![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-762803-100x100.png\")
I really want to read this book but at the same time I don't want my mind reeling as i read about all the products I've used in my life that were made there..
\"oh shit i used that..\"
\"oh man i put that in my mouth\"
I really want to read this book but at the same time I don't want my mind reeling as i read about all the products I've used in my life that were made there..
\"oh shit i used that..\"
\"oh man i put that in my mouth\"
![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
I really doubt the average American is going to insist that their local stores remove the shoddy product from China in favor of the higher priced stuff made domestically.
You get what you pay for.
@oceanstate: I just took an inventory of the items on my desk in front of me. TI-83 calculator that I've used for 12 years - made in China. Motorola cell phone and charger - made in China. MacBook and charger - assembled in China. Old computer speakers, ~10 years old and still work as well as the day I got them - made in China. Black fine point Sharpie - assembled in USA. Old-school office telephone (that hardly works and doesn't ring) - made in USA. The only one of these things that hasn't lived up to my expectations is the US-made office phone.
Just goes to show that \"made in China\" isn't always synonymous with \"piece of crap.\" The trick seems to be having enough pride in your product to demand high tolerances from the factory. I seriously doubt any of the Chinese products listed would be any better had they been made in the US. I'm not going to defend the working conditions or environmental impact associated likely associated with these products, but I think it's dismissive to label anything made in China as cheap garbage, and delusional to hold American-made products up as the gold standard.
@wheresmymind: The issues comes in the latitude given to the manufacturer to cut corners and the US company's desire to squeeze more profit rather than providing a good product. It isn't all China's fault but they have zero incentive to make a quality product as long as the US company is willing to accept what was made under the contract. There is a financial incentive on both parties to make the item as cheap as possible, each party is trying to squeeze as much profit as possible out of it.
@katras22: This would be why I have quit buying new furniture. I will either buy old durable pieces that can be repaired, antiques or local hand made. I have seen way too many $5000 pieces of particle board in supposed reputable furniture stores to even bother any longer. They just sell particle board furniture with nicer finishes.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-351819-100x100.png\")
I'm personally happy about the tradeoff. It's amazing how much cheaper some products have gotten thanks to the manufacturing boom in china.
I'm so glad that there's finally a book to make this even more public. My whole family's been in the furniture industry for over a hundred years (what used to be Broyhill now owned by Furniture Brands Int.). I've heard and seen first hand how shitty the furniture's become because of China's refusal to comply with what the industry standards ask for.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-16563-100x100.png\")
@katras22: It'd be interesting if you could share some of your company's experiences. Either QC issues, reliability, etc.
There are a lot of people (myself included) who lack your direct experience so your observations would be welcome.
@Trai_Dep:
Well I don't work for Broyhill. My dad's the last generation of my family to work there (we're waiting on his layoff) since its inception after Mr. Broyhill bought it out from Harper Furniture.
Some of the stories include problems with customers calling customer service because they're missing a screw or item to put together something like a drawer. Well, the Chinese use screw-like items that can't be found in America or really anywhere, so all the screws have to come from China or aren't in existence because the one's distributed in the first place were shoddy. That problem is hard to explain to a customer, no one likes paying a few thousand for furniture and hear the screw they're using doesn't exist anymore.
People don't understand that floor scraps of material are literally used. You may think you have a pine frame underneath your sofa for instance, when really it's an assortment of scrap woods assembled and you're not getting what you pay for.I don't think China's well known for its hard woods.
For a long time, any item that came to America, had to be taken apart and reassembled because it wasn't put together properly (how this saves money I don't know).
Also, if you order an entire furniture suit, you don't know where the pieces came from, so the colors or stains often don't match. This happened with my neighbor who bought one of the last pieces made in America of Attic Heirlooms (discont. now) but had to order a book shelf to complete the set. The item came from Vietnam, but the piece doesn't match the American items. The pieces have a reddish stain, but with the Chinese, Vietnamese etc putting formaldehyde in EVERYTHING, the colors etc often get a little off.
I hope these examples help...
