Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Zero Sum Game

Discussions about the economic and financial ramifications of PEAK OIL
Post a reply

Zero Sum Game

Postby tokyo_to_motueka » Mon 05 Sep 2005, 23:25:31

link

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')ree traders are resurrecting class war, not because they are Marxists but because they confuse free trade with global labor arbitrage. Free traders turn cold shoulders to US job losses from offshore outsourcing, because they mistake the losses for the beneficial workings of comparative advantage. Committed to a 200 year old theory that they no longer understand, free traders are cheering on the destruction of middle class jobs and the dismantling of the ladders of upward mobility that make large income disparities politically acceptable.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')ree trade economists have forgotten that not all trade reflects the beneficial workings of comparative advantage. For comparative advantage to function, a country's capital must stay at home and be allocated to activities in which the country has comparative advantage. The other necessary condition is that countries have different internal cost ratios of producing different goods.

When the principle of comparative advantage was discovered, capital was mainly kept at home under the watchful eye of the owners and protected by the country's laws. Tradable commodities were primarily products influenced by climate and geography, guaranteeing that the cost of a yard of wool in terms of a bottle of wine would vary among countries.

Today capital is more mobile than tradable goods. Modern production functions are based on acquired knowledge and produce identical results regardless of location. When a US corporation closes a factory in Ohio and relocates its production for US markets to China, the loss of US jobs is not the result of a Chinese firm gaining a comparative advantage over the Ohio one. It is the result of US capital seeking absolute advantage in lower cost Chinese labor.

Free trade economists have completely forgotten that the flow of resources to where they have absolute advantage does not result in mutual benefit. The country that receives the resources gains and the other country loses.

When capital and technology flow from the US to China and India, the productivity of labor in China and India rises. In the US it falls.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he August payroll jobs report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics repeats the consistent pattern of 21st century America--no net job creation in high productivity sectors. The only jobs created are in nontradable lower paid domestic services.

Of the 154,000 private nonfarm jobs created in August, 25,000 are in construction and are filled primarily by legal and illegal Mexican immigrants; 20,000 are in wholesale and retail trade; 16,000 in administrative and waste services; 43,000 in education and health services; 34,000 in leisure and hospitality (primarily waitresses and bartenders). Manufacturing lost another 14,000 jobs.
User avatar
tokyo_to_motueka
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue 19 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Tochigi
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby jaws » Mon 05 Sep 2005, 23:38:01

The arguments against international free trade are pathetic. There is no tangible difference between national and international free trade. If you support free trade within your country you have to support it with other countries to remain logically consistent.

Comparative advantage still applies. U.S. corporations derive more gains from trade from the comparative advantage they have towards Chinese factory workers than they do with U.S. workers, therefore they trade with Chinese workers. Chinese workers also realize gains from trade. It would be no different if a plant was moved from California to Alabama, a situation where capital mobility is completely free. The objection is braindead nationalism pure and simple.

Manufacturing doesn't pay anymore, that's why 'lower paying' jobs are replacing manufacturing jobs. There's no point in shielding it. What's happening to manufacturing work is the same thing that happened to farm work a hundred years ago. Farming became so productive that prices for food plummetted and workers had to move into manufacturing. They were better off for it.
User avatar
jaws
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun 24 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby rogerhb » Mon 05 Sep 2005, 23:42:43

It's also called a race to the bottom.
User avatar
rogerhb
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4727
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Smalltown New Zealand
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby tokyo_to_motueka » Mon 05 Sep 2005, 23:49:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'T')here is no tangible difference between national and international free trade. If you support free trade within your country you have to support it with other countries to remain logically consistent.

so i take it you support in principle most US workers being paid under $0.25/hour? just like their Chinese counterparts?

and i also assume that you support absolute free trade in labour, i.e. several tens of millions of Chinese et al arriving in the US to help eliminate the need for arbitrage?

sounds like an excellent plan!

