"Innovation, Competition, and Global Economy" are bullshit words.

[kentuck]

If the problem is lack of jobs, then why did "American" corporations create more jobs overseas last year than in America?

If innovation is the solution, then why did the new solar technology move most of its manufacturing to China?

If we have labored since the Industrial Revolution to build up the wages and the standard of living of American workers, how are we now supposed to "compete" with countries that pay from .18 cents to $1.00 per hour?

When they say "global economy", they are talking about countries where the most profit can be made for the cheapest labor. That is the bottom line.

All the sweet words about "exceptionalism" and "competitiveness" are only that. They do not address the reality of labor in America.

The only way for America to compete with these countries is for wages and our standard of living to drop in this country. In fact, they already have. But we will need about 20 more years of this bullshit to equalize the wages of the other "competing" countries. They will use inflation to drive down the wages to the level required to compete with the Chinese. Only then will the American workers be able to compete with the other countries.

To talk about these words in such positive terms is only perpetuating the status quo and is a heavy weight on the shoulders of all Americans.

Let us first look at the reality.

[mmonk]

1. Good post.

[pampango]

2. Canada, Germany and other high-wage countries "compete" quite well in the "global economy".

Why not us?

[mmonk]

4. Good point.

The companies there don't close all their plants. And they play by whatever rules the government has in place.

[kentuck]

5. It must be....

...that they have much lower corporate taxes or...

...they do not ship their jobs all over the world?

Why do you think?

[pampango]

8. Taxes in Canada and Germany are higher than in the US, so lower taxes is not the attraction.

Why don't they send their jobs overseas, even though they pay wages comparable to American wages? To some extent they do export jobs but not on our scale. I have a friend in Germany who went to college 30 years ago to become a textile engineer. But all the textile companies left Germany, so she went back to school and is now a teacher.

The best explanation I've seen for why the German economy works is from a book "Were You Born on the Wrong Continent". The author suggests that "an economic model with more bottom-up worker control than that of any other country in the world — and argues that, while we have to take Germany’s problems seriously, we also have to look seriously at how much it has achieved. Social democracy may let us live nicer lives; it also may be the only way to be globally competitive. His anecdotal book helps us understand why the European model, contrary to popular neoliberal wisdom, may thrive well into the twenty-first century without compromising its citizens' ease of living — and be the best example for the United States to follow.

Strong unions are a part of Germany's success. Of course, they also have a strong social safety net and effective national health care. It may be that this combination creates a social cohesion (and middle class wealth and buying power) that makes it more likely for German companies to remain in the country.

Even with that domestic buying power from a strong middle class, trade with other countries represents 60% of their economy so they rely on exports for much of their prosperity.

[mmonk]

9. I have heard of that book.

I hope to get a copy.

[Hello_Kitty]

15. Once again, pampango, those things should be in place BEFORE you start sending jobs away,

[Romulox]

22. "trade ... represents 60% of their economy"--Yes, because they run huge trade SURPLUSES

with the likes of the United States. And we have concomitant huge trade DEFICITS with Germany and others. You left that part out (convenient!). :hi:

[pampango]

30. You're right. Germany's high-wage economy runs huge trade surpluses.

They even run a trade surplus with China.

[Romulox]

33. So, logically, we should reduce imports until exports are drastically increased

in order to emulate Germany with any precision. More free trade doesn't get us from here to there. :hi:

[pampango]

40. Imports are 11% of our economy, 30% of Germany's. They didn't get where they are by

fixating on imports, why should we?

[Romulox]

44. Right. But their large trade SURPLUSES mean that exports are a FAR LARGER portion of their economy

as compared to ours.

"They didn't get where they are by fixating on imports, why should we?"

Germany not "fixated" on building an export based economy? Laughable. :hi:

[pampango]

46. They are indeed fixated on exports, not imports. They import much more than we do

yet have a very healthy economy because, as you say, they have an "export based economy". They didn't get where they are by bemoaning the fact that imports are 30% of their economy, but by accepting that and creating an economy that succeeds in spite of it.

[Romulox]

49. Are you doing "Who's on First" now? A "Surplus" means more exports than imports.

:hi:

[Go2Peace]

52. They protect their workers. If a company is going to lay off the government gets directly involved!

They offer the company breaks or they pay part of the salaries. It has far more to do with their approach to their people and governing than a "competitive workforce".

You know that the competitive workforce meme is bullshit because we ****already**** are the most productive workforce in the world. So tell me einsteins? How can that be?

[somone]

6. They also have single-payer universal health care

Even Japan and Taiwan have it.

[Recursion]

10. We do. We're still the world's leading manufacturer.

And our current unemployment rate is similar to rates that are considered normal in many European countries.

[Donnachaidh]

18. Canada also has a strict rule that CANADIANS get the jobs first.

But we outsource our jobs to slave labour markets.

[pampango]

19. I didn't know that. I know Canada has 2.6 times the legal immigration per capita

compared to the US so they have lots of immigrants getting jobs there every year. I had never heard anyone say that Canadians had employment preference over legal immigrants. It is a very multi-cultural society with strict anti-discrimination laws, so that must get pretty tricky for them.

