Reich writes: "I used to believe in trade agreements. That was before the wages of most Americans stagnated and a relative few at the top captured just about all the economic gains."
Former Clinton labor secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)
The New Truth About Free Trade
15 March 16
used to believe in trade agreements. That was before the wages of most Americans stagnated and a relative few at the top captured just about all the economic gains.
The old-style trade agreements of the 1960s and 1970s increased worldwide demand for products made by American workers, and thereby helped push up American wages.
The new-style agreements increase worldwide demand for products made by American corporations all over the world, enhancing corporate and financial profits but keeping American wages down.
The fact is, recent trade deals are less about trade and more about global investment.
Big American corporations no longer make many products in the United States for export abroad. Most of what they sell abroad they make abroad.
The biggest things they �export� are ideas, designs, franchises, brands, engineering solutions, instructions, and software, coming from a relatively small group of managers, designers, and researchers in the U.S.
The Apple iPhone is assembled in China from components made in Japan, Singapore, and a half-dozen other locales. The only things coming from the U.S. are designs and instructions from a handful of engineers and managers in California.
Apple even stows most of its profits outside the U.S. so it doesn�t have to pay American taxes on them.
Recent �trade� deals have been wins for big corporations and Wall Street, along with their executives and major shareholders, because they get better direct access to foreign markets and billions of consumers.
They also get better protection for their intellectual property � patents, trademarks, and copyrights � and for their overseas factories, equipment, and financial assets.
That�s why big corporations and Wall Street are so enthusiastic about the Trans Pacific Partnership � the giant deal among countries responsible for 40 percent of the global economy.
That deal would give giant corporations even more patent protection overseas. And it would allow them to challenge any nation�s health, safety, and environmental laws that stand in the way of their profits � including our own.
But recent trade deals haven�t been wins for most Americans.
By making it easier for American corporations to make things abroad, the deals have reduced the bargaining power of American workers to get better wages here.
The Trans Pacific Trade Partnership�s investor protections will make it safer for firms to relocate abroad � the Cato Institute describes such protections as �lowering the risk premium� on offshoring � thereby further reducing corporate incentives to make and do things in the United States, using and upgrading the skills of Americans.
Proponents say giant deals like the TPP are good for the growth of the United States economy. But that argument begs the question of whose growth they�re talking about.
Almost all the growth goes to the richest 1 percent. The rest of us can buy some products cheaper than before, but most of those gains would are offset by wage losses.
In theory, the winners could fully compensate the losers and still come out ahead. But the winners don�t compensate the losers.
For example, it�s ironic that the Administration is teaming up with congressional Republicans to enact the TPP, when congressional Republicans have done just about everything they can to keep down the wages of most Americans.
They�ve refused to raise the minimum wage (whose inflation-adjusted value is now almost 25 percent lower than it was in 1968), expand unemployment benefits, invest in job training, enlarge the Earned Income Tax Credit, improve the nation�s infrastructure, or expand access to public higher education.
They�ve embraced budget austerity that has slowed job and wage growth. And they�ve continued to push �trickle-down� economics � keeping tax rates low for America�s richest, protecting their tax loopholes, and fighting off any attempt to raise taxes on wealthy inheritances to their level before 2000.
I�ve seen first-hand how effective Wall Street and big corporations are at wielding influence � using lobbyists, campaign donations, and subtle promises of future jobs to get the global deals they want.
Global deals like the Trans Pacific Partnership will boost the profits of Wall Street and big corporations, and make the richest 1 percent even richer. But they�ll contribute the to steady shrinkage of the American middle class.
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
I think that as long as most of the people in the world are people we don't know personally, we will be playing the game.
I discussed this on the OWS chat last year with two anarchists. After drilling down into their core, we found that what they really want is person-to-perso n management of our daily affairs, not impersonal authority doing that for us.
I wish I could envision a just society composed of anything other than small self-governing villages and nomadic bands of hunter-gatherer s, but I can't. Not as long as we are who and what we are.
