I want to address a few of the comments in my previous post. First of all, I wasn't suggesting that we consider this on a macroeconomic level, considering the tariffs and protectionism that entails. What interests me, actually, is the lack of consideration we are giving it on a microeconomical scale. And it's true that clothes, as manufactured products (arguably different from food)* require a multi-level approach. There is the question of where the clothes are made, and then there is the question of where the materials are produced. Oddly, the following should bring some solace: the U.S. is still the biggest cotton producer in the world and the biggest cotton exporter (per Wiki, so have it at, nerds). In point of fact, the materials that much of our clothes are made from (at least mine) are actually grown in the U.S. and exported to China, Bangladesh, Guatemala, United Arab Emirates, Vietnam, etc. where it is made into the clothing that is shipped back here (and the remainders are sent to be sold in markets in less developed countries, no doubt).
And I'm not suggesting a "movement" per se. I just find it curious that we (those of us willing to pay $6 for a gallon of organic milk, etc) are not curious about where our clothes come from. Is it because we don't put them in our mouths? Since their toxicity isn't really something we question, we don't ask questions? Or is it because most of the U.S. clothes manufacturers who tout that fact make ugly clothes? Al, I am not suggesting you try to buy only American-made clothes. But just try looking for a couple of pieces and let me know whether you can find any you want to wear.
DCV, I am am unconvinced that a rise in productivity in the manufacturing sector is a measure of success for anyone other than those companies still operating in this country. Manufacturing employment in this country has fallen by 10 million jobs since 1980 (CBO data and Natl. Assn. of Manufacturers data). Imagine where we would be if those 10 million jobs had not been shed by trade agreements and outsourcing, but instead had reached the productivity levels we see today. There would still be jobs lost, but it would have been a much softer landing. I also have enough of the millenarian in me to be freaked out that our country does not make anything. Where would we be if the rest of the world decided not to sell us their shit? Or changed its prices? Okay, so now I am back to my macroeconomic level discussion that I promised not to have, and frankly don't want to cross swords with DCV if JFB does not fully have my rhetorical back.
*I said arguably, so that means you don't have to argue with me about food manufacturing practices. I know it's complicated. Thanks.
1 comment:
Reading these posts kept reminding me of something my husband mentioned recently. He has a love/hate relationship with niche blogs about old timey style and design. Apparently there is a movement afoot in those circles for Made in America goods as well. He pointed me to this post in particular:
http://www.acontinuouslean.com/the-american-list/
It seems that it's true that American goods are either awful or very high end. And of course there's the issue of materials vs manufacture as you pointed out. J Crew is big on "here are some shirts made out of small batch Italian silk we found in a small boutique in Positano" and was it the Gap or some high end jeans label who recently-ish was touting jeans made from denim found in a Kentucky mine or something.
Somewhat relatedly, there is a blog I read by a journalist who writes about commerce and shopping and mass market apparel in general:
http://schmeiser.typepad.com/filthy_commerce/
She's from your hood I believe (Alameda?)(here's where you're like, oh yeah I know and love/hate her).
Post a Comment