To comment on just one sentence in Andrew's contribution:
>In my opinion, after listening to the many distinguished voices on this
>list, we are in a period of turbulence which will last for some
>time--perhaps another 20 years?
Yes, I agree, but I think the turbulence will last for much longer than 20
years--probably at least another two or three generations. It won't really
stop until the whole world has arrived at similar standards of living.
I follow with my summary of a recent article from The Independent by Hamish
McRae. This condensation will be one of many short articles that will
appear in a new type of Web site that will start life in the next few weeks.
<<<<<
3. FIVE NIGGLES ABOUT FREE TRADE
Keith Hudson
On balance, and over the longer term, free trade is immensely beneficial
but, over the short to medium term, there are understandable worries and
these must be paid attention to
---------
The violence of protestors at the meeting of the World Trade Organisation
(WTO) at Seattle means that the WTO is not seen as an obviously benign
organisation by some of the young.
In order to avoid the crippling protective measures and competitive
devaluations of many national governments in the 1920s and 1930s, which
caused so much unemployment and economic suffering, three new international
bodies were planned at Bretton Woods in 1944, even before World War II had
come to an end. These were the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund
and the WTO. The first two were established quickly but the last never got
off the ground at the time because nation-state governments continued to
quarrel among themselves. An interim body was founded—the General Agreement
on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)—and this was able to stagger along and achieve
some reforms until WTO was finally launched in 1995.
However, there are are at least five real concerns which should not be
ignored. They are:
1. A freeing up of trade of any particular good will cause temporary
unemployment at a particular time and place before the workers concerned
find new employment;
2. Increased free trade adds to the pressure on world resources, and if
every country were to try and live at the present standard of living of
North Americans and in their present style, then this would be impossible;
3. Some countries have such a lack of resources, and such low standards of
education and technological know-how that they cannot get even a modest
share of increased trade in the foreseeable future;
4. Increasing global trade also involves increasing capital and investment
flows but these, given the nature of modern financial systems, can be
rapidly withdrawn from particular sectors or countries at the first sign of
trouble causing unexpected unemployment;
5. The world economy is becoming increasingly dependent on information and
this, at present, is unequally available to people in different parts of
the world, effectively isolating many people from any immediate share of
increased trade.
Summarised from "Five reasons to worry about free trade" by Hamish McRae
(The Independent, 2 December 1999)
>>>>>
Many types of reforms are implied in the above article, but competitive
protectionism by one country after another is not one of them. If the
youthful protestors at Seattle had their way they would certainly bring
about a repetition of the 1920/30s in which tens of millions of people
would suffer -- that is, additional to those who are already suffering
(for quite different reasons than trade) -- and only hurt multinational
corporations marginally. (One or two of them might fold up, of course, but
then multinationals are being formed and are dying all the time -- it's
their natural state of existence.)
Keith Hudson
At 13:03 03/12/99 -0500, you wrote:
>I must admit that I am often torn between supporting those who want freer
>trade and those who are interested in protecting workers in core countries
>like the US.
>
>On the one hand, laborers in the US have fought for decades to attain fair
>wages and reasonable benefits for the hard work they do. Making trade
>freer gives management a huge leverage and bargaining tool: either take
>our offer or we will do a serious cost/benefit about whether we should
>move to Juarez/Singapore/Thailand, etc. Of course this is a threat to the
>livelihood of core-country laborers and their unions. I think of it as
>macro-level union busting.
>
>On the other hand, providing good jobs in other countries is not such a
>bad thing either. How many workers in SW Indiana complained when Toyota
>built a factory there? People were lining up to work there because jobs
>are scarse in such rural areas. The same happens when an American company
>moves to a rural part of another country: they line up for those jobs
>because for them, they ARE good jobs. If the jobs paid a relatively awful
>wage in that country, there would not be such a demand to become an
>employee.
>
>In my opinion, after listening to the many distinguished voices on this
>list, we are in a period of turbulence which will last for some
>time--perhaps another 20 years? After which time, the dust will have
>cleared, and most jobs will have workers who are paid the rate that
>benefits stockholders the most. Whether or not that result is a living
>wage capable to sustaining a quality standard of living has yet to be
>determined.
>
>I don't see protests in Seattle as changing this verdict in the least.
>It was happening before the WTO, and will continue whether that
>organization is abolished or not. As someone who does care about workers
>both in core and peripheral countries, I think the best thing is to use
>what little nation-state power there remains to increase the diversity of
>precisely the stockholding ownership that drives this system.
>
>Make more people owners. Active owners. Both in core AND in peripheral
>countries.
>
>Any other answers? Concerns?
>
>Andrew U. D. Straw
>Fredericksburg, VA
>
________________________________________________________________________
Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com
6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________
