All I know is that if I came to the US, I would find a job and get paid far more than I do now. Americans just have to realize at some point that if you want to earn more than the rest of the world, you have to work for it. You need better skills, better developed infrastructure, harder work, protectionist trade policies, or some other way to keep ahead.
Living on cheap mortgages and credit card debt is a recipe for disaster.
Originally posted by Melanerpes according to chart #9, the number of manufacturing jobs remained more or less steady at around 18mill since around 1965 until 2000 before the recent drop - so it seems that an absolute "best-case scenario" would be to get that number back up to near 18mill again -- but with the population now around 310mill vs 190mill in 1965, manufacturing jobs would sti ...[text shortened]... end since 1965, manufacturing is going to continue to strongly decline as a % of the jobs.
At least one hurdle is the fact that the US signed on to the GATT treaty and joined the WTO (thanks to the 1994 lame duck congress).
Manufacturing jobs in the US pay perhaps more than $20 per hour, while similar workers in other parts of the world can do the same thing for $10 per day. Once we buy into the idea of "free trade", trying to keep these jobs from going over seas is about like trying to keep the tide from coming in.
Originally posted by techsouth At least one hurdle is the fact that the US signed on to the GATT treaty and joined the WTO (thanks to the 1994 lame duck congress).
Manufacturing jobs in the US pay perhaps more than $20 per hour, while similar workers in other parts of the world can do the same thing for $10 per [b]day. Once we buy into the idea of "free trade", trying to keep these jobs from going over seas is about like trying to keep the tide from coming in.[/b]
But is it really possible to build a tariff wall high enough to offset the advantage of having workers earning only $10-day?
And what about those many millions of people who have to scrape by on $10-day? In what way is it fair to deprive them of a chance to improve their living standards?
Originally posted by highdraw ...a welder...making 6 figures?...you know that has to be part of the problem. not that welding isn't an important and difficult skill....but 6 figures?
living in Wyoming is probably a lot like living in Saudi Arabia, but with beer.
Originally posted by TheBloop Well, welcome to Obamaville.
btw, we're not accepting it, as you'll see in less than a month.
I'm sure you missed it, but wages have been stagnant for over 30 years. And nothing Republicans are proposing will change that trend (in fact most of what they propose will make the problem worse).
Originally posted by Melanerpes But is it really possible to build a tariff wall high enough to offset the advantage of having workers earning only $10-day?
And what about those many millions of people who have to scrape by on $10-day? In what way is it fair to deprive them of a chance to improve their living standards?
Maybe they should struggle against their oppressors like the American working class had to do. Prevailing wage rates have little to do with economics and a lot to do with power structures.
US workers shouldn't have to see their living standards precipitously decline because workers in other countries are exploited.
Originally posted by no1marauder Maybe they should struggle against their oppressors like the American working class had to do. Prevailing wage rates have little to do with economics and a lot to do with power structures.
US workers shouldn't have to see their living standards precipitously decline because workers in other countries are exploited.
but modern technology makes it very hard for mass uprisings against The Oppressor to bear much fruit.
Suppose the workers in India form a big union and demand higher wages at the Scrooge & Marley Factory -- well ol' Ebenezer will simply move his operations to a country where the workers are more docile -- and the people that used to work at their miserly factory in India will be stuck doing something that pays even less -- (if there were alternatives that paid more, surely the workers wouldn't have chosen to work for Scrooge & Marley).
Short of a movement that can somehow unite workers everywhere in the world (despite the huge disparities among them) into one big union, the struggle in any given country or region will almost certainly be in vain. The only exception would be cases where the employer doesn't have a realistic option of moving his operations, and the employer doesn't have backing from the government or military to quash any budding union movement.
Perhaps the US government needs to intervene in other nations' power structures and economies until wages in places like India and China rise at least to something near the US minimum wage? But would the American people support such a policy? -- conservatives would oppose it for obvious reasons - but most liberals would also blanche at such an unprecedented exercise in imperialism.
Originally posted by Melanerpes but modern technology makes it very hard for mass uprisings against The Oppressor to bear much fruit.
Suppose the workers in India form a big union and demand higher wages at the Scrooge & Marley Factory -- well ol' Ebenezer will simply move his operations to a country where the workers are more docile -- and the people that used to work at their miser ...[text shortened]... ns - but most liberals would also blanche at such an unprecedented exercise in imperialism.
Mel: but modern technology makes it very hard for mass uprisings against The Oppressor to bear much fruit.
the REAL state of unemployment in America
07 Oct '10 12:11
Back to Top