@katras22:Um.... Screw \"the industry\" for trying to force standards upon consumers (i.e. colluding). They do this as a form of protectionism. Guess what? Many people don't need furniture that lasts 100 years and goes out of style. Some people prefer the Ikea stuff, because they are at a stage in their life where they may not be able to afford Broyhill stuff, or they just don't want to mess with moving furniture every few years.
True, many don't need furniture for a 100 years, but my family and many others like to hold onto things and pass them down through the family. I guess it's more sentimental, at least for me. Perhaps, if big items like furniture weren't so disposable there would be less landfill problems etc. If you go to local antique stores or even the Habitat for Humanity resell stores old Broyhill furn can be found. Great furniture can be reused and recycled. What's out of style for one may be great for another. After the move to China though, Broyhill furn is actually about at the same quality of IKEA, but it's slowly coming back to America. I think it's too late though. I mean Broyhill chairs that aren't even made by the company but have there logo slapped on can be found at Sam's Clubs.
@katras22: If it is an American company using China as a manufacturing source, it is up to that American company to specify how it is to be made. If it does not meet requirements, it should be rejected. Many of the problems that have made headlines sound to me to be as much a fault with inspection efforts as fraud on the part of Chinese firms. And I am not referring to US government inspectors, but the company that is ultimately responsible for putting the product on the shelf.
@swearint:
I agree that it is up to the company, however, the company begs for the specs to be met but the factories over there still refuse to follow them. And I still have the view that had they not moved to China and sold they own equipment, the problem wouldn't have been there in the first place. If the specs are not met, which still happens, the shipment has to be shipped back to start all over again ( how this saves money, I have no clue). There's horror stories of how entire shipments of case goods (the big furniture items) aren't put together properly and had to be returned or taken apart and put back together here in America by the few that still have jobs.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-469751-100x100.png\")
@swearint: Maybe you didn't RTFA. It said that Chinese manufacturers gradually tweak those manufacturing specs until someone complains. It's the boiling frog theory applied to manufacturing where degradation of quality kind of sneaks up on you.
@HurtsSoGood: I did read the article and stand by my statement. I was speaking from the point of view as a design engineer that provided detailed drawings and specifications. They did not have control over the manufacturing specs, we did. If the items did not meet those requirements we rejected them. We were certainly aware of the reputation of Chinese manufacturers for quality fade and we did 100% inspection as a result. Like I mentioned elsewhere, we were a small firm and the quantities involved were certainly smaller than a company like Mattel would have to contend with. But ultimately if Mattel is putting their name on the product, it is up to them to assure that it meets their standards.
@swearint: Sure. Because Mattel hates children SO much that they were quietly hoping that their goods would be laced with brain-damaging components.
Seriously. Lead has been SUCH a no-no for SO long that companies here no longer inspected for it, assuming (wrongly) that no one sane would lace children's products with the stuff.
It's hard to fault the US manufacturers for this (initially). It's purely the poisoned fruit of having toxic (heh) partnerships.
@Trai_Dep:
You hit the nail on the head! You must be reading the same blog as me! Mattel is secretly aiming to rid the world of children... we must stop them.
@Gramin: First Barbie. Then Bratz. Seems to follow that lead is the next most effective way to rot their brains...
JOKE! Luvs Mattel, actually.
Or, how about we buy less good but of higher (and, maybe American) quality. Easy example- for 10 dollars, you can either get a 6 pack of local microbrews or a 30 pack of Natty Light. See, even your health wins with this one.
@zibby: Whatever. Point is, you can live on the same budget, consume less, and have better quality goods.
I love how American consumers demand the absolute lowest possible prices for items, but then bitch when these cheaply-made products fall apart or are found to be below standards.
As others have pointed out, you get what you pay for.
@redskull: But quality doesn't always equal price. There are things that cost less that hold up well, and on the other hand there are things that cost more that will break more easily. Just because a product is made in the USA doesn't automatically mean a product is quality. Many products made in the USA use materials that come from China too, and companies ship orders to china then bring them back to the USA to put on the finishing touches, this allows them to claim made in the USA. There is more to quality than just looking at the price of the item and saying oh the price is low for this item, its probably going to break in a day or 2.
