Where the Good Jobs Are Going

Time Canada ^ | August 4, 2003 | Jyoti Thottam

[onemoreday]

The question seems to me to be:

...In a Free Market Economy, is the Market itself "for sale"....

....and, as to the "role of government".....when the government itself is seen to a an active participant in the economy, making money for certain interests at the expense of others.....is this not the definition of corruption ?

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

You have that right....they want independence just out of reach of the middle class..

[StatesEnemy]

Do Not Panic!

I hope you have your towel...

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

Of course, China is the last slave state. Everything moves to the slave states. Wages are cheap. And we get to pick up the welfare burden of our unemployed here in the USA. The amount I save on shirts and shoes goes to the feds retirement and health plans then whats left goes to people who can sit and collect and vote demoncrat. Now you know why politics is the great gravy train.

[massadvj]

Of course even protectionism isn't really helping them.

Most of Japan's problems were caused by its protectionism, not by its laudible frugal citizenry. The huge amounts of foreign capital thay amassed became utterly worthless as their trade barriers made it impossible to spend. A cab ride in Tokyo got to be $50. A small hotel room $300. They were playing with Monopoly money, having collected vast amounts of foreign currency with no way to spend it. Sooner or later, it had to implode.

Contrary to your thesis, Japan is a perfect illustration of the failures of trade barriers, not the proof of their legitimacy.

[Wolfie]

No sweat. When the Vogons show up to build their interstellar bypass, I'll be ready.

[raybbr]

To all free-traders: (I have been asking this question for two weeks now and no one has answered)

What would our economy and our nation be like if we had a 500 billion dollar trade surplus or, an even trade instead of a 500 billion dollar deficit?!?!

I wait patiently for an answer.

[StatesEnemy]

Don't go to any poetry readings...

[TheSpottedOwl]

54K is still is good salary. His mortgage and bills should have been based on conservative assumptions, if he'd been more frugal with utilities etc in the first place, he'd have more savings now, and if he thinks he can make 54-77K house painting he's nuts. I know, I've done it.

He isn't a loser. He's bitter. Can't say that I blame him. I went through childhood with parents who lived through the depression. Until I barked back, I got a bath on saturday, just one bath a week. Water was expensive. The gas to heat the water is too expensive. The electricity used to power my little transistor radio was....too expensive. I still run around shutting off lights, and keeping the furnace off, because I went back to school, we're living on child support and alimony....and it's too freaking expensive. Forget about Scouts, soccer, band, and ballet, I'm looking at going on food stamps because my two kids at home are like locusts.

I'm hoping that I can eventually get a job in publishing, or newspapers,proofreading and editing. I'm hoping that being an American will give me an edge in that field. I don't expect to make 70k. I will be happy to make a decent living wage with health benefits. Har har har...

Don't sit and laugh at this man's misfortune, okay?

[P.O.E.]

IMHO, it's a purposeful squeeze-out of the middle class. Many of the traditional "jobs you can fall back on" are filled around here by immigrants, and the hi-tech jobs go overseas where the tax & regulatory burdens are lighter.

It's only a matter of time....

[TheSpottedOwl]

If the missus takes a job, then the kids may need daycare, they may need to pay higher auto insurance costs, etc. And it really isn't that easy to find basic low-skilled jobs anymore. I'm sure they can cut back to save money. It sounds like they are trying to cut their utility costs. But it often costs money to cancel things like a cell-phone contract, dish service, or car lease, so that's not always a great option.

Preach it brother. On 8 bucks an hour, I can't even rent a motel room. Cable? Dish? Bwaahahha! I went back to school, and hopefully the foreigners won't be able to snatch proofreading or editing. That would be text. Like newspapers and books. There is only so much you can do to cut costs. When I was married and my oldest kids were little, I bought fabric remnants and sewed their clothes. I crocheted doilies and antimacassars for Christmas presents. Then many years later I found out how much my ex husband was actually making. Oh well. I'm self sufficient. Day old bread, half price meat, and dented canned goods. I just hope I can get a degree and a decent job. Hopefully my 89 New Yorker can make it past 300,000 miles.

[TheSpottedOwl]

I believe people here are more concerned with govt manipulation. What other govt. on earth actually actively lobbies and subsidies companies to leave, taking many jobs and lots of money with them?

They feel betrayed. You're talking gold rush and remote controls. Was the govt. stabbing gold rushers in the back? The only way these situations are comparable, is if the govt. was scheming and artificially ended the gold rush early on behalf of a foreign power.

