Slashdot Mirror
The Problem with DHS's Plan to 'Buy American'
An anonymous reader points out a Cnet report on the
Homeland Security Authorization Act, which would require that more than 50 percent of the components in any end product bought by the Department of Homeland Security be produced or manufactured in the U.S., writing "The Pentagon has agreements with 21 countries that waive the act, but an amendment that just passed the House would prevent the DHS from waiving the 'Buy American' restrictions. "The president of the Information Technology Association of America observed that this means the DHS may 'have to learn to do without computers and cell phones,' since he could not think of any manufacturers of those devices that would meet the 50% threshold."
The Saudi Arabs already did. They bought their American -- George W.
Sad but true.
Haven't you heard, Americans are above making things. Our hands might get dirty like.
Congress is just out of it, like always.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
a rather stupid rulling here , If your going to run a department which deals with national security it is in your intrests to use the best avaliable .Arguments on the usefullness of the DHS aside , if they want to perform to peak effiency they must use the best the world has to offer not the best the USA has to offer.
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
i find it sad that our own government agencies are being forced to buy american because they wouldn't otherwise. what does that say about the american economy?
that the 'Buy American' scam is really just an attempt to protect American companies from cheaper competitors under the guise of 'security'
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
No need to worry about this. DHS will just have the regs changed to mean that 50% of components by weight must come from within the US. Then they can just add lead weights to every computer case and cell phone housing manufactured in the US, to allow all those patriotic manufacturers to make some scratch off the war on terror.
9/11! NEVER FORGET!
The United States manufactures primarily US Dollars. Military hardware is second to that. In exchange for these two products, other countries send everything else here.
This is insane.
The sum result is that the products bought will be more expensive than they would otherwise be.
What exactly is the benefit of this? American companies benefit by having more trade? but they're *paying* for that additional trade in their taxes, because the State has to pay more to buy the more expensive products.
--
Toby
I believe it. It seems we are (sigh) again repeating history. After large battles we temporarily go into short periods of extreme isolationism of one sort or another. This seems to be one of those knee-jerk reactions. Think about when the buy American stuff started (which war was it again? umm, WWII perhaps?). And which cars do we hate the most? (other than Ford, I mean) Oh thats right.. the cars built by our greater adversaries. Ignoring good technology to punish others or to feel self righteous is only self defeating and limits your possible options. This, too, shall pass.
** "It's not my job to stand between the people talking to me, and the ones listening to me." -- Pego the Jerk
What about things like uniforms? I know most cheap bulk clothing is manufactured in East Asia.
Guess they'll go cold this winter - no oil and gas from Canada for Homeland Security...
Oh well, what the hell...
"So the government can spend an extra $8 per item times how ever many items. What does that mean? That means they raise taxes to pay for it."
Haven't you heard? The government has been cutting taxes for the last 5 years and sticking the difference in the national deficit. 'Cause, you know, that's free money that the taxpayers of America aren't responsible for.
Ah, the horror of cost accoounting.
That $8.00 per item savings translated, in the past two decades, into complete shutdown of the textile and clothing manufacturing industry in the U.S. That meant millions of people thrown into the local Wal-Mart job, if they were lucky, and onto welfare if not. And Wal-Mart exists because it passes its healthcare on to the local state's tax-supported public services -- not to mention the number of Wal-Martish employees who are on food stamps because they aren't paid enough to eat.
That eight bucks cost us our electronics sector, our manufacturing sector, software, it goes on and on.
The "savings" is localized on someone's balance sheet. The cost incurred to generate that savings is measured in ruined careers, disappeared industry, impoverished people, and let's not forget, the almighty national security hole caused by our inability to make our own defense equipment.
The savings in moving our economy overseas goes into few pockets, but the costs come out of all our taxes. And the real costs never show up in the Economist or the cable news shows, because those are paid by the poor and almost-poor, the invisible majority that don't really count.
Those tax savings are lost on the back end.
Yes, but it's usually high end and thus out of reach of the masses.
... etc
... etc.
... but in China you can just dump these chemicals out the back.
examples:
Bose Wave Radio
McIntosh audio equipment
Apple's XServes
IBM servers and mainframes
Cisco Routers
Netopia Routers
AMI Motherboards
Lots of commercial electronics for things like autos, CNC machines, telephony
The same goes for electrical components that you don't see like Illinois Capacitors, TadCom resistors, several OEM power supplies
The real reason that so much industry has moved overseas to places like China and India, is that there are very loose environmental and worker safety rules. Manufacturing electronics involves toxic chemicals that are very expensive to dispose of in Germany, US and Japan
__________
|rip/\/\aster
Dear Quoran,
I know how you feel.
Sincerely,
US Constitution
I work for a department of the NIH--the National Institute of Health. I have been closely associated with some large computer purchases, and I can tell you that, over a certain dollar amount, we must also source from US manufacturing plants.