go to it!
User avatar
tokyo_to_motueka
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue 19 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Tochigi
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby jaws » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 00:35:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tokyo_to_motueka', 's')o i take it you support in principle most US workers being paid under $0.25/hour? just like their Chinese counterparts?
I support the principle that people ought to be paid the wage that best satisfies the needs of the consumers.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'a')nd i also assume that you support absolute free trade in labour, i.e. several tens of millions of Chinese et al arriving in the US to help eliminate the need for arbitrage?
There once was a time when countries had open borders to both goods and labor. This is how the young United States became populated so rapidly. What is the motto on the statue of liberty, 'give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses?' The rise of welfare politics put an end to that, since no government welfare institution can survive a mass migration of the poor. You will find however that it is extremely simple for educated, productive people in poor nations to emigrate to rich nations. Just a nasty side-effect of government welfare.
User avatar
jaws
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun 24 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby UIUCstudent01 » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 00:42:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tokyo_to_motueka', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'T')here is no tangible difference between national and international free trade. If you support free trade within your country you have to support it with other countries to remain logically consistent.

so i take it you support in principle most US workers being paid under $0.25/hour? just like their Chinese counterparts?

and i also assume that you support absolute free trade in labour, i.e. several tens of millions of Chinese et al arriving in the US to help eliminate the need for arbitrage?

sounds like an excellent plan!

go to it!


Hmm.. free trade in labour would make 'Free Trade' not sound half-hearted at best or the newest cloak of Empire-building at worst.

Of course, isn't it also a Marxist belief/criticism that the borders aren't relevant anymore? (Thus, tens of millions of Chinese, et al can arrive in the U.S freely.)
-----------------Whatever, I'm not really into all that economic talk

What it seems to be is that this whole "Service Economy" and the big ol' Trade Deficit (Getting something from China, et al for nothing in return (well, dollars)?) supposedly isn't working too well or somesuch?
https://www.videogamevoters.org/ http://www.savetheinternet.com/ http://www.votersforpeace.us/index.jsp
www.911myths.com - To the 9/11-ers, give it some thought.
User avatar
UIUCstudent01
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby tokyo_to_motueka » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:11:00

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'I') support the principle that people ought to be paid the wage that best satisfies the needs of the consumers.

so you DO support US workers being paid the same as Chinese workers, because this will best satisfy the needs of consumers.
excellent! we have now cleared that one up.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'T')here once was a time when countries had open borders to both goods and labor. This is how the young United States became populated so rapidly. What is the motto on the statue of liberty, 'give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses?' The rise of welfare politics put an end to that, since no government welfare institution can survive a mass migration of the poor. You will find however that it is extremely simple for educated, productive people in poor nations to emigrate to rich nations. Just a nasty side-effect of government welfare.

oh, so people aren't immigrating for jobs and higher wages (arbitrage) but for welfare from the government?
now i get it.
Full Spectrum Disorder, by Stan Goff.
Just read it!
User avatar
tokyo_to_motueka
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue 19 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Tochigi
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby UIUCstudent01 » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:26:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Consumers


A bit off-topic, but not entirely. I watch C-Span. When Congressmen make their speeches, whenever the subject is somewhat related with the economy, they always refer to 'the American consumer' or more succinctly 'the consumer'. It's interesting to see how they don't use the word 'citizen'. Maybe there aren't any, anymore?

Kinda interesting. But when jaws wrote:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') support the principle that people ought to be paid the wage that best satisfies the needs of the consumers.


It had the ring of a congressmen's speech in my mind. It seems like he forgot that there are more than 5 billion potential consumers outside the U.S.
Last edited by UIUCstudent01 on Tue 06 Sep 2005, 02:14:32, edited 2 times in total.
https://www.videogamevoters.org/ http://www.savetheinternet.com/ http://www.votersforpeace.us/index.jsp
www.911myths.com - To the 9/11-ers, give it some thought.
User avatar
UIUCstudent01
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 838
Joined: Thu 10 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby MicroHydro » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:30:26

Well the deliberate abandonment of tens of thousands of US citizens in New Orleans to death and disease will make room for some $0.25/hr immigrant Chinese laborers to replace them.
"The world is changed... I feel it in the water... I feel it in the earth... I smell it in the air... Much that once was, is lost..." - Galadriel
User avatar
MicroHydro
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1242
Joined: Sun 10 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby nero » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 01:37:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'T')he arguments against international free trade are pathetic. There is no tangible difference between national and international free trade. If you support free trade within your country you have to support it with other countries to remain logically consistent.


jaws,

No free trade within a country does have tangible differences with international trade. Within the same juristiction trade doesn't take advantage of differences in safety and environmental regulations. I don't know if there is a "race for the bottom" going on but I don't think it is precluded by the economics of comparative advantage.

