user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
It is because all major corporations, be they American, French, Japanese, etc, had all originally earlier decades ago had outsourced their stuff to South Korea and Taiwan. As a result, the average South Korean and Taiwanese people became wealthier, living standards rose, access to basics on all levels of society increased, demands for other things such as democracy, worker's rights and individual rights increased. South Korea and Taiwan progressed because of this, and were no longer a source of cheap labour, etc. So it was that corporations outsourced out of South Korea and Taiwan, and into China which had become economically convenient by that time.
So because South Korea and Taiwan became wealthy due to the activity of corporations, investment, an in flow of capital that resulted from it- the corporations had to offshore to China for cheap labour.
The pattern will probably repeat with China as it did for South Korea and Taiwan, and the corporations will then probably outsource out of China when it possibly becomes more wealthy and developed too; probably outsourcing out of China into mainland Southeast Asia (Vietnam, Thailand and such).
I suspect China will soon be outsourcing to BestandWorst.
On this issue, I always like to remind everyone of a few facts:
1. Very little being built in China is actually fully assembled there. Globalization has resulted in a very convluted series of deals and tax breaks. A good example is that a computer may have the final few pieces put on in China, but before being shipped to China, that computer may have been assembled at various stages in the USA, Mexico, India, South Korea and then finally in China, etc., etc.. This is done for many reasons, many of which are low costs being offered by China and tax incentives offered to products made in an emerging market.
2. China does not own any major brands. In fact, China has yet to really establish itslef on the global market with a brand it actually owns.
3. China's manufacturing base is almost totally reliant on foreign companies. What they're building, they build for others and most of those factories are not even fully owned by China. China's policy is that a foreign company will pay for the factory and technically own it, but the Chinese government is given an automatic stake in the building. If the companies that are having goods made in China were to pull out and switch to India or Mexico, etc., China would be faced with a huge crisis.
4. Many of the goods you see that are "Made in China," that can be bought in stores like WalMart are junk. Most of them are mass produced, low-cost consumer goods and are not durable goods of any major importance. There's a huge difference between a throw pillow and a jet engine.
Voted : Because they are...
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEVIIIIIIIIIIIIIL!
Come on. You *know* I'm *right*.
"The only people profiting on WalMarts existence are CEO's and China (their leaders anyway)"
What about American consumers? and the Chinese people and economy benefit as well.
Socrates- You have a very piss poor understanding of capitalism. For years the wealthy have tried to lead us to believe that the only way to sustain the wealth we have in this country is to exploit other nations poverty. Why do we HAVE to outsource to China? South Korea and Taiwan have gained wealth and are no longer looked at for a viable source of cheap labor. So do we move on, like a virus, to another country that treats it's employees like garbage? The only way to sustain that type of economic "growth" is to exploit the underprivileged. Our country's economy is not enjoying success on the level walmart and other Benedict Arnold corporations are, because the working class are being shafted. The working class are the back bone of this country and if shortsighted neocons and their apologists don't wake up to this soon, all may be lost.
patch22us- I'm so glad to hear China isn't doing as well as Walmart and the other traitor companies that follow their business model. Unfortunately, the rest of America is getting shit on just as bad as China is.
kingAlfredTheGreat- If you think the Americans are profiting from buying cheap chinese goods and having their jobs sent overseas then you have your head firmly planted deep up your own ass.
The Hecksher ohlin model (H-O) predicts that countries will export goods that are intensive in the factor they have an abundance. America has an abundance of skilled labour, hence America retain comparative and absolute advantage in the production of goods using skilled labour/high technology. America export these goods, and import labour intesive goods from labour intensive countries, such as China.
This increases everyone consumption possibilities, and as such can defitely be said to benefit consumers.
The only people it may NOT benefit are unskilled workers in America, by lowering their wages. This is sad, but the labour force must be adaptable to such changes.
With the right social safety nets (provided by the government, welfare benefits etc) and investement in training unskilled workers into becoming skilled workers(+ education), everyone will benefit.
Overall, trade with China is a very good thing for the United states.
Oh, and Socrates appears to have a sound understanding of the outsourcing issue actually. Its not "exploitation", its economics.
You are being manipulated by one of a few myths that anti-capitalists and left leaning university students, with a poor grasp of economics, spread.
There is room for debate concerning the exact level of wages paid to third world workers, and their exact working conditions. But when it comes to the fact thsat those workers ARE better off with their outsourcing jobs than without them, there is no argument. Trade is GOOD for poor countries.
RobinGaylord- "South Korea and Taiwan have gained wealth and are no longer looked at for a viable source of cheap labor."