The details of how this works aren't 100% clear to me--but I believe that major manufacturers have a manufacturing plant for just this purpose, although I don't know if they serve any other gov't institutes besides the NIH.
I can tell you that we can purchase Dell, Apple, and HP following the US sourcing rules. While it does indeed complicate the bidding process, it's not impossible. I would imagine that the DHS would tap the same resources; in fact, their use of these resources might drive down the prices for all gov't buyers who are currently constrained by this rule. The more the merrier.
The fact that you can't purchase "Made in the USA" computer goods at Best Buy really has no relation to the purchasing power of the US gov't.
--
$tar -xvf
Since the government buys their equipment using money from the US taxpayers, it seems in the best interests of the taxpayers and the country to keep as much of that money in the country as possible. Consider the following:
The US government outsources everything to companies in other countries - everything from highway construction to phone support to the IRS. Making up a number for the tax rate, call it 40%, that people pay, including the federal taxes in gas, phone service, licensing, income taxes, etc. This means that every year 40% of the countries GDP goes to another country or countries. That reduces the overall "value" of our country by that much. At the other end, if we pay nothing to other countries for services or aid or anything, the "value" of the country remains the same.
Now, I understand that this isn't realistic economically, but it illustrates the point. As a government, isn't it better for their citizens if as much of their expenditures as possible remain in the country? Yes, it is possible that buying from an outside source is cheaper, (for the nation as a whole), than buying locally. (For example, many food crops won't grow in the US and to irrigate/climate control the fields to support those crops would cost more than buying them outright from somewhere else.) However, for a few percentage points difference in the price, I doubt it, since we have to consider income taxes that the country "gets back" by taxing the workers who produce it. (Assuming all other aspects are equal.)With that said, I think it would be better overall to embrace a true global economy, so if someone in India can do a job better/faster/cheaper then they can do it. However, since we don't have a world government, and we still have this annoying habit of killing each other over things like imaginary lines on a map, I don't see any real alternative to being somewhat protective of the country you happen to reside in, whether that is the US, the UK, China or India.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
American Cell Phone Company buys cell phone part pre-assembled from China for $20 and battery from Korea for $10, then does final assembly here and charges $61 wholesale to the gov't.
By value, it's over half American-made.
If 51% mass is the problem, bundle it with an American-made car battery and charging device.
You may think this is funny but crazy rules call for crazy workarounds.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I worked at walmart for a while after college -- The people there were just miserable, and I dont mean shitty people, actualy most of the people were pretty nice, it was just like being on the ship of the damned. The smarter among us knew where the ship was headed, the less aware didn't. And the undertext was always, dont tell anyone. Management was stupid, but they could spot the smart people -- who didn't generally last long. I got along by pretending to be not stupid, but not smart either. They want someone just smart enough to stock their shoes, electronics, etc, and not be trouble -- but stupid enough to believe their lies. They lied constantly, did rotten (and sometimes illegal) things, and just generally made your life shit. The guys who had been there for 15 years, were worn to the nub by life. I was originally thinking of trying to become the store manager or something -- I was *BY FAR* the most educated employee with a BS, but after a while my conscience started to bother me. I *literally* felt by working at this company I was selling out myself, the country, and my own interests.
I quit after a few months when they decided to make me permanant... my back was hurting so bad from the labor that I couldn't sleep more then 3 hours at once (i'd wake up with knotted muscles, have to stretch for 20 - 30 mins, then go back to sleep) And it wasn't like I could afford the walmart insurance, which IIRC was about 30% of your wage (7$ an hour).
The other thing that struck me (coming from a household that made over 200k a year) was how poor the people working there were. I remember one girl bragging abuot how well she was doing -- she had a dvd player and a ps2.
Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley
Yes, that's right, and those people are poisoning themselves, particularly in China. The pollution in the industrial cities is so bad that if it goes unchecked, it will, paradoxically, threaten their economic survival. Ruined land and water is no good to anybody.
Tangentially: have you ever driven on I-80 through the Rust Belt? I'm talking about former manufacturing hubs like Buffalo, Gary, and parts of Cleveland. They look abandoned. And the factories? Rusting and abandoned. It's sad, not only because of the unemployment and social upheaval, but because great swaths of that abandoned land cannot be reclaimed for agriculture. The soil and groundwater is too polluted. So the hulks of the factories remain, the rusting monuments to America's fading greatness.
Now, what's really eerie are all of the abandoned strip malls: just boarded-up buildings and weedy expanses of grey asphalt. Nearby, you find housing built in the 40's and 50's, some abandoned by the people who once made their livings in the factories, some filled with poor immigrants, others by retirees who try to keep up appearances and put out their flags on Independence Day. I'm not being lurid here, either. There are a thousand towns like this and they are depressing places. What will become of them?
"OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
"Yes, that's right, and those people are poisoning themselves, particularly in China. The pollution in the industrial cities is so bad that if it goes unchecked, it will, paradoxically, threaten their economic survival."