It seems to me that people who talk about capital moving between countries are really thinking of money. But when it comes to the real economy of things, fixed equipment doesn't really move about that much. Physical infrastructure doesn't move that much. Human capital doesn't move that much. The intangible social capital of a well functioning rules based democracy doesn't move. What does move is the ephemeral capital associated with the development of a business: the "institutional memory, the business contacts, the "experience". I do think it is important to recognize that the loss of the "institutional memory" capital is a definite loss of potential for a country. Silicon valley is an asset to the US but when companies offshore their engineering to Bangalore they are exporting the "institutional memory" capital. The future business leaders with the experience and the business contacts are going to be in Bangalore not Si valley. In that situation it is very hard to argue that the trade is a net benefit to the US.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'C')omparative advantage still applies. U.S. corporations derive more gains from trade from the comparative advantage they have towards Chinese factory workers than they do with U.S. workers, therefore they trade with Chinese workers. Chinese workers also realize gains from trade.


(I don't know what a "US corporation" is anymore. Multinational corporations don't have a citizenship.)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t would be no different if a plant was moved from California to Alabama, a situation where capital mobility is completely free. The objection is braindead nationalism pure and simple.


Yes it's nationalism, but "comparative advantage" is used to argue that trade is in the national interest. This is dishonest, or at the least simplistic. Your argument here seems to be that nationalism is bad and therefore it is OK for the jobs to head overseas because the chinese engineer has to live too. Ok I actually can see this point of view but don't hide it with talk of "comparative advantage".
Biofuels: The "What else we got to burn?" answer to peak oil.
User avatar
nero
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat 22 May 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby tokyo_to_motueka » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 03:07:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', 'I')t seems to me that people who talk about capital moving between countries are really thinking of money. But when it comes to the real economy of things, fixed equipment doesn't really move about that much. Physical infrastructure doesn't move that much.

unfortunately, i don't believe this assumption is correct.
physical capital, i.e. whole plants and production lines, engineering facilities, factories, etc. are being transferred from the US, Japan and Europe to China and other parts of Asia.
try doing a survey of non-military-related US manufacturers and see how much of their productive capital (not money but productive infrastructure) has gone off shore.

a lot of it has gone to China under joint ventures with Chinese state-owned enterprises (foreign investment rules require local participation).
User avatar
tokyo_to_motueka
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue 19 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Tochigi
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby jaws » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 03:26:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tokyo_to_motueka', 's')o you DO support US workers being paid the same as Chinese workers, because this will best satisfy the needs of consumers.
excellent! we have now cleared that one up.
I am positively looking forward to the day Chinese workers can live in the same level of comfort U.S. workers do. In the meantime they'll have to take what they can get from their U.S. partners, while U.S. workers keep comparatively more profitable service jobs for themselves. But it is only a matter of a decade before the Chinese are caught up.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('nero', 'j')aws,

No free trade within a country does have tangible differences with international trade. Within the same juristiction trade doesn't take advantage of differences in safety and environmental regulations. I don't know if there is a "race for the bottom" going on but I don't think it is precluded by the economics of comparative advantage.
No one has argued that environmental regulation be repealed in the United States since it would adversely affect American property and have no effect on the labor arbitrage. The Chinese will eventually realise the benefit of environmental protection themselves. And besides this has nothing to do with free trade, just like banning trash incinerators within a city's limits doesn't affect internal free trade. It is just an expression of property rights.