Do you have a source for their Canadians-first law?

I know that Germany does not have a rule of hiring Germans first.

[Donnachaidh]

21. you can probably find it on Google

I know of it bcause my DH wanted to apply to a plant in the Maritimes and was told that the jobs would be filled by Canadians first. It was the law.

[Romulox]

23. Canada has MUCH stricter immigration laws than does the U.S. Germany even more so.

:hi:

[pampango]

26. One would expect that a country with STRICT immigration laws would have few immigrants.

Canada's rate of immigration is 2.5 times that of the US and their percentage of resident immigrants is about 50% higher than ours.

"According to Canada's Immigration Program (October 2004) "Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world, although statistics in the CIA World Factbook show that a number of city states and small island nations, as well as some larger countries in regions with refugee movements, have higher per capita rates."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_canada

The foreign-born population in Canada is 18.2% of their total population. The foreign-born represent 12.3% in Germany and 12.5% in the US just about the same.

http://www.migrationinformation.org/USFocus/display.cfm?ID=4022

[Romulox]

27. Nonsense. One would expect that a country with strict immigration laws is picky

...and selects immigrants with an eye toward complementing local workers. And that one with a "door's wide open!" approach would not use such care in planning, and in fact might even encourage immigration patterns designed to undermine domestic workers.

Unsurprisingly, his is precisely the pattern that plays out; an exploited underclass of black market drudge labor is not a significant factor in either Germany or Canada's economy. Unlike our own! :hi:

[pampango]

31. Then we agree. I misunderstood "strict" to mean limited in numbers.

Canada is very strict with illegal immigration and very generous with legal immigration.

I think you are right that Canada does seem to view economic migrants as complementary to their economy rather than that every immigrant doctor, engineer, scientist, or whatever is unwelcome competition for Canadians in those positions.

These kinds of economic migrants are much larger percentage of Canada's immigrants than here where family reunification is stressed more.

[Romulox]

32. The vast majority of immigrants to the US are low skilled workers. Entirely unlike Canada, e.g.

Canada does not have the same history of low-skilled immigration being used as a bludgeon against the working classes that we in the US have.

[pampango]

42. You're right. Canada does focus more on highly skilled immigrants.

I think family reunification is about 40% of their immigration, so they must have some low-skilled immigrants, but not nearly to the degree that we do. Some in the US seem to resist highly-skilled immigrants, too, viewing them as competition rather than as Canada views them. I don't see much support for restructuring our immigration system to encourage more highly skilled immigrants rather than family reunification.

[robdogbucky]

37. Apparently someone in Germany is not happy with its immigrants

German chancellor agitates against immigrants

By Peter Schwarz
22 October 2010

"Two months ago, Angela Merkel, the German chancellor and chair of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), sought to distance herself from the racist positions put forward by then-German Central Bank official Thilo Sarrazin in his book Germany is Abolishing Itself. At the time, Merkel declared that Sarrazin’s theses were “of little help and counterproductive.”

Since then, Merkel has joined Sarrazin’s campaign. Last weekend, she told a conference of Christian Democratic youth that multicultural society in Germany was dead. “This multicultural approach has failed, utterly failed,” she told the cheering careerists and social climbers present as delegates of the CDU’s youth movement.

The chairman of the Bavarian-based Christian Social Union (CSU), Horst Seehofer, went even further and declared that Germany was not a pro-immigration country and there should be no relaxation of its restrictive immigration policy. “We of the CSU,” he declared, “are in favour of a German Leitkultur (dominant culture) and oppose multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is dead.”

This denial of the right of people of different cultures, religions and national origins to live together on the basis of equality recalls the blackest chapter in German history. In the 1920s, it was not only the Nazis who agitated against “contaminants in the body of the German people,” but also conservative sections of the bourgeoisie, including many church dignitaries. By “contaminants” they meant the Jews, who were later relegated to pariah status on the basis of racist laws and ultimately annihilated..."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/oct2010/merk-o22.shtml


Apparently "This multicultural approach has failed, utterly failed...." Echoes of the 20s and 30s in Germany.




Just my dos centavos

robdogbucky

[pampango]

43. True. The right wing in Germany and much of Europe is increasingly anti-immigrant. n/t

[Romulox]

45. Only takes minor encouragement to get you to "Oppose free trade? You're a NAZI!"

By the gentlemen's rules which govern the internet, you must now concede this argument. :hi: :silly:

[pampango]

47. First, the post was about immigration, not trade, but in Europe it's the far-right

parties that oppose both. In the US, as we both know, it is different in that we have opposition to immigration and trade on both the left and the right.

I didn't accuse the British National Party, the National Front (France) and the other far right parties in Europe of being Nazi's, just referred to them as right wing, which they undisputedly are.

[Romulox]

48. The thread is about the overall global economy, which encompasses both issues.

"I didn't accuse the British National Party, the National Front (France) and the other far right parties in Europe of being Nazi's, just referred to them as right wing, which they undisputedly are."

