America is bleeding jobs to death

[Sheepdog]

why are we engaged in free trade agreements which undercut the American Economy? why is it we have a trade agreement which allows a monopoly in Canada (a monopoly, BTW, which would be illegal in the US) to undercut wheat prices in America? why don't we allow commercial imports of prescription drugs, which come in the same bottle, has the same standards of purity, etc., but would be 10% of the price if bought from another country? why are Huffy bikes (which used to be made in the good ole U S of A) now made in China, where wages are so low the US bike manufacturers cannot compete? in fact, why can the same be said of Levi Jeans, which used to be manufactured in America, but are now imported from Mexico? you know what the minimum wage is in Mexico? Radio Flyers, the classic American red wagons, are no longer produced in the US. neither are fig newtons.

we have indiscriminately opened ourselves up to trade agreements with countries which allow ethically questionable or even down right inhumane business practices are permitted, and now we are taking it in the... mind you, i am not against trade, but when we our major export are jobs and we have an ever growing trade deficit, something is terribly wrong.

(and don't blame it all on Bush; he does share the blame, but so do earlier administrations, as well as our current Congress as well as congresses under those administrations. our policy on trade has generally been crap.)

[Christianotaku]

i like cheap stuff especailly when i lived in mexico you could go the stores next to the factories and buy it half of what it cost in the USA

a big screen tv 600 dollars back when they cost 2000+ in the usa

i miss that...

[seer]

we have indiscriminately opened ourselves up to trade agreements with countries which allow ethically questionable or even down right inhumane business practices are permitted, and now we are taking it in the... mind you, i am not against trade, but when we our major export are jobs and we have an ever growing trade deficit, something is terribly wrong.

Actually, I'am pretty much against free trade. While growing up in the 50's and 60's you hardly ever saw something made in a foreign country - a sports car here and there. And my neighborhood was doing quite well - just about all the men had good union factory jobs, and could raise a family on one pay check.

[Solly]

Let's see, America became the biggest free market economy after WWII, and attained a standard of living unimagined by the Brits still living with austerity packages and rationing, or a smashed Germany. America exports lots of its goodies overseas, in time including factories to build them. The rest of the world wants that standard of living too, and finds it can make stuff for less, pay workers less, and still do alright - which is what Capitalism, whether state or private, is all about - even to selling back to America, as Japan, and now China *cough*Walmart*cough* do. America had restrictive union practices, just like the Uk and Europe; the others didn't. America has restrictive import duties when it feels like it *cough*steel*cough* that favoured uneconomic American businesses over economic foreign ones. America hampers third world countries from developing their markets by dumping goods, even items that are illegal at home. And now you complain?
Physician heal thyself.

"Sustainable economy" applies as much to the West as to the rest of the world.

[TheOneAndOnly]

why are we engaged in free trade agreements which undercut the American Economy?

Are you sure none of these agreements are beneficial to America in some way? If America decided to tear up some trade treaty (like it does most other treaties) then wouldn't that hurt American exports?

why are Huffy bikes (which used to be made in the good ole U S of A) now made in China, where wages are so low the US bike manufacturers cannot compete?

I think the answer is in the question.

in fact, why can the same be said of Levi Jeans, which used to be manufactured in America, but are now imported from Mexico?

Why should a company pay you $6 per hour (or whatever it is) to make jeans when they can pay some poor Mexican whose willing to work more hours a fraction of that?
America effectively prices itself out of the market. An American has no more right to a job than a Mexican, or Chinese or Indian.

Why does America still subsidise its inefficent farmers at the expense of Mexico? See, trade treaties aren't all bad for America.

http://www.charitywire.com/charity123/04224.html

Mexico's 10,000-year heritage of corn production is being destroyed after just 10 years of rigged "free trade" rules with the United States, international agency Oxfam said today.

In a new report "Dumping Without Borders" published today, Oxfam says that Mexican corn prices are freefalling in competition from heavily subsidized US imports. Local farm incomes are slashed, resulting in rural suffering and misery from which millions of people are seeking escape.

[Solly]

Thanks for that link OaO!!

