"Spare_change, post: 16017783
See? That's where you are wrong - I have to prove nothing.
Of course you believe you have to prove nothing you live in the Trump fake news world. If you went to a board meeting making claims about regulations in the real world you'd have to prove what you were claiming was true.
On the other hand I could present to the same board that our competitors had no problem with the regulations. So why move. Let's be loyal to our workers and stay. You would be the asshole and I would be the hero.
LOL ----
The next time you see an ad on tv for medicine, pay attention to the "possible side effects" portion of the ad. Notice, first, that the volume is increased during this part. Notice also the requirement that ALL potential side effects are listed. Notice the amount of time it takes to relay this information to the consumer. Notice how much this costs.
Now ... you can't buy this medicine without a prescription, right? You pay your doctor to be knowledgeable about the impact of those medicines, right? So, explain to me why I should pay the cost of that advertising time when you can't make the decision by yourself? What purpose have it served, other than to increase the cost of those drugs?
Why aren't car companies required to list the potential "side effects" of driving a car?
Now - let's talk about employment regulation. Perhaps, you're aware that each company is required to submit quarterly accident reports to the federal government (even if they have had NO workplace accidents). Maybe you're aware that every company nationwide is required to inform OSHA that they have conducted safety training (in specific instances pertinent to the job). Now, what's the value of that? I send them a list with your name on it - because you got the training. The other guy I hired didn't get the training - he didn't get on the list. BUT - OSHA doesn't get a list of my employees to compare training vs. employment. There is no way they can identify that I have an untrained worker on the job. It's simply a form that goes nowhere (other than to employ some government worker somewhere).
The list just goes on and on and on .....
Now, let's talk about your mythical company. Better yet, let's talk about the company that was forced to move out of country (it wasn't my company - I was brought in to provide management guidance). They manufactured a product using extruded steel. When they started the company, they used steel made in the US. In about 2009, the cost of steel went out of sight (if you ask the steel companies, they will tell you that the cost increase was due to the increased cost of coke - made out of - you guessed it - West Virginia coal. It seems the government started putting all kinds of restrictions - via the EPA - on the production of coke, driving its price thru the roof).
Because of the increased cost of steel, we looked for alternative sources. Japanese steel was significantly cheaper - even with the increased shipping costs. So, we changed our steel source to a company in Japan. Problem solved, right? Well, not quite ---
The steel companies complained to Obama that they were being undercut by Japanese steel (which, in truth, they were). Rather than look at why US steel was so expensive, the Obama administration put a 22% tariff on imported steel.
Unfortunately, that component increase made our product non-competitive internationally (about 45% of our business model). US wages plus US steel (or Japanese steel whose cost was arbitrarily increased by US tariffs) meant we couldn't do business. Our only alternative was to move our manufacturing facility off shore - driving down our labor costs, our compliance costs, our tax costs and the cost of our primary component.
Now, about that cost of labor ---- obviously, the baseline hourly wage is lower in Brazil. In addition, our labor overhead (the cost of having an employee --- insurance, taxes, management, support personnel to manage the employment paperwork, vacations, sick leaves, etc., etc., etc) in the US was 53%. In Brazil, that "wrap rate" is 39%. In other words, in the US, $10 of labor cost us $15.30. In Brazil, it cost us $13.90 (A good portion of that O/H rate is generated by regulatory compliance - obviously easier in Brazil than in the US)
We were able to keep our management structure in the US (about 165 positions) but 1400 middle class, blue collar, well-paying manufacturing jobs were forced to move to Brazil.
BTW - when we made the presentation at the annual stockholder's meeting, we weren't the assholes -- we were the heroes. We saved their company.