Illustrated very clearly in the chart below. The Chinese yuan appreciated 30% against the dollar since 2004 (when the Bush Administration started this China bashing policy). Since then, manufacturing jobs have fallen by 300,000.
Not only does this not work, it acts as a tax on the middle class and poor, who have to pay more for Chinese goods, when they were once a lot more affordable.
It's a really, really, stupid policy.
17 comments:
the chart might make more intuitive sense if you flipped the Chinese currency line upside-down.
For Pete's sake, creating manufacturing jobs is a tactic, not an adaptive strategy or necessarily a Desired Outcome.
Citizens gainfully employed, working toward outcomes adaptive for the USA - yes. But don't try to dictate what the optimal jobs are.
That' breaking Gen Patton's maxim.
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to [achieve] and they will surprise you with their ingenuity."
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgespa106027.html
might as well demand whaling jobs for US citizens. That would be just as arbitrary.
Roger,
that's true to a certain extent, but what if the US was incapable of producing food... would that be an 'arbitrary' problem?
It's context dependent.
Just let the context dictate what jobs are needed.
Deciding what to do before reading context is a surefire way to get off course.
What is optimal?
Who gets to defines what is optimal?
that's the question;
democracy & consensus take time to discover context
but presuming it first almost always backfires, which is why social species always win
generate diversity, then do the work necessary to select well from that diversity
by sampling all available feedback, doing the analysis, and inventing new assessment metrics on the fly
the process never ends
it's called evolution;
cultural evolution, in our case
who does "the work necessary to select well from that diversity, by sampling and analysis"?
who does the "inventing new assessment metrics on the fly"
?
The crisis will explain some of the fall in manufacturing employment. Plus manufacturing employment has fallen steadily since 1970. See:
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-GZ5rg4wUSFo/TdZT6iIFMkI/AAAAAAAABwg/-WWeK3HF95s/s1600/Screen%2Bshot%2B2011-05-20%2Bat%2B7.42.34%2BAM.png&imgrefurl=http://earlywarn.blogspot.com/2011/05/us-manufacturing-employment.html&h=945&w=1385&sz=114&tbnid=PW0dtlw_uWXEgM:&tbnh=90&tbnw=132&zoom=1&usg=__5KK9epmzBBLeboW0NTkcJXIVxD8=&docid=IUpHcAjbelcVtM&sa=X&ei=XOxxUpnpA_CN4gTdnIDgAQ&sqi=2&ved=0CC4Q9QEwAA
the chart might make more intuitive sense if you flipped the Chinese currency line upside-down.
It's USD/CNY, but yes, I hear you. Will do that.
y,
There is no "Who" in the evolutionary paradigm... its imo similar to "the invisible hand" concept in the academe of economics...
Its like with the current "obamacare" issue, somehow, citizens desires for greater access to healthcare have ended up in the law put there by a cohort (certain Democrats) and now we are stumbling towards that goal... its messy and who knows how it will turn out in detail, but I don't think we are "going back"... and this new system will be tweaked as we go on in time....
This is Tom's 'history has a liberal bias' imo...
rsp,
Enlarge the context...
Back up to Clinton years...
1. Commodities and inputs were really cheap.
2. Gas $1.00 per gallon
3. Asia wages much lower.
4. Euro lower than dollar, smaller euro zone.
5. Dollar stronger than ¥ € £ than now...
When China appreciates their Yuan, inputs for USA factories go up too so Bush taxed USA mfg sector too. USA mfg cannot buy cheap stuff from Asia.
Result is that usually cheap Yuan leaves poor China slaves snd middle class powerless in purchasing power.
But now with stronger yuan they can start a business and buy the inputs and replace USA mfgs.
Thus CHINA creates middle stand like Germany and kicks everyone's butt.
This is how we lose mfg jobs in USA...
It is our fault by telling China to appreciate the yuan which is relative to saying depreciate the U$D.
We lose purchasing power
..esp our manufacturers.
Commodities go up
General Patton spirit is in China
They have goal in front and center
This is Tom's 'history has a liberal bias' imo...
Yes, as far back as the ancient Greeks there was suspicion of direct democracy since "the rabble" would vote their interests and supposedly damage the interest of the city-state.
It wasn’t until the 18th century that there was a strong and general impetus in the West toward liberalization socially, politically and economically. And we are still chipping away at the chains.
What is optimal?
The question is optimal for what. This involves selecting objectives and criteria for accessing effectiveness.
Who gets to defines what is optimal?
Determined by the institutional power structure.
The ACA was and is an attempt by Democrats…so-called liberals…to maintain the status quo…
…making the business models of almost allplayers in the system to maintain high profits at theexpense of the citizens real healthcare.
This is hardly a progressive position, it is neo-liberalism writ large.
The New-Deal Democrats have left the building, and along with it the value of the Democratic Party.
The new democrats are conservatives in liberals clothing…just as dangerous as the crazies, maybe more-so because they are tricking their constituents into thinking they are being helped.
Most people can see crazy coming from a mile away…sleight-of-hand not so much.
Right, Paul. And just as the GOP Establishment was open to attack from the right after making promises and not following through, the Dem Establishment is open to attack on the left for abandoning the principles of the New Deal. Unfortunately, "left" now means Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who are clueless about monetary economics, without which it looks like the long way to fund liberal social programs is with higher taxes.
Should be "only way to fund government....."
Y keep asking the same question:
"who does the necessary work"
Answer: As many as are required by context.
If it was predictable, evolution wouldn't take so long.
Democracy takes time to figure out the leanest way to fulfill emerging tasks.
No easier answer. Unless YOU want to personally do all the work required to provide all the answers.
Good luck with that.
Post a Comment