Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 12-13-2006, 02:57 AM   #1 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: California
Outsourcing Bonanza: Vietnamese Trade Normalization

On Friday, December 8th, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 6406, by a vote of 212-184 This bill allows for "normalization" of trade with Vietnam.

This new "permanent normalization of trade relations" (PNTR) with Vietnam is the first step in opening up their labor market to exploitation by Corporate America and to the outsourcing of American jobs to Vietnam.

What are the relative "benefits" to the United States? It allegedly opens up the Vietnamese "consumer" market to American goods. However, the benefit of such market opening is minuscule. The exchange traded value of Vietnam's entire GDP is only $43 billion. (See Vietnam: CIA assessment ) This is approximately 3/100ths of a percent of U.S. GDP. To put it another way, if Vietnam's entire GDP was spent on American imports, it would raise U.S. GDP .03%. So a U.S. GDP growth of 2.20% would rise to 2.23%. Again, this is assuming ALL of Vietnam's GDP was spent on American goods, which is certainly not going to happen. Vietnam's Exchange Rate per capita GDP is only $521/year. {Vietnam's Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) per capita GDP is listed as $2800. By converting this to an exchange rate value this becomes a per capita income of only $521/year. It's the Exchange Rate income that is important here, because this measures the ability to purchase American imports.} Given these numbers it's very unlikely that we can sell significant U.S production to Vietnamese consumers.

What's the downside? Vietnam has a labor force of 43 million workers. Once Vietnam is opened up to investment by Corporate America, this could become a virtual addition of 43 million workers to America's 152 million participating labor force. If Corporate America replaced 43 million American workers ( averaging $17/hour ) with 43 million Vietnamese workers, it would reduce American labor & consumer income by $1.52 trillion.

(43 million X $17/hr. X 8 hrs./day X 365 days/yr. X 5 days/wk divided by 7 days/week = $1.52 trillion. )

This would also reduce American consumer spending power by $1.52 trillion dollars. A decline in consumer spending by that $1.52 trillion, subtracted directly from our $13 trillion GDP, would amount to a direct decline in our GDP of almost 12%. (Applying any multiplier would drop our GDP far more than 12%) Of course, we could "gain" that whopping 0.03% in GDP from selling our exports to Vietnam.

These are theoretical calculations only, designed to show the magnitude of relative benefits vs. costs to Americans from "normalization" of trade with Vietnam. While Corporate America is not likely to hire all 43 million Vietnamese workers, it's clear that the potential loss to our economy is much greater than the potential gain. We'll gain an almost non-existent consumer market from Vietnam, while adding a virtual 43 million workers to America's labor pool. And the direct loss of jobs is only the measurable effect. The decline in American wages from the supply & demand effect of competition with another 43 million impoverished workers hasn't been calculated. Clearly this would decrease American wages and labor income MUCH more than just $1.52 trillion.

To the majority of Americans, permanent normalization of trade with Vietnam is exclusively negative. Once again, it'll put American workers (and their wages) in direct competition with impoverished 3rd world workers.

Clearly the goal here is not to open up the Vietnamese consumer market to American goods. The goal is to open up the Vietnamese labor market to American Multinational Corporations. The true goal is to replace even more American workers with easily exploitable semi-slave laborers of another impoverished country. It'll be another disaster for American workers, and another windfall profit gain for rich Globalist Corporations.

unlawflcombatnt

Economic Populist Forum

EconomicPopulistCommentary

_________________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."
unlawflcombatnt is offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 05:45 AM   #2 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
I have to respectfully disagree. The American companies that are most likely to benefit from this change are manufacturers of consumer goods, like auto makers, electronics and other durable goods.

You're worried about 43 million Vietnamese potentially competing for American jobs when there are 400 million Chinese workers and 300 million Indian actively seeking those jobs already? By the way, the Chinese posted a $20 BILLION trade surplus with us recently, and that my friend is the cold, hard truth of job exportation. In light of those two facts, your post sounds more like an anti-Vietnamese rant than anything that addresses the export of American jobs.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 07:39 PM   #3 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: California
Vietnamese Workers

Vietnamese workers are poorer than Chinese workers, and much poorer than Indian workers. They'll add an additional source of ultra-cheap, easily exploitable labor for Corporate America. It'll be just that much more low-wage competition for American workers resulting in further wage declines.

unlawflcombatnt

Economic Populist Forum

EconomicPopulistCommentary

_________________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."
unlawflcombatnt is offline  
Old 12-13-2006, 10:05 PM   #4 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
So, what? Is it better that the Vietnamese remain impoverished? The world is growing smaller. Americans just may have to accept that the dynamics of the global economy are changing and get used to the competition. It has to happen. We cannot afford to let entire nations of people dwindle in economic isolation any longer. No matter how you slice it, more jobs in Vietnam is good for the Vietnamese. And as their economic conditions start to improve, so will their technology, education, healthcare and infrastructure, to name a few. And as a result, their workers will become more skilled and flexible and earn better wages, open their own businesses, invent their own unique commodities and services, and join with us in the world economy with the hopes of more opportunity for their children than their own parents ever dreamed possible. Just as it is happening in India and China.

