Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Globalization Wolf?

Intellectual Conservative ^ | 05 February 2004 | Julius Wroblewski

[inquest]

This article ignores the real danger from economic globalization: political globalization. As trade barriers come down, multinational corporations will have extra freedom to maneuver away from national regulatory apparatus. Those who think this will result in a new era of competitive deregulation are sadly mistaken. The political class isn't going to just sit by and let things go unregulated. Instead, they're going to demand - and get - international regulatory apparatus.

I mean, just look at the EU.

[GOP_1900AD]

Corporate leaders, with allegience to no one nation - what is do difficult to understand? Globalism is a mental condition suffered by modernist, utopian, liberal managers, who have been brainwashed into thinking that "nationalism" is some sort of malady which affects solely rednecks and fascists. Just yesterday, an exec with which I am profoundly familiar, was bragging about how he is moving to Beijing. What ever happened to corporate leaders with truly conservative values, and who are pillars of the community? Today's ones don't know what a community is - their community is a virtual one, spanning the entire globe. Sick.

[GOP_1900AD]

"do difficult" > "so difficult" (Doh!)

[Paulie]

I agree with you.

[Mears]

I was nodding my head in agreement with everything you said so didn't even notice your typo.

This outsourcing thing scares me to death.The more they outsource the less many Americans will have to spend and a large consumer base will be lost.

Do they care? Of course not,look at the consumer base in India and China.

Sad,isn't it? We are rapidly losing our middle class.

[lasereye]

The more they outsource the less many Americans will have to spend and a large consumer base will be lost.

If you bothered to read the article in its entirety you would see that answer to that argument. There are not a finite number of jobs, contrary to what most people think.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[blowfish]

There are not a finite number of jobs, contrary to what most people think.

Absolutely not!
"Would you like fries with that?"

[Dog Gone]

Great article.

[lasereye]

I expected somebody would come back with a cliched response with that. There's not a finite number of decent paying jobs either. The idea that everyone's going to be hamburger flipping soon was going around a quarter century ago.

[inquest]

The fact remains that the process is causing tremendous displacements in the here and now. The new high-paying jobs you speak of will take time to materialize. In the meantime, foreign governments - in countries where the distinction between the private and public sectors is a bit hazy, if you catch my drift - are going to gain further influence on our economic affairs, which could be very bad news for long-term stability - and ultimately for our sovereignty and freedom.

[Schattie]

Ok, so how does the current situation pare with comparative advantage? Oh wait, Ricardo said that for free trade theory to work the factors of production would have to immobile.

When the factors of production are mobile then the nations with the greatest absolute advantage will benefit to the detriment of those nations which are wealthier. It is a known and proven fact that regions can have a decrease in standard of living because of an economic disadvantage. To suggest that regions can have a lower standard of living due to free trade and nations cannot is ludicrous.

The US and the West in general will experience a relative and real drop in standard of living... perhaps for the next 20 years or so. As social mobility is destroyed, the result will be polical and economic chaos.

I hate to say it but the only answer is protectionism.

[Schattie]

What new, wealth-generating jobs can be created when the US is at an obvious absolute disadvantage? Now that all levels of wealth-creating jobs are completely mobile, those nations with the greatest absolute advantage will benefit to the detriment of other nations.

The result? A lowering of the standard of living in Western nations... maybe gradual, maybe rapid. But you will feel it. Have fun. :)

[lelio]

Williams pointed out that since 1970 that industry “lost” eighty percent of its switchboard operators, while now handling ten times the number of long distance calls. As anyone should know, this was done through automation.

Yes, automation brought about by R&D and investing in your company, which in turn produced growth. What investment in this country is there when you just ship jobs overseas as its cheaper to do work there?

Does Williams think that this automation just fell from the sky without Americans working on it?

[e_castillo]

telecommunications. Williams pointed out that since 1970 that industry “lost” eighty percent of its switchboard operators, while now handling ten times the number of long distance calls

VOIP will again force change on whats left of the Telco's but the real problem that Williams and these others refuse to face is unfair and predatory competition from such countries as France. What if the US government decided to aid our Telecommunications companies in ways which would gauranty technological leadership? Pay for R&D help out with Capital... What would China or Mexico do then?

I am so tired of these two dimensional arguments and the simpleton politicians which adhere to them.

[Cacique]

It is no accident that the explosive rise of mutual funds coincided with the Clintonistas rise to power. Direct ownership of stocks meant stockholders could vote on the running of their companies. The mutual funds separated the owners of the means of production from their property by putting up a wall run by a socialist corporate class that maintains an incestuous relationship with each other. They have learned what Hitler and the Nazis as well as fascists understood. It is not the ownership of capital that counts, what counts is who controls it.

Devoid of any national loyalty with corporations being owned by transnational entities run by a transnational corporate class none of these companies feel they should be loyal to anyone but themselves.

It is an elite class which contributes large amounts of money to the political parties in their respective countries. Most western governments are already bought and paid for. No matter who is in power they will put forth policies to insure their growing control.

They delude themselves into thinking that they will always be in control. They are sorely mistaken, of such stuff revolutions and upheavals are made.

[Clemenza]

The goal for us Younguns is to become PART of the elite and rule the world...

[GOP_1900AD]

At some point, the anti Western powers will stop pretending to be going along with globalism and there will be war. It will be a slaughter, because the West will have pared military power down to low levels, and the West will be undermined economically and culturally by the globalist system. Therefore, I must conclude that the Westerners who are "elites" in this system are only pawns in the game. Once the objectives of taking the West's wealth and technology, and making the West supply-chain-dependent on anti Western states have been accomplished, the charade of global economism will be dropped by our enemies, and we'll be quickly reminded how nationalism, applied against us, is a potent force to reckon with. Thomas L. Friedman is a buffoon and a snake oil salesmen, and Francis Fukuyama is an infantile teller of tall tales. If it was not such a tragedy, it would be a joke.

[hawk1]

Reading the entire article still does not help the problem. The notion that the jobs that are being lost will be replaced with better jobs apparently is not happening. Eventually, an equilibrium would be reached to stop outsourcing but at this point it will be too late.