U.S. Labor Force: One Foot in the Third World

Chronicles Magazine ^ | Tuesday, June 07, 2005 | Paul Craig Roberts

[Nonstatist]

The only first world economies listed are Canada, England, maybe Spain (?) , and their economies are on the order of 15 % the size of us and less (and they are just barely higher).

For a "mature" economy with our size , none are more productive

[hedgetrimmer]

Spot on comments

[Nonstatist]

provided both travel through the same route(i.e the same time period).

But they don't, of course. China is a developing country with enormous built in demand and a still rather primitive (overall) infrastructure. It would be absurd to extrapolate that rate of growth out indefinitely. Not going to happen.

[Racehorse]

That looks impressive until you ask "108.5 percent of what?"  [. . .] Which economy is really "doing better"?

I couldn't agree with you more.  That's why these discussions are so aggravating.  There is no common understanding of what constitutes economic growth nor relative well-being.

[Nonstatist]

Far more than half of China has a standard of living worse than many third world nations. Its ridiculous to compare apples and oranges.

Growing an economy 6 times the size of China with 70 % less people as fast as we do is a testament to our overall productivity and efficiency.

[Racehorse]

The interesting thing about this list is that 4 out of the ten countries on it are third world and have done so well because they started out in abject poverty. [. . .] The other five countries you list have very similar trade policies to the United States and have been shifting their own manufacturing over to China nearly as fast as we have. They seem to have done all right in spite of that.

Sure, they did alright.  They're not at the bottom of the list . . . yet.

But, according to a real growth in GDP all they and we did was alright.  Whether the countries you're calling third world can sustain their growth or meet some undefined test for per capita well-being, wael, I'm kinda interested in knowing the answer to that puzzle myself.

[Racehorse]

The only first world economies listed are Canada, England, maybe Spain (?) , and their economies are on the order of 15 % the size of us and less (and they are just barely higher).

For a "mature" economy with our size , none are more productive

I can't decide whether you're quibbling or tossing out the test question.  :-)

Interesting discussion, though.  I just wish we had some better defined frame of reference.

[Racehorse]

Far more than half of China has a standard of living worse than many third world nations. Its ridiculous to compare apples and oranges.

What this seems to say is you're not interested in comparing the growth of world economies but prefer to measure the "standard of living" of various groups within some inconvenient national border.  What is the advantage in doing that?

[Black Tooth]

What a bunch of BS. This country has been running trade deficits pretty consistently for 40 years, but we continue to get richer.

We? I know your not talking to me. Maybe some are getting richer, but I sure am not.

[CarrotAndStick]

Not going to happen.

China's growth rates have stayed put for nearly two decades. Any slowdown can only happen if there is a drastic worldwide decline in the demand for "Made in China" goods, or if there is political turmoil in China. As there isn't much sign of either of these happening, don't hold your breath till any of these happen.

We all like things to be different, but unfortunately, the store shelves seem to be filling with more and more Chinese-made stuff.

[janetgreen]

We have been trading our trade and techonogical secrets in exchange for cheap labor. In the end we will have neither.

BTTT

[Penner]

In the 21st century, the U.S. economy has been unable to create jobs in export and import-competitive industries. U.S. job growth is confined to nontradable domestic services.

This movement of the American labor force toward Third World occupations in domestic services has dire implications both for U.S. living standards and for America’s status as a superpower.

Paging Mr. Greenspan...

[durasell]

...and you expect Greenspan to do what? Educate a youth whose attention span is precisely calibrated to the exact length of a music video? Maybe he should raise all the Third World wages so they are competitive with wages in the U.S.? Maybe he should implement a seres of subsidies to businesses to build factories in previously abandoned industrial areas?

It's an adult world. America will either compete or perish.

[truemiester]

There is no "free trade" with Red China!

[raybbr]

Our ability to provide for our own National Security is being sold out, and in the hypothetical event of major world conflict, we would have to re-tool all of our old manufacturing capabilities to sustain a protracted effort.

If China were to do something (invade Taiwan, for example) and we came to Taiwan's defense by declaring war on China, what would allies like Germany, Britain, India, France, etc. think about our attacking a country that they have so much invested in?

Or, what would the large corporations of America, who have billions invested in industrial enterprises in China, do in response to our warring with China?

Wouldn't we be threatening the billions of dollars that millions of Americans have in stocks in these corporations?

What would the result of those losses to 401K's, IRA's, etc. have on our economy?

Does anyone think that the Chinese haven't thought this out?

Further, do you think the free-traders will allow us to actually war with China?

[TXBSAFH]

Free trade and free traitors are killing us.

[junta]

Stan Roach has seconded this in a recent essay of his.

[Brilliant]

We make lots of stuff. We make construction equipment and airplanes for example. True, we don't make shoes or textiles.

So explain to me why making shoes and textiles is so essential to our national prestige and our economic success that we should tax people who produce construction equipment and airplanes to subsidize people who produce shoes and t-shirts.

[durasell]

There are more shoe and t-shirt manufacturers than there are heavy equipment manufacturers. They would, in theory, employ more people.

[Brilliant]

That's pretty lame. There aren't more shoe makers and t-shirt makers in the US. And I don't want to import Mexican laborers so that we can open more of that kind of business here. I'm perfectly fine with Mexico and China making shoes and t-shirts. We'll make the construction equipment, farm equipment, airplanes, and other stuff that they can't make.