Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Webby
Example.. outsourcing and the trade balance with China etc. If people want cheap product, the Walmart's of this world will not buy "expensive" product made in the US, but get this from Asia and help towards increasing unemployment within the US. The trade deficit will increase because of customer preference/choice.
If folks are willing to pay more and purchase product made in the US - this will increase US employment and reduce the trade deficit.
|
It might be more realistic to refer to globalism as corporatization, because as companies - some with sales bigger than the budgets of smaller countries - move their manufacturing wherever it suits them, governments have less and less ability even to attempt to control their economies. And when a government has little control over its economy, it has only limited control over any of its activities.
The corporations need not be concerned, because as the US gets poorer, other countries will become wealthier: it doesn't matter to them whether their income is dollars or rupees.
I don't know there is an answer. For all kinds of reasons politicians lean towards corporations rather than individuals, but anyway the few, half-hearted examples of attempts to control the migration of capital and jobs have failed dismally. And it is a fact that if the US tried to prevent its companies operating as profitably as possible (by among other things, exporting jobs), they would lose ground to companies based in other countries which had no such restrictions. We should still face economic decline.