Canadian Wages Plummet

[cybercoma]

Median income, the stat that would show what the middle class is making, only grew by 5.5% over 34 years.

Median income is the only statistic that should be used when discussing what the "average" Canadian is making. The mean average is heavily skewed when it comes to income. Income distribution in Canada, the US and the UK looks like this graph.

http://www.philender.com/courses/intro/notes2/skew1.gif

The median income level is more important because 50% of the population is below and 50% of the population is above that level. Mean is dragged to the right significantly by the outliers with considerably more income.

The increase in the mean income is probably due to a handful of outliers pulling it further to the right, while the median income hasn't changed much at all because most Canadians incomes are unchanged. This just reinforces the idea that the top 1%, if not less (more likely the top 0.1%) are actually hoarding the wealth. In other words, the only thing that trickles down in trickle down economics are people's real wages. The top 1% have benefitted disproportionately from neo-conservative (liberal) supply-side economics.

Edited November 25, 2011 by cybercoma

[Wild Bill]

Seems this thread is full of posts about how "trickle down economics hasn't worked", "Free Trade hasn't worked" and of course "It's all Harper's fault!" which implies that things were just peachy before Harper was elected.

I'm wondering if this is all untrue. Perhaps they HAVE worked except there's a factor so big that it masks out all the others and makes their beneficial effects trivial.

I'm talking about the massive shift in production and jobs to countries like China and India! We're talking more than a few million jobs in Canada and at least 10 times that in the USA.

Manufacturing jobs tended to be among the higher paid in North America. Remove them and people's median wage falls like a rock.

I think the politicians MUST have studied this, at least those on the higher levels and certainly those in the Finance ministry. Perhaps the hit from losing all those jobs has hurt so deeply that we're essentially screwed for a generation or two, if not longer. If this is so it's a lead pipe cinch that the LAST thing they want to do is talk about it!

For such a factor at this point would be beyond their control. Voters would not believe that, of course. So there's no way an incumbent party could do anything significant about it. Opposition parties would be afraid to use it as a tool to help oust them and get themselves into power, except they likely know full well that they can't do a damn thing any better and they'd only end up suffering the same fate the next election.

Or perhaps once again I'm just too cynical?

As Mike Meyers mother-in-law used to say: "Talk amongst yourselves!"

[Jack Weber]

Seems this thread is full of posts about how "trickle down economics hasn't worked", "Free Trade hasn't worked" and of course "It's all Harper's fault!" which implies that things were just peachy before Harper was elected.

I'm wondering if this is all untrue. Perhaps they HAVE worked except there's a factor so big that it masks out all the others and makes their beneficial effects trivial.

I'm talking about the massive shift in production and jobs to countries like China and India! We're talking more than a few million jobs in Canada and at least 10 times that in the USA.

Manufacturing jobs tended to be among the higher paid in North America. Remove them and people's median wage falls like a rock.

I think the politicians MUST have studied this, at least those on the higher levels and certainly those in the Finance ministry. Perhaps the hit from losing all those jobs has hurt so deeply that we're essentially screwed for a generation or two, if not longer. If this is so it's a lead pipe cinch that the LAST thing they want to do is talk about it!

For such a factor at this point would be beyond their control. Voters would not believe that, of course. So there's no way an incumbent party could do anything significant about it. Opposition parties would be afraid to use it as a tool to help oust them and get themselves into power, except they likely know full well that they can't do a damn thing any better and they'd only end up suffering the same fate the next election.

Or perhaps once again I'm just too cynical?

As Mike Meyers mother-in-law used to say: "Talk amongst yourselves!"

Well you've certainly hit on how Ontario has been decimated.

I guess the real question is why and who allowed this to happen?

I suppose the free marketeers wwill say that the "greedy unions" are to blame and have priced themselves out of business.Some of us who don't buy the drivel spouted by thse types may be a litle more cynical and think the manic Dickensian search for profit by those who have an insatiable need for power and control are the "invisible hand" behind this unfortunate shift...

Someone here said a while ago that if there was one good thing about the Communist Block it was the evidence that people could rise up against those who controlled the cash box.I think there is some truth to this because since the downfall of the Soviet Union,the global free market "movement",and its resultant wealth redistribution excercise,hs definately accelorated.

As I said,30 years of misguided economic policy by allowing business to essentially take over legislatures all over the Western world,has got us to this point...

[dre]

Well you've certainly hit on how Ontario has been decimated.

