On TV.com: THE OFFICE: Cue Sad Horn Noise
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 29 of 33:
Next »
« Previous
Protectionism? Not really.
The big multi-nationals are throwing this term around in
order to protect their interests. The fact is that it is not
"proctionism" as has been defined for almost 100 years.

Protectionism was originally designed to limit the import of
manufactured goods, made by foreign companies in foreign
countries. Protectionism, usually in the form of high tariffs,
made those goods more expensive than domestic goods.
This was practiced by virtually all major countries.

A perfect case of pure "protectionism" was when Bush raised
tariffs on European steel a little while back.

Today, domestic companies (in many developed countries -
not just the US) are simply shifting their production (and the
employment that goes with it) to low wage countries. Then
they are shipping those goods (including services and
software) back to their home countries. In many cases the
domestic companies hire sub-contractors to do the work.
This relieves them of responsiblity for the workforce in the
low wage country - giving them "deniability" when it's found
that the foreign workers are treated like animals. The
domestic company says; "We didn't know about it, so we
didn't do anything wrong". Nike played that game for years.

The simple fact is that the developed nations have never
faced such a threat to employment, standards of living, and
their tax structures. This is a NEW ball game.

The term "protectionism", with its negative conotation, will be
trotted out by allthose with a vested interest in exporting
jobs to low wage countries. But, in truth, prevention of this
job exporting has nothing to do with "protectionism" as it's
been practiced over the last 100 years.
Posted by: j.m.galvin   Posted on: 02/05/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

American citizens should be first  Christian_<>< | 02/04/04
View from the other side  Fred Fredrickson | 02/04/04
everyone knows this  JWatson77 | 02/05/04
Huh?  Fred Fredrickson | 02/05/04
You're a wee bit off  j.m.galvin | 02/05/04
But  voska | 02/05/04
Dah  thepubba | 02/05/04
the simple facts  blahblahblah | 02/04/04
Right on the H1B, wrong on the L1  thepubba | 02/04/04
And of course...  BitTwiddler | 02/05/04
Learn to read  thepubba | 02/05/04
shedding light  blahblahblah | 02/05/04
agree with you  JWatson77 | 02/05/04
US corporations digging their own grave.  HellScream | 02/04/04
Absolutely true...  codewarrior2112 | 02/05/04
My prediction is this.  voska | 02/05/04
Politicians need to be answer to their electorate  bhafner | 02/04/04
well duh  JWatson77 | 02/05/04
Real Estate is a better field now  Christian_<>< | 02/05/04
Won't buy from Intuit anymore  mwille | 02/05/04
Re: Agree  Christian_<>< | 02/05/04
I won't use thier products either  voska | 02/05/04
Since there IS NO SHORTAGE....  BitTwiddler | 02/05/04
It's all the pols  j.m.galvin | 02/05/04
Visa program...  codewarrior2112 | 02/05/04
Please explain  thepubba | 02/05/04
Who signed H1B into law?  thepubba | 02/05/04
Protectionism or Offshoring  voska | 02/05/04
Protectionism? Not really.  j.m.galvin | 02/05/04
That was 100 years ago  voska | 02/05/04
The negative results of unfetterd capitalism  j.m.galvin | 02/05/04
Nothing is going to happen!  serpentmage | 02/05/04
Guest Worker Program  Redhead_z | 02/09/05

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here