[RD] Your Federal Policy Wishlist

[Timsup2nothin]

Ethical here isn't some nebulous concept, it's a standard of pay and labor conditions that make it a poor value proposition to ship components to Bangladesh for assembly and then ship the finished product to the US, rather than just making the whole thing in the US.

You can't say "you have to pay US wages in Bangladesh." I mean, you can, but it's absurd. If your boss paid you $400,000 a month how long would you work?

 

[Lexicus]

You can't say "you have to pay US wages in Bangladesh." I mean, you can, but it's absurd. If your boss paid you $400,000 a month how long would you work?

Well, that's the whole point. No one in Bangladesh is going to pay that. The point of this policy is not to ensure Bangladeshi workers get treated well, the point is to stop the US from bleeding jobs.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, that's the whole point. No one in Bangladesh is going to pay that. The point of this policy is not to ensure Bangladeshi workers get treated well, the point is to stop the US from bleeding jobs.

Ultimately, the only way to stop the US from bleeding jobs is to raise the standard of living in Bangladesh, or lower the standard of living in the US. Got a preference?

 

[Lexicus]

Ultimately, the only way to stop the US from bleeding jobs is to raise the standard of living in Bangladesh, or lower the standard of living in the US. Got a preference?

Maybe so. This is a good segue to talk about climate reparations I guess

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Maybe so. This is a good segue to talk about climate reparations I guess

How about them Lakers?

 

[civvver]

You can't say "you have to pay US wages in Bangladesh." I mean, you can, but it's absurd. If your boss paid you $400,000 a month how long would you work?

Funny, or maybe just terrifying, anecdote, when I was at a ford plant in mexico we (the americans) were talking about this same thing, of why ford doesn't pay the mexican workers more. Apparently ford company was very willing to pay them more than they current were paid (obviously not as much as american labor), but they couldn't do so safely. The plant jobs were already extremely coveted jobs in that area and I was told if they pay too much, at a certain point people will actually murder the workers so there is a job opening at the plant they can apply for. It's kind of like winning the lottery and everyone knowing who you are and where you live only you aren't rich enough to move away or hire security.

 

[Berzerker]

Jesus... I can see the logic

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Funny, or maybe just terrifying, anecdote, when I was at a ford plant in mexico we (the americans) were talking about this same thing, of why ford doesn't pay the mexican workers more. Apparently ford company was very willing to pay them more than they current were paid (obviously not as much as american labor), but they couldn't do so safely. The plant jobs were already extremely coveted jobs in that area and I was told if they pay too much, at a certain point people will actually murder the workers so there is a job opening at the plant they can apply for. It's kind of like winning the lottery and everyone knowing who you are and where you live only you aren't rich enough to move away or hire security.

I was working at a Ford store when they opened the plant in Hermosillo and heard the same story.

 

[Zkribbler]

... I was told if they pay too much, at a certain point people will actually murder the workers so there is a job opening ...

An interesting anecdote, but it sounds like corporate BS to me.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

An interesting anecdote, but it sounds like corporate BS to me.

If there were a place in my city paying $400,000 a month for basic scut work that anyone could do I could definitely see people killing the workers to make openings. Heck, I can see one in the mirror.

 

[Lexicus]

An interesting anecdote, but it sounds like corporate BS to me.

I strongly doubt it. The ability of Mexicans to make a living was really undercut by NAFTA.

 

[Cassius Critzer]

With unfair competition due to labor costs, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy of perpetual low wages and benefits. This is why Free Trade is insidious and then looks for progressively lower wages elsewhere until eventually that labor pool becomes industrial robots.

The best way to improve the political stability of a country is fair trade where the workers are given fair wages and raise their standard of living. Private property ownership creates stability and then political power as the worker has some measure of autonomy and is finally respected and courted by politicians.

Debt forgiveness is about achieving that and is not just for the poor as a wealth redistribution concept. Modern banking is weath redistribution as they loan money they do not physically have and thus absurdist theatre. If I can loan people money that I do not physically have myself, there is no limit to my wealth. And then when they cannot pay, I foreclose. It's monsterous.

Inflation is ruinous for all. The middle class has been eroded by Free Trade and inflation and that results in not only blue color jobs leaving but white color professional jobs leaving. I am totally serious that 80 hours of work today by two people in a committed relationship earn less than a man working forty hours in 1960. The bankers have ruined the middle class and doubled their workload.

American millenials are at a crisis point because they are delaying marriage and living with their aging parents. Why? Because they cannot achieve economic independence and it stunts their maturity. There are states where nearly 25-33% of millenials live with their parents at 30.

Now that was not unusual pre1945, as generations lived under the same roof and the home subsequently passed to heirs and they cared for their parents. But postWW2, America had enormous real estate growth coupled with the middle class growth and that fundamentally changed America.

That is the dire state America is in where we cannot afford to help other countries either militarily or economically as it's not financially possible.

 

[Bootstoots]

Yeah, I mean, much like current sanctions on doing business with e.g. authoritarian regimes and terrorist organizations hands every election to right-wing candidates.

As it is now, we sanction a few states for foreign policy reasons. Ethical arguments are used as justifications, but the real reason we have sanctions on Syria and Iran, but not on Saudi Arabia or even, say, Equatorial Guinea or Eritrea (horrifying regimes which the US doesn't really care about), is that they have run afoul of the American empire. We also sanction drug cartels for more pedestrian counter-criminal reasons, and terrorist organizations are a mix of both.

