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

[Paul Ross]

If we didn't, all the jobs that could be lost would be gone already.

Wrong. There is obviously an element of 'friction' in the pace of economic dislocation as the capital is re-routed to the newly-discovered opportunity. I.e., the collapse of U.S. employment and capital protections (due to the subversive perversion of the NAFTA treaty, followed by the even more disastrous WTO agreement by Comrade Xlinton overriding our national trade sovereignty), simultaneous with the relatively sudden interest and ability of the great pools of drastically-underpaid labor (China and India) to seek to exploit that capital influx.

This is THE paradigm shift of our times for modern U.S. management. Hence, It is a done deal. Those jobs ARE gone already. In the words of Hollywood: You just don't know you're dead already. The body just hasn't had time to cool yet.

E.g., Another 14 million service jobs are slated to go in less than 6 years. And as the manufacturing expertise of the Chinese 'partners' equals ours then no U.S. manufacturing will be able to resist the black-hole of Chinese wages. If the U.S. dollar didn't collapse first, EVERYthing will 'have' to be made in China.

All that will remain in the U.S. will be government jobs and necessarily local employment...construction, maintenance and service fields (Grocery, Gas Station, and other stores). All manufactures and all relocatable productive activities will be relocated to China. You just continue to refuse to see the National Security elements in trade...which Adam Smith expressly made an over-riding caveat to 'the unseen-hand' in his 'Wealth of Nations'.

[Paul Ross]

Unfortunately, you are quite mistaken about what China and India are 'converting' into. They are statist, and remain statist. They may warp from communist to fascist, but either way, that doesn't make them less of a threat. Their populations are not going to be our pals. Quite the contrary. They would gladly war against the U.S. after the degree of nationalist hatred pointed our way by their...and 'our' media.

[Paul Ross]

Uh, in idealized economic model, greater technology for production creates more jobs. Someone is needed to design, produce, and maintain the machines.

But Outsourcing to competing labor sources merely destroys the employment opportunities for domestic labor. This production diversion can have catastrophic effects on the U.S. economy in the long run. The negative multipliers for a national economy of outsourcing is non-debatable.

[A. Pole]

If the U.S. dollar didn't collapse first, EVERYthing will 'have' to be made in China.

Imperial Spain had huge reserves of New World gold so she could play outsourcing game for quite long. Read about Spanish decline.

[Paul Ross]

Colorful imagery aside, your post is an excellent example of communist sophistry.

While not willing to protect your nation's citizens...or the laws that protect the U.S....yourself, you are more than willing to see to it that your fellow taxpayer is duped into having to subsidize the Chinese out-sourcing cyclone with U.S. IMF monies.

[snopercod]

End of true capitalism, by virtue of handing the entire means of production to those who are essentially lawless and implicitly reject our system and laws.

America has now arrived at the dead end of the philosophy which preaches that brute labor is to be respected, but brainpower is worthless.

American brainpower designed all the machines and processes which make it possible for third-world countries to put us out of business.

And we gave all that knowledge away for free.

[Paul Ross]

Spoken like a true union thug.

EPU: Seems like you're moniker is a misnomer. With divisive and disrespectful commentary like this, it should instead be E. Unum Pluribus. Yet another communist thug trying to divide and conquer America. "Pay no attention to those National Security issues...! It's all a filthy protectionist trick!"

[Paul Ross]

The foreign car plants located in the USA were due to the protectionist quotas that Reagan implemented. So it is not a true example of 'jobs coming back' that the Free Traitors would have us believe.

[tpaine]

"Finding cheaper ways to produce goods and services frees up labor to produce other things."
-Walter Williams-

---

Yep. Labor saving technology is developed in response to costly, labor intensive production methods.

So what's your point, Walter?
Did you forget that globalization is a regressive force that acts against technological development?
It continually substitutes ever cheaper labor to undermine development and implementation of more sophisticated (and expensive) automated technology.
Go back to watching the Oprah Show, Walter. Quit pretending that you're a "conservative" economist. Heck, you might as well quit pretending you're an economist of any type, for that matter.
-Willy-

---

Willy, instead of bashing Walters logic, think about your own as regards to tech development..

Such development is a fact of life. - 'Slave labor' in manufacturing is dying out as it becomes cheaper to automate technology than to feed, clothe, & house the slaves.

Go back to watching the Oprah Show, Willie, until you formulate a rationale of your own on how we will deal with surplus workers in a high tech world. -- Can you even address the problem?
143 tpaine

---

Uh, in idealized economic model, greater technology for production creates more jobs. Someone is needed to design, produce, and maintain the machines.

But Outsourcing to competing labor sources merely destroys the employment opportunities for domestic labor. This production diversion can have catastrophic effects on the U.S. economy in the long run. The negative multipliers for a national economy of outsourcing is non-debatable.
263 -Paul Ross-

---

"in an idealized economic model"?

Seems that neither you, nor willy, can address the real world problem.

How will we deal with surplus workers in a high tech world.?

[A. Pole]

The foreign car plants located in the USA were due to the protectionist quotas that Reagan implemented. So it is not a true example of 'jobs coming back' that the Free Traitors would have us believe.

