Page 6 — THE LACONIA DAILY SUN, Tuesday, December 3, 2013
Froma Harrop
Will Americans pay more for American-made? Wow, this T-shirt costs only $8. Great color. Problem is, your finger could punch a hole through it. In most Americans’ shopping experience, colors change and styles come and go, but there’s one constant: low quality and a sweatshop-country label. Lot’s been said lately about a flickering comeback in American apparel manufacturing. Walmart vows to raise its meager buying of American-made products by $50 billion over the next 10 years. American clothing names — New Balance and L.L. Bean, for instance — now proudly advertise some of their wares as domestically produced. Could an industry devastated by cheap imports come back? Americans are allegedly clamoring for more “made in USA” stuff. A poll shows almost half saying they’d pay an extra $5 to $20 for what’s now a $50 sweater if the garment were made here. But some skeptics doubt that consumers will act on these feelings. One is Marvin Greenberg, who spent many painful years in the garment business. As he sees it, consumers willing to pay more for better- and American-made clothes will remain a definite minority. The vast shopping public demands basement-scraping prices on two-for-one deals. Patriotism ends at the cash register. He’s seen it happen. “Back in the ‘60s, there was a union protest in Fall River (Mass.) about saving jobs, stopping imports,” Greenberg recalls. “People carrying signs were wearing imported clothes.” Fall River’s nickname is Spindle City, and it was there that Greenberg took over his father’s sweater factory. He made products for the Garland label and then ran its manufacturing operations in Fall River, Brockton, Mass., Warrenton, Ga., and Beaufort, S.C. He contracted with small manufacturers throughout the South. Then imports killed them. “I look around at all the empty factories here, down South,” he says. “They’re not coming back.” What about the supposedly revived interest in quality? “My contention is most shoppers don’t know quality,” Greenberg says.
“They know style. They know logos.” Greenberg recounts how he once tried to sell sturdy T-shirts. He looked for and found the finest cotton yarn in Belmont, N.C. A competitor in New Hampshire was making T-shirts for Ralph Lauren with cheaper yarn but getting more money for them because of the logo. “Same guy makes for Ralph Lauren and J.C. Penney,” Greenberg sighs, “and the only difference is the horse.” One suspects that some of these buy-American programs are mainly marketing ploys. You hear Walmart executives declaring their desire to help the struggling blue-collar workers who shop in their stores. But it was Walmart that urged its U.S. suppliers to move their factories to low-wage countries in the first place. On the other hand, there seems to be a significant and growing market for higher-quality, locally produced goods, even if they cost more. Whole Foods is now a national presence. People will pay more for Apple’s products. (Despite its aggressively American image, Apple manufactures most of its gear in low-wage countries. But Apple has started making more here.) Advanced computers have enabled Americans to produce things with fewer workers. That’s an advantage for domestic companies and the employees running their machines — though making apparel remains more labor-intensive than other kinds of manufacturing. The good news is that companies such as Airtex Design Group in Minneapolis are indeed shifting some operations back to this country. The less-good news is that the industry has been so shrunk that Airtex struggles to find the old cutting and sewing skills that used to be plentiful, even as pay for them has risen. Sad that the best place these days to find middle-class clothes made in America is on eBay. Things can change, right? (A member of the Providence Journal editorial board, Froma Harrop writes a nationally syndicated column from that city. She has written for such diverse publications as The New York Times, Harper’s Bazaar and Institutional Investor.)
He teaches our young people it’s OK to lie as long as cause is good? To The Daily Sun, I read Dr. Maloof’s letter in the Saturday edition of The Daily Sun. In it he opined that “the end justifies the means” and indicated that it’s just hunky dory for the president to lie and connive if that’s what it takes to achieve his goals . . . whether we the people like it or not. He also indicated that it’s naive on our part to expect otherwise. Oy vey! Now, isn’t that just hunky dory, too,
ing types, who teach our young people, to tell them it’s okay to lie or deceive as long as it gets you what you want. That’s some lesson plan! At what point do we finally put “tenure” in the trash bin and start paying on merit . . . just like we do in the non-tenured, productive world? And please, will someone check the water at Plymouth State. Bob Meade
LETTERS We hope beloved Constitution can protect us from wind farms To The Daily Sun, Is the New Hampshire government, in seeking to appear green, violating our New Hampshire Constitution under the Green Energy Act? Health concerns, property rights, wildlife rights, safety concerns, the view tax and democratic freedoms are just a few examples. Many other states have also fallen in line with the nationwide movement to appear green, led by wind energy developers. But not all states had the good fortune of hearing firsthand from people adversely impacted elsewhere by wind turbines. New Hampshire has this fortune. NHWindWatch.org, a local opposition group, must raise hundreds of thousands of dollars to cover legal costs to challenge these wind companies in court. In defending our rights, we’re all up against exceedingly wellfunded, corporate lawyers and government-paid lawyers who are well versed in dictating their agenda on us. Does the Green Energy Act and the New Hampshire Constitution conflict? The Constitution of the State of New Hampshire is the fundamental law of the State of New Hampshire, with which all statute laws must comply. “Article 2. Natural Rights. All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights — among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.”
Have those locally affected by the Groton Wind Farm fallen on deaf ears? Have politicians succumbed to the corporate promise of “quick and easy” money. Has the N.H. government done a cost-benefit analysis? Has the N.H. government done any impact studies? Has the N.H. government conducted a financial analysis on how much will it cost N.H. ratepayers or the state to send electricity to southern states? And if so, what is that cost? Most states don’t bother with costbenefit analyses because most of the costs don’t show on their own books. The result is much costlier electricity and no net reduction of carbon. But community costs are massive: including the loss of fundamental rights and freedoms, loss of our right to a good night’s sleep and good health, lost market value of homes, and loss of the right to enjoy non-industrialized rural landscapes, dangers to our watershed, dangers to our tourism revenues, dangers to our wildlife, etc. So, New Hampshire citizens are taking this high-priced battle to the courts where we hope our beloved Constitution can protect us and our democracy. After-all, it was Ed Cherian who’s promise echoed through these foothills “if the community doesn’t want us — we will leave”. A promise that was offered to us by an Iberdrola Renewables representative willingly. An offer that was soon reneged. Ask questions, demand answers and pound the table if you don’t get them. Ray Cunningham Bridgewater
Will Sen. Forrester explain these fiscally irresponsible decisions? To The Daily Sun, Sen. Jeanie Forrester is the newlyappointed chair of the N.H. Senate Finance Committee, entrusted with leading thoughtful conversations and drafting fiscally responsible legislation in the area of N.H.’s fiscal policy. But how does that square with some of her recent decisions? Back in June, Sen. Forrester voted against the inclusion of Medicaid expansion in the budget before the legislature. Instead, she endorsed appropriating $200,000 to seat a commission to study the issue
That expenditure is after the Department of Health and Human Services hired an outside consultant, the Lewin Group, to study and report on the exact same issue earlier in the year. In addition to sanctioning the commission, Sen. Forrester agreed that Governor Hassan should call the Legislature back into Special Session for 10 days in November. Special sessions involve reimbursement of members for mileage, committee hearing expenses, staff salaries; it is neither a cost-free nor a normal order of busi-