Now, I'm not being all Pollyanna-like and asserting that there will be no growing pains or conditions for opportunism and corruption, as there is always, just that I cannot, for the life of me, understand why someone believes that the overall good for people who are struggling to survive is less important than their grudge against "multi-nationals." It is a catch-22 situation for us all, as those multi-national corporations who are benefitting from the current influx of cheap labor in our traditionally disadvantaged neighbors in the world, they are also enabling them to become better paid, better educated, better informed and, as a result, more demanding as workers and less of an advantage to them. I know if I have considered this certainly so have forecasters in the "multi-nationals."

Oh, and more demanding workers will also mean more demanding citizens who will feel more enabled to protect their communities from environmental exploitation and contamination.

It goes on and on. I'm sure I could come up with more if it weren't so late.....
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 10:28 AM   #5 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: California
Trade

Trade policies of any nation are designed to better that nation itself. The doctrine of Comparative Advantage requires that both nations benefit and that trade increases total GDP in both countries. That is not what has been happening with U.S. trade policy. The increase in GDP and general betterment has occured exclusively in the 3rd world country (if at all), while reducing it in the United States.

In the case of NAFTA, trade with the U.S. has made most Mexicans poorer, as well as costing 4 million American jobs. The only people benefitting from this outsourcing are the multinational Corporations, who've increased their profits by reducing labor costs.

The goal of American trade policy has historically been to improve the American economy. If we want to help Vietnam, it should be through direct foreign aid to Vietnam and Vietnamese-owned businesses, not by giving assistance to American business & Corporations who want to substitute Vietnamese workers for American workers to lower their own costs of production for American markets.

unlawflcombatnt

Economic Populist Forum

EconomicPopulistCommentary

_________________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."
unlawflcombatnt is offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 05:16 PM   #6 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by unlawflcombatnt
Trade policies of any nation are designed to better that nation itself. The doctrine of Comparative Advantage requires that both nations benefit and that trade increases total GDP in both countries. That is not what has been happening with U.S. trade policy. The increase in GDP and general betterment has occured exclusively in the 3rd world country (if at all), while reducing it in the United States.
I don't have a problem with this. Gross financial inequity is as unjust on a global scale as it is on a solely American economic scale. Please don't get me wrong, I am not in favor of giving multinationals free reign over the third world. What I do believe is that the best way to usher disadvantaged nations into the global economic fold is by giving people jobs - something to lose. That is how it will start. It's been a while since I read anything about Mexico, but I think it is far too soon to be calling NAFTA either a success or a failure and most of what you read about it at this point is usually presented with a pro or con agenda. Yes, I am aware that many Mexicans in agriculture are struggling and have not benefitted from NAFTA. But millions of workers have gotten jobs that were not there before. And if I remember correctly, Mexico's GDP quadrupled within ten years of its enactment. I could be wrong about that, correct me if so.

Quote:
In the case of NAFTA, trade with the U.S. has made most Mexicans poorer, as well as costing 4 million American jobs. The only people benefitting from this outsourcing are the multinational Corporations, who've increased their profits by reducing labor costs.
It has made some Mexicans poorer and has benefitted some Mexicans. Again, I think anyone who is/was expecting to draw final conclusions from NAFTA's success or failure within 15 years is relying on pre-conceived biases.

Quote:
The goal of American trade policy has historically been to improve the American economy. If we want to help Vietnam, it should be through direct foreign aid to Vietnam and Vietnamese-owned businesses, not by giving assistance to American business & Corporations who want to substitute Vietnamese workers for American workers to lower their own costs of production for American markets.
1) I think the historic goals of American trade policy are history.

2) The only way Vietnamese-owned businesses are going to stake a claim in the global economy is by having a sound and secure Vietnamese economy to back them up. Giving aid to Vietnamese business owners is a great idea, but what we really need to do is foster an environment where more Vietnamese have the opportunity to go into business. You cannot accomplish this with aid alone.

3) I strongly believe that America's conception of herself as an untarnishable superpower is going to change, has to change, will change whether we like it or not and ultimately I think that is a good thing.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
Old 12-14-2006, 09:35 PM   #7 (permalink)
Addict
 
guyy's Avatar
 
Location: Cottage Grove, Wisconsin
This casts a slightly different light on the Ol' Vietnam War, doesn't it?

