outsourcing

Should GE's Jeffrey Immelt Really Be Leading Our Job Creation Strategy?

Scott Paul — Fri, 21 Jan 2011 10:06:35 -0500

There is no swifter way to alienate working class voters than to name an outsourcing CEO to lead your jobs strategy. Yet that’s exactly what President Obama is doing.

General Electric CEO Jeffery Immelt has fooled the media and the White House into believing that he cares about American manufacturing jobs. I have a hard time imagining a worse pick, unless Obama would have tapped Immelt’s predecessor Jack Welch, who seemed fine with the idea of putting factories on barges in search of the lowest wages in the world.

Let’s look at GE’s jobs record. You would have difficulty finding a company that has outsourced more jobs and closed more American factories than GE. While they have slashed their American workforce to fewer than 150,000, GE has dramatically expanded its global presence, now employing over 300,000 workers worldwide. Yes, GE has brought a trickle of jobs back to the U.S. over the past two years, but it still outsources more than it insources. And those executives at GE are not clueless—they realize the value of good publicity as it announces new hires at a time like this. But they do not devote nearly the same amount of publicity to their factory closings.

Immelt’s prescription for boosting manufacturing harkens back to the days of bloodletting as a medical procedure: bad policy with consistently poor results.

In a speech to the Detroit Economic Club in 2009, Immelt berated “Buy American” policies while acknowledging that GE lived under domestic preference regimes in China, France, and other nations. In Immelt’s mind, it is fine for China and France to require to GE to make what it sells in their nations, but it’s not OK for America to do the same.
Immelt essentially rules out any enforcement of our trade laws in his Washington Post op-ed today through a spurious claim that distorts the issue. So China can cheat all it wants, and Immelt wants us to do nothing. Trade enforcement is not “erecting barriers,” as Immelt alleges. Rather, trade enforcement is about removing distortions from the free market. Immelt reveals his true stripes with this ridiculous assertion. It’s a dangerous statement, and it demands an immediate and forceful rebuke from the White House.
Immelt supported two of the most disastrous economic policies of the post-World War II era: financial deregulation and China’s entry into the World Trade Organization with few, if any, consequences for breaking the rules.

The result of policies Immelt has supported: one-third of our manufacturing workforce gone in a decade. 50,000 shuttered factories. At least $245 billion in real wage and salary losses for manufacturing workers. Record trade deficits with China. In short, our worst decade in manufacturing history—by most measures even worse than the Great Depression.

Blue collar workers in the Industrial Heartland—swing states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin—will not be impressed. The President would have been well advised to select a business leader committed to pragmatic policies to revitalizing manufacturing. Intel’s former CEO Andy Grove, U.S. Steel’s John Surma, Nucor’s Dan DiMicco, or Chandra Brown of United Streetcar—which built an industry out of nothing—would all have been far superior choices. And, leading thinkers on manufacturing strategy like Leo Gerard of the United Steelworkers should be intimately involved.

The White House jobs council will fail unless it embraces ideas that will get our economy moving again and that enjoy widespread support. Here’s a good list for them to start with:

• Eliminate our trade deficit through boosted exports, vigorous trade enforcement, and penalties for China’s cheating on currency, subsidies and intellectual property. Congress and the Administration should approach the trade deficit with more vigor—it will make balancing the federal budget a whole lot easier.
• Investment in our nation’s crumbling infrastructure that goes well beyond the Recovery Act projects. Where’s our next Hoover Dam, Golden Gate Bridge, Erie Canal? The answer right now, unfortunately, is somewhere in China. We need to think big on high speed rail, a smart grid, universal broadband, and more efficient transportation arteries and hubs.
• Buy America policies—perfectly within our rights—that ensure tax dollars are reinvested in American workers. [http://americanmanufacturing.org/content/buy-america-works]
• Focusing on skills and training for industrial careers. Germany begins preparing its manufacturing workforce at age 16. We warehouse those kids. It’s no wonder we are falling behind.
• Revitalizing our innovation base, which is also moving offshore. We need federal investment to connect our great research universities, domestic manufacturers, and best private labs to make sure that the next technical breakthrough is not only invented here, but made here.
• A better tax structure for domestic production. Taxes for manufacturers who keep their production and income in the U.S. are high compared to our competitors. We should not give a blank slate to corporations, but rather target tax breaks to companies committed to investing those savings domestically.

Some of these ideas have already been embraced by the President and Jeffrey Immelt, but key aspects of this plan have been summarily rejected by Immelt in the past. If the President really wants a game changer on jobs, he picked the wrong guy with the wrong ideas to lead the effort.

Erie, Pa., Town Hall: "No Country Ever Went Broke Investing In Its Own People"

Dave Johnson — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 13:03:00 -0400

Last night's "Keep It Made In America" Town Hall meeting was at the Bayfront Convention Center in Erie, Pennsylvania. Kyle Foust, Chairman of the Erie County Council welcomed the attendees and led off the Town Hall meeting, quoting Hubert Humphrey: "No country ever went broke by investing in its own people."

I recently spoke with a Tea Party member who did not know that it is government that builds the roads, airports, sewer systems, etc. that make up the infrastructure that is the foundation of our country's ability to have companies at all. He actually thought that private companies do this, and that "government spending" just "takes money out of the economy." Maybe this is why so many candidates in this election say that "government spending" is bad but will not say, no matter how hard they are pressed, what spending they plan to cut in their quest for "smaller government."

The Town Hall

Following a Unitarian invocation by Rev Steve Aschmann, Scott Paul of the Alliance for American Manufacturing (AAM) -- the organization that is putting on these "Keep It Made In America" Town Hall events -- explained what AAM is about, strengthening manufacturing in this country. Scott gave the audience several facts about manufacturing:

74% of Tea Party supporters support more manufacturing, as do 82% of union members.
563,500 in Pennsylvania work in the manufacturing sector
This is down from 864,000 in 2000
And represents a 35% cut in manufacturing jobs.

Candidates Speak

Two local House candidates spoke at this meeting. Mike Kelley, Republican candidate for Congress spoke first.

"We can’t control unfair competition. Just make it fair, that’s all, make it fair. Enforce the rules. We play by the rules, other people don’t. Chinese currency."

Q: "Will you support buy American policies?" A: Who would not? Especially in taxpayer-funded projects.
Q: "Hold China accountable?" A: The world has been waiting for America to take the lead. China has to be held accountable when they break the rules.
Q: "Policies?" Competition, we never back away from competition. We need to get a national strategy in place. Taxes – need a VAT. Others all do it. (Note, Kelley's answer is good for manufacturing. Short explanation: Other countries use a VAT to boost their manufacturing sector. Their manufacturers get a VAT rebate, but goods imported from the US do not, so in effect a VAT is a either a subsidy of their companies or a tariff on imports from us.)

Next up was his opponent in the race, Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper:

We need to get back to a manufacturing economy, to provide that good family-sustaining wage.

How to keep it made in America, three points:
1) Close the loopholes, Republicans’s did not vote with us on this. My opponent has pledged, signed a pledge no to remove the tax advantages given to companies for moving factories out of the country and outsourcing American jobs. (Note see my post on this today.)
2) Stop China’s cheating. Everyone knows China cheats. The currency bill, voted for it, the Chamber of Commerce - that's the national Chamber which is a very different thing from the local Chambers -- is against it. We also have to stop China's illegal trade practices and dumping (selling below cost to capture markets).
3) Invest in our domestic manufacturing base. The COMPETES act has passed the House, but Senate… Education.

Raw materials – rare earth elements, China is saying they can get these IF they bring manufacturing t their country.
We can produce them here, but don’t. Because China subsidizes, it is not profitable to start production here.

The Panel

This Town Hall's panel of local experts:
• Kenneth Boothe Jr., General Manager, Donjon Ship Builders
• Reverend Jeffery Priscaro, St. Ann's church
• Ron Oliver, Community Labor Leader
• Tim Ryan President, Apex Offshore Wind.
• David J. Rosenberg, Head of Marketing, North America Gamesa Energy
• Hillary Bright, Blue/Green Alliance Field Organizer.

Priscaro – When people make things It create sjobsm, revenue, they buy houses, participate in economy.

Ryan – Windmills, local wind turbines on old steel mill site, made in the US. Sun Ray project in Texas used GE wind turbines, GE Transport made the gearboxes. Gemasa, of Sain, has set up manufacturing near here. The Export/Import bank financing requires high local content. We need a national Renewable Energy Standard, then there is a tremendous opportunity for American manufacturing in wind energy.

Oliver – the effect on people of losing job, moving, move in with mom, manufacturing is the heartbeat of America.

Boothe – Donjon has recently gone from 13 employees, in 10 months have 118. 125 by end of year, 150 then up to 250.

Bright – Labor and environmentalists share common goals Hadn’t recognized how intertwined manufacturing is with a healthy community, environment, wages, families, healthy communities. And healthy environment. The way we see America in future generations, manufacturing is key to recognizing that.

Q: "Where are we going to get jobs? We need the infrastructure rebuilt, everything reconstructed. How?"

Bright – AAM, others have recognized that one of the largest opportunities is in clean energy. The stimulus was a down payment. Opportunity at federal policy level like Renewable Energy Standard to create the market and the demand to get it going, otherwise we lose the race to countries like China.

Oliver – We need to create the jobs here, the stimulus was using money to buy windmills made in China.

Ryan – We need new power plants as well as wind energy power plants. National policy has been up and down up and down, industry can’t survive on federal programs that last 6 months or a year, we need national policy that looks at the next 20 years or so.

Priest, we lost jobs because of legislation, we can gina jobs by legislation.

Q: "What can we do to stop the leak of jobs from US?"

Scott Paul: Stop tax breaks to ship jobs overseas.

(Note - All pictures by Ike Gittlen, USW, click any pic for enlargement, see the entire collection here.)

Flint, Michigan: A City Ahead Of The Rest Of Us

Dave Johnson — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 13:28:48 -0400

I am in Flint, Michigan today, getting ready to drive down to Jackson for this evening's "Keep It Made In America" Town Hall. Flint has been through it and has come out the other end. Now the rest of us are going through what Flint has been going through.

Many people know about Flint from Michael Moore's1989 movie "Roger & Me." In the documentary General Motors had closed factories in its home town, outsourced the jobs, and left the community behind. This sort of corporate behavior was becoming common by 1989 but it was still shocking that an American company would do this to Americans and America. The movie focused on the effect this had on Flint and its people. You might remember seeing block after block of boarded-up homes and people talking about how the try to get by.

This has now been a familiar story for decades, companies closing factories, outsourcing the jobs, abandoning the communities, a few at the top pocketing the money and leaving absolute devastation in their wake.

I was last in Flint three years ago, visiting relatives. Twenty years after the movie Flint was still struggling, in depression, its downtown full of closed stores and many of the blocks of boarded-up homes were worse, if anything. There were "For Sale" signs everywhere, and this was before the national housing bust. But there were many signs of people learning to cope. The Farmer's Market was going strong. The University of Michigan was working on a new campus, the Mott Foundation and others were working on various approaches to try to help the community...

So here I am again. You can see three years worth of progress here. Revival is clearly occurring. The new U of M Campus is open and clearly making a difference. Part of the downtown is clearly revived, including the Durant Hotel restoration, while other parts are under construction. The Farmer's Market was named one of the best in the nation. There are fewer "For Sales" signs around. All around there is a better mood. Crime is still bad, there are still abandoned buildings, but a corner is turned.

Flint Farmer's Market:

Flint Ahead Of Nation

So Flint has been through it and has come out the other end. Now the rest of us are going through what Flint has been going through. And the rest of the country has a ways to go before we will see the other end of this. Roger & Me was 1989 and now it is 2010. The same crap is still going on, and more so. As I said, in 1989 it was still shocking that American corporations would treat Americans and America the way they did. But now we have been through another two decades of the few at the top closing factories, outsourcing the jobs, devastating the communities, pocketing the money and then using their financial power to demand tax breaks to further defund government. The difference is that now we all live with the effects, not just Flint.

Dems Right To Force Votes On Outsourcing And China Currency

Dave Johnson — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 20:00:22 -0400

Tuesday in A Chance To Show The Public -- TAKE THE VOTES I wrote,

Our form of government depends on an informed public. But currently the gap between what the public wants and what the public knows is huge. Democrats in Congress have an opportunity this week to draw sharp contrasts between the parties, so voters can be made aware of the choice this November. They owe it to the public to help them make decisions.

Specifically I cited the outsourcing/offshoring problem, where our tax policies actually give companies an incentive to move jobs out of the country, and the Chinese currency problem, where the Congress has shown China that they back the President's efforts to get them to bring their currency to market rates. Congress forced clear votes on the issues that are so important to people, so people now know where their representatives stand and can hold them accountable.

The Senate did take the vote Tuesday on stopping some of the policies that encourage companies to outsource our jobs. All Republicans and a few "corporate Democrats" stood with the Wall Street and the big multinationals and filibustered against Main Street and jobs. And now the public knows.

The bill will not become law, but the public can see who stood up for them and who stood up for the job-killers. This is just as important -- possibly more important in the long run -- because it helps break through the corporate-financed smokescreen that masks the real agenda that pushes for a few becoming vastly wealthy at the expense of the rest of us. The public can finally see clearly and act accordingly.

Once again, because of this vote the public now knows that all the Republicans and a few "corporate Democrats" voted to continue the policies that encourage companies to move our jobs out of the country.

Wednesday the House passed a bill to take action on currency manipulation, which currently is in the news because of China's manipulation of its currency which gives goods made in China a pricing advantage of up to 40%. This bill passed 348-79 with broad bipartisan support.

The trends in policy and polling are going in good directions. The fact that Democrats are in the lead on currency and are being joined by many Republicans shows that the "anti-protectionist" rap is no longer working. The public is extremely supportive of these actions. Taking these on is smart politics as well as good policy.

I wrote this in Tuesday's post and I'd like to conclude by repeating it: Democrats are leading in the right direction on currency, on manufacturing and on jobs. But it is important to TAKE THE VOTES, so the public can see for sure who is for things and who is against things. The voting matters as much for what the public understands, not whether it will pass, tells the public that there are politicians who get it. Theater matters because the public, in a democracy, must know where their representatives stand. And voting for smart policies, pas or fail, is not just theater, it is doing the right thing.

Taking these votes combines smart politics and smart substance and it is smart before an election. The public deserves to know.

American Betrayal, Sponsored By Intel

Isaiah J. Poole — Wed, 19 May 2010 13:43:55 -0400

LISTEN

Hear Clyde Prestowitz discuss the central theme of his book, "The Betrayal of American Prosperity."

If trade expert Clyde Prestowitz’s latest book, “The Betrayal of American Prosperity,” were a television series, one segment would open with this voiceover: “This episode of ‘The Betrayal of American Prosperity’ is brought to you by Intel.”

A group of Chinese workers in white smocks would smile into the camera and sing, “Bahm-bom-bom-bahmmm.”

Intel is indeed the sponsor of the latest act of the betrayal of American workers, who were told by the apostles of free trade and conservative corporatism that it’s OK if nitty-gritty manufacturing jobs went overseas; our supremacy in technology would create opportunities that would more than make up for the blue-collar jobs that were being rapidly exported.

But later this year Intel will open a $2.5 billion plant in Dalian, China that is just the latest example of how the free-traders’ line has proven false. The plant will serve China’s huge demand for lower-end processors, but there is speculation that if Intel can work around U.S. technology export controls, it would move higher-end production to the new facility as well.

At a presentation at the AFL-CIO headquarters in Washington May 18, Prestowitz used Intel as Exhibit A in how American workers are losing as a result of misplaced faith in free-marked orthodoxy and failed American economic policy. “The Betrayal of American Prosperity” details the history and consequences of this failure and offers policy recommendations for rebuilding the country’s job base.

“We’re in a world in which all of the incentives are such as to facilitate the movement of production of tradable goods and the provision of tradable services out of the United States,” Prestowitz said. “It doesn’t matter if they are low-tech, high-tech or medium-tech, they are all moving out.”

In the case of Intel and its new plant in China, which has plants in New Mexico and Oregon, many of the factors that are often used to explain the outsourcing of jobs to other countries don’t apply.

“Is the labor cost going to be less? Well, it will be less, but the labor cost is insignificant in semiconductor production,” Prestowitz said. “Will the operating costs be less? No, it will probably be higher. Will the quality be higher? No, probably worse. Well, will the productivity be higher? No, probably won’t be as good.”

Even the Chinese government’s currency undervaluation, which gives Chinese manufacturers an effective 40 percent cost advantage for their exported goods, is not a major concern for Intel, given that it has no roughly equal competitor.

“So, what’s going on? The answer is, this is a $6 billion investment, and of that $3 billion are being put up in one way or another by the Chinese government,” Prestowitz said. The government investment benefits Intel's bottom line to the tune of $100 million a year over 10 years.

On the website of the American Chamber of Commerce in China, an article confirms that the Chinese government was “influential in persuading Intel to setup its semiconductor manufacturing plant in Dalian,” and notes that, among other things, the Chinese government is building high-speed rail links, new highways and port facilities that would support new industry in Dalian and surrounding areas.

Prestowitz said that America does not have a policy that matches what China and other Asian countries are doing to encourage American firms to stay in America and produce jobs here at home. Merely cutting taxes and hoping for the best doesn’t count.

Prestowitz encouraged a contrast between how Chinese officials and American officials deal with American business leaders. When an American business leader goes to China to cut a deal, Prestowitz said, “you need to prove that you are a friend of China”—and that means moving a significant share of your production to their country and hiring their workers.

When was the last time an executive of a multinational business was challenged to demonstrate that he or she was a “friend of the United States” in that same way?

The pressure that China exerts on businesses that want access to its market “is a very powerful, subtle, unquantifiable factor that does not exist in the United States,” Prestowitz said.

The United States has the huge trade deficit and weak domestic economy that it has because “there’s been a big scam going on in the United States for the past 40 or 50 years,” Prestowitz said. “The scam is that the economists use the term ‘free trade,’ and they know that the average guy doesn’t understand that when they say ‘free trade,’ they means unilateral.”

In other words, “free trade” is not really fair or reciprocal trade, in which countries agree to abide by shared rules in which both sides gain, but it is effectively unilateral disarmament, in which a country such as China can set its own terms for global trade and industrial policy and the United States acts as if its living in an Adam Smith world.

Prestowitz argues for coming out of that fantasy world and borrow from the playbook of its trade competitors. One of his recommendations is to have a war chest of federal funds that can be used to support businesses that expand production and create jobs in the United States, and aggressively court foreign manufacturers who want greater access to the U.S. market to move some of their manufacturing into the U.S. At the same time, he said, U.S. policymakers should fight for fairer trade rules and insist on enforcement.

“It’s not too late, but it’s getting late,” Prestowitz warned.

U.S. Stimulus Helping Chinese, Spanish Wind Energy Industries

Natasha Chart — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 02:53:57 -0500

Wind energy is supposed to be able to create thousands of manufacturing jobs, but unfortunately the early wind energy manufacturing jobs financed by U.S. stimulus money have all gone to overseas manufacturers. There are at least three reasons why this happens, some easier to fix than others.

The Easier Problem

First is the problem of U.S. wind-turbine manufacturing capacity. It's tiny.

This could be improved by the adoption of a well-designed feed-in tariff. Feed-in tariffs are where the government sets mandates for renewable energy and supports the purchase of the resulting electricity at a rate that pays for the initial market entry.

Feed-in tariffs are why Spain is one of the countries whose wind turbines are being purchased for installation in the U.S. Also, many countries have preferential purchasing policies at the local level, which don't violate World Trade Organization rules.

Both feed-in tariffs and state or local government 'buy American' policies could be implemented in full keeping with our international trade obligations and we should do so at once.

The U.S. needs to support its own industries, particularly those with significant environmental benefits, without apology.

The Somewhat Harder Problem

The U.S. government has a bad attitude towards manufacturing and has favored the making of money over the making of things for a long time, the more complicated the scheme, the better. And conventional wisdom from the Commerce Department to all the serious business press has held that offshoring and outsourcing US jobs would cause no net changes in the job picture overall, even if there might be an unfortunate backlash tendency among the public.

Indeed, the policy elite seem baffled when people get upset that their mill or factory job disappears and they had to take work stocking shelves at a store that sells the imported version of what they used to make. Politicians appear confused when workers with degrees in computer science react badly to being told to get an education. But their confusion is surely an act.

It's been clear for a while now that many industries leave and don't come back. Manufacturing capacity and know-how is shipped off first, then the high value research and development jobs follow after them.

Retraining, a solution that politicians like to promote along with stern bromides about 'personal responsibility', is only a solution that works if there are comparable jobs to train for. It only works if the finance industry is willing to invest in businesses that hire skilled Americans, and if the tax code stops advantaging companies who keep jobs and profits overseas.

The reality more Americans live with all the time is that their job prospects have gotten worse over the years, with employers and investors increasingly unwilling to share profits with them.

Obama recognized this when he was campaigning and newly elected, saying that he'd stop offshoring tax breaks all the way through the summer. As of the middle of October, business leaders had convinced the president to shelve those plans.

You might hear politicians, business leaders, news anchors and various policy wonks say that outsourcing creates jobs and increases real wages for Americans. This is a lie unless you're referring specifically to the top 10 percent of U.S. income earners, though wage inequality is a problem all around the globe.

Those offshoring tax breaks need to be rescinded, and more, policy makers need to connect start connecting the dots between an economy that makes useful things and one in which ordinary consumers can afford to buy them. One hedge fund manage making a million dollars off an overseas business deal isn't going to generate the same level of beneficial economic activity as twenty manufacturing workers making $50,000* per year, each.

The Very Challenging Problem

This problem is the real sticker, because unlike adjusting our own policies, economy, or leaders' attitudes, this one involves Chinese policy.

Wind turbines require rare earth elements for their manufacture, which make good permanent magnets, and this is also true of many other green technologies. As Keith Bradsher pointed out, "China currently accounts for 93 percent of production of so-called rare earth elements — and more than 99 percent of the output for two of these elements, dysprosium and terbium," and they've been both more tightly restricting exports every year, as well as securing controlling interests in overseas mines.

The Chinese government is well aware that most wealth is created farther down the value chain than simple extraction, that the real money is in processing and fabrication. They would like their people to earn that profit. Considering that I'd like my government to take the same attitude, I can hardly fault the Chinese on that count.

I even hope the Chinese do continue to grow their alternative energy manufacturing for their own domestic market in particular. At present, they're sending over 95 percent of their solar panels to be exported, while opening a new coal plant every 7-10 days.

Yet it significantly disadvantages manufacturing in other countries that the Chinese government won't allow the materials to be sold on the open market like other commodities.

The Obama administration, acting in concert with the European Union, filed a June complaint with the WTO about Chinese export restrictions of raw materials that have driven prices up for the steel industry. It might be a while before we know how that's going to turn out in the end. Perhaps rare earth mineral exports will be a target of future actions, or perhaps more clean, high grade deposits (rare earths are often found in low concentrations and contaminated with radioactive elements) will come to light that the Chinese don't control.

Either way, something's got to give.

A flourishing US wind industry that does more than installation and maintenance will require steady supplies of permanent magnets. Otherwise, they'll end up over the same barrel as Toyota, whose Prius hybrids use 12 kg of rare earth materials per battery and more for the motor, and whose component manufacture they're now under pressure to move to China.

These issues are solvable, but it'll take quite the fire getting lit underneath the US political establishment to get them sorted out.

* Speaking of which, the median US household income in 2007 was $50,740, and it dropped 3.6% in 2008.

The U.S. and India: Trading Jobs For Problems

Eric Lotke — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:48:06 -0400

I’m torn.

On one hand, a wonderful event is taking place today, the annual U.S.-India Business Council “Synergies Summit” in Washington, DC.

It is a high-powered business summit in the beautiful flag room of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. India West describes the agenda as a “Who’s Who of business between the U.S. and India.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton provides a keynote address, along with Commerce Secretary Gary Locke. The same session features speakers from Pfizer Inc. and Dow Chemical International, alongside India’s own Minister of Commerce, Anand Sharma.

The event looks in every way like a celebration of business, commerce and shared prosperity between two great democracies. India had some 400 million voters in its last election. It boasts a vigorous free press and a genuine desire to spread its new-found wealth to still-poor rural villages. (Full disclosure: I have spent a good deal of time in India, even without counting my honeymoon.)

So why am I torn? What’s to worry?

I could start with our $12 billion trade deficit to India, including a $4 billion deficit in services. Anyone who has called the 1-800 number of a US company has likely helped to export those services, as more and more companies outsource such telephone staffing.

More troubling than the trade deficit — a tiny fraction of our deficit with China or OPEC nations — is the spirit of industry. India realizes that it needs commerce and trade to grow and prosper, and the government is helping to make it happen. India’s government is creating a thoughtful, far-reaching industrial policy designed around three pillars — services, manufacturing and agriculture. The government is creating strategic partnerships and building infrastructure to entice foreign investment that will lift its people, and increase their appeal to future investors and entrepreneurs.

