Jobs Come and Go (One of the smartest economists in the world hits the nail on the head)

www.townhall.com ^ | 11/26/2003 | Walter E. Williams

[XBob]

156 - "What happens when we're a country like Mexico and facing a Revolution? There might not be a place for us to flee like they have now. We shouldn't be so eager to give up the country our Founding Fathers had in mind."

All these selfish, short sighted people, haven't got a clue as to what future they are creating for us when they continue to export our jobs to save a small amount of money. Many of the countries I have been in would love to have it as good as the Mexicans do in Mexico. And note how many Mexicans are now protesting the 'cheap imports' which are exporting their jobs overseas.

[optimistically_conservative]

I think it is absolutely the case that the more hostile the environment is to the employer, the more detached the employer is to his/her employees.

Detaching his employees, especially at the more hostile lower levels where union and government is most intrusive, becomes an economic factor resulting in outsourcing of labor to temps or overseas.

[Willie Green]

Can you formulate a rationale of your own on how we will deal with surplus workers in a high tech world?

• Assume they'll magicly become creatively employed in some other productive occupation. (lacking skills and capital, it ain't gonna happen.)
• Assume they'll peacefully starve to death and disappear on their own. (Ain't gonna happen, it goes against human nature.)
• Use the military to slaughter 'em when they become thieves and revolutionaries. (Ya gotta do it when the threat is real and imminent, but it is immoral as a long-term plan. Scratch that idea.)
• Placate the masses with welfare handouts to sustain their lives. (Nah, that's socialism/communism. That doesn't work.)
• Shorten the work week so available work is spread around more evenly. (Hmmmm... sounds fine in theory for the most prosperous nations... but it's still oppressive of those in the more overpopulated, poverty stricken nations who will still pull down the average of the more developed ones. Can't stop people from working longer hours if that's what they want/need to do.)

Oh what to do? What to do?

I still prefer utilization of revenue tariffs to act as a trade buffer between different nations. So what if it's less "labor efficient" as defined by the transnational corporations? Those globo-bureaucracies aren't elected representatives of We the People anyway.

Serving as a buffer between nations, tariffs would encourage each nation to become self-sufficient at utilizing their own natural resources, including labor. So what if this results in "excess global capacity"??? Redundant, excess capacity is actually good, and keeps people productive within the expectations of their own national economies, permitting a more stable transition to whatever the future may hold.

[XBob]

164 - I got a great idea, to save even more money -

"I am a licensed engineer, and have 11 Mexican engineers working for me in Mexico. They are not as competent at my projects as I, but they only get paid about 1/20 as much as my old salary, too (which to them is a HUGE wage). They are doing the dreariest parts of my old job, while I oversee the whole project far more efficiently. Therefore, I can produce about 3 times as much as before I had them. "

Let's hire a really good mexican engineer, at 1/20 of your current salary, and make you even more productive. That way, we could have an infinite increase in productivity, and wouldn't need to pay you anything. Then you could retrain for a job serving tamales to the mexican engineers.

[tpaine]

Good reply willie.. I knew you could do it..

But still, -- what to do? What to do?

Once we utilize revenue tariffs to act as a trade buffer between different nations, thus saving our own manufacturing base, - we still have massive numbers of unemployable 'we the people'..

In essence, except for tarrifs, you are agreeing with Williams by saying:

"Redundant, excess capacity is actually good, and keeps people productive within the expectations of their own national economies, permitting a more stable transition to whatever the future may hold."

[Willie Green]

Could it be there is no solution? That Williams is right in writing:

Could it be there is no solution? That Williams is right in writing:

No, Williams is dead wrong.
Whether it is business or government, the globo-trend is toward merger, acquisition and consolidation of behemoth and oppressive centralized bureaucracies. I preach a "solution" that emphasizes more decentralization and local responsibility/self-sufficiency/opportunity.
I believe in capitalism with a small "c": extremely fractured and competitive markets. Not this abomination that's being mislabled by global corporatists who utilize excessive economies of scale to manipulate government policies in their quest to win the globo-monopoly game. And I equally despise the proponents of centralized UN controlled marxism.

Centalized control is bad.
Decentralization is good.
Where can we find a Teddy Roosevelt to bust up the transnationals?
Oh, I know!
Go Pat Go!!!

[XBob]

209 - "the U.S. in one generation went from the greatest R&D engine ever seen, to something bordering on third-rate in many cases. "

As a poster said earlier - just look how great Allentown, PA is doing after 30 years - moving from a huge, powerhouse, engine which shook the world, to shuffling around Chinese toasters.

