YOU WANT A JOB THEN LET THIS CHINESE CORPORATION IN THE US HIRE YOU BUT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO IGNORE ALL US LABOR AND JUSTICE LAWS THAT TAKE AWAY PROFITS THEY COULD EARN IF THEY OPERATED IN THEIR OWN NATION.
So, the idea that these high-skilled or any immigrant being brought to the US for a better life is totally fictional. It has been and it will get worse if TPP is allowed to become installed.
IT IS NOT PROGRESSIVE TO CREATE A SYSTEM OF WORLD-WIDE MIGRANT WORKERS ALL TO CHEAPEN THE LABOR FORCE OF DEVELOPED WORLD NATIONS ONLY TO MAXIMIZE CORPORATE PROFITS.
What Hispanic and other immigrants already in the US need is CITIZENSHIP NOW. We understand that neither Clinton neo-liberals nor Republicans will allow this so what a progressive liberal state would do is protect the workplace rights of immigrants already here. Stop allowing them to be fleeced of wages, be paid less, and be abused in the workplace and this can be done on a local and state level. If a state allows all this abuse for immigrants----it is not a progressive state.
We need to educate that when workplace equality is embraced for all then corporations see no need to bring labor from elsewhere and everyone has an equal opportunity for employment-----IT IS NOT A BAD DEAL FOR US WORKERS. What makes this hard to accept is the control global corporations have been given on creating high unemployment and job scarcity and none of this has to be the case. Work to change bad economic policy before we fight with one another for jobs!
'Because of the importance of well-managed migration',
First, we need to remember that the current high unemployment and stagnant economy is a direct result of Clinton neo-liberalism and global market neo-cons. It is not immigrants-----it is not a shortage of 'business-friendly' policy-----it is global free market policy. US immigrant labor would be glad that Americans work to change this!
Globalization Creates Unemployment: American Job Loss Is Permanent
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Global Research, October 28, 2010 28 October 2010
Now that a few Democrats and the remnants of the AFL-CIO are waking up to the destructive impact of jobs offshoring on the US economy and millions of American lives, globalism’s advocates have resurrected Dartmouth economist Matthew Slaughter’s discredited finding of several years ago that jobs offshoring by US corporations increases employment and wages in the US.
At the time I exposed Slaughter’s mistakes, but economists dependent on corporate largess understood that it was more profitable to drink Slaughter’s kool-aid than to tell the truth. Recently the US Chamber of Commerce rolled out Slaughter’s false argument as a weapon against House Democrats Sandy Levin and Tim Ryan, and the Wall Street Journal had Bill Clinton’s Defense Secretary, William S. Cohen, regurgitate Slaughter’s claim on its op-ed page on October 12.
I sent a letter to the Wall Street Journal, but the editors were not interested in what a former associate editor and columnist for the paper and President Reagan’s Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy had to say. The facade of lies has to be maintained at all costs. There can be no questioning that globalism is good for us.
Cohen told the Journal’s readers that “the fact is that for every job outsourced to Bangalore, nearly two jobs are created in Buffalo and other American cities.” I bet Buffalo “and other American cities” would like to know where these jobs are. Maybe Slaughter, Cohen, and the Chamber of Commerce can tell them.
Last May I was in St. Louis and was struck by block after block of deserted and boarded up homes, deserted factories and office buildings, even vacant downtown storefronts.
Detroit is trying to shrink itself by 40 square miles. On October 25, 60 Minutes had a program on unemployment in Silicon Valley, where formerly high-earning professionals have been out of work for two years and today cannot even find part-time $9 an hour jobs at Target.
The claim that jobs offshoring by US corporations increases domestic employment in the US is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated. As I demonstrated in my syndicated column at the time and again in my book, How The Economy Was Lost (2010), Slaughter reached his erroneous conclusion by counting the growth in multinational jobs in the U.S. without adjusting the data to reflect the acquisition of existing firms by multinationals and for existing firms turning themselves into multinationals by establishing foreign operations for the first time. There was no new multinational employment in the U.S. Existing employment simply moved into the multinational category from a change in the status of firms to multinational.
If Slaughter (or Cohen) had consulted the Bureau of Labor Statistics nonfarm payroll jobs data, he would have been unable to locate the 5.5 million jobs that were allegedly created. In my columns I have reported for about a decade the details of new jobs creation in the U.S. as revealed by the BLS data, as has Washington economist Charles McMillion. Over the last decade, the net new jobs created in the U.S. have nothing to do with multinational corporations. The jobs consist of waitresses and bartenders, health care and social services (largely ambulatory health care), retail clerks, and while the bubble lasted, construction.
