Gut. From that leftist, commie, Marxist rag Bloomburg Business Week .......
  
  While recently auditing an apparel manufacturer in Dongguan that supplies American importers, the corporate compliance manager says he discussed wage levels with the factory's Hong Kong-based owner. The 2,000 employees who operate sewing and stitching machines in the multi-story complex often put in overtime but earn an average of only $125 a month, an amount the owner grudgingly acknowledged to the compliance manager doesn't meet Chinese overtime-pay requirements or corporate labor codes. "These goals are a fantasy," the owner said. "Maybe in two or three decades we can meet them."
  
  So...even with working an abundance of overtime, these workers are making a paltry $125 a month.
  
  And more snippets from this "liberal rag"
  
  "CHINESE EXPORT manufacturing is rife with tales of deception. The largest single source of American imports, China's factories this year are expected to ship goods to the U.S. worth $280 billion. American companies continually demand lower prices from their Chinese suppliers, allowing American consumers to enjoy inexpensive clothes, sneakers, and electronics. But factory managers in China complain in interviews that U.S. price pressure creates a powerful incentive to cheat on labor standards that American companies promote as a badge of responsible capitalism. These standards generally incorporate the official minimum wage, which is set by local or provincial governments and ranges from $45 to $101 a month. American companies also typically say they hew to the government-mandated workweek of 40 to 44 hours, beyond which higher overtime pay is required. These figures can be misleading, however, as the Beijing government has had only limited success in pushing local authorities to enforce Chinese labor laws. That's another reason abuses persist and factory oversight frequently fails.
  
  Some American companies now concede that the cheating is far more pervasive than they had imagined. "We've come to realize that, while monitoring is crucial to measuring the performance of our suppliers, it doesn't per se lead to sustainable improvements," says Hannah Jones, Nike Inc.'s (NKE ) vice-president for corporate responsibility. "We still have the same core problems."
  
  This raises disturbing questions. Guarantees by multi-nationals that offshore suppliers are meeting widely accepted codes of conduct have been important to maintaining political support in the U.S. for growing trade ties with China, especially in the wake of protests by unions and antiglobalization activists. "For many retailers, audits are a way of covering themselves," says Auret van Heerden, chief executive of the Fair Labor Assn., a coalition of 20 apparel and sporting goods makers and retailers, including Nike, Adidas Group, Eddie Bauer, and Nordstrom (JWN ). But can corporations successfully impose Western labor standards on a nation that lacks real unions and a meaningful rule of law?
  
  Historically associated with sweatshop abuses but now trying to reform its suppliers, Nike says that one factory it caught falsifying records several years ago is the Zhi Qiao Garments Co. The dingy concrete-walled facility set near mango groves and rice paddies in the steamy southern city of Panyu employs 600 workers, most in their early 20s. They wear blue smocks and lean over stitching machines and large steam-blasting irons. Today the factory complies with labor-law requirements, Nike says, but Zhi Qiao's general manager, Peter Wang, says it's not easy. "Before, we all played the cat-and-mouse game," but that has ended, he claims. "Any improvement you make costs more money." Providing for overtime wages is his biggest challenge, he says. By law, he is supposed to provide time-and-a-half pay after eight hours on weekdays and between double and triple pay for Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays. "The price [Nike pays] never increases one penny," Wang complains, "but compliance with labor codes definitely raises costs."
  
  
  I forgot to bold print the $45 to $101 a month. This article was written 5 years ago.....and only a fool would surmise that the labor rates would have quadruoked over that time frame as you have stated.
  
  Read the whole article Gut and learn.
  
  http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_48/b4011001.htm
• Footwedge

  And this...from a pro China labor force blog site..
  
  And the gap grows for jobs that require little education. Many factory workers make 1/25 or less of what their American counterparts would make ($125/month or 1000 RMB/month is pretty standard for semi-skilled factory work in the modern coastal cities of China like Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen).
  
  Years of massive amounts of memorization and classes before their working years prepares many Chinese people for extremely trying jobs that only pay nominal sums of money.
  
  http://www.thechinaexpat.com/the-advantages-of-chinas-education-system-the-implications-for-you/
• 2kool4skool

  

  China will eventually catch up to where the "modern" world is regarding fair wages, worker rights, etc.
  