[Solly]

US "Gives With One Hand, Takes With The Other" In Africa

Oxfam-America
Tuesday, 8 July 2003

"All of us share a common vision for the future of Africa. We look to the day when prosperity for Africa is built through trade and markets."
—President George W. Bush, January 2003

As President Bush prepares to leave for his week-long visit to Africa, Oxfam is calling on him to address the enormous harm being done to the continent by unfair US trade policies.

While Oxfam welcomes the Administration's pledge of $15 billion to help fight HIV/AIDS and other diseases, the agency says the US is seriously undermining its own generosity by failing to reform the way it trades with Africa.

"President Bush extols the virtues of free markets and level playing fields, but the export subsidies paid to large corporate farms in the US call into question these ideals and force millions of poor African farmers into poverty," said Phil Twyford of Oxfam.

American cotton growers are paid subsidies worth $4 billion a year and produce vast surpluses of cheap cotton. This has contributed to a downward spiral in the world price of cotton, forcing 11 million West African farmers into deeper poverty as they can no longer get a fair price for their produce.

The US is also blocking any agreement at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) that could allow poor countries to import cheap generic copies of drugs to treat HIV/AIDS.

"By blocking negotiations that would give African countries access to the cheap medicines they so desperately need, the US is undermining its pledge of more money for the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS," said Twyford.

"It's a classic case of giving with one hand while at the same time snatching away with the other."

For more information, or to contact Oxfam-America, see their website at: www.oxfamamerica.org

http://www.charitywire.com/charity123/03417.html

I understand the HIV/AIDS issue is not quite the same now.

[Sheepdog]

Let's see, America became the biggest free market economy after WWII, and attained a standard of living unimagined by the Brits still living with austerity packages and rationing, or a smashed Germany. America exports lots of its goodies overseas, in time including factories to build them. The rest of the world wants that standard of living too, and finds it can make stuff for less, pay workers less, and still do alright - which is what Capitalism, whether state or private, is all about - even to selling back to America, as Japan, and now China *cough*Walmart*cough* do.

don't get me wrong. i do not want us to stop trade altogether-- it would be a disaster to the US and world economies, and i certainly would like to see the standard of living in developing countries increase. the problem is that many places, like China, aren't increasing their standard of living (except perhaps for the rich), and in fact exploit cheap labor to undercut US prices. when you have children working in sweat shops 16 hours a day, six to seven days a week, at thirty cents (US$0.30) an hour, how can US workers (or really, in any country in the West) compete? again, when you have children in China literally working themselves to death, how can we compete?

America had restrictive union practices, just like the Uk and Europe; the others didn't. America has restrictive import duties when it feels like it *cough*steel*cough* that favoured uneconomic American businesses over economic foreign ones. America hampers third world countries from developing their markets by dumping goods, even items that are illegal at home. And now you complain?
Physician heal thyself.

this is a fair complaint, and i would like to see us change our policy across the board. to few Americans realize that it is not in our interest to piss off the rest of the world.

[Sheepdog]

Are you sure none of these agreements are beneficial to America in some way? If America decided to tear up some trade treaty (like it does most other treaties) then wouldn't that hurt American exports?

i'm not saying we should tear them up-- this is a strawdemon on your part. i figured when i said "i am not against trade," it would be implied that i support a revision of our trade policy, not eliminate it altogether.

we do have a vested interest in protecting our exports, but the question is, have the benefits justified the costs? if not, how can we improve our free trade agreements in a way that both the US and our trade partners can win?

except, i don't think i'd mind seeing us tearing up our agreement with China, at least until their working conditions become more humane.

I think the answer is in the question.

the question was rhetorical to begin with. but just remember, next time you see a Huffy at the department store, think of the children who built the parts for it. how many of them injured themselves to produce that bike? are the eating and sleeping well?

Why should a company pay you $6 per hour (or whatever it is) to make jeans when they can pay some poor Mexican whose willing to work more hours a fraction of that?
America effectively prices itself out of the market. An American has no more right to a job than a Mexican, or Chinese or Indian.

granted, but what happens when the middle class American can't buy as many imported goods from those countries because the unemployment check is not enough? Now both the American and a Mexican, Chinese, or Indian are out of a job.