- So you admit that South Korea and Taiwan benefited?
"So do we move on, like a virus, to another country that treats it's employees like garbage?"
- How can one call it a virus, if it leaves behind a trail of modernisation and raised living standards? You yourself just implied that South Korea and Taiwan became wealthy.
"The only way to sustain that type of economic "growth" is to exploit the underprivileged."
- Here is my question: would there be poor paying rates and poor working conditions in developing countries even if Western corporations didn't go anywhere near them? I believe, for example, that if all corporations suddenly pulled out of China or if they never went in in the first place, that China's problems of working conditions and such would be existent nonetheless, except without the corporations, things would be even more arguably stagnant. China has changed so much in the last few years alone because of its economic activity, and it is predicted to continue to progress. And while China still has a long way to go, let it be known that not too long ago South Korean and Taiwanese made and owned products were once seen as junk, but they developed and are now respected. Japanese products, even much earlier before that were also surprisingly once seen as cheap junk too once. But it developed, and I predict China's will develop too. Yes, corporations are selfish and only out for profit, and yes, they should pay workers more, and are wicked to take advantage of low government standards. However, nonetheless, I must point out that from what I has been seen, their activity also unintentionally results in improvements as well for some of the underpriveledged people in question.
What is your alternative? More socialistic protectionism in the first world? I believe that more than anything, that is what unjustly keeps capital so concentrated in the West, and that is what keeps the developing world from developing. A freer flow of capital allowed for strong capital gathering in Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, and with this risen living standards: which did not significantly reduce living standards overall in the West.
- Actually, the United States continues to have a much larger GDP than any corporation.
"The working class are the back bone of this country and if shortsighted neocons and their apologists don't wake up to this soon, all may be lost."
- My mind is not limited to the United States. I desire to see the developing world to develop. I have seen this best done by the Asian Tiger model than any other so far. And 'neo-cons'? I disagree that it is just them that supports outsourcing. The moderate right does too, and so does the mainstream left-wing Democrats, as well as the libertarians. It is not just the neo-cons that support this.
Socrates- Unfortunately South Korea is an exception not the rule. Places like Mexico, India and China have not been as fortunate. The average citizen is still living in poverty in those countries despite massive investments by American corporations. It's the same old story the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Being a democratic republic helped South Korea's citizens escape widespread exploitation but it hasn't worked for Mexico.
Patch made good points about how China hasn't developed as was expected. As long as they hang on to communism (State Capitalism) I doubt the people there will ever get a fair shake. I disagree entirely with outsourcing. If American workers build a company up they should reap the rewards not be fired. Outsourcing is unnecessary and disenfranchises the people that allowed the companies to develop in the first place. I am a capitalist because I believe in meritocracy. The American working class has not merited this treatment.
Wow, are ypou trying to break a record for the "most incorrect facts in a single statement"?
"Places like Mexico, India and China have not been as fortunate"
Placves like Mexico, India and China have seen double digit growth levels since they opened up their markets to world trade.
"The average citizen is still living in poverty in those countries despite massive investments by American corporations. It's the same old story the rich get richer and the poor get poorer."
These things dont happen overnight, The point is that foreign trade IS promoting growth in the countries you mentioned. As for the "rich getting richer" nonsense, the workers in those countries are low skilled and poor, and are benefiting form their wages. There is evidence that a 1% increase in income per capita leads to a 1% increase in the per capita income of a countries poorest people, so they are reaping the benefits of their work.
"As long as they hang on to communism (State Capitalism) I doubt the people there will ever get a fair shake."
One miniute you are complaing about capitalism and "the rich getting richer", then you are complaining about communism. State capitalism is an oxymoron that is at bets misguided, at worst non-sensical.
"disagree entirely with outsourcing"
Thats because you see the negative effects of it, and dont understand the positives.
"I am a capitalist because I believe in meritocracy"
The Chinese do the job in half the time for 1/10th of the wages, thats the definition of getting the job on merit.
Letting unskilled American workers keep their jobs out of sympathy, when their are more efficient candidates for the job, is the very antithesis of meritocracy.
kingAlfredTheGreat- Do you know how State Capitalism works? The government holds a monopoly over all industries in a country allowing government officials to live fat and starve the citizenry. This is how China works. If you think that monopolies "merit" your business then you aren't a capitalist you are a fascists.
"The Chinese do the job in half the time for 1/10th of the wages, that's the definition of getting the job on merit."