These are not the high-tech, high-paying jobs that the “New Economy” promised, and they are not jobs that can be associated with global corporations. Moreover, these domestic service jobs are themselves scarce.
But facts have nothing to do with it. Did Slaughter, Cohen, the Chamber, and the Wall Street Journal ever wonder how it was possible to have simultaneously millions of new good-paying middle class jobs and virtually the worst income inequality in the developed world with all income gains accruing to the mega-rich?
In mid-October Treasury Secretary and Goldman Sachs puppet Tim Geithner gave a speech in California in the backyard, or former backyard, of 60 Minutes’ Silicon Valley dispossessed upper middle class interviewees in which Geithner said that the solution is to “educate more engineers.”
We already have more engineers than we have jobs for them. In a recent poll a Philadelphia marketing and research firm, Twentysomething, found that 85% of recent college graduates planned to move back home with parents. Even if members of the “boomeranger generation” find jobs, the jobs don’t pay enough to support an independent existence.
The financial media is useless. Reporters repeat the lie that the unemployment rate is 9.6%. This is a specially concocted unemployment rate that does not count most of the unemployed. The government’s own more inclusive rate stands at 17%. Statistician John Williams, who counts unemployment the way it is supposed to be counted, finds the unemployment rate to be 22%.
The financial press turns bad news into good news. Recently a monthly gain of 64,000 new private sector jobs was hyped, jobs that were more than offset by the loss in government jobs. Moreover, it takes around 150,000 new jobs each month to keep pace with labor force growth. In other words, 100,000 new jobs each month would be a 50,000 jobs deficit.
The idiocy of the financial press is demonstrated by the following two headlines which appeared on October 19 on the same Bloomberg page:
“Dollar Index Appreciates as Geithner Supports Currency Strength”
“Geithner Weak Dollar Seen as U.S. Recovery Route”
To keep eyes off of the loss of jobs to offshoring, policymakers and their minions in the financial press blame US unemployment on alleged currency manipulation by China and on the financial crisis. The financial crisis itself is blamed by Republicans on low income Americans who took out mortgages that they could not afford.
In other words, the problem is China and the greedy American poor who tried to live above their means. With this being the American mindset, you can see why nothing can be done to save the economy.
No government will admit its mistakes, especially when it can blame foreigners. China is being made the scapegoat for American failure. An entire industry has grown up that points its finger at China and away from 20 years of corporate offshoring of US jobs and 9 years of expensive and pointless US wars.
“Currency manipulation” is the charge. However, the purpose of the Chinese peg to the US dollar is not currency manipulation. When the Chinese government decided to take its broken communist economy into a market economy, the government understood that it needed foreign confidence in its currency. It achieved that by pegging its currency to the dollar, signaling that China’s money was as sound as the US dollar. At that time, China, of course, could not credibly give its currency a higher dollar value.
As time has passed, the irresponsible and foolish policies of the US have eroded the dollar’s value, and as the Chinese currency is pegged to the dollar, its value has moved down with the dollar. The Chinese have not manipulated the peg in order to make their currency less valuable.
To the contrary, when I was in China in 2006, the exchange rate was a little more than 8 yuan to the dollar. Today it is 6.6 yuan to the dollar–a 17.5% revaluation of the yuan.
The US government blames the US trade deficit with China on an undervalued Chinese currency. However, the Chinese currency has risen 17.5% against the dollar since 2006, but the US trade deficit with China has not declined.
The major cause of the US trade deficit with China is “globalism” or the practice, enforced by Wall Street and Wal-Mart, of US corporations offshoring their production for US markets to China in order to improve the bottom line by lowering labor costs. Most of the tariffs that the congressional idiots want to put on “Chinese” imports would, therefore, fall on the offshored production of US corporations. When these American brand goods, such as Apple computers, are brought to US markets, they enter the US as imports. Thus, the tariffs will be applied to US corporate offshored output as well as to the exports of Chinese companies to the US.
The correct conclusion is that the US trade deficit with China is the result of “globalism” or jobs offshoring, not Chinese currency manipulation.
An important point always overlooked is that the US is dependent on China for many manufactured products including high technology products that are no longer
produced in the US. Revaluation of the Chinese currency would raise the dollar price of these products in the US. The greater the revaluation, the greater the price rise. The impact on already declining US living standards would be dramatic.