Besides, that wasn't even anywhere near the argument they were making. It was wah wah 25 cents an hour. They don't care about the conditions of Chinese workers one bit. The benefits to the U.S. and Chinese of employing workers at 25 cents an hour is the classical definition of gains from trade deriving from comparative advantage.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')t seems to me that people who talk about capital moving between countries are really thinking of money. But when it comes to the real economy of things, fixed equipment doesn't really move about that much. Physical infrastructure doesn't move that much. Human capital doesn't move that much. The intangible social capital of a well functioning rules based democracy doesn't move. What does move is the ephemeral capital associated with the development of a business: the "institutional memory, the business contacts, the "experience". I do think it is important to recognize that the loss of the "institutional memory" capital is a definite loss of potential for a country. Silicon valley is an asset to the US but when companies offshore their engineering to Bangalore they are exporting the "institutional memory" capital. The future business leaders with the experience and the business contacts are going to be in Bangalore not Si valley. In that situation it is very hard to argue that the trade is a net benefit to the US.
From what I can tell the U.S. companies outsourcing activities to Asia are still staffed by Americans. They weren't attacked by Asian UFOs who zapped away all the executives and engineers who knew how the place ran to replace them with Asians. There's no reason that will change any time soon because it takes Americans to know what American consumers want to buy. These companies will remain staffed by Americans until long before Asian labor becomes too expensive to outsource.$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '(')I don't know what a "US corporation" is anymore. Multinational corporations don't have a citizenship.)

Yes it's nationalism, but "comparative advantage" is used to argue that trade is in the national interest. This is dishonest, or at the least simplistic. Your argument here seems to be that nationalism is bad and therefore it is OK for the jobs to head overseas because the chinese engineer has to live too. Ok I actually can see this point of view but don't hide it with talk of "comparative advantage".
There is no such thing as the national interest unless you are a nationalist. 'China' doesn't trade with 'America'. People in China trade with people in America, as is their right to do. To a liberal there are only the interests of people, and the great numbers of consumers (who happen to be Americans) who enjoy lower prices from corporations (who happen to be staffed by Americans) that outsource production to firms in China (who happen to employ Chinese workers) have the right to enjoy gains from trade in freedom without the government creating a protected elite out of a small groups of workers. (Who deserve it because they happen to be American? What about all the other Americans who get no protection? Why do they deserve special treatment?)
User avatar
jaws
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun 24 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby jaws » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 03:30:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('UIUCstudent01', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Consumers


A bit off-topic, but not entirely. I watch C-Span. When Congressmen make their speeches, whenever the subject is somewhat related with the economy, they always refer to 'the American consumer' or more succinctly 'the consumer'. It's interesting to see how they don't use the word 'citizen'. Maybe there aren't any, anymore?
A citizen is what you are when you vote. A consumer is what you are when you buy. Both are expressions of your desires through action, but affect reality in very different ways. You always get what you want when you buy, very rarely when you vote.
User avatar
jaws
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Sun 24 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby Raxozanne » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 04:29:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rogerhb', 'I')t's also called a race to the bottom.


Yesterday I was watching the BBC news and it showed Tony Blair going to a summit in China. The news reporter said that they had managed to call a cease-fire in the ongoing EU/China bra wars- for all of you Americans we currently have huge loads of textiles being stopped at European ports because China has already gone over its European export quota for this year. Anyway the man on the news said that the UK needed to become competitive with China or there would be trouble in the future. That led me to thinking how on earth could we become competitive with China apart from introducing sweatshops here. So yeah I agree with the race to the bottom. The most productive and economically revered country is usually the one where employees are treated the shittest and work the longest hours for the crappiest pay and somehow they stand as a shining model of competitiveness to the global economic community. Well here is a question for all you politicians and economists, would you like to see your children working their lives away in a sweatshop? Do you think that was what homo sapiens was intended to do? Or are you trying to change people into homo roboticus?
Raxozanne
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 945
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: UK
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby cube » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 04:37:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tokyo_to_motueka', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'I') support the principle that people ought to be paid the wage that best satisfies the needs of the consumers.

so you DO support US workers being paid the same as Chinese workers, because this will best satisfy the needs of consumers.
excellent! we have now cleared that one up.
...............
At the rate the US dollar is depreciating who knows what's going to happen? BTW do a I smell a hint of, "It's my birthright as an American to have a high standard of living!"

What I have to say will sound unpleasant. There is no economic law that says Americans are the "choosen people" by the god of money and wealth. Granted Americans do have the highest standard of living but that's because of our sound economic policies....which created the greatest economy history has every known. However that was the past. Somewhere along the line we made a wrong turn.