I guess the real question is why and who allowed this to happen?

I suppose the free marketeers wwill say that the "greedy unions" are to blame and have priced themselves out of business.Some of us who don't buy the drivel spouted by thse types may be a litle more cynical and think the manic Dickensian search for profit by those who have an insatiable need for power and control are the "invisible hand" behind this unfortunate shift...

Someone here said a while ago that if there was one good thing about the Communist Block it was the evidence that people could rise up against those who controlled the cash box.I think there is some truth to this because since the downfall of the Soviet Union,the global free market "movement",and its resultant wealth redistribution excercise,hs definately accelorated.

As I said,30 years of misguided economic policy by allowing business to essentially take over legislatures all over the Western world,has got us to this point...

I guess the real question is why and who allowed this to happen?

Pretty much all of us. Canadians were more than happy to throw each other under the bus to get at dirt cheap non-durables.

[Wild Bill]

I guess the real question is why and who allowed this to happen?

I suppose the free marketeers wwill say that the "greedy unions" are to blame and have priced themselves out of business.Some of us who don't buy the drivel spouted by thse types may be a litle more cynical and think the manic Dickensian search for profit by those who have an insatiable need for power and control are the "invisible hand" behind this unfortunate shift...

It's not that simple, Jack. I don't think the unions were consciously greedy. I just think they didn't see the big picture.

Any smart salesman knows that if you get your customer to pay you more than he can afford there is the risk that he will go bankrupt. When production first started to move out the companies that were left were faced with a big problem. Stuff coming from places like China was SO much cheaper than what they could produce here that they simply could not compete!

So what were they supposed to do? Stay here until they went bankrupt? To expect that would be stupid. No one will willingly commit suicide just to keep someone else happy, especially when after they're dead the happiness will end anyway.

Their choice was simple. Follow the crowd or lie down and die. Most chose to follow the crowd to China and those others similar countries.

In the early 80's the boss of the electronic company I worked for saw this coming. He went on a tour of Hong Kong, which was as close to China as a westerner could get in those days. He saw so many of the standard items we sold everyday, like switches, relays, terminal blocks and so on that were as much as 30% of what we had been paying to our domestic suppliers! He set up accounts and we started buying from those Hong Kong suppliers but it was too late by then to save the domestic manufacturers collective asses.

Remember Jack that all the businesses in the country aren't run by the same brain! Each one is different, looking out for its own needs.

I do blame the unions in that I've never heard of one that recognized the situation their opponent company was in. They seemed to think that all they had to do was to win the battle against their company's management, while oblivious to the fact that their company was going to lose the war by not being able to compete against the Chinese. It's all very well for a Ford union negotiator to say that his workers' productivity is better than that of GM. Who gives a crap if everybody is buying Toyotas?

However, the union position didn't matter anyway. They could not have given enough concessions to leave their workers with a living wage that would have enabled their companies to keep production here and compete. The Chinese were just that much cheaper!

Mind you, there are many things our own politicians could have done that might have helped. They've never stood up to China for many of its unfair trade practices. China cheerfully ignores intellectual property rights, selling pirate copies of not just DVDs and such but almost everything you can imagine! Worst of all, their labour cost advantage is far greater than it should be, since China artificially pegs its currency to a level in favour of its exports. Western countries should have placed an embargo on Chines goods until they allowed their currency to float freely, the same as every other country does! If this was done a good portion of the lost manufacturing could come back and be competitive, especially when you're saving shipping costs.

It wasn't just a "maniacal search for profit", Jack! For most of the industries involved, it was simple survival!

Or are you going to tell me that companies could have just ignored the Chinese and kept plugging along, charging the same prices and paying the same wages?

Frankly Jack, if you had been running one of those companies in the late 80's you would have had to do the same thing yourself!

If you have an alternate solution that would have worked I'd love to hear it!

[dre]

It's not that simple, Jack. I don't think the unions were consciously greedy. I just think they didn't see the big picture.

Any smart salesman knows that if you get your customer to pay you more than he can afford there is the risk that he will go bankrupt. When production first started to move out the companies that were left were faced with a big problem. Stuff coming from places like China was SO much cheaper than what they could produce here that they simply could not compete!

So what were they supposed to do? Stay here until they went bankrupt? To expect that would be stupid. No one will willingly commit suicide just to keep someone else happy, especially when after they're dead the happiness will end anyway.