  They haven't been trying to be a player on the international stage for more than a few decades. I seem to recall the United States thinking it was cool to own other people as property for our first century or so. China's already a step ahead of us.
• iclfan2

  

  Workers in China and Japan are already beginning to make more. At a furniture Company I audited at, the prices for their labor was almost enough to start opening up US plants again. They have not done so yet, but I would assume if their current workforce continued demanding a higher wage, more products will once again be made in America.
• Al Bundy

  iclfan2;839715 wrote:Workers in China and Japan are already beginning to make more. At a furniture Company I audited at, the prices for their labor was almost enough to start opening up US plants again. They have not done so yet, but I would assume if their current workforce continued demanding a higher wage, more products will once again be made in America.

  
  As china becomes more expensive in labor, the plants will move to countries that have a cheaper workforce
• gut

  Footwedge;839131 wrote:Here ya go Gut. From that leftist, commie, Marxist rag Bloomburg Business Week .......

  Are you being intentionally deceptive or do you not understand the concept of AVERAGE? Or did you just get you're racial insults wrong? You posted one article from 2006 and an undated blog entry and expect to be taken seriously? Really?
  
  http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2011-05/651640.html
  "The average annual income of private-sector employees was 20,759 yuan ($3,194) last year, a 14.1 percent increase on the previous year." (note this is everyone, not just the min wage manual/cheap factory labor sector)
  
  http://seekingalpha.com/article/259494-pay-to-play-what-china-s-rising-wages-mean-for-investors
  "China's 31 provinces boosted minimum wages by an average of 24% last year, according to Yin Weimin, China's minister of human resources and social security. Meanwhile, the average monthly income for migrant workers rose 13% to $256.89 (1,690 yuan).
  ...Indeed, Chinese workers are no longer at the bottom of Asia's pay scale. In 2009, monthly factory wages in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam were about $100. They were $148 in Jakarta, Indonesia and $47 in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Monthly wages in Shenzen, China by that point had reached $235. And now they're likely significantly higher."
  
  http://www.forbes.com/2007/07/02/china-wage-growth-markets-econ-cx_jc_0702markets1.html
  "On a per-capita basis, the average Chinese worker earned an annual wage of 12,422 yuan ($1,630) in 2002, or 1,035 yuan ($136) per month. As of 2006, they were making 21,001 yuan ($2,756) a year, or 1,750 yuan ($230) a month. "
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Al Bundy;839780 wrote:As china becomes more expensive in labor, the plants will move to countries that have a cheaper workforce

  
  No, it will mean inflation in prices. It is already happening in Asia, the U.S. hasn't experienced inflation due to the lousy job/RE market that's kept prices down, but eventually it will hit.
• gut

  Manhattan Buckeye;840149 wrote:No, it will mean inflation in prices. It is already happening in Asia, the U.S. hasn't experienced inflation due to the lousy job/RE market that's kept prices down, but eventually it will hit.

  
  True, however wages & unemployment are preventing inflation as much as anything. Very tough to raise your prices in those circumstances. You either stop selling, or you take a lower margin with your costs going up.
• Al Bundy

  Manhattan Buckeye;840149 wrote:No, it will mean inflation in prices. It is already happening in Asia, the U.S. hasn't experienced inflation due to the lousy job/RE market that's kept prices down, but eventually it will hit.

  
  It depends upon the industry. Many things that used to be made in China are now made in countries such as Vietnam because of the lower cost of labor.
• Footwedge

  gut;840069 wrote:Are you being intentionally deceptive or do you not understand the concept of AVERAGE? Or did you just get you're racial insults wrong? You posted one article from 2006 and an undated blog entry and expect to be taken seriously? Really?
  
  http://china.globaltimes.cn/society/2011-05/651640.html
  "The average annual income of private-sector employees was 20,759 yuan ($3,194) last year, a 14.1 percent increase on the previous year." (note this is everyone, not just the min wage manual/cheap factory labor sector)
  
  http://seekingalpha.com/article/259494-pay-to-play-what-china-s-rising-wages-mean-for-investors
  "China's 31 provinces boosted minimum wages by an average of 24% last year, according to Yin Weimin, China's minister of human resources and social security. Meanwhile, the average monthly income for migrant workers rose 13% to $256.89 (1,690 yuan).
  ...Indeed, Chinese workers are no longer at the bottom of Asia's pay scale. In 2009, monthly factory wages in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam were about $100. They were $148 in Jakarta, Indonesia and $47 in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Monthly wages in Shenzen, China by that point had reached $235. And now they're likely significantly higher."
  
