The Big "Globalization" LIE

[RethugAssKicker]

This is just my opinion... but I think this whole phiosophy that we need to keep wages down to compete with the rest of the world is TOTAL BULLSHIT propaganda... perpetuated by USA Corporations..

The US companies are the GLOBAL companies... Sure other countries compete with us gloablly... but by far, far, far it is the US Companies that are the big boys!!!..

They use the "we have a global economy" as a ruse to keep our wages low, for outsourcing and insourcing our jobs, and for EXPLOITING the shit our of the rest of the world.... Its all about money, money, money, ... more profits at all costs, now they have us all believing that if we don't buy into this "GLOBALIZATION" phjilosophy that our American economy will falter... More scare tactics !

I say its all BS!

[GOPBasher]

1. Agree. What will really make the American economy falter is

our enormous trade deficit. That's hurting the value of the dollar, and it's going to keep getting worse.

We need to manufacture more here. We also need clean, domestic sources of fuel, since oil is a huge percentage of our trade deficit.

[redqueen]

2. You're right. They make astronomical amounts of money, and

the reason why is they insist on the right to pay slave wages. We need a living wage law worldwide.

These fatcats can't make all that money without the sweat of the workers, and so they should pay those actually doing all the work (wherever they live) a fair share of the profits. Period.

[FILAM23]

5. A world wide livable wage sounds like a great idea but

as I see it very impractical.

First: Who gets to decide what is a livable wage?
Second: Who decides which country increases wages and who lowers wages to come in line?
Third: No country/organization has the right to tell other countries
what they shold/can do about their wages/economy.

[redqueen]

8. First: economists. (how is that hard?)

Second: Economists and social scientists.

How is this in any way difficult? You figure out how much it takes for a person to attain basic needs. That's it.

Third: The WORKERS have the right... what's this "country" nonsense? Ever since the WTO, there is no nationality to companies.

Where does this fealty to fatcats come from? It must die, now.

[The2ndWheel]

11. So what's a basic need?

The definition of basic changes over time.

You want to get a couple economists together to figure out what's fair? Alright, lets get Paul Krugman, someone from the Bush administration, a person from the Chinese government, an Indian working for an American company in India, and a few from the rest of the world, industrial and non-industrial alike, men and women, old and young, right and left, and get them to agree to what a liveable wage would be for the entire globe. Good luck.

[redqueen]

14. It has to be done.

Just because it won't be easy doesn't mean we throw up our hands and let the corporations do whatever the hell they want.

[The2ndWheel]

25. Didn't say we should

You're the one who said it would be easy. I don't see how you can force fairness in what was designed as an unfair system.

[FILAM23]

13. Sorry,

the workers have the right to set minimum/livable wage
via their elected representatives/govt..And NOONE outside that
country has the right to tell them what to set that at.

[redqueen]

15. sounds good to me!

as long as it works for the workers, that's good.

however, there should be global labor unions to facilitate bargaining power :7

[FILAM23]

34. As long as membership in the union

is not required. Closed shops suck. Joining unions should be voluntary

[klyon]

10. good questions

Tariffs would be a means of implementing.

Each country would set there own and decide which jobs to protect.

Tariffs have been used though out our history until recently. Until all local economies are equal in labor costs this is needed. It is wrong that we are exploiting very low wage jobs in foreign counties at the expense of our own jobs.

Our country should have the best workers doing the high priced jobs and leading the world in technology but what we have is a flood of cheap goods from cheap labor and no investment in our country.

[The2ndWheel]

12. I need something explained better

"Until all local economies are equal in labor costs this is needed."

"Our country should have the best workers doing the high priced jobs and leading the world in technology"

Do you want economies to be equal, or do you want our country to have the best workers doing the high priced jobs?

[klyon]

17. I think at the end all economies will level off at about the same

place.
Yes, we want high paying jobs, as many as possible. All economies will have a range and we will be no exception. The jobs with the least education necessary, the lower the pay will be.

[The2ndWheel]

27. So then there is an end game to globalization?

A global class system? I don't think we'll ever get rid of poverty either, so fair enough.

[Armstead]

16. US should use its market power as pressure

It would be easy for the US to exert pressure to raise wages overseas by regulation and/or public and corporate pressure.

We can basically demand that all goods entering the US adhere to basic standards for wages and working conditions.

No more Ipods made by people working under slave-like conditions. No more jeans sewed by 12 year old girls working 70 hours a week.

Countries and cvompanies who want to p
(As for the detailsa, it would not be difficult to determine what the equivalent of a livable working class income would be in those countries.)

[Deja Q]

21. Who gets to decide who lives, and when it's time to die,

why can't they give us a painless pill instead of rotting in the gutter slowly?

Or people who saved all their lives to retire; that money being taken away because the corporate executive, who claims he deserves his wages because he makes big decisions, now files for bankruptcy yet still deserves that he and only he deserves the money? And I'll tell you what that is: Legalized thievery.

[sinkingfeeling]

3. Absolutely. Just look at what NAFTA has done.

[stillcool]

4. I don't think globalization is anything new...

industry's have been globalized for a long time without much fanfare. Capitalism...maybe more the problem. In order to produce growth these industries have to constantly be looking for ways to increase capital and decrease debt. It seems like a foregone conclusion that cheap labor is a winner...regardless of the country one operates in. I have no idea how these multi-nationals deal with the different trade/tax/legal issues...their books must be a maze you never find your way out of...

[Deja Q]

22. There once was a saying, "Labor create$ ALL wealth"

Saw it on a bumper sticker.

