There will be few winners in the increasing recall game. As people lose trust, they will buy fewer items. This hurts cash flow in a big way when margins are tight. It also hurts jobs because fewer people will be employed. Consumers will pay more for what they buy and they will be less likely to recommend anything for fear it too may be recalled later. As more companies demonstrate a lack of ability to oversee the products they import, the brush strokes will mark even responsible companies who cannot prove their case.
Local shops will be benefit for a time, because we know and trust the owner. Unfortunately they are probably more prone to not testing since they have fewer resources. Eventually we may have to go back to buying only what we can see being made locally because it will be almost impossible to tell who you can trust.
In the early days of the Internet, I was often told that no one wants to buy online. You need a "Throat to choke." when things go wrong. So here we are. The throats are so far away and we do not even know who they are. Sort of leaves us without a means to punish them doesn't it?
You cannot even punish Mattel financially - you get a voucher for a replacement product, if you can prove that you have one of the specifically recalled toys. How many people keep the boxes for the toys they give their children?
How do we as consumers get a measure of retribution when our own government agencies continue to allow industries to police themselves?
The first responsibility of a government is the protection of its' citizens against foreign and
domestic aggressors. This goes all the way back to Mesopotamia (now Iraq!) and Babylon, where Hammurabi established a very useful code. Part of that code was an agreement that the people would be protected if they obeyed the law. This is why we have a military force and police forces. When do we start seeing some protective action? I'm starting to sound like a Berkeley musician - Anthony Gregory. (I do not agree with all of what he said in this piece but I do agree that at some point, a lack of protection undermines the government's case to tax us.)
America started its revolution over taxation without representation. Do we now ask to be relieved of taxation if we do not receive adequate protection? (This thread is starting to drift off of management, but not leadership, and definitely beyond my level of governmental studies.) Doesn't the US Constitution say something about the purpose of our government:
" We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
(This is the Preamble - if you care to you can read the whole thing.)
What do you suggest the next step should be?
Comment Preview