But the US doesn't establish sanctions that do serious damage to the bottom lines of multinationals located here - and that's exactly what would happen if the US started sanctioning companies for all the inhumane working conditions, child labor, and other human rights violations in their supply chains. It would, of course, also substantially raise the price of a variety of goods, which are subsidized by the blood and cheap labor of people in poor countries. Consumers would see that they were being hit in the pocketbook and get very angry at the government, and much of the outsourced labor wouldn't come back because of automation.

Then again, as I understand it, this thread is about picking a good idea to implement even if it's politically impossible IRL. I do like the idea of sanctioning or applying tariffs on countries that don't meet some minimal human rights standards.

 

[Lexicus]

the real reason [...] is that they have run afoul of the American empire.

Well, I'm very well aware of that. Funny thing about pretexts, particularly pretexts that are also moral appeals, is that they tend to take on a life of their own. They can be used against the people who initially deploy them for cynical reasons. For example, many of the claims that the US used as propaganda in World War II were then used by the Civil Rights Movement to get the US government to change its behavior.

Then again, as I understand it, this thread is about picking a good idea to implement even if it's politically impossible IRL. I do like the idea of sanctioning or applying tariffs on countries that don't meet some minimal human rights standards.

Some sort of tariff might be more appropriate. I did say that it would be best to implement this over a longer time period than all at once, to give the production-side a chance to adjust.

 

[Cassius Critzer]

If Mexicans only bought Mexican automobiles, then that results in increasing workers' wages. Rather than free trade, you want fair trade where each country is largely buying their own goods and services.

Not all countries have their own natural resources and thus some international trade must exist, but domestic trade is best. This ruinous idea of promoting international trade as a federal policy harms all.

It is also ridiculous to be at the mercy of foreign suppliers as that leads to political instability. And if say a country lacks some vital natural resource like petroleum, that is the natural impetus for future green energy. Otherwise we are using old technology that leads to wars in the Middle East and other countries that have petroleum.

 

[Lexicus]

Rather than free trade, you want fair trade where each country is largely buying their own goods and services.

That is a bunch of autarkic economic units, it's not trade of any kind. @MagisterCultuum got it right earlier (I think it was in this thread) when he said that "free trade" is misnamed and really generally refers to specific forms of managed trade designed to benefit elites regardless of what country they're in. This fact is then intentionally obscured by discourse that portrays entire countries (which, after all, are just abstractions) as the "winners" and "losers" of trade. Then of course sage neoliberals can point out that saying "free trade has hurt America" is kind of stupid, no one ever talks about the class effects of trade agreements, and the elites keep winning so much they're tired of winning.

It is also ridiculous to be at the mercy of foreign suppliers as that leads to political instability. And if say a country lacks some vital natural resource like petroleum, that is the natural impetus for future green energy. Otherwise weare using old technology that leads to wars in the Middle East.

Yes, GF List recognized all the way back at the beginning of the 19th century that adopting free trade policies for vital national resources required to construct and maintain the country's armed forces was a Bad Idea.

 

[Cassius Critzer]

The ultimate US sanction is halting all domestic aid except for sharing technical assistance and only in order to support benevolent leadership and when it actually and selfishly helps American interests. Why help the enemies of America? Decades of foreign aid have accomplised nothing but anger at our meddling in their political affairs to prop up their government.

America can be a utopia if we selfishly help Americans. It is local altruism.

Military aid is a boneheaded idea. That is the responsibility of each nation unless they are willing to pay, and that is equally stupid and leads to extortion.

 

[Cassius Critzer]

Does it make a lick of sense for America to sell petroleum to others? No. It is a limited and declining resource and thus is priceless. That is the impetus for future energy policy for safe fusion energy or better solar using domestic resources.

That is as stupid as Hillary selling 10% of uranium deposits to the Russians. What coud be more destabilizing?

And if other nations lack critical resources, that is their impetus to develop green energy. It will never be solved if we use international energy trade to keep this antiquated scheme going. And you don't want to consider the horrendous agricultural effects of limited oil.

 

[civvver]

An interesting anecdote, but it sounds like corporate BS to me.

I don't think so at all. Have you been to mexico outside of the resorts? It's not nice and scary. Shady people would assault you for your iphone in a heartbeat. You take chauffeurs from your hotel everywhere. The plants have barbed wire and armed guards with rifles. I was at the one in cuautitlan.

 

[civvver]

Inflation is ruinous for all. The middle class has been eroded by Free Trade and inflation and that results in not only blue color jobs leaving but white color professional jobs leaving. I am totally serious that 80 hours of work today by two people in a committed relationship earn less than a man working forty hours in 1960. The bankers have ruined the middle class and doubled their workload.

Do you have facts to link? Other than housing in urban areas and their outlying suburbs, what's really skyrocketed in price?

Stuff like cars seem expensive but compared to household wages they have actually gone down, even as quality and value have gone up. Though of course that may be due to importing cars from other countries, but still, does it matter if your wages stagnate if the price of everything else goes down?

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_DLIvw6mZGBU/SRDPkT-yq7I/AAAAAAAAAP0/OcJTOJF61lU/s400/comerica.jpg

Maybe real wages have gone down but not to the tune of double as you claim.