Exactly. We're more expensive to hire? Noooo, If they hire American workers, it will cut into their personal pork. I love George Bush, but he needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

[hedgetrimmer]

You bet its on purpose! Multinationals and the US government are busy implementing sustainable development. You will see this term on nearly every US government website and the websites of the OECD, WTO, INF, UN, NAFTA, GATT you name it. Here is an explanation of how "sustainable development" works:

Everything Must Change, according to USAID administrator J. Brian Atwood. The pursuit of "sustainable development" will require nothing less than a "comprehensive revision of institutions, practices, and attitudes on the part of every human being." The result of this plan is "downward harmonization" - the reversal of U.S. living standards to the conditions existing in most Third World countries.

http://www.tribulationalinstitute.com/usaid_and_world_bank_unite_churc.htm

[raybbr]

On the other hand, if we get to even trade by protectionism and wrecking the US economy...

Our economy is being wrecked anyway. Don't quote me figures about joblessness and economic reports. It only applies to the people in power. The middle-class worker is on his way out. When we become a subservient society to the ultra-rich, we will all be battling to see who can cut their rich neighboors grass for a few bucks.

BTW. I don't believe either the R's or the D's give a rat's a$$ about the average American worker. Just as long, as like Huck, they can say they got theirs.

[P.O.E.]

I'm usually the last person to subscribe to conspiracy theories, BUT...

There does seem to have been a significant amount of intentional "social engineering" going on over the last few decades.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Several congressional committees have held hearings on the impact of offshore outsourcing on the U.S. economy, and lawmakers in five states have introduced bills that would limit or forbid filling government contracts through offshore outsourcing.

Except that US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick, gave assurances to Indian Commerce Minister Arun Jaitley that Washington is against any attempt by state governments to legislate a ban on outsourcing on the lines of what is being considered in New Jersey and other states.

Check it out here.

[massadvj]

The trade deficit is pretty much a red herring used by protectionists. Most economists recognize that the trade deficit is a meaningless number today. There are several reasons, but I'll just give you a few:

(1) It doesn't measure the vast majority of serices, mostly goods. The service sector in the trade deficit is something like 16 percent. The service sector in our economy is about 75 percent. So we are exporting a lot of services that don't get accounted for. Everything from software, engineering and accounting services, medical treatments, on and on. So virtually no one who is informed thinks the real trade deficit is really anywhere near $500 billion. For most of the last few decades it's likely been positive if services were accounted for.

(2). The numbers aren't real. Just for example, how many eBay dealers ship stuff overseas and report the real value? Yet the numbers on those forms are what's used to calculate the deficit. For the most part, the numbers are fiction.

(3) The real issue is cash transfers. If we are importing more goods than we export, but foreigners are investing the profits and more back here by buying our stocks and bonds, that's a net positive for us in terms of cash flow. Cash transfers have been down over the past few years, but we remain the safest investment in the world. A lot of that confidence would get shaken if we started imposing trade barriers.

(4) Trade is not an equal sum game. Say you have lemons and I have eggs. If we trade we can both make lemon meringue pie. That's a new gain for both of us. If we restrict trade, we only limit our choices. Compound that by thousands of products over hundreds of countries and $500 billion (even if it were real, which it is not) is a spit in the bucket compared to the economic value of expanded trade on our standard of living.

There are quite a few other reasons for supporting free trade, including the need for global competition for American companies, and the avoidance of trade wars. The bottom line is that trade barriers are an artificial constraint on the economy. They are worse than taxes in many respects, and should be avoided at all costs. Educated and responsible economists have known this for several decades and for the most part the political class should be lauded for standing up to the political pressure from special interests that seek to skew the game in their favor at the expense of America's standard of living.

[hedgetrimmer]

As for intentional social engineering, remember Al Gore wrote "Earth in the Balance", signed the Kyoto treaty and was in office for 8 years. Eight years is time enough to do a _lot_ of harm. Here is the net effect of our energy policies based on global warming on a treaty which was never ratified but which has been implement bit by bit by the department of energy, the EPA and other federal agencies:

...under the [Kyoto] treaty, while emerging economies are exempted, global warming hysteria will [has]:

1.Increase the cost of living, forcing U.S. consumers to pay more for electricity (40-50 percent in some parts of the country) and other consumer goods, since electricity costs are reflected in the production costs of almost all goods and services;

2.Reduce American wages each year by 5 percent to 10 percent;

3.Devastate strategic U.S. industries, such as the steel, aluminum, chemical, pulp and paper, coal and cement industries, which also includes many large employers;

4.Encourage energy-intensive U.S. industries to move out of the U.S. to exempted countries like Mexico and Indonesia -- to any country beyond the reach of America's environmental police -- causing the additional loss of tens of thousands of high-skilled, high-wage jobs.

http://www.annapolisinstitute.net/archives/commentary/pb1997331.html