When US policymakers argue that the solution to America’s problems is a stronger Chinese currency, they are yet again putting the burden of adjustment on the out-of-work, indebted, and foreclosed American population.
This is a very good article that looks at what Trans Pacific Trade Pact looks like as the structures are being built while neo-liberals and neo-cons pretend this is about growing jobs in America. Remember, TPP seeks to allow global corporations to operate in the US as they do in developing world nations. These immigrant investors are people enriched in their own nations just as the rich in America became super-rich and now they are moving that wealth here to America just to create jobs for you and me. So, US global corporations are bringing their tag team from developing world nations to bring the US to the level of those developing nations.
Right now we have loads of immigrant investors creating businesses say in the tech industry just waiting for Obama's executive order for high-skilled immigrant workers so they can bring their Indian workforce here to America. Just wait for TPP and those Indian tech corporations are now allowed to work those immigrants from India just as they do in India-----ignoring all US labor and justice laws. That is how you take the US from first world----to now second world----and with TPP to third world status. This is the goal behind allowing the wealthy foreign investors to come to the US to create businesses while the American people cannot access loans and see their personal wealth erode.
Selling Visas and Citizenship: Policy Questions from the Global Boom in Investor Immigration
By Madeleine Sumption and Kate Hooper
Employment & the Economy Competitiveness Labor Market Impacts Recruitment Immigrant Integration Citizenship & Civic Engagement Immigration Policy & Law Selection Systems Visa Policy see more... Download Report Over the past decade, the number of countries with immigrant investor programs has increased dramatically. Although governments have long extended residence permits or citizenship to wealthy individuals willing to invest large amounts in their economies, the forces of globalization and rapidly increasing interest among prospective immigrant investors are challenging policymakers to step up to meet this demand. About half of Member States in the European Union now have dedicated immigrant investor routes, while Malta and countries in the Caribbean have developed their own "citizenship-by-investment" programs, sparking public debate.
In theory, the benefits of immigrant investor programs for both newcomers and destination countries are straightforward. For potential investors, these initiatives make doing business abroad attractive by offering a faster or easier route to resettlement, insurance against political or economic upheaval at home, or access to visa-free travel, among other things. In exchange, destination countries enjoy the perks of new investment, including revenues and job creation. In practice, however, policymakers have been disappointed to find the economic impacts of immigrant investment are often modest at best, and designing a program to control where and how money is invested, thereby maximizing economic benefits, can be a challenge.
This report offers an overview of immigrant investor programs around the world, ranging from the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom to Bulgaria, Greece, Latvia, Portugal, Spain, and St. Kitts and Nevis.
Click to Enlarge It examines several of the approaches policymakers have taken to encourage immigrant investment while balancing the objectives of economic benefit, public opinion, and program integrity. Finally, the report concludes with an outlook on the future of investor programs. Even as new countries take a shot at developing their own initiatives, more experienced players are reviewing or scrapping their programs altogether due to insufficient economic benefits, and these outcomes will likely have implications for future program design.
Table of Contents I. Introduction
II. How Do Immigrant Investor Programs Work?
A. Who Applied for Investor Programs and Why?
B. Types of Immigrant Investor Programs
III. Determining the Investment Type
A. Programs Based on Private-Sector Transaction
B. Programs Based on Investor-Government Transactions
IV. Immigrants or Casual Visitors? Residency Requirements
V. Ensuring Integrity
VI. What Next? The Future of Investor Programs
As you see the movement of people as migrants worldwide is soaring and this is due to the policies that have nations bringing in workers from abroad to work more cheaply than the domestic workers. This of course is nothing new but the difference is that it is escalating and as Trans Pacific Trade Pact policies are pushed------developed world nations like Europe, Canada, US, and Australia now act as developing world nations in bringing migrant workers into their nations to be exploited and abused. That is where TPP takes the US and it is not good for these immigrants at all. What looks right now as better wages in the US will become wages just as bad as they received in their home nations.
Migrant workers do not want to leave their home nations to come elsewhere to work so these policies are not creating work conditions these immigrants want for the most part. It is not the progressive approach to lifting people around the world or in the US. It is simply a policy with a goal to exploit immigrant workers and make US workers already challenged with competition for good jobs more pressed to take whatever they can get.
Note that the United Nations has a Labor Organization but embraces and promotes global markets and corporations.