EXACTLY! I remember how hard Reagan fought for American jobs.

[Paul Ross]

BUMP! Well said.

[bvw]

globalization is regressive to technological development. Transnational corporatists are essentially pennypinching, technophobic luddites who prefer to profit with slave labor operating antiquated technology.

Astute observation, Mr. Green. And one that may be built on, I think For example, the financiers throw jobs to Inida claiming they can not be filled here be quality workers, when that is most assuredly not true. And where India is demonstratedly no great leading technological innovator -- its railway system shows that India has many strengths, absolutely, a wonderful, warm and smart people they are! Yet, AMERICA is where techonological innovation is incadescent -- every minute of the American History shows that.

Why throw the money to a place where its long return will be hundreds of times, thousands of times less than it would be if invested state-side? Because -- you called it -- they fear change!

One of India's strengths is its inertia, its dampening of radical changes, taking them in slowly and digesting them. Their product is fine and pretty, but slow. Silk and not rayon. Delicate tapestry and not broadloom. That slowness, that inertia, that resistance to innovation, to the dreaded *Change* is what has brought the eye of the greedy, the greedy yet fearful to the bones of change to India.

The modern King Luddites seek a Principality to Rule. Like the Victorians (same mindset they had), they have found it in India.

It is time for us to throw off those neo-Victorian Luddites, and develop rascally and novel ways of financing innovative industry, manufacture business here, outside the range of operation of those fiat money Princes and Federale Legislators.

[ninenot]

In fact, we ARE "giving away" the jobs through legerdemain: the USA subsidizes foreign direct investments through various guarantee programs and indirectly through the IRS code provisions having to do with where income is earned, etc.

As to your point about "jobs moving" all the time--it certainly is not the case that Europe has abandoned manufacturing. Look at the CIA "Factbook" numbers on manufacturing as a percentage of various national GDP's and you will find that in the First World, the USA has the LOWEST percentage (18%); the average is 27%.

Must be those Europeans are all making buggy whips.

The point is: howcomeizzit that all those Europeans RETAIN manufacturing through policy, and the Chinese are FIGHTING for all those manufacturing jobs through whatever means--and the USA doesn't seem to get it?

Maybe the multinationals have really, really good lobbyists?

Duuuhhhhhh.

[ninenot]

Health Care will remain.

Former CPA's and IT pros will become bedpan-cleaners.

[Paul Ross]

Actually, the Smoot-Hawley tariff is getting a bum-rap. Even Milton Friedman has more or less admitted it.

Other factors played a bigger part: You have already noted appropriately the negative role of the confiscatory policies of FDR discouraging investment.

And then there were other discouragements and obstacles: U.S. capitalists had gotten sucked into Russia in 1925-1930 by Lenin, under his 'New Economic Program' when he pretended that he was abandoning communism...if the West would just, pretty please, finance the start of modern capitalism in his country. When these billions of U.S. and Western capital was ultimately nationalized at the end of the sucker play, a lot of the companies...including Ford which got burned really bad, no longer had the ready capital wherewithal to reinvest and innovate in the U.S. This contributed heavily to the stagnation of the U.S. economy post-crash...

The stock market crash also did dry up a lot of venture capital. This is not a leftist or rightist fable. It's facts that both Dow and IBD would corroborate. A number of stock prices 'came back' (as monies gravitated to the safe haven of the 'blue chips') but the over all effect was a drastic contraction of overall capital available for new issues.

[FITZ]

You can't rely on unemployment charts at all --- especially not comparisons between years --- the Clinton administration changed the way unemployment is reported --- employment used to mean a full job but Clinton changed it to mean any job at any number of hours. You can work part time for $5.15 an hour with no job benefits at all and receive government housing, food stamps, CHIP and many other welfare programs and you are counted as employed.

Also unemployment statistics don't count the other unemployed --- those receiving welfare and who aren't working at all, or those receiving SSDI --- which include many able-bodied working age people.

[ninenot]

Pennypinching, yes.

Take a quick look around and show me which organizations actually invest in their WORKERS--re-training COBOL coders to C/C++/Java, for example.

It's far cheaper to throw them away...

To its credit, GE still maintains an excellent training program for its entry-level white-collar employees; but it does NOT maintain (nor do many others) re-training programs for high-salaried individuals who need 'refreshed' tech. skills...

[FITZ]

How many people combined --- from all the many welfare programs, the NAFTA displaced worker welfare programs, plus the officially unemployed are there? Has government social program spending (federal and state) been cut because of the high employment? That would be a better measurement.

[FITZ]

Unfortunately, you are quite mistaken about what China and India are 'converting' into.

People have become very naive about what China is. The Chinese stealing documents and computers --- Los Alamos --- was seen as a problem during the Clinton administration --- they never changed their government but now we believe they are the most trustworthy friends we as a country could ever have. Chinese labor is so cheap because it is Communist labor. China is our enemy since the day it became Communist.

[FITZ]

Go back to watching the Oprah Show, Willie, until you formulate a rationale of your own on how we will deal with surplus workers in a high tech world. -- Can you even address the problem?

The Jerry Springer show would be better --- what do we do with the former assembly line workers --- and don't say they can all become health care workers or inventors.