When I saw the article linked in the DU thread was from the LA Times, I didn't check it out, assuming it would be biased. I was right, yet I should have checked it out:
In 1997, when apparel makers were flocking overseas, American Apparel began making cotton T-shirts in Los Angeles and paying its workers higher than minimum wage. At the time, founder Dov Charney recalls, the local apparel industry thought the company was doomed.
...
But the company proved detractors wrong, and its success inspired other garment makers to make a go of it in Los Angeles, said Ilse Metchek, president of the California Fashion Assn.
...
... In February, the company was taken private after emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
After years of net losses, moving production out of Los Angeles is necessary for the survival of American Apparel, industry experts said. The company initially considered staying in California and moving to the city of Vernon, according to a person familiar with the discussions who was not authorized to speak publicly. After the state raised the minimum wage, executives began looking at manufacturers in the South, the person said.
The company that is the focus of this nascent exodus story, American Apparel, has been a showcase for Libs, Progs, and others who claim manufacturing in the US poses no economic problems. As the article claims, "... the company proved detractors wrong ...". Ironically, a very few paragraphs later, the article says, "... the company was taken private after emerging from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection," and, "After
years of net losses ..." (my emphasis).
HELLO! The company went bankrupt less than 20 years after its founding! IOW, the company proved its "detractors"
were RIGHT! And being freshly out of Chapter 11, American Apparel is particularly sensitive to cost increases, especially government-mandated increases that entail the underlying threat of further arbitrary government interference.