International Labour Standards on Migrant workers
ILO is a specialized agency of the United Nations
The growing pace of economic globalization has created more migrant workers than ever before. Unemployment and increasing poverty have prompted many workers in developing countries to seek work elsewhere, while developed countries have increased their demand for labour, especially unskilled labour. As a result, millions of workers and their families travel to countries other than their own to find work. At present there are approximately 175 million migrants around the world, roughly half of them workers (of these, around 15% are estimated to have an irregular status). Women make up almost half of migrants. Migrant workers contribute to the economies of their host countries, and the remittances they send home help to boost the economies of their countries of origin. Yet at the same time migrant workers often enjoy little social protection and are vulnerable to exploitation and human trafficking. Skilled migrant workers are less vulnerable to exploitation, but their departure has deprived some developing countries of valuable labour needed for their own economies. ILO standards on migration provide tools for both migrant sending and receiving countries to manage migration flows and ensure adequate protection for this vulnerable category of workers. (Note 1)
Because of the importance of well-managed migration, the 2004 International Labour Conference called for the implementation of an action plan for migrant workers, which includes a non-binding multilateral framework for migrant workers in the global economy, the wider application of relevant standards, capacity building, and a global knowledge base on the issue.
Think how policies as we have here in Baltimore and Maryland deliberately allow national and global corporations to take all state and local contracts and control how these projects will be manned and as we know often these corporations hand businesses from all over the country contracts that then allow these businesses to bring their state's own labor to Baltimore and Maryland to do the work. This is why and how you create high unemployment in Baltimore and Maryland and it is how you lower the standards of labor as well. This is what Clinton neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons are doing to the workforce. Look as well to the model China has created that leaves massive numbers of citizens too impoverished to leave the urban sweat shops and made to be happy simply to get home for a Chinese New Year.
Think what will happen as Chinese foreign investors create businesses here in America and then Obama's Executive Order allows them to bring their own workers from China and then TPP allows these global corporations to ignore all US labor and justice laws and allows these global corporations to work these immigrant workers as they do in China.
DO YOU SEE THE PROGRESSION? THAT IS THE GOAL OF CLINTON NEO-LIBERALS AND BUSH NEO-CONS AND THESE TRANS PACIFIC TRADE PACT AND FOREIGN INVESTORS AS BUSINESS OWNER POLICIES ARE.
Migrant Workers In Tears, Happy to Go Home for Chinese New Year
by Fauna on Sunday, January 8, 2012 48 comments
The following video was featured on popular Chinese video sharing website Youku’s home page, having accumulated over 560k views after just 7 hours of being uploaded, featuring several migrant workers overcome with emotion at the prospect of returning home to celebrate the Chinese New Year with their families…
Migrant workers overcome with emotion and shedding tears after getting their train tickets, happily going home to celebrate the new year! Several migrant workers are interviewed in the 5 minute long video. Several migrant workers express happiness and are thankful that they received their wages in time for the Chinese New Year, perhaps allowing them to go home to celebrate with their families. Some thank their employers for paying on time, the government, and the media for helping bring public attention to their lives and hardships.
The second pair of migrant workers talk about their train trip, that it will take 2 days and 1 night in order to get home, requiring a one day stopover as well, and their train tickets are for standing room only, without seats for the entire ride. When asked by the interviewer how they can endure not having seats, they explain that they are in a rush to get home and there were out of options. It was only until they got their wages that they were able to go home at all.
They also share about who they are looking forward to see at home, such as their wives, children, and parents. When asked what he wants to say to his family at home on camera, the crying migrant worker says he’s bringing home the money he’s earned through blood and sweat, that he’s about to come home, and they can be reunited.
At time of translation, there were over 5000 comments by Chinese netizens in reaction to this video. Many of the comments reveal not only the attitudes of many Chinese people towards migrant workers, the government, and Spring Festival (aka Chinese New Year) but also various phenomenon common to the Chinese internet and the internet as a whole…
As Republicans pretend to be anti-immigrant they are all for using immigrant labor for profit and they love the Chinese style of 'business-friendly' policy that Congress is now trying to implement with Trans Pacific Trade Pact and the foreign investor state policies. Move over Republicans because this is Clinton neo-liberal policies too! See why both Republican Party capture by Bush neo-cons and Democratic Party capture by Clinton neo-liberals are moving the US to third world status!
China Is Very “Business-Friendly”
February 15, 2012 Dave Johnson Campaign for America's Future
China is very, very “business-friendly.” Corporate conservatives lecture us that we should be more “business-friendly,” in order to “compete” with China. They say we need to cut wages and benefits, work longer hours, get rid of overtime and sick pay — even lunch breaks. They say we should shed unions, get rid of environmental and safety regulations, gut government services, and especially, especially, especially we should cut taxes. But America can never be “business-friendly” enough to compete with China, and here is why.