Their choice was simple. Follow the crowd or lie down and die. Most chose to follow the crowd to China and those others similar countries.

In the early 80's the boss of the electronic company I worked for saw this coming. He went on a tour of Hong Kong, which was as close to China as a westerner could get in those days. He saw so many of the standard items we sold everyday, like switches, relays, terminal blocks and so on that were as much as 30% of what we had been paying to our domestic suppliers! He set up accounts and we started buying from those Hong Kong suppliers but it was too late by then to save the domestic manufacturers collective asses.

Remember Jack that all the businesses in the country aren't run by the same brain! Each one is different, looking out for its own needs.

I do blame the unions in that I've never heard of one that recognized the situation their opponent company was in. They seemed to think that all they had to do was to win the battle against their company's management, while oblivious to the fact that their company was going to lose the war by not being able to compete against the Chinese. It's all very well for a Ford union negotiator to say that his workers' productivity is better than that of GM. Who gives a crap if everybody is buying Toyotas?

However, the union position didn't matter anyway. They could not have given enough concessions to leave their workers with a living wage that would have enabled their companies to keep production here and compete. The Chinese were just that much cheaper!

Mind you, there are many things our own politicians could have done that might have helped. They've never stood up to China for many of its unfair trade practices. China cheerfully ignores intellectual property rights, selling pirate copies of not just DVDs and such but almost everything you can imagine! Worst of all, their labour cost advantage is far greater than it should be, since China artificially pegs its currency to a level in favour of its exports. Western countries should have placed an embargo on Chines goods until they allowed their currency to float freely, the same as every other country does! If this was done a good portion of the lost manufacturing could come back and be competitive, especially when you're saving shipping costs.

It wasn't just a "maniacal search for profit", Jack! For most of the industries involved, it was simple survival!

Or are you going to tell me that companies could have just ignored the Chinese and kept plugging along, charging the same prices and paying the same wages?

Frankly Jack, if you had been running one of those companies in the late 80's you would have had to do the same thing yourself!

If you have an alternate solution that would have worked I'd love to hear it!

When production first started to move out the companies that were left were faced with a big problem. Stuff coming from places like China was SO much cheaper than what they could produce here that they simply could not compete!

Of course stuff from a totalitarian regime where people are not allowed to participate in the political process is going to be way cheaper. Stuff made in Soviet gulags would have been cheaper as well during the cold war and todays generation of Canadians would have been more than happy to buy it if they saved a few bucks.

The consumer ethics model changed. In the classic model price is only one consideration, we also considered which practices we were rewarding with our patronage. So we were more likely to trade with other democracries, and we would try to isolate totalitarian regimes, and not buy much stuff from them. We also forced producers to behave more responsibily, and treat their workers and the environment better even though we KNEW it meant higher prices for the goods they made.

Todays generation would have lost the coldwar for this exact reason. We would have decided that the best way to bring about political change and potitical reforms in the USSR was to move millions of our jobs there, and dump hundreds of billions in capital into the soviet economy.

Ultimately this could turn out to be the mother of all huge mistakes. We are creating another communist economic superpower. On the other hand the emergence of a large chinese middle class might liberalise china and make it a better global citizen.

Or are you going to tell me that companies could have just ignored the Chinese and kept plugging along, charging the same prices and paying the same wages?

Yeah we pretty much could have done that. Until we decided to open up trade with China it was pretty much isolated and going nowhere.

Edited November 26, 2011 by dre

[cybercoma]

It's funny how the same people who fight against austerity measures for businesses as being damaging to the economy, also promote austerity measures for the employees and unions. Who do you think buys these companies' products? Their employees. They argue that businesses can't be squeezed because they need to create jobs, but then argue that positions need to cost less... so they can merely maintain jobs. Until companies make their way back towards the Fordist Compromise, the economy will only get worse before it gets better. Employees need to be able to afford the products that companies are selling in order for the companies to be successful.

[blueblood]

Actually high savings rates are the nuclear scenario in our system. Both saving and paying off debt would quickly shrink the monetary base and lead to deflation and depression.

Thats why youre getting all those offers in the mail from banks for pre-approved credit cards, personal loans, and lines of credit. Without all that borrowing and spending this system collapses into a pile of rubble, because without debt theres no money.

Except it wouldn't collapse, it would go through severe withdrawal, but not collapse. We are going through the early stages of withdrawal right now. Taking out a massive amount of debt did diddly squat and exacerbated the problem.

[dre]

Except it wouldn't collapse, it would go through severe withdrawal, but not collapse. We are going through the early stages of withdrawal right now. Taking out a massive amount of debt did diddly squat and exacerbated the problem.

No high savings rates would simply drive up the public debt. The central banks would ease credit by dumping money into the economy like crazy. This period of high personal savings rates you describe it whats known by economists today as a recession... people stop spending and the economy freezes up and employment goes down. The whole purpose of having the monetary system we have is to give government tools to further ease credit and get people spending again when this happens.

Its theoretically possible to have a "pay as you go" economy, but definately not using fiat/fr money. The only thing this system has every produced is perpetually increasing debt.

Edited November 26, 2011 by dre

[MiddleClassCentrist]

It's funny how the same people who fight against austerity measures for businesses as being damaging to the economy, also promote austerity measures for the employees and unions. Who do you think buys these companies' products? Their employees. They argue that businesses can't be squeezed because they need to create jobs, but then argue that positions need to cost less... so they can merely maintain jobs. Until companies make their way back towards the Fordist Compromise, the economy will only get worse before it gets better. Employees need to be able to afford the products that companies are selling in order for the companies to be successful.

Exactly, we can't buy anything if we don't have money. That is what leads to a depression scenario. If we have money, we can make purchases, in turn creating more jobs. The wealthy don't create jobs, the market does. When people have money to spend in the market, jobs are created.

Corporatists want working people to fight each other rather than focus on the real issues.

Edited November 26, 2011 by MiddleClassCentrist

[Jack Weber]

Exactly, we can't buy anything if we don't have money. That is what leads to a depression scenario. If we have money, we can make purchases, in turn creating more jobs. The wealthy don't create jobs, the market does. When people have money to spend in the market, jobs are created.

Corporatists want working people to fight each other rather than focus on the real issues.

What's the quote about Fascism and Corporatism Mussolini said?

[Wild Bill]

Of course stuff from a totalitarian regime where people are not allowed to participate in the political process is going to be way cheaper. Stuff made in Soviet gulags would have been cheaper as well during the cold war and todays generation of Canadians would have been more than happy to buy it if they saved a few bucks.

Yeah we pretty much could have done that. Until we decided to open up trade with China it was pretty much isolated and going nowhere.

Which is why I'm still pissed at the Liberals! Chretien and his boys were falling all over themselves to set up trade with China. Worse yet, they got snookered! It all started in the early 1990's when the Mulroney/Campbell government got defeated by Jean and his boys.

Working for a supplier in the electronics parts industry gave me a clear perspective of what was going on. Chretien goes to China. Next thing you know its in all the media that Northern Telecom is going to sell China a zillion phones! China was basically a primitive country and needed to be wired from scratch, to service a zillion people!

Northern Telecom's stock went through the roof. Chretien and his Liberals held photo op after photo op at manufacturing plants in Kanata and Mississauga. Everyone expected there would be a lot of new hires.

Meanwhile, China held talks with Northern Telecom and insisted that she had no desire to simply buy the phones and switching systems from plants in Canada. Instead, she wanted Northern Telecom to build the factories in China, training Chinese people and giving them the jobs!

That of course is what actually happened. The first step was to move the production and start laying off Canadian Northern Telecom workers. The engineering stayed here but surprise! they soon found that none of us suppliers were willing to help their engineers with data and samples of new-fangled integrated circuits and stuff when the production buys would be done by China and we would thus never have a chance to bid on the production quantities! So engineering eventually moved as well.

It took a while for the domestic stock market to wise up but we all saw the Big Fall where NT's stock dropped from over $200 per share to less than a dollar! Everything really went for a dump just after 9/1/11. NT had been buying over a third of ALL the electronic parts that were soldered on circuit boards in Canada! When that disappeared suppliers and sales rep houses began to drop like flies. Thousands of inside and outside sales staff, warehouse workers and the like lost their jobs, including me!

The Canadian electronic manufacturing industry never did recover. The jobs never came back. Production for all manufacturing, not just for Northern Telecom also drifted away to China and also a large part to Ireland, not so much for cheaper labour as for MUCH less government paperwork aggravation! Labour was never as big a deal as many ill-informed observers thought since most of such manufacturing was done by machines anyway.

So for a decade of power Chretien traded away an entire Canadian industry and perhaps 40,000 jobs that worked in and supported it!

I've never been able to decide if Chretien and his people were stupid and rooked by the Chinese or if they knew all along and just didn't care. Likely they believed a popular myth of that time, that Chinese workers were unskilled grunts who would take the "joe jobs" while Canada would retain the "brain work" with engineers and better educated technicians. This of course was a very arrogant, patronizing and completely wrong assumption! China had well trained and educated workers and as she created a new industry for herself she produced many more of them! From the seeds of factories producing phones grew factory after factory producing every kind of electronic consumer device you could think of! Virtually ALL of it comes from China now, including everything in the computer you are using to read this post.

Yet few know the score and even fewer care! Early in Harper's term he tried to link trade with China to human rights and the left and even much of the right went livid! "Don't rock the boat! We need their trade!"

With such a staggering imbalance of trade between China and Canada why on earth would we care?

Edited November 26, 2011 by Wild Bill

[Michael Hardner]

However, the union position didn't matter anyway. They could not have given enough concessions to leave their workers with a living wage that would have enabled their companies to keep production here and compete. The Chinese were just that much cheaper!

Very thoughtful and true. Only tariffs would have kept China our of our markets.

[Michael Hardner]

Which is why I'm still pissed at the Liberals! Chretien and his boys were falling all over themselves to set up trade with China. Worse yet, they got snookered! It all started in the early 1990's when the Mulroney/Campbell government got defeated by Jean and his boys.

Well, Mulroney's government started the ball rolling on the debate and the legislation with the FTA, then NAFTA. Governments do like free trade for what they do for the overall economy, however they're in new territory when it comes to the effects.

It took a while for the domestic stock market to wise up but we all saw the Big Fall where NT's stock dropped from over $200 per share to less than a dollar! Everything really went for a dump just after 9/1/11. NT had been buying over a third of ALL the electronic parts that were soldered on circuit boards in Canada! When that disappeared suppliers and sales rep houses began to drop like flies. Thousands of inside and outside sales staff, warehouse workers and the like lost their jobs, including me!

You are I were both set back by Globalization and off-shoring. There's no reason to believe that this trend won't continue as the Conservative government is currently looking to get Canada into a Pacific free trade zone.

And... I understand why. It makes the overall economy stronger and is a win-win overall. But the economic benefits aren't as visible as the costs. Costs and benefits... Jobs are lost, and some Canadian companies do better and hire... Wages go down, but people can spend less (in the long term) on goods...

So for a decade of power Chretien traded away an entire Canadian industry and perhaps 40,000 jobs that worked in and supported it!

I've never been able to decide if Chretien and his people were stupid and rooked by the Chinese or if they knew all along and just didn't care. Likely they believed a popular myth of that time, that Chinese workers were unskilled grunts who would take the "joe jobs" while Canada would retain the "brain work" with engineers and better educated technicians. This of course was a very arrogant, patronizing and completely wrong assumption! China had well trained and educated workers and as she created a new industry for herself she produced many more of them! From the seeds of factories producing phones grew factory after factory producing every kind of electronic consumer device you could think of! Virtually ALL of it comes from China now, including everything in the computer you are using to read this post.

It's interesting that you put this on Chretien, rather that the general enthusiasm that centre-right and centre-left governments have for open trade. The only party that is consistently against open trade is the NDP - you do realize that right ?

Yet few know the score and even fewer care! Early in Harper's term he tried to link trade with China to human rights and the left and even much of the right went livid! "Don't rock the boat! We need their trade!"

With such a staggering imbalance of trade between China and Canada why on earth would we care?

It seems you somehow believe that Harper et al are more cautious about Globalized trade than Liberals... and that is not the case. Am I right ?

[Wild Bill]

Well, Mulroney's government started the ball rolling on the debate and the legislation with the FTA, then NAFTA. Governments do like free trade for what they do for the overall economy, however they're in new territory when it comes to the effects.

And... I understand why. It makes the overall economy stronger and is a win-win overall. But the economic benefits aren't as visible as the costs. Costs and benefits... Jobs are lost, and some Canadian companies do better and hire... Wages go down, but people can spend less (in the long term) on goods...

It's interesting that you put this on Chretien, rather that the general enthusiasm that centre-right and centre-left governments have for open trade. The only party that is consistently against open trade is the NDP - you do realize that right ?

It seems you somehow believe that Harper et al are more cautious about Globalized trade than Liberals... and that is not the case. Am I right ?

No, but I probably haven't made myself as clear as I should have!

"Jobs are lost, and some Canadian companies do better and hire... " If it were truly a win/win, then why is our unemployment rate higher now than before? Why have incomes dropped?

As for "putting it on Chretien", I'm NOT against free trade! I just don't like rigged deals! It was up to Chretien to make sure that his deal was good for Canada and not just China. It was up to Chretien to audit China and make sure they didn't renege on their part of the bargain.

Yet that's exactly where he failed! Once the doors were open, China threw obstacles in the path of Canadian companies wanting to sell into China while filling our WalMarts to the roof!

Michael, we don't need to nitpick all the stats. The sheer size of the trade deficit between ourselves and China is so mindboggling huge that it's obvious something was very wrong! Today it is being offset a SMALL bit by sending them resource exports but China thus keeps the real money, which is always in manufacturing and value-added. Third world countries depend on raw resources for their economies. Because there are so many of them the competition is cutthroat, which depresses prices.

I would agree that Harper is more cautious about free trade deals but not against free trade in itself. It all depends on what kind of a deal and the integrity of the country you sign with. It's like making a deal with Britain or with France for agricultural products. Britain would either live up to such a deal or not sign it in the first place if they were unwilling to give up their subsidies to their farmers. France would more likely cheerfully sign an agricultural free trade deal, flood our markets with their stuff while INCREASING the subsidies to their farmers! They know full well that if they reduce the protection to their farmers they will face riots in the streets.

Perhaps the biggest factor is one of approach. Chretien signed his deals with China for the photo-ops. He doesn't appear to have ever bothered to audit the deal after the signing and confront China for not living up to it. We can't blame the Chinese. If the Canadian government didn't care, why should they? All those warlord Chinese leaders want is the money!

Harper appears to understand this, maybe because he was schooled as an accountant. I'm not saying he's been any more successful. It's too early to say. Certainly, while he may be helping the national economy as a whole with the Alberta oil sands he doesn't appear to have done much for Ontario's manufacturing industry. To be fair, I'm not sure what he COULD do! Also, it's more McGuinty's job anyway. McGuinty doesn't have much rapport with Harper's government. All he seems to do is sit there and demand federal money! With no strings attached, of course!

Hope that makes my position a bit clearer, Michael!

[cybercoma]

Western nations should put tariffs on Chinese goods until they stop pegging their currency. Only then will we be able to see the true cost of things. We're living with artificially low inflation because the real cost of the goods is much higher. We're actually incurring that cost by lowered incomes (for the bottom 80% anyway). If China stopped pegging their currency, the price of things would be much greater, forcing people to demand higher wages. Buseinesses would stop finding it as profitable to export from China and companies would start coming home. China is making a tiny percentage of people in the West insanely wealthy, while the rest are suffering.

Edited November 26, 2011 by cybercoma

[Wild Bill]

Western nations should put tariffs on Chinese goods until they stop pegging their currency.

I agree with you, CC! I would also support "green" tariffs!

If a ton of Canadian steel is say $40/ton more expensive than Chinese, not because China is more productive but because China doesn't spend a dime on anti-pollution measures, then we should impose a $40/ton tariff on Chinese imported steel to level the playing field!

Right now countries like China, India and Russia are getting a free ride. Our governments don't seem to be willing to stand up to them!

It's ridiculous! Those countries desperately need our markets. They survive on our consumption. We should use that power in our bargaining.

[cybercoma]

It turns out as well that China has been using prisoners as slave labour in factories too. It's tough to compete with "free".

[eyeball]

Of course the best thing about free trade with countries like China is how our societies become more like one another as a result. Western government and corporate leaders have clearly learned how efficiently the concentration of power coupled with less democracy, transparency, accountability, and human and environmental rights can deliver wealth to the top percentile.

So now that Canadian's wages are quite successfully being driven down, it's time to work on concentrating what's left of our power into fewer hands.

So yeah, why anyone would risk any of this progress by voting for a left-wing government in Canada is nuts.

[Evening Star]

I agree with you, CC! I would also support "green" tariffs!

If a ton of Canadian steel is say $40/ton more expensive than Chinese, not because China is more productive but because China doesn't spend a dime on anti-pollution measures, then we should impose a $40/ton tariff on Chinese imported steel to level the playing field!

Right now countries like China, India and Russia are getting a free ride. Our governments don't seem to be willing to stand up to them!

It's ridiculous! Those countries desperately need our markets. They survive on our consumption. We should use that power in our bargaining.

I think this may be the most I've ever agreed with you, Bill! Well, this and fixing Cancon.

[Evening Star]

It turns out as well that China has been using prisoners as slave labour in factories too. It's tough to compete with "free".

Link?

[Michael Hardner]

"Jobs are lost, and some Canadian companies do better and hire... " If it were truly a win/win, then why is our unemployment rate higher now than before? Why have incomes dropped?

As was pointed out elsewhere by several others - some do worse and some do MUCH better. Resource companies, mining and oil companies would presumably do much better since the world market for resources would increase.

As for "putting it on Chretien", I'm NOT against free trade! I just don't like rigged deals! It was up to Chretien to make sure that his deal was good for Canada and not just China. It was up to Chretien to audit China and make sure they didn't renege on their part of the bargain.

It doesn't sound like they had a bargain of any kind, just that they outsmarted Nortel - who underestimated them.

Perhaps the biggest factor is one of approach. Chretien signed his deals with China for the photo-ops. He doesn't appear to have ever bothered to audit the deal after the signing and confront China for not living up to it. We can't blame the Chinese. If the Canadian government didn't care, why should they? All those warlord Chinese leaders want is the money!

Well we're 2 prime minsters past Chretien and Harper is looking to sign more deals with the east. What does that tell you ? All the Liberal and Conservative governments have sought trade deals, and parties are enthusiastic about them except the leftist ones and you're still sounding very NDP to me. Again, nothing wrong with that.

[SF/PF]

I do blame the unions in that I've never heard of one that recognized the situation their opponent company was in. They seemed to think that all they had to do was to win the battle against their company's management, while oblivious to the fact that their company was going to lose the war by not being able to compete against the Chinese. It's all very well for a Ford union negotiator to say that his workers' productivity is better than that of GM. Who gives a crap if everybody is buying Toyotas?

Of course, your anti-union rhetoric can't explain why the non-union manufacturing sector in North America has been gutted just as efficiently as the union side. The fact is that any worker that demands more than a couple bowls of rice per day of labour has effectively priced themselves out of the global labour market. Quibbles about a few bucks an hour difference are meaningless.

I do find it interesting that so many in Canada believed that offshoring was great for the overall economy as long as it was limited to the manufacturing sector. Of course, now that companies have realized that its actually easier to offshore the jobs of "professionals" than manual labour, everyone cries that we have a problem.

[Wild Bill]

Of course, your anti-union rhetoric can't explain why the non-union manufacturing sector in North America has been gutted just as efficiently as the union side. The fact is that any worker that demands more than a couple bowls of rice per day of labour has effectively priced themselves out of the global labour market. Quibbles about a few bucks an hour difference are meaningless.

I do find it interesting that so many in Canada believed that offshoring was great for the overall economy as long as it was limited to the manufacturing sector. Of course, now that companies have realized that its actually easier to offshore the jobs of "professionals" than manual labour, everyone cries that we have a problem.

If you truly read my posts, show me where I made the claim that it was all the fault of the unions! I DID point out that unions as a whole seemed oblivious to the competition their empployers faced but I also pointed out that it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

The rest of your first paragraph just agrees with what I said!

As for shallow misconceptions about "of shoring", there seems to be some trouble with the phone line. Please be patient, as your call is very important to us! BTW, my name is actually Krishna Ravi Devi but I go by the name of "Walter"!

[blueblood]

I agree with you, CC! I would also support "green" tariffs!

If a ton of Canadian steel is say $40/ton more expensive than Chinese, not because China is more productive but because China doesn't spend a dime on anti-pollution measures, then we should impose a $40/ton tariff on Chinese imported steel to level the playing field!

Right now countries like China, India and Russia are getting a free ride. Our governments don't seem to be willing to stand up to them!

It's ridiculous! Those countries desperately need our markets. They survive on our consumption. We should use that power in our bargaining.

Wrong, by china pegging their currency they are subsidizing our consumption. I am wondering if the usa isn't using reverse psychology on them. If that yuan goes up, one billion people suddenly have more purchasing power than ever, that means chinese demand will skyrocket and commodities will go through the roof, which would put you easterners over a barrell.

If you slap on tariffs, that steel becomes more expensive and the canadian consumer gets stuck with the bill. Its a two way street.

We are in an adjustment period and there isn't sweet f all one can do about it. Why not take the wests example and ride the wave.