Why does America still subsidise its inefficent farmers at the expense of Mexico? See, trade treaties aren't all bad for America.

i never said they were.

http://www.charitywire.com/charity123/04224.html

don't get me wrong, i want to see the US cease using such underhanded tactics. i think we can promote good trade -- both import and export -- without being a bully.

[themuzicman]

The world economy has moved passed manufacturing. Manufacturing talent is a commodity, today, and anyone in manufacturing is going to find their wages declining in a world where setting up and running a plant is as easy as making cookies.

The money and jobs are now found in information and innovation (where it's always been, it's just that manufacturing innovation was the key 30 years ago, whereas today, it's not.) If you want a decent job, get into the fields that are still advancing innovation and creativity, such as technology and communication. These are the items that drive company profits, these days, and that is also where the money is.

Honestly, if the product can be produced more cheaply in China, free markets dictate that they should be produced there. Only if/when the American worker is willing/able to compete with the worker in China will the jobs come home. I doubt the American worker is willing to make that kind of sacrifice.

Michael

[Sheepdog]

we have indiscriminately opened ourselves up to trade agreements with countries which allow ethically questionable or even down right inhumane business practices are permitted, and now we are taking it in the... mind you, i am not against trade, but when we our major export are jobs and we have an ever growing trade deficit, something is terribly wrong.

Actually, I'am pretty much against free trade. While growing up in the 50's and 60's you hardly ever saw something made in a foreign country - a sports car here and there. And my neighborhood was doing quite well - just about all the men had good union factory jobs, and could raise a family on one pay check.

from what i've read, a major reason why we prospered so much in the 50's and 60's was because of our exports. free trade was promoted in post WWII America because it was assumed (and at the time correctly so) that the rest of the world could not compete, and thus free trade would only benefit us. but now the rest of the world can compete in many markets, and do so effectively. our trade policy should reflect this, but it generally doesn't.

[C. D. Ward]

Honestly, if the product can be produced more cheaply in China, free markets dictate that they should be produced there. Only if/when the American worker is willing/able to compete with the worker in China will the jobs come home. I doubt the American worker is willing to make that kind of sacrifice.

All very true. But isn't the key to effective free trade that it be fair trade as well? Solly's example of American steel is on point as would be similar examples from other countries (Canadian lumber and wood products, for example). I am a firm believer in free trade, but the playing field needs to be level in order for it to work. How level is the playing field between America and China, for example?

[themuzicman]

Well, foreign trade and foreign policy are fairly dogmatic pursuits, and while things should be "fair", the definition of "fair" between nations is tenuous at best. Most nations are Machiavellian (including the US) in these respects, but they tend to work themselves out over time.

There is GATT and the WTO, which is supposed to have some authority in disputes and such, but...

That's life in international trade.

US workers just need to realize that the economy is changing, and they have to change with it.

Michael

[Sheepdog]

The world economy has moved passed manufacturing. Manufacturing talent is a commodity, today, and anyone in manufacturing is going to find their wages declining in a world where setting up and running a plant is as easy as making cookies.

The money and jobs are now found in information and innovation (where it's always been, it's just that manufacturing innovation was the key 30 years ago, whereas today, it's not.) If you want a decent job, get into the fields that are still advancing innovation and creativity, such as technology and communication. These are the items that drive company profits, these days, and that is also where the money is.

this could be well and good. the problem i see, though, it costs money to gain the specialized knowledge required for these fields. i'm about to spend $17,500 for more education because my degree is not enough to get into the IT field i want to get in. fortunately i can afford it, but what about the Average Joe lower-to-middle class American? seventeen grand is a lot of welfare and unemployment checks.

Honestly, if the product can be produced more cheaply in China, free markets dictate that they should be produced there. Only if/when the American worker is willing/able to compete with the worker in China will the jobs come home. I doubt the American worker is willing to make that kind of sacrifice.

we couldn't if we wanted to-- for one the labor practices in China would be illegal in the US, and the cost of living here is too high for the pay rates required. besides, would you work at a machine press (or equivelent manufacturing position) for less than a dollar an hour?

[Sheepdog]

All very true. But isn't the key to effective free trade that it be fair trade as well?

sigh, i wish i had articulated it that well. more pearls for C. D.