Americans used to work for slave wages too. They also had child labor and sweat shops. Then labor unions arose and smashed these human rights violations. Corporations loved those days cause they payed us less and made larger profits. Unfortunately for them America has too many laws banning those illegal activities, but they don't have those laws in places like China, India and Mexico. Plus the officials all the way down to the cops are notorious for being corrupt so the laws in place may not be enforced.
"Places like Mexico, India and China have seen double digit growth levels since they opened up their markets to world trade. "
There is evidence that a 1% increase in income per capita leads to a 1% increase in the per capita income of a countries poorest people, so they are reaping the benefits of their work."
In 2005 the average American income went up by 9%, but that was eaten up entirely by the richest 10& of Americans. The bottom 90% all saw their wages go down 0.6%. A biased person sees that the average income in a country is going up and is satisfied that everything is OK because they don't really care to invest any interest. I strongly suspect the growth in those countries reflects what is happening here. The poor have jobs but are still struggling.
"the workers in those countries are low skilled and poor, and are benefiting form their wages."
You know why you can't build a TV or car? Because it takes skilled labor to build them. You've called this work "unskilled" which it clearly isn't and "low skilled," but regardless it's work that you clearly can't do without training. Regardless without industrial jobs there would never have been an industrial revolution, a rise of the middle class or a market for $100,000 auto mobiles (since the rich will buy far more expensive cars and the poor would be getting by with economy cars). If outsourcing continues you can expect to lose all the benefits of the industrial revolution.
If these countries want factories and strong companies let them build them the way we did. It's only fair.
My problem with outsourcing is that it's unnecessary and unfair. Americans built those companies up with American labor. American auto manufacturers were doing better before they outsourced than they are now.
^Some fair points.
"Do you know how State Capitalism works?"
Apparently not, I hadnt heard the term until today. If that is indeed the case in China (which I will look into) then that is clearly undesirable. However, it still doesnt refute the logic in support of outsourcing. One bad apple shouldnt ruin the bunch.
"Americans used to work for slave wages too."
They are only "slave" wages by American standards, the dollar obviously goes a lot further in an impoversished country such as China. I dont have figures, but almost certainly the wages those workers are earning are better than they could earn WITHOUT those outsourced jobs. Which is surely fairer than denying the right to earn at all.
As for the working conditions, lack of trade unions etc, those thinsg will come with devlopment. I agree that the multinational corporations should have some resonsibilty for improving the conditions of their workers, but expecting equivalent working conditions with American workers simply wont happen, with American investment or not. As the country becomes richer and people beocme more educated they will inevitably call for these improvments themselves and a legal infrastructure will develop.
"There is evidence that a 1% increase in income per capita leads to a 1% increase in the per capita income of a countries poorest people"
My bad, I forgot the important qualifier, the poorest people IN POOR COUNTRIES, such as China. There is proof of this.
"You know why you can't build a TV or car? Because it takes skilled labor to build them"
Im afraid that is not true. It requires a certain degree of capital sophistication, but the workers are essentially just manning the conveyor belts and welding the pieces together. Im not saying this doesnt require some trainign, but it is in no way the equivalent of passing the bar exam or a degree, in which the social capital invested is much greater.
"Regardless without industrial jobs there would never have been an industrial revolution, a rise of the middle class or a market for $100,000 auto mobiles (since the rich will buy far more expensive cars and the poor would be getting by with economy cars). If outsourcing continues you can expect to lose all the benefits of the industrial revolution"
Exactly, which is why the newly industrialised economies need this outsourcing to speed up their development. We in the west are living in a post-industrial age, witha comparative advatnage in high technology engineering and services. The high GNP of the UK, with its service based economy, is testament to this.
We wont lose the priveledges of the industrial revolution, because we will trade our own products (services, high technology etc) with other countries to aqquire them. Some industrial base should arguably remain for purposes of self sufficiency in case of unexpected political strife, but the manufacturing industry will naturally die out whether we like it or not.
"My problem with outsourcing is that it's unnecessary and unfair. Americans built those companies up with American labor. American auto manufacturers were doing better before they outsourced than they are now. "
If they HADNT outsourced there costs would be astronomical compared to other countries, and they wouldnt sell a thing. They chose survival over patriotism. Putsourcing is necessary to stay competitive.
As for unfair, thats a matter of opnion. I understand the frustrations of the manufacturing sector workers; however I also appreciate the benefits to consumers of outsourcing. Besides, what do you suggest we DO about outsourcing? Ban companies from doing it? That would be somewhat contrary to the ideals of the "free" capitalist American nation wouldnt it?