  http://www.forbes.com/2007/07/02/china-wage-growth-markets-econ-cx_jc_0702markets1.html
  "On a per-capita basis, the average Chinese worker earned an annual wage of 12,422 yuan ($1,630) in 2002, or 1,035 yuan ($136) per month. As of 2006, they were making 21,001 yuan ($2,756) a year, or 1,750 yuan ($230) a month. "

  On top of everything else, you don't know how to read. From my post number 35....where I responded directed to YOU I said:
  
  "Not according to the links that I provided...although I will concede that some of the links may be somewhat outdated. But it's more than just wages....it's working conditions, lax safety laws, and it also includes complete lack of concern regarding environmental issues. Today, the overtaxed Chinese factory workers have had a pretty big spike in their suicide rates. Are the Chimese factory workers nothing more than an "expense" on a balance sheet?"
  
  Learn to read and comprehend before you spew.
  
  So the wages in the factories have gone up from $100 to $200 a month over the past 5 years. BFD. Now...you care to link your preposterous claim that the US has the highest corporate rate in the world?
  
  You are too easy.
• gut

  Footwedge;840236 wrote: So the wages in the factories have gone up from $100 to $200 a month over the past 5 years. BFD. Now...you care to link your preposterous claim that the US has the highest corporate rate in the world?
  
  You are too easy.

  
  Yeah, I understand that. Has nothing to do with you stating an erroneous fact once (and, um, look at your thread title), being corrected on it, then pulling garbage to try and prove the erroneous fact again, then backpedaling when you were proven wrong.
  
  And show me where I've said the US has the highest corporate tax rates in the world. You're a fucking joke.
• Footwedge

  gut;840251 wrote:Yeah, I understand that. Has nothing to do with you stating an erroneous fact once, being corrected on it, then pulling garbage to try and prove the erroneous fact again, then backpedaling when you were proven wrong.
  
  And show me where I've said the US has the highest corporate tax rates in the world. You're a ****ing joke.

  My fact was dead nuts accurate....in 2006. And then I conceded that my dead nuts on the money fact might have been outdated. What you said is that the US has one of the highest tax rates in the world. when people say shit like that, I point it out so that others are not hoodwinked by your erroneous crap.
  
  You should be ashamed of yourself.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Al Bundy;840219 wrote:It depends upon the industry. Many things that used to be made in China are now made in countries such as Vietnam because of the lower cost of labor.

  
  Where do they export from? Vietnam doesn't have a world class port. They depend on China for their exports, and Singapore for their logistics.
• gut

  Footwedge;840268 wrote:My fact was dead nuts accurate....in 2006. And then I conceded that my dead nuts on the money fact might have been outdated. What you said is that the US has one of the highest tax rates in the world. when people say **** like that, I point it out so that others are not hoodwinked by your erroneous crap.
  
  You should be ashamed of yourself.

  More like 2002 (might try reading that again)...Gee, can you NEVER get anything right?
• gut

  Gee, wherever would I get the idea that the US has high marginal corporate rates (which is what I said, not THE highest) and high effective corporate rates?
  
  http://www.itif.org/files/2011-corp-tax-merrill.pdf
  
  http://seekingalpha.com/article/257977-high-u-s-corporate-tax-rate-a-barrier-to-economic-growth
• Footwedge

  gut;840314 wrote:Gee, wherever would I get the idea that the US has high marginal corporate rates (which is what I said, not THE highest) and high effective corporate rates?
  
  http://www.itif.org/files/2011-corp-tax-merrill.pdf
  
  http://seekingalpha.com/article/257977-high-u-s-corporate-tax-rate-a-barrier-to-economic-growth

  And the CATO Insitute is full of shit. CATO is using the highest marginal tax rate to fool the gullible people...like you. The US corporate tax rate is graduated...with the mean rate at 17.5%, which puts it below most free trading countries. Or don't you understand the difference between the highest marginal tax rate and the lowest? Which in this case...is 0. Next time, use a reliable source.
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world
  
  Morover....the aggregate corporate tax rate as a percent of GDP is less than 2% in the US....which is less than 80% of other free countries.
  
  http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/69xx/doc6902/11-28-CorporateTax.pdf
• Manhattan Buckeye

  ^^^
  
  That made about as much sense as a poop flavored lollipop, if a business even turns a reasonable profit, say $10M, it will pay over 30% in tax, if the business doesn't make that much chances are it will likely fail, like the many that have in the Obamaconomy.
  
  BTW read the link, where did the 17.5% come from, did you just make that up?
• Footwedge

  More....
  
