Minimum Wage In Vietnam 28 Cents An Hr. 4 Days Off Month. Look At Your Competition.

[TheMastersNemesis]

If you are an American worker Vietnam is one of the countries where you have labor competition. TPP is meant to bring in these workers as equal partners with Americans. Hell in some countries the wage is 28 cents a day if that.

American workers cannot compete with such working conditions unless they are put on the same level. Unless workers start revolting we are in big trouble. Walmart is paying HUGE wages based on what the average Vietnamese worker gets.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

1. If only we were still bombing them things would be so much better.

[Boxerfan]

2. TARIFF TARIFF TARIFF...Sorry for shouting

But its just that easy...

We have done all this before & the solutions utilized by the Roosevelt administration pretty much all still apply.

And until we return manufacturing to the USA we will have a problem with a lack of jobs & sufficient tax base-Duh!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

8. Roosevelt worked to end overly burdensome tariffs

Economic effects

At first, the tariff seemed to be a success. According to historian Robert Sobel, "Factory payrolls, construction contracts, and industrial production all increased sharply." However, larger economic problems loomed in the guise of weak banks. When the Creditanstalt of Austria failed in 1931, the global deficiencies of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff became apparent.[14]

U.S. imports decreased 66% from $4.4 billion (1929) to $1.5 billion (1933), and exports decreased 61% from $5.4 billion to $2.1 billion, both decreases much more than the 50% decrease of the GDP. Thus, net exports declined from $1 billion to $600 million, while GDP was $58.9 billion.

According to government statistics, U.S. imports from Europe decreased from a 1929 high of $1,334 million to just $390 million during 1932, while U.S. exports to Europe decreased from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade decreased by some 66% between 1929 and 1934.[18]

...


End of the tariffs

The Smoot-Hawley Tariff was a reflection of Republican Party policy. In his 1932 election campaign platform Franklin Delano Roosevelt pledged to lower tariffs. He and the then-Democratic Congress did so in the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934. As the name suggests, this allowed the President to negotiate tariff reductions on a bilateral basis, and also treated such tariff agreements as regular legislation, requiring a majority, rather than as a treaty that required a two-third vote. This set one of the core components of the trade negotiating framework that developed after World War II. The tit-for-tat responses of other countries were understood to have contributed to a sharp reduction of trade in the 1930s. After World War II this undergirded a push towards multi-lateral trading agreements that would prevent a similar situation from unfolding. While the Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944 focused on foreign exchange and did not directly address tariffs, those involved wanted a similar framework for international trade. President Harry S. Truman launched this process in December 1945 with negotiations for the creation of the International Trade Organization (ITO). As it happened, separate negotiations on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) moved more quickly, with an agreement signed in October 1947; in the end, the US never signed the ITO agreement. Adding a multilateral "most-favored-nation" component to that of reciprocity, the GATT served as a framework for the gradual reduction of tariffs over the subsequent half century.[22]

Post WW II Smoot-Hawley levels reflected a general tendency of the United States to unilaterally reduce its tariff levels while its trading partners retained their high levels. The American Tariff League Study of 1951 compared the free and dutiable tariff rates of 43 countries. It found that only seven nations had a lower tariff level than the U.S. (5.1%), while eleven nations had free and dutiable tariff rates higher than the Smoot-Hawley peak of 19.8% including the United Kingdom (25.6%). The 43-country average was 14.4% which was 0.9% higher than the U.S. level of 1929 demonstrating that few nations were reciprocating in reducing their levels as the U.S. reduced its own.[23]
Presence in modern political dialogue

In the discussion leading up to the passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) then-Vice President Al Gore mentioned the Smoot-Hawley tariff as a response to NAFTA objections voiced by Ross Perot during a debate in 1993 they had on The Larry King Show. He gave Perot a framed picture of Smoot and Hawley shaking hands after its passage.[9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act

[snooper2]

3. pack of cigarettes are a dollar there

curious what prices were...

Pretty interesting site here-

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/country_result.jsp?country=Vietnam&displayCurrency=USD

[ChisolmTrailDem]

6. So, what exactly is your point? If a worker works 12 hrs/day, he/she will earn $20.16. Are

you saying that is enough to live on based on the cost of living Vietnam? And, btw, that is the reason they make much less and we make more?

[snooper2]

7. I saw the min wage and was curious what prices were there

aren't you curious?

They have a range by region-

minimum wage is 128.061 USD per month to 90.1117 USD


Vietnam Minimum Wage with effect from January 1, 2014

The Government has recently issued Decree 182/2013/ND-CP to replace valid Decree 103/2012/ND-CP.

The table below shows Minimum Wage rate stipulated under region level (in each region consists of one or more than one provinces/districts)
http://www.wageindicator.org/main/salary/minimum-wage/vietnam

[pampango]

4. Damn poor Asians. There ought to be a law keeping them and their stuff away from us.

In 2013 (thru November) our exports to Vietnam were $4.5 billion; our imports were $22.5 billion. Tariffs on Vietnamese exports to the US average 4%.

http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5520.html

That is hardly a trade balance that I would fight to protect (even though trade with Vietnam is tiny at less than 1% of our total). If the TPP was effective at imposing environmental and labor rights standards on Vietnam, that would be worth more than the 4% tariff (if waiving that is in the draft agreement). If it is ineffective in environmental and labor policy then it should not be passed and we will continue with the current rules.

If you are an American worker Vietnam is one of the countries where you have labor competition. TPP is meant to bring in these workers as equal partners with Americans.

That's essentially what Ross Perot said about NAFTA and Mexican workers and he was proven wrong.

[madville]

5. And the major CEOs here are pushing for

And the major CEOs here are pushing for the current version of immigration reform so they can import lower-wage labor into the US. It feels everyone is against the middle and lower classes here.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. So, how do we help raising their wages?

[liberal_at_heart]

10. This is the direction we are headed.