[gula]

6. and going downhill steadily,

"They use the "we have a global economy" as a ruse to keep our wages low, for outsourcing and insourcing our jobs, and for EXPLOITING the shit our of the rest of the world.... Its all about money, money, money, ... more profits at all costs," it used to be called GREED.

Look at the list of where the 500 global companies are headquartered.

1 Tokyo Japan 52 1,662,496
2 Paris France 27 1,188,819
3 New York U.S. 24 1,040,959
4 London Britain 23 1,054,734
rest on http://tinyurl.com/ow7rh

I am surprised to see that Paris comes both before NY and London.

Bush's isolationism isn't going to help US companies in the future. If you nose around the foreign press you'll notice that more and more countries are simply by-passing the US.

[Deja Q]

23. Isolationism? But Bush and Bernanke tell us that is hurting globalization

How can they have things both ways?

[bryant69]

7. I think that's too americo centric

I know it's comforting to believe that we are the only bastards out there, but the truth is that there are huge europeon companies and huge japanese companies.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[The2ndWheel]

9. Everyone can't have everything

More access to more people means lower wages on average. Even if every country had a middle class, by definition that means there will be a large amount of people below that middle class. It's not a ruse, it's how it works.

[Armstead]

18. kick

This is a big issue and ought to be more central to the political debate at the moment.

All the wars and terra talk distracts from many of the other real issues that affect real people everyday.

[robcon]

19. Globalization is the most important movement in the world.

It's essential for economic growth, reduction in poverty, elimination of hunger, and is extremely important in promoting peace.

Discrimination against products/services produced outside the U.S. kills people. As soon as agriculture is globalized like most manufacturing (reduction of trade barriers, tariffs, quotas and subsidies by the West) the effect on world hunger and economic growth will be astonishing, IMO.

The U.S. sugar quotas, for example, causes poverty and death in third world countries whose access to the largest economy in the world is killed.

Globalization has not happened yet. When it does, it will be marvelous.

[Deja Q]

20. Only when it allows people to live comfortably.

When gas becomes 33 cents per liter in America, Americans will be comfortable again too.

It's hurting us.

I can think of a good reason why it's happening... but as nobody in power wants to be upfront or honest, I don't believe that particular perception for one attosecond.

[JHB]

28. "When it does, it will be marvelous"

You'll have to pardon me if I take a dubious view of that leap of faith.

It's the sort of thing propounded by religious fanatics and scruffy, red-bandana-wearing persons who thrust their fist in the air and salute "the REVOLUTION!" rather than globalization as the source of all that expected marvellousness.

And as evils of the world go, I think you'll find that among the things causing poverty and death in the third world, US sugar quotas aren't exactly at (nor near) the top of the list.

[The2ndWheel]

29. Endless globalized growth(of everything) on a finite planet

Can't wait.

[LWolf]

30. I don't know about that.

It all hinges, for me, on fair labor practices and living wages.

In reality, a "living wage" is different even inside the U.S. borders, depending on where you live and the cost of housing, etc. in that place. Globally, it's broader.

How do you make sure that every worker, no matter where they live and work and no matter what they do, gets a living wage, safe and healthy working conditions, and reasonable work hours? Global labor standards? Global labor unions? Wages set by local cost-of-living to ensure that working can provide a decent standard of living?

I don't think that enriching our government-controlling corporations by allowing them to pay substandard wages and neglect safe working conditions in other places on the globe really sets us up for world peace.

I also don't think economic "growth" is the direction we ought to be going. Local or global, we should be looking for economic stability and sustainability that doesn't count on constant population increases, more land, more resources, more energy, to stay in the black. The continuous growth model, in my opinion, works against stability and sustainability.

[skids]

32. When "it" happens, it will not be called "globalization"

The word "globalization" is nothing but rich folk code for sidestepping human rights laws in one country by going to another, and playing off labor markets against one another.

This idealistic no-bad-consequences free market you think of as "globalization" is not what is actually happenning, and we are in no way set on any sort of course to make it happen. That's not the plan of people that say they are for "globalization." Yes, they tell you that is their plan, but the real plan in their own personal enrichment and empowerment.

Until you separate the concept of that which you desire from the reality of everything the term "globalization" implies, you will be just a tool of the pre-empowered.

On a second point, the idea that the best course to take is for our individual local economies to become one huge economy is also faulty, and based on the same pollyannaism that has caused trouble in just about very sector of our society. The proper, well engineered approach to a durable and sustainable system -- in any sense, not just in economics -- incorporates redundancy and exploits locality (both esoteric and, yes, emphatically, geographic as well.) Separate cooperating but not codependent economies is the only system that will survive the shocks that the future has in store for us.

[citizen snips]

33. Globalization only helps the corporations.

[theophilus]

24. Different peoples have been trading for how long? The problem

is Malignant Capitalism. Overthrow the greedy corporation and let the people have control again. The idea of a Corporation has morphed into something very bad, imo. We can trade globally without destroying the environment and ruining the lives of countless millions. Let's do it!

[U4ikLefty]

26. Until there is an acceptible "Global Standard of Living"

there must be no sucessful globalization...IMHO, of course.

[robcon]

31. There is a "Global Standard of Living"

And it is horrible for the majority of people. As soon as the benefits of globalization accrue to the parts of Asia and Africa that are cut off, there will be a higher standard of living. A higher standard of living cannot be legislated. Asking for increased standards of living before increases in productivity is putting the cart before the horse.

Raising living standards means increases in productivity per capita and, usually, diversification of economies. China's and India's increases in standards of living are not accidental. Other countries can achieve the same growth if they globalize: find markets they can serve, and marshall their resources towards fulfilling those markets' needs.

[baldguy]

35. When companies start outsourcing jobs

does the price of their product go down?