In a message dated 2/12/2006 11:17:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 2/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [snip The path of globalization tends to lead downward to the lowest > common denominator. [snip]
How so? Cheers, Gautam ======== US (and probably European and Japanese too) Companies move to countries where they can pay their workers the least amount. And where there are no worker protection laws say regarding toxic substances and safety on the job. Which make products in countries where there are protections for workers more expensive by comparison. Which tends to bring down the job market in those countries that do protect workers. For instance, the USA used to be a major manufacturing center. Now most manufacturing of US company products is done overseas where they can pay workers less -- a lot, lot, lot, less -- and not have to worry about niggling safety laws. So the US has turned into a service economy, where service jobs are the largest growing segment of the economy. Service jobs have replaced manufacturing jobs. Except service related jobs (say hotel workers) pay about 1/3-1/4 of what manufacturing jobs once did. So the average worker in the USA is actually getting poorer. As evidenced by one of our biggest employers now, WalMart, that doesn't provide health care for its workers, and doesn't pay them enough to let them even approach a decent standard of living. Downward spiral. All around. For everyone. Spiraling down to the least common denominator. It can't last forever, of course, because eventually workers in all countries will demand more rights, but it can last a long, long, long, long, long time. There are still a lot of poor countries for companies to continue to migrate to once one country has wised up. That's about as well as I can sum it up. ======== "Under the conditions of an integrated world economy... in which capital flows freely across national borders to the locality offering the highest, quickest profits, capital transnationalizes; capital loses its national identity... localities no longer share control over trade and capital with the firm. Instead, control rests almost exclusively with firms that have limited local attachment... Today the most intense competition in the globally integrated market is... between governments that find themselves competing with one another for investors by offering the cheapest and most compliant labor; the weakest environmental, health, and safety standards; and the lowest taxes; and the most fully developed infrastructure. David Korten Getting to the 21st Century and Globalizing Civil Society ======== I think he said something also like, global capital has no conscience. But I cannot find the exact quote. I need to show a PESO soon, and get back to photography, but you asked. Marnie aka Doe