Workers In Dormatories, 12 To A Room, Rousted At Midnight
China is very, very “business friendly.” Recent stories about Apple’s manufacturing contractors have started to reveal just how “business-friendly” China is. Recently the NY Times’ Charles Duhigg and Keith Bradsher exposed the conditions of workers at Apple’s Chinese suppliers, in How the U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work. They describe how China’s massive government subsidies and exploitation of workers mean, as Steve Jobs told President Obama, “Those jobs aren’t coming back.”
One former executive described how the company relied upon a Chinese factory to revamp iPhone manufacturing just weeks before the device was due on shelves. … New screens began arriving at the plant near midnight.
A foreman immediately roused 8,000 workers inside the company’s dormitories, according to the executive. Each employee was given a biscuit and a cup of tea, guided to a workstation and within half an hour started a 12-hour shift fitting glass screens into beveled frames. Within 96 hours, the plant was producing over 10,000 iPhones a day.
“The speed and flexibility is breathtaking,” the executive said. “There’s no American plant that can match that.”
Right. No American plant can roust workers out of nearby dorms at midnight to force them onto a 12-hour shift. And the corporate conservatives criticize America for this, not China, saying we are not “business-friendly” enough to compete. This is because we are a place where We, the People still have at least some say in how things are done. (Don’t we?) Later in the story,
The first truckloads of cut glass arrived at Foxconn City in the dead of night, according to the former Apple executive. That’s when managers woke thousands of workers, who crawled into their uniforms — white and black shirts for men, red for women — and quickly lined up to assemble, by hand, the phones.
“Business-friendly” = living 12 to a room in dorms, rousted out of bed at midnight for 12-hour shifts, working in a plant paid for by the government, using a neurotoxin cleaner that harms people but enables more production for companies like Apple.
Forced Labor Is The Real “Business-Friendly”
Arun Gupta at AlterNet, in iEmpire: Apple’s Sordid Business Practices Are Even Worse Than You Think, writes,
Researchers with the Hong Kong-based Students and Scholars Against Corporate Misbehavior (SACOM) say that legions of vocational and university students, some as young as 16, are forced to take months’-long “internships” in Foxconn’s mainland China factories assembling Apple products. The details of the internship program paint a far more disturbing picture than the Times does of how Foxconn, “the Chinese hell factory,” treats its workers, relying on public humiliation, military discipline, forced labor and physical abuse as management tools to hold down costs and extract maximum profits for Apple.
… Foxconn and Apple depend on tax breaks, repression of labor, subsidies and Chinese government aid, including housing, infrastructure, transportation and recruitment, to fatten their corporate treasuries. As the students function as seasonal employees to meet increased demand for new product rollouts, Apple is directly dependent on forced labor.
… The use of hundreds of thousands of students is one way in which China’s state regulates labor in the interests of Foxconn and Apple. Other measures include banning independent unions and enforcing a household registration system that denies migrants social services and many political rights once they leave their home region, ensuring they can be easily exploited. In Shenzhen about 85 percent of the 14 million residents are migrants. Migrants work on average 286 hours a month and earn less than 60 percent of what urban workers make. Half of migrants are owed back wages and only one in 10 has health insurance. They are socially marginalized, live in extremely crowded and unsanitary conditions, perform the most dangerous and deadly jobs, and are more vulnerable to crime.
Please read the entire AlterNet piece, iEmpire: Apple’s Sordid Business Practices Are Even Worse Than You Think. These things are not “costs” that we can compete with by lowering our wages, these things are something else.
Not JUST Low Taxes — Massive Government Subsidies
These stories also describe how the Chinese government massively subsidizes these operations, assists their low-wage labor-recruitment schemes, and looks the other way at violations of labor and trade policies. The Chinese government is very “business-friendly.” They hand money to businesses so they are much more able to “compete.” They are so friendly to business that they even own many businesses.
Trade Secret Theft
Another area where China has very “business-friendly” policies is when their own businesses steal from non-Chinese businesses. This NY Times story, U.S. to Share Cautionary Tale of Trade Secret Theft With Chinese Official details just one case of the “unbelievably endemic” problem of Chinese theft of “intellectual property” — the trade secrets that keep businesses competitive. In this case China’s Sinovel sole the software that ran an American company’s products, and immediately cancelled their orders for those products because they could now make them in China:
Last March, China’s Sinovel, the world’s second largest wind turbine manufacturer, abruptly refused shipments of American Superconductor’s wind turbine electrical systems and control software. The blow was devastating; Sinovel provided more than 70 percent of the firm’s revenues.
