>This is a very relevant question for New Zealand. Our textile, clothing and >footwear (TCF) industry has been reduced from 40,000 to 20,000 workers over a >decade, largely as a result of tariff cuts. Many of the remainder >are at risk of >being sacrificed to a FTA currently being negotiated with Hong Kong. This is >jobs issue, but more than that: most of those employed are women, Maori and >Pacific Islanders, and people in small provincial towns, for whom there is >little hope of other employment (leave alone relatively skilled employment) >if/when the TCF manufacturers close down. > >On the other hand the unions representing those workers - among them one the >best organising unions in the country - recognise the significance of TCF to >developing countries, and maintain strong relationships with >representatives of >workers in many of those countries. So their advocacy of continued tariff >protection is not one-eyed. (Incidentally, TCF tariffs are for practical >purposes about the only remaining tariffs New Zealand has.) > >What would a progressive strategy be?
Protecting a severely uncompetitive industry must cost money. Can't you abolish tariffs on textile, clothing, and footwear and spend the saving on education, income maintenance, & job creation for displaced workers? If the saving is not enough, you can cut foreign aid also. -- Yoshie * Calendar of Anti-War Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>