How have the old mining and industrial towns in Britain been redeveloped? Not by re-inesting in another industrial sector, thats for sure. The government has invested money in retraining the local populace and regenerating the areas with new areas of production, such as services. Its a natural progression.
Robin- "Unfortunately South Korea is an exception not the rule."
- South Korea... and Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong and if one goes back far enough also Japan. Plus one can include contmporary Eastern Europe. So how many 'exceptions' have to occur before a pattern is perceived?
"Places like Mexico, India and China have not been as fortunate."
- All three have been experiencing high levels of economic growth.
"The average citizen is still living in poverty in those countries despite massive investments by American corporations."
- That's because it is still very early. You could say the same thing about South Korea and the other Asian Tigers back in the 60's and such that 'economic liberalisation only made a few wealthy while most were still in poverty.' The reality is, it took the Asian Tigers decades and decades for the trickle down effect to take place, and it will probably take China even longer because it is so much larger.
"Being a democratic republic helped South Korea's citizens escape widespread exploitation but it hasn't worked for Mexico."
- ... yet.
"Patch made good points about how China hasn't developed as was expected."
- Patch's points were correct, which is why I did not challenge them. However, China is still in the process of transition, and they have the potential to develop futher than they already have in the near future. Not too many decades ago the Asian tigers were technologically backward too. These things take time.
"As long as they hang on to communism (State Capitalism) I doubt the people there will ever get a fair shake."
- There seems to be a pattern in which people are more prone to protest in favour of democracy and individual rights when they first have the basic necesseties of life- food, etc. As living standards rose in South Korea and Taiwan, what followed were also demonstration and such in favour of better governance. I believe outsourcing helps better the chances of rising living standards.
Robin- "The government holds a monopoly over all industries in a country allowing government officials to live fat and starve the citizenry. This is how China works. If you think that monopolies "merit" your business then you aren't a capitalist you are a fascists."
- While I would prefer China to have changed from communism to capitalism in a quick phase such as Poland did, I can at least see that fascism (which China most certainly currenlty is) may be used in a period of transition from communist to capitalist. South Korea and Taiwan were arguably fascist too not too long ago- yet these ended up being mere periods of transition.
"Americans used to work for slave wages too. They also had child labor and sweat shops. Then labor unions arose and smashed these human rights violations."
- Exactly. Every single nation on the planet had to go through this process in order to modernise. It is unfortunate but one does not go from poor standards to modern standards overnight- things can take time. And arguably the labour unions became powerful enough to push for change because the low paying jobs at least helped people attain some of the basics of life more so. Once the masses have access to basics it seems they begin to demand other things- such as the things you mention: history seems to display this kind of trend.
"Americans built those companies up with American labor. American auto manufacturers were doing better before they outsourced than they are now."
- Not really. Corporations take the natural resources a lot of the times from foreign nations, produce goods that people of those foreign nations have always used, and then sell these goods to these other countries for cheaper prices than the local products. For example, in India: historically they had always made their own clothes, and then suddenly the West came in, bought up their resources, sold them back their Indian cloth produced into clothing at cheaper prices than local producers. China is just doing to the West what the West has done to everyone else for years.
Socrates & kingAlfredTheGreat- I can't believe you guys are only too willing to fight to protect the slave bosses that are producing your goods. Any company that uses slave labor can have lower prices than companies that treat their employees fairly. Capitalism is not regulated by morality but by power. If we ignore our responsibility to purchase products that are ethically produced then we will lose our right to do so, since the entire market will follow the business model of whichever company is producing the most profit. Thus companies that don't buy Chinese goods for moral reasons will be forced to in order to compete. When you buy goods you are voting for the company that sells them.
"the workers in those countries are low skilled and poor, and are benefiting (from) their wages."
"The only people it may NOT benefit are unskilled workers in America, by lowering their wages. This is sad, but the labour force must be adaptable to such changes."
kingAlfredTheGreat
This is a lie. Even the wealthiest middle-class workers are suffering from outsourcing, capital flight and brain drain. The answer to China's human rights abuses is not to give more money to the people that are oppressing them. Their system is designed to allow the people in power to be the only one to profit from "economic growth." Walmart pays below a living wage and thus is reliant on the welfare system to cover their labor costs (more than half their employees are on welfare). If you think this is fair then feel free to shop there.
I'm beginning to wonder if you guys really have a sense of ethics or if you are only concerned with what other people think of you. I'm being sincere, this isn't meant to be an attack. Do you care about the plight of society or do you really believe that working class people are uneducated and worthy of suffering or even death because they didn't fully utilize opportunities that where scarce or never present?
|
|