In 1975, the last US agents leave the roof of the embassy in Ho Chi Minh City. Some 10 or so years later, Gorby and Ronnie become chummy. By the 14 year mark, in 1989, the Cold War ends. (So much for the domino theory!) Some 30 years later, Richard Nixon's ideological scions are finalising an agreement with Ho Chi Minh's political heirs which fully integrates Vietnam into the networks of global capitalism. (n.b. It is already fairly well integrated. Plenty of stuff In Stores Now!!! is Made in Vietnam.)
guyy is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 06:02 AM   #8 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
Am I the only one who finds it odd that the OP is citing himself as a source here? Maybe I'm missing something, but all of his links are to his blog.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 12-15-2006, 06:18 AM   #9 (permalink)
has all her shots.
 
mixedmedia's Avatar
 
Location: Florida
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Am I the only one who finds it odd that the OP is citing himself as a source here? Maybe I'm missing something, but all of his links are to his blog.
Yes, I did notice this and what's more the color pallette on his forum singed my corneas. Thanks a lot, dude.
__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce
mixedmedia is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 08:41 PM   #10 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
But what is the alternative.

Would you prefer Vietnam to be "isolated". Their only friends other US enemies pehaps? Maybe they could sell rice to North Korea in exchange for technology, or cashews to Iran in exchange for oil. Maybe the US could cut trade with Russia too yes?

Any scenario that I think of is worse than them exporting a clothes.

But it's all beside the point. Vietnam is already trading, within asiapac and with Europe.
Nimetic is offline  
Old 12-16-2006, 11:04 PM   #11 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: California
Yeah, better to put Americans out of work

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nimetic
Maybe they could sell rice to North Korea in exchange for technology, or cashews to Iran in exchange for oil.
Or maybe they could put 10-20 million Americans out of work by taking the few manufacturing jobs we have left in this country, while driving down American wages even more than global outsourcing has already done.

unlawflcombatnt

Economic Populist Forum

EconomicPopulistCommentary

_________________
The economy needs balance between the "means of production" & "means of consumption."
unlawflcombatnt is offline  
Old 12-18-2006, 02:27 PM   #12 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
welcome to the brave new world of globalizing capitalism, now almost 40 years old...where have you been?
you are just noticing?
wake up.

you know, globalization: conditioned by the transnational trade in stock (since the early 1970s) so that the idea of a nationally-specific corporate entity means nothing, has meant nothing; real-time financial flows that have for years been redrawing the political geography of capitalism away from its old-fashioned, outmoded emphasis on nation-states, any illusion of democratic redress, any meaningful requirement for or interest in social stability...you know, globalizing capitalism, which unfolds in a special, separate dimension severed from the social, severed from the political, which is like the weather, which blows this way and that leaving all of us in a position of having-to-adapt.....because how do you complain about the weather? how do you organize to oppose changes in the forces of Nature?

globalization, which is enabled by a neoliberal ideological framework that sees maximization of corporate profits as a necessary good regardless of the social consequences--a bankrupt horrorshow ideology that still somehow twitches on television sets across america, even as corporate sector after corporate sector back away from it as being suicidal for business...but one that has the advantage of depoliticizing the consequences of reorganization and of enabling the holders of capital to extract maximum short term profits that they will no doubt need to reinforce their gated communities and to hire private militias once the neo-feudal order that is the logical consequence of neoliberalism comes into full, fetid blossom...


globalization that is enabled by the development of the internet we communicate across, the computers that we like to pretend free us, the supply chain management technologies, real-time supply chain management, a highly rationalized transportation infrastructure that enables an internationalization of just-in-time systems...the commodity results of which you have been eating, dressing in, driving, listening to, watching for 20 years...

yes, all this has just started.
and clearly the problem is vietnam.

wake up.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 12-21-2006, 03:59 AM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
You aren't clear here.

The manufacturing is/has mainly gone to Japan, Taiwan and China I expect. Vietnam is a mere mosquito compared to China + India. How much stuff do you buy from Vietnam (seriously). Probably not much.

In terms of trade, I was making some points. Show me that you understand at least two of them and we can converse more.

On the jobs front. Heck, I thought the US had that solved. Put a portion of the population in jail, employ another large portion as security (police and guards), put a portion in the military, and withdraw welfare from the rest.

Bingo. Low unemployment.

What is this subject 'popular economics'. Is this something like 'popular science'?

Last edited by Nimetic; 12-21-2006 at 04:01 AM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Nimetic is offline  
Old 12-21-2006, 07:50 AM   #14 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
nimetic: are you talking to me above?
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 12-23-2006, 04:28 PM   #15 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Melbourne, Australia
No. And apologies, I got sorta annoyed at the original poster. I lost my cool for a moment - which is not polite, and which does not put a reasonable or logical case.

To unlawflcombatant, I apologize for my tone. With respect, I disagree with your point. My understanding of the US is that it has benefitted from being a strong trading nation. Perhaps I am wrong, but that is the situation as I understand it.

For what it's worth, we face similar issues AU, we are relatively self sufficient with fuel (oil-gas-uranium-coal), food, minerals and technology. Due to increased pressure from Asia, our car manufacturers periodically struggle however, our IT workers are more inept each day and are being supplemented by overseas labour (working here on Visas in many cases).

Despite this, I don't think that isolationism nor protectionism (in it's extreme form) is an answer.
Nimetic is offline  
 

Tags
bonanza, normalization, outsourcing, trade, vietnamese

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:49 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360