Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The hidden cost of free trade
THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | September 18, 2005 | Jeffrey Sparshott

Posted on 09/18/2005 9:19:51 AM PDT by Willie Green

Angel Mills worked at GST AutoLeather in Williamsport, Md., most of her adult life. She cut, inspected, packed and shipped leather upholstery until she was laid off in June 2003 as the company scaled back local operations and shifted production to Mexico.

"It's sad. It's scary. I've been a factory worker all my life, and I didn't know what I wanted to do," said Ms. Mills, a 38-year-old Williamsport resident with a teenage son.

But by March 2004 she was taking a half-year course to become a state-licensed massage therapist. A federal program that helps workers who lose jobs owing to foreign competition paid for her training and offered extended unemployment benefits.

In July, she started working at Venetian Salon and Spa in Hagerstown, Md.

~~~SNIP~~~

Mr. Thomas said that for all trade adjustment program workers passing through the consortium, the average wage was $14.36 an hour before the layoffs, while after retraining it was $11.87 an hour, a decline that is common for factory workers who have to restart their lives.

U.S. Labor Department figures indicate that among the retrained, those that find new jobs end up making only 70 percent to 80 percent of their old wages on average.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government
KEYWORDS: cafta; corporatism; freetrade; freetraitors; globalism; nafta; offshoring; protectmeplease; racetothebottom; thebusheconomy; wagesandbenefits
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 521-538 next last
To: linkinpunk
But, the bureaucratic strangleholds exist & cannot be ignored
61 posted on 09/18/2005 12:12:21 PM PDT by TheOracleAtLilac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: superiorslots

Thanks for the tip.


62 posted on 09/18/2005 12:14:08 PM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PositiveCogins
But just one more thing. If we got rid of all the unwanted regulations and bureaucracies then no country would sign a free trade agreement with us because we would kick there buts in any production

It's like a line from Atlas Shrugged..from one of the villains of course, arguing through some sort of perverse logic that inefficency is actually a good thing.

63 posted on 09/18/2005 12:14:25 PM PDT by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: v. crow
Maybe she replaced some one who making more who is now being
reeducated to take someone else's job who will then be unemployed........
64 posted on 09/18/2005 12:14:27 PM PDT by PositiveCogins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

No one has asked the million dollar question...what kind of masseuse?


65 posted on 09/18/2005 12:14:56 PM PDT by abovethefray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PositiveCogins
Maybe she replaced some one who making more who is now being reeducated to take someone else's job who will then be unemployed........

....or going in the reverse direction some poor blacksmith is out of work.

66 posted on 09/18/2005 12:16:24 PM PDT by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued
What on earth are you talking about? Somebody has an unskilled job in an unimportant industry, the job is unprofitable, they get new training for a job that is actually wanted and do said job. What is supposed to be wrong with any of that? "But she makes $2.50 less than she did before". So the bleep what? On average wages rise over time, but only on average. Of course they go down in some industries and for some workers, all the bleeding time. Why shouldn't they? The value of the work is set by its usefulness to consumers now, not by what a given worker did for consumers 10 years previously.
67 posted on 09/18/2005 12:16:32 PM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
"I just don't know why some people just can't see that."

They would rather jump into the wayback machine than adapt to the new realities. Nothing is more sure than that things change and free trade is here to stay, given the state of the modern communication and transportation systems.

Over time, everyone in general benefits from free trade, although there are always going to be individual winners and losers when one is forced to compete. Competition and the market place are wonderful spurs to industry and innovation, which leads to progress.
68 posted on 09/18/2005 12:19:15 PM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: PositiveCogins
What in your opinion does a trade deficit have to do with the gains from trade? Is trade profitable inside a country but not outside?
69 posted on 09/18/2005 12:19:34 PM PDT by JasonC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: All; oldbrowser
let's review the definition of capitalism once again.

I think we need more work on this.

cap•i•tal•ism

Pronunciation: (kap'i-tl-iz"um), [key]
n.
an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, esp. as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth.