… Last summer, evidence emerged that Sinovel had promised $1.5 million to Dejan Karabasevic, a Serbian employee of American Superconductor in Austria.
If you steal the ideas, processes, techniques, expertise, plans, designs, software and the other things that give companies a competitive edge, then you don’t have to pay them and you can just make the things yourself. When you get in bed with a very “business-friendly” country, you might find that they are more friendly to their own businesses. Because they consider themselves to be a country with a national strategy, not a self-balancing, self-regulating “market.”
Trade Deficit Drains Our Economy
As a result of our ideological blindness, refusing to understand China’s game, we have a massive trade deficit with them. This means hundreds of billions of dollars are drained from our economy, year after year. And to make up for this we borrow from them in order to keep buying from them. But this does not cause their currency to strengthen in the “markets” because China loves this game the way it is going, and intervenes against the markets to keep their currency low. And so it continues, year after year. We believe in “markets” they believe in rigging markets so they come out ahead…
Markets Can’t “Compete” With This
Corporate conservatives tell us we need to be more “business-friendly” to “compete” with China. But at the same time Steve Jobs was being a realist when he said “the jobs are never coming back” because he understood that the current political climate, controlled by a wealthy few who benefit from China’s “business-friendly” policies will not let us fight this. Why should these companies bring jobs back here, when over there they can roust thousands from dorms at midnight and make them use toxic chemicals for 12 hours a day for very low pay to make iPhone screens that he can sell at fantastically high prices? Why should they, unless We, the People tell them they can’t do that to people, and that we won’t let them profit from it?
As long as we continue to think that this is about “markets” competing, we will lose. China sees itself as a nation, and they have a national strategy to continue to be so “business-friendly” that our businesses can’t compete. Our leaders and corporations may have “moved on” past this quaint nation thing but China has not.
We, The People Need To Act To Fix This
As long as we continue to send our companies out there alone against national economic strategies that engage entire national systems utilizing the resources of nations, our companies will lose. But the executives at those companies are currently getting very rich now from these schemes, so what happens in the future is not their problem. Maybe the companies they manage won’t be around later, but that is not their problem. Others are concerned, but are forced to play the game because no one can compete with national systems like China’s.
When everyone is in a position where something isn’t their problem, or where they can’t do anything about it on their own, it means this is a larger problem, and this is where government — We, the People — needs to get involved. It is our problem but we have been convinced that we — government — shouldn’t interfere, or “protect” our industries, because “the markets” don’t like “government” — We, the People — butting in. This is a very convenient viewpoint for few who are geting very, very wealthy at the expense of the rest of us.
We Need A Plan
In U.S. must end China’s rulers’ free pass at Politico, AAM’s Scott Paul writes, Read it, read it, read it!)
We shouldn’t fear China’s citizens. But we should be worried about the actions of its authoritarian — and, yes, still communist — regime that tightly controls the People’s Republic. And we should be downright terrified by some of our own leaders’ attitudes toward China.
… China is not merely the key U.S. supplier of cheap toys, clothing and electronics: Its government is also one of our foreign financiers. China achieved this status by defying the free market and its international obligations toward more open trade and investment.
[. . .] History didn’t do in the Soviet Union. A sustained and aggressive strategy did. China engaged our business and political elites — and seduced them into believing these policies were no longer necessary.
… There has been no strategy, no effort to prevail economically.
… No one is suggesting that China is an enemy and we should just update our Cold War strategies. No one can accurately define what China’s intentions are in terms of foreign policy or defense. But on the economic front, the lessons of the past are instructive: We need a plan.
We need a plan. We need to understand that China is not competing with us in “markets’ they are competing with us as a nation. We need a national economic/industrial strategy that understands the urgent need to fight as a country to win the industries of the future.
It’s not just price, it is things a democracy cannot allow. We can’t ever be “business-friendly” ENOUGH. We have to do something else. We have to understand that We, the People — the 99% — are in a real fight here to keep our democracy, or we will lose what is left of it.
Democracy Is The Best Economics
When people have a say they demand good wages, benefits, reasonable working conditions, a clean environment, workplace safety and dignity on the job. We need more of that, not less of that. We must demand that goods made in places where people who do not have a say do not have a competitive advantage over goods made in places where people do have a say. And we must demand that those places give their people a say.
As long as we let democracy be a competitive disadvantage, We, the People will lose.