Personal use also factors into it, is it something your using every day, or is it something your only going to use once or twice a year? If its the latter you may want a cheaper version to avoid paying too much for something you will only be using a couple times. So there is a place for cheap goods too.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-103878-100x100.png\")
@redskull: I agree. However, those of us who do want to buy quality products are sometimes stuck. We can't pay more for higher quality even if we want to. Try to buy a small appliance that isn't crap.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1059799-100x100.png\")
Where will this book be printed? Because I don't want to find out it's full of lead and I've been licking my fingers to turn the pages...
Consumer advocacy has really crossed into bizarro land when the companies responsible for \"Silent Spring\" and \"Unsafe at any Speed\" are held up against foreign companies as paragons because we've crossed the nationalism/sanity line.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-603395-100x100.png\")
@Unsolicited Advice: In fairness to American companies, Carson's Silent Spring was published in 1962, and Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed was published in 1965. Just maybe, things have improved in the last 47 and 44 years. I don't think the companies are being held up as paragons of virtue, but the US does have better regulatory laws than China does, and buying an American made product that keeps an American employed is not a bad thing. Now buying a poorly made or unsafe American made product just because it is American made is just dumb.
The only difference at GM from 1965 to today is bankruptcy. There is no \"quality argument\" for American products. The advent of outsourcing and globalism simply create goods that consumers can afford given that average American living standards have steadily fallen since the 70's.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-237394-100x100.png\")
@Unsolicited Advice: I'm driving a Chevy Cobalt this week because my wife's car needed body work (hit an all-American deer). It sucks. It beyond sucks. She's driving my car because I think another deer might annihilate this awkward, uncomfortable piece of crap.
@KyleOrton: I got to drive a Pontiac G6 as a rental (brand new) when my car was in the shop. It was the most uncomfortable lousy to drive piece of crap I have ever driven. Worse than any of my ancient beaters from my college days. The seat had a non adjustable head rest that leaned forward and was set higher than my neck due to the seat itself being taller. I am of average height but driving this required having my head pushed down and forward. You could not take a high speed curve or an on ramp without the car bunny hopping sideways. It was at that point I swore I would never own another GM product ever again.
Show me where I can buy the American made high quality good and I'll buy them. Good example - hardware. Recently I went to buy brackets for my stair railing. All made overseas. All cheap casts with instant-stripping screws. I would GLADLY pay $5 more a piece for an American version that had real steel screws and solid metal. For all the eco-rambling out there no one seems concerned about the giant flood of shoddy Chinese crud going into landfills because it is made to last for 6 weeks. Take a look at refrigerator lifetimes now - my old one was made in 1978 and ran for 30 years. I'll be lucky if I get 10 out of the new one.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-25946-100x100.png\")
This reminds me of the famous quote.
A questioner asked him what went through his mind while he was crouched in the rocket nose-cone, awaiting blastoff. He wryly replied \" I was thinking that the rocket had twenty thousand components, and each was made by the lowest bidder\". Glenn survived to become a US senator, as well as an inspiration to elderly Americans when he ventured into space again, at age 77.
It's not the price that matters, it's standards and QA on the product that matters. American companies have to treat good manufactured in foreign countries as a \"black box\" and need stringent Q/C to make sure they are getting what they expect. Sure it's more expensive to have robust QA and contracts that enforce those standards, but anything else is just playing Russian roulette with your customers.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-841594-100x100.png\")
This affects Americans in other ways. How many of us have lost our jobs or businesses because of these cheap Chinese imports?
As a consumer I want to pay the lowest price, but as a worker I don't want to lose my job because of the Chinese underselling American products. They have lower costs for materials, labor, and they don't even have to worry about pollution controls, liability insurance, etc.
It's a double-edged sword and we Americans have not helped ourselves, we've only helped the Chinese.
@Harry Pothead: I don't want to pay extra for stuff just to give you a job that's basically unsustainable. Why should I have to pay extra for a pair of shoes just because you didn't want to go to college and work at a shoe designing firm vs. a factory floor?
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1114821-100x100.png\")
@RedwoodFlyer: Do you really believe that the cost savings in manufacturing something in China get passed along to you? If so, I know of this nice bridge out here in California that I can sell you really cheap...