  "The U.S. corporate tax burden is smaller than average for developed countries.[1] Corporations in 19 of the member states of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development paid 16.1 percent of their profits in taxes between 2000 and 2005, on average, while corporations in the United States paid 13.4 percent.
  
  Nevertheless, some have argued that U.S. corporate tax rates unduly burden U.S. companies by pointing to the country’s top statutory tax rate, which is 35 percent. For example, a recent Wall Street Journal editorial calling for corporate tax cuts noted that this is the second highest top statutory tax rate among developed countries.[2] While true, this gives the false impression that the corporate tax burden is greater here than in other developed countries. Because the U.S. tax code offers so many deductions, credits, and other mechanisms by which corporations can reduce their taxes, the actual percentage of profits that U.S. corporations pay in taxes — or what analysts refer to as their effective tax rate — is not high, compared to other developed countries.
  
  Because the average U.S. corporate tax burden is low, many economists believe a revenue-neutral corporate tax reform that reduces statutory corporate tax rates, while broadening the tax base by eliminating costly tax breaks, could improve economic efficiency and likely benefit the U.S. economy.
  
  ■Effective tax rate much lower than top statutory rate. Government and independent researchers have long pointed out that the top statutory corporate tax rate is an incomplete measure at best of the burden of corporate taxes. It does not take into account the generous depreciation rules, exemptions, deductions, and credits (some of which are sometimes termed “loopholes&#8221 that corporations may be eligible for. Those special provisions lower corporations’ effective tax rate, or the share of their profits they actually pay in taxes, and do so in a way that creates different tax rates for different industries. These differential tax rates across industries are generally regarded as more harmful to economic efficiency than any burden due to the current top statutory rate."
  
  
  http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=784
• Manhattan Buckeye

  What's more? The same BS? Companies that lose money don't pay taxes, their employees might, assuming they have any, which in the Obama depression the number is getting worse and worse every week. The United States is broken. But you know Footie, you are right, let's just jack up the corporate tax rate, that is going to have a just DANDY effect on the employment numbers.
• gut

  Footwedge;840347 wrote:More....

  
  Now, here's what's interesting....The CATO study references the OECD (and the PWC study was done in conjuction with World Bank). Did you bother to notice the NUMEROUS studies showing effective US corporate rates consistently among the highest?
  
  Your link references the OECD (and lmao, in this case I won't fault you for pulling out data over 6 years old)...OK, let's go to the source (this is how you learn to think for yourself and don't got caught up in BS analysis and politicized views). This study references the same OECD 2005 data (think you have to pay for the actual source....scroll down to page 3 - notice the US effective rate?) Note, also, this is just federal and isn't counting state and local taxes.
  http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/13/41501413.pdf
  
  Don't like CATO? How about AEI?
  http://www.aei.org/outlook/101024
  "Effective corporate tax rates are a better measure of competitiveness than statutory rates. Even by this measure, the United States does much worse than the other OECD countries"
  
  Or do you only trust the govt data, despite numerous other studies/organizations with different findings - the same govt that routinely undershoots by miles estimates for spending cuts and revenues? I mean, there couldn't be anything political there to trying to say US corporations are undertaxed. And not that they are necessarily over taxed, at least to the point of relevancy, because taxes aren't the only consideration of where to incorporate. But certainly there are other countries with more favorable corporate tax policies. 13.4% is way out of whack with this other studies - and my guess is because they include S corps that pay no tax because it's taxed at the partnership level (read: personal income tax). Another neat trick they pull is the "average corp with 60 people", which as a weighted average of corporate profits pails in comparison to the multi-nationals (not to mention, when the talk of raising taxes on corporate it's almost always targeting the big, evil companies not the small businesses). That likely also excludes the incidence of double taxation on foreign income that larger companies and multi-nationals have.
• gut

  Oh, there's one more key take-away from that OECD table - personal and corporate income taxes make-up among the highest % of tax collected...Social security is lower....The big hole or gap there is consumption taxes/VAT - if you want to collect more revenue that is where you HAVE to go. But, oh no's, that would mean the govt starts collecting tax from the 50% of the population that don't pay any.
  
  Notice how high personal income tax rates are, as well (this despite the wealthy paying most of it)? And look at SS...looks like the great social welfare states make - GASP - the individual foot the bill instead of really sticking it to the evil rich (and this is also confirmed by the below average tax wedge). That's SS and Consumption tax is a pretty shocking number, taxes that would be mostly flat (i.e. not progressive), and the US sits at about 40% while most countries are in the 50-60% range (or more).
  http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/13/41501413.pdf