"The TPP, which will include Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, as well as the US, is a critical component of President Barack Obama’s so-called pivot to Asia, a strategy to counter China’s rising economic and diplomatic influence.
The US Congress resumes sessions on June 1 after a 10-day Memorial Day holiday recess."
I want a 10 day Memorial Day holiday recess!
Seriously though, it looks like this thing that "takes NAFTA even further", the thing that made it impossible to "buy American", is being shoved through.
NAFTA (effective 1994) affected U.S. workers in four principal ways.
First, it caused the loss of some 700,000 jobs as production moved to Mexico. Most of these losses came in California, Texas, Michigan, and other states where manufacturing is concentrated. (isn't that where detroit is--was---)
Second, NAFTA strengthened the ability of U.S. employers to force workers to accept lower wages and benefits.
Third, the destructive effect of NAFTA on the Mexican agricultural and small business sectors dislocated several million Mexican workers and their families, and was a major cause in the dramatic increase in undocumented workers flowing into the U.S. labor market.
Fourth, NAFTA was the template for rules of the emerging global economy, in which the benefits would flow to capital and the costs to labor. The U.S. governing class—in alliance with the financial elites of its trading partners—applied NAFTA’s principles to the World Trade Organization, to the policies of the World Bank and IMF, and to the deal under which employers of China’s huge supply of low-wage workers were allowed access to U.S. markets in exchange for allowing American multinational corporations the right to invest there.
Here is a table showing how things look before and after NAFTA.
| year | minimum wage/hour | average annual income | average cost of a car | average cost of a gallon of milk | minimum annual income | minimum to average | Average hourly income | hours of minimum to buy a gal of milk | ||
| 1938 | $0.25 | $1,700 | $700 | $0.50 | $520.00 | 31% | $0.81 | >3 | ||
| 1940 | ||||||||||
| 1945 | $0.40 | $2,900 | $1,250 | $0.62 | $832.00 | 29% | $1.39 | >1 | ||
| 1950 | $0.75 | $3,800 | $1,750 | $0.82 | $1,560.00 | 41% | $1.82 | >2 | ||
| 1956 | $1.00 | $5,300 | $2,100 | $0.97 | $2,080.00 | 39% | $2.54 | >2 | ||
| 1960 | ||||||||||
| 1968 | $1.60 | $6,583 | $2,822 | $1.07 | $3,328.00 | 63% | $2.55 | <2 | ||
| 1970 | ||||||||||
| 1974 | $2.00 | $9,780 | $3,750 | $1.57 | $4,160.00 | 50% | $4.70 | >2 | ||
| 1979 | $2.90 | $14,896 | $5,770 | $1.62 | $6,032.00 | 41% | $7.16 | <1 | ||
| 1980 | ||||||||||
| 1990 | $3.80 | $28,149 | $16,000 | $2.78 | $7,904.00 | 28% | $13.53 | <1 | ||
| 1997 | $5.15 | $35,788 | $16,900 | $3.22 | $10,712.00 | 30% | $17.20 | <1 | ||
| 2000 | ||||||||||
| 2007 | $5.85 | $48,729 | $27,950.00 | $3.13 | $12,168.00 | 25% | $23.42 | <1 | ||
| 2008 | $6.55 | $48,762 | $2.65 | $13,624.00 | 28% | $23.44 | <1 | |||
| 2009 | $7.25 | $48,276 | $2.69 | $15,080.00 | 31% | $23.20 | <1 |
In 1982, we had a "recession" which is apparently a lot like a depression but with inflation.In 2007, we had not had the minimum wage earners lower since a minimum wage was started. The 2 increases to the minimum wage occurred in response to the economic meltdown that occurred in 2007. Thankfully, we did not have to try the austerity method Europe used, and which has still not worked.
We did not pop back to the sixties or even the 50's or 70's after NAFTA. In fact, being at the bottom in the USA is still a lot like being at the bottom during the Great depression, and has been since the 1980's brought us Dallas on TV while we had a tent city on our river bank from homelessness. If you are making more than the average annual income, feel lucky. That number is elevated by including those billionaire outliers in the numbers. If you average 1 minimum wage earner in 2007 with one Fortune 400 CEO, then the average income is about 10 billion for those 2 people. One of those 2 is probably having a hard time with rent and getting to work without making sacrifices in the budget. The other one doesn't really understand the whole budget concept. Any new business arrangement that is only aimed at business success, and not at regular people success is not going to produce positive life changes for the majority of us.
I keep hoping the TPP doesn't happen. It offers me no personal benefit and potentially causes my descendants a lot of hardship. I have no problem with a global economy. I don't mind buying things from other countries. I hate that if everything is made somewhere else, it won't take much to cause a real problem here.
Every country that has been dependent on someone else to grow their food, make their clothes, make their shoes, produce their medications is at risk of offending the nation that is doing that and suffering an embargo.
Right now, lets start with the basics, food, water, shelter, shoes and clothing, and then head on up the to the more luxurious things, books, electronics, perfumes, coffee (one of my basics), bananas, diamonds, gold, cars and see what we would actually have here if someone decided that we could not import. Then we can look at what we would have a glut of if we could not export.
I like the idea of the global economy, but my ideal is more fair trade and less back room politics. I don't particularly like making rich people richer. I thoroughly enjoy buying local--local like the flea market and farmers market and not like another branch of wallyworld. The Walton's have so much money that if they never work again, their great great grandkids would still be rich. Putting my money in Walmart is the equivalent of trying to store my water in space--just gone; no hope of any personal return.
So, I would like more global trade agreements, but only if they are based on everyone, everywhere making a living wage. I want the money I spend on an ink pen from some other country to help the person that made that ink pen buy food and clothes, educational toys, hope for the future of their children. The thought that I am buying an ink pen that used to be made in my home town, but that the people that worked in that factory are now unemployed and the people that are now making that pen are locked in a dirty bunkhouse between shifts and not even making enough to buy one of those ink pens, that disturbs me. The thought that the makers are small children, or are owned by the factory, or are in any way being used or abused to make the money I paid for that ink pen and that goes to someone that can't decide if they wants their 5th house to be in a tropical climate or a winter wonderland, that makes me want to write with the burnt end of a stick.
And no, its not just business--its all personal.
No comments:
Post a Comment