I'd be pretty certain that they are. Net margins in retail are minuscule, and the market is highly competitive. Grocery stores, retail pharmacies, and most other major chain a big box stores net somewhere on the order on 1-2%. If they weren't passing on the savings, their margins would be a good deal higher.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-1034061-100x100.png\")
@RedwoodFlyer: How much less do you end up paying? $100 shoes could be made in America for $25, or they could be made in China for $5, but in either case you pay $100. Any company that charges less than the maximum your salary allows is leaving money on the table.
@morlo:
Because that doesn't happen because the market for shoes is competitive, if your company tried to do that, a competitor would undercut them.
America is no longer a manufacturing country. The largest portion of our GDP comes from the services industry, i.e. retail stores. It's a transition that we have to make. It's another reason we should invest in infrastructure and green energy. Our natural resources will run out at some point and the biggest opportunity for jobs exists in that industry. Not only are there great opportunities for job creation, but also a great opportunity to better our planet.
Our chemical industry is the world's largest as well. At the end of the day it's all about comparative advantage. Ours is that we can automate like no ones business (except the Japanese) and make things that require high precision and high technology. China's is that they have large numbers of impoverished dirt-farmers for whom working conditions that we would find appalling are a major step up from pushing a water buffalo all day long and provide a definite pathway for something that starts to resemble a modern, comfortable life. Cheap labor is really the only way that China can grow its economy and compete in a global marketplace, without it they would have little to no trade and all those poor dirt farmers would remain poor dirt farmers.
@Gramin: Our GDP is dependent on mindless shopping, manicures and dog grooming. No wonder we are so messed up.
@Gramin: Umm, wrong. The financial services industry was the \"service industry\" that was supposed to balance out giving away our manufacturing capability for.
That worked out really well, didn't it?
If we don't reverse this (not totally but just to get some sort of balance so we have some mfg capacity here again), our balance-of-payments are going to be insane once we pull out of our current troubles. And with the $US no longer the unassailed global benchmark, we'll find that if we don't address the balance issue, we'll have significant problems.
It's a BIG problem, longer term. We need to rebuild our capacity to help address this.
@Trai_Dep: Look at history, any society that can't sustain itself (dependent on trade to survive) is at a significant risk.
@bohemian: Well, you CAN do it, but you have to be smart. And realize how fragile everything is. Japan or Singapore are examples of how to do it successfully. But note when they veered from providing valued goods and services, it comes tumbling down with ferocious rapidity.
Our \"post-manufacturing\" experiment was based on a lie: that financial services would make up for giving up a manufacturing base regards our balance of trade numbers. We need to recalibrate so we have a more mixed, resilient economy instead of one chasing phantom profits producing ephemeral, single-crop goods. It'll result in a lower GDP growth rate, but a more real and sustainable one.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-301614-100x100.png\")
@Gramin: America is the world's largest manufacturer. The US just mainly manufactures capital intensive products (drugs, medical equipment, farming equipment, military equipment, airplanes, and autos I guess). All the labor intensive work is going to China because labor costs are lower compared to the US.
The US could do all its own manufacturing. But that wouldn't be efficient. It's like having a gourmet chef who can cook meals and bus tables better than anyone. But it makes more sense to just have the bus boy clean the tables and the chef make the food.
@EBounding: All of those items except for defense are moving or will move to offshore production. Chinese state-owned/supported factories have no problems with capital.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-133963-100x100.png\")
The quality of products has gone down significantly over the years. Where it was manufactured is fast becoming a mute point. There is a \"comfort level\" of pricing where no matter what you buy, it will be low quality build. The higher price of items is related to the name of the brand, not the longevity of the product. You have to pay a premium to get to the next tier of quality, which in many cases is substantially higher. Hence the elitist nature of \"high-end\" goods.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-716547-100x100.png\")
Let me guess, they won't be selling this at Walmart. (Assuming they actually sell books at Walmart, which doesn't seem likely.)
