Not sure what Country YOUR from (with a name like Makloda), but I believe in free-market Capitalism and fair trade. You think the Fed is Free Market Capitalism? You think Free Trade with China is good for American manufacturing? Who do you think owns the Fed, genius? Lemmie guess, the 'American Public'!! And who do you reckon lobbied Congress to pass all those Free Trade Agreements in the first place? Our political leaders who can't win a local election without collecting a cheque from special interests first? Okay, Guy. You go back to sleep now.
Sure you believe in capitalism, just a couple of exceptions - Mom should stay at home while Dad is working and feeding the family. - China shouldn't be allowed to export to the US. - US companies should not be allowed to move manufacturing jobs offshore as they become economically infeasible due to international competition. - In fact, the US should not feel any economic pressure to move the average job upwards on the value/quality/complexity slope and thus - God forbid - increase productivity and leave low complexity jobs to emerging market economies.
For someone whose got such a 'keen' grasp on the sheer wonder thats Globalism, the simple points of Patriotism and US-centric policy ellude you. For most families, its preferable that Mom (or Dad) stay home to rear kids during their impressionable years. Maybe you prefer minimum wagers raise your kids. Hey, thats up to you. China should be allowed to export products to America - as long as they compete FAIRLY with existing American industry. That means tariffs on foreign products to PROTECT American JOBS and LIVING STANDARDS. Point 3 is Corporate Welfare BS. US Corporations have been allowed to take advantage of cheap foreign labor and re-export to foreign markets for a very long time. As you say, this allows 'fair competition'. But what they weren't able to do is set up shop offshore and reexport TO America - thus cutting out the American worker. Thats what the ENTIRE PUSH for Globalization was all about - outsourcing American jobs so US Corporations could 'monetize' their workers salaries. Duh. Your 4th point is pure Globalist tripe. Globalism was the invention of American and European industry to avoid being saddled with what-would-otherwise-be massive R&D investment on robotic/automation process. The alternative was to lobby Congress for "Free Trade Agreements" that required no capital investment or risk for similar profit potential - albeit destroying the Country's manufacturing base and middle class in the process. Low complexity jobs would have stayed in America, done by robots. That means all the ancillary support jobs inherent in manufacturing - engineering, process design, logistics, floor staff and product R&D would HAVE STAYED IN AMERICA. Not handed over to a Communist Rival because our Corporate Leaders have no sense of Patriotism or Loyalty to the Country. If America had automated and not outsourced, this Country would be an industrial and export juggernaut - untouchable economically and light years ahead of the world. Academia jumped on the Globalist bandwagon because they're comprised almost entirely of left-wingers who saw Globalism as the perfect vehicle to Socialize Americas wealth with the poor, helpless Third World. Its as simple as that, Guy. Think about it.
I was beginning to feel like the voice in the wilderness there. Good article. One key point is outsourcing drives down wages. And then lower wage earners can't afford domestic and forced to buy cheap crap at Walmart. Its a positive feed back loop. Second, a domestic manufacturing base is critical to retain and build intellectual capital (engineering, management, and R&D labor) that have broad spectrum applicability to manufacturing and other commercial fields. By keeping and growing a manufacturing base, we're investing and growing the human capital and skills needed to run that manufacturing base. That creates trickle-down benefits for the everyone, in terms of intellectual capital. Third, a strong manufacturing base dampens the effects of any recession or depression by driving trickle-through economic demand. Every dollar spent finds it way to a US producer at each level of the supply chain. This keeps WAY more Americans employed per dollar spent then say buying a pair of Nikes from an outlet, who buys directly from a Nike Warehouse who buys from China.
How long can prices of fundamental consumer items like energy (gas, nat gas, home oil, electricity) and food rise without employees demanding raises? In the short term people can make-do with less but sooner or later they are going to wake up and realize that their real standard of living is decreasing because their piddly 2% raise didn't even begin to cover the increasing costs of everything around them.
Demanding how? And from whom? The only way a middle class person can combat the rising inflation of oil and health care is to own assets that appreciate. But the typical American has no assets so he/she is getting squeezed.
You've never had a job where you asked for a raise? I thought the process would be self-explanatory - my bad.
Corporations and companies in general aren't going to be raising wages. That usually only happens when the company is awash in cash, which isn't the case for a broad swath of the economy. Some employees will get profit sharing but, in general, not raises.
Wages increase when the economy is 'overheating' and labor is in high demand by employers. That's when unit labor costs can increase and start feeding on themselves, creating an adverse feedback cycle.