Global trade: friend or foe?

This issue features an unintended point-counterpoint of sorts on the subject of international trade.

On page 24 is a Letter to the Editor decrying the Loss of U.S. manufacturing output and jobs to China and other Low-wage countries whose populations are controlled by "oppressive" governments, submitted by Bill Northrup, purchasing/engineering for Newood Display Fixtures of Eugene, OR. Northrup's tone and message starkly contrasts with the Guest Opinion penned by Brent McClendon, executive vice president of the International Wood Products Assn., on page 71, which makes a case for "imports as a growth factor."

Northrup makes it clear his comments are personal and do not necessarily reflect those of his employer. He felt compelled to put his feelings into writing after reading the January Editor's Page, in which I lauded Thomas Friedman's book, The World Is Flat. It angers him that U.S. businesses and consumers alike tend to buy products based on price alone, without giving greater thought to why those prices might be so low in the first place or consider the impact their purchasing decisions have on domestic manufacturing.

Northrup asserts, "[I]f a dictator forces people to Live in squalor and then capitalizes off of basically brutish indentureship to sell to countries like the United States the cheapest products possible, then countries that value freedom and that feel people deserve a fair wage for a fair day's work are going to lose manufacturing jobs ..."

Northrup stops short of asking the U.S. government to enact protectionist measures against imports from countries with unfair trade advantages. Instead, he writes, "Protecting our jobs from being Lost to countries that produce in squalor truly depends on the American people abstaining from buying cheaper products for the sake of the future and the children of the future."

'Fear Factor or Growth Factor?'

"Imported Woods: Fear Factor or Growth Factor?" is the title McClendon submitted for his guest column, noting the United States imported $23 billion of wood and wood products in 2004, not including an additional $14 billion of furniture and furniture parts.

"There are some who fear such rapid growth and demand in the import industry," McClendon writes. "Some see a looming threat for U.S. jobs. Others fear that quality is being sacrificed. And, of course, there is the continued challenge of confronting illegal logging.

"Many others are seeing imports as a growth factor--enhancing the job market with a quality, value-added complement to the marketplace," McClendon continues. "Leading manufacturers and distributors are smart-sourcing their inventory by incorporating imported woods alongside domestically produced woods ... Manufacturers and consumers are buying more imports to meet the growing demand for quality products at affordable prices. These imports are helping support hundreds of thousands of domestic U.S. jobs at many Levels --at ports, throughout the Logistics chain and within our domestic manufacturing base."

Editor's Dilemma

There are many in the wood products industry who blame "unfair" imports for the Loss of business or jobs and, thus, share Northrup's angst. There are also many who have capitalized on the global outsourcing trend and in the process have created new businesses and jobs, as McClendon opines.

Over the past 10 years, I have written two dozen or so columns about imports and China in particular. I have alternately viewed the glass as half full or half empty, in trying to make sense of such a sensitive and complex issue.

I have frequently noted that China is a Communist nation that withholds the basic human freedoms that Americans hold dearly--I have not forgotten Tiananmen Square. This, coupled with an artificially low currency and other unfair trade practices, Leaves me feeling uneasy about China's meteoric growth in furniture exporting.

I have also used this space to observe that the U.S. government has set a course to placate China with the olive branch of trade, in hopes that bringing China into the world economy will ultimately bring about government reforms and human rights.

The cruel reality is that most consumers do not care where their products are made as Long as the quality is worthy of the price they pay. As a result, even the most ardent supporter of "made in America" at some point had to make the gut-wrenching decision to close down domestic plants and move offshore to stay afloat.

Lexington Home Brands has Learned this Lesson the hard way. The company recently relented to famed artist Bob Timberlake's demands that Lexington continue manufacturing the popular The World of Bob Timberlake collection in the United States instead of moving its production offshore.

As Bob Stec, Lexington's chief executive, recently put it to the Associated Press, "When the Titanic goes down, you try to save as many people as you can. We used to be a 100 percent domestic producer and we were a financial disaster. Now we are importing and I'd put our financial health up against anyone."

In a world of compromises, it should be noted that while Timberlake was adamant about keeping the original Line bearing his name Made in the USA, a newer, less expensive line bearing his name is being made overseas.