What I can hope for is a stable system of checks and balances of power. We have never had a perfectly functioning system, but we have had one that worked better than this one does. I believe that TV-driven politics and the environment of ignorance that nurtures it are the core of the problem.
Same here, but I'm watching now as violent anarchists (not part of the Occupy Movement) are smashing windows and causing chaos in Seattle amid what should be a non-violent strike.
These people are all dressed in black and hooded and masked, as usual, and once they finished bashing in things, they disperse and remove their coverings and meld into the crowd of peaceful Occupy protestors.
Unfortunately, their violent actions deflect from the valid purposes for the strike and the overarching reasons for the Occupy Movement.
Will the violence EVER end in the US? Or will it escalate, and use a righteous movement to perpetuate it?
This saddens me deeply.
N.
excellent point FireFly
- using the power of government to get things by force that one normally can't voluntarily get from others is a huge magnet for those who are dishonest and uncaring of others and have no problem lying and pretending like they care to get the power that they want.
Complete disconnect from reality - people across the globe can read and comment on this foolishness within moments and that hard fact totally escapes you casting a huge shadow of doubt when you do stumble across some actual truth.
But in no way should people let up. We need to be heard and as Patrick Leahy just said. "KEEP THE PRESSURE UP." NOT VOTING IS NOT A SOLUTION. And having a Rove puppet as president is not the answer either.
When the producers - those who have "exploited" you with their goods and services like iPhones, and polar fleeces, and their gasoline, and their computers, their medicines, their cars and their best services for the lowest cost and you have "exploited" them with your money -- when they are over taxed and over regulated to the point of economic failure and THEY go on strike -- you better be ready to take care of your greedy selfish selves for once.
OCCUPY OCCUPY OCCUPY !
Gandhi style:
Step 1: Sit down and get arrested
PEACEFULLY
Step 2: When released a few hours later,
repeat Step 1.
Overload the whole system.
Where will they put all these people?
Guantanamo?
Concentration Camps?
and show their true face.
(google Gandhi and see how he managed)
It reminded me of a magnificent point made by Trevor J. Saunders, in the essay with which he introduces his translation of Plato's "Laws," in the Penguin Classics series. Writing on the institution of slavery, which, we are disappointed to obsserve, many great-souled people in antiquity could never quite get beyond (cf. the recent movie "Agora," which turns on the troubled relationship between the brilliant mathematician Hypatia and her slave), Saunders writes, "We [moderns]reject [slavery] utterly; yet it was as completely taken for granted in the ancient world as the employer-employ ee relationship today (which may itself in time come to be regarded with as much distaste [!] as slavery is regarded now."
And yet, it will never be easy to overcome the systemic evil of competitiveness , since we are sexually reproducing animals and social primates. Competitiveness , and zero care for the suffering of outsiders, is our original sin. The strikers today maintain a hope that we may yet overcome that sin. And for that, I love them, admire them, and stand with them.
Correction: Was intended to be a reply to the comment posted 2012-05-01 10:45 by Martintfre, not directed at the article's author Mr. David.
-----
I am reminded of the 'ask a bitter man' skit of years past.
I submit that there is a different 'Complete disconnect from reality', maybe from being stuck behind a computer only connecting (or being paid to connect) on comment boards.
When speaking of greedy selfish selves, do you mean all of those people who became rich by striking?
Randian-speak at its finest.
I used to be unable to deal with any criticism, now I look at criticism as an opportunity to turn anyones criticism of me right back at them! So instead of anonymous thumbs down, what is your solution to injustice?
Why did Monarvchy change or fall? Why did Communism change or fall? Why will NWO USA change or fall?
Same answer.... it's the reverse of your thinking..not exist to expand....expan d to exist is the Robyn Hoood idea when it crosses the National borders in war to sell more everything at homw and rid populations to destroy things to make more labor jobs and force the richest to pay more to the machine than the machine pays to them.
Unindustrial revolution your need, out with GMO weedicides etc, back with weeders labor, out with Combine harvesters for rice, back with paddyworkers. Out with I-pad, Iphone, back with I can walk postie labor etc. Out with digital billing back with book keepers.