I do not believe this "wrong turn" was globalization but instead our massive debt.....and other stuff that would take too long to explain.
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby Doly » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 04:41:59

One of the good things of peak oil is that it will put a stop, or at least a good brake, to globalization. The price of transport is going to become a much more important consideration than before.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby tokyo_to_motueka » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 05:07:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tokyo_to_motueka', 's')o you DO support US workers being paid the same as Chinese workers, because this will best satisfy the needs of consumers.
excellent! we have now cleared that one up.
I am positively looking forward to the day Chinese workers can live in the same level of comfort U.S. workers do. In the meantime they'll have to take what they can get from their U.S. partners, while U.S. workers keep comparatively more profitable service jobs for themselves. But it is only a matter of a decade before the Chinese are caught up.

you might be waiting a while. it is a physical impossibility, considering how much petroleum per capita it takes to support the US standard of living.

According to the US Census Bureau(.pdf):

(page 31; from Table A-1)

Real Household Median Income (2004 dollars)

1998 $45,003
1999 $46,129
2000 $46,058
2001 $45,062
2002 $44,546
2003 $44,482
2004 $44,389

So, in six years real income has fallen about $600 for the middle point households.

Sounds like all those service jobs pay so well!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')f the 154,000 private nonfarm jobs created in August, 25,000 are in construction and are filled primarily by legal and illegal Mexican immigrants; 20,000 are in wholesale and retail trade; 16,000 in administrative and waste services; 43,000 in education and health services; 34,000 in leisure and hospitality (primarily waitresses and bartenders). Manufacturing lost another 14,000 jobs.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'F')rom what I can tell the U.S. companies outsourcing activities to Asia are still staffed by Americans. They weren't attacked by Asian UFOs who zapped away all the executives and engineers who knew how the place ran to replace them with Asians. There's no reason that will change any time soon because it takes Americans to know what American consumers want to buy. These companies will remain staffed by Americans until long before Asian labor becomes too expensive to outsource.

you must be joking?! the jobs are gone. done by people in other countries for a fraction of the wage paid in the US. factory floor, computer programming, engineering, design, production systems, etc., etc. all those people in China can do this stuff for much less and US companies are more than happy to fire their US workers, skilled and unskilled, and hire workers in China to do the same thing for 90% less cost.
Full Spectrum Disorder, by Stan Goff.
Just read it!
User avatar
tokyo_to_motueka
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Tue 19 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Tochigi
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby CrudeAwakening » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 05:27:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('UIUCstudent01', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Consumers


A bit off-topic, but not entirely. I watch C-Span. When Congressmen make their speeches, whenever the subject is somewhat related with the economy, they always refer to 'the American consumer' or more succinctly 'the consumer'. It's interesting to see how they don't use the word 'citizen'. Maybe there aren't any, anymore?


I think the word 'citizen' is avoided by our elites, as it suggests some degree of politicisation of the populace, which is anathema to them; they would prefer we regarded ourselves as 'consumers', with the freedom to choose Brand A from Brand B, but with our democratic rights restricted to choosing between two near-identical political parties at voting time.
User avatar
CrudeAwakening
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue 28 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby nero » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 06:59:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('jaws', 'N')o one has argued that environmental regulation be repealed in the United States since it would adversely affect American property and have no effect on the labor arbitrage. The Chinese will eventually realise the benefit of environmental protection themselves. And besides this has nothing to do with free trade, just like banning trash incinerators within a city's limits doesn't affect internal free trade. It is just an expression of property rights.


You seem to have a profound faith that the Chinese will someday have a system of government that respects the wishes of their citizens! Banning trash incinerators certainly would affect internal trade. I have no idea how you can say that. Here is one possible scenario how it could affect trade. It raises the cost of waste disposal, raising taxes, creating a disadvantage for the local companies. The local companies in response pay their employee less or move out of the city or go bust. Almost anything could be said to affect trade. The "race for the bottom" influence can be found in all sorts of areas. Minimum wage, labour relations, right to strike, vacation pay, taxes, government subsidies, fuel economy, you name it.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')esides, that wasn't even anywhere near the argument they were making. It was wah wah 25 cents an hour. They don't care about the conditions of Chinese workers one bit. The benefits to the U.S. and Chinese of employing workers at 25 cents an hour is the classical definition of gains from trade deriving from comparative advantage.