In the future, let's try not to have any more confusion as to who controls the markets and what system has the government controlling prices.

70 posted on 09/18/2005 12:19:42 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Clintonfatigued

....Free trade is not free.....

The marginal costs noted are insignificant when balanced against the benefits.

Free trade is not what gets people riled, change is what riles. The inability to accept change is a mortal disease


71 posted on 09/18/2005 12:19:44 PM PDT by bert (K.E. ; N.P . I smell a dead rat in Baton Rouge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PositiveCogins

Nonsense?


72 posted on 09/18/2005 12:20:54 PM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Nowhere Man

....We must maintain some kind of low income job market for those who will never "rise to the occasion".....

We have the job market, but the jobs are taken by Mexicans who don't do drugs and who come to work every day.


73 posted on 09/18/2005 12:21:34 PM PDT by bert (K.E. ; N.P . I smell a dead rat in Baton Rouge!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: abovethefray
Your question reminds me, I read somewhere where some country that had legal prostitution was cutting off womens welfare checks if they refused to take jobs as prostitutes.
74 posted on 09/18/2005 12:25:48 PM PDT by PositiveCogins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: PositiveCogins
...its not import taxes, NAFTA, CAFTA, outsourcing thats a threat to my job...

Dang!  we do have a lot in common, besides both being guitar-playing Texan construction workers.   I have got to tell you about Panamanian construction.  I've got the time sheets that prove that it costs the same per square foot to pay an American $25/hr as to have the work done by a Panamanian for $1/hr.

You are spot on by saying it's the government, not the foreign worker that we're fighting.

75 posted on 09/18/2005 12:34:04 PM PDT by expat_panama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: elbucko
Wrong! You really missed the reality in that example. The factory in Mexico is not more "efficient", the labor is simply cheaper. In the immediate, it made the American worker slightly poorer and only provided the Mexican a job.

I don't know the specifics of why a leather factory in Mexico is cheaper than the same one in Maryland, however, I suspect you are correct that the cost of labor is a significant factor. Regulationary onus is probably another one.

Why it's more efficient in Mexico is not my argument. It's indisputed that it's more efficient (meaning less expensive) there by virtue of the leather factory being located there by those folks whose money and capital is being risked. My argument is simply that allowing this to take place through a laissez-faire free market is the best outcome and will result in a net gain of wealth for Americans. The cost of leather products to Americans is less, and they spend the surplus money to employ other Americans to meet their other demands -- including, in the end, those laid off by the Maryland leather factory. Mexicans also benefit from this. A Mexican will take a labor job at the factor in Mexico precisely because it is the best available option (to his knowledge) for employment. The wage may be miserly, and by American standards it is, but if he elects to take that wage, then it logically must be better than what his alternatives are.

Trade is win-win, that's why free people do it, and do so much of it.

76 posted on 09/18/2005 12:35:32 PM PDT by v. crow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: PositiveCogins
Your question reminds me, I read somewhere where some country that had legal prostitution was cutting off womens welfare checks if they refused to take jobs as prostitutes.

hmm..pretty vague.

77 posted on 09/18/2005 12:36:10 PM PDT by bkepley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: JasonC
Easy. The value of the money earned. The buying power. Wealth is determined on the value of the currency in trade.
I may see your point here. Todays deficit may loose it's value over time as the currency looses value. But doesn't the deficit debase the buying power of the currency in the first place?
78 posted on 09/18/2005 12:39:14 PM PDT by PositiveCogins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Mr. Thomas said that for all trade adjustment program workers passing through the consortium, the average wage was $14.36 an hour before the layoffs, while after retraining it was $11.87 an hour, a decline that is common for factory workers who have to restart their lives.

Um, maybe that's because they're *starting* rather than *continuing* or *finishing* in their chosen profession? Wait a few years; wanna bet their wages go up?

79 posted on 09/18/2005 12:40:11 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Hey, Cindy Sheehan, grow up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: expat_panama

"I think we need more work on this"
I think we need more cowbell.


80 posted on 09/18/2005 12:40:48 PM PDT by PositiveCogins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 521-538 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson