Sweeney: Trading away our jobs

[question everything]

Trading away our jobs

By John J. Sweeney
February 10, 2005

America is a country of record-setters. Our national trade deficit for 2004, to be announced today, will set a new record – an all-time high of close to $600 billion.

But this is one record America's working families cannot be proud of. The $600 billion gap between our trade exports and trade imports symbolizes the flood of good jobs out of our country, the devastation of our communities as plants close or move and the millions of skilled workers who still cannot find living wage work.

(snip)

And it's not just "old economy jobs," as some claim. Close examination of the trade deficit shows America is beginning to lose its competitive edge in high-tech, services and agriculture. All the sectors that build California's economy, like computers, electronic machinery, and apparel, are losing jobs.


(snip)

We need an urgent and aggressive policy response, starting with trade, tax and currency policies that allow American businesses and workers to compete and survive in the global economy.

The first step is for Congress to reject CAFTA and the other flawed trade agreements on the horizon – with Thailand, the Andean countries and several others. These deals reflect precisely the wrong model for trade – excessive protection of corporate rights and a flimsy fig leaf for workers, farmers and the environment.

And we must take a good hard look at our trade relationship with China. Our own government must insist that the Chinese government live up to its end of the bargain on workers' rights, currency manipulation and unfair subsidies. Largely because China has been allowed to flout international rules, trade with China has meant the loss of more than 500,000 jobs here in the last two years.

(snip)

Sweeney is president of the 13-million member AFL-CIO.



Find this article at:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050210/news_lz1e10sweeney.html

[TexasLawyer]

1. Job losses to China-- 1.5 million jobs!

From Asia Times

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/GB09Ad05.html

Asia Times is publishing on its site a comprehensive and lengthy economic study performed by Dr. Robert E Scott, who is the director of international programs at the Economic Policy Institute (link to Institute is available at the end of AT article). Really interesting article.

Feb 9, 2005
China trade costs US 1.5 million jobs
By Robert E Scott

The rise in the United States' trade deficit with China between 1989 and 2003 caused the displacement of production that supported 1.5 million US jobs. Some of those jobs were related to production or services that ceased or moved elsewhere; others were jobs in supplying industries. These jobs reflect the effect on labor demand - in lost job opportunities - in an economy with a worsening balance between exports and imports. Most of those lost opportunities were in the high-wage and job-hemorrhaging manufacturing sector. The number of job opportunities lost each year grew rapidly during the 1990s and accelerated after China entered the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. The loss of these potential jobs is just the most visible tip of China's impact on the US economy.

During the 14-year period covered by this study, there has been a significant shift in the kinds of industries suffering job displacement, a shift that runs counter to initial expectations. Where the largest impact was once felt in labor-intensive, lower-tech manufacturing industries such as apparel and shoes, the fastest growth in job displacement is now occurring in highly skilled and advanced technology areas once considered relatively immune, such as electronics, computers, and communications equipment.

Major findings of this study

The loss of job-supporting production in the United States due to growing trade deficits with China has more than doubled since it entered the WTO in 2001. The 1.5 million job opportunities lost nationwide are distributed among all 50 states and the District of Columbia, with the biggest losers in numeric terms being California (199,922), Texas (99,420), New York (81,721), Pennsylvania (69,822), Illinois (69,668), North Carolina (62,698), Florida (60,026), Ohio (58,094), Michigan (50,991) and Georgia (46,848).
The 10 hardest-hit states, as a share of total state employment, are Maine (14,951, or 2.47%), Arkansas (19,123, 1.67%), North Carolina (62,698, 1.65%), Rhode Island (7,548, 1.56%), New Hampshire (9,443, 1.53%), Indiana (43,533, 1.50%), Massachusetts (46,463, 1.46%), Wisconsin (39,668, 1.43%), Vermont (4,211, 1.41%) and California (199,922, 1.39%).

China's exports to the US of electronics, computers and communications equipment, along with other products that use more highly skilled labor and advanced technologies, are growing much faster than its exports of low-value, labor-intensive items such as apparel, shoes and plastic products. Consequently, China now accounts for the entire US$32 billion US trade deficit in advanced-technology products (ATP). China is also rapidly gaining advantage in more advanced industries such as autos and aerospace products.

China's entry into the WTO was supposed to provide openings for a sufficiently rapid growth in US exports to reduce the trade deficit with China. While the export growth rate has increased since 2001 (from a very small base), the value of those exports has been swamped by a rapidly rising tide of imports. The WTO is a free-trade and investment agreement that has provided investors with a unique set of guarantees designed to stimulate foreign direct investment and the movement of factories around the world, especially from the US to low-wage locations such as China and Mexico.

<much more>

[AndyTiedye]

2. They Get TAX INCENTIVES for Shipping Our Jobs Overseas

That means that the government WANTS us to lose our jobs.

Boosh** wants us all to have only one employer: the Army.




Kerry did bring this up repeatedly during the campaign, but the media
blacked that out like everything else Democratic.

[TexasLawyer]

3. We're even outsourcing TORTURE!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x104597

not that we should be in the torture business to begin with!