[tpaine]

No, Williams is dead wrong.

Whether it is business or government, the globo-trend is toward merger, acquisition and consolidation of behemoth and oppressive centralized bureaucracies.
I preach a "solution" that emphasizes more decentralization and local responsibility/self-sufficiency/opportunity.
I believe in capitalism with a small "c": extremely fractured and competitive markets.

---

From what Williams writes in his article here, -- he too believes in capitalism with fractured and competitive markets.
I simply don't see him touting "merger, acquisition and consolidation of behemoth and oppressive centralized bureaucracies."

In fact, isn't it true that tariffs need to be administered by such bureaucracies?

[bvw]

A simple tariff needs no more bureaucracy than already exists for say the gasoline tax, or a sales tax. That is, it could actually be done with LESS customs personel if we allow the first domestic receivers to pay the tax -- that is give business receiving imports a tax stamp, and only occassional importers and indiviuals go through customs.

[XBob]

186 - "So if you own your mud hut in Sri Lanka, and make eight cents a day, saving three cents a day, you are not in poverty? "

I personally had that experience once, in the Philippines. We walked over a mountain path (no roads) to get to a small fishing village on the beach.

Absolutely breath taking beauty. And I accepted an invitation to dine with one family. So, after some scurrying around, several of the children climbed coconut palms and got coconuts at various stages of ripeness, for drinks and food, the husband killed a chicken running around the yard, and another boy pulled a fish out of his trap on the beach. The wife cooked these and some of the rice from their small plot.

And as we sat down to dinner, on chairs made from tree branches, the ocean breeze wafted nicely through the walls of thier thatched, twigg walled home, we enjoyed an excellent meal, and I wondered, 'Who is rich?, me the 'rich American', or these lovely happy peoople?'.

I found out they had a family income (from selling fish and lobster) of about $80 per year.

I would love to be so 'rich'.

PS - I, as the honored guest, was treated to the best part, the 'fish head' to go with the rice. It was excellent.

[XBob]

Dear Newbee student -

188 - "As for that computer programmer, he or she can move to India. Either that, or stop whining and find another job."

Good idea. I assume you are looking for work in India after your graduation, no?

[XBob]

212 - This is worth repeating,and many of the dummies here do't understand the way money 'circulates' to raise the standards of all in the 'circle'. Very weel put:

"The problem is that the self-reliant type in Sri Lanka doesn't pay US taxes. He doesn't:

Have his car repaired in American shops
Buy groceries in American markets
Use and pay for US utilities
Buy his home from an American
Buy his gas from an American service station
Get his clothes cleaned in an American cleaning service
Eat in American restaurants
Buy clothes from an American retailer
Pay American state land taxes
Buy his car from an American dealership
Deposit in American banks "

[Willie Green]

In fact, isn't it true that tariffs need to be administered by such bureaucracies?

Nope. In fact, bureaucracies only distort such tariffs.
As James Madison asserted (and I'm paraphrasing): a simple, uniform, flat-rate tariff applied to ALL imported goods, regardless of what they are or where they're from, is consistant with the principles of true free trade.

A bloated bureacracy becomes "necessary" only when this principle is violated by the demands of special interests for specific higher/lower rates and myriad loopholes and exemptions. Micromanagement and manipulation at its worst, with similarly disdainful "unintended" consequences.

One rate that applies to EVERYTHING is easiest, fairest, and works best.
Pick a rate, any rate: 10%? 15%?
Doesn't much matter if the sole purpose is to raise revenue.
It's essentially self-capping. If you raise the rate too high, then trade decreases TOO MUCH and revenues begin to decline.
Pick the rate that maximizes revenue and you can further reduce other forms of domestic taxation without bankrupting the Treasury. And the citizenry becomes more free to enjoy the fruits of their own labor when they utilize their own natural resources.

[XBob]

215 - WOW - you put it best of anyone so far, and far better than I ever have. You really have expressed my feelings and understanding of this subject:


"More to the point is the way it seems to be playing out in recent years, and what some here on FR seem to advocate. That is, a cruel, heartless, rapacious, greedy, out-of-control grubbing for every last one of those almighty dollars to put on the quarterly bottom line, and if anyone dare get in the way of that pursuit, look out. If that means destroying the jobs, careers, lives, and families of honest, hardworking people in the process, well, tough, screw 'em, let them eat cake, they deserve their fate."