Gimmeabreak. You've a long history of not-so-coy attempts to smear anyone who should dare disagree with you by association with that lot. I've long ago discovered that the best way to undress a wielder of such passive aggressive attacks is to directly confront them with the concept that they are attempting to promote--in this case, that criticism of trade or unfettered migration by US citizens speaking from the Left is of a piece with virulently racists attitudes in Europe. And yes, the poster to whom you responded make a direct reference to Nazis.

As I was saying, directly addressing the not-so-sly message loaded into such passive aggressive attacks invariably evokes a sputtering retreat, as in your response. It's quite effective.

Now then, who is like the Nazis here on this thread again? :hi:

[pampango]

50. It seems that you're not denying that it's the far right in Europe that opposes immigration/trade.

That doesn't mean that anyone, anywhere who wants to limit trade and immigration is on the far right. Just that is currently the case in Europe.

Because of their history, Europeans have developed a different attitude towards the idea of open borders on the continent and the concept that one country's peace and prosperity is tied to those of its neighbors. You may not want that for the US, but it's hard to deny that is the path that Europe has chosen since WWII.

The US has had a much different history than European countries (particularly in terms of the periodic destruction from recurring wars with neighbors), so it is not surprising that our approach to some international issues is significantly different. Many of us don't feel that American peace and prosperity is particularly tied to those of our neighbors, because historically, they really haven't been. (Very different from the European experience) This difference in our histories is the reason that in the US one finds opposition to trade and immigration coming from the left as well as the right, while in Europe that is not the case today.

You and I know that "strange bedfellows" are unavoidable in discussions of trade and immigration. Since Bush and corporate repubs come down on one side and the far right in Europe and our tea baggers on the other, people on the left are bound to be stuck with bad "bedfellows" no matter what position we take. I trust that neither of us are corporate repubs or far right wingers. :)

[WinkyDink]

36. TAXATION.

[RB TexLa]

54. Don't you know? We are Mericans, we ain't part of the world. Competing with them is beneath us

we are Mericans and we are entitled! God bless America and no damn where else!

Sadly you find many who completely agree with those thoughts. :puke:

[somone]

3. The Corporate CEO's Random Word Generator

is a very popular software in this White House

[HughBeaumont]

7. K&R. The Cost of living Goes Up. The Chance of MAKING that living goes DOWN.

THAT'S the problem. Working America needs to be paid better. Executive America needs to take a giant pay CUT.

[jtown1123]

11. It was very telling that our biggest crisis, unemployment, was largely absent last night

[WinkyDink]

41. Maybe becasue unemployment is directly proportional to a rise in stock values?

That Which Must Not Be Acknowledged.

[ljm2002]

12. We need to build local economies...

...because ecologically it makes no sense to ship daily necessities such as food all over the globe when most places can provide for their own needs.

Not saying we should try to eliminate global shipping of goods and materials; but we should aim for more local provision. This should happen globally. If it means strengthening local currencies, then find a way to do that.

Local food, local light industry -- I see this as the best thing we can do to combat the corporate stranglehold.

[chillspike]

13. Competitiveness is not an answer it's the problem (nt)

[Javaman]

14. Stop bringing reality to the conversation...

people are still glowing from the flowery words.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

16. Yup.

Whenever I hear the word "competetive" in regard to jobs, I hear offshoring, reduced pay and benefits for American workers, and deregulation. :puke:

[SOS]

17. Neither my wife nor I can find enough work to survive

Later today I will set aside some time to innovate.
That should do the trick.

[woo me with science]

20. [phone]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=273482&mesg_id=276193

[EFerrari]

29. It's boot-strapping rhetoric once removed. n/t

[Romulox]

24. Another thread on the front page says that Obama wants the gov't to pay for the wireless broadband

infrastructure that is allegedly required for all of this so-called "free market competition". It becomes difficult to understand why wireless communication shouldn't be subject to this same "free trade competition" dynamic to which we surrender things like food safety and healthcare. :shrug:

[earth mom]

25. Couldn't stomach listening to Obama speechify more of the same corporatist b.s.

But the writing is on the wall folks: We Are Screwed.

The powers that be are laughing ALL the way to the bank and don't give a damn if we all end up living in boxes while eating cat food under the freeway overpass.

Turkey & Cheese and Poultry Platter are so yummy, ain't that so? :puke:

[WinkyDink]

38. But corporate profits are UP! Wheeeeee!

[G_j]

28. right on

:applause:

[Hannah Bell]

34. kr

[WinkyDink]

35. Precisely. American wages/benefits MUST drop to "compete" (hey, the bosses in China ain't RAISING

wages any time soon). That has been the goal of our laws, our corporations, our financial institutions, and our leaders since NAFTA.

REDUCE THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF LIVING BY MOVING JOBS ELSEWHERE AND MAKING AMERICAN WORKERS/UNIONS BEG AND MAKE CONCESSIONS TO GET THE JOBS BACK.

[leftstreet]

39. K&R

[RandomKoolzip]

51. Damn right. None of those words or concepts means a damn thing

to struggling Americans on the lower rungs of the economic ladder. JUST GIVE US JOBS AND PAY YOUR FAIR SHARE, YOU RICH FUCKS.

[Safetykitten]

53. All corporate code words.

[TheKentuckian]

55. and pretending to not understand them is beyond willful ignorance.