What China needs is an armed revolution by the working classes, overthrowing their government and setting up a true worker's paradi... oh, er, nevermind.
Just a bit north, near Detroit at the River Rouge (extremely industrialized part of michigan) and also one of the home to one of those SuperFund sites, the contamination is so great that a person, without protection, supposodly will get cancer within 20 minutes of exposure.
As a kid, my dad would bring my brother and I down there in the boat and watch the fires. Fires, literraly on the river, they'd just start spontaneously, it almost seems surreal thinking about that experience. It was almost like a weird scene out of mad-max/apolocalpyse now/terminator.
I think you and everyone else have missed a major point. What happens if the devices our military depends on are not developed and made in america? Two things:
1. Our military won't be able to keep up with the technical advances of other countries because we no longer produce enough engineers and scientists. All the engineers will be overseas
2. Our national defense will depend on foriegn companies selling us equipment which they may choose not to do at some point in time.
If it's like DOD / Corps of Engineers contracts, the penalty is you don't get paid. When we do a Corps job, it states in the specifications you must meet the "Buy American" act. If I install foreign-made items, I have to either produce documentation confirming that the vendor is on the "exceptions" list the DOD has (which won't work for this case) or I have to replace the items.
Otherwise, the Corps won't sign off on the job and we don't get paid.
What a load of crap and overgeneralizations. Government programs giving work to minority owned businesses are doing so to stimulate the economy, usually in ghettos where there is no cash flowing. The end result is a net increase of tax paying middle class people (who may be non-white) and all the benefits that go along with being affluent. Your painting of all minority owned businesses as incompetent borders on racist.
In this thread, we the +5's tend toward denouncing the US's choice to effectively do the same thing. Is there some method to the madness? I'm genuinely curious...
This is not just bad for free software, but this is a clarifying special case of why this requirement is in practice a subsidy. Things will be bought that are not required to do the job.
In addition, it should be remembered that US dollars flow back to where they can be used as legal tender. Ie: the US. Buying goods from abroad initiates the whole process of trade. But then economic and scientific illiteracy are patriotic: Americans live in a post-rational culture AFAICT.
Wikileaks, no DNS
...the US-House of Saud relationship was cemented by FDR and continued by his successors both D and R. Apparanty few realize that.
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
The other thing that struck me (coming from a household that made over 200k a year) was how poor the people working there were. I remember one girl bragging abuot how well she was doing -- she had a dvd player and a ps2.
Which makes her richer than 95% of the world's population. Poverty is relative; as long as there are any differences in wealth, there will be people near the bottom. But the bottom in the US and other developed nations is far higher than the rest of the world, and far higher than it was anywhere 100 years ago. You can thank capitalism for that.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
...that you hold quite a few degrees in BS.
This isn't a partisan issue. I don't know whether the US-Saud relationship was politically wise under FDR given what they knew back then and given what the world was like back then. What I do know is that over the last 20 years, it has become increasingly clear that it is incompatible with US claims of advancing democracy and freedom around the world.
If the current president still doesn't know that continuing the US-Saudi relationship on these terms is a mistake, he is either stupid, or has a financial interest in the relationship that keeps him from doing the right thing, or both.
Where did you get your economics degree? Perhaps you ought to consider asking for your money back.
m ance.html)
...
Here's is the shocker: China does not run a large trade surplus. (Serious, it's very very small, and was in '04 only slightly in the black.) Now, the numbers "experts" give you tell you that the US ran a $160bn trade deficit with China in the year to April '05. But that is against an overall trade surplus of just $26bn (which, trust me, isn't a lot of money when it comes to surpluses and deficits.)
(For details on China's trade performance, check this http://www.uschina.org/statistics/2005tradeperfor
But this is not relevent: China imports as much as it exports. It just happens not to import a lot from the US. It does however import a lot from Germany (which, along with Japan is the world's largest manufacturer of capital goods). So, China has a trade deficit with Germany, and a trade surplus with the US. Now: go to Germany. Who do they buy from? Well, lets start with the US. Germany imports a terrific amount of software and financial services from the US.
So: money goes US -> China -> Germany -> US ->
(Now, this isn't great if you work in the manufacturing sector in the US, and your job goes to China. But it is great if you're selling fund management products to the Germans.)
Here's another shocker. Between 1998 and 2005, the US lost 2m manufacturing jobs (while, it should be noted, manufacturing output rose). And those jobs went to China, right? No. China lost 15m jobs. Yes, you heard that right fiftenn million manufacturing jobs were lost. (The result, I should add, of moving from an inefficient state system to a marginally more efficient private system.)
Anyway: the point I make is a simple one. Focussing on bilateral trade surpluses or deficits is stupid. You have to look at the system. You also have to remember that those trade deficit/surplus numbers are vey bad at capturing so called "invisible" exports, such as financial services.
Cheers,
Robert
--- My dad's political betting