[tpaine]

A simple tariff needs no more bureaucracy than already exists for say the gasoline tax, or a sales tax. That is, it could actually be done with LESS customs personel if we allow the first domestic receivers to pay the tax -- that is give business receiving imports a tax stamp, and only occassional importers and indiviuals go through customs.
309 -bvw-

---

You'll have to check with willie, but I doubt his protective tariffs could work as just an overall percentage type tax.

Some 'crat would have to decide what US widgets should cost in order to decree the proper tariff on foreign widgets.

Pat, & thousands of willies, would oversee the whole operation of course, from DC.

[Willie Green]

Some 'crat would have to decide what US widgets should cost in order to decree the proper tariff on foreign widgets.

No doubt they'd try. Just as they try to mung-up any other mode of taxation you can name.
That's nothing different, unique or peculiar to tariffs only.
But as a practical matter, there's no reason Customs can't develop a constantly updated database that reflects current market pricing. Pick the pricing right of the shipping manifests / bills of lading. Yeah, there's an extremely wide variety of items being imported. But when you do it day-in, day-out and day-in, it all becomes rather routine. And while there's always gonna be somebody trying to beat the system with false documentation, anything that's grossly misvalued will stick out like a sore thumb.

[tpaine]

One rate that applies to EVERYTHING is easiest, fairest, and works best.
Pick a rate, any rate: 10%? 15%?
Doesn't much matter if the sole purpose is to raise revenue.
-willie-

---

I thought the purpose was to protect american jobs?

Say we have a flat 10% tariff.. How would that protect a US clothing manufacturer? 10 dollar mexican made blue jeans at $11 are still gonna undercut US made at $15. - [If the US can be made/sold at that price, big IF.]

[XBob]

Fascinating facts about the invention
of the Blue Jeans by Levi Strauss in 1873. BLUE JEANS

The Gold Rush of 1848 attracted many adventurers to California. One of them was a twenty-year-old named Levi Strauss. Strauss had been a draper, or cloth seller, in New York, and he took a few bolts of cloth to sell on the journey west.
In this manner he earned his way, and by the time he reached California, Levi Strauss had sold everything except a roll of canvas. No one wanted clothes made of canvas! Or did they? It turned out that "up in the diggings," where the miners worked, pants wore out very quickly. So Strauss made some pairs of canvas trousers to sell to miners. More and more miners were coming to Strauss and asking him for a pair of those canvas trousers. Not entirely happy with canvas, Levi started using a new fabric from Genoa, Italy The weavers there called the fabric "genes". Strauss changed the name to "jeans" and later he called his pants "Levi’s". They were popular with cowboys as well as miners. Today, called Levi's or blue jeans, they are popular with men, women, and children in many countries of the globe.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

It's not that hard to create things

An off-base and ignorant assertion. Your pejorative attacks on those whom you mistakenly 'presume' to be doing nothing. With assumptions such as this, it explains a great deal why you are overly smug and arrogant. Try and manufacture something in the U.S. with garage-scale economic backing today. You are competing against all of China, and its horde of intellectual property violators. Your design patent may as well be used for toilet paper.

I remember when the Steel industry was on its last legs in the 1980's. Finally, some began to modernize by starting up mini-mills and dumping the turn-of-the-century blast furnace hell holes. It didn't take steel makers long to get over investing and going back to the old ways of letting plants age beyond their economical life. Witness Bush trying to give the steel makers a few more years with tariffs against the Europeans. Funny thing. old Europe has been modernizing its steel making. Why can't we? Steel making is not the only industry one can make productive through technology.

Why do we have to let foreign countries advance the technology of manufacturing while we just graduate more lawyers who screw up the business of producing? Lawyers, teachers, and hard left labor unions fund the political process that sustains our decline. Engineers just whine that they are losing their jobs. Whenever I look over the list of campaign contributers, I rarely see engineers on the list of donors. Apparently, If you don't participate in the process, you don't get to reap any rewards.

As much as Americans want to piss on the Canadians and Europeans, it looks to me that they are intending to compete.

(Canadian Fabric cottage industry)

(British Oil Processor cottage industry)

[XBob]

250 - "I can apply for a few jobs that pay $8 an hour, but I wont get hired. Tried it. Never got hired, got told I was going to leave once the economy picked up.

That's a fact. "
===
I understand. I've been there.

Throw away your resume, 'forget' your education (stop at high school), fill out an application in pencil, incompletely, and make some spelling errors.

That should help you get hired at a 'temp' job for $8/hr. It's better than no job, but not much.