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-71694-100x100.png\")
Actually, there's a pretty good chance that this book was printed in (duh duh DUH) China.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-255368-100x100.png\")
Just reading some of the synopsis, it really makes me want to never by a Chinese-made product again. He describes a cultural behaviour where they love to see how low they can make the quality, and still not get caught or punished. It's a game, a form of entertainment, for them. No wonder we have melamine and lead in products.
Our best weapon against this is \"Shame\". From a western perspective, \"honor\" doesn't work the way we think. Fraud and deceit are okay and celebrated, but getting caught is inexcusable. We need to shame them over and over (even if it results in multiple suicides) until they get it.
Companies need to let us know they are having quality problems like this, in order to advertise this shame. \"The Chinese company [name of company] making our bottles failed to make them properly. We are sorry we did not catch their failure. Please accept our apologies.\". Then demand an apology and explaination from the President of said company, and find a non-Chinese company to replace them. And we need to support the companies that do that.
@SacraBos: Something that really is missing is a real guide to the longevity of an item. I see reviews and best buy suggestions. I want to know if there are things like plastic parts inside that you don't know about or parts that can't be replaced.
Even a list of products made under old standards of longevity and repairability.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-60778-100x100.png\")
I would like to point out that wanting more for less is not an American habit; it's human nature.
I would also like to point out that even \"Made in America\" doesn't automatically imply better quality.
Thirdly, if one high-quality toaster oven lasts me 20 years but costs me $100, versus two low-quality toasters that last me 10 years each, but cost $40, then I've saved $20. \"But, Fist-O! You've produced an extra waste toaster!\" Irrelevant to the system. Economics doesn't care. That is the reality.
My toaster cost me a grand total of $8 new. It is thoroughly sufficient for my needs, it takes up to two slices of soft, not-brown bread, and turns them into crunch, brown toast in a reasonable amount of time. I can't really see how much better my life would be by spending 10 times more on one. I for one will take my consumer surplus and let the poor, Chinese ex-farmer have his job, he certainly needs it more than I do.
@Fist-oâ„¢: Yeah, my friend was trying to convince me to shop for a single sheet that would cost $250, instead of going for softer sheets that cost $80 for an entire set. The cheap sheets, she said, would fall apart in 10 years, while the expensive sheet would last the rest of my life. I told her I'd invest the $170 difference and come back in 10 years for more soft, cheap sheets.
@Fist-oâ„¢: Party like a rock star on that $1/year you're saving. Oh, and how do you believe that the price of the \"cheaper\" toaster over won't go up, actually erasing the savings you \"think\" you'll get?
@Fist-oâ„¢:
No, it's not irrelevant to the system. You ignore the externality of the waste stream - finding somewhere to put your used-up junk is not free.
Nor is there an infinite regenerating supply of the materials used to make toasters.
Your attitude, taken on a collective basis, results in finite natural resources being used wastefully, needlessly increasing the rate of depletion.
@polarscribe: Well, so I should buy the more expensive toaster so that later, my waste bill will decrease? That does not immediately gratify my need for toast!
And as far as supply of materials used to make toasters, that is outside the scope of my purchase.
@polarscribe: But you missed his point entirely. As currently set up, for most American city dwellers, waste \"disappears\". As far as they can tell, there IS an infinite supply of resources, that are getting even cheaper every year.
That is something that people are working on changing, but even then, \"recycling\" to most people ignores the effects of entropy, so that obviously all resources are reused, so there isn't a loss.
While I admire your attitude, it is unrealistic to expect a majority of consumers to share that.
A source of the problem is corruption that flows upwards. Manufacturers bribe inspectors, inspectors bribe local politicos, local politicos bribe state politicos, and so on and so forth.
Just look at what happened with the Sichuan earthquake. Journalists who tried to investigate were jailed and silenced because the evidence would show that politicos in China allowed manufacturers to build schools using shoddy materials in order to embezzle the money. Bribes flow upwards, manufacturers use cheap materials, and the people end up with \"tofu-dreg houses\".
China won't allow this to affect their politicos since exposure of widespread (both horizontal and vertical) corruption would undermine people's faith in the government.
