Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

FakeNoose

(42,105 posts)

6. Cheap foreign labor translates into higher profits for the importers

Reply to CTyankee (Original post)

Sun May 22, 2022, 05:29 PM

May 2022

... so it doesn't pay to build expensive plants here in the US. Also the US has a lot more safety controls for food manufacturing within our borders. We can't control how other countries enforce their safety regs.

Wouldn't it be nice if the baby formula mfgrs were required to operate plants within our borders AND the companies must be women-owned and operated?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why don't we have several makers of infant formula in the U.S.? [View all] CTyankee May 2022 OP

it's a result of capitalism gone wild Skittles May 2022 #1

Yep Rebl2 May 2022 #10

Failure of anti-trust enforcement. elleng May 2022 #2

+1,000! SheltieLover May 2022 #3

+1, uponit7771 May 2022 #19

That and inthewind21 May 2022 #24

Around 1980 one of the more popular policy debate cases exboyfil May 2022 #4

Because it is more profitable for the owning/ruling class for the masses to suffer calamities RockRaven May 2022 #5

Cheap foreign labor translates into higher profits for the importers FakeNoose May 2022 #6

$$$$$$$ in America it is always about the money. walkingman May 2022 #7

Trump's USMCA trade deal made it virtually impossible for the US to import formula from Canada. sop May 2022 #8

Guess Rebl2 May 2022 #12

Gotta offshore MOMFUDSKI May 2022 #9

There are 4 main companies but just closing one is problematic womanofthehills May 2022 #11

Competition was supposed to cause better products and prices pandr32 May 2022 #13

Except they don't admit that there's nothing free about our markets. lindysalsagal May 2022 #20

Exactly! pandr32 May 2022 #22

Best explanation I've seen is in this video.... KY_EnviroGuy May 2022 #14

We have 4 mcar May 2022 #15

and more than 2 is "several", so we have several. maxsolomon May 2022 #25

??? mcar May 2022 #27

right. I should have responded directly. maxsolomon May 2022 #29

Well, ok, but just this once mcar May 2022 #30

Competition is frowned upon in this country. Chainfire May 2022 #16

Two words: predatory capitalism Emile May 2022 #17

This message was self-deleted by its author SYFROYH May 2022 #18

I think it was an NPR piece that explained the near monopoly like grip of manufacturers. SYFROYH May 2022 #21

Yes, only the Big 4 brands are usually WIC eligible. Pure regulatory/pseudo capitalistic capture. Celerity May 2022 #26

There's not just one inthewind21 May 2022 #23

It's late stage, monopoly capitalism Dave says May 2022 #28

We have four jmowreader May 2022 #31

This is sounding -- don't laugh -- like where we were when WW2 broke out. Every factory was CTyankee May 2022 #32