Isn’t that cool?

So why aren’t we doing that?

While other country governments are taking the side of their people, our government sits on the sideline and cheers free trade — as if the interests of multinational corporations and the nation-states where they [nominally] reside are one and the same.

The interests of the corporation and the nation's people are not necessarily the same. India appears to be subsidizing its steel industry. Italy bailed out Fiat on the condition that manufacturing remain in Italy — while the U.S. bailed out GM on the basis of survival tactics such as outsourcing production to China and Mexico. U.S. companies lay off skilled workers, then import talent on H-1B visas. We’ve lost one in five manufacturing jobs since 2000.

I don’t pretend to have all the answers … but I can see that questions that need to be asked. And just down the street, I see a business summit where a flat Earth is tilting towards countries whose governments are doing more than just sitting on the sidelines.

A shout-out thanks to a reader who alerted us about this event. That reader gets the closing words:
“Given the American unemployment situation, why are American jobs still up for global labor arbitrage?”

Economic Terrorism

Tula Connell — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:23:23 -0400

Corporate opponents of workers' freedom to form unions repeatedly have shown they are not interested in the welfare of their employees or any of the pseudo-lofty ideals they cite while fighting the Employee Free Choice Act.

Now, they've made clear they will do anything--even destroy jobs, communities and harm the U.S. economy--to ensure that more American workers do not have a voice on the job. (And this just in--they're now using Joe the Plumber as an anti-Employee Free Choice Act spokes-idiot. That guy can't seem to keep a job.)

In Wisconsin, a local economic development official in Eau Claire County said a project was derailed because of the proposed Employee Free Choice Act. According to today's Eau Claire Leader-Telegram, the unnamed project would have brought a

$50 million investment to Eau Claire County in the next five years, along with creating up to 800 full-time jobs, Brian Doudna, executive director of the Eau Claire Area Economic Development Corp., said in a news release Wednesday evening. Construction was expected to begin this year. The first employees were to begin work in early 2010, with about 100 new jobs being created. [snip]

'Proposed federal and state legislation, as shown by this company's decision, can impact location decisions and limit the private sector's ability to create quality jobs for Eau Claire area residents. This is especially disappointing given the condition of our current national, regional and local economies.'

Yo, Brian: What's 'disappointing' is the blackmail screaming out here. The threat by employers to destroy the community they theoretically are invested in just so those employers don't have to actually talk with workers across a bargaining table about what might make for a safe workplace, what they need to support their families and retire without working until they die.

That's bad enough. But here's the kicker:

Doudna said if the bill is approved, the project will not occur--at least not in the U.S.

Blackmail, big time. In short, U.S. corporations are saying: Give us unlimited control over the lives of our workers, or we'll go to another nation where 'human rights' is a dirty phrase and 'workers' rights' even worse.

The local Chamber of Commerce's response is to attack government.

Bob McCoy, president of the Eau Claire Area Chamber of Commerce, said the government essentially is stopping growth in the Chippewa Valley.

'I think it's one of those situations when the state starts trying to generate additional revenue or put certain criteria on business, it can reverse itself,' he said. 'There's a potential for the Employee Free Choice Act, and (businesses) can't afford those types of consequences.

Because the Wall Street way worked so well for us, huh, Bob?

There's a lot to be said about corporate greed fueling the opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act. But as the nation's $4 billion annual union-busting industry shows, more than money is involved. When corporations are willing to spend far more to fight unionization than they would spend on a unionized workforce, when they are willing to rip out the economic guts of the community--then something seriously is wrong with the culture of those who call the economic shots in this nation. Because the corporate threat screaming from Eau Claire is not just blackmail. It's anti-worker. Anti-you. Anti-me. Anti-American.

This is a crosspost from Firedoglake.

Companies Avoid U.S. Pay Standards, Outsourcing Jobs

Armand Biroonak — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:00:00 -0400

For every dollar an American manufacturing worker is paid, a worker in Mexico is paid 12 cents and one in Hong Kong makes just 24 cents.

Private Corporations Control Our Nation's War Endeavors

Alexander Sewell — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Seventy percent of the intelligence budget now goes to contractors. Private corporate interests control our nation’s most sensitive information and help direct our most critical foreign policy decisions.