@PlanetExpressdelivery: Under-the-table deals and bribery are common there, it's true. Americans can't seem to wrap their brain around that... I certainly can't. I have trouble with understanding it too.
So, if you're a creative company pushing off manufacturing to China, expect your \"partners\" to rip you off, closing 3/4 the world (by population) to you because their poorly-made knockoffs will both saturate and destroy this market for you.
We already know how awful this is for workers. We learned how bad it is for the environment. Now we find it's even awful for the companies.
Boy, I hope this is part of the pendulum swinging back. A role for China is good, but I think many companies over-shot.
@Trai_Dep: But if you don't partner with China then they will still knock-off your product and by building in the US your product will be closed off from 1/2 of the world (by population) because of the exchange rates anyways.
@snowmoon: That's what diplomats and trade officials are for. Besides, as partners, they get much better information than from reverse-engineering from afar. If you find someone trying to twist a knife slowly into your back, why help them sharpen it?
I wonder how many people commenting on this string actually know anything about overseas sourcing. I agree that there are many issues with sourcing in China (and any foreign country for that matter). But the reality is this. Yes, all \"cheap\" products are made in China. But alot of high quality stuff is made there also. It amazes the mind what is actually made in China. Many fine Italian suits are started in China and finished in Itay. The problem for us and the world is that China has most of the manufacturing processes down. We can talk about quality and safety and I agree that it is a concern. But if you look at all the scandals that have happened lately (Mattel toys with lead, contaminated drywall) there are directly linked to American vendors cutting corners and not following the regulations we have here to prevent that. This of course does not justify using unsafe materials, but the fact is vendors here in America expect everything to be cheap and drive the suppliers to find the lowest margins, which means, lowest quality. Its a horrible cycle. The only way to compete is through innovation. I always tell people the factories in China are great xerox machines but can't conceptualize something they don't have a sample of. Thats why one of the few things China does import from us is specialized equipment, like construction parts.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-21984-100x100.png\")
@nuprinboy: You can thank Wal-Mart et al for the cycle of \"cost downs\" that infects all of manufacturing now.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-738213-100x100.png\")
This problem of \"outsourcing\" and importing is not as complex as people make it out to be.
As a nation, we have a right to 1) protect the safety of products sold in this country; 2) protect our jobs.
We should remove China from most-favored nation status in trading unless they raise their min. wage, implement democratic reforms and enforce environmental protection laws (you think the crp they put in the air and dump in the ocean doesn't eventually impact us?)
I have a feeling the American people would be all for such measures, and would not care how much extra money it cost them.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-413611-100x100.png\")
\"Chinese manufacturers want business relationships with customers in these places - so much so that they'll even sometimes sell to them below cost. But then they'll turn around and\"
Duh. Destroy your competitors then you can raise the price.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-435267-100x100.png\")
Just wait, folks. The Chinese are getting into things like commercial aircraft manufacturing.
Anyone got a 50-ton capacity umbrella?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-54278-100x100.png\")
One of the big points Midler makes in the book is that manufacturers actively engage in quality fade, which is where they gradually (and therefore imperceptibly) make changes to the product's quality in order to pad their bottom line. So while the first run of the product line is exactly as it should be, over time cheaper ingredients are swapped in, less plastic is used (for a product that comes in a plastic bottle), etc., such that by the time the importer realizes something is wrong a) the product has already shipped and b) the factory has already been paid for its work - oftentimes after demanding a price increase that the importer will have to eat.
@Wasabe: Wasabe, if you have read the book, hten you will know that most often he was catching the problems BEFORE the products shipped, but still shipped them anyway.
YEs, quality fade is a problem that is faced in China, and yes, Chinese manufacturers should be held accountable for that, but it is also the responsibility of the buyer to ensure that when products fade they do not enter the market.
What I found most interesting about this book was that at no time did Paul himself check the safety of the products he was sending.
He has a supplier who had a history of cutting corners, a product that had been adulterated on several occasions, and had himself stopped showering with the product that he was himself making.
I am amazed that this has escaped everyone who read the book! He was sending millions of bottles of Shampoo that he knew could be adulterated.