They were complaigning that wages are pulled down. Wages are highly influenced by governmental regulations. Minimum wage, labour relations, guilds , vacation pay, all those things are set by regulation.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')rom what I can tell the U.S. companies outsourcing activities to Asia are still staffed by Americans. They weren't attacked by Asian UFOs who zapped away all the executives and engineers who knew how the place ran to replace them with Asians. There's no reason that will change any time soon because it takes Americans to know what American consumers want to buy. These companies will remain staffed by Americans until long before Asian labor becomes too expensive to outsource.


Sure the company is still there, it just has lost the capacity to perform manufacturing or engineering, or customer service, what ever it has decided to outsource. Then one day the OEM decides that marketing can't be all that hard and starts selling under it's own brand (think BENQ).


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')here is no such thing as the national interest unless you are a nationalist. 'China' doesn't trade with 'America'. People in China trade with people in America, as is their right to do. To a liberal there are only the interests of people, and the great numbers of consumers (who happen to be Americans) who enjoy lower prices from corporations (who happen to be staffed by Americans) that outsource production to firms in China (who happen to employ Chinese workers) have the right to enjoy gains from trade in freedom without the government creating a protected elite out of a small groups of workers. (Who deserve it because they happen to be American? What about all the other Americans who get no protection? Why do they deserve special treatment?)


There is such a thing as a national interest. It is the result of having a common government and living under a common rule of law. In the things that we share we can say we have a national interest. I theoretically shouldn't care for the textile worker in Montreal any more than the textile worker in Shanghai but I do because if he and his coworkers lose their job the government is going to pay them money from my taxes. Equally I benefit from the success of the auto industry in southern Ontario since it helps pay for my health care. There is a reason for nationalism and so very sensibly people are "nationalists" since it is in their self interest for their country to succeed.

I find it a little ironic that you are anti-nationalism yet you used the term "US company". What exactly makes a company a US company? And why even mention the distinction between a US company and a foreign company if you don't have a nationalist view point.
Biofuels: The "What else we got to burn?" answer to peak oil.
User avatar
nero
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1433
Joined: Sat 22 May 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Top

Re: Zero Sum Game

Postby pup55 » Tue 06 Sep 2005, 08:56:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_code('', 'I am positively looking forward to the day Chinese workers can live in the same level of comfort U.S. workers do.')

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') agree with the race to the bottom


The average american or Canadian has no idea of the standard of living (or lack of) and also worker safety standards of the typical asian factory worker.

I was in a factory fairly recently in one of the more prosperous Asian countries. This factory had basically no safety or pollution control equipment, and a layer of chemicals covered the factory floor. We spent the day watching a crew of workers operate a large, dangerous piece of mixing equipment. The crew was from Bangladesh. The crew consisted of a family that had agreed to work in the factory for a year in exchange for the company paying for their admittance to the country, the father, who was operating the mixer, the mother, who was weighing the chemicals, and two kids, about 9 or 10, who were loading a big conveyor belt.

The factory provided some minimal rice-based food and water, but apparently the crew basically slept in a corner of the factory when it was not their shift.

The company was making a product that was exported directly to Japan and the US.

Is this wrong? Well, the people agreed to it, and it appeared to suit their needs because it got them out of Bangladesh and kept them from starving, so in a way, it worked for them. At what point the company actually started whipping them to get them to work harder, I do not know. They didn't do it in front of us.

The point:

There will always be some people more downtrodden and starving to outsource cheap labor to. I don't think anyone wants this sort of thing to start happening in the US or Canada. But, you cannot expect industry in the US and Canada to compete in the marketplace with this sort of indentured servitude.

Maybe the fuel cost will be the correcting mechanism, but there will be a corrective mechanism at some point, because we will certainly go back to labor riots in the US before we get back to that level.
User avatar
pup55
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5249
Joined: Wed 26 May 2004, 03:00:00
Top
Next
Post a reply

Return to Economics & Finance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron