It's late enough, but I've got to leave you all two awesome links: 1) The Christian Science Monitor carries the
story of one family that actually did forgo Chinese-made goods for one year, and suffered for it. 2) Jim Slagle's
Religion Blog, written by the religion writer for The Oregonian, is back!
4 comments:
so why is it that in all the "made in china" stories, we always hear about the horrors of american jobs being lost, and not one word about hundreds of thousands of poor chinese workers that now have food and clothing. one american job can serve the equivalent of several times many chinese jobs. so what is not really fair? starving countless chinese families so that workers at a gm plant can keep their completely unrealistic pay and benefits?
how's that for a counter-argument? ;-)
Bipin, you definately have an argument: If you're Chinese. But if you're American, it's not in your best interest to lose a job overseas to China.
TS interesting story! Thanks for pointing it out.
One more thing: the entire problem would be easily solved if we put an import tax on all things coming in from China, and used the money for those people on unemployment.
bipen,
i think you've a generous mind, and i like that.
saur,
the problem (and i do agree it's a problem) is not easily solved like you suggested as long as china is the #2 financier of american debt, investing in hundreds of billions of dollars every year in u.s. dollars. they subsidize our trade deficit, but could easily decide to purchase euros instead. right now, everyone's happy, but in the end we can't have our cake and eat it, too.
also, making u.s.-manufactured goods on equal footing with chinese goods would mean we have to pay $65 for toddlers shoes, like the lady in the story had to do. it's like many americans say we need to be oil-independent, yet continue to demand greater horsepower rather than fuel-efficiency.
i'll i'm saying is that it's a much more complicated situation than most people like to admit, and i think the christian science monitor story really illustrates that.
Post a Comment