That is not a \"China\" problem. It is a Paul Midler problem.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-101046-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-18124-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-143777-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-343837-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-879037-100x100.png\")
Though there have been some recent problems with Chinese manufactured products, the vast majority contain no health risks. And while someone will inevitably argue that products made in the USA are of greater quality (and I would probably agree), I doubt most Americans are willing to pay the higher price for those products. Our wage laws and unions contribute to the higher cost for American goods. Due to the lack of such regulation in China, goods are cheap and we reap the benefits.
@Gramin: I would LOVE TO buy better quality US made goods with a longer life span. The problem is that for many items you can't. Or the other problem of only two markets existing now, crap from China or way high end products made in the US or Europe that cater to that top 1%. I see way to many luxury brands made in China with equally crappy life spans as their cheaper counter parts.
They could produce goods in the US or Europe in those mid to upper price points but instead rely on smoke & mirrors to pass off crappy Chinese made items as \"luxury\" or supposed better quality.
I find way too many of these supposedly nicer products (and more expensive) with scathing reviews about mechanical flaws, early failing parts or not performing as it should. We looked at dumping the money into a high end toaster hoping to find one we could use for the rest of our lives. The reviews on all the expensive brands were as bad as reviewing $9 toasters from Walmart.
In order to find an espresso machine that isn't made in China your into about the $1000 price point.
@Gramin: Curious. What is your profession?
@Gramin:
I'm not sure you can make the argument that benefit is derived from buying goods on the cheap, given that they often that then fail in short order. Cheap = junk regardless of where something is manufactured. It is not dissimilar to cheap food - eat junk fast food off the 99 cent menu - become obese and develop cardiovascular disease. Purchase things manufactured in China because they are cheap, get items that fail to perform, wear out quickly, and potentially contain toxic chemicals or substances. Not that buying USA made goods is the alternative - it is nearly impossible to even find a US made product to buy in many instances.
I recently went to replace my (failed) Chinese manufactured toaster oven with one built in the USA. There isn't one. None. The closest thing is an Italian built 1/4 size countertop convection oven, which is significantly more massive than the largest toaster oven and about 2.5 times the price of the best quality China made oven. However, the 1/4 size ovens are used in heavy use commercial settings and will last a typical homeowner nearly forever - whereas the typical toaster oven is tired if not done in a few years. I bought the 1/4 oven - my wife loves it.
Finally, it is disengenuous to claim that few if any products manufactured in china have toxicity issues. The public only hears about a small percentage of items that pose a risk. I have comissioned independent testing of suspect items (infant/toddler items) that are Chinese made, as well as many other household items both made in China and not - and found significant lead levels, for example, in plastic items, things that do not appear painted, flatware, baby teether clips(!), cutlery from a major high end retailer, etc. It is endemic and epidemic, it seems.
@Gramin: Yes. The fact that we are a civilized society when it comes to worker protections--we don't want to work people's fingers to the bone; we value time off and a living wage and health care; we don't view humans as an expendable resource--means that we are willing to exploit the people of other countries just to save a few cents.
@Gramin: True. However, the availability of cheap, low quality products feeds our instant gratification consumerist culture and actually hurts us economically in the long run. I don't blame them, but it's a natural result. We'd rather buy a crappy particle board bookshelf three times over, rather than buying a quality product once just because we want to buy it now, or we're \"bored\" with what we have and we've been told we must always have the newest thing. We've become so accustomed to getting something dirt cheap, we don't see real value anymore.
@Gramin: i'm going to go ahead and took each of your sentences ironically.
@Gramin:
Wow. Our \"wage laws\" also provide for protection from workplace injury, overtime, environmental protections, and other workers rights. It is CHINA that has the problem, not the United States. We should put up trade barriers w/China until they bring human rights and labor/environmental protections into the 21st century.
Now... we'll never do that because they own all of our debt and would just call us on it if we ever got serious.
Also- I think most people would be happy to pay higher prices for SAFE toys, and higher prices if they knew that by doing so jobs were protected in the U.S. Note-- we're talking MARGINALLY higher prices.
@Gramin: There is no benefit to me putting Chinese made cutlery in my mouth. I'll pay more for american made, thanks.